TC Council Packet 08-12-2003STATE OF COLORADO )
COUNTY OF EAGLE ) SS
TOWN OF AVON 1
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN THAT A WORK SESSION OF THE TOWN COUNCIL OF THE
TOWN OF AVON, COLORADO, WILL BE HELD AUGUST 12, 2003, AT 2:00 P.M. AT AVON
ELEMENTARY SCHOOL LOCATED AT 0850 W. BEAVER CREEK BLVD, AVON,
COLORADO FOR THE PURPOSE OF DISCUSSING AND CONSIDERING THE
FOLLOWING:
2:00 PM - 2:45 PM 1) Council Committee Updates
a. Truck Limitations on Metcalf Road
(Mayor Reynolds)
2:45 PM - 3:00 PM 2) Eagle County Master Plan Discussion
(Rebecca Leonard, Senior Planner)
3:00 PM - 3:15 PM 3) Countywide Recreation Update -
"Draft Intergovernmental Agreement"
(Councilor Wolfe & Meryl Jacobs)
3:15 PM - 4:00 PM 4) Capital Improvements Projects Discussion
(Norm Wood)
4:00 PM - 4:30 PM 5) Programmatic Environmental Impact Study
(Helen Migchelbrink, County Engineer)
4:30 pm - 5:15 PM 6) Village at Avon PUD Amendments (Ruth Borne)
5:15 PM - 5:25 PM 7) Staff Updates -
Council Questions
Consent Agenda Questions
AND SUCH OTHER BUSINESS AS MAY COME BEFORE THE COUNCIL. THIS MEETING IS
OPEN TO THE PUBLIC.
TOWN OF AVON, COLORADO
BY: 0 ?,
P tt McKenny
Town Clerk
POSTED AT THE FOLLOWING PUBLIC PLACES WITHIN THE TOWN OF AVON ON
AUGUST 8, 2003:
AVON MUNICIPAL BUILDING, MAIN LOBBY
ALPINE BANK, MAIN LOBBY
AVON RECREATION CENTER, MAIN LOBBY
CITY MARKET, MAIN LOBBY
Town Clerk\Council\Agendas\2003\Avon Council Meeting. 03.08.12
AVON
C O L O R A D O
Town ofA m
P.O. &x975
400 BEnchnTrk Road
Awn, Cdoncb 81620
970-748-1005
Office of the Town Manager
To: Honorable Mayor and Town Council
Fr: Larry Brooks, Town Manager
Dt: 8/7/03
Re: Delivery truck restrictions
The Mayor has asked me to provide some information about delivery trucks. He will talk with
you under Council updates about the idea of restricting the length of delivery trucks on
Metcalf Road. A number of people have expressed concern about the safety of the longer
trucks making deliveries on this road. Based upon staff observations, it would appear that
WB-40 delivery trucks could perform this service in a much safer way than the current WB-
67 vehicles that are currently being used.
I believe the staff feels the Town is empowered to restrict delivery vehicle types on this road,
but we should discuss the matter to determine if there is consensus for developing such a
regulation.
L!
II II II II 11 II 11 II II
• • • o 0000 CD CD
0 333 3lb y
-I cn 7 f, sr q Q gr 10
Nm III 2•p°<mmmm<<
s?_ m Qao.no m
ac.m??'d3333mm
(1) (D m m
W Si w O (U N N r=i) 7'
ova 00'00077
to G) a
SOON N N N ?.Ta
O O
3 3 w r6aCC am d
1° m om m ?m m
? 7 n v w<< j w w m
W q O ,,. x -- 7 N N
=ar w d O N O O °- (o w
-a iD N 7 <7,? o cn 0 0 ? N a
w o m en y m?
< X W 7
.0 q m C :3 40 CL CL (G
7• W n p N Q N
IQ 3 m . O:
S n
yy?•yy m?=raSx ?F.c
lJ n' N CL w vj 7d
G w N CI
A) Zo
•r" d S, N m o a ? 00
cr o y x? Q f (nm
3 0 o Cl c D
R 3 c m 7•
N N p N n? ?'O
N+ r 0) _{ c
o.3mco ?o
C Q O N N
CD 0)
0 n W N 7 O N
o ? w
N z w 0 n
A 0 x '_ N n
Q ? m ? m 1,
A" m o (n j U
?" O C 0
fD m
' m N y
m N 3 > .
(D ?, (n
'S c
.?• In to m D
w Q D
0 O 3
(0
0 O
? Qa
d W
O
C N 0
is Q
C 3 3 ,
CL sry
0 °
IN
chi w
N N D
N -
Q (7D
U;o
w °
0 ?
x 61
O 7
Q
CID Q
7 w
c v
? d
al
O
CP
nlaO'J!JD puv 91041103 uBrsaQ
M
m O
° 0 q
°
O'
7 3
c
rr
-
r
d 3
<
W
N
o > > m m m n
-n
w o
3 ? ? w o
c w
N °?
o m
N
d m
? 3
W 3
CD >
a w
0 :3
w 0
to a n E
0 ; 3
D w
m a
w a
m ? o
° tn
0 C W
-1
D1
d m
ID
3 m
q
N f
N
m
((
N w
a
G°
O0' d
N C
0 o -1 ? o
3 3 ` 3 ? p
co m CD Co o -1
P1 d d w N A g m n C
m w w m N IN
vc
W fD fD y m =r
N m m v
m c? m
(13 ? D tn tn n Im E
O7 m ? I CD
C C { C C
X 177 ? 2 ? p -4 CS Cn N In A 0.ry
Ctl
( o w 6 w C
O " 0 0 n r
O W (Cn Ut 0
O N I O N t''1 ? ? ? P ? ? ' O O O N N - i
U3
(n °1 U Cn {r (n [n O Cn Cn N G O rn
in
i
m
m
m
m m
Cn m
Cn m
CA m
[n co
Cn m
(.11 m
0 m
En m
G m
O m
Cll m
(A m
in m
O
O
ps C3 N m A W fVi1 fn
N m
0 A
0 N A
0 ?
a1 A
O W
O
V A m W m ? ? ?
1 A W W A N
W N
(.? ro
is A A W W V w V m 0) ?
W W W
I
m
m
o
os
.
N
N
W
O A
?
N
N
Cn
N
N
L n
,
O
W
N
m
m
{n
O
w
m
W
Cn
8
0 N
0
-? ....
-` N
O A
W -+
O -?
O N
m to
a1 A
a N N
0 N
O
4 to
? N
A N.
) N 1 cn
co l i l l w N w A o cco V co I 1 1 a W I
io [n O
CY1 A ,
A cn a. O --4
A
W as (n {r I TA Q O I I I 1 jV 1 t I 1 1 1 I (n
CD m N m 1 Q O O 1 I I I N I I 1 1 1 I
1 1 1 A W w
1 1
cn . I I I I I I I I I I 1
I
I
I
I
I
I N
W
I
I
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
I
O
A
U
I
I
I
I
I A
N N
W N
W A
N W
V N
V
1
1
1
1
1
1
t
N O O V Cn cn {n
As
1 g
teri Yriy r ?' ,' r
4»
LA f?
n 1 i kf??' § z ?
1, 1 r
-Nllf
•3 G
r
SS-?y .
p
Yy.. A ?.
*1 '?-
ip,
St - `'cCv+?,q??, }y+y Fps{ .
Yg - -"yam-`h1'
O r r y t
fr ;
v b?, s yY ?
07 ] .,??sY'F
c yy ??
G q Y ? '
I W ? ! a
l ??s
I 1
W
m
OO7C1
1 ID ? ?'?O A _ .
d ? 7 m
1
Jul-30-03 09:19A 'Town of Avon 970 748 1958
AASHTO-Get metric Design Of Hrglnvn. y;••: - • -_.. ---•
a.
b.
(CABOVER)
(C
WNW
?-8I 3.08 RL? 11 2 m .2 1
4,12 fl]' 110.1 fy 1 (4.33 ft]
3.T I m 1,35-ML 5.
!2 ft] (12.2 ft] -4'42-fI 11'
cdy and Ww*haui tractors (Tractor - semitrailer Configuration)
0.71m-1 3m
12.33 ft] (12.5 ft] [3
c. Typical tractor for Double & Triple configuration
1.28 m 3.17 m _1
[ .211 [1 U,4 hI
1.35m1` 3.81m
(4.42 M' [12.5 01
OR rn
U, r 1 r?l d. d?7 .L,
12.33 ffj (11 h] 12.33 h
d. Typical tractors for Rooky Mountain Double & Turnpike Double configuration
1.98 m
(CASOVER) 16.5 R (CONVENTIONAL.)
2.89 m
X1,22 m
[4 h)
.91 m
(3 R)
' . 28 4.70 In 0.71 m
"30nm- '
i 1.28 i 0.71 m 14 2 1 (15.4 ftJ ? 33 f
3614.1 n) 110. 1 fl) ' (2.33 h] 1.35 ml 5,34 M i
42 112.2 R] [4.42 ttJ 117.5 ft]
Exhibit 2.12. i.engths of commonly Used Truck Tractors
P_02
30
Jul-30-03 09:20A Town oV Avon
970 748 1958
P. 03
Design C;untruls and Criteria
pica, fire size and space between
s applies to all trailers.
Path of front
F'sun or ion - r
front wheal 0
1
Min. turni
radius = 12.20 m C40 ftj `?, ± i
2.44 m Path of ht I
8.0 h rear wheel I
I
ploft
I
o 2.5 m
scale I
I
I
Assumed steering angle is 20.4 ° I
• Assumed tractorllrailer angle is 46 a I
• GTR = Centerllne tuming I
radius at front axle I
2.44 m
td*-?
16.0 ft]
2.13. Minimum Turning Path for Intermediate Semitrailer (WB-12 [WB-401)
Design Vehicle
;i I
Jul-30-03 09:20A Town of Avon 970 748 1958 P-04
AA.SHTO-Gimnerric_Uesign of ffFghways rued Sneers
12.95 m L42.5 ft] Trailer ._
1.22 m 10.82 m [35.5 ft]
4?-
I 0 5ft loft I
0 1m 2.5m 0.91m.?
scale [3 ft] - J--
`
1.22m 1.28M 3.1? 7m
[4 ft] [4.2 ft [10.4 ft]
1.35 RBI 3.01 m I
i (4.42 ft) [12.3 111
_ 15.24 m 150 ft] Wheelbase
I 16.77 m 155 ftl or greater
Path of left
front wheel
r
r
/
? M ` C
f
turn/. n
2 372m p
?f1
? ?45?j `
Q6ft 0 ft Path of right
r ¦ r rear wheel
0 2.5 m
scale
• Assumed steering angle is 17.9°
Assumed tractoritrailer angle is 56°
• CTR = Centerline turning radius
at front axle
1
1
of front
2.58 rn
[8.5 ftJ
Exhibit 2.14. Minimum Turning Path for intermediate Semitrailer (WB-15 [WB-501)
Design Vehicte
32
,I
1
Jul-30-03 09:20A Town of Avon 970 748 1958 P_05
Design Cmurtils a?ad Criteria
_ _ 14.83 m 48 ft Trail®r_., J,_?
1.37 m 12.34 m [40.5 R] •-?,?
t •5
0 5 ft loft
m I
WE2F5 m 0.81
[3[3 ftj'
I scale
I .28
I .28 m
1.22 m 1,35 m ?I
M-
[4 ft] [4,42 ft] [4.2 R] [?
18.90 m 182 ii] Wheelb8se
20,68 m 68,5 ft?
front
2.59 m
[8.5 RJ
Path of front
1lxhlhit 2-15. Minimum Turning Path for Interstate Semitruiler (WK-19 [WB•621)
Design Vehicle
--V?
4.57' m
?[15 ft]
l1
33
Jul-30-03 09:20A Town of Avon p 970 748 1958 P-06
1
AASElTU--(irumrlricr I)r-sign of
1.98 m
In m 15.5 nJ r rarer
13.26 rri [43.5 ft]
0 1 m 2,5m 0.91 m RI
Scale [3 ft) l
;i . r-aU m
I 14.42 ft
' 19,42 m [65 ft) Wheelbase
front
0
r
r
/ 0® ft[4.4 ft] min.
0 2.5 m Path ad ri htT m Path a?f ri ht
scale rear wtwel
Note: The WB40 [W-85] to shown.
A longer wheelbase vehicle, the
WB-20.[W8-671, can be created
by moving the tandem wheel
assembly on the trailer hack by
0.61 m[2f.],
• Assumed steedng angt<e is 26A
• Assumed tracterttraller angle is 68.5 •
• CTR = Centerline turning
radius at front axle
I'
I '
I
I
I
Path of front
1.58 m
[8.5 ft]
Exhibit 2-16. Minimum Turning Path for Interstate Semitrailer
(WB-20 [WB-65 and WB-671) Design Vchicle
h]
34
Memo
To: Honorable Mayor and Town Council
Thru: Larry Brooks, Town Manager
From: Patty McKenny, Town Clerk
Date: August 7, 2003
Re: Work Session Discussion - Eagle County Master Plan
Summary:
Attached is a letter from Senior Planner for Eagle County, Rebecca Leonard requesting
some time with the Avon Town Council to discuss the process for updating the Eagle
County Master Plan. She will attend the August 12th work session to discuss the topic.
July.8, 2003
Tambi Katieb
Town of Avon
Via email
RE: Eagle County Master Plan
Dear Mr. Katieb:
As I mentioned on the telephone this morning, the county is beginning an update of the Eagle
County Master Plan. We are anticipating that the first round of open houses will occur in
September. Prior to those open houses, we would like an opportunity to update each town
council and notify them of the schedule and various opportunities for input into the process. 1
am requesting a 15-30 minute work session with the Avon Town Council for July 22, 2003.
Could you let me know if this date will be appropriate for the town council?
Please call if you have any questions.
Sincerely,
J. Rebecca Leonard, AICP
Senior Planner
Eagle County
Memo
To:
From:
Through:
Date:
Re:
c
Honorable Mayor
Meryl D. Jacobs/Director of Recreation
Larry Brooks/Town Manager
August 4, 2003
Draft off IGA establishing the Eagle Valley Recreation "Co-op"
Summary: Over the past several months elected officials and various staff members of
the Valley's Recreation Departments and Districts have been meeting to explore the
concept of consolidation. As a result of these meetings, it has been determined that a
logical first step would be to begin working on cooperation between the entities.
Attached for council review is a draft of an IGA that would establish an Eagle Valley
Recreation Cooperative. The following parties are interested in being a part of this valley
wide effort: Eagle-Vail Metro, Berry Creek Metro, Vail Recreation District, Western
Eagle County Metro District, Town of Avon, Eagle County School Board and County of
Eagle. Ron Wolfe is the councilor representing the Town of Avon and will lead the
discussion regarding this effort, at the next scheduled council meeting.
Town Manager Comments:
TO: Avon Town Council
Avon Town Staff
FROM: Ron Wolfe
DATE: August 5, 2003
SUBJECT: Draft Recreation IGA
My comments on the IGA draft are as follows.
GENERAL: This draft goes beyond what I think we envisioned and should agree
to. We began the discussions with the objectives of avoiding duplication of
resources, redirecting the County's efforts and to determine compensation by
non-resident users to the providers of recreation facilities. The IGA creates a
management body that will have incremental overhead and expenses and the
subsequent need to raise operating funds... first on a voluntary basis with the
contemplation of eventual Special Purpose District status. It creates a body well
in excess of that needed for cooperative planning and use of facilities.
My comments refer to specific referenced portions of the draft; unfortunately I
could not convert the PDF file to a format that I could edit.
PAGE 1: "WHEREAS the Members desire to explore the possibility of
establishing ... a separate governmental entity..."
Do we? I suggest not. I do not support the contemplation of another
overlying entity even with a Board made up of Member govern-board elected
officials.
PAGE 2; 5 USE AGREEMENT GUIDELINES: This should call for unanimous
agreement on use guidelines especially in light of my proposal to that
compensation is provided to the Member providing any facility (see below).
PAGE 3: So far there is no provision to compensate the taxpayers of a Member
entity for their provision of facilities to other Members. The implication is that all
Members of the Co-Op can us a facility at the sole expense of the facility owner...
not a good concept... except as inadequately provided and defined in 6.d below.
PAGE 4; 6.d: This is the only provision for a fee structure compensating the
provider of facilities. It is too vague. In the spirit of cooperation and reciprocity,
should we support the inclusion of a requirement that fees charged to individuals
and/or other Members, as a unit, be equal to something like the per capita
operating cost plus per capita debt interest (only) plus the per capita
amortization/depreciation/replacement. The last element, or some such concept,
is the tool to recover the capital investment of the providing Member.
Expansions, replacements and new construction could be financed by the
providing Member with the costs recovered in the same way. I'm not confident
about this concept and if it would work. A new Recreation District would be a
better way here in that it could totally compensate, for example, Avon for our
Recreation Center in return for open access. However Districts take on a life of
their own without adequate consideration of the priorities and issues of the
entities that financially support them. I submit that the Town of Avon should
decide the "what, where and how much." The VRD behaves, at times, as if it
were the enemy of the Town of Vail! To me this area is a major point for further
discussion.
PAGE 5; 18 REGULAR ELECTIONS AND TERM OF OFFICE: This item requires
clarification as to whether individuals can be re-elected without limit. Would we
prefer a rotating automatic sequence of appointment to the officer positions?
PAGE 7; 24 FUNDS OF MEMBERS: This in essence creates an incremental
cost... along with #25 and #26.
PAGE 7; ASSESSMENT OF FEES: I think this was supposed to be written...
"The remaining portion of the fee assessed to each Member, for administrative
and operating expenses and any capital improvements that may be undertaken
in the future, shall be proportionate to the dollar-value of the Member's total
assessed property valuation in relation to the aggregate dollar-valuation of
assessed property of all Members." The total fee that a member is to pay
therefore...
Fee = [fixed administrative cost assessed equally to each Member] plus
[annual capital & event funding budget] x {(Member's assessed valuation) / (total
valuation of all Members combined)}
This concept does not reflect the level of use by constituents of a Member.
PAGE 7: BUDGET PROCEDURE: "Executive Director"... where did this come
from? An employee? This has moved from cooperation to new entity.
DRAFT - 6 /12/2003
INTERGOVERNMENTAL AGREEMENT ESTABLISHING
THE EAGLE VALLEY RECREATION COOPERATIVE
THIS INTERGOVERNMENTAL AGREEMENT (hereinafter referred to as the "IGA")
establishing the EAGLE VALLEY RECREATION COOPERARATIVE (hereinafter referred to
as the "Co-Op") made and entered into this _ day of 2003, by and between the parties to this
Agreement which are as follows:
the EAGLE-VAIL METROPOLITAN DISTRICT, a quasi-municipal corporation and
political subdivision of the State of Colorado (hereinafter referred to as " Eagle-Vail Metro
District"), the BERRY CREEK METROPOLITAN DISTRICT, a quasi-municipal corporation
and political subdivision of the State of Colorado (hereinafter referred to as Berry Creek Metro
District"), VAIL PARK AND RECREATION DISTRICT, a quasi-municipal corporation and
political subdivision of the State of Colorado (hereinafter referred to as Vail Park and Recreation"),
WESTERN EAGLE COUNTY METROPOLITAN RECREATION DISTRICT, a
quasi-municipal corporation and political subdivision of the State of Colorado (hereinafter referred
to as WECMRD"), and THE TOWN OF AVON, a municipal corporation of the State of Colorado
(hereinafter referred to as "Avon"), the EAGLE COUNTY SCHOOL DISTRICT RE-50J, a
public school district of the State of Colorado (hereinafter referred to as the "District") and the
COUNTY OF EAGLE, COLORADO, by and through its Board of County Commissioners, a body
politic and corporate (hereinafter referred to as the "County"). Please note, when specificity is not
required, the individual parties hereto will be hereinafter referred to as Member(s); and
WHEREAS, each Member is empowered to provide and does provide parks and recreational
facilities or programs within its current service area; and
WHEREAS the Members now desire to work towards a greater level of cooperation in the
use of facilities and development of programs and in building a vision of recreation in the Eagle
River Valley; and
WHEREAS the Members desire to explore the possibility of establishing at some future date
a recreation Co-Op as a separate governmental entity to make the best practical use of some of their
joint resources in providing efficient and cost effective full participation sports programs for the
Members and their inhabitants and such others as the Board of Directors may include.
NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual promises and covenants set forth below
and other good and valuable consideration, the Members agree as follows:
1. Effective Date and Term: This IGA shall become effective when it has been duly
executed by all of the Members of this IGA. Subject to section 1.1 below, the initial term of this IGA
shall be for three (3) years from said effective date. The IGA shall be renewed for additional one-
year terms thereafter, unless terminated by written notice duly executed by each of the Members at
least ninety (90) days prior to the expiration of the initial term or the expiration of any subsequent
one (1) year renewal term.
DRAFT - 6 /12/2003
DRAFT - 6 /12/2003
1.1 TABOR Compliance: To the extent required by Article X, Section 20 if the
Constitution of the State of Colorado, the financial obligations of the parties pursuant to this
Agreement are subject to annual renewal and appropriation by the parties hereto.
2. Establishment of Recreation Co-Op: The Members do hereby establish a separate
entity to be known as the Eagle Valley Recreation Co-Op to be used by the Members to work
towards a greater level of cooperation in the use of facilities and development of programs and in
building a vision of recreation in the Eagle River Valley. The Members desire to provide for the
efficient and cost effective sports and recreational programs, services and facilities with special
emphasis on full participation recreation programs for residents and visitors of all ages.
3. Purpose: The Co-Op shall conduct its business and affairs for the benefit of the
Members and their inhabitants and to develop cooperative programs, services and facilities designed
to coordinate and improve the sports and recreation services, programs and capabilities of all the
Members, and to implement cost savings to the Members through various types of resource pooling
and joint purchase, use or participation arrangements.
4. Functions/Services: The functions and/or services that may be provided by the Co-
Op are as follows:
a. Developing a plan for the full participation of youth and adult recreation
programs by agreement or arrangement with the Members and various entities in the Eagle valley.
The Program Providers who jointly organize the Co-Op's recreation programs and league play will
be responsible for implementing such programs.
b. Developing a standard Use Agreement to be entered into between the Co-Op
and each Member setting forth the terms, provisions and conditions whereby the fields and/or other
facilities of each Member (except for those fields and facilities excluded from the Agreement by a
Member) shall be made available for the recreation programs and league play approved by the Co-
Op.
C. Developing and refining a valley-wide recreation vision for the residents and
visitors to the Eagle valley. The Co-Op shall develop a strategy to expand and include all types of
recreation. In addition, the Co-Op will endeavor to serve all ages and all groups with varying
abilities. The Co-Op shall implement its vision by creating a recreation master plan for the Eagle
River Valley.
d. Providing for such other recreational services or facilities as may be
authorized by law and determined by the Board of Directors of the Co-Op to be in the best interests
of the Members and their constituents.
5. Use Agreement Guidelines: For purposes of clarification and to assist the Co-Op in
the development of the Use Agreement described in Section 4b above, the Members mutually agree
that the Use Agreements, when finalized, will contain provisions that address, to the satisfaction of
the Co-Op's Board of Directors, the following matters:
DRAFT - 6 /12/2003 2
DRAFT - 6 /12/2003
a. The Co-Op or its designees or the facility owners will be required to
provide evidence of liability insurance that will cover the Member when the Member's fields and
facilities (hereinafter referred to as "Member's Property") are used to provide Co-Op programs and
services.
b. The Co-Op will provide each Member with a schedule of the programs
and play activities scheduled for the Member's Property. Each Member shall have priority to use its
own Property at all other times.
C. A Member may exclude use of the Member's Property from time to
time for certain events sponsored by another Member provided that such exclusions are set forth in
advance of the finalization of the schedules for the recreation programs provided by the Co-Op. The
Members agree to ensure that the frequency of individual Member use does not compromise the Co-
Op's ability to carry out the purposes of this IGA.
d. No Member's Property shall be a physical asset of the Co-Op, nor shall
any Member's Property be subject to any liability of the Co-Op. Furthermore, under no
circumstances shall a Member's Property be deemed to be held in trust for the benefit of the Co-Op.
User Agreements shall not be assigned without the express written consent of the Member who is a
party to the User Agreement, which consent may be withheld for any reason.
Member.
e. Each User Agreement will terminate upon the withdrawal of a
f. Members providing fields and facilities under a User Agreements will
be responsible for maintaining said fields and facilities at its sole cost and expense.
g. The Co-Op Board of Directors may approve such changes to the User
Agreements as the Board determines appropriate from time to time.
6. Powers of Co-Op: To enable the Co-Op to carry out its functions and provide the
services described in this IGA, the Co-Op shall have the following powers:
a. To acquire, hold, lease (as lessor or lessee), sell, or otherwise dispose
of equipment and items of tangible personal property for the recreational programs, services and
league play that is provided by and/or through the Co-Op.
b. To conduct the business and affairs of the Co-Op for the benefit of the
Members, their constituents, and others, in the discretion of the Board of Directors.
C. The Co-Op is authorized to facilitate or enter into, make and perform
contracts directly related to the recreational programs for services and facilities, to provide and/or
enter into contracts as are reasonably necessary or required to carry out the purposes and functions of
the Co-Op, including but not limited to one-year contracts renewable annually with Program
Providers approved by the Board of Directors.
DRAFT - 6 /12/2003 3
DRAFT - 6 /12/2003
d. To cooperatively fix, maintain and revise fees, rates and charges for
functions, services or facilities provided by the Co-Op.
e. To adopt, by resolution, regulations respecting the exercise of its
powers and carrying out is purposes.
f. To exercise any other powers, which are essential to providing for the
operation, function, and services, or facilities by the Co-Op and which are specified in this IGA.
g. To receive contributions, gifts, bequests or other grants of cash,
equipment or services from the Members or other entities, individuals or political subdivisions.
7. Board of Directors: The governing body of the Co-Op shall be a Board of Directors
(hereinafter referred to as the "Board") in which all powers of the Co-Op shall be vested.
8. Number: The number of Directors shall be seven. Each Director shall be entitled to
cast one vote.
9. Appointment: The governing body of Eagle County, the Town of Avon, Eagle
County School District RE50J, Vail Park and Recreation District, West Eagle County Metropolitan
District, Eagle-Vail Metropolitan District and Berry Creek Metropolitan District shall each appoint
one of its governing board members to the Board of the Co-Op.
10. Term: All Directors shall serve at the pleasure of the governing body of the Member
by whom the Director is appointed for a three (3) year term. Members may reappoint to the board
without limit.
11. Vacancies: A vacancy occurring on the Board whether such vacancy be the result of
resignation, death, removal or disability, shall be filled in the manner of appointment or selection as
provided in paragraph 10 above.
12. Compensation: Directors may not receive compensation for their services.
13. Regular Meetings: The Board may set regular meetings of all Directors without
notice to the Directors by adopting a unanimous resolution to that affect. The resolution shall set the
time and place of the location in which the regular meetings will be held.
14. Special Meetings: Special meetings of the Board may be called by the Chairman or
any Director and it shall thereupon be the duty of the Secretary to cause notice of said meting to be
given as hereinafter provided. All special meetings of the Board shall be held at such time and place
and within Eagle County as shall be fixed by the Chairman or Director calling the meeting.
15. Quorum. A majority of the Directors currently in office shall constitute a quorum for
the transaction of business, if, if less than a quorum is present, the Directors present may adjourn the
meeting. The secretary shall notify any absent Directors of the time and place of such adjourned
DRAFT - 6 /12/2003 4
DRAFT - 6 /12/2003
of the Board of Directors, and a register of the names and addresses and officers and shall issue
notice of meetings, attest and affix the corporate seal to all documents of the Co-Op and shall
perform all other duties as the Board of Directors may prescribe from time to time.
d. Treasurer. The Treasurer shall serve as financial officer of
the Co-Op and, pursuant to the fiscal resolution adopted by the Board governing the financial
transactions of the Co-Op and the restrictions imposed by law, be responsible for the receipt,
custody, investment and disbursement of the Co-Op's funds and securities, and for duties incident to
the office of Treasurer and shall perform other duties as the Board of Directors may prescribe from
time to time.
21. Indemnification of Officers and Directors: Each Director and officer of the Co-Op,
whether or not currently in office and his personal representative shall be indemnified by the
Member entities against all costs and expenses actually and necessarily incurred by him/her in
connection with the defense of any action, suit or proceeding in which he may be involved or to
which he may be made a party by reason of his being or having been such Director or officer, except
in relation to such matters as to which he shall be finally adjudged in such action, suit or proceeding
to be liable for willful or wanton negligence or misconduct in the performance of his duty. Such
costs and expenses shall include amounts reasonably paid in settlement for the purpose of curtailing
litigation, but only if the Co-Op is advised in writing by its counsel that in counsel's opinion the
person indemnified did not commit such willful and wanton negligence or misconduct. The
foregoing right of indemnification shall not be exclusive of other rights to which he may be entitled
as a matter of law or by agreement.
22. Adding and Deleting Parties: No party shall be added to this IGA as a Member
without the unanimous consent of all Members authorized by a written document formally approved
by the governing body of each Member. A party added as a Member shall be subject to such terms
and conditions as the Board of Directors in its sole discretion may determine, however, a new
Member shall be assessed a capital investment fee to cover its pro rata share of the cost of those
capital costs previously purchased by the Co-Op for joint use by all Members. A Member may
withdraw from this IGA by submitting a written document authorized by the governing body of such
Member, which shall be presented to the Co-Op no earlier than June 1 or later than July 15 of any
calendar year. However, the withdrawing Member shall remain liable for any and all financial
obligations and all indebtedness incurred while the withdrawing Member was a party. Upon
withdrawal, such Member shall have no further interest, right or title in or to any assets or equity of
the Co-Op, unless there is a specific agreement to the contrary.
23. Execution of agreements: Except as otherwise provided by law, the Board may
authorize any officer or officers, agent or agents, to enter into any contract, or execute any
instrument in the name and on behalf of the Co-Op.
24. Funds of Members: The Co-Op may receive from proprietary revenues of the
Members' funds, revenues for services rendered by the entity, funds from proprietary revenues or
other public funds, as contributions to defray the cost of any purpose, facility or program set forth in
this IGA and funds from proprietary revenues or other public revenues as advances for any purpose,
subject to repayment by the Co-Op, as the Board of Directors of the Co-Op and the Members may
DRAFT - 6 /12/2003 6
DRAFT - 6 /12/2003
agree. Notwithstanding any other provision contained in this Agreement to the contrary, the
maximum aggregate assessment imposed in any given year by the Co-Op upon the Members as a
whole shall be limited to the dollar amount of revenue that would be generated by a one-half mill
levy upon all taxable property located within the combined boundaries of the Members of the Co-
Op. Notwithstanding, said aggregate assessment shall under any circumstances exceed 120% of the
budget submitted by the Program Providers for recreation services and programs for the ensuing
year.
25. Assessment of Fees: The Co-Op shall assess to each Member a fee for administrative
and operating expenses of the Co-Op. A portion of such fee shall be the same for each Member
regardless of the Party's size or assessed valuation. The remaining portion of the fee assessed to each
Member for administrative and operating expenses including any capital improvements that may be
undertaken in the future, shall be proportionate to the dollar amount assessed that each Member
bears, to the total dollar amount of assessed valuation to all of the Members. The fees assessed shall
not be in excess of The Members when established by resolution of the Board of
Directors shall remit fees.
26. Budget Procedure: There is hereby established, a Budget Committee to aid the Board
of Directors in setting and adopting an annual budget for the Co-Op. Such Committee shall consist
of the Executive Director or Manager, or such other appointed representative, of each Member. It
shall be the duty of the Budget Committee to study the budgeting requirements of the Co-Op starting
with the combined budget submitted by the Program Providers, and based thereon, to propose and
remit to the Board of Directors by August 15 of each year, a draft budget for consideration and
approval by the Board and approval and funding by each Member. Approval and commitment to
funding by each Member shall occur by November 1 of each calendar year.
27. Filing of Agreement: A copy of this IGA shall be filed with the
Division of Local Government of the State of Colorado as soon as practicable following its
execution by the Members and in all events within 10 days after such execution.
28. Notices: Any formal notice, demand or request provided for in this IGA shall be in
writing and shall be deemed properly served, given or made if delivered in person or sent by
registered or certified mail, postage pre-paid, to the Members as follows, unless another address is
certified to the Co-Op:
Eagle-Vail Metropolitan District
Attn: District Administrator Post Office Box 5660
Avon, Colorado 81620
Berry Creek Metropolitan District
Attn: District Administrator
28 Second Street, Suite 213
Post Office Box 500
Edwards, Colorado 81632
DRAFT - 6 /12/2003 7
DRAFT - 6 /12/2003
Vail Park and Recreation District
c/o Robert C. Trautz
700 South Frontage Road East
Vail, Colorado 81657
Western Eagle County Metropolitan Recreation District
Attn: Steve Russell
P.O. Box 246
Eagle, Colorado 81631
Town of Avon
Attn: Mary I. Jacobs
P.O. Box 975
Avon, Colorado 81620
Eagle County School District RE-50J
Attn: Karen Strakbein
P.O. Box 740
Eagle, Colorado 81631
Eagle County
Attn: Michael L. Gallagher
P.O. Box 850
Eagle, Colorado 81631
29. Amendments: This IGA may be amended only by written document approved by
formal Co-Op of the governing bodies of all of the Members, provided, however, that such
amendment will not affect other obligations outstanding of the Co-Op unless provision for full
payment of such obligations, by escrow or otherwise, has been made pursuant to such obligations.
30. Severability: In the event that any of the terms, covenants or conditions of this IGA
or their application shall be held invalid as to any person, corporation or circumstance by any court
having jurisdiction, the remainder of this IGA and the application and effect of its terms, covenants
or conditions to such persons, corporations or circumstances shall not be effected thereby.
31. Duplicate Originals: This IGA may be executed in several counterparts, each of
which shall be an original but all of which together shall constitute one in the same instrument.
WITNESS WHEREOF the Members have caused this Agreement to be executed as of
this day of , 2003.
G:\WM\DRAFT recreation co-oop.doc
DRAFT - 6 /12/2003 8
Memo
To: Honorable Mayor and Town Council
Thru: Larry Brooks, Town Manager
From: Norm Wood, Town Engineer
Date: August 7, 2003
Re: Capital Improvements Budget - 2004
Summary: A copy of the POTENTIAL CAPITAL PROJECTS / WISH
LIST (Rating Sheet) is attached. This list includes the Capital Projects in the current 5-
Year Capital Projects Budget plus four potential capital projects. This Rating Sheet has
been revised to include the four potential projects and lines are provided for additional
projects that may be identified prior to prioritizing. The rating sheet includes two columns
for rating. The first column rating is to evaluate the overall importance of the various
projects regardless of current viability. The second column rating is to evaluate the
urgency or timing of the various projects. A project may rate very high in importance, but
conditions may not be right for construction at the current time. Another project may not
rate as high in importance but conditions may be very favorable for immediate
construction. We believe this will help with project prioritization by considering both
overall importance and immediate needs or availability.
We have also enclosed brief descriptions and general status reports for various capital
projects that are in the current Capital Projects Fund 5-Year Plan. The four additional
potential capital projects have been included with these descriptions along with estimated
costs where possible.
Our goal for this work session is for council to prioritize the potential capital projects from
standpoint of both importance and also current viability or available opportunities. Input
received will be utilized to refine project cost estimates and project schedules to develop a
Proposed Draft of the Capital Projects Fund 5-Year Plan for Council consideration at
September 9th Council Work Session.
Town Manager Comments:
L\AdministrationUP Budget\2004\Priority Memo-2.Doc
POTENTIAL CAPITAL PROJECTS / WISH LIST
2004 CIP BUDGET
August 7, 2003
Importance Urgency
Project Rating (1 - 5) Rating (1 - 5)
Avon Road Pedestrian Bridge
Drainage - Metcalf (Nottingham Rd. to I-70)
Drainage - Metcalf Road
Drainage - W. Beaver Creek Blvd. (I-70 to Railroad)
Eaglebend Drive Streetscape Improvements
Eaglebend Entry Sign
East Beaver Creek Boulevard Improvements
Fireplace Conversions
I-70 Information Center
Metcalf Road Improvements
Municipal Government - Space Needs Analysis
Municipal Parking Facilities
Nottingham Road - I-70 to Buck Creek Road
Nottingham Road - Buck Creek Road to Metcalf Road
Paving / Road Improvements
Planning & Consulting
Public Works Administration Building
Public Works Equipment Storage & Work Area Buildings
Recreation Center Phase II
Swift Gulch Road Relocation
Town Center Mall / Town Center Plan Implementation
Transportation Center
Wildridge - Emergency / Bike Access
Wildridge Park Improvements & Playground
Wildridge Pavilion
Wildridge Pocket Park - New in Block 5
Wildridge Pocket Park - Upper Area (New in Block 3 or 4)
Wildridge Traffic Calming / Pedestrian Circulation
Other
Comprehensive Plan Development
East Avon Redevelopment (Main Street Extension)
Swift Gulch Road Bikepath (Paving to Village I-70 Interchange)
Swift Gulch Road Bikepath (RA I to Maintenance Shop)
Note: Rate all Projects from 1 to 5, with 1 being lowest priority and 5 being highest priority.
I:\Administration\CIP Budget\2004\Priority List 2004 Rev-1.Doc
CIP BUDGET - 2003 to 2008 & BEYOND
CAPITAL PROJECTS - GENERAL DESCRIPTIONS
July 17, 2003
Revised - August 7, 2003
Avon Road Pedestrian Bridge
Description: Pedestrian Bridge over Avon Road located between the Union Pacific
Railroad and Benchmark Road.
Budget: 2008 & Beyond
$ 500,000
Drainage - Metcalf (Nottingham Rd. to I-70)
Description: Improvements between Nottingham Road and I-70 drainage structures as
required to maintain storm water capacity recommended by Metcalf
Drainage Study and Preliminary Design.
Budget: 2004 $ 20,000 2005 $ 219,000
Proposed Funding: Water Fund
Drainage - Metcalf Road
Description: Improvements along Metcalf Road to maintain storm drainage and reduce
erosion, per recommendation in Metcalf Drainage Study and Preliminary
Design.
Budget: 2005 $ 70.000 2006 $1,068,000
Proposed Funding: Water Fund
Drainage - W. Beaver Creek Blvd. (I-70 to Railroad)
Description: Stormwater Improvements per Metcalf Drainage Study and Preliminary
Design, from I-70 to railroad tracks in vicinity of West Beaver Creek
Blvd. and Benchmark Condominiums.
Budget: 2005 $ 14,000 2006 $ 150,000
Proposed Funding: Water Fund
Eaglebend Drive Streetscape Improvements
Description: Extend Streetscape Improvements Including Curb, Gutter, Streetscape
Lights and Bikepath Along Eaglebend Drive from Nottingham Station to
Stonebridge Drive and Extend Bikepath to US Highway 6
Budget: 2004 $ 40,000 2005 $ 350,000
Special Funds: Eaglebend Housing Authority $ 50,000
Eaglebend Entry Sign
Description: Decorative Landscaping and Signage with Avon Logo Identifying Area as
Eaglebend, Located at Us Highway 6 and Stonebridge Drive.
Budget: 2005 $ 35,000
IAAdministration\CIP Budget\2004\Proj Dscrpt Drft-2.Doc
East Beaver Creek Blvd. Improvements
Description: Streetscape Improvements Including Traffic Control Medians, Sidewalks,
Pedestrian Areas and Bicycle Lanes from End of Existing 5-Lane Section
to Village at Avon Connection. The First Amendment to the Annexation
and Development Agreement requires construction of these improvements
commence no later than April 15, 2005 and be complete on or before
December 31, 2005.
Budget: 2003 $ 90,000
2004 $ 895,068
Special Funds: Village at Avon (2003) $ 90,000
Village at Avon (2004) $ 895,068
Fireplace Conversions
Description: Funding to Encourage Homeowners to Replace Wood Burning Fireplaces
and Stoves with Approved Clean Burning Devices.
Status: On-Going Annual Project.
Budget: 2003 $ 6,000 2004 $ 6,000
2005 $ 6,000 2006 $ 6,000
2007 $ 6,000 2008 & Beyond $ 6,000
I-70 Information Center
Description: Facility for Dissemination of Information to I-70 Travelers and Area
Visitors.
Status: The scope and magnitude of this project is currently undefined.
Budget: 2008 & Beyond - $ 100,000
Metcalf Road Improvements
Description: Reconstruct Metcalf Road from Nottingham Road to Wildwood Road.
Improvements May Include Additional Lanes to Accommodate Left Turn
Movements and Uphill Passing Along with Paved Shoulders for Bike and
Pedestrian Traffic.
Status: This Project is not well Defined at this Time and Proposed Budget is
Based on Order of Magnitude Cost Estimate Only. Project May Become
Better Defined with Completion of Stormwater and Drainage Project for
the Metcalf Road Basin.
Budget: 2008 & Beyond $ 1,000,000
Municipal Government - Space Needs Analysis
Description: Evaluate Existing and Future Space Needs for the Town Based on
Projected Administration Needs, Level of Public Services to be Provided
and Required Staffing Levels. Needs Analysis Could Include Town
Council / Public (Meeting & Communications), Police Department,
Recreation, Administrative Functions and Swift Gulch (Transit / Public
Works / Engineering).
Status: Recommend postponing analysis pending reevaluation required staffing
levels with economic conditions.
Budget: 2008 & Beyond $ 25,000
L\Administration\CIP Budget\2004\Proj Dscrpt Drft-2.Doc 2
Municipal Parking Facilities
Description: Centrally Located Parking Structure Constructed Independently by the
Town or in Cooperation with and in Conjunction with Private
Development.
Status: Included in recommendations in both Town Center Plan and East Avon
Access and Circulation Plan. Relatively High Cost Project. Estimated
Cost is from Draft Town Center Plan.
Budget: 2008 & Beyond $ 7,000,000
Nottingham Road Improvements - I-70 to Buck Creek Road
Description: Widen Nottingham Road to Four Lanes from Roundabout No.l to Buck
Creek Road, Construct Roundabout at Nottingham Road/Buck Creek
Road Intersection and Widen Nottingham Road to Three Lane Section
from Buck Creek Road to East Entrance at Sherwood Meadows, Construct
Streetscape Improvements Including Curb & Gutter, Sidewalks,
Streetscape Lighting and Landscaping Along Length of Improvements
Note: Improvements May Include Relocation of Swift Gulch Road
Connection from Nottingham Road to Buck Creek Road. This Change is
Pending Response from Owner of Wildwood Resort and is listed as a
separate project with cost estimate.
Status: Final Design is substantially complete and ready to develop easement and
right-of-way descriptions for acquisition.
Budget: 2004 Right-of-Way & Easement $ 300,000
2005 Construction & Admin. $ 1,920,800
Nottingham Road Improvements - Buck Creek Road to Metcalf Road
Description: Streetscape Improvements Including Curb, Gutter, Sidewalk, Bus Stop
Pull-Out, Pedestrian Level Lighting, Stormwater & Drainage
Improvements and Asphalt Leveling & Resurfacing Between East
Entrance to Sherwood Meadows and Metcalf Road.
Status: Design for this Portion of the Nottingham Road Improvements Project is
Nearing Completion and Inter-Mountain Engineering (IME) is Expected
to have it Complete Before Year-End. The Proposed Budget is based on a
Combination of Preliminary Construction Cost Estimates Prepared by
IME and Other Costs as Estimated by Staff. Proposed Right-of-Way
Acquisition is Scheduled for 2006 and Construction is scheduled for 2007.
Budget: 2006 Right-Of-Way & Easement $ 168,000
2007 Construction $ 1,347,000
Paving/Road Improvements
Description: Annual Street Resurfacing and Pavement Maintenance Program Generally
Consisting of Asphalt Overlays and Related Surface Treatments.
Status: Projects will be Determined Annually Based on Various Street Conditions
Existing at that Time.
Budget: 2003 $ 200,000 2004 $ 205,000
2005 $ 205,000 2006 $ 210,000
2007 $ 215,000 2008 & Beyond $ 215,000
I:\Administration\CIP Budget\2004\Proj Dscrpt Drft-2.Doc 3
Planning & Consulting
Description: Consulting Services for Various Planning Projects That May Arise
Throughout the Year.
Status: Annual Budget Item to Address Miscellaneous Unscheduled Planning
Issues That May Occur During the Year.
Budget: 2003 $ 25,000 2004 $ 25,000
2005 $ 25,000 2006 $ 25,000
2007 $ 25,000 2008 & Beyond $ 25,000
Public Works - Administration Building
Description: Replace Existing Modular Building with Permanent Structure to House
Public Works, Transit and Engineering Departments Administrative
Functions.
Status: Relatively High Cost Project. Project Needs May Become Better Defined
as Impacts of ECO Changes and Potential Partnership Issues Are
Resolved.
Budget: 2008 & Beyond $ 1,500,000
Public Works - Equipment Storage & Work Area Buildings
Description: Enclosed and Heated Shop Space for Woodworking, Sign Making and
Other Similar Activities Plus Storage of Weather & Temperature Sensitive
Equipment Such As Street Sweepers and Water Tank/Spray Equipment.
Status: Moderate Cost Project. Project Needs May Become Better Defined As
Impacts of ECO Changes and Potential Partnership Issues Are Resolved.
Budget: 2008 & Beyond $ 750,000
Recreation Center Phase II
Description: Phase II Expansion of the Recreation Center Could Include Expanded
Cardio-Weight Area, Additional Administration & Storage Space,
Climbing Wall, Meeting Rooms and Gymnasium.
Status: Relatively High Cost Project. Estimated Cost is not Based on Specific
Project and Actual Costs May Vary Significantly as Actual Scope of
Project is Defined.
Budget: 2008 & Beyond $ 3,500,000
Swift Gulch Road Relocation
Description: Realign Swift Gulch Road from behind Pizza Hut to cross Wildwood
Resort, Lot 1 and connect with Buck Creek Road. Current connection and
right-of-way to Nottingham Road would be vacated in exchange for right-
of-way across Lot 1.
Status: Preliminary layout and cost estimates were prepared by Inter-Mountain
Engineering and the preliminary layout has been forwarded to Ray Nielsen
for consideration in preparation of their proposed Cottonwood PUD
application. Potential Cost Sharing with Cottonwood.
Budget: 2005 $ 777,000
L•\Administration\CIP Budget\2004\Proj Dscrpt Drft-2.Doc 4
Town Center Mall / Town Center Plan Implementation
Description: Construct vehicular, transportation and pedestrian way through Town
Center Mall to Nottingham Park. Improvements include bus pullout areas,
on street parking and pedestrian sidewalks and streetscape. Other
improvements include reconfiguration of existing lot lines and relocation
of Benchmark Road.
Status: RNL Design has just completed and presented a Draft of the Proposed
Town Center Plan.
Budget: 2008 & Beyond $ 3,200,000
Potential Funding: Local Improvement District, Confluence Metropolitan District &
Adjoining Property Owners
Transportation Center
Description: Centralized Transportation Hub Where Multi Transportation Modes
Connect and Interact - Potential Interactions Include Automobile, Local
Buses, Regional Buses, Passenger Rail, Local Transportation System
(Cableliner), Beaver Creek Gondola/Funicular and Pedestrians.
Status: Project is Concept only and Details of Final Project Design and Actual
Costs Are Highly Variable and Dependent Upon Other Development in
the Area. CDOT Funds for This Project Are Currently Listed in the STIP
for 2003. This Timing is also Expected to Correspond with Anticipated
Development of the Confluence Site.
Budget: 2004 $ 800,000 2005 $1,200,000
Special Funds: CDOT Grant Anticipated 2004 $ 640,000
CDOT Grant Anticipated 2005 $ 960,000
Wildridge - Emergency / Bike Access
Description: Improved Access Across USFS Land Proposed for Land Trade and
Affordable Housing Development From Nottingham Road Through
Proposed Housing Development to Wildridge. Surface of Access to be
Determined as Project is Defined Following Completion of the Land
Trade and Housing Development Plans.
Status: Project is a Concept Only and Estimated Cost is Based Only on an Order
of Magnitude Cost Estimate. Costs May Vary Significantly as Project
Design is Developed and Refined.
Budget: 2008 & Beyond $ 850,000
Wildridge Park Improvements & Playground
Description: Phase II Development Of Existing Park At Intersection Of Old Trail Road
and O'Neal Spur - Potential Phase II Improvements Include Expanded
Lower Area With Playground, Improved Play Areas, Picnic Shelters and
Connecting Trails.
Status: Specific Improvement Plans Have Not Been Developed at this Time.
Level of Improvements Could be Based Upon Extent of In-House
Resources Available for Construction and Amount of Potential Grants
Received from Various Sources.
Budget: 2008 & Beyond $ 150,000
I:\Administration\CIP Budget\2004\Proj Dscrpt Drft-2.Doc
Wildridge Pavilion
Description: Building With Open Floor Plan, Restrooms and Minimal Kitchen
Facilities Which Can Be Utilized For Local Group Meetings, Individual
Parties, Wedding Receptions and Similar Type Functions - Easily
Accessed with Adequate Parking for Anticipated Activities.
Status: Moderate Cost Project. Estimated Cost Does Not Include Land Purchase
for Development. Cost Could Increase Significantly if not Constructed on
Existing Town Owned Property.
Budget: 2008 & Beyond $ 500,000
Wildridge Pocket Park - New in Block 5
Description: Small Neighborhood Pocket Park Located on Town Owned Tract Q with
Minor Landscaping and Small Playground.
Status: Moderate Cost Improvement. Specific Improvement Plans Have Not Been
Developed at this Time. Level of Improvements Could be Based Upon
Extent of In-House Resources Available for Construction and Amount of
Potential Grants Received from Various Sources.
Budget: 2008 & Beyond $ 150,000
Wildridge Pocket Park - Upper Area (New in Block 3 or 4)
Description: Small Neighborhood Pocket Park Located in the Upper Areas of Block 3
or 4 with Minor Landscaping and a Small Playground.
Status: Moderate Cost Improvement. Requires Acquisition of Appropriate Site for
Development of Park. Specific Improvement Plans Have Not Been
Developed At This Time. Level of Improvements Could Be Based Upon
Extent of In-House Resources Available for Construction and Amount of
Potential Grants Received from Various Sources.
Budget: 2008 & Beyond $ 250,000
Wildridge Traffic Calming / Pedestrian Circulation
Description: This Project is Expected to Include a Variety of Improvements Directed at
Reducing Conflicts Between Vehicles and Pedestrians. Improvements
Are Expected to Include Open Space Pedestrian Trails Connecting
Concentrated Residential Development Areas with Destination Areas,
Sidewalks or Paved Paths Adjacent to More Heavily Traveled Roads,
Widened and Paved Shoulders, and Use of Various Design Techniques to
Encourage Reduced but Realistic Vehicles Speeds Throughout the Area.
Status: Project is a Concept Only and Proposed Budget is Based Only on an Order
of Magnitude Cost Estimate. This May Develop as an On-Going Project
With Some of the Smaller Projects Implemented During the Course of
Normal Repair and Maintenance Activities. Costs May Vary
Significantly, as Project Design is Developed and Refined.
Budget: 2004 $ 20,000 2005 $ 135,000
L\Administration\CIP Budget\2004\Proj Dserpt Drft-2.Doc 6
NEW PROJECTS:
Comprehensive Plan
Description: The primary goal of a Comprehensive Plan is to develop a working
document that contains specific goals and policies related to the Capital
Improvement Program of the Town and future development and
redevelopment proposals. The Comprehensive Plan will also create a
framework of `quality of life' indicators specifically tailored to the Town,
as well as provide an analysis and forecast of economic opportunities and
constraints as they relate to the continued provision of quality public
services in an expanding resort community.
Estimated Cost: $ 85,000
East Avon Redevelopment
Description: Redevelopment and reconfiguration of area east of Avon Road as
necessary to extend "Main Street" from Roundabout 4 (with or without
Avon Road Crossing Solution) east to Chapel Place and on through
Chapel Square to East Beaver Creek Blvd which becomes Main Street
through The Village to Home Depot and Wal-Mart.
Estimated Cost:
The cost of this project has not been estimated at this time. This can
vary significantly depending upon property owner participation, project
configuration, timing of various components and undefined constraints,
obstacles and opportunities.
Swift Gulch Road Bikepath (Paving to Village I-70 Interchange)
Description: This project is to reimburse the cost of asphalt paving on bikepath adjacent
to Swift Gulch Road from Buffalo Ridge to the new I-70 Interchange
being constructed by The Village (at Avon). This project is in
conformance with and required by the First Amendment to The Village (at
Avon) Annexation and Development Agreement.
Estimated Cost: 2004 $ 40,000
Swift Gulch Road Bikepath (Roundabout 1 to Public Works Facility)
Description: This project is to construct a paved bikepath easterly along the northerly
side of I-70 from Roundabout I to connect with the existing bikepath at the entrance to
the Swift Gulch Public Works Facility. This section of bikepath would complete a path
that currently extends from Metcalf Road to Buffalo Ridge and with the completion of
Swift Gulch Road by The Village (at Avon), will extend to the new 1-70 Interchange.
This is expected eventually connect with the Eagle County trail system that is proposed
through Dowd Junction to connect with the Vail Pass and beyond trails.
Estimated Cost: $ 250,000
L\Administration\CIP Budget\2004\Proj Dscrpt Drft-2.Doc 7
Memo
To: Honorable Mayor and Town Council
Thru: Larry Brooks, Town Manager
From: Norman Wood, Town Engineer
Date: August 5, 2003
Re: I-70 Corridor Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement (PEIS)
Summary: The I-70 Mountain Corridor PEIS evaluates various alternatives to
meet long-term transportation demands along the I-70 Corridor between Glenwood Springs
and C-470. The purpose of the 1-70 PEIS is establish a basis for ultimately identifying the
preferred alternative to meet the underlying need to increase capacity, address the congestion
issue, and improve accessibility and mobility for the 1-70 Mountain Corridor users. The
preferred alternate will address 1) Environmental Sensitivity, 2) Adherence With Community
Values, 3) Safety, and 4) Implementation of the Preferred Alternative. This work is being
funded through CDOT with J. F. Sato providing the consultant team.
Helen Migchelbrink, Eagle County Engineer will be at the August 12, 2003 council work
session to provide a brief report on the PEIS and solicit input from the council with respect to
various alternatives being considered. This input will assist Eagle County representatives with
their input at a "Listening Forum" scheduled for September 23, 2003. The Division
Administrator of the FHWA, Executive Director of CDOT and other members of Colorado
Transportation Commission, FHWA and CDOT will be present for the Forum.
The attached DRAFT Summary Purpose and Need Statement and copy of slides from a
previous presentation may help explain the purpose of the study and the various alternatives
being considered.
Town Manager Comments:
1:Wdministration\Transportation\I-70 PEIS Memo-I.Doc
DRAFT 712212003 Purpose of and Need for Action.
Summary
Purpose and Need Statement
The purpose and need statement will be the basis for ultimately identifying the preferred alternative (package of
modal alternatives) that meets the underlying need and best achieves the purposes and environmental goals to be
attained for the I-70 Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement (PEIS) between Glenwood Springs and C-470
in Colorado. The purposes and environmental goals in the PEIS, along with satisfying the overall need, will also
serve as the scope of the decision factors for the selection of the preferred alternative in the Record Of Decision.
Statement of Need for the Proposed Action
Significant traffic congestion occurs along the I-70 Mountain Corridor (Corridor) in the mountainous portions of
Colorado, primarily during the weekends. Corridor congestion is expected to increase over the next 25 years and
beyond. The need to relieve this congestion is especially acute for the travelers seeking access between the Denver
metro area and US 40, as well as through the Eisenhower-Johnson Memorial Tunnel (EJMT). The need is
predominantly due to the number of Front Range users and tourists desiring access to the mountains for purposes of
recreation.
Due to the projected growth, Corridor residents, second homeowners, and workers commuting into the Corridor on a
daily basis would also compound the congestion problem. Weekday commuter-like traffic patterns are emerging
along portions of I-70, particularly in Eagle County, which is expected to become more congested over time. The
motor carriers providing freight services necessary to serve residents, businesses and visitors to the mountains, and
interstate commerce also add to the Corridor traffic. As a result, current congestion is degrading accessibility for the
mountain residents and businesses, as well as the mobility of interstate traffic.
Therefore, the underlying need for the proposed action is to increase the Corridor capacity,
address the congestion issue, and improve accessibility and mobilityfor the users of the I-70
West Mountain Corridor.
Statement of Purposes to be Attained While Meetina the Underivina Need
There are four primary purposes to be attained, to the degree possible, by the preferred alternative, while meeting the
underlying need to increase capacity, address the congestion issue, and improve accessibility and mobility for the I-
70 Mountain Corridor users. These purposes are 1) Environmental Sensitivity, 2) Adherence With Community
Values, 3) Safety, and 4) Implementation of the Preferred Alternative.
1) Environmental Sensitivity - In compliance with the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) and other
applicable regulations, the purpose of a project also needs to address the important issues related to the area
encompassing a proposed action. For this PEIS, important purposes include pursuing a preferred alternative that best
addresses such problems as stream sedimentation, wildlife crossings, air quality, and impacts to wetlands. An
environmental mitigation program will identify measures not only to minimize or avoid direct, indirect and
cumulative impacts, but also to improve existing environmental conditions (i.e. wildlife habitat, and other sensitive
natural environments within the Corridor). The I-70 PEIS provides the opportunity to assess the types of potential
direct, indirect and cumulative impacts to the I-70 Mountain Corridor associated with the alternatives. As a result,
cumulative impacts will become an integral aspect of the impact assessment and mitigation planning process.
2) Adherence With Community Values - The preferred alternative will be responsive to air quality, historic
resources, and noise level goals, minimize infringement to the mountain communities, and understand the growth
that may occur depending upon the ease or difficulty of access to and from the mountains.
3) Safety - The preferred alternative will address problematic roadway geometric conditions (i.e. tight curves and
lane drops), improve operations, and emphasize safety characteristics of the modes of travel. There are several
geologic hazard areas along the I-70 Corridor that represent potential danger to motorists on the highway as well as
physical damage to the highway itself. In addition, wildlife crossings will be evaluated to identify opportunities to
alleviate the conflict between animals and vehicles.
4) Implementation - Important components of the proposed action include affordability in terms of capital cost,
maintenance and operation costs, users costs, and environmental mitigation costs. All modes of transportation will
be fairly evaluated. Alternative modes will need to be technically feasible, locally supported and have an affordable
cost per new rider (capital cost, operating and maintenance cost, fare, and subsidy).
IlServer19900_Jobs199931PEIS Internal Draft April 20031Chapter 1 - Purpose and Need 03-03.doc
DRAFT 712212003 Purpose of and Need for Action.
Environmental Goals
The I-70 highway traverses the rugged terrain and outstanding scenery of the Rocky Mountains, including the steep
grades leading up to the Continental Divide and Vail Pass, and narrow steep-walled Clear Creek and Glenwood
canyons between C-470 and Glenwood Springs. Numerous rivers and creeks run along 1-70 within the Clear Creek,
Blue River, Eagle River, and Upper Colorado watersheds. The complexities of the high altitude ecosystems create a
sensitive natural environment as a backdrop to the mountain communities along the Corridor. Both the historic and
recreation oriented communities, and the recreation areas within the White River and Arapahoe National Forests are
destinations for summer and winter recreationists from Colorado, other parts of the U.S. and from around the world.
While I-70 provides the major east-west route across the Colorado Rocky Mountains, over the initial 30 years of
operation, the presence of the road and increasing highway congestion have affected the adjacent environment and
communities in a variety of ways, both beneficial and detrimental. The highway has provided stimulation to local
economies, improved access to and from the Colorado Rocky Mountains, and enhanced highway users' driving
experience in Colorado (e.g., Vail Pass and Glenwood Canyon). The I-70 Corridor also provides a spine for a
network of statewide and regional pedestrian and bicycle trails of value to local communities, tourists, and the
citizens of Colorado. In addition, numerous ski resorts are located directly along or within 10 miles of the Corridor.
However, the construction of 1-70 also has led to dust and vehicle emissions, truck and traffic noise, disruption to
historic resources, and stresses on local community resources such as emergency responses to highway accidents.
Roadside erosion and winter maintenance practices also have affected the water quality of streams and wetlands, and
the highway has affected adjacent wildlife habitat and animal movement corridors that cross the highway.
To address the sensitivity of the environment, as well as the current issues within the I-70 Mountain Corridor, the
following environmental goals have been identified.
Initiate environmental improvement programs - Both FHWA and CDOT are committed to identifying and
establishing programs to enhance and potentially improve existing aquatic and terrestrial habitats. A Stream and
Wetland Ecosystem Enhancement Program (SWEEP), and A Landscape Level Inventory of Valued Ecosystem
Components (ALIVE) program will be established by CDOT. The role of SWEEP is to develop a plan for the
management practices and enhancement of the ecosystems (including fisheries) associated with the streams,
wetlands, riparian areas, and watersheds in the Corridor. The ALIVE program will target management strategies for
high value conservation sites to wildlife, including federally endangered and candidate species, and develop
cooperative agreements with regulatory and resource agencies. In addition, resource agencies have defined high
priority wildlife crossings needed in the Corridor. The Record Of Decision (ROD) will develop a plan for the
implementation of these programs.
11Server19900_Jobs199931PElS Internal Draft April 20031Chapter 1 - Purpose and Need 03-03.doc
rrioo
?0mbmyh?ii4 co -r
1-70 MOUNTAIN CORRIDOR PEIS
Eagle County Meeting
July 28, 2003
JFS:' "R
iii Coirriboir
Alternatives Being Evaluated in I-70
Mountain Corridor PEIS
JFS-_",
1
m
Existing Conditions Various Locations
frs_ it+s?a+?w.'.?cx
?rrf1
---- ------ -----
rriboir
No Action Alternative
JFS
2
70 01414 a]
'Ai oil'
No Action Alternative Locations
r'is .
F-
• Local highway and interchange modifications
• Eagle interchange
• Widening of SH 9
• Gaming Access improvement
• Planned Park-n-Ride facilities
• Existing tunnel enhancements
• Ongoing maintenance
JFS "Z
Minimal Action Alternatives
JFS' ".i
• Aviation
• Transportation Management (TDM, TSM, ITS)
• Interchange modifications
• Auxiliary lanes
• Curve safety modifications
• Winter maintenance
• Bus in mixed traffic
• Winter Park Ski Train
JFS'':"a
Transit Alternatives
JFS:F "?
4
Minimal Action Alternative Locations
Transit Alternative Locations
ti
- z
771
- -- ---- ------- -
t ?
M
4
1\j\
/
• Rail transit with Intermountain
Connection
Eagle County Airport to C470
• Advanced Guideway System (AGS)
• Dual-mode bus in guideway
Guided: Silverthorne to C470,
• Diesel bus in guideway
unguided: Eagle to Silverthorne
JFS`O',
5
rrionr
AGS
Advanced Guideway System
Y21
33 Fill
3
1 70 Mountain Corriblay
Dual-Mode or Diesel Bus in Guideway
Dual-Mode Bus or Diesel Bus in Guideway
1 I
V=WV
Guided: Silverthorne to C470,
unguided: Eagle to Silverthorne
JFS''_
6
Corriony
MENEWim
Highway Alternatives
Highway Alternative Locations
KK
55 1 P1 L -I T-n Adam [ i yy
/ r
a sqw? _M_ ..:_
• 6-lane highway widening ass mph,
• Reversible/HOV/HOT lanes
• 65 mph local tunnel alternatives
7
?> w ,,; ? T = ?o Nf ouv
Dowd Canyon Alternatives
65 mph Local Tunnel Alternative
US 6 Tunnel
6-1-ane Widening
6
8
Combination Alternatives
70 Mbuntaili-corribor
Rail and AGS Combination Alternative Locations
...._.._.. ...._..__ ._. ____ .? ..._ _ ........ ........
u,l
• 6-lane highway plus rail, and IMC
¦ 6-lane highway w/ rail transit preservation
• Rail transit w/ highway preservation
• 6-lane highway plus AGS
¦ 6-lane highway w/ AGS preservation
• AGS w/ highway preservation
JF&'N
9
? .Ee
Rail & 6-lane Highway
Combination Rail Transit/6-Lane Highway
J -
AGS & 6-lane Highway
Combination AGS/6-Lane Highway
ICKII UO
JFS; 7
10
\
w..
.a .
Bus Combination Alternative Locations
• 6-lane highway plus dual-mode bus in Guideway
¦ 6-lane highway w/ dual-mode bus preservation
¦ Dual-mode bus w/ highway preservation
• 6-lane highway plus diesel bus in Guideway
¦ 6-lane highway w/ diesel bus preservation
¦ Diesel bus w/ highway preservation
JFS:,"."".
T _70
Mba
Bus & 6-lane Highway
Combination Diesel Bus in Guideway/6-lane Highway
PYNOnH 4M H?11awbivr RUme C!`.
• Y h'an SNrr % Cu cn ?e Eirannowr Tnrrie '
Guided: Silverthorne to C470,
unguided: Eagle to Silverthorne
JFS ` ."i
11
Growth
JFIS IN, =
rrionr
-, -
Land Use Growth
ISSUE:
• Potential for Induced / Suppressed Growth in the I-70
Corridor
APPROACH:
• Establish relationship between Travel Demand and Land
Use/Growth
• Predict potential for induced or suppressed population
associated with I-70 alternatives
JFS.' "`
owl
12
c T o Mouvitan Coi
w.
I-70 Land Use Growth Context
• Population growth in the corridor has generally
followed/coincided with 1-70 traffic growth
• From 1985 to 2000, the population of the nine
Corridor counties rose from 101,500 to 173,000, an
increase of 70 percent
• Average annual daily traffic reference level (at the
Genesee control point in Clear Creek County) rose
from 33,500 vehicles per day to nearly 58,400 (an
increase of 74 percent).
JFSS".'a
Figure 3.7.1-3
Trends in 1-70 Population and Traffic, 1985-2000
180.000 60,000
1 I
I
160,000 _. ----- 54.000
i
EL 140,000 -48,000 >,
0 I
a ? o
0 I v
t 120.000 - '- - - ; ! 42.000 2
0 ,r
U t " ? Q
o i o
100,0000 36,000
80,000 30,000
1985 1987 1989 1991 1993 1995 1997 1999
JFS? a-1-70 Population (left scale) ? 1-70 Trafic (right scale) ....1
13
?
?. -
V tai -r
-td WM
Population / Traffic Growth Relationships
Eagle County Trends
50
000 -?- Population
,
45,000
40,000
? EJMT AADTs
35,000
30,000
ry/* p
25,000 ?,.
? ti °
r
?
° Vail Pass to
20,000 ?
-
---
°
?
?
Copper
15.000 o°°°::°6°A
g
°
.o tain
10
000 _.
?, AADTs
, --a- Employment
5,000
0
1985 1987 1989 1991 1993 1995 1997 1999 2001
JF&1;1 i owl
:
77,
Assumptions - Growth Impacts
• It is noted that traffic can be impacted by population (as well as
the opposite scenario)
• It is noted that future traffic/population relationships might (and
will likely) vary from the 15-year past trends (especially for new
types of transportation - such as transit alternatives)
• It is noted that population growth is related to many other
factors and not only traffic/travel
• The population predictions obtained from the regression analysis
are only used to provide a snapshot of the potential degree of
growth pressure a County might encounter associated with
different alternatives (and is not meant to predict actual
populations)
JFS,,7
14
Population Growth in the Corridor
• 2025 - resident population of Corridor counties is
projected to more than double to 350,000, an increase
of almost 175,000 over the 2000
• While resident populations are increasing, they only
comprise a portion of growth impacts in the Corridor
area
• Seasonal population fluctuations must also be
considered
JFS' "`4
Population Growth in the Corridor
• Corridor counties have a high percentage of second
homes (non-local ownership)
• 50% in Eagle County
• 65% in Summit County
• Future trends indicate many second homeowners will
be moving to these homes as year-round residents
15
im
-
c
oyr
K
y
Population
County 2000 2025 Clump Pereeyd Clump
Clear CieA 9,322 17,060 7,738 83.0
Eagle 41,659 76,081 34,422 82.6
Garfield 43,791 80,879 37,088 84.7
Cdllxin 4,757 7,175 2,418 50.8
Grand 12,442 25,998 13,156 105.7
Lake 7,812 18,458 10,646 136.3
Park 14,523 56,100 41,577 286.3
Pitkin 14,872 23,719 8,847 59.5
5ununit 23,548 42,561 19,013 80.7
Total 172,726 347,631 174,905 101.3
Souna: DOLA 2002, WCCOG Census aallenge, DOLA 20(9
KS-1%,
Employment and Commuting
• Overall employment in the Corridor is expected to
increase by over 100 percent by 2025
• Eagle County is expected to have the greatest increase
with 200 percent (over 66,000 additional workers)
• In several counties' employment growth far exceeds
their population growth (Eagle, Pitkin, Summit)
JFS:` "_"?
16
2000
CDWiy Emplaymmt 2025
Employmerd FeweatIrrcreasein
Empbyrrrent
Clear Creek 3,509 5,529 57.6
Eagle 33,276 100,531 202.1
Gart"ield 25,387 40,954 61.3
al* 5,747 7,131 24.1
Grand 9,230 14,108 52.0
Lake 2,335 5,932 145.7
Park 2,931 2,994 2.1
Fitkin 19,191 39,217 104.4
Svrnrcit 23,242 44,261 90.14
Corridor fatal 124,948 260,657 108.6
JFS
200012025 Population and Employment by County
120,000
100
000
,
80
000
,
60
000
,
40
000 --- -
,
20
000
,
0
a
Cie
? 2000 Population ® 2000 Employment (DC LA)
? 2025 Population (DCLA) ? 2025 Employment (DOL.A)
JFS,."a,
17
GROWTH IMPACTS - Preliminary Results
Aft.matiws
Transit Highway Combination Transit Mighway
lbU 6-Lane 6.Laro
county 2025 DOLA
2000-2025
al
Min'rn Dual Mods 6-Lana
-La ns
6
6-Caro Wid.nirq Widening
Population
Chango
Y. No Action Action Rail or
M or Diasol
B Widening
i Widen
ing Wid
ening
id n
with Dwl
with
A us in Rawrs
bl w/ Rail i Mods Bus Diesel
Guideway a La nas Bus in
Guidoway Guideway
Clear 17,060 824% Less Susceptible
Creek
Eagle 76,161 77.2% potential Suppression Potential Inuaeso
Garfield 80,879 829% Potential Suppression Less Susceptible
Grand 25,598 1002% Potential Suppression Less Susceptible
Lake 18,458 135.9% Potential Suppression Less Susceptible
Pitkin 23,719 49.7% Potential Suppression Less Susceptible
Summit 45,650 78.5% Potential Suppression Less Susceptible Pobnsal Increase
Potential Suppression = predicted impacts have the potential to suppress anticipated DOLA and County growth
projections
Less Susceptible = predicted impacts are less susceptible to potential growth inducement
Potential Increase = predicted impacts have the potential to increase anticipated DOLA and County growth
projections
C Note that ilrese resulty do not take DOLA's latest (June 1003) projections into account- Engle County- 79,673
JFS(June 1003) m. 76.081 (used in this .stunt)
Distribution of Potential Induced Population
• Highway Alternatives - up to 10,000: distribution will follow
existing trends (about 50%150% population in urban/rural
areas - Eagle County)
• Transit Alternatives - up to 14,000: growth will concentrate
in existing/planned urban areas around transit centers (100%
of population will be distributed to urban areas)
• Transit-Highway Combination Alternatives - up to 36,000:
half of growth (population) will follow existing trends, and
half of growth (population) will be distributed to urban areas
J
18
Distribution of Potential Induced Growth
• Highway Alternatives:
• urban growth might be expected in Avon, Eagle, Gypsum,
• rural growth might be expected in numerous areas where
growth is currently anticipated such as: Avon/Eagle-Vail
Area, Edwards Area, Colorado River Area, Dotsero Area
• Transit Alternatives:
• urban growth might be expected to center in Vail,
Minturn, Avon, Edwards, Eagle (due to Transit Station
locations)
JFS,-w* "-;LL
NM:- ff ` o M bk
Eagle River Watershed Study Area
"1
K ,y
'WOIean
Gypsum Eagle Edwards
.. Avon
e S
tiintarn
Vail-
19
M
Eagle River Watershed Study Area
• Total area in acres: 342,000
• Historic and Existing Development - 13,000
• Planned Urban Development - 39,000
• Planned Rural Development - 48,000
• Federal Management - 242,000
• 150,00 = special management (wilderness,
non-motorized, open space)
• 92,000 = active recreation management (ski
areas, motorized, developed recreation
jf§:Ia
Eagle River Watershed Study Area
• Existing and planned development within 200 of
streams, open water and wetlands (acres)
• Existing - 2,500
• Planned urban - 49700
• Planned rural - 5,300
20
Eagle River Watershed Study Area
ti"• a. 1
.,• .d"??` ? t 1 S ?l - ' VI'DICOft ' ' a r (',' ?? ..?'* S?'Q?f
r r ' 7
Detsero ?,y vpSUm Gagta w r..? dw?rds j j
i
V. "11
Ael
JF§:,, "
I Moi
W
Water Supply Evaluation
ISSUE:
Water Supply as a Potential Limiting Factor to
Induced Growth
OVERALL FINDING OF EVALUATION:
There is a high likelihood that water supply issues will
be a limiting factor in relation to future Corridor
growth.
21
Water Supply Evaluation
Information Used
All available/known information from USGS,
CWCB, DOW, NWCCOG, DRCOG, County and
local water group studies
*a single source of comprehensive information
regarding water availability/shortages could not be
found. Therefore, the evaluation results are
qualitative vs. quantitative.
7a Mhantaih Co
Water Supply Evaluation - General Conclusions
• Data from numerous sources indicates that the Corridor area is
facing water supply issues and that these conditions will
continue in the future.
• Growth during the 1990s occurred during a wet cycle.
• The current drought cycle was not anticipated by most water
providers in Colorado.
• The drought situation has demonstrated that many providers are
not prepared for extended drought conditions.
• Drought has brought water shortage issues to the forefront.
J FS ,ON,
22
coyyiboy
Water De mand Estimates
*Based on per capita use with adjustment to account for "peak" populations
Estimated Total Water Demand (acre-feet)
2000 2025
County/Subarea Water Demand Water Demand
Clear Creek 2,227 4,011
Eagle 12,711 22,736
Garfield 10,897 19,223
Summit 11,418 18,439
-70 Corridor counties 37,253 64,409
Gilpin 2,969 3,989
Grand 3,932 7,831
Lake 1,972 4353
Park 4,029 13,780
Pitkin 4,478 7,098
All counties 54,632 101,460
JFS,,!%,
M „z
° 'T
'70 Mo ntain Conti
Potential to Acquire Additional Water Resources
Storage Inter-Related Issues
Ground-water Drought
Surface water Tourism and Recreational Use
Water Rights Global Warming
Management Measures Water Quality and Fisheries
Trans-basin Sources
Forest Management
Cloud Seeding
JFS; " ..
23
Eagle River Watershed Study Area
• Existing and planned development within Bighorn
Sheep Habitat (acres)
• Existing - 72
• Planned urban - 226
• Planned rural - 53
?t
Eagle River Watershed Study Area
• Existing and planned development within Elk
Habitat (acres)
• Existing - 1,400
• Planned urban - 8,200
• Planned rural - 5,300
24
Eagle River Watershed Study Area
• Existing and planned development within Deer
Habitat (acres)
• Existing - 5,000
• Planned urban - 6,000
• Planned rural - 9,000
, F>
70 n
M01411 141' - vviAnv
k
Eagle River Watershed Study Area (Aggregated HUC 6 sub watersheds)
Vie
i
`L. MP 1147,&74, Wokotf la Aron'' 1 ? r
MP 154.5-165.5'
?t
Eaglc to Walcott - T ?rl?t '•f .{jj I
r.? ? '.ilP 1d] 9 151 d' ? ?? a- •?
25
.
._............................................... ........ .......... ._..... .................................... ......... ................. .._ ...........
low
Y+ ? y» S
,o .+'y
3
8 i.
/
?, ? .v nrev+w r.?.w
S
T" w
1-70 M...W. Corridor PETS
i ?'j ?•r `? ? twiur•Mrn.n.u ra.v or...m
w .
Zone 1: Dotsero (MP 131.4 - 134.5)
• Moderate Priority
• Rapidly developing
• Planned development 475 acres on two parcels south of I-70,
including:
• high density residential
• a school
• Current land uses in surrounding area are not conducive to
wildlife crossing but is a historic migration corridor
• Because of continuing development, conservation easements
are crucial to maintain the integrity of this zone
26
Zone 2: Eagle Airport to Town of Eagle (MP 142.0 -145.3)
• Moderate Priority
• Growth pressures as Gypsum and Eagle expand
• One structure could be modified to improve potential for use
by larger animals
• Conservation easements along Eagle River would ensure
future winter range is available for, primarily, mule deer
JFS.;,,Onk
27
Zone 3: Eagle to Wolcott (MP 147.3 - 153.6)
• Moderate Priority
• Development exists to south and west
• A crossing is greatly needed in this zone
• No suitable underpasses exist primarily because of
topography
• One area at MP 151.8 may have potential for some type of
crossing; further investigation is needed to assess costs
28
Zone 4: Wolcott to Avon (MP 154.4 - 166.5)
• High Priority - opportunities for connecting with habitats on adjacent federally
managed lands are becoming more scarce throughout the zone
• Edwards to Avon is heavily developed on both sides of I-70
• Several large developments are underway, including:
• subdivision of sixty 35-acre lots into 15-acre lots at Red Sky Ranch PUD
• Vasser Land Exchange planned to add 40 acres of development (300
employee units for Vail Resorts)
• Land directly south of MP 163.0 developed
• 256 employee units for Colorado Mountain College
• a high school
• a church
• soccer fields
• BLM is considering exchanging 1,400 acres of surrounding land for 1,000
potential housing units
29
Zone 5: Dowd Canyon (MP 169.5 - 172.3)
• Moderate Priority
• CDOW owns several properties surrounding Dowd Canyon
and leases 114 acres from the State Land Board
• Developed on east and west ends near West Vail and Eagle-
Vail
30
Zone 6A & 613: Upper & Lower West Vail Pass
(MP 181.8 - 186.0 & 186.0 - 188.5)
• High Priority
• No development in zone except:
• developed recreation along Vail Pass-Tenmile bike path
• Black Lakes
• numerous trails along drainages
• WRNF manages the area for forested landscape linkage
• Any crossing or fencing structures need to be closely
coordinated with the SCAP program, as the two would
coincide in stretches.
JFS,.1%.
31
Eagle River Watershed Study Area
• Existing and planned development within 170
Viewshed (acres)
• Existing - 10,000
• Planned urban - 14,500
• Planned rural - 17,600
ryion-r
Economics
JFS
32
REMI Model - Economic Baseline
• REMI is calibrated to match DOLA's 2025 Economic
Baseline
• DOLA projected population and employment and other
economic parameters supplied by REMI for the Region
T -'7o MO
REMI Model
• DOLA population/employment projections
• REMI Model Regional economic parameters for 9-County
area
• Travel Times based on alternatives from the Travel Demand
Model
3 3
REMI Model - Baseline Condition
• The current recession is restraining relocation to and
investment in the project area
• From 2013-2020, economic activity will accelerate due to
improving economic conditions
• By the mid - 2020s and beyond, build-out conditions in the
Corridor will gradually dampen growth
• No explicit assumption is made about the ability of I-70 to
serve future demand - it is assumed to be met (consistent
with DOLA)
rrionr
A
REMI Model - Construction of Action Alternatives
• All alternatives are constructed between 2010 and 2025
• The region will experience some economic benefit during
construction
• The benefit of construction will be realized prior to
completion of the alternative
• The induced growth will not take place until the completion
of the alternative
JFSI
34
i
REMI Model - Value of Time and Access Factors
• The REMI model translates the loss or gain of amenity values
(like free-flowing traffic, clean air, etc.) into a factor that acts
to restrain or stimulate worker migration over the longer
term, which in turn impacts regional income and employment
Coy
REMI Model Process - Economic Baseline
Baseline Forecast, 2001-2035:
1-70 Population and Employment
450 .-_. _ ... ... ..... .. ........ .....,
aoo - - -- -
350
300 _ _ .._...Y'r
h
a
c 250
0 200
150
10o
50
Employment t Population
op. p. p.
35
Tourism Spending
• Projected estimate of 2025 Total Personal Income (9-County
area)
• Person-Trips (PTs) from the Travel Demand Model (Winter
and Summer Weekends) - Twin Tunnels Location
• 2000 and 2025 PTs (at Twin Tunnels) - Day Recreation, Local
Recreation, Stay Overnight, Colorado Non-Work, External
• The Twin Tunnel location and average inducement factors
(from the Model) capture overall impacts to the Corridor Area
Spending Assumptions
• Tourists (by PTs) spend $171/day for Winter recreation and
$92/day for Summer recreation
• Tourist (by PTs) spend $266/day for Winter lodging and
$114/day for Summer lodging
• The degree of tourism contribution to the Corridor economy
does not change from 2000 to 2025 in the Corridor area for
the 2025 Baseline Condition
• Trips - susceptible to suppression/inducement by alternative -
are translated into tourism spending
36
Ooil'
Tourism Spending Assumptions (Continued)
• 2025 Adjusted Spending is suppressed/induced by alternative
based on the following factors (average model inducements):
6-Ian
Mauaal ltasssrt- DuseVDual VAd-91 AGL nth-y/ MO-Ml
'No A(tinn kcdo. R.TAGS Mode Bus Rev¢sr-hk Wqhw&y RailC-U Dus Combo
Lanes Combo
S.Pp ...d bd -.d
-2)%
-5011.
& -70l. 1511. +12% +11% +2% 20% +211 +19%
cases
*Tlie No Action cnse.s use specific suppressioct l,rcenrage.s for y-cific trip Apes.
• The suppressed/induced spending (by alternative) is
compared to the 2025 Baseline Adjusted Spending to yield
potential change in tourism spending relative to Baseline
conditions.
fi..
Definition
Value of Time:
• Traffic congestion is a major source of wasted time and loss
of income. For example: traffic delays while commuting to
work - as a cost in teens of time taken away from other
activities.
JFS '1'
37
:.
Definition
Gross Regional Product (GRP):
• The annual value of new goods and services produced in the
regional economy, and is equivalent in concept to the Gross
Domestic Product, which encompasses the national
economy.
JFS:
Definition
Disposable Personal Income:
• Comprises employee compensation, proprietors' earnings,
income from property (rents, dividends, and royalties), and
net transfers from governments (e.g., Social Security,
welfare payments, etc.)
JFS;'"a
38
Definitions
Local Revenues/Expenditures:
• These values are based on data from the U.S. Census of
Governments, and include revenues and expenditures of
county and municipal governments, school and other special
districts, and government enterprises and public utilities. In
contrast, the local government fiscal data reported by
DOLA cover just individual county and municipal
government general funds.
IJFS."-' Owl
Gross Regional Product
Gross Regional Product E
($'s in billions)
2001 2010 2025 2035
Baseline (DOLA I REMI) 12 16 38 45
No Action - 50%
suppression with 15% adverse 12 12 22 24
wage and productioncost
VoT) adjustment
JFS: "`? =?
39
Personal Income
Personal Income
($'s in billions)
2001 2010 2025 2035
.Baseline (DOLA l REMI) 6 6 18 23
No Action - 5o%
suppression with 16% adverse 6 6 11 13
wage and productioncost
(VoT) adjustment
JFS,-!' ,
w
Total State / Local Government Revenues
Total State ! Local Government Revenues
($'s in billions)
2001 2010 2025 2035
'Baseline (DOLA 1 REMI) 2.3 2.6 5.0 6.5
No Action - 50%
suppression with 15% adverse 2.3 2.3 3.5 4.0
wage and productioncost
(Vol) adjustment
JFS:',! ,
40
T O Nf?uvttaivi Corridor
Total State / Local Government Expenditures
Total State ! Local Government Expenditures
2001 2010 2025 2035
Baseline (DOLA / REMI) 1.7 2.0 4.0 4.6
No Action - 5o%
suppression with 15% adverse 1.6 1.9 2.9 3.0
wage and productioncost
(VoT) adjustment
IJFS ""a A
< o M014- taro Crn
I-70 Gross Regional Product: Baseline vs No
Action 50% Suppression Scenario (,pith Value of Time Adjustment)
41
wmmmmmlim
Alternative Details
Alternatives
No Action Alternative • Limited highway and interchange modifications
• Planned Park-n-Ride facilities
• Minimal tunnel enhancements
• Ongoing maintenance
Minimal Action • Aviation
Alternative • Transportation management
• Interchange modifications
• Auxiliary lanes
• Curve safety modifications
• Winter maintenance
• Bus in mixed traffic
Transit Alternatives • Rail transit w/ InterMountain Connection (IMC)
• Advanced Guideway System (AGS)
• Dual-mode bus in Guideway
• Diesel bus in Guideway
JFS r 0'1
42
Alternatives (continued)
Highway Alternatives • 6-lane highway widening
• Reversible/HOV/HOT lanes
• 65 mph local tunnel alternatives
Combination • 6-lane highway plus rail, and IMC
Alternatives 6-lane highway w/ rail transit preservation
• Rail transit w/ highway preservation
• 6-lane highway plus AGS
6-lane highway w/ AGS preservation
• AGS w/ highway preservation
• 6-lane highway plus dual-anode bus in Guideway
• 6-lane highway w/ dual-mode bus preservation
Dual-mode bus w/ highway preservation
• 6-lane highway plus diesel bus in Guideway
6-lane highway w/ diesel bus preservation
Diesel bus w/ highway preservation
43
44
Tunnel Options by Alternative
Elanh-/JeAnsen MAmsEW hnn.J Twin TUnnek
1111-, AkMnalire •??i«. Allernatirs .IrE?
sus ?n aweew Z it
11
oM w ?: w
8 N-O..y
?.ten .•.. IJh Mai-
CartlAp ?EK
...»,..? TsnM oon.n y An »Iwn
45
46
Memo
To: Honorable Mayor and Town Council
Thru: Larry Brooks, Town Manager
From: Ruth Borne, Director of Community Development
Date August 7, 2003
Re: First Reading of Ordinance 03-10, An Ordinance Approving the PUD
Amendment for the Village at Avon Development Plan and PUD Guide
for Planning Area M (RMF-4), RMF-1, Tract G, Tract N (Community
Park), and Open Space 5 and Open Space 13, Town of Avon, Eagle
County, Colorado
Summary
Traer Creek LLC submitted this PUD Amendment for the Village at Avon on May 30, 2003.
Several hearings were held by the Planning & Zoning Commission defining and
understanding the proposed changes to the development standards and densities for the
affected areas, which is limited to modifications to the planning areas located north of the
new 1-70 Interstate exchange.
On August 5, 2003 (the 4th public hearing) the Planning & Zoning Commission unanimously
recommended approval of the Village at Avon PUD Amendment as set forth in Resolution
03-14. The major highlights of this application include:
Creating an additional 19.2 acres of Regional Commercial (Tract Q) immediately
adjacent to the new interstate exchange. This commercial area is divided by Post
Blvd. into separate parcels. The east parcel is approximately 7.8 acres and the
west side consists of two parcels: 7.8 acres and an additional 3.6 acres. As a
frame of reference: Christy Sports is 6.35 acres and Original Wal-Mart 6.33 acres.
Tract Q also includes 1.0 acres for the Fire District Regional Facility as required by
the Annexation and Development Agreement.
Relocating the school site to Tract M and increasing the planning area for the school
site by almost 2.0 acres.
• Reducing the Community Park from 29.0 acres to 17.4 acres. The loss of useable
acreage for the community park is limited to 3.4 acres. The existing topography and
steep slopes were not considered in the original planning area designation for the
Memo to Town Council, August 12, 2003 Page 1 of 2
Ordinance 03-10, VAA PUD Amendment
Community Park. Traer Creek LLC has agreed to replace the park area when
RMF-1 and RMF-4 are developed.
• Increasing Planning Area RMF-1 from 146 residential dwelling units (24.2 acres -
6.Odu/acre) to 307 residential dwelling units (30.7acres - 10.Odu/acre).
• Providing a mix of 310 dwelling units on Tract M, which surrounds the new school site.
Tract M is specifically excluded in the Village at Avon PUD Guide from the total
development rights currently approved. Therefore, this amendment includes the
addition of 310 dwelling units (8.Odu/acre) to the previously approved 2,400 dwelling
units for the Village at Avon. Since the additional density is above what has been
previously approved, Staff has recommended transit services be required for this
development area combined with the school to mitigate the impacts and isolation from
the rest of the Town of Avon.
A more detailed analysis of the application and compliance with the Town's zoning code
and related regulations of the Village at Avon are contained in the Staff Report, dated
August 5, 2003.
Recommendations
Staff recommends approval of Ordinance 03-10 on first reading with the conditions as
proposed.
Alternatives
1. Approve on First Reading
2. Modify the terms of the Ordinance for approval
3. Deny
Proposed Motion
"I move to approve on first reading Ordinance 03-07, Approving the PUD Amendment
for the Village at Avon Development Plan and PUD Guide for Planning Area M (RMF-
4), RMF-1, G, N (Community Park), and Open Space 5 and Open Space 13, Town of
Avon, Eagle County, Colorado
Town Manager Comments ?,
Attachments:
A. Ordinance 03-10
B. Planning and Zoning Commission Staff Report dated August 5, 2003
C. Planning and Zoning Commission Resolution 03-14
Memo to Town Council, August 12, 2003 Page 2 of 2
Ordinance 03-10, VAA PUD Amendment
TOWN OF AVON
ORDINANCE NO. 03-10
SERIES OF 2003
AN ORDINANCE APPROVING A PUD AMENDMENT
TO THE VILLAGE AT AVON PUD DEVELOPMENT PLAN
AND PUD GUIDE FOR PLANNING AREA M (RMF-4), RMF-1,
G, N (COMMUNITY PARK), AND OPEN SPACE 5 AND OPEN
SPACE 13, TOWN OF AVON, EAGLE COUNTY, COLORADO
WHEREAS, Traer Creek LLC has applied for a PUD Amendment to The Village at
Avon Development Plan and PUD Guide to Planning Areas M (RMF-4), RMF-1, G, N
(Community Park), and Open Space 5 and Open Space 13 as more specifically described in the
application dated May 30, 2003 and subsequent revision dated July 24, 2003;
WHEREAS, the proper posting, publication and public notices for the hearings before
the Planning & Zoning Commission of the Town of Avon were provided as required by law; and
WHEREAS, the Planning & Zoning Commission of the Town of Avon held a public
hearing on June 17, 2003, at which time the applicant and the public were given an opportunity
to express their opinions and present certain information and reports regarding the proposed
PUD Amendment; and
WHEREAS, following such public hearing, the Planning & Zoning Commission
forwarded its recommendations on the proposed PUD Amendment to the Town Council of the
Town of Avon; and
WHEREAS, after notices provided by law, this Council held a public hearing on the
day of , 2003, at which time the public was given an opportunity to
express their opinions regarding the proposed PUD Amendment; and
WHEREAS, based upon the evidence, testimony, and exhibits, and a study of the
Comprehensive Plan of the Town of Avon, Town Council of the Town of Avon finds as follows:
F:\Counci1\0rdinances\2003\0rd 03-10 Village PUD Amendment 3.doc
1. The hearings before the Planning & Zoning Commission and the Town Council
were both extensive and complete and that all pertinent facts, matters and issues
were submitted at those hearings.
2. That the amendment is compatible with the Village at Avon PUD Guide and
original application premise and the policies as specified by the Town of Avon
Comprehensive Plan.
3. That the development standards for The Village at Avon PUD comply with each
of the Town of Avon's PUD design criteria and this proposed development is
consistent with the public interest.
NOW THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE TOWN COUNCIL OF THE TOWN
OF AVON, COLORADO, THAT:
The PUD Amendment for The Village at Avon PUD is approved for Planning Areas M, RMF-4,
RMF-1, Tract G, Tract N (Community Park), and Open Space 5 and 13, Town of Avon, Eagle
County, Colorado with the following conditions:
1. The additional density on Tract M, which consists of 310 dwelling units, is in addition to the
2,400 dwelling units currently approved in the Village at Avon PUD Guide, Section D and the
Annexation and Development Agreement recorded November 25, 1998.
2.At such time as development is proposed for Planning Area Q, Tract G (School site), RMF-1
and/or RMF-4, the subdivision process will require adequate fiends with the Town to secure
public improvements, including but not limited to roads, bike paths, sidewalks, and utilities.
3. The Annexation and Development Agreement, Section 2(o), requires the Swift Gulch Road
extension be completed at the time of the Interstate-70 Improvements. No development
approvals will be issued until the Swift Gulch Road extension is completed.
4. Submit a detailed plan for the Community Park (Planning Area N) for review in conjunction
with subdivision plans for Area RMF-1. Submit a detailed Park Plan for RMF-1 and RMF-4,
in conjunction with subdivision plan submittal that accounts for the 3.4 acres of useable park
space removed by this amendment. The park improvements will incorporated into the
Subdivision Improvement Agreements.
F:\Counci1\0rdinances\2003\0rd 03-10 Village PUD Amendment 3.doc
5. Submit a road and pedestrian alignment that is designed to accommodate the potential for a
continuous connection between RMF-1 and RMF-4 though the United States Forest Service
parcel at such time as subdivision plans are submitted for RMF-1. In the event the proposed
alignment is obtained from the Forest Service, then a sufficient public road will be required to be
constructed and secured through a Subdivision Improvements Agreement, and be in place prior
to the construction of Planning Area G (school site dedication).
6. A continuous ECO trails bike path connection from Swift Gulch Road to RMF-1, RMF-4, Q,
N and G must be provided. This path will be secured through the Subdivision Improvements
Agreement, and will meet minimum trail standards as specified by the Town of Avon.
7. Public Transit services will be required to serve RMF-4 as a result of the impact of the
additional density and relocation of the school site to a more remote location. The Town will
determine the public transit services during the subdivision process.
Establish the VAA Wildlife Trust Fund prior to the issuance of the first building permit
associated with residential development north of I-70 as required in the Wildfire Mitigation Plan,
Exhibit D, of the Village at Avon PUD Guide.
9. This PUD Amendment approval is contingent upon concurrent approval of the Subdivision
Sketch Plan for all affected planning areas (RMF-l, RMF-4, Tract Q, Tract N, and Tract G).
10. Except as otherwise modified by this permit approval, all material representations made by
the applicant or applicant representative(s) in this application and in public hearing(s) shall be
adhered to and considered binding conditions of approval.
INTRODUCED, PASSED ON FIRST READING, APPROVED AND ORDERED
POSTED, this day of , 2003, and a public hearing shall be held at the
regular meeting of the Town Council of the Town of Avon, Colorado, on the day of,
2003, at 5:30 P.M. in the Municipal Building of the Town of Avon, Colorado.
Town of Avon, Colorado
Town Council
F:\Council\0rdinances\2003\0rd 03-10 Village PUD Amendment 3.doc
Mayor
ATTEST:
Town Clerk
INTRODUCED, PASSED ON SECOND READING, APPROVED AND ORDERED
POSTED the day of , 2003.
Town of Avon, Colorado
Town Council
Mayor
ATTEST:
Town Clerk
F:\CoLmcil\Ordinances\2003\Ord 03-10 Village PUD Amendment 3.doc
TOWN OF AVON
PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION
RESOLUTION NO. 03-14
SERIES OF 2003
A RESOLUTION RECOMMENDING TO THE TOWN COUNCIL OF THE TOWN OF
AVON APPROVAL OF A PUD AMENDMENT FOR PLANNING AREAS M (RMF-4),
RMF-1, G, N, OPEN SPACE 5, AND OPEN SPACE 13, THE VILLAGE AT AVON
PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT, TOWN OF AVON, EAGLE COUNTY,
COLORADO
WHEREAS, Traer Creek LLC, has applied for an amendment to The Village at Avon PUD,
to amend The Village at Avon PUD Planning Areas M (RMF-4), RMF-1, G, N
(Community Park), Open Space 5, and Open Space 13 as more specifically described in
the original application dated May 30, 2003 and subsequent revision dated July 24, 2003;
and
WHEREAS, after notices required by law, a public hearing on. said application was held by
the Planning & Zoning Commission of the Town of Avon; and
WHEREAS, said application is consistent with all legal requirements pursuant to Section
17.20.110 (H) of the Avon Municipal Code, the Planning and Zoning Commission has
considered the following design criteria:
1. Conformity with the Avon comprehensive plan goals and objectives;
2. Conformity and compliance with the overall design theme of the Town, the sub-area design
recommendations and design guidelines adopted by the Town;
3. Design compatibility with the immediate environment, neighborhood, and adjacent properties
relative to architectural design, scale, bulk, building height, buffer, zones, character, and
orientation;
4. Uses, activity, and density which provide a compatible, efficient, and workable relationship
with surrounding uses and activity;
5. Identification and mitigation or avoidance of natural and/or geologic hazards that affect the
property upon which the PUD is proposed;
6. Site plan, building design and location and open space provisions designed to produce a
functional development responsive and sensitive to natural features, vegetation and overall
aesthetic quality of the community;
7. A circulation system designed for both vehicles and pedestrians addressing on and off-site
traffic circulation that is compatible with the Town transportation plan;
8. Functional and aesthetic landscaping and open space in order to optimize and preserve
natural features, recreation, views and function;
9. Phasing plan or subdivision plan that will maintain a workable, functional and efficient
relationship throughout the development of the PUD. The phasing plan shall clearly
demonstrate that each phase can be workable, functional and efficient without relying upon
completion of future project phases;
10. Adequacy of public services such as sewer, water, schools, transportation systems, roads,
parks, and police and fire protection;
11. That the existing streets and roads are suitable and adequate to carry anticipated traffic within
the proposed PUD and in the vicinity of the proposed PUD.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Planning and Zoning Commission hereby
recommends to the Town Council of the Town of Avon approval of the application for
PUD Amendment for The Village at Avon PUD, Planning Areas M (RMF-4), RMF-1, G,
N (Community Park), Open Space 5, and Open Space 13 Town of Avon, Eagle County,
Colorado with the following conditions:
1. Submit a revised Village at Avon PUD Guide, which addresses the development standards for
Planning Area Q, and RMF-4 prior to the approval of PUD Ordinance.
2. At such time as development is proposed for Planning Area Q, RMF-1 and/or RMF-4, the
subdivision process will require adequate funds with the Town to secure public improvements,
including but not limited to roads, bike paths, sidewalks, and utilities.
3. Prior to the issuance of any more development approvals north of I--70, the Swift Gulch Road
extension as set forth in the First Amendment to the Annexation and Development Agreement,
Section 2(0), which requires the Swift Gulch Road improvements be completed at the time of the
Interstate-70 Improvements. This includes the extension of Swift Gulch Road from Buffalo
Ridge (Filing 2) to pass through Post Boulevard, terminating at Planning Area RMF-1 prior to
any development set forth in this PUD.
4. Submit a revised Planned Unit Development Plan prior to the approval of the PUD Ordinance
that revises the proposed Planning Areas as follows:
Clarify development standards for RMF-4, which limits the amount of deed-restricted
for-rent employee housing provided on this site.
Revise development standards for Planning Area Q to require a Special Review use for
the inclusion of automobile fueling stations and carwashes.
5. Submit a detailed plan for the Community Park (Planning Area N) for review in conjunction
with subdivision plans for Area RMF-1. Submit a detailed Park Plan for RMF-1 and RMF-4, in
conjunction with subdivision plan submittal that accounts for the useable park space removed by
this amendment. The park improvements will be a part of the Subdivision Improvement
Agreements.
6. Submit a road and pedestrian alignment that is designed to accommodate the potential for a
continuous connection between RMF-1 and RMF-4 though the United States Forest Service
parcel at such time as subdivision plans are submitted for RMF-1. The proposed alignment will
provide sufficient detail for review to meet public road standards as required by the Town, be
secured by the Town through the Subdivision Improvements agreement for RMF-1, and be in
place prior to the construction of Planning Area G (school site dedication).
7. A continuous ECO trails bike path connection from Swift Gulch Road to RMF-1, RMF-4, Q,
N and G must be provided. This path will be secured through the Subdivision Improvements
Agreement, and will meet minimum trail standards as specified by the Town of Avon.
8. Public Transit services will be required to serve RMF-4 as a result of the density and school
site proposed and determined by the Town during the subdivision process.
9. Establish the VAA Wildlife Trust Fund prior to the issuance of the first building permit
associated with residential development north of I-70 as required in the Wildfire Mitigation Plan,
Exhibit D, of the Village at Avon PUD Guide.
10. This PUD Amendment approval is contingent upon concurrent approval of the Subdivision
Sketch Plan for all affected planning areas (RMF-1, RMF-4, Q, N G).
11. Except as otherwise modified by this permit approval, all material representations made by
the applicant or applicant representative(s) in this application and in public hearing(s) shall be
adhered to and considered binding conditions of approval.
ADOPTED THIS 5th DAY OF AUGUST, 2003
Signed:
-- (? Date:
Chris Evans, Chairman
Attest:
Date: $ Q
Terry Smi , Secretary
F:Tlanning & Zoning Commission\Resolutions\2003\Res 03-14 VAA PUD Major Amdnt.doc
Staff Report
PUD Amendment VO N.
C O L O R A D O
August 5, 2003 Planning & Zoning Commission meeting
Report date July 29, 2003
Project type Planned Unit Development (PUD) Amendment -
new planning areas Q, RMF-4 and modifying
RMF-1, OS-5, Planning Area G, and Area N-
Community Park
Legal description The Village at Avon PUD
Current zoning Planned Unit Development
Address No addresses assigned
Introduction
Traer Creek LLC has submitted an application for a PUD amendment to the Village at Avon
PUD. The amendment proposes modifications to land uses on the north side of the new I-70
interchange.
The Planning & Zoning Commission has reviewed this application at several. meetings, and the
applicant has revised certain elements of the application in response to both staff and Planning &
Zoning Commission comments.
The following amendments, with the most recent revisions listed in italics, are being proposed:
• Create a new Planning Area Q for Regional Commercial development immediately
adjacent to the interchange, which is currently zoned for a community park, school site,
and residential development. The application has been updated since last review to
increase this Planning Area from 6.3 acres to 19.1 acres, increase allowable building
height to 45 feet, and allow residential uses associated with community service
facilities (i.e. Fire and Ambulance District site) as a use by right.
• Included in the Planning Area Q, Regional Commercial zoning is 1.5 acres for a fire and
ambulance district regional facility as a use by right. The dedication site has been
reduced to 1.0 acre, however, still complies with the development agreement
exaction.
Increase the residential development rights immediately north of the I-70 interchange
known as Residential Multi-Family (RMF-1) from 145 dwelling units to a potential of
242 dwelling units. The size of this parcel is also increased from the existing 24.2 acres
to 33.1 acres. Planning Area RMF-1 has been decreased in size to 30.7 acres, with a
proposed density of 307 dwelling units.
Town of Avon Community Development (970) 748-4030 Fax (970) 949-5749
The Village at Avon, PUD Amendment
August 5, 2003 Planning & Zoning Commission meeting Page 2 of 10
• Redefine the borders and the size of Planning Area N (Community Park), decreasing the
overall parks and open space. The Community Park has been reduced from the
existing 29 acres to 17.4 acres in size. The original useable area of 19.1 acres has
been reduced to 11.8 acres.
• Planning Area M is being revised to include new residential densities in addition to the
densities (2,400 dwelling units/ 650,000 square feet of commercial space) approved in the
existing PUD Development Plan, Section (D) 2.
The density proposed for this new area is reduced from 15 to 8 dwelling units per acre
and is titled RMF-4. RMF-4 includes a proposed mix of 310 dwelling units. The types of
units are unspecified. This proposal remains unchanged.
Relocate Planning Area G (School site dedication) to Planning Area M. Area G is
currently approved as 7.3 acres in size, and is proposed at 9.0 acres. This proposal
remains unchanged.
A revised PUD Development Plan (Amendment No. 3), and Planned Unit Development Guide
will reflect any changes approved in this amendment.
PUD Design Criteria
According to the Town of Avon Zoning Code, Section 17.20.110, the following shall be used as
the principal criteria in evaluating a PUD. It shall be the burden of the applicant to demonstrate
that submittal material and the proposed development plan comply with each of the following
design criteria, or demonstrate that one or more of them is not applicable, or that a particular
development solution is consistent with the public interest.
1. Conformance with the Town of Avon Comprehensive Plan's Goals and Objectives.
The Comprehensive Plan did not contemplate the development pattern of the Village, but
instead recognized the property as a potential annexation with opportunities for future
development. However, the plan does identify several policy goals related to land use and
development patterns that should be reviewed with respect to the proposed Village PUD
amendment.
The goals and policies that pertain are as follows, each with a review comment regarding this
application's compliance:
Goal Al: Ensure a balanced system of land uses that maintains and enhances Avon's
identity as a residential community, and as a regional commercial, tourism and
entertainment center.
Review Comments: The proposed amendment is generally consistent with the land use
pattern contemplated and approved in the original Village at Avon PUD application.
However, that application did make several assumptions related to the type of development
contemplated for areas north of I-70:
"Very low density development on portions of The Village located north of I-70" (Original VAA
PUD application, Section 2.2 Key Features of the Plan)
Town of Avon Community Development (970) 748-4030 Fax (970) 949-5749
The Village at Avon, PUD Amendment
August 5, 2003 Planning & Zoning Commission meeting Page 3 of 10
"Proposed land use pattern for portions ... located north of I-70 provides for a gradual transition from
higher density residential development along... I-70 ... very low density on the upper portions of the
Village" (Original VAA PUD application, Section 3.4 The Village (at Avon) Development Plan)
"Planning Areas include the mixed-use development sites located south of I-70 and one area north of
I-70 (Area M)"(Original VAA PUD application, Section 3.4 Land Use Designations)
The proposed amendment is consistent with the representations made in the original
application in terms of density. The largest changes are shifts of the location and type of
proposed development, including the relocation of Planning Area G, the school site,
minimizing commercial development on Planning Area M (now RMF-4) and creating a new
small commercial site on Planning Area Q (immediately north of the I-70 interchange).
Villal!e at Avon - Proposed Densities and Planning Areas north of I-70
RMF- 4 (formerly referred to as Planning Area Tract M) has densities which are not
included in the total Village at Avon density approval (2,400 DU's), however, as originally
contemplated was zoned Regional Commercial with 15 dwelling units per acre (and no
minimum/maximum residential to commercial ratio). The maximum allowable density per
the current plan is 1,496 dwelling units. RMF-4 is now proposed as a residential
development of 310 residential dwelling units.
RMF-1 is being proposed in the same general location as currently approved, however, is
requested for higher density residential development at 307 dwelling units (currently
approved for 145 dwelling units). This includes secondary units and/or lock-offs with single-
family residences.
Planning Area Q is a new regional commercial designation for both sides of the I-70
interchange ramps that is being proposed as 19.1 acres. This planning area also is proposed
with a density of 15 residential dwelling units per acre; however, residential density is
allowable only as a special review use unless associated with community service facilities.
Planning Area G: The school land dedication site is being proposed at 9 acres in size and at
the center of the RMF-4 parcel. It is currently approved on the PUD Development Plan as
occurring immediately adjacent to the new I-70 interchange.
Planning Area N: The Community Park is being proposed in generally the same location as
currently approved, shifting slightly in location as a result of the Swift Gulch Road extension
and the creation of the increased commercial area of Planning Area Q. Most significant is
the reduction of useable park space from 19.1 acres to 11.8 acres.
Open Space and R.O.W: Open Space is being reduced by approximately 25 acres as a result
of the increased Right-of-Way (R.O.W.) necessary to create the Swift Gulch Road extension
and the road access to RMF-4, the I-70 ramps, and the reconfiguration of RMF-1.
Goal A3: Maintain a compact urban form that respects and preserves the natural
beauty of the valley, river and surrounding mountains, and maintains distinct physical
and visual separations between Avon and surrounding communities.
Town of Avon Community Development (970) 748-4030 Fax (970) 949-5749
The Village at Avon, PUD Amendment
August 5, 2003 Planning & Zoning Commission meeting Page 4 of 10
Planning Area RMF-4 and Planning Area G: The proposed zoning for RMF-4 (formerly
Planning Area M) has been revised to allow commercial zoning as a Special Review Use.
The proposed school site is located in a valley, which should incorporate the natural
environment when planned and developed.
RMF-1 does propose a significant increase in allowable density - a 47% increase from
currently approved density. However, this application appears to further reinforce a more
compact urban form and balanced system of land use that is consistent with the
Comprehensive Plan goal as stated above.
Planning Area Q: Staff recommended increasing the potential commercial area, which was
proposed as 7.3 acres, and deleting the potential dwelling units from this parcel as the area is
not appropriate for residential uses in such close proximity to the I-70 interchange. The
applicant has responded by providing a more suitable commercial area (19.1 acres), however,
the dwelling units have not been deleted. As proposed, Area Q carries 15 residential
dwelling units per acre as a special review use.
Goal B1: Enhance the Town's role as a principal, year-round residential community
and regional commercial center.
As previously stated, the application does create a logical site for commercial development
immediately adjacent to the new I-70 interchange which would further enhance the year--
round role of the Town as a regional commercial center. The increased size of Planning Area
Q has been designed in a more functional configuration than originally proposed in the
amendment. This requires a reconfiguration of Swift Gulch Road as well as a reduction of the
useable area of the Community Park (Tract N).
Goal 133: Maintain a balanced, diverse economic base that provides employment
opportunities for residents and a sustainable tax base for the Town.
The provision of a reasonable commercial space to accommodate the potential for
entertainment/recreation/restaurant facility within close proximity to residential densities will
favorably provide economic opportunity for the Town.
Goal Cl: Provide for diverse, quality housing to serve all economic segments and age
groups of the population.
RMF-1 proposes high to medium density residential development alongside community
amenities such as the Community Park (Planning Area N) and a bike path.
RMF-4 proposes a mix of high-density residential (potentially employee housing), medium
and low-density residential development adjacent to the school site.
Goal C2: Provide affordable housing for permanent and seasonal residents that is
attractive, safe, and integrated with the community.
RMF-4 originally proposed the development of approximately 163 high-density residential
dwelling units on parcel RMF-4 (formerly Tract M). If constructed as employee housing,
combined with the existing 244 units built on Filing 2 (Buffalo Ridge), approximately 407 of
the 500 total employee housing units required would be constructed on areas north of I-70'.
Based upon our experience to date with deed restricted employee housing in the Town, Staff
recommends that free-market for sale affordable/attainable housing units be built rather than
Town of Avon Community Development (970) 748-4030 Fax (970) 949-5749
The Village at Avon, PUD Amendment
August 5, 2003 Planning & Zoning Commission meeting Page 5 of 10
a project similar to Buffalo Ridge. Buffalo Ridge (Filing 2) is not physically integrated with
the community in terms of pedestrian or public transit. The project is further isolated from
the majority of services (retail, grocery, recreation, etc.) that most employee residents enjoy.
Though proximity to the proposed elementary school is a logical location for employee
housing, Staff believes that accessibility to employment, central shopping and Town
amenities for largely seasonal employees will be drastically reduced. Seasonal residents will
be made dependent upon the provision of public transit facilities as RMF-4 is proposed. This
may ultimately create a higher public service cost to the Town as a result.
Goal D1: Ensure cost effective development of public facilities and services such as
parks, community centers, youth activities, a community college campus, and public
safety services... that support the health, safety, and welfare of existing neighborhoods
and new development.
As previously stated, the liote;?t: _: rc pro-vid such a large amount of employee housing on
Planning Area RMF-4 is discouraged and does nog rOmote a cost-effective
solution to public services for the Town. However, in terms of total dwelling units, the,
proposal appears to comply with the Comprehensive Plan goal as stated.
Goal E1: Create an integrated transportation system that minimizes dependence on
automobile travel within the Town by making it easier to use transit, walk, or use
bicycles and other non-motorized transportation.
The proposal does not address the public transit demand that will.be generated by Plannir_g
Area RMF-4. The public road has been significantly lengthened (approximately 2.55 miles)
as compared to the current PUD approval (which provides a school pad immediately adjacent
to the I-70 interchange).
Further information is required on the provision of the bike path through Planning Area
RMF-4, and the application should demonstrate that the proposed trail location complies with
the Eagle County Trails Master Plan. Additionally, staff would request the applicant pro-vide
(through the subdivision process) sufficient information on the proposed grading and
drainage and phasing of this trail to ensure the alignment is physically possible and
corresponds to the ECO Trails plan.
Goal E3: Promote the development of an enhanced transit system to the Town of Avon.
As stated above, the proposal does not address the public transit demand that will be
generated by RMF-4. As a result of the densities and school site being proposed, staff
recommends that the Traer Creek Metropolitan District provide transit services to Planning
Area RMF-4.
Goal Fl: Make Avon's unique natural setting and its open space system central
elements to identity and structure.
The community park is unplanned at this point, and a more detailed phasing plan for this
park should be submitted at such time that the Roadway and RMF-1 subdivision plans are
submitted. However, since the overall useable community park space is being significantly
reduced, it is recommended that this space be made up in acreage as active community park
space in RMF-1 and RMF-4.
Town of Avon Community Development (970) 748-4030 Fax (970) 949-5749
The Village at Avon, PUD Amendment
August 5, 2003 Planning & Zoning Commission meeting Page 6 of 10
Goal GI: Provide an exceptional system of parks, trails, and recreational programs to
serve the year-round leisure-time needs of area residents and visitors.
The proposed community park and trail are not submitted in sufficient detail to review the
feasibility of each. The trail alignment and grading should be coordinated with ECO Trails.
The Community Park will require further clarification on recreation opportunities through the
subdivision process. The useable space lost in the Community Park should be made up in the
residential areas of RMF-1 and RMF-4.
Goal 111: Establish and maintain a high-quality visual image of the Town.
At a conceptual level, it appears that the parkway proposal for the extension of Post
Boulevard and subsequent residential collector streets would help create a high quality
development.
2. Conformity and compliance with the overall design theme of the town, t:,4 sub-urea
design recommeL•_' 4ie!y: -nn4d s:. uetmes of the Town.
The Village Design Review Board governs design review for the entire PUD.
3. Design compatibility with the immediate environment, neighborhood, and adjacent
properties relative to architectural design, scale, bulk, building height, buffer zones,
character, and orientation.
The Village Design Revic1Y .Boa,u governs _':;sigi. ivvie r' for the entire PUD
4. Uses, activity, and density provide a compatible, efficient, and workable relationship
with surrounding uses and activity.
The densities proposed create a more compact development plan for the Village. T110-, uses
appear workable provided that access, public transit, and trail alignments are feasible.:.
5. Identification and mitigation or avoidance of natural and/or geologic hazards that
affect the property upon which the PUD is proposed.
Staff will evaluate all natural and geologic hazards as part of the subdivision review process
and further review of the Planning Area RMF-4. At a conceptual level, it appears th'_,
planning areas are sited to avoid known hazards.
6. Site plan, building design and location and open space provisions designed to produce a
functional development responsive and sensitive to natural features, vegetation and
overall aesthetic quality of the community.
The Village Design Review Board governs design review for the entire PUD.
7. A circulation system designed for both vehicles and pedestrians addressing on and off
site traffic circulation that is compatible with the Town Transportation Plan.
The Village Design Review Board governs design review for the entire PUD. The
circulation system and traffic will be reviewed as part of the subdivision process.
8. Functional and aesthetic landscaping and open space in order to optimize and preserve
natural features, recreation, views and function.
Town of Avon Community Development (970) 748-4030 Fax (970) 949-5749
The Village at Avon, PUD Amendment
August 5, 2003 Planning & Zoning Commission meeting Page 7 of 10
Landscaping and open space has not been planned beyond a conceptual level for the
proposed amendment. The Village Design Review Board governs design review for the
entire PUD.
9. Phasing plan or subdivision plan that will maintain a workable, functional, and efficient
relationship throughout the development of the PUD. The phasing plan shall clearly
demonstrate that each phase can be workable, functional and efficient without relying
upon completion of future project phases.
No phasing plan has been submitted, and phasing of public improvements will be
coordinated through the subdivision review process.
10. Adequacy of public services such as sewer, water, schools, transportation systems,
roads, parks, and police and fire protection.
The appropriate public service entities have submitted letters stating that they are willing to
service the areas subject to this amendment. The roadway alignments and public transit
demands have not yet been reviewed in sufficient detail to calculate the demands created by
this development. The Eagle County School District has submitted a letter supporting the
land area dedication provided the primary access is directly from RMF-1, and the access
currently proposed is utilized as a secondary access.
Completion of the subdivision review process will allow staff to review the adequacy and
costs associated with the provision of certain public services.
11. That the existing streets and roads are suitable and adequate to carry anticipated
traffic within the proposed PUD and in the vicinity of th:; proposed PUD.
The road and street improvements will be reviewed through the subdivision process.
12. Development Standards
Development Standards including lot area, site dimensions, setbacks, height, density control,
site coverage, landscaping and parking shall be determined as part of the approved
development plan with consideration of the recommendations of the Planning & Zoning
Commission.
The applicant has submitted development standards that would affect the existing PUT)
zoning classifications in three specific areas: Planning Area Q, RMF-4, and RMF-1 (the first
two being new area classifications).
Though no typical site-specific development plan has been generated with this application or
is required at this time, several new development standards and zone districts are being
submitted for review at this time.
Planning Area Q is proposed as `Regional Commercial' zoning, and in intent and
development standards, differs from the existing Regional Commercial parcels (i.e. Area K,
L, J) in the following respects:
Planning Area Q (19.1 acres / Two parcels immediately off of the exit and entrance ramps
of I-70)
• Proposes density allowance of 15 dwelling unit per acre; however, residential uses
require a special review use permit and are being proposed to have a maximum buildout
ratio of 20% as compared to aggregate commercial and residential square footage
Town of Avon Community Development (970) 748-4030 Fax (970) 949-5749
The Village at Avon, PUD Amendment
August 5, 2003 Planning & Zoning Commission meeting Page 8 of 10
constructed on the property. Residential uses associated with a community service
facility (i.e. the Fire District dedication site) are permitted as a use by right.
• Proposes `Gasoline Dispensing Service Station' regulations.
• Proposes building setback requirements of 10' on all sides (front, side, rear). Proposes
building height of 45 feet.
Does not specify a minimum or maximum of commercial square footage for the zone
district, however, does require that 80% of the aggregate square footage of the tract be
commercial.
RMF-1 is proposed at 10 dwelling units per acre, and RMF-4 is proposed at 8 dwelling units
per acre. Both classifications differ from existing `Residential/Multi Family' zoning
standards in the following respects:
RMF-1 (30.7 acres / Immediately north of I-70 interchange)
• RMF-1 proposes neo-traditional building setbacks (from 3 to 10 feet).
• RMF-1 proposes no commercial activities as either use by right or special i eviev., uses.
• RMF-1 proposes accessory detached apartments not to exceed 700 square fleet ip size.
This type of configuration is allowed as a `primary/secondary' dwelling uririt.
Parcel RMF-4 is proposed as `Re??_.7cntial/Nlulti Family' zoning. There are currently only
three other parcels with the same designation - RMF-1, RMF-2 and RMF-3. Density ranges
are fror_: 5 dvellin,; ?units p--_-c-F-- (RnATF.-3) to 12 dwelling units per acre (RMy-2). RMF-4 is
proposed at 8 dwelling units per acre.
RMF-4 (38.7 acres / Formerly Planning Area M)
Proposes commercial uses as a special review use, limits uses to those "intended to serve
surrounding residential areas". However, does not specify a minimum or maximum
commercial square footage.
Proposes no setbacks, but instead, proposes setbacks as a product of the Village Design
Review Board review of site-specific development plans.
Proposes the relocation of Planning Area G (school site dedication) to this area rather
than as currently approved immediately adjacent to the new I-70 interchange. This parcel
is also being proposed as 9 acres in size.
Planning Areas OS-5, G, and N are not proposed as changed in uses (other than location and
size) from the currently approved development standards. Most significant in the proposal is
the reduction of useable community park space (Planning Area N) from 19.1 acres to 11.8
acres.
Staff Comments & Recommendation
The application proposed generally complies to the standards and approval criteria applicable, if
approved with conditions as proposed by staff. We have the following specific
recommendations in response to the application as proposed:
Town of Avon Community Development (970) 748-4030 Fax (970) 949-5749
The Village at Avon, PUD Amendment
August 5, 2003 Planning & Zoning Commission meeting Page 9 of 10
l/ The school site dedication on Planning Area M should consider a minimum of two public
access points for circulation, whether provided from Highway 6 of other reasonable means to
accommodate both pedestrian and vehicular traffic.
2/ The decrease of useable space in the Community Park (approximately 7.3 acres) will remain
in either RMF-1 or RMF-4 (or a combination of both), and represent active recreation and
cultural opportunities- not informal recreation or open space. A detailed park plan should be
submitted to the Town at such time the subdivision plans are submitted for RMF-1 and/or RMF-
4.
Recommended Motion
Approve Resolution 03-14, recommending to the Towit Council approval of The Village at Avon
PUD Amendment No. 3; Town of Avon, Eagle County, Colorado with the following conditions:
1. Submit a revised Village at Avon PUD Guide, which addresses the development stam"Mrds for
Planning Area Q, and RMF-4 prior to the approval of PUD Ordinance.
2. At such time as development is proposed for Planning Area Q, RMF-1 and/or RMF-4, the
subdivision process will require adequate funds with the Town to secure public improver., tents,
including but not limited to roads, bike paths, sidewalks, and utilities.
3. Prior to the issuance `of any more development approvals north of I-70, the Swift Gui;h Road
extension as set forth in' the First Amendment to the Annexation and Development Agreement,
Section 2(0), which requires the Swift Gulch Road improvements be completed at the tirr;e of the
Interstate-70 Improvements. This inc 4udes the extension: of Swift Gulch Road from BuP- to
Ridge (Filing 2) to pass through Post Boulevard and serve Planning Area RMF-1 prior tk.., any
development set forth in this PUD.
4. Submit a revised Planned Unit Development Plan prior to the approval of the PUD (."Ainance
that revises the proposed Planning Anus as follows:
Clarify development standards for RMF-4, which limits the amount of deed-restricted
for-rent employee housing provided on this site.
• Revise development standards for Planning Area Q to require a Special Review use for
the inclusion of automobile fueling stations and carwashes.
5. Submit a detailed plan for the Community Park (Planning Area N) for review in con >nction
with subdivision plans for Area RMF-1. Submit a detailed Park Plan for RMF-1 and R_N.,i- F-4, in
conjunction with subdivision plan submittal that accounts for the 7.3 acres of useable park space
removed by this amendment. The park improvements will be a part of the Subdivision
Improvement Agreements.
6. Submit a road and pedestrian alignment that is designed to accommodate the potential for a
continuous connection between RMF-1 and RMF-4 though the United States Forest Service
parcel at such time as subdivision plans are submitted for RMF-1. The proposed alignment will
provide sufficient detail for review to meet public road standards as required by the Town, be
secured by the Town through the Subdivision Improvements agreement for RMF-1, and be in
place prior to the construction of Planning Area G (school site dedication).
Town of Avon Community Development (970) 748-4030 Fax (970) 949-5749
The Village at Avon, PUD Amendment
August 5, 2003 Planning & Zoning Commission meeting Page 10 of 10
7. A continuous ECO trails bike path connection from Swift Gulch Road to RMF-1, RMF-4, Q,
N and G must be provided. This path will be secured through the Subdivision Improvements
Agreement, and will meet minimum trail standards as specified by the Town of Avon.
8. Public Transit services will be required to serve RMF-4 as a result of the density and school
site proposed and determined by the Town during the subdivision process.
9. Establish the VAA Wildlife Trust Fund prior to the issuance of the first building permit
associated with residential development north of I-70 as required in the Wildfire Mitigation Plan,
Exhibit D, of the Village at Avon PUD Guide.
10. This PUD Amendment approval is contingent upon concurrent approval of the Subdivision
Sketch Plan for all affected planning areas (RMF-1, RMF-4, Q, N, G).
If you have any questions regarding this project or any planning matter, please call me at 748-
4030, or stop by the Community Development Department.
Respectfully submitted,
lCL1/
uth Bo , irector
Tambi Katieb, AICP
Town of Avon Community Development (970) 748-4030 Fax (970) 949-5749
Z_ E H R E N
AND ASSOCIATES, INC.
July 23, 2003
Town of Avon Community Development
Attn: Ruth Borne
P.O. Box 975
Avon, Colorado 81620
Re: Village at Avon PUD Amendment
RLCieIVLeD
JUL 2 4 2'003
Community De1e4ment
This statement is to address items one through twelve as listed in the Planned Unit Development
Review Criteria as outlined in the application requirements. Nothing in the following statements
shall be construed to supercede any existing agreements between the developers of the Village at
Avon and the Town of Avon.
1. Conformity with the Avon Comprehensive Plan Goals and Objectives
The Town of Avon Comprehensive Plan did not specifically address the details of the land
now known as the Village at Avon at the time of the last revision. The plan did anticipate
development in this area, but it was not yet part of the town. Although the Comprehensive
Plan has not been amended to include this property, we believe that the annexation process
and subsequent PUD that was approved by the town constituted an interim development plan
and that this plan outlined what the Town agreed was the proper development. The proposed
amendment is consistent with both the previously approved development plan and the goals
and objectives stated in the Avon Comprehensive Plan. This proposed amendment further
clarifies the development in a few specific areas based upon further study of the topography
and unique site characteristics.
This amendment also revises the PUD to incorporate several new requests by the Town and
the School Board including the Swift Gulch Road extension and the relocation of the school
site away from the highway interchange. These opportunities will allow the applicant to
identify specific opportunities for clustered residential development, public facilities,
schools, and commercial activities. The overall residential densities, commercial
development, and dedicated land for open space and/or public: facilities remain consistent
with those previously approved as part of the overall Planned Unit Development.
2. Conformity and Compliance with the overall design theme of the Town, the sub-area design
recommendations and design guidelines adopted by the Town.
This statement is not applicable because The Village at Avon maintains its own design
review authority.
• 1
i ERC,F I • `C:.11; Af CI-JTEC-
h',:
i •
3. Design compatibility with the immediate environment, neighborhood and adjacent properties
relative to architectural design, scale, bulk, building height, buffer zones, character and
orientation.
This statement is not applicable because The Village at Avon maintains its own design
review authority.
4. Uses, activity, and design, which provide a compatible, efficient, and workable relationship
with surrounding uses and activity.
The uses, activity and design modifications of the proposed amendment relate to adjacencies
of existing circulation systems and are intended to buffer less intensive residential and park
uses from those higher intensity uses directly adjacent transit systems.
5. Identification and mitigation or avoidance of natural and/or geologic hazards that affect the
property upon which the PUD is proposed.
The identification and/or mitigation of natural and/or geologic hazards.are addressed in the
appendix of the approved Village at Avon Development Plan and remain unchanged. Further,
more detailed study is currently being conducted. Development has been located out of
hazardous areas and/or will be mitigated by proposed infrastructure improvements.
It should be noted that the previously agreed upon location for the fire station facility on the
parcel of land between the Swift Gulch Road extension and the Westbound I-70 on ramp is
not feasible due to the nature of the debris flow hazard in this area. The current designation
does not allow any use akin to a residential occupancy. Because fire personnel often live in
their building while on duty, this is not an allowable use.
6. Site plan, building design, and location and open space provisions designed to produce a
functional development responsive to natural features, vegetation, and over all aesthetic
quality of the community.
The site plan, location and open space provisions are responsive to natural features and., avoid
natural hazards, are in locations convenient to residents of each respective neighborhood, and
are responsive to proposed vehicular and pedestrian circulation systems.
7. A circulation system designed for both vehicles and pedestrians addressing on and off site
traffic circulation that is compatible with the town transportation plan.
The location of higher density residential near the soon to be completed I-70 highway
interchange will place traffic impacts close to transportation nodes rather than within existing
communities. Higher density residential in these locations are also linked to the proposed
ECO regional trail alignment and an extensive network of internal pathways and trails
providing a convenient alternate means of transit and linkage between the neighborhoods and
the school site and community park.
Village at Avon PUD Amendment July 23. 2003 Page 2 of 5
•
The design of these new trails, including the currently planned and approved trail paralleling
Swift Gulch Road, will meet current ADA standards and provide uninterrupted access
without the need for road crossings. Tunnels and bridges will cross all arterial roads
providing a safe way for children to travel to school given the recent modifications to the
school bussing standards.
8. Functional and aesthetic landscaping and open space in order to maximize and preserve
natural features, recreation, views, and function.
The open space provisions of the approved PUD remain largely unchanged. The slight
reduction in Area-N is as a result of the Swift Gulch Road extension. The town requested the
extension of this road and its alignment at Area N is the result of CDOT standards and the
Federally mandated distance of intersections away from highway interchanges. The resulting
isolated parcel of land will now be many feet below the grade of the pant and not well suited
for park-like activities due to its proximity to the highway and the road. To mitigate the loss
of parkland an additional 1.5 acres was gained due to a new alignment of the road accessing
lots 1-96.
We have recently been informed that CDOT has rejected the current alignment of Swift
Gulch Road because a portion of the curb radius is too close to the highway interchange.
They are requiring that the intersection be moved further to the northeast. This will cause a
larger impact.to Area N and Area Q and may have an impact on RMF-1 as well. Because we
have only now become aware of this we are unsure of these impacts for this work session,
but wish for the town to be aware of the changing conditions. We will have this resolved
prior to the first approval by P&Z of the PUD amendment.
9. Phasing plan or subdivision plan that will maintain a workable, functional and efficient
relationship throughout the development of the PUD. The phasing plan shall clearly
demonstrate that each phase can be workable, functional, and efficient without relying upon
completion offuture phases.
Each of the proposed amendments or parcels can be phased as an individual subdivision
based upon the availability and completeness of utilities, roadways, and infrastructure. The
phasing and infrastructure requirements of the approved PUD will not change.
10. Adequacy of public services such as sewer, water, schools, transportation systems, roads,
parks, police, and fire protection.
Public utilities such as water, sewer, electric, and gas are adequate for the proposed
amendments to the PUD as identified in the attached letters. Public services including fire
protection and schools are being accommodated in accordance with guidelines and in
locations discussed with each specific district. Transit systems, parks, and open space are
more clearly defined, identified, and incorporated in this amendment.
11. That existing streets and roads are suitable and adequate to carry anticipated traffic within
the proposed PUD and in the vicinity of the proposed PUD.
Village at Avon PUD Amendment July 23, 2003 PaLe 3 of 5
0
The proposed roadways are designed to standards anticipated to accommodate proposed
traffic volumes, speeds, and parking requirements within each subdivision as well from
anticipated future development according to the approved PUD.
12. Describe the proposed development standards. Provide justifications for the proposed
standards and describe the benefits to the Town if they deviate from the proposed standards.
The proposed development standards for RMF-1, Area-Q, Area G and RMF-4 are outlined
separately below:
RMF-l; designated as Residential Multi-Family, and is intended to be developed primarily
as single family homes on small,lots with mostly detached garages on alleyways using
traditional neighborhood principles. Some larger corner lots may have duplex hordes
designed to look like larger single-family homes. Higher density multifamily units will be
used to buffer the neighborhoods from the arterial streets and provide a mix of housing types.
Reduced setbacks are anticipated to allow the homes to reinforce the character of the street.
Small accessory apartments will be allowed above detached garages to promote a diversity of
residents within the community. The resulting increased densities are located nearest to
arterial roadways and the new I-70 interchange. A network of internal neighborhood st-ets
forming a grid and two entrances into the neighborhood will diminish the traffic load on any
one individual street.
Area Q; designated as Regional Commercial, is also located nearest to the highway
interchange. This allows the greatest access to major roadways without generating
unnecessary traffic through residential areas. Commercial uses located on these parcels will
be encouraged to build close to the northern property line and place automobile oriented
functions (such as parking and auto circulation) along the south portion of the property. This
building placement will help to reinforce the pedestrian nature of the neighborhood by
making the buildings approachable for pedestrians walking and biking from the regionO trail
and the RMF-1 neighborhood. Parking, signage and potential gas islands located south of the
buildings will then be located where they will be most visible to highway motorists and
buffered from the residents.
Area G; designated as the School Site, has been relocated away from the highway
interchange at the request of the school district. The new location will be central within the
RMF-4 residential community, which was also a request of the school district. The current
access shown is via the upper road, but negotiations have begun to secure an easernent or a
land exchange of the forest service parcel of land between Area RMF-l and RMF-4 allowing
for a more direct road alignment. This access issue will be resolved before any development
commences. The proposed ECO regional trail alignment also crosses this forest service
parcel and serves to connect the Area-G and the surrounding residential communities.
Village at Avon PUD Amendment July 23, 2003 Pace 4 of 5
• •
Area RMF-4; designated as Residential Multi-Family, and is intended to surround the
school site (Area-G) with residential units in accordance with the wishes of the school
district. This area was previously designated as Regional Commercial with an allowable
density of 15 dwelling units per acre. The new designation results in a reduction in overall
density while still providing for a variety of residential housing types to suite regional
demand in an attractive setting.
Village at Avon PUD Amendment July 23. 2003 Pa°e 5 of 5
4
RECEIVED
Planning Area Q - Regional Commercial
JUL 2 4 2003
(a) Purpose:
Community Dsvelopnwnt
To provide sites for a variety of regionally oriented and commercial and service
oriented uses and activities in order to serve the needs and uses of residents and
guests of the Upper Eagle River Valley.
(b) Uses byRig_ht:
(i) Commercial Uses including but not limited to any activity for the purpose
of generating retail business or consumer services with the intent of
producing a financial profit including but not limited to; retail stores,
professional offices and businesses banks and financial institutions,
personal services, and food and beverage establishments.
(ii) Lodging facilities including but not limited to hotel, motel, and bed and
breakfast.
(iii) Service commercial uses including but not limited to auto fueling and
service stations, auto repair, auto repair, and car washes.
(ii) Public or private transportation, transit or parking facilities including but
not limited to bus and rail stations.
(iii) Public or private community service facilities including ambulance and
fire stations, storage and repair facilities, buildings including but not
limited to residential uses that directly serve those specified uses.
(iv) Temporary real estate and construction offices.
(v) Public or private roads and utilities including but not limited to utility
improvements, lines and mains, facilities, services, and buildings.
(vi) Additional uses, which the Director of Community Development
determines to be a use by right.
(vii) Accessory Uses and Structures customarily appurtenant to uses by right-
(c) Special Review Uses
(1) Churches, museums, libraries, and public buildings.
(ii) Day care facilities.
• i
(iii) Parks and open space.
(iv) Recreational facilities.
(v) Residential Uses not directly associates with community service facilities.
(d) Building Setback Requirements:
Front: 10'
Side: 10'
Rear: 10'
(e) Maximum Building Height:
45 feet.
(f) Density Allowance:
15 Dwelling Units per acre. Total permitted density shall be consistent with
minimum and maximum residential and commercial ratios as stated for the
Regional Commercial Designation (Areas J, K, L ,Q) in the PUD Development
Guide.
(g) Parking Requirements:
As defined by the Village (at Avon) Parking Requirements.
(e) Minimum Landscape Area:
5%.
(f) Gasoline dispensing and service station regulations.
(1) All fuel storage tanks shall be completely buried beneath the surface of the
ground except where such burial conflicts with applicable laws and
regulations.
(ii) All fuel pumps, or similar devices shall be located at least twenty feet
from the right of way.
(iii) All servicing of vehicles, except the sale of fuel and oil services
customarily provided in connection therewith, shall be completely within a
structure.
• •
(iv) All storage of goods shall be completely within a structure.
•
Planning Area RMF - 1 - Residential Multi-Family
(a) Purpose:
To provide sites for a variety of residential uses.
•
RECEIVED
JUL 2 4 2003
Community Development
(b) Uses bight:
0) Residential uses including but not limited to single-family, duplex, and
multi-family dwellings including interval ownership.
(ii) Temporary real estate and construction offices.
(iii) Public or private roads and utilities including but not limited to utility
improvements, lines and mains, facilities, services, and buildings.
(iv) Recreational facilities.
(v) Parks and open space.
(vi) Additional uses, which the Director of Community Development
determines to be a use by right.
(vii) Accessory Uses and Structures customarily appurtenant to uses by right.
(viii) Accessory (detached) apartments not to exceed 700 square feet-
(c) Special Review Uses
(1) Churches, museums, libraries, and public buildings.
(ii) Day care facilities.
(d) Building Setback Requirements:
(i) Front lot line - 10 feet
(ii) Side lot line (traditional neighborhood) - 3 feet
(iii) Side lot line - 7.5 feet
(iv) Rear lot line - 10 feet
(v) Rear lot line (traditional neighborhood at public right of way) - 3 feet
(e) Maximum Building Height:
35 feet.
(0 Density Allowance:
• 0
8 Dwelling Units per acre- primary dwelling units.
10 Dwelling Units per acre including accessory dwelling units.
(g) Parking Requirements:
As defined by the Village (at Avon) Parking Requirements.
(h) Minimum Landscape Area:
15%.
(i) Accessory dwelling unit regulations:
(i) Accessory dwelling units shall not exceed 700 square feet.
(ii) Accessory dwelling units shall be located within detached, accessory
structures served by a separate identifiable entry.
(iii) Accessory dwelling units are accessory to the primary dwelling or use of
the lot and may not be sold or conveyed in any way to separate ownership.
0 •
Planning Area RMF - 4 - Residential Multi-Family RECEIVED
(a) Pu ose: J U L 2 4 2003
To provide sites for a variety of residential uses. Community Develbprneint
(b) Uses by Right:
(i) Residential uses including but not limited to single-family, duplex, and
multi-family dwellings.
(ii) Residential Management Offices.
(iii) Temporary real estate and construction offices.
(iv) Public or private roads and utilities including but not limited to utility
improvements, lines and mains, facilities, services, and buildings.
(v) Recreational facilities.
(vi) Parks and open space.
(vii) Additional uses, which the Director of Community Development
determines to be a use by right.
(viii) Accessory Uses and Structures customarily appurtenant to uses by right. .
(c) Special Review Uses
(1) Churches, museums, libraries, and public buildings.
(ii) Child and Day Care facilities.
(iii) Commercial uses intended to serve surrounding residential areas including
any activity for the purpose of generating retail business or consumer
services with the intent of producing financial profit including, but not
limited to retail stores, professional and business offices, personal service;
shops, food and beverage establishments, and club and recreational
facilities to support and provide service to the residential development-
(d) Building Setback Requirements:
To be determined by sub-division and design review criteria except as necessary,
to accommodate utility improvements, lines and mains, facilities, services and
buildings.
0 •
(e) Maximum Building Height:
48 feet. Single family or Duplex residential structures shall not exceed 35 feet.
Non-habitable architectural features such as chimneys, towers, steeples, or similar
features shall be excluded from the calculation of building height.
(f) Density Allowance:
8 Dwelling Units per acre.
(g) Parking Requirements:
As defined by the Village (at Avon) Parking Requirements.
.. (h) Minimum Landscape Area:
20%.
06/19/2003 22:01 970-328-3539 ECO TRANSIT & TRAILS PAGE 02
trails
.,....w"eye0,..••.•.... ,••,.•...,. ,•••.
eagle county regional trails system
June 19, 2003
Town of Avon Community Development
Attn: Tambi Katieb
PO Box 975
Avon, Colorado 81620
Dear Tambi,
I have reviewed the Village at Avon PUD Amendment. Thank you for including ECO Trails in
the review process. I have the following comments on the submittal at this time.
Area N, RMF-,l and Q Development Concept, northside 1-70 interchange:
I . Design Details: I commend the developer for inclusion of the regional trail in the proposed
development concepts. I do recommend that more study occur on the enact trail connections
and locations as the devei.?; Men plan evolves. For example: is the trail tunnel under the
mama road in the best location to keep the trams as direct as possible direct and encourage use;
is the regional trail best suited on the north or south side of the road parallel to 1-70 heading
east; should this plan show the regional trail connecting to the USFS dirt road in the accurate
location or is it adequate as slsown for this stage of the planning process?
2. Timing and Responsibility, l assume the Town will require the trail construction and will
require it as one of the first public improvements fully constructed through the F.W-1/Q area
Area G I MF--4 Development Concept:
1. Design Details: Again, it trppears that regional trail segment is very conceptual in that it does
not connect on this concept plan to the existing USFS road, but is shown in the general
location of the lower access road proposed by the developer. The exact location will need to
be determined through the entire site including the school Area G. If the existing dirt road on
the USPS land is the target: for connection, it will require a connecting alignment that
complies with ADA and AASHTO guidelines for grade.
The trail is shown leaving the site in the southeast corner but if the developer is only required
to construct that portion that is on the subject property, than the location may need to be
revised to remain on the property until the eastern boundary.
2. Timing and Responsibility: As you know, the Eagle Valley Trails Committee is interested in
trying to bridge this trail system gap within the next year or two. It is my understanding that
the Avon Town Council supports that effort. Tirnin.g is a major issue and we hope the Town
. • . , . • • • • • • • ECO Trails. the comr aunities of Gypsum, Eagle, Avon, Vail, Minturn, Red Cliff
and Eagle County working together to create a regional trail system • . , . • ' • ' • • 0 .. .
06/19/2003 22:61 979-328-3539 ECO TRANSIT & TRAILS PAGE 03
will consider securing the full. construction of this segment as well as a possible interim trail
as one of the first steps in the project implementation.
Re: a possible interim trail: As you know, the developer is preparing a land exchange
application for the adjacent U'SFS parcel for the purpose of constructing a more direct access
road, and the trail would be included in that construction at their cost. The interim trail across
the Village at Avon parcel would be needed if we wanted to move forward on the entire trail
connection from Highway 6 to the Avon interchange while waiting for the UFSFS exchange
process to be completed. Foi your information, the ECO Eagle Valley Trails Conmu ittee has
asked that I write a letter of s-apport for the USFS land exchange on their behalf.
Please do not hesitate to contact one if you have any questions.
Sincerely,
Ellie Caryl
ECO Trails Program Manager
EAGLE COUNTY SCHOOL DISTRICT RE 50J
P.O. BOX 740 • EAGLE. COLORADO 31631 • (970) 328-6321 EXT- 23 * FAX (970) 328-1024
June 16, 2003
Town of Avon Community Development Department
PO Box 975
Avon, CO 81620
RE: The Village at Avon PUD Amendment Z-PU2003-2
Ladies and Gentlemen,
The Town of Avon Planning & Zoning Commission is hearing the PUD amendment for The
Village at Avon. The PUD amendment does not change the school land dedication requirement
and the developer-identified 9-acre parcel in Tract M meets the dedication requirements. The
site will most likely be developed as an elementary school and the developer has insured that our
current elementary footprint will fit on the site.
Additionally, with the identification of all school sites, the school district requests that utilities be
delivered to the school site property line and that the property have both a primary and secondary
access for emergencies. Utilities include water, sewer, natural gas, telephone/data, cable and
non-potable water if being used in the immediate development. The school district supports the
primary access that is directly north of the interstate/river as this is the most direct route to the
site. The proposed roadway that winds down the mountain from the north would be seen as the
secondary access.
Thank you for contacting the school district regarding this PUD amendment. I can be reached at
328-2747 if you have any questions.
Sincerely, /,/,?
a/Cz'zR_' &__)
Karen Strakbein
Director of Finance
cducariag. ?ueruy $tudeat `?az Sccccea¢
Ampol"', EAGLE RIVER
WATER & SANITATION DISTRICT
846 Forest Road • Vail, Colorado 81657
(970) 476-7480 • FAX (970) 476-4089
June 11, 2003
Mr. Tambi Katieb
Town of Avon
P.O. Box 975
Avon, CO 81620
Subject: Application Refcri-al - Village (at Avon) PUD Amendment
Dear Tambi:
I have received and reviewed your application referral for the above-referenced project.
This amendment appears to consist of reapportionment of density and allowable uses
within the existing PUD and does not appear to affect the total approved number of
dwelling units. The Upper Eagle Regional Water Authority (Authority) staff has been
working with the Village (at Avon) developer and it's engineers on individual
development phases. Subsequent development will require the construction of a regional
water storage tank and sewer trunk line. The Authority and the Eagle River Water &
Sanitation District have no further comments on this file.
Thank you for the opportunity to comment.
Sincerely,
Linn Schorr
Engineering Manager
Cc Fred Haslee
Dennis Gelvin
LS/mem
MEGEIVED
JUN 1..3 2003
Community Development
AVF:\15WSD\SREGS\Lt:tters\2003\VatAPUD.doc
WATER, WASTEWATER. OPERATIONS & MANAGEMENT SERVICES
1?* United States Forest White River
Department of Service Holy Cross Ranger District
National 24747 US Highway
24
40Agriculture Forest
P.O. Box 190
Minturn, CO 81645-0190
(970) 827-5717
FAX (970) 827-9343
File Code: 1560
Date:
Tambi Katieb
Community Development
Town of Avon
P.O. Box 975
Avon, CO 81620
Dear Tambi:
JUN I r2o
We have received the application referral package relating to a proposed amendment to the PUD
Development Plan for Traer Creek LLC. The National Forest System parcels located in Sections
8 and 9 are bordered on three sides by Traer Creek LLC lands and will be affected by the
proposed action.
It appears that the amount of open space on 'Tract M" would be reduced and portions would be
intensively developed. This is anticipated to reduce the wildlife utilization of the eighty-acre
National Forest parcel located in Section 8. We will defer to the Town of Avon on the type and
density of use to be allowed on the private property known as Tract M. Should the proposed use
be approved, we request that provisions be made so that roads and utilities could, at some future
date, be extended across the National Forest System parcel in Section 8.
The suitability of this parcel for exchange out of federal ownership will increase as the parcel
loses its forest character and is surrounded by private development. If you have any questions on
this matter please contact Howard Kahlow at 827-5180.
Sincerely,
F
f
CALVIN G. WETTSTEIN
District Ranger
Receive,)
JUN 2 3 2003
Community DevebPment
S Caring for the Land and
TOWN OF AVON
REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING AGENDA
AUGUST 12, 2003 - 5:30 PM
MEETING TO HELD AT AVON ELEMENTARY SCHOOL
LOCATED AT 0850 W. BEAVER CREEK BLVD, AVON, COLORADO
1. Call to Order/ Roll Call
2. Citizen Input
a. Erica Yoshimoto, Eagle River Watershed Council
b. John Buchli, Off-Leash Dog Area
3. Ordinances
First Reading
a. Ordinance No. 03-10, Series of 2003, An Ordinance approving a PUD Amendment to
the Village at Avon PUD Development Plan and PUD Guide for Planning Area M
(RMF-4), RMF-1, G, N (Community Park), and Open Space 5 and Open Space 13,
Town of Avon, Eagle County, Colorado (Ruth Borne)
4. Resolutions
a. Resolution No. 03-35, Series of 2003, A Resolution to amend the 2003 Budget.
(Scott Wright)
5. New Business
a. Eagle River Water & Sanitation District Service Contract Agreement (Bob Reed)
6. Other Business
7. Unfinished Business
8. Town Manager Report
9. Town Attorney Report
10. Mayor Report
11. Consent Agenda
a. Approval of the July 22, 2003 Regular Council Meeting Minutes
b. Resolution No. 03-33, Series of 2003, A Resolution approving the First Supplement
to the Condominium Map, Barrancas-1, Phase 1, a Resubdivision of Lot 40, Block 1,
Benchmark at Beaver Creek, Town of Avon, Eagle County, Colorado (Norm Wood)
c. Buck Creek Drainage Improvements - CO#1 (Norm Wood)
12. Adjournment
Town Clerk\Council\Agendas\2003\Avon Council Meeting. 03.0 8.12
Memo
To:
Thru:
From:
Date:
Honorable Mayor and Town Council
Larry Brooks, Town Manager
Patty McKenny, Town Clerk
August 7, 2003
10
Re: Citizen Input - Eagle River Watershed Council
Summary:
Attached is information regarding the Eagle River Clean Up on Sunday September 14tH
Erica Yoshimoto with the Eagle River Watershed Council will address the details of the
event and make a request for volunteers as well as a sponsorship funding for the event.
Jul 24 03 11:55a Caroline Bradford (970)827-4210
Lade River
Watershed Council
Vail Resorts Proudly Presents
TA.e, 8?A- Annvixt
Aelte RiUer Gteas? Up
Sunday, September 14
1:00-4:00 PM Teams Pick Up Litter
4:00-7:00 PM Family Volunteer Party
Sponsored by Beaver Creek Resort Company at a site TBD
BBQ by Beaver Creek Mountain Dining
TEAM LEADERS NEEDED: contact Andi at Eagle River Watershed Council at 845-5406.
Over 300 volunteers participate in this exciting community project. We need about 50
team leaders to clean up all of the tributaries and main stem segments that have been
identified as needing help. Team Leaders recruit 10-12 friends, family and co-workers to
work on a small segment of the river.
SPONSORSHIPS AVAILABLE: Contact Ken Neubecker, Event Chairman at 328-2070
or Erica Yoshimoto, event coordinator at 331-1105. We are happy to customize a sponsorship
package for your business that meets your budget and your needs. Every dollar raised
helps us work on behalf of the health and conservation of the Eagle River watershed
through research, education and projects. We provide a forum where everyone can gain
a better understanding of the Eagle River environment. Please join us.
Tom., e-„ic Phipr dean UP is a project of the Eagle River Watershed Council.
Jul 24 03 11:55a Caroline Bradford [970)827-4210 p.3
E agle River ?o
Watershed Council,
PLEDGE INVOICE
ATTN: Jackie Halburnt, Asst Town Manager
Town Of Avon
400 Benchmark Road
Avon, CO 81620
FROM: CAROLINE BRADFORD Volunteer: Erica Yoshimoto
EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, ERWC Phone: 970-331-1105
Bradfordavail.net Email: Erica yoshimoto@)lycos.com
DATE
AMOUNT
Check #
? $11000.00 Watershed Guardian
o $500.00 Riparian Steward
? $250.00 Tributary Protector
? $100.00 River Advocate
DUE On receipt.
We are able to include your company name in printed material after receiving your
check. Thank you!
DESCRIPTION:
DONATION TO SUPPORT THE EAGLE RIVER WATERSHED COUNCIL'S
PROJECT: EAGLE RIVER CLEAN UP Sunday afternoon, September 14, 2003
PAYABLE TO:
Eagle River Watershed Council
P.O. Box 10
Red Cliff, CO 81649
If there are any questions regarding this contribution, please do not hesitate to call 827-5406. Thank
you for your support of our efforts on behalf of the Eagle River environment.
WAYS YOU CAN HELP US RECOGNIZE YOUR SUPPORT:
• Please send us your logo via email or hard copy so that we may thank you in our future printed
materials.
• You are welcome to provide us with company banners to hang at the volunteer party. Please
contact me at 827-5406 in order to discuss a mutually convenient drop off /pick up tine.
• Please join us at the Volunteer Party 4:00-7:00 PM on Sunday afternoon, September 14 so that we
may thank you personally and publicly recognize your company's support.
TAX INFORMATION
No goods or services were provided in consideration of this unrestricted contribution to the Eagle
River Watershed Council. The Eagle River Watershed Council is a nonprofit organization,
#84-1179543. Please consult your tax advisor and keep this information for your records. Thank you.
- .._... :? m e% e.., on o-i rrnff rn 219d9 TAI 970-827-5406 Fax 970-827-5412 bradfordCcDvail.net
Memo
To: Honorable Mayor and Town Council
Thru: Larry Brooks, Town Manager
From: Scott Wright, Finance DirectoQ1
Date: August 7, 2003
Re: Resolution 03-35, Fleet Maintenance Fund Budget Amendment #1
Summary:
A budget amendment is proposed to the Fleet Maintenance Fund pursuant to the approval of the
contract with the Eagle River Water and Sanitation District (ERWSD) for maintenance of their vehicles.
Discussion:
Based on information provided by Dan Higgins, the Town's Fleet Maintenance Supervisor, we project
the total charges from the period September 1St to December 31St, for ERWSD to be $106,949. This
figure includes billings for labor (@$80 per hour) and parts. It is anticipated that the Town will be able
to perform this work with its existing mechanics and that the net reduction in the Town's subsidy to the
Fleet Maintenance Fund from this contract will be approximately $60,000.
Staff is also implementing an accounting change whereby the Town departments will begin being
charged on an actual work order basis as opposed to a standard cost basis. This change is being
made pursuant to the recent interest of Beaver Creek in a long-term vehicle maintenance agreement
with the Town. Staff feels that this change will result in more accurate cost accounting for the Town
and any potential 3rd parties.
Recommendation:
Staff recommends that Council adopt the resolution discussed above as presented.
Town Manager Comments:
V
Attachments:
A- Summary of Proposed Amendment
B- Resolution 03-35
Page 1
RESOLUTION NO. 03-35
SERIES OF 2003
A RESOLUTION TO AMEND THE 2003 TOWN OF AVON BUDGET
A RESOLUTION SUMMARIZING EXPENDITURES AND REVENUES BY
FUND AND AMENDING THE 2003 BUDGET FOR THE TOWN OF AVON,
COLORADO, FOR THE CALENDAR YEAR BEGINNING ON THE FIRST DAY OF
JANUARY, 2003, AND ENDING ON THE LAST DAY OF DECEMBER, 2003.
WHEREAS, the Town Council of the Town of Avon has adopted the 2003
budget; and
WHEREAS, the Town Council reviewed the revised estimated revenues and
expenditures for 2003; and
WHEREAS, the Town Council finds it necessary to amend the 2003 budget to
more accurately reflect the revenues and expenditures for 2003; and
WHEREAS, whatever increases may have been made in the expenditures, like
increases were added to the revenues so that the budget remains in balance as required by
law.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE TOWN COUNCIL OF THE
TOWN OF AVON, COLORADO:
Section 1. That estimated revenues and expenditures for the following fund is as
follows for 2003:
Original or
Previously
Amended
2003
Budget
Fleet Maintenance Fund
Beginning Fund Balance $ 146,319
Revenues and Other Sources 1,275,584
Expenditures and Other Uses 1,272,357
Ending Fund Balance $ 149,546
Current
Proposed
Amended
2003
Budget
$ 64,996
1,539,816
1,563,393
$ 66,420
1
Section 2. That the budget, as submitted, amended, and hereinabove summarized
by fund, hereby is approved and adopted as the budget of the Town of Avon for the year
stated above.
Section 3. That the budget hereby approved and adopted shall be signed by the
Town Manager and made part of the public record of the Town.
ADOPTED this 12th day of August, 2003.
TOWN OF AVON, COLORADO
Albert D. Reynolds, Mayor
ATTEST:
Patty McKenny, Town Clerk
2
Fleet Maintenance Internal Service Fund #61
Amended Budget #1
Fund Summary
Original or
Current
Prev. Amend. Proposed Difference
Actual Actual Budget Amendment Increase
2001 2002 2003 2003 (Decrease)
REVENUES
Charges for Services
Other Revenue
Total Operating Revenues
Other Sources
Capital Lease Proceeds
TOTAL REVENUES
EXPENDITURES
Public Works:
Fleet Maintenance
Washbay
TOTAL EXPENDITURES
NET SOURCE (USE) OF FUNDS
$1,731,621 $ 1,299,455 $ 1,250,584 $ 1,539,816 $ 289,232
98,240 26,138 25,000 25,000 -
1,829,861 1,325,593 1,275,584 1,564,816 289,232
1,829,861 1,325,593 1,275,584 1,564,816 289,232
1,451,977 1,295,941 1,151,245 1,442,281 291,036
161,358 117,060 121,112 121,112 -
1,613,335 1,413,001 1,272,357 1,563,393 291,036
216,526 (87,408) 3,227 1,424 (1,804)
FUND BALANCES, Beginning of Year (64,122) 152,404 146,319 64,996 (81,323)
FUND BALANCES, End of Year $ 152,404 $ 64,996 $ 149,546 $ 66,420 $ (83,127)
Page 1
Fleet Maintenance Internal Service Fund #61
Amended Budget #1
Charges for Services:
54806 3rd Party Fleet Maintenance Charges
54901 Departmental Fleet Maintenance Chrgs
54901 Nondepartmental (Subsidy)
54902 Wash Bay Charges
54903 Sales of Fuel
54000 Total Charges for Services
$ 881,167 $ 538,344 $ 568,534 $ 729,438 $ 160,904
586,520 567,821 515,726 501,220 (14,506)
96,945 97,803 58,937 220,000 161,063
115,804 75,793 69,158 69,158 -
51,185 19,694 38,229 20,000 (18,229)
1,731,621 1,299,455 1,250,584 1,539,816 289,232
Other Revenues:
58205 Insurance Reimbursements 96,557 24,967 25,000 25,000
58999 Miscellaneous Nonclassified Revenues 1,683 1,171 - -
58000 Total Other Revenues 98,240 26,138 25,000 25,000
Other Sources:
59303 Capital Lease Proceeds
59000 Total Other Sources
50000 TOTAL REVENUES
$1,829,861 $1,325,593 $1,275,584 $1,564,816 $ 289,232
Page 2
Fleet Maintenance Internal Service Fund #61
Amended Budget #1
Revenue Detail
Original or
Current
Prev. Amend. Proposed Difference
Account Actual Actual Budget Amendment Increase
Number Description 2001 2002 2003 2003 (Decrease)
Charges for Services:
3rd Party Fleet Maintenance Charges
54806 Beaver Creek Bus System $ - $ 299,764 $ 319,886 $ 296,678 $ (23,208)
54806 Vail Resorts Dial-a-Ride - 185,537 192,240 244,730 52,490
54806 Eagle River Fire Protection District - 34,304 39,371 59,796 20,425
54806 Eagle County Ambulance District - 18,739 17,037 21,285 4,248
54806 Eagle River Water & Sanitation District - - - 106,949 106,949
54806 Sub-total - 538,344 568,534 729,438 160,904
Departmental Fleet Maintenance Chrgs
54901 Nondepartmental - Motor Pool Vehicle $ 2,994 $ 2,994 $ 2,905 $ 1,341 (1,564)
54901 Information Systems 1,939 1,996 - - -
54901 Comm Dev - Planning 5,998 2,994 2,905 1,222 (1,683)
54901 Comm Dev - Building Inspection 4,009 8,982 8,714 6,226 (2,488)
54901 Police - Administration 2,059 2,994 2,905 3,678 773
54901 Police - Patrol 56,076 48,493 29,956 43,508 13,552
54901 Police - Investigations 5,413 3,417 3,837 3,305 (532)
54901 Police - Neighborhood Services 1,367 4,158 3,837 2,302 (1,535)
54901 Public Works - Engineering 587 4,491 5,810 3,314 (2,496)
54901 Public Works - Roads and Streets 99,916 117,625 120,452 129,569 9,117
54901 Public Works - Facilities Maintenance 7,059 7,889 9,959 6,625 (3,334)
54901 Public Works - Parks 52,367 82,320 92,988 70,861 (22,127)
54901 Recreation - Administration 3,916 13,981 3,850 4,179 329
54901 Transit - Administration - 1,996 1,996 1,996 -
54901 Transit - Operations 317,267 245,820 194,135 203,196 9,061
54901 Fleet Maintenance 25,553 17,671 16,477 4,898 (11,579)
54901 Equipment Replacement Fund - - 15,000 15,000 -
54901 Sub-total 586,520 567,821 515,726 501,220 (14,506)
Page 3
Fleet Maintenance Internal Service Fund #61
Amended Budget #1
ccount
Number
escription Revenue Deta
Actual
2001 il
Actual
2002
Original or
Prev. Amend.
Budget
2003
Current
Proposed Difference
Amendment Increase
2003 (Decrease)
Washbay Charges:
54902 Administration 97 390 390 390 -
54902 Information Systems 30 390 - - -
54902 Comm Dev - Planning - 390 390 390 -
54902 Comm Dev - Building Inspection 143 1,560 1,560 1,560 -
54902 Police - Administration 105 390 390 390 -
54902 Police - Patrol 2,054 4,290 2,730 2,730 -
54902 Police - Investigations 38 390 390 390 -
54902 Police - Neighborhood Services 15 390 390 390 -
54902 Public Works - Engineering 30 780 780 780 -
54902 Public Works - Roads and Streets 2,103 6,488 6,488 6,488 -
54902 Public Works - Facilities Maintenance 37 780 780 780 -
54902 Public Works - Parks 703 3,780 3,780 3,780 -
54902 Recreation - Administration 15 1,170 780 780 -
54902 Transit - Administration 30 390 390 390 -
54902 Transit - Operations 21,870 20,790 20,280 20,280 -
54902 Fleet Maintenance - - 1,170 1,170 -
54902 ECRTA 61,534 - - - -
54902 Beaver Creek Bus System 27,000 33,425 28,470 28,470 -
54902 Sub-total 115,804 75,793 69,158 69,158 -
Page 4
Town of Avon
Line Item Detail
Function: Public Works
Department: Transportation
Program: Fleet Maintenance #434
Account
Number
ccount Description
Actual
2001
Actual
2002 Original or
Prev. Amend.
Budget
2003 Current
Proposed
Amendment
2003
Difference
Increase
(Decrease)
Personnel:
61101 Regular Full-time Salaries $ 338,759 $ 331,773 $ 343,218 $ 343,218 $
61121 PTS Wages 36,927 - - -
61122 PTS Bonuses 2,232 - - -
61151 Overtime Wages 22,280 2,947 7,879 7,879
61301 FT Pension 37,235 36,462 37,754 37,754
61302 PTS Pension 1,568 - - - -
61303 Wellness 2,370 3,180 - - -
61304 Employee Assistance Program 259 207 216 216
61401 FICA/Medicare 5,849 4,886 5,091 5,091
61501 Group Health and Life Insurance 67,309 70,306 68,653 68,653
61502 PTS Group Health 932 - - -
61505 Long-term Disability Insurance 2,586 2,911 3,226 3,226
61507 Dental Insurance 3,728 6,330 4,860 4,860
61509 Worker's Compensation 22,230 12,935 16,025 16,025
61510 Unemployment Insurance 1,206 1,006 1,030 1,030
61000 Total Personnel 545,470 472,943 487,952 487,952
Commodities:
62401 Gasoline 3,206 1,808 2,500 2,500
62404 Stock Parts 93,829 255,641 - 325,076 325,076
62405 Nonstock Parts - 6,630 52,500 16,788 (35,712)
62407 Tires, Tubes and Patches 77 217 - -
62802 Food and Beverages 269 - 315 315
62805 Clothing and Uniforms 165 - 500 500
62807 Consumable Tools/Small Equipment 12,834 4,936 6,750 6,750
62809 Medical Supplies and 1 st Aid 154 587 730 730 -
62899 Other Miscellaneous Operating Supplies 33,301 19,977 19,297 20,969 1,672
62999 Office Supplies and Materials 293 526 500 500 -
62000 Total Commodities 144,128 290,322 83,092 374,128 291,036
Services:
63505 R&M - Vehicles 13,156 26,722 20,000 20,000
63506 R&M - Radios and Communications Equipment 1,266 722 1,000 1,000
63507 R&M - Machinery and Equipment 95,939 4,389 20,400 20,400
63549 R&M - Other Specialized Equipment 674 1,238 1,200 1,200
63551 Laundry and Cleaning Services 10,354 7,379 8,500 8,500
63552 Janitorial and Custodial Services 461 - - -
63599 Other Maintenance Services 17,232 6,970 12,300 12,300
63999 Other Purchased and Contracted Services 16,437 5,486 10,750 10,750 -
63000 Total Services 155,519 52,906 74,150 74,150 -
Page 5
Town of Avon
Line Item Detail
Function: Public Works
Department: Transportation
Program: Fleet Maintenance #434
Account
Number Account Description
Other Operating Costs:
64101 Travel and Conference
64102 Dues, Licenses and Memberships
64201 Telephone
64202 Gas
64203 Electric
64204 Water & Sanitation
64205 Trash Collection & Recycling
64206 Cellular & Paging
64301 Postage and Delivery
64401 Fleet Maintenance Charges
64403 Washbay Charges
64905 Insurance Premiums
64907 Paid Claims
64000 Total Other Operating Costs
Debt Service:
65201 Capital Lease Payments
65000 Total Debt Service
Capital Outlay:
66401 Office Equipment
66402 Computers and Peripherals
66499 Other Machinery and Equipment
66000 Total Capital Outlay
60000 Total Expenditures
Original or Current
Prev. Amend. Proposed Difference
Actual Actual Budget Amendment Increase
2001 2002 2003 2003 (Decrease)
77 100 - - _
515 565 200 200
691 591 544 544
18,728 12,988 17,000 17,000
30,592 13,310 13,496 13,496
3,480 2,659 3,078 3,078
8,626 4,016 5,750 5,750
660 521 1,000 1,000
361 207 500 500
25,553 17,671 16,477 16,477
- 1,170 1,170 1,170
8,653 5,738 7,866 7,866
89,676 - 25,000 25,000
187,612 59,536 92,081 92,081
412,253 415,317 412,670 412,670 -
412,253 415,317 412,670 412,670 -
4,917 - -
- - 1,300 1,300
6,995 - - -
6,995 4,917 1,300 1,300
$ 1,451,977 $ 1,295,941 $ 1,151,245 $ 1,442,281 $ 291,036
Page 6
Town of Avon
Line Item Detail
Function: Public Works
Department: Transportation
Program: Washbay #435
Account
Number Account Description
Personnel:
61101 Regular Full-time Salaries
61121 PTS Wages
61122 PTS Bonuses
61151 Overtime Wages
61301 FT Pension
61302 PTS Pension
61303 Wellness
61304 Employee Assistance Program
61401 FICA/Medicare
61501 Group Health and Life Insurance
61502 PTS Group Health
61505 Long-term Disability Insurance
61507 Dental Insurance
61509 Worker's Compensation
61510 Unemployment Insurance
61000 Total Personnel
Commodities:
62805 Clothing and Uniforms
62899 Other Miscellaneous Operating Supplies
62000 Total Commodities
Services:
63501 R&M - Buildings and Facilities
63549 R&M - Other Specialized Equipment
63999 Other Purchased and Contracted Services
63000 Total Services
Other Operating Costs:
64201 Telephone
64204 Water & Sanitation
64000 Total Other Operating Costs
60000 Total Expenditures
Actual
2001
Actual
2002 Original or
Prev. Amend.
Budget
2003 Current
Proposed Difference
Amendment Increase
2003 (Decrease)
$ 49,712 $ 39,539 $ 29,485 $ 29,485 $ -
17,859 2,037 10,120 10,120 -
2,666 - 600 600
5,477 1,881 2,644 2,644
5,486 4,349 3,166 3,166
872 76 464 464
404 500 - -
65 34 24 24
1,120 639 611 611
14,253 12,232 7,597 7,597 -
666 - - - _
388 330 271 271 -
769 1,135 540 540 -
5,105 1,918 1,809 1,809
235 131 117 117
105,077 64,801 57,448 57,448
767 - 500 500
12,711 12,527 14,000 14,000
13,478 12,527 14,500 14,500
7,933 6,403 16,000 16,000 -
7,505 - 3,000 3,000 -
5,918 9,579 9,000 9,000 -
21,356 15,982 28,000 28,000
588 550 - -
20,859 23,200 21,164 21,164
21,447 23,750 21,164 21,164
$ 161,358 $ 117,060 $ 121,112 $ 121,112 $
Page 7
Memo
To: Scott {?
From: Dan JtN
CC: Bob
Date: 07/31/03
Re: ERW&SD projected revenues
I used the Town's equipment class costs as a basis for maintenance cost projections. I will have a
better idea of costs when we have done their maintenance for a couple of months.
Charges per month: $8,912.00
Monthly charges x 4 months in 2003: $35,648
Projected charges for 2004: $106,949.00 C4 00 c--, WOO r-
Expenses to "434" budget:
2003:
434-62405 Automotive & equipment parts: add $4,288.00
434-62899 Misc operating supplies: add $1,672.00
2004:
434-62405 Automotive & equipment parts: add $12,870.00
434-62899 Misc operating supplies: add $5,017.00
0 Page 1 ?? ?6 '1
Memo
To: Honorable Mayor and Town Council
Thru: Larry Brooks, Town Manager
From: Bob Reed, Director of Public Works
Date: August 7, 2003
Re: ERWSD Service Agreement
Summary:
Attached you will find a copy of a service agreement with Eagle River Water and Sanitation
District to provide routine maintenance and repairs to their vehicles and equipment. Also
attached is a current list of their vehicles and equipment.
Background:
We were approached by ERW&SD and asked to provide maintenance to their vehicles. A
copy of the current service agreements we have with other entities was sent to John Dunn for
review and forwarded to ERW&SD for their signatures.
Financial Implications:
The following was added to the Fleet Maintenance Budget (434):
For 2003 62405(parts and supplies) - $4,288, 62899(other operating supplies) - $1672
For 2004 62405(parts and supplies) - $12,870, 62899(other operating supplies) - $5,017
Recommendation:
Approve Service Agreement with Eagle River Water and Sanitation District.
Town Manager Comments:
ft
Aug-07-03 02:36P Town of Avon 970 748 1958 P.02
SERVICE AGREEMENT
This agreement is made and entered into this day of 2003 by and between Eagle River Water &
Sanitation District whose address is 846 Forest Road, Vail Colorado, 81657 (hereafter know as -ERW&SD") and the Town
of Avon whose address is P.O. Box 1726, 500 Swift Gulch Road, Avon, Colorado. 81620 (hereafter designated as
"Contractor').
RECITAL
In consideration of the obligation of ERW&SD to pay the Contractor as herein provided and in consideration of the other
terms and conditions hereof, the parties agree as follows,.
Contractor Services: Contractor will, during the term of this Agreement, provide:
(a) Routine maintenance and preventive maintenance ("Routine Maintenance') of the ERW&SO vehicles
and equipment. Service will be performed on approximately 49 vehicles and 15 pieces of equipment,
although the number of vehicles and equipment serviced may be increased or decreased in
ERW&SO's sole discretion; provided, the combined number of vehicles and equipment shall not
exceed 75 without the approval of Contractor. Routine Maintenance will be performed at least every
3,000 miles or 250 hours of use. Routine Maintenance shall consist of those services outlined in
Exhibit A attached hereto.
(b) Repair and replacement work as requested by ERW&SD ("Repair and Replacement"). No payment
for any Repair and Replacement shall be due unless ERW&SD has approved of such charges.
Services may be commenced with verbal approval by ERW&SD of a written estimate submitted by
Contractor. Repair and Replacement includes, without limitation, transmissions repairs, engine
repairs, rear end repairs and any other work or repairs exceeding $2,000.00. ERW&SD
acknowledges that subcontractors will perform certain repair work. Contractor shall be responsible
for assuring that all such subcontracted work will be per-Formed promptly and in accordance with the
terms and conditions of this Agreement.
(collectively the "Services")
2. Facllltles: Contractor represents that its facilities are in good repair and adequately equipped and
that it has a sufficient staff to perform all work in a timely manner. All Routine Maintenance shall be
completed within 24 hours of any vehicle being brought to Contractor's facility.
3, Compensatlom In consideration of Contractor's services during the term of this Agreement,
ERW&SD will pay Contractor the shop rate of $80.00 per hour for Routine Maintenance and Repair
and Replacement. Materials and sublet work shall be charged at cost plus ten percent. Invoice shall
be issued by the I& of each month for services performed the previous month. Payment shall be
remitted within ten (10) days of receipt of invoice. Contractor's Fueling Facilities may be used by
ERW&SD. The cost of Unleaded Gasoline and Diesel Fuel wilt be at the Contractor's cost plus ten
cents per gallon.
4, Terms and Termination: This Agreement will be effective as of September 1, 2003 and will
terminate on December 31, 2003 unless either party fails to substantially perform the duties and
obligations in accordance herewith. In such an event, the other party may terminate this Agreement
upon seven (7) days written notice to that party, unless that party cures the breach within the seven
(7) day remedy perlod. Either party may terminate this Agreement without cause upon 30 Days
written notice.
5 Relationships and Taxes, The relationship between the parties is that of independent contracting
parties, and nothing herein shall be deemed or construed by the parties hereto or by any third party
as creating a relationship of principal and agent or partnership, or of a joint venture between the
parties Contractor shall be solely responsible for any tax, withholding or contribution levied by the
Federal Social Security Act, Contractor is not entitled to unemployment compensation or other
employment related benefits, which are otherwise made available by ERW&SD to its employees,
Contractor shall provide ERW&SD an original of its Form W-9 (Request for Taxpayer Identification
Number of Certification).
AuQ-07-03 02:37P Town of Avon 970 748 1958 P-03
g, Warranty: Contractor shall perform all Services in a prompt, efficient and workmanlike manner
Contractor shall promptly correct any defective work. This warranty shall be in lieu of all other
warranties, express or implied. Contractor's sole liability hereunder, whether in tort or in contract, is
expressly limited to the warranty provided for herein.
7. Assignment; Contractor's duties hereunder requires particular expertise and skills, and may not be
assigned to any third party without the expressed written consent of ERW&SD, and any attempt to do
so shall render this Agreement null and void and no effect as respects the assignee (s) and shall
constitute an event of default by Contractor,
B. Waiver Failure to insist upon strict compliance with any terms, covenants, and/ or conditions hereof
shall not be deemed a waiver of such term, covenant, or condition, nor shall any waiver or
relinquishment of any right or power hereunder at any time or more times be deemed a waiver or
relinquishment of such fight or power at any other time or times,
g. Benefit: The terms, provisions, and covenants contained in this Agreement shall apply to, inure to
the benefit of and be binding upon the parties hereto and their respective heirs, successors in
interest, and legal representatives except as otherwise herein expressly provided.
10. Situs and Severabillty: The laws of the State of Colorado shall govern the interpretation, validity.
performance and enforcement of this Agreement. If any provision of this Agreement shall be held to
be invalid or unenforceable, the validity and enforceability of the remaining provisions of this
Agreement shall not be affected thereby.
1 t . Modification: This Agreement contains the entire agreement between the parties, and no
agreement shall be effective to change, modify, or terminate in whole or in part unless such
agreement is in writing and duly signed by the party against whom enforcement of such change,
modification, or termination is sought.
EXECUTED this day of 2003.
Eagle River Water & Sanitation District
By:
EXECUTED this day of , 2003.
TOWN OF AVON
By:
Aug-07-03 02:37P Town of Avon 970 748 1958 P_04
EXHIBIT A
"A" PM 3,000 miles or $80.00 hr.
Preventive Maintenance 250 hours Plus parts &
Inspection sublet
"Annual" every 12months 380.00 hr.
Preventive Maintenance Plus parts &
sublet
Inspection
NOTE Included as a part of Exhiblt A is the vehicle listing applicable to thls agreement as of
August 1, 2003.
Aug-07-03 02:37P Town of Avon 970 748 1958 P-05
,.w/?,MEMORANDUIN7
TO: Dennis Gelvin, General Manager
FROM: Larry Sanford, Field Operations Manager
DATE: January 30,2003
RE: Fleet Maintenance Information
Building needs:
Y A 25 foot long bay with a pit & 12' door, for maintenance on larger vehicles
D A bay with a lift and standard door, for maintenance on passenger cars and pickups
Storage area for parts, oils, and tires
? Storage area for Tools
Office area
9 Wash area for vehicles and engines
? At least one outside parking space
r 24 hour Access to the facility for emergency repairs
District Fleet
Total number of vehicles including large equipment = 64
Average age of vehicles = 1996
Average mileage of vehicles = 54,960
Camrys = 6
Blazers =3
Toyota Forerunner = 1
Utility Pickup Trucks =19
Toyota Pickups = 13
Chevy 5-10 pickup = 1
Dump Trucks = 5
End Dump =1
Semi-Tractor = 1
Small Flusher =1
Large Flusher = 1
T.V. Van = 1
Loaders =2
Backhoe =1
Skid Steers = 2
Trailer Mounted Generators =4
Trailer Mounted Portable Pumps = 2
MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE AVON TOWN COUNCIL
HELD JULY 22, 2003
A regular meeting of the Town of Avon, Colorado was held in the Wildridge Fire Station, 2110
Wildridge Road, Avon, Colorado in the Council Chambers.
Mayor Buz Reynolds called the meeting to order at 5:30 PM. A roll call was taken with
Councilors Michael Brown, Debbie Buckley, Peter Buckley, Brian Sipes, Ron Wolfe and Mayor
Pro Tern Mac McDevitt present. Also present were Town Manager Larry Brooks, Town Attorney
John Dunn, Town Clerk Patty McKenny, Town Engineer Norm Wood, Recreation Director Meryl
Jacobs, Public Works Director Bob Reed, Finance Director Scott Wright, Police Chief Jeff
Layman, Community Development Director Ruth Borne, as well as members of the press and
public.
Citizen Input
Julie Kessenich, Special Events Coordinator, was present to highlight the Angels in Action Run
& the circus to be held in Avon throughout the next week.
Input for Vassar Meadows Land Exchange
Mayor Reynolds opened the meeting for public input regarding the Vassar Meadows Land
Exchange. Councilor P. Buckley stepped down from the podium at this time due to a conflict of
interest. Comments from the public generally included support for the land exchange and a
great deal of support for the open space that will be a result of this approval. Many Wildridge
residents were present making comments in support of the projects as follows: Holly Woods,
Sandra Donnelly, Wendy Van Wyn, Michael Hazard, Angelio Loria, Rich Carroll, Mike Greeda,
Bob Gardner, Jeana Wilner, Lars Hutchinson, Steve Clemmens. Representatives from other
interested parties made comments as well, such as Tom Macey with Conservation Fund, Jimmy
Mandell with Vail Resorts, Inc., Barry Shagley with U.S. Forest Service, Adam Poe with Western
Land Group and Cindy Cohagen with Eagle Valley Land Trust. Many were very concerned with
the timing of Avon's decision and indicated that funding from the Forest Service would likely not
be available much longer. Council members expressed some concerns regarding the land
exchange as follows:
Traffic impacts that would result from the proposed development by VRI.
The validity of the traffic study submitted by VRI's consultant. The concern over the
level of traffic impact from the proposed development that was outlined in the report, i.e.
Level C vs. Level D.
The number of units proposed and the nature of the units as "for sale" vs. "affordable
rental" units.
Mayor Reynolds closed the public input on the project at this time and took Council comments.
Council members shared their position on the project identifying more specifically their issues.
Some discussion took place about the traffic and how to identify which level of traffic would be
acceptable to the group. Councilor Sipes moved to endorse the concept of the Vassar
Meadows Land exchange with 29 acres of developable land, with approximately 250 units, with
the goal that staff try to achieve minimal additional impacts to the Nottingham Road and Metcalf
Road intersection, and staff work with transit issue, and that Council appropriate $300K out of
the 2003 budget for the land exchange for Avon's portion and that traffic impacts, at a minimum,
to not exceed a Level D of service as outlined in the traffic study report and that the units are
structured as "for sale" units. Councilor Brown seconded and the motion passed unanimously.
Mayor Reynolds thanked the participating parties for their efforts on putting the land exchange
together. Councilor P. Buckley joined the podium at this time.
Input for Skier Shuttle
Town Manager Larry Brooks provided a summary on the status of the "skier shuttle" service for
the Town of Avon. He explained a number of the proposed funding scenarios, funding from
various parties, i.e. Eagle County & Beaver Creek. He noted that ECO has approved funding of
up to $100K to the continuation of running this service. He spent some time explaining the
philosophy of the service & the associated costs. Brooks was hopeful that a decision on
whether or not to continue the services would be decided upon soon. Some discussion took
place and members from the lodging community were present to express their views on the
topic. Councilor Wolfe presented his perspective as an ECO Board member on what has
transpired at the ECO meetings. He explained how the Board arrived at a funding level of
$100K for the service. Council provided some parameters on how to proceed with the
partnering efforts as well as discussed the breakdown of costs associated with running each
portion of the service.
Mayor Reynolds asked for a motion on the issue. Councilor Wolfe moved that the "skier shuttle"
remain free provided that the Beaver Creek entities collectively fund a minimum of $75K subsidy
for the service and in which case $25K would be returned to ECO, so the two entities would be
splitting half the cost of the service in a 50%-50% split for the out-of-town portion of the service,
and if that does not happen, then only continue service to the east Beaver Creek parking lot.
Further discussion ensued about which entity should be responsible for paying which
percentage breakdown of the cost of the service. It was also suggested that this proposal would
only be good for one year. Councilor D. Buckley suggested the motion be based on the
premise that the entities are paying for the actual costs of providing the service and not
necessary identify any amounts. In clarifying the motion, Councilor Wolfe again moved that the
"skier shuttle" remain free as long as the BC entities and ECO can jointly and collectively fund a
minimum of $150K for the out-of-town service, and if they cannot fund to this level, the Town of
Avon will only provide service to the East Lot free of charge. Councilor Sipes seconded the
motion and it passed unanimously.
Resolution
Town Engineer Norm Wood presented Resolution No. 03-30, Series of 2003, a proposed
budget amendment to the Capital Project's Fund for the Nottingham-Puder ditch piping and
Swift Gulch Road should commitments in the amount of $56,941. He noted that the fund
balance of the CIP fund at this time was over $3M. After some brief discussion a motion was
made. Mayor Pro Tern McDevitt moved to approve Resolution No. 03-30, Series of 2003, a
Resolution to amend the 2003 Town of Avon CIP Budget. Councilor D. Buckley seconded the
motion and it passed unanimously.
New Business
Town Engineer Norm Wood presented information on the process for determining the Capital
Improvement Projects List for 2004. He asked the Town Council to forward any items they
would like to include to the list. He explained the rating schedule and noted that brief project
descriptions were included as well. Mayor Pro Tern McDevitt asked that staff resolve the traffic
questions he has had regarding the report submitted by VRI for the proposed development at
the bottom of the hill.
Consent Agenda
Mayor Reynolds asked for a motion on the Consent Agenda items. Councilor D. Buckley
moved to approve the consent agenda. Councilor Sipes seconded the motion and it passed
unanimously.
a. Approval of the July 8, 2003 Regular Council Meeting Minutes
b. Eagle County Regional Transportation Authority Service Agreement
Regular Council Meeting Page 2 of 3
July 22, 2003
c. Resolution No. 03-29, Series of 2003, Resolution approving the Final Condominium Map,
Grandview Condominiums, a Resubdivision of Lot 42, Block 1, Benchmark at Beaver Creek,
Town of Avon, Eagle County, Colorado (Ann Martens)
d. Resolution No. 03-31, Series of 2003, A Resolution approving the Final Condominium Map, Swift
Gulch Commercial Condominiums, A Resubdivision of Lot 68, Block 1, Benchmark at Beaver
Creek, Town of Avon, Eagle County, Colorado (Norm Wood)
e. Resolution No. 03-32, Series of 2003, A Resolution approving the Final Condominium Map for
Mountain Vista Condominiums, A Resubdivision of Lot 2B, Mountain Vista Resort Subdivision,
Town of Avon, Eagle County, Colorado (Norm Wood)
There being no further business to come before the Council, the meeting adjourned at 7:15 PM.
RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED:
Patty McKenny, Town Clerk
APPROVED:
Michael Brown
Debbie Buckley
Peter Buckley
Mac McDevitt
Buz Reynolds
Brian Sipes
Ron Wolfe
Regular Council Meeting
July 22, 2003
Page 3 of 3
Memo
To: Honorable Mayor and Town Council
Thru: Larry Brooks, Town Manager
From: Norman Wood, Town Engineer
Anne Martens, Assistant Town ngineer
Date: August 7, 2003
Re: Resolution No. 03 - 33, Approving the First Supplement to the Condominium Map,
Barrancas-1, Phase 1, A Resubdivision of Lot 40, Block 1, Benchmark at Beaver
Creek, Town of Avon, Eagle County, State of Colorado (0491 Metcalf Road)
Summary: Barrancas LLC, owners of Lot 40, Block 1, Benchmark at Beaver Creek, has
submitted a Supplement to the Condominium Map to resubdivide a portion of Lot 40, Block 1,
Benchmark at Beaver Creek, Town of Avon, Eagle County, State of Colorado. This is a
Condominium Map of a developed lot, creating an Utility Easement and nine condominium
units (buildings A, B and C). The preliminary subdivision map was approved at the March 11,
2003 Council Meeting. The Subdivision is in conformance with the Title 16 of the Avon
Municipal Code, Subdivisions.
Recommendations: Staff recommends approval of Resolution No. 03 - 33, Series
of 2003, A Resolution Approving the First Supplement to the Condominium Map,
Barrancas-1, Phase 1, A Resubdivision of Lot 40, Block 1, Benchmark at Beaver Creek,
Town of Avon, Eagle County, State of Colorado, subject to completion of technical
corrections to be approved by staff.
Town Manager Comments:
CADocuments and Settings\nwood\Local Settings\Temporary Internet Files\01-K2\1-4013113MI3CAmendFP.doc
TOWN OF AVON
RESOLUTION NO. 03 - 33
Series of 2003
A RESOLUTION APPROVING THE FIRST SUPPLEMENT TO THE CONDOMINIUM
MAP, BARRANCAS-1, PHASE 1, A RESUBDIVISION OF LOT 40, BLOCK 1,
BENCHMARK AT BEAVER CREEK, TOWN OF AVON, EAGLE COUNTY,
COLORADO.
WHEREAS, Barrancas LLC, has submitted a Supplement to the Condominium Map for a
Resubdivision of Lot 40, Block 1, Benchmark at Beaver Creek, Town of Avon, Eagle County,
Colorado; and
WHEREAS, the Condominium Map has been reviewed by the Town Staff; and
WHEREAS, the Condominium Map was found to be substantially in conformance with Title 16
of the Avon Municipal Code; and
WHEREAS, the proposed subdivision complies with the requirements for consideration as a
Condominium Map.
NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED BY THE TOWN COUNCIL OF THE TOWN
OF AVON, that the First Supplement to the Condominium Map, Barrancas-1, Phase 1, A
Resubdivision of Lot 40, Block 1, Benchmark at Beaver Creek, Town of Avon, Eagle County,
State of Colorado, is hereby approved by the Town of Avon subject to:
The completion of technical corrections as identified by Town Staff.
ADOPTED THIS DAY OF
, 2003.
TOWN COUNCIL
TOWN OF AVON, COLORADO
Albert D. Reynolds, Mayor
ATTEST:
Patty McKenny, Town Clerk
CADocuments and Settings\nwood\Local SettingsUeinporary Internet Fi1es\0LK2\L40B1BMBCres0333.doc
Memo
To: Honorable Mayor and Town Council
Thru: Larry Brooks, Town Manager
From: Anne Martens, Assistant Town Engineer
Norman Wood, Town Engineer
Date: August 7, 2002
Re: Buck Creek Drainage Improvements (I-70 to Eagle River)
Change Order Number One
Summary: Attached Change Order One for the Buck Creek Drainage
Improvements represents changes required to address utility conflicts encountered during
construction for the boring operation under the railroad. The changes to the bore are required
due to the 24" ductile iron pipe (DIP) water line is a different location and the 18" sewer line
is constructed of clay and not ductile iron. Several alternate solutions were examined to
evaluate the most cost effective method to deal with the conditions. The most cost effective
and safe solution is to extend the 48" bore by 50 linear feet. Change Order Number One is for
the extension of the 48" bore. This change is necessary to allow for the bore pit installation
and to bridge the unexpected location and materials of existing utilities. The cost of the
Change Order is to increase the contract amount by $61,325 and the contract time by 5 days.
The net effect of this Change Order is to increase the Contract Amount from $ 973,001.28 to
$1,034,326.28. This change order can be covered by the contingency line item in the project
budget.
ADDroved Proiect Budget Proiect Costs
Construction Contract
Change Order No. 1
Engineering (Design)
Easement (Surveying)
Easements (Appraisals)
Easements (Acquisition)
Legal
Permits & Fees
Contract Administration
Testing
Contingency
Total Construction Budget
$973,000 $ 973,000
$ 61,325
$118,500 $ 118,500
$ 10,500 $ 10,500
$ 12,500 $ 12,500
$ 10,000 $ 10,000
$ 10,000 $ 10,000
$ 7,000 $ 7,000
$ 10,000 $ 10,000
$ 5,000 $ 5,000
$ 92,500 $ 31,175
$1,249,000 $ 1,249,000
C:\DOCUlnents And Settings\Nwood\Local Settings\Temporary Internet Fi1es\OLK2\Change Order No 1 MemO.Doc
Approval of Change Order One to the B & B Excavating, Inc. contract for construction of the
Buck Creek Drainage Improvements is recommended, increasing the Contract amount
$ 61,325 from $ 973,001.28 to $ 1,034,326.28 and increasing the Contract Time by 5 days.
Recommendations: Approve Change Order One to the B & B Excavating,
Inc. contract for construction of the Buck Creek Drainage Improvements, increasing the
Contract amount $ 61,325 from $ 973,001.28 to $ 1,034,326.28 and the Contract Time by 5
days.
Town Manager Comments:
C:\Documents And Settings\Nwood\Local Settings\Temporary Internet Files\0LK2\Change Order No 1 MemO.Doc 2
CHANGE ORDER
Order No.: One
Date: August 7 2003
Agreement Date: July 14, 2003
NAME OF PROJECT: 2003 Buck Creek Drainage Improvements
OWNER: Town of Avon
CONTRACTOR: B & B Excavating, Inc.
The following changes are hereby made to the CONTRACT DOCUMENTS:
Justification:
Additional Bore Length due to conflicts with utility locations and differing materials.
Add 50 LF Permalok Bore @ $1167 /LF = $58,350
Add UPRR flagging 6 days $1750/day = $10,500
Deduct 50 LF in 48"CMP @ $115.50 / LF = $ 5,775
Deduct 1 day UPRR flagging @ $1750/day= $ 1,750
$61,325
Acceptance of this Change Order by the Contractor constitutes full and complete settlement for
all time and money for all direct and indirect costs and impacts flowing out of the changes
described above. Additional requests for time and money because of these changes will not be
considered.
Change to CONTRACT PRICE:
Original CONTRACT PRICE:
$_61,325
$ 973,001.28
Current CONTRACT PRICE adjusted by previous CHANGE ORDER _$973,001.28
The CONTRACT PRICE due to this CHANGE ORDER will be (increased)(decreased) by
$__61 325
The new CONTRACT PRICE including this CHANGE ORDER will be $_1,034326.28
Change to CONTRACT TIME:
The CONTRACT TIME will be (increased)(decreased) by 5 calendar days.
The date for completion of all work will be October 13, 2003 (Date).
APPROVALS REQUIRED:
CO-1
Memo
To: Honorable Mayor and Town Council
Thru: Larry Brooks, Town Manager
From: Norman Wood, Town Engineer
Date: August 8, 2003
Re: US Forest Service Land Trade - Housing Project Traffic Impact Analysis
Summary: I have met with David Leahy from TDA, traffic engineers for
Vail Resorts, to discuss the previous draft of the Traffic Impact Assessment. We also visited
the Metcalf/Nottingham Road intersection to look at possible options for traffic congestion
relief. In the discussion he was able to clarify the significant increase in delay time, projected
at the Nottingham/Metcalf Road intersection at full buildout without the housing project, in
the previous draft. This projected increase in delay time is primarily attributable to potential
development on Tract Y on the easterly side of Metcalf Road. The projected traffic was based
on 100,000 square feet of light industrial use. This use is not projected to generate a lot of
traffic per day but has a very high peaking factor that coincides with peak hour traffic at this
intersection. Because of this there is a significant increase in traffic from this potential
development for a short period of time during the Peak AM and PM traffic hours.
He is in the process of revising the previous draft of the Traffic Impact Analysis based on our
discussion and observations made during the site visit. The revised draft will be based on
100% of the traffic impacts as projected by the ITE Trip Generation Manual with no
reductions for bus service, car-pooling or special considerations for employee types. He is
also recommending the addition of a right turn lane for westbound traffic on Nottingham Road
to Metcalf Road. The current analysis indicates that at full buildout the level of service at this
intersection will drop to level of service E with no improvements and level of service C with
the addition of the proposed right turn lane. This is shown in Table 5 in the attached excerpt
from the revised analysis. Attached Figure 8 shows the proposed alignment and layout for a
right turn lane from Nottingham Road on to Metcalf Road.
I:\Administration\Miscellaneous\Land Trade\Tratfic Memo 2.Doc
We anticipate the final report will be complete in the next few days and will forward as soon
as it becomes available.
A level of service table for non-signalized intersections from the Highway Capacity Manual
2000 is also attached. This table shows a delay of 15 - 25 seconds at Level of Service C. This
is the total amount of time from when you enter the queue until you exit the intersection.
Town Manager Comments:
2,?O?
0 Page 2
MITIGATION MEASURES
Overall, Nottingham Road will operate acceptably in peak travel times (level of service D or
better) at full land use development and completion of the Town's planned road improvement
projects. One change in future peak hour traffic operation is attributed to the subject development
project. With the Avon Housing development at the west end of Nottingham Road, motorists on
Metcalf Road approaching the Nottingham Road stop sign-controlled intersection will experience
a one level drop in level of service in the AM and PM peak hours. Specifically, the southbound
approach goes from LOS C to D in the AM and from LOS D to E in the PM peak hour. Level of
service D is considered acceptable future peak period operation. Two alternative measures were
investigated to restore LOS D or better operation for the Metcalf approach to the intersection at
travelshed buildout;
Two-Way Stop Mitigation
One way to reduce future delay for the Metcalf approach at this three-way Stop controlled
intersection would be to eliminate the stop sign for Metcalf motorists. The dominant movements
through this intersection are left turns from Metcalf and the corresponding right turns from
Nottingham. The relatively low volume of eastbound and westbound through motorists would
proceed only if there were no motorists approaching from the Metcalf leg of the intersection. The
resulting operation, although very good for Metcalf motorists, LOS A in the AM and PM peak
hour, produces exceptionally high delay for the Nottingham approaches, LOS F in both peaks, see
Table 5. Included in the long delay on westbound Nottingham are motorists destined to Metcalf
Road. Due to overall extensive delay this mitigation alternative is not advised.
Table 5
Travelshed Buildout Level of Service with Mitigation
AM/PM Peak Hour
Metcalf Road /Nottingham Road Intersection
Travelshed Buildout
Approach/Mitigation Existin No Mitigation 2-Way Stop Add Rt. Turn
Eastbound Thru/Left A/A B/B F/F B/B
Westbound Thru/Right B/A D/D F/F A/A
Southbound Left/Right B/B D/E A/A C/C
Intersection Summary:
Average Delay (sec.) 11.1/10.0 25.9/31.1 115.5/1918 12.9/14.4
Level of Service B /B D/D F/F B/B
Source: TDA using Synchro 5 software, see worksheets attached in Appendix B
Provide Westbound Nottingham Right Turn Lane
Delay for the major Metcalf/Nottingham east movements can be reduced by separating
westbound right turns from westbound through movements at the Stop sign. This allows the right
turns to move past the relatively low volume of through trips rather than wait behind them.
Motorists approaching from Metcalf wait their turn at the three-way Stop but contend only with
those motorists passing through on Nottingham. Field investigation suggests there is sufficient
space available between the current south edge of Nottingham Road and the existing bike/ped
trail to shift the eastbound lane through the intersection, see Figure 8. About a 450-foot stretch of
road would be effected including 135-foot and 180-foot redirect transitions west and east of
Metcalf, respectively. All widening is confined to the south side of Nottingham Road within
current public right of way.
08/07/03
With this improvement the Metcalf approach operates at LOS C in the AM and PM peak hours at
corridor buildout. Averaging delay for all motorists shows overall delay restored to existing LOS
B conditions in both peak periods.
08/07/03
Aug-07-03 ? 04:16P Town of Avon 970 748 1958 P-02
g?
c
0
d
IM
c
? o m
2
I
I
X11
?I
?I
.c I
o)
ZI
? I
I?
Imo;
I
,<11
i
i
i
I
I ?
w
a
Highway Capacity Manual 2000
Background and
concepts for AWSC
intersections are given in
Chapter 10
- Worksheet 8 is used to compute shared-lane capacities, if more than one
movement shares the same minor-street approach.
- Worksheet 9 is not used, since the effect of flared minor-street approaches is
generally not included.
- Worksheet 10 is not used, since the impedance and delay for the major through
movements are not accounted for in a planning analysis.
- Worksheet 11 is used to compute capacity, delay, and LOS.
The detailed analysis procedure described earlier in this chapter is normally not used
for design purposes. However, through iteration, the analyst can use a given set of traffic
flow data to determine the number of lanes that would be required to produce a given
level of service.
PART B. ALL-WAY STOP-CONTROLLED INTERSECTIONS
1. INTRODUCTION - PART B
This section of Chapter 17 presents procedures for analyzing all-way stop-controlled
(AWSC) intersections (1). A glossary of symbols, including those used for AWSC
intersections, is found in Chapter 6.
II. METHODOLOGY - PART B
LOS thresholds for
AWSC intersections
differ from those for
signalized intersections
to reflect different driver
expectations
LEVEL-OF-SERVICE CRITERIA
The level-of-service criteria are given in Exhibit 17-22. The criteria for AWSC
intersections have different threshold values than do those for signalized intersections
primarily because drivers expect different levels of performance from distinct types of
transportation facilities. The expectation is that a signalized intersection is designed to
carry higher traffic volumes than an AWSC intersection. Thus a higher level of control
delay is acceptable at a signalized intersection for the same LOS.
EXHIBIT 17-22. LEVEL-OF-SERVICE CRITERIA FOR AWSC INTERSECTIONS
Level of Service I Control Delay (s/veh)
A 0-10
B > 10-15
C > 15-25
D > 25-35
E > 35-50
F > 50
OVERVIEW OF METHODOLOGY
The methodology analyzes each intersection approach independently. The approach
under study is called the subject approach. The opposing approach and the conflicting
approaches create conflicts with vehicles on the subject approach.
AWSC intersections require drivers on all approaches to stop before proceeding into .
the intersection. While giving priority to the driver on the right is a recognized rule in
Chapter 17 - Unsignalized Intersections 17-32
Applications - TWSC Intersections
NOTES:
1. Latlisiatmdedfornve.hom,-
vuminun"Y uevelopment
LAND USE
Residential MAX. ALLOWED
ACRES %OF SrFE DENSrrY - DU/ACRE
20 Residential 1 Single Family 910.1 50
8% 1 primary/I secondary
rob 1.96 . residence per lot
RMF•1 Residential Multi-Family 30.7 1.7% -10 du/acre
RMF•2 Residential Multi-Family 43.6 2.4% 12 dWacre
RMF•3 ResidentiallMuld-Family 16.3 0.9% 6 dWacre
RMF-4 Residential l Multi-Family 38.7 2.2% 8 dulacre
Subtotal 1039.5 58.1%
Parks and Open Space
® Area N - Community Park 17.4 1.0%
® O
Open
e
S-1 Lh
nsar o?, es
-12 475.2 26.4%
Parkland
Ft &-th 2.6 15.7 0.9%
Subtotal 505.2 28.2%
I? Road R. 0. W. 93.3 5.2%
Subtotal 93.3 5.2%
-Lots with detached gauges on RhIF-1 shall be allowed m accessary dweiling twit above
the garage for amuuman d=ty of 10 dilaae
Residential MAX. ALLOWED
Village Center ACM TOFSITE
33.0 1.8% DENSITY-DIIIACRE
25 du/acre
Cultural l Recreational 2.4 0.1% 10 dWacre
AreC Ice Skating / Events Center 1.7 0.1% 4 dWacre
Area D Village Residential 20.5 1.1% 18 du/acre
AmE Village Residential 5.5 0.3% 18 dWacre
AreaF Village Residential 9.5 0.5% IS dWacre
AfBAti. School 9.0 0.5%
AreaH Neighborhood Center 3.2 0.2% 15 du/acre
AFB. l Neighborhood Center 5.7 0.3% 15 dWacre
AreaJ Regional Commercial 8.4 0.5% 15 du/acre
IArea K Regional Commercial 29.9 1.7% 15 dulacre
Area L Regional Commercial 4.0 0.2% 15 dWacre
Area0 Regional Commercial 19.1 1.1% 15 du/acre
Subtotal 151.9 8.5 %
PROJECT TOTALS: 1789.9 100.0% 2,400 MaximtmUniu*
The Village (at Avon)
August 5, 2003
PUD DEVELOPMENT PLAN
AMENDMENT NO.3
CERTIFICATE OF LANDOWNER REQUEST
Know all men by these presents thatTRAER CREEK, LLC and EMD LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY, Colorado
limited liability companies, do hereby request approval of PUD Development Plan Amendmen t Number 3.
OWNER:
EMD LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY
a Colorado !"cod liability company
by: LAVA CORPORATION
a Colorado corporation, as Manager
by:
OWNER:
TRAER CREEK LLC,
a Colorado limited liability company
by:
Name: Magnus Lindholm
Title: Manager
Name: Magws Lindholm
Title: President
STATE OF COLORADO)
) SS:
COUNTYOFEAGLE )
The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this day of April 2003, by Magnus Lindholm
as Manager of Traer Creek LLC, a Colorado limited liability company, and by Magnus Lindholm as President of
LAVA Corporation, a Colorado corporation, as Manager of EMD Limited Lability Company, a Colorado limited
liability company.
Witness my hand and official seal. My commission expires:
Notary Public
APPROVAL
This Amendment to The Village (at Avon) P. U. D. Development PlanlSketch dated October 9, 1998 (the
Original Plan) (i) is approved as an Amendment in accordance with The Village (at Avon) PUD Guide,
Section H.3(e) and the Town of Avon Municipal Code, Title 17 Chapter 17.20.110-K, this _ day
of May 2003 for filing with the Clerk and Recorder of the County of Eagle, and (ii) amends and replaces
the Original Plan in its entirety as shown hereon.
TOWN OF AVON
DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
By: Designated Representative
Ruth O. Borne, Director
Commtm ry Development Department
STATE OF COLORADO)
) SS:
COUNTY OF EAGLE )
The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this _ day of Colorado, by Ruth 0. June 2003,
Borne, Director of Community Development, Town of Avon, Eagle County, Colorado,
Witness my hand and official seal. My commission expires:
Notary Public
Prepaedfor:
EMD LASTED LIABILITY NMPANY
atd TRAERCREEK LLC
Prepaedby:
ZEHREN.A.ND ASSOCIATES, INC.
2EaREN
NORTH
SITE DENSITY AND USAGE
J
Road connection to Buffalo
Ridge and Sdit Gulch.
?_ =`?-mss-Jk
` AREA -0
Regional
Commercial
3.6 Acres
OS-13 a
0. Acres \
Conveniene* retell buildings,
placed along street with auto
behind, reinforcing neighborhooe
*00
character and promoting pedestrian
access from park
Pedestrian overpass provides separated
grade *'case from neigh boyhood to park
and links neighborhood and Buffalo
Ridga to school site at Area M.
Regional Eco Trail
alignment
Convenience retail buildings
placed along streatwith auto access
behind, reinforcing neighborhood
character and promoting pedestrian
access.
Final alignment and connection tc
regional tall to be determined vlrcacl
subdivision.
Area Dedicated for Fire Protection
District an Area D (1.0 Acres
Bike path connection to
Buffalo Ridge and beyond.
AREA N
Ccmmunhy Park
•? 17.4Acres
AREA Q
Regional
Commercial
7.8 Acres
AREA Q
Regional
Commercial
7.8 Acres
AREA RMF-1
RESIDENTIAL
30.7 Acres
OS-12
0.2 Acres
\\\ Access road to future
.?rssidentlal lots 1.96 and
?? Area RMF-4, and G.
USFS LAND
1
Proposed regional Eco Trail
alignment an d connections
to Tracts RMF-4 and G. Tnli
cross" US Forest Service
land on easement
Prepared for THE VILLAGE AT AVON /N
Traer Creek LLC Area RMF-1 Development Concept "
Avon, Colorado August 8,20o3 ZaEe ociREE N