The URL can be used to link to this page

TC Packet 04-27-2021_______________________________________________________________________________ MEETING AGENDAS AND PACKETS ARE FOUND AT: WWW.AVON.ORG AGENDAS ARE POSTED AT AVON TOWN HALL, AVON RECREATION CENTER, AVON ELEMENTARY AND AVON PUBLIC LIBRARY IF YOU HAVE ANY SPECIAL ACCOMMODATION NEEDS, PLEASE, IN ADVANCE OF THE MEETING, CALL TOWN CLERK BRENDA TORRES AT 970-748-4001 OR EMAIL BTORRES@AVON.ORG WITH ANY SPECIAL REQUESTS. AVON TOWN COUNCIL MEETING AGENDA TUESDAY, April 27, 2021 MEETING BEGINS AT 5:00 PM (ALL START TIMES LISTED IN RED ARE APPROXIMATE) !! SETUP AS A VIRTUAL MEETING VIA ZOOM DUE TO COVID-19 AVON TOWN COUNCIL PUBLIC MEETING BEGINS AT 5:00 PM 1. CALL TO ORDER AND ROLL CALL 5:00 2. APPROVAL OF AGENDA 3. DISCLOSURE OF ANY CONFLICTS OF INTEREST RELATED TO AGENDA ITEMS 4. PUBLIC COMMENT – COMMENTS ARE WELCOME ON ITEMS NOT LISTED ON THE FOLLOWING AGENDA Public comments are limited to three (3) minutes. The speaker may request an additional one (1) minute, which may be approved by a majority of Council. 5. BUSINESS ITEMS 5.1. Work Session: US6 Pedestrian Crossing (Mobility Director Eva Wilson) (60 Minutes) 5:15 5.2. Presentation: Water Supply Master Planning #2 (Linn Brooks, General Manager at the ERWSD) (60 Minutes) 6:15 5.3. Public Hearing: Second Reading of Ordinance 21-06 Amending Chapter 13.04 of the Avon Municipal Code Pertaining to Water Use Restrictions (Town Attorney Paul Wisor) (15 Minutes) 7:15 5.4. Planning and Zoning Commission Appointments (Planning Director Matt Pielsticker) (30 Minutes) 7:30 5.5. Work Session: Community Survey (Communications Manager Elizabeth Wood) (30 minutes) 8:00 5.6. Public Hearing: Resolution 21-10, amending the 2021 Town of Avon Budget (Assistant Town Manager and Finance Director Scott Wright) (15 minutes) 8:30 5.7. Work session: West Beaver Creek Boulevard, On-Street Parking (Town Engineer Justin Hildreth and Mobility Director Eva Wilson) (15 minutes) 8:45 6. MINUTES 6.1. Approval of April 13, 2021 Regular Council Meeting Minutes (Town Clerk Brenda Torres) (5 Minutes) 9:00 7. WRITTEN REPORTS 7.1. April 20th Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Abstract (Planner David McWilliams) 7.2. April 15th CASE Committee Draft Meeting Minutes (General Government Intern Emily Myler) 7.3. Monthly Financial Report (Senior Accountant Joel McCracken) 7.4. Quarterly RETT Report (Senior Accountant Joel McCracken) ** Indicates topic will be discussed at future agenda’s _______________________________________________________________________________ MEETING AGENDAS AND PACKETS ARE FOUND AT: WWW.AVON.ORG AGENDAS ARE POSTED AT AVON TOWN HALL, AVON RECREATION CENTER, AVON ELEMENTARY AND AVON PUBLIC LIBRARY IF YOU HAVE ANY SPECIAL ACCOMMODATION NEEDS, PLEASE, IN ADVANCE OF THE MEETING, CALL TOWN CLERK BRENDA TORRES AT 970-748-4001 OR EMAIL BTORRES@AVON.ORG WITH ANY SPECIAL REQUESTS. 8. MAYOR AND COUNCIL COMMENTS & MEETING UPDATES (15 MINUTES) 9:05 9. ADJOURN 9:20 Public Comments: Council agendas shall include a general item labeled “Public Comment” near the beginning of all Council meetings. Members of the public who wish to provide comments to Council greater than three minutes are encouraged to schedule time in advance on the agenda and to provide written comments and other appropriate materials to the Council in advance of the Council meeting. The Mayor shall permit public comments for any action item or work session item and may permit public comment for any other agenda item, and may limit such public comment to three minutes per individual, which limitation may be waived or increased by a majority of the quorum present. Article VI. Public Comments, Avon Town Council Simplified Rules of Order, Adopted by Resolution No. 17-05. FUTURE AGENDAS MAY 11 o First Reading of Ordinance 21-XX: OHV on Wildridge Roads o Public Hearing: Major Development Plan for Riverfront Lot 1 Townhomes – Phase II o Work session on the design, cost and community engagement for the improved parking on the north side of Nottingham Park on West Beaver Creek Blvd o Potential Resolution in Support of Oil and Gas Leasing Pause o Presentation: overhaul of discoveravon.org website o First Reading of Ordinance 21-XX Model Traffic Code o Presentation the Climate Action Plan Update o Work Session: Climate Action Investment Matrix o Public Hearing: Sound Permits Main Street Mall o Notice of Award for the Buck Creek Road Asphalt Overlay & Repairs o Art Installations Update: Art Around Avon MAY 25 o Presentation SpeakUp ReachOut o First Reading Ordinance 21-05 Amending Avon Municipal Code to change the definition of a reusable bag o Second Reading of Ordinance 21-XX: OHV on Wildridge Roads o Second reading of Ordinance 21-XX Model Traffic Code o Work Session: Road 779 o Work Session: Recycling for Multi-Family and Net Zero Communities (970) 390-2014 ewilson@avon.org TO: Honorable Mayor Smith Hymes and Council members FROM: Eva Wilson, Mobility Director RE: US6 Pedestrian Crossings Work Session DATE: April 18, 2021 WELCOME: Legislators: Senator Kerry Donovan; Representative Dylan Roberts Eagle County: Commissioner XXX, County Manager, Jeff Shroll, ECO Transit Director, Tanya Allen Colorado Department of Transportation (CDOT): Region 3 Traffic and Safety Manager, Zane Znamenacek; Region 3 Traffic Operations Engineer, Andi Staley; Resident Engineer, Karen Berdoulay EagleVail Metro District: District Manager, Steven Barber WORK SESSION GOALS: • Promote Safety for Transit Users and Pedestrian Mobility • A Regional Solution • Advocacy & Support SUMMARY: This report presents information, updates, and a proposed strategy solution for improving pedestrian crossing safety on Highway 6 in the Town of Avon. Avon Town Council identified improvements to Highway 6 pedestrian crossing safety as a High and Immediate Priority. The goals of this work session are to promote safety for transit users and pedestrian mobility. A regional solution is proposed. Advocacy and support are needed from all stakeholders, including our legislators, CDOT, Eagle County, and EagleVail communities. Improvement discussions have included 1) a mid-block pedestrian crossing with Rectangular Rapid Flashing Beacon and roadway lights, and 2) a Stonebridge Roundabout with 2 or 3 mid- block crossings. A joint grant application (Avon, Eagle County, and EagleVail) for a $2.5M project to construct the Stonebridge Dr. Roundabout and 2 or 3 mid-block pedestrian crossings is recommended. The Page 2 of 4 20% local match would be $500,000. BACKGROUND: The absence of pedestrian crossings on US 6 has been a safety concern for Avon citizens and Avon Town Council for numerous years. US 6 is a major transit route for ECO Transit and bus stops are located on both sides of the local highway. CDOT, ECO Transit, and Avon staff have evaluated the situation. •US6 is a major Transit Corridor for ECO Transit o There are four mid-block pairs of bus stops. o Transit users have to scramble across multiple lanes. •Crash history (3.5-mile stretch: Avon to Eagle-Vail) for the past 10 years: 3 incidents reported. o 2015 at Eagle Road: Pedestrian crossing near the crosswalk and against the pedestrian signal. o 2014 by Stone Bridge Dr: During icy conditions, a vehicle slide into a pedestrian who was walking along the shoulder of the road during daylight. o 2019 by Stone Creek Dr: Fatal Pedestrian crash. •The posted speed limit for the studied section by Stone Bridge Dr. is 45mph. CDOT has determinedthe prevailing speed is too high for an uncontrolled mid-block pedestrian crossing. The pedestrian survival rate in high-speed crashes is low. Page 3 of 4 Pedestrian survival rate vs. vehicle speed A mid-block pedestrian crossing at this time was considered not appropriate due to the posted speed limit of 45mph, a high risk to pedestrians. CDOT proposed a two-phase project. Phase I, a traffic calming phase, would urbanize the feel of US6 by adding a raised median and constructing curbs, plantings, and sidewalks near the bus shelters. If and when the prevailing speed on US6 is reduced to 35mph, Phase II would proceed with the construction of a marked pedestrian crossing with actuated Rectangular Rapid Flashing Beacons. This solution was not well received by some stakeholders due to the uncertain outcome of the traffic calming phase. Schematic of Stonebridge Dr. Roundabout Option STONEBRIDGE DR. ROUNDABOUT: A Stonebridge Dr. Roundabout solution was discussed as a good option. A roundabout would provide traffic calming effects to the corridor as well as a pedestrian crossing. In addition, a roundabout would improve vehicle mobility for left-turn movements on US 6 and Stonebridge Dr. Although the cost of a roundabout was considered prohibitive. Page 4 of 4 FINANCIAL CONSIDERATIONS: A new CDOT grant opportunity, Revitalizing Main Streets, with a $2M max award may help fund the Stonebridge Dr. Roundabout and pedestrian crossings on US6. The grant’s goals include; (1) reducing fatal and serious injury crashes on the region’s transportation system, (2) Improving transit access and multimodal mobility, (3) supporting the development of connected urban/employment centers and multimodal corridors, and (4) providing safe access to opportunity and mobility for residents of all ages, incomes, and abilities. A local match will strengthen the application. OPTIONS: (1) A mid-block pedestrian crossing (2) A Stonebridge roundabout and two or three mid-block pedestrian crossings RECOMMENDATION: I recommend a joint grant application (Avon, Eagle County, and EagleVail) for a $2.5M project to construct the Stonebridge Dr. Roundabout and two or three mid-block pedestrian crossings. The 20% local match would be $500,000. Thank you, Eva Attachments: Attachment 1. Presentation: US6 Pedestrian Crossing Work Session Attachment 2. CDOT Crosswalk Guidebook Attachment 3. Region 3 Crosswalk Supplement Report US6 Pedestrian Crossing Work Session ATTACHMENT 1: Welcome Legislators:Eagle County: -Senator Kerry Donovan -Commissioner XXX -Representative Dylan Roberts -County Manager, Jeff Shroll -ECO Transit Director, Tanya Allen Colorado Department of Transportation EagleVail Metro District: -Region 3 Traffic & Safety Mgr, Zane Znamenacek -District Manager, Steven Barber -Region 3 Traffic Operations Engr, Andi Staley -Resident Engr, Karen Berdoulay 2 US6 Pedestrian Crossing Work Session Work Session Goals: •Promote Safety for Transit Users and Pedestrian Mobility •A Regional Solution •Advocacy & Support 3 US6 Pedestrian Crossing Work Session US 6 –Major Transit Corridor I-70 US 6 Four mid-block pairs of bus stops in Avon 4 US6 Pedestrian Crossing Work Session Town of Avon –High Density Communities 5 US6 Pedestrian Crossing Work Session Town of Avon –High Density Communities 6 US6 Pedestrian Crossing Work Session Town of Avon –High Density Communities 7 US6 Pedestrian Crossing Work Session Town of Avon –High Density Communities 8 US6 Pedestrian Crossing Work Session Town of Avon –High Density Communities 9 US6 Pedestrian Crossing Work Session Town of Avon –High Density Communities 10 US6 Pedestrian Crossing Work Session Town of Avon –High Density Communities 11 Crash History: •2015 at Eagle Road: Pedestrian crossing near the crosswalk and against the pedestrian signal. •2014 by Stone Bridge Dr: During icy conditions, a vehicle slide into a pedestrian who was walking along the shoulder of the road during daylight. •2019 by Stone Creek Dr: Fatal Pedestrian crash. Pedestrian survival rate in high-speed crashes is low: Background Edwards Mid-block Crossing 12 Engineering Evaluation: •Posted Speed Limit of 45mph is high for an uncontrolled pedestrian crossing •CDOT recommendation: •Phase I: Traffic Calming improvements, if/when prevailing speed is reduced to 35mph, then •Phase II: Construct Mid-block crossing Midblock Crossing Solution Edwards Mid-block Crossing ~$200,000 13 Preferred US6 Roundabout Solution -Traffic Calming for the Corridor -Enhance Pedestrian and Vehicular Mobility 14 New Funding Opportunity CDOT Revitalizing Main Street Grant Program -$2M/Award. Grant Selection Criteria: • Support a transportation system that safely accommodates all modes of travel • Improve transit access and multimodal mobility • Provide safe access to opportunity and mobility for residents of all ages, incomes and abilities —including vulnerable users • Local match preferred: •0-20% •$0 to $500,000 15 Stonebridge Dr. Roundabout Solutions Proposed Project Scope: $2.5M Project ●Preliminary Engineering ●Design and construct Stonebridge Dr. Roundabout and two or three mid-block pedestrian crossings Steps Forward: ●Pursue Revitalizing Main Street Grant ●Legislative and Local Advocacy ●CDOT Advocacy 16 17 Colorado Department of Transportation Region 3 Crosswalk Installation Guidebook ATTACHMENT 2: i | Page Crosswalk Safety Approximately 5,000 pedestrians die and 70,000 are injured in traffic crashes each year in the United States. This accounts for approximately 14 percent of all fatal crashes. According to National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA), on average, a pedestrian is killed every 2 hours and injured every 8 minutes. Young children and the elderly are more likely to be killed or injured in a pedestrian crash than any other group. Pedestrians at greater risk include children age 14 and below and seniors age 60 and above. While it is easy and common to blame drivers for the crashes, it is interesting to note that a report published by the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) indicated that pedestrians are solely culpable in 43 percent of crashes and drivers in 35 percent of crashes. Pedestrians using a crosswalk may have a false sense of security that all motorist will stop once they are in the crosswalk. Education, enforcement, and engineering are components that need to be employed to address this issue. As a step toward this effort, Region 3 of the Colorado Department of Transportations (CDOT) has developed this Crosswalk Installation Guidebook (guidebook) to address pedestrian crossing safety at controlled and uncontrolled intersections and mid-block crossings. CDOT recognizes that pedestrians should be able to cross the highway safely. As such, CDOT has a professional responsibility to facilitate safe and convenient crossing facilities, where needed. This may range from a simple marked crosswalk to pedestrian under/over passes. It is very important to note that not all locations are appropriate for the placement of crosswalks. This guidebook will assist the engineering component in determining if locations are appropriate for the installation of crosswalks. It is important to understand that these are general guidelines for the consideration of a marked crosswalk. Engineering judgement should always be used prior to the installation or removal of any crosswalk. ii | Page Purpose of This Crosswalk Installation Guidebook These guidelines were developed for use by CDOT Region 3, for the determination of crosswalk placement on the State Highway System. This guidebook will assist CDOT staff in determining whether a crosswalk is warranted and if a crosswalk is justified. As such, the determination to place a crosswalk is broken down into two steps: 1. Determine if a crosswalk is warranted. 2. Determine if a crosswalk is justified. Similar to the Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD) with the consideration of a traffic signal, a crosswalk can be warranted but not necessarily made safe (justified) to install. Therefore, a crosswalk warrant process is completed first. If a crosswalk is warranted, the next step is to determine if the crosswalk should be placed and if so, should there be other improvements or enhancements. It is important to recognize that the speed of motorists has serious consequences when a pedestrian is involved. A pedestrian hit by a vehicle traveling 40 mph has an 85 percent chance of being killed; at 30 mph, the likelihood goes down to 45 percent, while at 20 mph, the fatality rate is 5 percent. At higher speeds, motorists are less likely to see a pedestrian at a crosswalk and are even less likely to be able to stop in time to avoid hitting them. DOT HS 809 021 October 1999 Final Report iii | Page Acknowledgments 1. Safety Effects of Marked Versus Unmarked Crosswalks at Uncontrolled Locations. Final Report and Recommended Guidelines, FHWA Publications Number HRT-04-100 2005 2. City of Boulder Pedestrian Crossing Treatment Installation Guidelines November 2011 3. UNCONTROLLED PEDESTRIAN CROSSING GUIDELINES City and County of Denver 4. PEDESTRIAN CROSSING GUIDELINES FOR TEXAS-Report No. FHWA/TX- 01/2136-2 December 2000 5. Florida Pedestrian Planning and Design Handbook / University of North Carolina 6. Virginia Department of Transportation Pedestrian Policy Plan 2014 7. City of Longmont Pedestrian Crossing Treatment Guidelines 2009 8. Design and Safety of Pedestrian Facilities ITE March 1998 9. Guidance on the 2010 ADA Standards for Accessible Design September 2010 10. Guide for the Planning, Design, and Operation of Pedestrian Facilities AASHTO July 2004 11. Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD) FHWA 2009 12. Traffic Control Device Handbook ITE 13. Urban Design Guide 14. AASHTO - A Policy on Geometric Design of Highways and Streets 15. CDOT M&S Standards 16. CDOT Roadside Design Manual Chapter 14 17. Colorado Revised Statutes iv | Page Terms and Definitions ADT Average Daily Traffic (ADT). The amount of vehicular traffic that crosses an imaginary line across a roadway in a 24-hour period. ADT information typically includes both directions of vehicle travel (if on a two-way street). HAWK Beacon (also known as a Pedestrian Hybrid Beacon) A HAWK beacon, or a pedestrian hybrid beacon, is a traffic control device used to stop road traffic and allow pedestrians to cross safely. MUTCD The Manual of Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD) defines the standards used by Traffic Engineers nationwide to install and maintain traffic control devices on all public streets, highways, bikeways, and private roads open to public travel. Peak Hour The one hour each day when traffic volumes are at their highest on a given road. Road Diet A road diet is a low-cost strategy that reconfigures a roadway cross-section to better accommodate all users' needs, increase mobility, reduce crashes, and improve the quality of life in communities. PROWAG Public Right of Way Accessibility Guidelines (PROWAG) are being developed to ensure roadway facilities are accessible to people with disabilities. RRFB A Rectangular Rapid Flashing Beacon (RRFB) uses pedestrian-activated, high-intensity warning lights to notify drivers when a pedestrian is entering a crosswalk. SSD Stopping sight distance (SSD) is the distance required by a driver of a vehicle, traveling at a given speed, to bring the vehicle to a stop after an object on the roadway becomes visible. VPD Vehicles per day (VPD) is the amount of vehicular traffic that crosses an imaginary line across a roadway in a 24-hour period. v | Page Table of Contents Crosswalk Safety ........................................................................................................................... i Purpose of This Crosswalk Installation Guidebook .................................................................. ii Acknowledgments ........................................................................................................................ iii Terms and Definitions .................................................................................................................. iv Introduction ....................................................................................................................................1 Applicable Laws .............................................................................................................................2 Pedestrians ............................................................................................................................................. 2 School Bus .............................................................................................................................................. 2 Pedestrian Crossing Flowchart ....................................................................................................3 Table 1: Crosswalk Selection Table ...........................................................................................4 Possible Enhancements ...............................................................................................................5 School Crosswalks ........................................................................................................................7 School Crossing Guards ....................................................................................................................... 7 Transit Stops ........................................................................................................................................... 8 Table 2: Near Sided vs. Far sided Bus Stop Locations .............................................................8 Roundabouts ..................................................................................................................................9 Instructions for Crosswalk Requests ........................................................................................ 11 Crosswalk Request Form .................................................................................................................... 12 Crosswalk Evaluation Worksheet ...................................................................................................... 13 Crosswalk Request Form at Signalized Locations .......................................................................... 14 Pavement Marking Guidelines ................................................................................................... 15 Removal of Crosswalks ....................................................................................................................... 15 Colored Pavement Markings within Crosswalks ............................................................................. 15 Stop Bars ............................................................................................................................................... 16 Crossing Layout ........................................................................................................................... 17 Yield Lines ............................................................................................................................................. 18 Examples of Yield Lines at Unsignalized Midblock Crosswalks ................................................... 19 Table 3: Typical Pedestrian Signs ............................................................................................. 20 Enhancements ............................................................................................................................. 21 Table 4: Enhancement Table ...................................................................................................... 21 1 | Page Introduction The safety goal of the Colorado Department of Transportation (CDOT) is Vision Zero. This concept sets a bold and visionary goal of zero deaths for every individual, family, and community using Colorado’s transportation network. Moving toward this goal, CDOT Region 3 has embarked on an effort to reduce fatalities and serious injuries at crossing locations on the State Highway System. This guidebook discusses marked and unmarked crossings and through extensive research, procedures have been developed for the installation of crosswalks in CDOT Region 3. Providing marked crosswalks is one of many engineering countermeasures that may be used to improve safety at crossing locations. It is important to note that all potential crossing locations are not necessarily good candidates for a crosswalk. Crosswalk safety has been very controversial in the United States for several years. There have been numerous studies showing mixed results with some of these studies being used as justification to not install crosswalks. To eliminate confusion over crosswalk safety, the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) produced a report in 2005 called: Safety Effects of Marked Versus Unmarked Crosswalks at Uncontrolled Locations Data was collected at 2,000 sites. Of the 2,000 crosswalks evaluated, 1,622 were at uncontrolled intersections and 278 were at midblock crossings. In an attempt to account for regional conditions, sites from different parts of the country were selected. Conclusions from this report indicate: • On 2-lane roads, there was no significant difference in pedestrian crash rates between marked and unmarked sites; • On multilane roads with an ADT of 12,000 vpd or less, there was no difference in pedestrian crash rates between marked and unmarked locations; • On multilane roads with no raised median and an ADT greater than 12,000 vpd, marked crosswalks had a higher pedestrian crash rate than unmarked crossings; and • On multilane roads with ADTs greater than 15,000 vpd and raised medians, a significantly higher crash rate was associated with marked crosswalks as compared to unmarked. Based on this report as well as policy reviews from several States and Cities, this guidebook was developed to maximize crossing safety and minimize pedestrian crashes. 2 | Page Applicable Laws Pedestrians Legal crosswalk locations can be either marked or unmarked. Colorado Revised Statue, section 42-1-102(21) C.R.S., define a crosswalk as: “. . that portion of a roadway ordinarily included within the prolongation or connection of the lateral lines of sidewalks at intersections or any portion of a roadway distinctly indicated for pedestrian crossing by lines or other marking on the surface. Accordingly, legal crosswalks exist at all public street intersections whether marked or unmarked. However, the only way a crosswalk can exist at a mid-block location is if it is marked. A marked crosswalk is any crosswalk, which is delineated by white painted markings placed on the pavement. Crosswalks consisting of pavement materials or colored concrete are unmarked crosswalks unless white paint is also present.” School Bus According to the Colorado Revised Statue, section 42-4-1903, in part states: “The driver of a motor vehicle upon any highway, road, or street, upon meeting or overtaking from either direction any school bus that has stopped, shall stop the vehicle at least twenty feet before reaching the school bus if visual signal lights as specified in subsection (2) of this section have been actuated on the school bus. The driver shall not proceed until the visual signal lights are no longer being actuated. The driver of a motor vehicle shall stop when a school bus that is not required to be equipped with visual signal lights by Subsection (2) of this section stops to receive or discharge schoolchildren.” Subsection 2 – “Display eight visual signal lights meeting the requirements of 49 CFR 571.108 or its successor regulation.” In other words, school buses are required to have 8 alternately flashing lights intended to identify a vehicle as a school bus to inform other users of the highway that such vehicle is stopped on the highway to take on or discharge school children. 3 | Page Pedestrian Crossing Flowchart 4 | Page Table 1: Crosswalk Selection Table The Crosswalk Selection Table is intended as general minimum recommendations. Engineering judgment should be used on a case by case basis. Note that prevailing speeds may be considered if substantially different than posted speeds. Roadway Type (Number of Travel Lanes and Median Type) Vehicle ADT ≤ 9,000 Vehicle ADT 9,000 – 12,000 Vehicle ADT 12,000 – 15,000 Vehicle ADT > 15,000 Speed Limit (MPH) 25 30 35 40 25 30 35 40 25 30 35 40 25 30 35 40 2 lanes (one-way street) 2 2 2 6 2 2 2 6 2 2 2 6 2 2 2 6 2-Lanes 2-way street 1 1 1 1 6 1 1 6 1 1 1 6 1 1 1 6 3-Lanes with raised median 3 3 3 3 6 3 3 6 3 3 3 6 3 3 6 6 3-Lanes without raised median 2 2 2 2 6 2 2 6 2 2 2 6 2 2 2 6 Multi-Lane (4 or More Lanes) with raised median 5 5 5 6 5 5 5 6 5 5 5 6 6 6 6 6 Multi-Lane (4 or More Lanes) without raised median and 3 or more lanes one way 4 4 4 4 6 4 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 5 | Page Possible Enhancements Following are the possible enhancements that should be considered based on the criteria listed on Table 1. 1. Level 1: a. Install marked crosswalks with a (W11-2) and a (W16-7P) plaque at the crosswalk location, with an optional advanced (W11-2). b. If the advanced yield or stop lines are placed, the (R1-5) or (R1-5b) signs shall be placed at the stop or yield locations. c. Use (S1-1) series signs for school crossings. d. Optional-place a (R6-1) (In-street State Law Yield to Pedestrian). 2. Level 2: a. Install marked crosswalks with an advanced (W 11-2) sign and (W11-2) with (W16-7P) plaque at the crosswalk location. b. Use advanced stop or yield markings 50 feet in advance of the crosswalk. c. Use (R1-5) or (R1-5b) signs at the stop or yield markings. d. Use (S1-1) series signs for school crossings. e. May install Rectangular Rapid Flashing Beacons. f. Optional-place a (R6-1) (In-street State Law Yield to Pedestrian). 3. Level 3: a. Ensure raised island meets Public Right of Way Accessibility Guidelines (PROWAG) requirements prior to placing the crosswalk. b. Install marked crosswalks with an advanced (W11-2) and (W11-2) with (W16- 7P) plaque at the crosswalk location. c. Use advanced stop or yield markings 50 feet in advance of the crosswalk. d. Use (R1-5) or (R1-5b) at the yield or stop locations. e. Use (S1-1) series signs for school crossings. f. Optional-may install Rectangular Rapid Flashing Beacons. g. Optional-place a (R6-1) (In-street State Law Yield to Pedestrian). 4. Level 4: a. Install marked crosswalks with an advanced (W11-2) and (W11-2) with (W16- 7P) plaque at the crosswalk location. b. Use advanced stop or yield markings 50 feet in advance of the crosswalk. c. Use (R1-5) or (R1-5b) at the yield or stop locations. d. Signs shall be placed both at the edge of the road or sidewalk and in the median if feasible. e. Install overhead pedestrian activated flashing beacons or consider a HAWK system, if warrants are met*. f. Use (S1-1) series signs for school crossings. g. Optional-may install Rectangular Rapid Flashing Beacons. h. Optional-place a (R6-1) (In-street State Law Yield to Pedestrian). 6 | Page 5. Level 5: a. Ensure raised medians meets Public Right of Way Accessibility Guidelines (PROWAG) requirements prior to placing the crosswalk. b. Install mark crosswalks with an advanced (W11-2) and (W11-2) with (W16- 7P) plaque at the crosswalk location. c. Use advanced stop or yield markings 50 feet in advanced of the crosswalk. d. Use (R1-5) or (R1-5b) at the yield or stop locations. e. Signs shall be placed both at the edge of the road or sidewalk and in the median if feasible. f. Install overhead pedestrian activated flashing beacons or consider a HAWK system/Pedestrian Hybrid Beacon, if warrants are met* or pedestrian activated signal, if warrants are met*. g. Use S1-1 series for school crossings. h. Optional-may install Rectangular Rapid Flashing Beacons. i. Optional-place a (R6-1) (In-street State Law Yield to Pedestrian). 6. Level 6: a. Consider a HAWK or a Pedestrian Hybrid Beacon if warrants are met*, or b. Consider a pedestrian activated signal, if warrants are met*. * See MUTCD for pedestrian warrants for installation of a HAWK and pedestrian activated signal. 7 | Page School Crosswalks School crosswalks should follow the warrant guide of at least 5 school children per hour using the crossing. In addition, all other engineering design criteria must be met. The crossing needs to be within 600 feet of the actual school building and/or be an official school route as assigned by the school. The school or school district should implement a school crossing guard program as a first added countermeasure before additional safety improvements are considered for a school crosswalk. School Crossing Guards School crossing guards have become an integral part of the school community and provide multiple benefits to school children. Whether school children walk, ride a bike, or take a bus, crossing guards provide protection for children crossing the street. In addition, they can educate both school children and parents of the benefits and skills needed to be safe while crossing the road. According to the FHWA: “Very young children lack skills, physical development and experience with traffic and street crossings. At ages 7 to 9, most are capable of making successful crossings, but can be distracted easily while crossing and, thus, be exposed to risk. Adults who serve as school crossing guards play important roles in educating children and helping them develop reliable behavior in traffic.” Crossing guard’s ultimate responsibility is to: • Encourage safe crossing and street behavior; • Deter pedestrian violations; • Enforce motorist compliance with the law and safe behavior; • Report hazardous conditions to school and/or the proper authority; • Create safe gaps for crossing; and • Provide one-on-one instruction with children on skills development. 8 | Page Transit Stops According to the Institute of Transportation Engineers’ (ITE) publication for the Design and Safety of Pedestrian Facilities, 2 percent of the pedestrian crashes in urban areas with bus stops located on the near side of the intersection happen as the passenger leaves the bus, crosses in front of the bus, and gets hit from a vehicle in the adjacent lane. In rural areas, the crash percentage increases to 3 percent. This can be reduced by moving the bus stop to the far side of the intersection. The passengers will more likely go to the rear of the bus where the intersection is located and cross there without the bus shielding the through lane of traffic. However, there may be times when a near side bus stop is desired as long as the location of the bus stop will provide sufficient view for pedestrians and motorists. The table below lists the circumstances under which far and near bus stop locations should be considered. Table 2: Near Sided vs. Far sided Bus Stop Locations Near Side Bus Stop Location Far Side Bus Stop Location Where the pedestrian demand is mostly near side In the central business district with heavy traffic and pedestrian volumes Where the pedestrian would have to cross a busy street to get to the far side Heavy vehicle volumes or with an exclusive turn lane Where buses make a right turn Two-way streets where bus makes a left turn Near Side Bus Stop Far Side Bus Stop If a bus stop is located on near side, the installation of a bus pull-out should be considered. If this is not feasible, then the bus stop should be located at least 30 feet from the intersection. 9 | Page Roundabouts A roundabout design, compared to a traditional intersection, allows for a shorter distance for pedestrians to cross due to the geometric features and can provide a safer place to cross because of the slower design speeds. A roundabout also has fewer turning movements requiring observation of traffic in one direction by pedestrians while providing for refuge in the splitter island if necessary. One concern of roundabout designs is the removal of the audible cues that typically exist at traditional intersections. This is concerning with regard to the visually impaired when they are trying to navigate the crossing of a roundabout leg. The United States Access Board was tasked with the development of the Public Right of Way Accessibility Guidelines (PROWAG) to address these concerns. Although they have not yet been mandated, the current language in the PROWAG requires pedestrian activated signals at roundabouts for each multi-lane segment of each crossing, including the splitter island. The pedestrian activated signals are required to comply with the MUTCD standards for accessible pedestrian signals and pedestrian pushbuttons. The purpose of these guidelines is to ensure that persons with disabilities have the same level of convenience, connection, and safety afforded to the general public. It is anticipated that these guidelines will be enforced for newly built or altered roundabouts. Roundabout signing is like other intersection signing regarding regulatory control, advanced warning, and directional guidance to motorists. In addition, warning motorists of the potential of pedestrians trying to cross the roundabout leg is critical and makes for proper signing imperative. Signs should be placed where they have maximum visibility for motorists but also located in an area that will not block the view of potential pedestrians or bicyclists within the crosswalk. Pedestrian Crossing signs (W11-2) with a (W16-7P) may be used at pedestrian crossings within a roundabout at both entries and exits. Pedestrian crossing signs should be used at all pedestrian crossings at double-lane entries, double-lane exits, and right-turn bypass lanes. Crosswalks should be located at least one passenger vehicle length (20 ft minimum) away from the yield point on the entrance and exit of the roundabout. In addition, the MUTCD states that: “Pedestrian crosswalks shall not be marked to or from the central island of roundabouts.” “If pedestrian facilities are provided, crosswalks should be marked across roundabout entrances and exits to indicate where pedestrians are intended to cross.” 10 | Page From the MUTCD, an illustration of crosswalk markings at a single-lane and two-lane roundabout with a single exit lane follows: Example of Double-Lane Markings Example of Single-Lane Markings 11 | Page Instructions for Crosswalk Requests The crosswalk application process is intended to provide a consistent procedure and approach when considering the installation of crosswalks and other enhancements. Not all locations are suitable for the installation of crosswalks. An engineering evaluation must first be completed and carefully considered. Experience has shown that poorly placed crosswalks may increase the possibility of a crash. Therefore, CDOT will complete an engineering investigation prior to the consideration of a crosswalk per the instructions below. 1. Complete the attached application and return to CDOT at the address located on the bottom of the application form. 2. CDOT will evaluate if the crosswalk location(s) meet minimum warrant* thresholds. a. If warrants* are not met, then CDOT will send out a response detailing why the location(s) do not qualify. b. If warrants are met, CDOT will begin an engineering investigation. 3. Once the investigation is complete, Region 3 Traffic will determine: a. If engineer controls are adequate, then consideration of a crosswalk moves forward. b. If engineer controls are not adequate, can enhancements** be used? c. If enhancements are feasible and cost effective, then consideration of a crosswalk moves forward. d. If enhancements are not feasible, then a crosswalk should not be approved. *Warrants and justifications include but are not limited to: • Distance to nearest controlled or uncontrolled intersections; • Number of pedestrians crossing in a peak period (usually an hour); • Number of lanes on the State Highway; • The posted or prevailing speed; and • Whether it’s an official school crossing. **Enhancements include but are not limited to: • Median Island; • Rectangular Rapid Flashing Beacons; • Road Diet; and • Pedestrian or HAWK traffic signal (needs to meet warrants as per the MUTCD). 12 | Page Crosswalk Request Form 1. Proposed location of pedestrian crosswalk: SH _________________MP____________________ 2. Posted speed limit on State Highway __________________________________________M.P.H. 3. Name of intersection cross street___________________________________________________ 4. If non-intersection, name of nearest cross streets ______________________________________ and __________________________________________________________________________ 5. Distance of proposed crosswalk to nearest intersections _______________________________ft and _________________________________________________________________________ft 6. Peak Hours of Pedestrian Traffic_____________________________________________ AM/PM 7. Pedestrian Volume / Peak Hour ___________________________________________________ 8. Is this an official school crossing? * _________________________________________________ 9. Does the crossing connect traffic generator on both sides of the road?** _______________________________________/_____________________________________ 10. Explain why you think a crosswalk is needed. _____________________________________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________________________________ 11. Do you know of any pedestrian crashes at this location? _____________________________________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________________________________ 12. Submitted By: ____________________________________________Date: ________________ 13. Phone Number ( )__________________________________________________________ 14. Address: ______________________________________________________________________ Return this form to: The Colorado Department of Transportation 222 S 6th Room 100 Grand Junction, CO 81501 This document must be submitted by a city, county, law enforcement, and/or school district. * Needs to be an official school crossing as designated by the school. ** There needs to be connecting paths from one side of the highway to the other side or have facilities that generate pedestrian traffic on both sides of the road. 13 | Page Crosswalk Evaluation Worksheet Location Data Major Street Major Street Name_______________________ Posted Speed Limit or/ ___________MPH Minor Street Name_______________________ Prevailing Speed Observed ________MPH Midblock School Zone Multi-use-path (both sides) Existing Crossing Treatments ___________________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________________________________ Roadway Elements 2- Lane Distance to nearest crossing ___________________ feet 3-Lane w/raised median 3 Lane w/striped median (marked or protected) 4-Lane Uncontrolled Crossing only SSD =________________feet 5-Lane w/raised median 5 Lane w/striped median Is SSD >= 8X Speed limit? Can improvements be made to SSD? Time of Day Time of Day AM Mid-Day PM School AM School PM Total # of Pedestrians Total # of at Risk Peds (Total X 2)* Total Pedestrians *At risk pedestrians include children (14 and younger) and the elderly (60 and over). Yes No Yes No Yes No Yes No No Yes 14 | Page Crosswalk Request Form at Signalized Locations It is not necessary to mark crosswalks at all signalized intersections; however, there are circumstance when a crosswalk should be installed. Listed below are criteria for the consideration of crosswalks at a signalized location. If one or more of the criteria is met, then crosswalks should be considered. 1. Location of Signalized Intersection: State Highway ________________________ Cross Street______________________________________________________ 2. Pedestrian Warrants Met Yes No 3. Official School Crossing Yes No 4. Ped Heads and Buttons* Yes No 5. Complicated Signal Phasing Yes No 6. Complex Intersection Yes No Geometry 7. Ped Crash History Yes No 8. Documented History of Yes No Near Misses 9. Connecting paths from one Yes No side of the highway or have facilities that generate ped traffic on both sides of the road *Crosswalk shall be installed or ped heads and buttons shall be removed. 15 | Page Pavement Marking Guidelines The MUTCD allows numerous options for crosswalks in order to give flexibility to traffic engineers. This guidebook does not recommend which type of treatment to use but identifies what treatments are available. To address this issue, the FHWA completed a study (Publication Number: FHWA-HRT-10-067) that concludes: “For the existing midblock locations, a general observation is that the continental marking was detected at about twice the distance upstream as the transverse marking during daytime conditions. This increase in distance reflects 8 s of increased awareness of the crossing for a 30-mi/h operating speed”. “because high-visibility markings are more easily detected by motorists and have been shown to lead to a reduction in pedestrian-vehicle collisions when compared to transverse line crosswalks, transportation agencies should install high-visibility markings at uncontrolled crossing locations whenever a determination is made to provide marked crosswalks”. CDOT Region 3 will adopt the continental marking for all approved crosswalk locations. Removal of Crosswalks Crosswalks may not be warranted over time as conditions and pedestrian patterns may change. As roadways are repaved or reconstructed, Region 3 Traffic will review existing marked crosswalks to determine if they are still warranted and meet the engineering criteria set forth in this guidebook. If either of these conditions are not met, the crosswalk should not be replaced. In reevaluating the engineering criteria and ensuring the pedestrian warrants are met, Region 3 Traffic will work with engineering and or maintenance to determine if enhancements could be made to bring the crosswalk into compliance. If enhancement countermeasures cannot be employed to bring the crosswalk into compliance, the crosswalk should be removed. Colored Pavement Markings within Crosswalks The MUTCD defines colored pavement as pavement that consists of differently colored road paving materials, such as colored asphalt or concrete or paint or other marking materials, applied to the surface of a road or island to simulate a colored pavement. Colored pavement is a traffic control device when it attempts to communicate with any roadway user or when it incorporates retroreflective properties. The MUTCD prescribes that only the uniform use of diagonal or longitudinal white bars in the crosswalk area is allowed to perform the function of adding conspicuity to a crosswalk. 16 | Page Colored concrete crosswalks at mid-block crossings shall have a transverse white thermoplastic stripe on both sides of the crossing at least one-foot wide. Colored concrete at signalized intersections does not require a transverse stripe. CDOT’s Region 3 Traffic Operations Engineer will review requests from Cities and Counties wishing to place colored pavement within a crosswalk. Generally, the only consideration appropriate for the use of colored pavement markings are on the approaches to a stop condition whether it’s a stop sign or traffic signal. This application allows for the appropriate sight distance for the motorists to see pedestrians within the crosswalk. Conditions where there is no stop control will be considered on a case by case basis by the CDOT Region 3 Operations Engineer. Non complaint legacy colored pavement markings will be allowed to stay, however, during repaving or reconstruction these locations will be reevaluated by the Region 3 Traffic Operations Engineer to confirm compliancy with the colored pavement marking requirements. Stop Bars Stop bars shall be a white 24-inch wide stripe and be placed across approach lanes to indicate the point at which the stop is intended or required to be made. Stop bars should be placed a minimum of 4 feet in advanced of the nearest crosswalk line at a signal or stop sign. If a crosswalk is not present, then stop bars should be placed at the desired stopping point but no more than 30 feet or less than 4 feet from the nearest edge of the intersecting road. Stop lines shall not be used at locations where a driver is required to yield or at uncontrolled intersections. Please see following diagram for a typical crossing layout for an intersection. 17 | Page Crossing Layout All longitudinal markings shall be 9 ft by 2 ft. 18 | Page Yield Lines Yield Lines shall be 12 inches at the base and 18 inches high. Spacing shall be 12 inches. Yield lines shall consist of a row of solid white isosceles triangles pointing toward approaching vehicles extending across approach lanes to indicate the point at which the yield is intended or required to be made. See illustration below. Yield lines may be used to indicate the point behind which vehicles are required to yield in compliance with a YIELD (R1-2) sign or a Yield Here to Pedestrians (R1-5 or R1-5a) sign. Yield lines shall not be used at locations where drivers are required to stop in compliance with a STOP (R1-1) sign, a Stop Here for Pedestrians (R1-5b or R1-5c) sign, a traffic control signal, or some other traffic control device. If yield or stop lines are used at a crosswalk that crosses an uncontrolled multi-lane approach, the yield lines or stop lines should be placed 50 feet in advance of the nearest crosswalk line, and parking should be prohibited in the area between the yield or stop line and the crosswalk. If yield or stop lines are used at a crosswalk that crosses an uncontrolled multi-lane approach, Yield Here To (Stop Here For) Pedestrians (R1-5 series) signs shall be used. Please see following diagram for an example of yield lines at unsignalized midblock crosswalks. 19 | Page Examples of Yield Lines at Unsignalized Midblock Crosswalks 20 | Page The following table identifies potential pedestrian signs that can be used at crosswalk locations: Table 3: Typical Pedestrian Signs (W11-2) R1-6 R1-6b School Crossing Ahead (S1-1 and W16-9p) R1-5 School Crosswalk (S1-1 and W16-7p) R1-5a 21 | Page Enhancements Crosswalk enhancements provide a safer place for pedestrians to cross when it has been determined that a crosswalk is warranted and justified based on engineering judgement. These enhancements range from a basic sign installation to pedestrian signals at controlled intersections. The following table describes the list of enhancements and their intended use. Table 4: Enhancement Table Enhancement Intended Use Signs The most basic passive enhancement used to inform motorists of potential pedestrians. Also, can be used to indicate state law. Curb Extensions Traffic calming enhancements used to reduce the distance a pedestrian must walk to reach the other side of the street. Improves visibility between motorists and pedestrians. Median Islands Traffic calming enhancement which can provide narrower travel lanes resulting in a reduction in speed. Pedestrians can cross one direction of travel at a time with the islands providing a refuge for pedestrians. Striping (Narrow Lanes) Traffic calming enhancement to provide narrower travel lanes and a potential reduction in speed. Flashing Beacon One or more signals that flash once activated and can be used as a supplemental emphasis to warning signs and for emphasis for midblock crosswalks. Flash rate between 50 and 60 times/minute. Rectangular Rapid Flashing Beacon (RRFB) Pedestrian activated and is comprised of two rapidly flashing beacons in alternating order. HAWK also known as a Pedestrian Hybrid Beacon A traffic control device used to stop traffic and allow pedestrians to cross safely. Activated by pedestrians. Traffic signals that consist of a yellow signal centered below two horizontally aligned red signals. Can be timed to minimize traffic flow disruptions. Pedestrian Signal Provides for the assignment of right of way. Provides a phasing dedicated to pedestrians and can be timed to minimize traffic flow disruptions. ATTACHMENT 3: 1 | Page Region 3 Table of Contents Executive Summary ................................................................................................................... 3 Legal Terms and Definitions....................................................................................................... 5 Terms and Definitions ................................................................................................................ 6 FHWA Research ........................................................................................................................ 7 Data Collection ....................................................................................................................................... 7 Crash Studies ......................................................................................................................................... 8 Study Results .......................................................................................................................................... 9 Conclusions and Recommendations ................................................................................................. 11 Possible Enhancements ............................................................................................................17 Publications Reviews ................................................................................................................19 Relationship of Crosswalks under Various Design Environments ..............................................21 Traditional Intersection ........................................................................................................................ 21 Channelized Right-Turns .................................................................................................................... 21 Mid-Block Crossings ............................................................................................................................ 22 Roundabouts ......................................................................................................................................... 22 School Crosswalks ............................................................................................................................... 23 Work Zones ........................................................................................................................................... 23 Enhancements ..........................................................................................................................24 Signs ...................................................................................................................................................... 24 Curb Extensions ................................................................................................................................... 24 Median Islands ...................................................................................................................................... 25 Road Diet-Striping (Narrow Lanes) ................................................................................................... 25 Flashing Beacon ................................................................................................................................... 25 Rectulangular Rapid Flashing Beacon.............................................................................................. 25 Pedestrian Hybrid Beacons (HAWK) ................................................................................................ 26 Pedestrian Signal ................................................................................................................................. 26 Appendix A: Types of Pedestrian Crashes ................................................................................27 Appendix B: Pedestrian/Transit and School Bus Statutes .........................................................28 Appendix C: Transit Stops and Laws ........................................................................................32 Appendix D: School Bus Stops and Laws .................................................................................33 Appendix E: Acknowledgements ...............................................................................................35 2 | Page Region 3 List of Tables Table 1: Pedestrian Crash Rate vs. Type of Crossing..................................................... 9 Table 2: Fatality Rate vs. Speed ................................................................................... 10 Table 3: Pedestrian Improvements at Uncontrolled Locations ...................................... 12 Table 4: Agency Guideline Comparison ........................................................................ 14 Table 5: Crosswalk Selection Treatment Guidelines ..................................................... 16 Table 6: Publication Guideline Comparison .................................................................. 20 Table 7: Near vs. Far Bus Stop Considerations ............................................................ 32 3 | Page Region 3 Executive Summary The safety goal of the Colorado Department of Transportation (CDOT) is Vision Zero. This concept sets a bold and visionary goal of zero deaths for every individual, family and community using Colorado’s transportation network. Moving toward this goal, CDOT Region 3 has embarked on an effort to reduce fatalities and serious injuries at crossing locations on the State Highway System. CDOT recognizes that pedestrians should be able to cross the highway safely. As such, CDOT has a professional responsibility to facilitate safe and convenient crossing facilities, where needed. This may range from a simple marked crosswalk to pedestrian under/over passes. It is very important to note that not all locations are appropriate for the placement of crosswalks. The Crosswalk Installation Guidebook (guidebook) and this Crosswalk Supplemental Report (report) will assist the engineering component in determining if locations are appropriate for the installation of crosswalks. This report has been developed to supplement the guidebook and summarizes important aspects in current research, adopted guidelines, and publications that discuss pedestrian safety with respect to crossing roadways. Specifically, the goal is to incorporate all the lessons learned for crossing safety and incorporate the best fit for the State of Colorado. Currently, CDOT uses Chapter 14 of the Colorado Roadside Design Guide for direction on the placement of crosswalks. However, this guide was not intended to address the many factors to consider in evaluating crossing treatments. As such, CDOT staff has employed other guidelines such as the City of Boulder’s Pedestrian Crossing Treatment Installation Guidelines on pedestrian crossings. Approximately 5,000 pedestrians die and 70,000 are injured in traffic accidents each year in the United States. This accounts for approximately 14 percent of all fatal crashes. According to the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA), on average, a pedestrian is killed every 2 hours and injured every 8 minutes. While it is easy and common to blame drivers for the crashes, it is interesting to note that a report published by the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) indicated that pedestrians are solely culpable in 43 percent of crashes and drivers in 35 percent of crashes. Education, enforcement and engineering are components that need to be employed to address this issue. As a step toward this effort, CDOT Region 3, has commissioned a report to address pedestrian crossing safety at controlled and uncontrolled intersections and mid- block crossings. The report will be confined to addressing the engineering components of when and where to place marked crosswalks. Crosswalks safety has been very controversial in the United States for several years. There have been numerous studies with mixed results with some of these studies being used as justification to not install crosswalks. Not all potential crossing locations are necessarily good candidates for a crosswalk. 4 | Page Region 3 To eliminate confusion over crosswalk safety, the FHWA produced a report in 2005 called: Safety Effects of Marked Versus Unmarked Crosswalks at Uncontrolled Locations Data was collected at 2000 sites. Of the 2000 crosswalks, 1622 were at uncontrolled intersections and 278 were at midblock crossings. In an attempt to account for regional conditions, sites from different parts of the country were selected. Conclusions from this report indicate: 1. On 2-lane roads, there was no significant difference in pedestrian crash rates between marked and unmarked sites; 2. On multilane roads with an ADT of 12,000 vpd or less, there was no difference in pedestrian crash rates between marked and unmarked locations; 3. On multilane roads with no raised median and an ADT greater than 12,000, marked crosswalks had a higher pedestrian crash rate than unmarked crossings; and 4. On multilane roads with ADTs greater than 15,000 vpd and raised medians, a significantly higher crash rate was associated with marked crosswalks as compared to unmarked. This report will contain a summary of all the documents, policies, publications and justifications that were considered in the development of the guidebook. It is important to note the research team approached crosswalk research by completing a literature review of existing guidelines, current practices and applicable laws. This was a two- prong approach: 1. Research existing publications for applicable laws, guidelines and recommendations; and 2. Research existing crosswalk polices and guidelines that cities, counties, and states have developed and/or implemented. Listed in the appendix under acknowledgements are the sources for this document. Based on this report, as well as policy reviews from several cities and states, the guidebook was developed to maximize crossing safety and minimize pedestrian crashes. 5 | Page Region 3 Legal Terms and Definitions Prior to discussing crosswalk research summaries, it is important to define legal terms and definitions for crosswalks. From the Colorado Department of Transportation Brochures on Marked Crosswalks: “Legal crosswalk locations can be either marked or unmarked. Colorado Revised Statue, section 42-1-102(21) C.R.S., define a crosswalk as: “. . that portion of a roadway ordinarily included within the prolongation or connection of the lateral lines of sidewalks at intersections or any portion of a roadway distinctly indicated for pedestrian crossing by lines or other marking on the surface. Accordingly, legal crosswalks exist at all public street intersections whether marked or unmarked. However, the only way a crosswalk can exist at a mid- block location is if it is marked. A marked crosswalk is any crosswalk, which is delineated by white painted markings placed on the pavement. Crosswalks consisting of pavement materials or colored concrete are ‘unmarked’ crosswalks unless white paint is also present. “ In addition, only crosswalks, (marked, unmarked and midblock) will be discussed. There are three terms that will be used in this report that describes the type of roadway crossing: •Controlled (the highway intersection is controlled by a signal or a stop sign); •Uncontrolled (the highway intersection is not controlled by a signal or stop sign); and •Midblock (non-intersection crossing location). A complete list of the Colorado Revised Statutes with respect to Pedestrians and School bus laws are listed in Appendix A. 6 | Page Region 3 Terms and Definitions ADT Average Daily Traffic (ADT). The amount of vehicular traffic that crosses an imaginary line across a roadway in a 24-hour period. ADT information typically includes both directions of vehicle travel (if on a two-way street). HAWK Beacon (also known as a Pedestrian Hybrid Beacon) A HAWK beacon, or a pedestrian hybrid beacon, is a traffic control device used to stop road traffic and allow pedestrians to cross safely. MUTCD The Manual of Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD) defines the standards used by Traffic Engineers nationwide to install and maintain traffic control devices on all public streets, highways, bikeways, and private roads open to public travel. Peak Hour The one hour each day when traffic volumes are at their highest on a given road. Road Diet A road diet is a low-cost strategy that reconfigures a roadway cross-section to better accommodate all users' needs, increase mobility, reduce crashes, and improve the quality of life in communities. PROWAG Public Right of Way Accessibility Guidelines (PROWAG) are being developed to ensure roadway facilities are accessible to people with disabilities. RRFB A Rectangular Rapid Flashing Beacon (RRFB) uses pedestrian-activated, high-intensity warning lights to notify drivers when a pedestrian is entering a crosswalk. SSD Stopping sight distance (SSD) is the distance required by a driver of a vehicle, traveling at a given speed, to bring the vehicle to a stop after an object on the roadway becomes visible. VPD Vehicles per day (VPD) is the amount of vehicular traffic that crosses an imaginary line across a roadway in a 24-hour period. 7 | Page Region 3 FHWA Research Safety Effects of Marked Versus Unmarked Crosswalks at Uncontrolled Locations, Final Report and Recommended Guidelines, FHWA Publications Number HRT-04-100 2005 Crosswalks safety has been very controversial in the United States for several years. There have been numerous major studies that have had mixed and contradictory conclusions. Most studies were inconclusive because of methodology and sample size. As a result, the mixed conclusions have given rise to disagreements and confusion. Some studies have been used for the justification for not installing crosswalks. Because of the confusion and lack of direction, the FHWA produced a report on “Safety Effects of Marked Versus Unmarked Crosswalks at Uncontrolled Locations”. This report appears to be the “Gold Standard” for crosswalk placement warrants and strategies. For example, both the City of Boulder and the City and County of Denver, as well as several other entities, use methodologies developed from the FHWA report to produce policy guidelines for their crosswalk programs. This report will summarize methodologies and conclusions of various studies that were considered in the development of the CDOT Region 3 Crosswalk Installation Guidebook. The FHWA report was to address the mixed conclusion and confusion of previous crosswalk reports that were being completed by various authors. FHWA’s goal was to ensure that conclusions and recommendations were objective, balanced and unbiased. The FHWA’s report is comprehensive and addresses safety issues that have been observed through this study. The study can be broken down into four basic categories: 1. Data Collection 2. Crash Studies 3. Study Results 4. Conclusions and Recommendations Data Collection To quantify crash risk for pedestrian(s) with or without a crosswalk at uncontrolled locations, the FHWA selected test sites from several cities across the United States. Data was collected at 2000 sites. Of the 2000 crosswalks, 1622 were at uncontrolled intersections and 278 were at midblock crossing. As an attempt to account for regional conditions, sites from different parts of the country were selected: 1. East a. Baltimore b. Pittsburg c. Cleveland 2. Central a. Kansas City b. Topeka c. Madison d. St. Louis 8 | Page Region 3 3. South a. Gainesville b. Winter Park FL c. New Orleans d. Raleigh e. Durham 4. West a. San Francisco b. Oakland c. Salt Lake City d. Portland e. Seattle 5. Southwest a. Austin b. Fort Worth c. Phoenix d. Scottsdale e. Glendale f. Tucson g. Tempe Specifically, at each of the 2000 crossing location studied, trained data collectors were onsite to classify and report their observations. Crash Studies Probably the most controversial study on pedestrian crosswalks is from the San Diego study by Herms, Pedestrian Crosswalk Study: “Accidents in Painted and Unpainted Crosswalks”. The study evaluated crashes at 400 intersections where at least one crosswalk was painted and the other not. The report leads the reader to believe that pedestrian(s) in crosswalks are more likely to get hit by a vehicle than at a non crosswalks location. Herms Stated: “Evidence indicates that a poor crash record of marked crosswalks is not due to the crosswalk being marked as much as it is a reflection on the pedestrian attitude and lack of caution when using the marked crosswalk.” The study did not cite any behavioral evidence to support this conclusion. In addition, the study did not distinguish between two lanes versus four lane or for low volume roads. There have been several other studies with varying results that were presented in the report but offer mixed results from author to author. Pedestrian volume, traffic ADT, number of lanes, median types were included in the model. The following table shows the results of the crash assessment. 9 | Page Region 3 Table 1: Pedestrian Crash Rate vs. Type of Crossing Study Results Factors related to a greater crash frequency included: a. Higher Pedestrian Volumes; b. High Volume of Traffic; and c. Greater Number of Lanes (Multilane vs Two-Lane Roads). Speed limit was not a controlling factor with respect to crash rates. However, since most sites analyzed (93%) ranged from 25 MPH to 35 MPH, there was not additional speed data to form a conclusion. There have been several reports noting how speed of the vehicle influences the severity of the crash. Most findings that have been researched by this report have similar results. However, other research has indicated a direct correlation between speed and injury/fatality rates. The higher the speed, the higher the percentage of fatal and Type A crashes. See following table. 10 | Page Region 3 Table 2: Fatality Rate vs. Speed Vehicle Speed (mph) Probability of Pedestrian Fatality (%) Probability of Pedestrian Fatality Age 14 and Below (%) Probability of Pedestrian Fatality Age 15 to 59 (%) Probability of Pedestrian Fatality Age 60 and Above (%) 20 5 1 1 3 30 45 5 7 62 40 85 16 22 92 Report No. FHWA-SA-10-001 The presence of a raised crossing island or raised median had significantly lower pedestrian crash rates for both marked and unmarked crossings at multilane sites. Painted medians and multi-purpose lanes that were painted did not offer significant safety benefits to pedestrians. It is interesting to note that there were some regional effects. Western cites have a significantly higher crash rate than eastern cities. The authors suggest that most of the locations studied (93%) had speed limits of 25 MPH to 35 MPH. As such, vehicle speed was not analyzed since most of the crosswalk locations had approximately the same speed. However, other research has indicated a direct correlation between speed and injury/fatality rates. The higher the speed, the higher the percentage of fatal and Type A crashes. The report also suggest that raised medians or raised crossing islands exhibited a significantly lower crash rate at multilane sites. Painted medians did not offer any significant safety benefits to pedestrians. 11 | Page Region 3 Conclusions and Recommendations Install crosswalks at the following locations: 1. At stop signs or signals, direct pedestrians to those locations and ensure vehicles are not blocking pedestrian paths when stopping; 2. In designated school zones at non-signalized locations; 3. At non-signalized locations where: a. Pedestrian exposure is high; b. Average daily traffic is high; c. Posted speed limit is below 40 MPH; and/or d. Geometry of the intersection is complex. Marked Crosswalks should not be used without enhancements under the following conditions: 1. Where the speed limit is greater than 40 MPH; 2. On a road with four or more lanes without a raised median and/or will have an ADT of 12,000 or greater; 3. On a roadway with four or more lanes with a raised median or crossing island that has (or soon will have) an ADT of 15,000 or greater. 12 | Page Region 3 From all the data and conclusions from this report, a crosswalk matrix was developed. This matrix is the “Gold Standard” with respect to other entities using all or in part. Table 3: Pedestrian Improvements at Uncontrolled Locations Roadway Type (Number of Travel Lanes and Median Type) Vehicle ADT ≤9,000 Vehicle ADT >9,000- 12,000 Vehicle ADT >12,000- 15,000 Vehicle ADT > 15,000 Speed Limit MPH* ≤30 35 40 ≤ 30 35 40 ≤30 35 40 ≤30 35 40 Two lanes C C P C C P C C N C P N Three lanes C C P C P P P P N P N N Multilane (four or more lanes) without raised median C P N P P N N N N N N N Multilane (four or more lanes) with raised median** C C P C P N P P N N N N * Where the speed limit exceeds 40 MPH, marked crosswalks alone should not be used at unsignalized locations. ** The raised median or crossing island must be at least 4 ft wide and 6 ft long to serve adequately as a refuge area for pedestrians, in accordance with MUTCD and American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO) guidelines. C = Candidate sites for marked crosswalks. Marked crosswalks must be installed carefully and selectively. Before installing new marked crosswalks, an engineering study is needed to determine whether the location is suitable for a marked crosswalk. For an engineering study, a site review may be sufficient at some locations, while a more in- depth study of pedestrian volumes, vehicle speed, sight distance, vehicle mix, and other factors may be needed at other sites. It is recommended that a minimum utilization of 20 pedestrian crossings per peak hour (15 or more at risk pedestrians, (children 14 and under, the elderly 60 years and older and/or the disabled) per peak hour) be confirmed at a location before placing a high priority on the installation of a marked crosswalk alone. 13 | Page Region 3 P = Possible increase in pedestrian crash risk may occur if crosswalks are added without other pedestrian facility enhancements. These locations should be closely monitored and enhanced with other pedestrian crossing improvements, if necessary, before adding a marked crosswalk. N = Marked crosswalks alone are insufficient, since pedestrian crash risk may be increased by providing marked crosswalks alone. Consider using other treatments, such as traffic calming treatments, traffic signals with pedestrian signals, where warranted, or other substantial crossing improvement to improve crossing safety for pedestrians. These guidelines include intersection and midblock locations with no traffic signals or stop signs on the approach to the crossing. They do not apply to school crossings. A two-way center turn lane is not considered a median. Crosswalks should not be installed at locations that could present an increased safety risk to pedestrians, such as where there is poor sight distance, complex or confusing designs, a substantial volume of heavy trucks, or other dangers, without first providing adequate design features and/or traffic control devices. Adding crosswalks alone will not make crossings safer nor will they necessarily result in more vehicles stopping for pedestrians. Whether or not marked crosswalks are installed, it is important to consider other pedestrian facility enhancements (e.g., raised median, traffic signal, roadway narrowing, enhanced overhead lighting, traffic-calming measures, curb extensions, etc.), as needed, to improve the safety of the crossing. These are general recommendations; good engineering judgment should be used in individual cases for deciding where to install crosswalks. In some situations (e.g., low-speed, two-lane streets in downtown areas), installing a marked crosswalk may help consolidate multiple crossing points. Engineering judgment should be used to install crosswalks at preferred crossing locations (e.g., at a crossing location at a streetlight as opposed to an unlit crossing point nearby). While overuse of marked crossings at uncontrolled locations should be avoided, higher priority should be placed on providing crosswalk markings where pedestrian volume exceeds about 20 per peak hour (15 or more at risk pedestrians). Marked crosswalks and other pedestrian facilities (or lack of facilities) should be routinely monitored to determine what improvements are needed. 14 | Page Region 3 In conclusion, the FHWA report on “Safety Effects of Marked Versus Unmarked Crosswalks at Uncontrolled Locations” set the crosswalk warrant baseline standard for many cities, counties, and states. However, some of the recommendations were modified to account for local conditions and policies. This report will compare major elements of the following guidelines: • City of Boulder - Pedestrian Crossing Treatment Installation Guidelines; and • City and County of Denver - Uncontrolled Pedestrian Crossing Guidelines In completing the research, the Boulder and Denver treatment guideline documents were cited as a good standard that has been used by several cities, counties and states. The treatment guidelines follow the FHWA report with exceptions for local practices and conditions. During this research effort, several cities and counties were reviewed. However, since the City of Boulder and the City and County of Denver align more closely with the FHWA report and since CDOT has used the Boulder guideline, only these processes will be compared. Table 4: Agency Guideline Comparison Pedestrian Warrant ADT Minimum 2 Lane Max Speed Limit Stopping Sight Distance Nearest Intersection FHWA 20/hr or 15/hr AR* No min (a) 40 MPH Required not defined TBD **** Boulder 20/hr or 10/hr AR ** > 1500 40 MPH 8x Speed *** >300 ft Denver 20/hr or No min 55 MPH Per AASHTO >300 ft CDOT 20/hr or 15/hr AR 40 MPH >300 ft • *At Risk-young (14 or younger), elderly (over 60) and the disabled. • ** 18/hr in any 2 hours, 15/hr in any 3 hours. • *** SSD = 8 times the speed limit up to 40 MPH. • **** To be determine by appropriate traffic engineer. • ADT’s below 12,000 were not found to have any positive or negative effect on pedestrian crash rates. 15 | Page Region 3 Pedestrian Crossing Flowchart 16 | Page Region 3 Table 5: Crosswalk Selection Treatment Guidelines The Crosswalk Selection Treatment Guidelines table is intended as general minimum recommendations. Engineering judgment should be used on a case by case basis. Note that prevailing speeds may be considered if substantially different than posted speeds. Roadway Type (Number of Travel Lanes and Median Type) Vehicle ADT ≤ 9,000 Vehicle ADT 9,000 – 12,000 Vehicle ADT 12,000 – 15,000 Vehicle ADT > 15,000 Speed Limit (MPH) 25 30 35 40 25 30 35 40 25 30 35 40 25 30 35 40 2 lanes (one-way street) 2 2 2 6 2 2 2 6 2 2 2 6 2 2 2 6 2-Lanes 2-way street 1 1 1 1 6 1 1 6 1 1 1 6 1 1 1 6 3-Lanes with raised median 3 3 3 3 6 3 3 6 3 3 3 6 3 3 6 6 3-Lanes without raised median 2 2 2 2 6 2 2 6 2 2 2 6 2 2 2 6 Multi-Lane (4 or More Lanes) with raised median 5 5 5 6 5 5 5 6 5 5 5 6 6 6 6 6 Multi-Lane (4 or More Lanes) without raised median and 3 or more lanes one way 4 4 4 4 6 4 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 17 | Page Region 3 Possible Enhancements Following are the possible enhancements that should be considered based on the criteria listed on Table 5. 1. Level 1: a. Install marked crosswalks with a (W11-2) and a (W16-7P) plaque at the crosswalk location, with an optional advanced (W11-2). b. If the advanced yield or stop lines are placed, the (R1-5) or (R1-5b) signs shall be placed at the stop or yield locations. c. Use (S1-1) series signs for school crossings. d. Optional-place a (R6-1) (In-street State Law Yield to Pedestrian). 2. Level 2: a. Install marked crosswalks with an advanced (W11-2) sign and (W11-2) with (W16-7P) plaque at the crosswalk location. b. Use advanced stop or yield markings 50 feet in advance of the crosswalk. c. Use (R1-5) or (R1-5b) signs at the stop or yield markings. d. Use (S1-1) series signs for school crossings. e. May install Rectangular Rapid Flashing Beacons. f. Optional-place a (R6-1) (In-street State Law Yield to Pedestrian). 3. Level 3: a. Ensure raised island meets Public Right of Way Accessibility Guidelines (PROWAG) requirements prior to placing the crosswalk. b. Install marked crosswalks with an advanced (W11-2) and (W11-2) with (W16- 7P) plaque at the crosswalk location. c. Use advanced stop or yield markings 50 feet in advance of the crosswalk. d. Use (R1-5) or (R1-5b) at the yield or stop locations. e. Use (S1-1) series signs for school crossings. f. Optional-may install Rectangular Rapid Flashing Beacons. g. Optional-place a (R6-1) (In-street State Law Yield to Pedestrian). 4. Level 4: a. Install marked crosswalks with an advanced (W11-2) and (W11-2) with (W16- 7P) plaque at the crosswalk location. b. Use advanced stop or yield markings 50 feet in advance of the crosswalk. c. Use (R1-5) or (R1-5b) at the yield or stop locations. d. Signs shall be placed both at the edge of the road or sidewalk and in the median if feasible. e. Install overhead pedestrian activated flashing beacons or consider a HAWK system, if warrants are met*. f. Use (S1-1) series signs for school crossings. g. Optional-may install Rectangular Rapid Flashing Beacons. h. Optional-place a (R6-1) (In-street State Law Yield to Pedestrian). 18 | Page Region 3 5. Level 5: a. Ensure raised medians meets Public Right of Way Accessibility Guidelines (PROWAG) requirements prior to placing the crosswalk. b. Install mark crosswalks with an advanced (W11-2) and (W11-2) with (W16- 7P) plaque at the crosswalk location. c. Use advanced stop or yield markings 50 feet in advanced of the crosswalk. d. Use (R1-5) or (R1-5b) at the yield or stop locations. e. Signs shall be placed both at the edge of the road or sidewalk and in the median if feasible. f. Install overhead pedestrian activated flashing beacons or consider a HAWK system/Pedestrian Hybrid Beacon, if warrants are met* or pedestrian activated signal, if warrants are met*. g. Use S1-1 series for school crossings. h. Optional-may install Rectangular Rapid Flashing Beacons. i. Optional-place a (R6-1) (In-street State Law Yield to Pedestrian). 6. Level 6: a. Consider a HAWK or a Pedestrian Hybrid Beacon if warrants are met*, or b. Consider a pedestrian activated signal, if warrants are met*. * See MUTCD for pedestrian warrants for installation of a HAWK and pedestrian activated signal. 19 | Page Region 3 Publications Reviews The following publications were reviewed for policies and guidelines dealing with pedestrian safety and the installation of crosswalks. It is interesting to note most manuals reviewed as part of the research effort was published several years prior to the FHWA’s guide on Safety Effects of Marked Versus Unmarked Crosswalks at Uncontrolled Locations, 2005. Even though the manuals are somewhat dated, it was surprising to see that most of the publications reveal similar findings as the FHWA report. Listed below are values that are recommended by each publication. 1.Design and Safety of Pedestrian Facilities, ITE March 1998 2.Guide for the Planning, Design, and Operation of Pedestrian Facilities, AASHTO July 2004 3.Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD), FHWA 2009 4.Traffic Control Device Handbook, ITE 5.CDOT Roadside Design Manual Chapter 14 6. Urban Design Guide 20 | Page Region 3 Table 6: Publication Guideline Comparison Pedestrian Warrant ADT Minimum 2 Lane Max Speed Limit Stopping Sight Distance Nearest Intersection 1) ITE Graph * Graph * 45 MPH Adequate SSD 300 ft 2) AASHTO Substantial Pedestrian Generators >12,000 >15,000 w/Median 40 MPH As per AASHTO 330 ft 3) MUTCD Complete Engineering Study >12,000 >15,000 w/Median 40 MPH Complete Engineering Study Complete Engineering Study 4) ITE Handbook Graph Graph 45 MPH Adequate SSD 600 ft 5) CDOT Chapter 14 ** See Below 6) Urban Design Guide No Specific Guidelines No Specific Guidelines No Specific Guidelines No Specific Guidelines No Specific Guidelines *ADT’s below 12,000 were not found to have any positive or negative effect on pedestrian crash rates. **CDOT Chapter 14 provides information on what type of traffic control devices may be used at midblock crossings. However, other than requiring crosswalk markings and Pedestrian Warning (W11-2) signs, it provides no clear guidance about the conditions in which any traffic control devices are recommended to be used to ensure motorists’ yielding. 21 | Page Region 3 Relationship of Crosswalks under Various Design Environments Crosswalks can be defined as that portion of the roadway designated for pedestrians crossing the street. Crosswalks can be unmarked or marked. At intersections, a sidewalk or pedestrian walkway extension across the street defines a legal crosswalk. This is true whether the crosswalk is marked or not. A midblock crossing is not considered a legal crosswalk unless it is marked. Traditional Intersection Traditional intersections (most common) can provide a challenge for pedestrians to cross due to the potential conflicts with a vehicle. There are many vehicular turning movements and motorists may not see the pedestrian in the crosswalk as they may be distracted with other vehicle maneuvers. For pedestrian safety, it is important to make sure that motorists will anticipate the possibility of a pedestrian crossing at the intersection as well as to have enough visibility (sight distance, adequate lighting, etc.) to clearly see the pedestrian(s). It is also important for pedestrians to feel safe by allowing enough time for them to cross the intersection without having to wait an unreasonable amount of time while waiting for a gap in traffic or with a pedestrian signal cycle length. Enhancements for crosswalks at an intersection includes: • Pavement Markings • Signs • Pedestrian Signals • Refuge Islands • Lighting Channelized Right-Turns Channelized right-turns are implemented to improve intersection performance as they minimize delay caused by right-turning vehicles. Pedestrians wishing to cross the intersection have a refuge area when crossing the channelized intersection. One concern is that drivers might be focused on the approaching vehicles that might interfere with their right-turn maneuver versus pedestrians wishing to cross. Appropriate signing and pavement markings can assist with warning motorists of the potential pedestrian conflict. Once again, engineering judgement must come into the analysis to determine if there is enough warning to motorists about the crossing. Enhancements for crosswalks at an intersection includes: • Pavement Markings • Signs • Pedestrian Signals • Refuge Islands • Lighting 22 | Page Region 3 Mid-Block Crossings If pedestrians feel that crossing at an intersection is not convenient, they may choose to cross mid-block. Pedestrians only have the right-of-way if there is a marked crosswalk with pavement markings and signage at a mid-block crossing. Should a pedestrian cross at an unmarked, mid-block location, they do not have the right-of-way which could cause potential conflicts with the motoring public. Motorists may not be anticipating pedestrians and therefor may not clearly see pedestrians crossing the road. Pedestrians want connectivity to generators (parks, businesses, shopping developments, etc.) and if they must travel an unreasonable distance, they may choose to cross at different locations to get to their destination. Network connectivity refers to the continuity of pedestrian facilities and should be connected to nearby sidewalks to ensure continuity of the network. Consideration of a mid-block crossing should be analyzed if there are generators or destinations on both sides of the road and there is a heavy pedestrian crossing demand. Crosswalks mid-block would encourage a single crossing location versus having pedestrians cross at multiple unmarked locations. In addition, mid-block crossings should be considered if there is a history of pedestrian collisions and engineering judgement concludes that safety would be improved with a marked mid- block crosswalk. Pedestrians should always be encouraged to use marked crosswalks when available and obey applicable state and local traffic laws. Enhancements for a mid-block crosswalk includes: • Pavement Markings • Signs • Pedestrian Activated Signals (Hawk, RRFB) • Refuge Islands • Road Diet (Narrow Lanes, Bulb Outs, etc.) • Lighting Roundabouts A roundabout design, compared to a traditional intersection, allows for a shorter distance for pedestrians to cross due to the geometric features and can provide a safer place to cross because of the slower speeds. A roundabout also has fewer turning movements requiring observation of traffic in one direction by pedestrians while providing for refuge in the splitter island if necessary. Roundabout signing is like other intersection signing regarding regulatory control, advanced warning, and directional guidance to motorists. In addition, warning motorists of the potential of pedestrians trying to cross the roundabout leg is critical and makes for proper signing imperative. Signs should be placed where they have maximum visibility for motorists but also located in an area that will not block the view of potential pedestrians or bicyclists within the crosswalk. 23 | Page Region 3 Pedestrian Crossing signs (W11-2) may be used at pedestrian crossings within a roundabout at both entries and exits. Pedestrian crossing signs should be used at all pedestrian crossings at double-lane entries, double-lane exits, and right-turn bypass lanes. Crosswalks should be located a passenger vehicle length (approximately 20’) away from the yield bar on the entrance and exit of the roundabout. In addition, the MUTCD states that: Pedestrian crosswalks shall not be marked to or from the central island of roundabouts.” “If pedestrian facilities are provided, crosswalks should be marked across roundabout entrances and exits to indicate where pedestrians are intended to cross.” One concern of roundabout designs is the removal of the audible cues that typically exist at traditional intersections. This is concerning with regard to the visually impaired when they are trying to navigate the crossing of a roundabout leg. The United States Access Board was tasked with the development of the Public Right of Way Accessibility Guidelines (PROWAG) to address these concerns. Although they have not yet been mandated, the current language in the PROWAG requires pedestrian activated signals at roundabouts for each multi-lane segment of each crossing, including the splitter island. The pedestrian activated signals are required to comply with the MUTCD standards for accessible pedestrian signals and pedestrian pushbuttons. The purpose of these guidelines is to ensure that persons with disabilities have the same level of convenience, connection, and safety afforded to the general public. It is anticipated that these guidelines will be enforced for newly built or altered roundabouts. School Crosswalks School crosswalks should follow the warrant guide of at least 5 schoolchildren per hour using the crosswalk. In addition, all other engineering design criteria must be met. The crossing needs to be within 600 feet of the actual school building and be an official school route as assigned by the school. Work Zones The accommodation of pedestrians in work zones needs to be considered with all construction activity. Pedestrians should be provided with a safe and accessible route that is convenient with as little disruption as possible. Care must be taken to not have pedestrians’ conflict with the work zone activities, construction equipment or vehicular traffic also within the work zone. 24 | Page Region 3 Enhancements Crosswalk enhancements provide a safer place for pedestrians to cross when it has been determined that a crosswalk is warranted and justified based on engineering judgement. These enhancements range from a basic sign installation to pedestrian signals at controlled intersections. Following is a list of these enhancements: 1. Signs 2. Curb Extensions 3. Median Islands 4. Striping (Narrow Lanes) 5. Flashing Beacon 6. Rectulangular Rapid Flashing Beacon 7. Pedestrian Hybrid Beacons (HAWK) 8. Pedestrian Signal Signs Ground mounted and overhead signs are the most basic enhancement that can be installed at crosswalks. The advanced pedestrian crossing sign (W11-2) should be installed in advance of a midblock crossing or other locations where pedestians may not be expected to cross the road. (W11-2) are warning signs that can be post-mounted or mounted overhead where there is a need to provide advance warning to motorists. These can include the “Ahead” plaque or the distance to the crosswalk can be provided. At uncontrolled locations (unsignalized intersections, midblock and those with no stop control) there are regulatroy signs indicating that motorists must yield to or stop for pedestrians (R1-5, R1-5a, R1-5b, R1-5c). In addition, the “State Law” sign can be added to reinforce to motorists that they must yeild to pedestrian(s) within a crosswalk. (R1-6) and (R1-6a) are ground mounted signs while the (R1-9) and (R1-9a) are to be mounted overhead and indicate either a yield or stop condition to the motorist. The signs can include the legends YIELD or STOP or the YIELD or STOP symbol may be used. Curb Extensions Curb extensions are a traffic calming enhancement and is intended to protect pedestrians wishing to cross the street in a crosswalk. The objective is to reduce the distance that a pedestrian must walk in order to reach the other side of the street. It is a narrowing of the roadway and is a widening of the sidewalk resulting in a reduction of exposure to vehicles. In addition, they improve visibility between the motorist and pedestrian so the pedestrian wishing to cross can make eye contact with the motorist to confirm the motorist sees the pedestrian. 25 | Page Region 3 Median Islands The MUTCD states: “Raised islands or medians of sufficient width that are placed in the center area of a street or highway can serve as a place of refuge for pedestrians who are attempting to cross at a midblock or intersection location. Center islands or medians allow pedestrians to find an adequate gap in one direction of traffic at a time, as the pedestrians are able to stop, if necessary, in the center island or median area and wait for an adequate gap in the other direction of traffic before crossing the second half of the street or highway.” Median islands can be placed on streets with four or more lanes that experience moderate to high traffic volumes as well as locations with a large proportion of pedestrians with slower-than-average crossing times. They can also be installed at intersections where it may be difficult to cross more than one direction of traffic at a time. These refuge islands must be designed in accordance with the MUTCD as well as AASHTO’s A Policy on Geometric Design of Highways and Streets. Road Diet-Striping (Narrow Lanes) Restriping a road to modify existing lane widths and reconfigurations can result in a slower speed for motorist. The FHWA states: “As more communities desire "complete streets" and more livable spaces, they look to agencies to find opportunities to better integrate pedestrian and bicycle facilities and transit options along their corridors. When a Road Diet is planned in conjunction with reconstruction or simple overlay projects, the safety and operational benefits are achieved essentially for the cost of restriping. A Road Diet is a low-cost solution that addresses safety concerns and benefits all road users — a win-win for quality of life.” Flashing Beacon A Flashing Beacon is a highway traffic signal with one or more signal sections that operates in a flashing mode. It can provide traffic control when used as an intersection control beacon or it can provide warning when used in other applications Rectulangular Rapid Flashing Beacon RRFBs are small rectangular yellow flashing lights that are deployed with pedestrian crossing warning signs. They are typically actuated by a pedestrian push button and flash for a predetermined amount of time, to allow a pedestrian to cross the roadway, before going dark. RRFBs are warning devices and do not themselves create a legal requirement for a vehicle to stop when they are flashing. 26 | Page Region 3 Pedestrian Hybrid Beacons (HAWK) A pedestrian hybrid beacon is a relatively new type of crossing treatment used to both warn and control traffic at a pedestrian crossing. The beacon is a hybrid between a pedestrian traffic signal and a stop sign. It is actuated by a pedestrian push button, and uses a combination of circular yellow and red traffic signal displays to: • Warn motorists of a pedestrian that is about to cross the street; • Require the motorist to stop for the pedestrian crossing; • and, then releases the motorist to proceed once the pedestrian has cleared the crossing. Pedestrian Hybrid Beacons can be used at roundabouts, these are traffic signals that consist of a yellow signal centered below two horizontally aligned red signals. The signals are not illuminated until they are activated by a pedestrian. They can be timed to minimize the interruption of traffic and the signals stop operation after the pedestrian clears the crosswalk. When activated by a pedestrian, the following signals are displayed to drivers: • A flashing yellow signal; • A steady yellow signal; • Two steady red signals during the pedestrian walk interval; • And then alternating flashing red signals during the pedestrian clearance interval. The following signals are displayed to pedestrians: a steady upraised hand (symbolizing DONT WALK) when the flashing or steady yellow signal is operating, then a walking person (symbolizing WALK) when the steady red signals are operating, and then a flashing upraised hand (symbolizing DONT WALK) when the alternating flashing red signals are operating. Pedestrian Signal A conventional traffic signal with circular red, yellow, and green displays for motorists and Walk/Don’t Walk signals for pedestrians that is applied at a pedestrian crossing. 27 | Page Region 3 Appendix A: Types of Pedestrian Crashes To better understand crash types involving pedestrians, it is necessary to define the difference between crash types. Walking Along the Road The pedestrian was struck while walking or running along a road without sidewalks. The pedestrian may have been walking with traffic and struck from behind or from the front, walking against traffic and struck from behind or from the front walking along a road. Intersection Dash While running through an intersection, the pedestrian was struck and/or the motorist’s view of the pedestrian was blocked until an instant before impact. Intersection other The crash did occur at an intersection but does not conform to any of the specified crash types. Backing Vehicle The pedestrian was hit as a vehicle was backing up. Mid-Block Dash At midblock location, the pedestrian was struck while running and the motorist’s view of the pedestrian was not obstructed Vehicle Turn/Merge The pedestrian and vehicle collided while the vehicle was preparing to turn, in the process of turning, or had just completed a turn (or merge). Multiple Threat At crossing locations usually uncontrolled or midblock on roads with multiple lanes, pedestrians may be at risk of a "multiple threat crash." This crash occurs when one vehicle yields to a crossing pedestrian, while the vehicle in another lane continues through the crosswalk or intersection potentially setting up a severe collision. Based on the FHWA’s Safety Effects of Marked Versus Unmarked Crosswalks at Uncontrolled Locations, 5.8% pedestrians failed to yield in marked crosswalks and 34.2% at unmark intersections. Conversely, drivers failed to yield 41.5% in marked crosswalks and 31.7% in unmarked crosswalks. 28 | Page Region 3 Appendix B: Pedestrian/Transit and School Bus Statutes Pedestrian Statutes Colorado Revised Statutes PART 8 PEDESTRIANS 801. Pedestrian obedience to traffic control devices and traffic regulations. (1) A pedestrian shall obey the instructions of any official traffic control device specifically applicable to the pedestrian, unless otherwise directed by a police officer. (2) Pedestrians shall be subject to traffic and pedestrian-control signals as provided in sections 604 and 802 (5). (3) At all other places, pedestrians shall be accorded the privileges and shall be subject to the restrictions stated in this Code. (4) Any person who violates any provision of this section commits a class B traffic infraction. 802. Pedestrians’ right-of-way in crosswalks. (1) When traffic control signals are not in place or not in operation, the driver of a vehicle shall yield the right-of-way, slowing down or stopping if need be to yield, to a pedestrian crossing the roadway within a crosswalk when the pedestrian is upon the half of the roadway upon which the vehicle is traveling or when the pedestrian is approaching so closely from the opposite half of the roadway as to be in danger. (2) Subsection (1) of this section shall not apply under the conditions stated in section 803. (3) No pedestrian shall suddenly leave a curb or other place of safety and ride a bicycle, ride an electrical assisted bicycle, walk, or run into the path of a moving vehicle that is so close as to constitute an immediate hazard. (4) Whenever any vehicle is stopped at a marked crosswalk or at any unmarked crosswalk at an intersection to permit a pedestrian to cross the roadway, the driver of any other vehicle approaching from the rear shall not overtake and pass such stopped vehicle. (5) Whenever special pedestrian-control signals exhibiting “Walk” or “Don’t Walk” word or symbol indications are in place, as declared in the traffic control manual adopted by the department of transportation, such signals shall indicate and require as follows: (a) “Walk” (steady): While the “Walk” indication is steadily illuminated, pedestrians facing such signal may proceed across the roadway in the direction of the signal indication and shall be given the right-of-way by the drivers of all vehicles. 29 | Page Region 3 (b) “Don’t Walk” (steady): While the “Don’t Walk” indication is steadily illuminated; no pedestrian shall enter the roadway in the direction of the signal indication. (c) “Don’t Walk” (flashing): Whenever the “Don’t Walk” indication is flashing, no pedestrian shall start to cross the roadway in the direction of such signal indication, but any pedestrian who has partly completed crossing during the “Walk” indication shall proceed to a sidewalk or to a safety island, and all drivers of vehicles shall yield to any such pedestrian. (d) Whenever a signal system provides for the stopping of all vehicular traffic and the exclusive movement of pedestrians and “Walk” and “Don’t Walk” signal indications control such pedestrian movement, pedestrians may cross in any direction between corners of the intersection offering the shortest route within the boundaries of the intersection while the “Walk” indication is exhibited, if signals and other official devices direct pedestrian movement in such manner consistent with section 803 (4). (6) Any person who violates any provision of this section commits a class A traffic infraction. 803. Crossing at other than crosswalks. (1) Every pedestrian crossing a roadway at any point other than within a marked crosswalk or within an unmarked crosswalk at an intersection shall yield the right- of-way to all vehicles upon the roadway. (2) Any pedestrian crossing a roadway at a point where a pedestrian tunnel or overhead pedestrian crossing has been provided shall yield the right-of-way to all vehicles upon the roadway. (3) Between adjacent intersections at which traffic control signals are in operation, pedestrians shall not cross at any place except in a marked crosswalk. (4) No pedestrian shall cross a roadway intersection diagonally unless authorized by official traffic control devices; and, when authorized to cross diagonally, pedestrians shall cross only in accordance with the official traffic control devices pertaining to such crossing movements. (5) Any person who violates any provision of this section commits a class B traffic infraction. 53 804. Pedestrian to use right half of crosswalk. (Repealed) 805. Pedestrians walking or traveling in a wheelchair on highways. (1) Pedestrians walking or traveling in a wheelchair along and upon highways where sidewalks are not provided shall walk or travel only on a road shoulder as far as practicable from the edge of the roadway. Where neither a sidewalk nor road shoulder is available, any pedestrian walking or traveling in a wheelchair along and upon a highway shall walk as near as practicable to an outside edge of the roadway and, in the case of a two-way roadway, shall walk or travel only on 30 | Page Region 3 the left side of the roadway facing traffic that may approach from the opposite direction; except that any person lawfully soliciting a ride may stand on either side of such two-way roadway where there is a view of traffic approaching from both directions. (2) No person shall stand in a roadway for the purpose of soliciting a ride from the driver of any private vehicle. For the purposes of this subsection (2), “roadway” means that portion of the road normally used by moving motor vehicle traffic. (3) It is unlawful for any person who is under the influence of alcohol or of any controlled substance, as defined in section 12-22-303 (7), C.R.S., or of any stupefying drug to walk or be upon that portion of any highway normally used by moving motor vehicle traffic. (4) This section applying to pedestrians shall also be applicable to riders of animals. (5) This local government may, by ordinance, regulate the use by pedestrians of streets and highways under its jurisdiction to the extent authorized under subsection (6) of this section and sections 110 and 111, but no ordinance regulating such use of streets and highways in a manner differing from this section shall be effective until official signs or devices giving notice thereof have been placed as required by section 111 (2). (6) No person shall solicit a ride on any highway included in the interstate system, as defined in section 43-2-101 (2), C.R.S., except at an entrance to or exit from such highway or at places specifically designated by the department of transportation; or, in an emergency affecting a vehicle or its operation, a driver or passenger of a disabled vehicle may solicit a ride on any highway. (7) Pedestrians shall only be picked up where there is adequate road space for vehicles to pull off and not endanger and impede the flow of traffic. (8) Upon the immediate approach of an authorized emergency vehicle making use of audible or visual signals meeting the requirements of section 213 or of a police vehicle properly and lawfully making use of an audible signal only, every pedestrian shall yield the right-of-way to the authorized emergency vehicle and shall leave the roadway and remain off the same until the authorized emergency vehicle has passed, except when otherwise directed by a police officer. This subsection (8) shall not relieve the driver of an authorized emergency vehicle from the duty to use due care as provided in sections 108 (4) and 807. (9) Any person who violates any provision of this section commits a class B traffic infraction. 806. Driving through safety zone prohibited. No vehicle at any time shall be driven through or within a safety zone. Any person who violates any provision of this section commits a class A traffic infraction. 31 | Page Region 3 807. Drivers to exercise due care. Notwithstanding any of the provisions of this Code, every driver of a vehicle shall exercise due care to avoid colliding with any pedestrian upon any roadway and shall give warning by sounding the horn when necessary and shall exercise proper precaution upon observing any child or any obviously confused or incapacitated person upon a roadway. Any person who violates any provision of this section commits a class A traffic infraction. 32 | Page Region 3 Appendix C: Transit Stops and Laws According to the Institute of Transportation Engineers’ (ITE) publication for the Design and Safety of Pedestrian Facilities, 2 percent of the pedestrian crashes in urban areas with bus stops located on the near side of the intersection happen as the passenger leaves the bus, crosses in front of the bus, and gets hit from a vehicle in the adjacent lane. In rural areas, the crash percentage increases to 3 percent. This can be reduced by moving the bus stop to the far side of the intersection. The passengers will more likely go to the rear of the bus where the intersection is located and cross there without the bus shielding the through lane of traffic. However, there may be times when a near side bus stop is desired as long as the location of the bus stop will provide sufficient view for pedestrians and motorists. The table below lists the circumstances under which far and near bus stop locations should be considered. Table 7: Near vs. Far Bus Stop Considerations Near Side Bus Stop Location Far Side Bus Stop Location Where the pedestrian demand is mostly near side In the central business district with heavy traffic and pedestrian volumes Where the pedestrian would have to cross a busy street to get to the far side Heavy vehicle volumes or with an exclusive turn lane Where buses make a right turn Two-way streets where bus makes a left turn Near Side Bus Stop Far Side Bus Stop In general, As CDOT approves bus stop locations on the state highway system, far side bus stops should be considered first unless near side benefits outweigh the associated risk. If a bus stop is located on near side, the installation of a bus pull-out should be considered. If this is not feasible, then the bus stop should be located at least 30 feet from the intersection. 33 | Page Region 3 Appendix D: School Bus Stops and Laws 42-4-1903-School buses: (a) The driver of a motor vehicle upon any highway, road, or street, upon meeting or overtaking from either direction any school bus that has stopped, shall stop the vehicle at least twenty feet before reaching the school bus if visual signal lights as specified in subsection (2) of this section have been actuated on the school bus. The driver shall not proceed until the visual signal lights are no longer being actuated. The driver of a motor vehicle shall stop when a school bus that is not required to be equipped with visual signal lights by subsection (2) of this section stops to receive or discharge schoolchildren. (b) (I) A driver of any school bus who observes a violation of paragraph (a) of this subsection (1) shall notify the driver's school district transportation dispatcher. The school bus driver shall provide the school district transportation dispatcher with the color, basic description, and license plate number of the vehicle involved in the violation, information pertaining to the identity of the alleged violator, and the time and the approximate location at which the violation occurred. Any school district transportation dispatcher who has received information by a school bus driver concerning a violation of paragraph (a) of this subsection (1) shall provide such information to the appropriate law enforcement agency or agencies. (II) A law enforcement agency may issue a citation on the basis of the information supplied to it pursuant to subparagraph (I) of this paragraph (b) to the driver of the vehicle involved in the violation. (2) (a) Every school bus as defined in section 42-1-102 (88), other than a small passenger-type vehicle having a seating capacity of not more than fifteen, used for the transportation of schoolchildren shall: (I) Bear upon the front and rear of such school bus plainly visible and legible signs containing the words "SCHOOL BUS" in letters not less than eight inches in height; and (II) Display eight visual signal lights meeting the requirements of 49 CFR 571.108 or its successor regulation. (b) (I) The red visual signal lights shall be actuated by the driver of the school bus whenever the school bus is stopped for the purpose of receiving or discharging schoolchildren, is stopped because it is behind another school bus that is receiving or discharging passengers, or, except as provided in subsection (4) of this section, is stopped because it has met a school bus traveling in a different direction that is receiving or discharging passengers and at no other time; but such lights need not be actuated when a school bus is stopped at locations where the local traffic regulatory authority has by prior written designation declared such actuation unnecessary. 34 | Page Region 3 (II) A school bus shall be exempt from the provisions of subparagraph (I) of this paragraph (b) when stopped for the purpose of discharging or loading passengers who require the assistance of a lift device only when no passenger is required to cross the roadway. Such buses shall stop as far to the right off the roadway as possible to reduce obstruction to traffic. (c) The alternating flashing yellow lights shall be actuated at least two hundred feet prior to the point where the bus is to be stopped for the purpose of receiving or discharging schoolchildren, and the red lights shall be actuated only at the time the bus is actually stopped. (3) Every school bus used for the transportation of schoolchildren, except those small passenger-type vehicles described in subsection (1) of this section, shall be equipped with school bus pedestrian safety devices that comply with 49 CFR 571.131 or its successor regulation. (4) The driver of a vehicle upon a highway with separate roadways need not stop upon meeting or passing a school bus which is on a different roadway. For the purposes of this section, "highway with separate roadways" means a highway that is divided into two or more roadways by a depressed, raised, or painted median or other intervening space serving as a clearly indicated dividing section or island. (5) Every school bus shall stop as far to the right of the roadway as possible before discharging or loading passengers; except that the school bus may block the lane of traffic when a passenger being received or discharged is required to cross the roadway. When possible, a school bus shall not stop where the visibility is obscured for a distance of two hundred feet either way from the bus. The driver of a school bus that has stopped shall allow time for any vehicles that have stopped behind the school bus to pass the school bus, if such passing is legally permissible where the school bus is stopped, after the visual signal lights, if any, are no longer being displayed or actuated and after all children who have embarked or disembarked from the bus are safe from traffic. (6) (a) Except as provided in paragraph (b) of this subsection (6), any person who violates any provision of paragraph (a) of subsection (1) of this section commits a class 2 misdemeanor traffic offense. (b) Any person who violates the provisions of paragraph (a) of subsection (1) of this section commits a class 1 misdemeanor traffic offense if such person has been convicted within the previous five years of a violation of paragraph (a) of subsection (1) of this section. (7) The provisions of this section shall not apply in the case of public transportation programs for pupil transportation under section 22-51-104 (1)(c), C.R.S. 35 | Page Region 3 Appendix E: Acknowledgements 1.Safety Effects of Marked Versus Unmarked Crosswalks at Uncontrolled Locations. Final Report and Recommended Guidelines, FHWA Publications Number HRT-04-100 2005 2.City of Boulder Pedestrian Crossing Treatment Installation Guidelines November 2011 3.UNCONTROLLED PEDESTRIAN CROSSING GUIDELINES City and County of Denver 4.PEDESTRIAN CROSSING GUIDELINES FOR TEXAS-Report No. FHWA/TX- 01/2136-2 December 2000 5.Florida Pedestrian Planning and Design Handbook / University of North Carolina 6.Virginia Department of Transportation Pedestrian Policy Plan 2014 7.City of Longmont Pedestrian Crossing Treatment Guidelines 2009 8.Design and Safety of Pedestrian Facilities ITE March 1998 9.Guide for the planning, Design, and Operation of Pedestrian Facilities AASHTO July 2004 10. Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD) FHWA 2009 11. Traffic Control Device Handbook ITE 12. Urban Design Guide 13. AASHTO - A Policy on Geometric Design of Highways and Streets 14. CDOT M&S Standards 15. CDOT Roadside Design Manual Chapter 14 16. Colorado Revised Statutes Water Supply Master Plan Overview of Previous Presentation •Political structure of District and Authority •History of water development and water rights •Where our water comes from •How we use water, reservoir storage and efficiency 2 •Why outdoor water use disproportionately impacts the water resource •Threats to our water supply (urbanization, wildfires, climate change) Definitions and Concepts Acre-foot: unit of measure of reservoir storage, one acre covered with water one foot deep; equal to ~326,000 gallons 3 Reservoir Capacity (acre-feet) Lake Dillon 257,000 Homestake 43,000 Eagle Park 3,301 Black Lakes 1 and 2 475 Bolts Lake 1,200 Black Lakes Definitions and Concepts % Water Supply Reliability: minimum frequency that water is available. District and Authority Target Reliability is 95%, or the ability to cover our needs in 19 of 20 years on average. 4 Definitions and Concepts Strategic Reserve: a reserve, or savings account, of water that is not committed to a specific use but is intended to mitigate risk. The strategic reserve can be drawn upon to provide a supply of water when the normal operating accounts run out, such as in a multiyear drought. District and Authority Target Strategic Reserve is 10% of annual customer water demand. 5 Definitions and Concepts Examples of efficiency efforts in water use include: -Reducing irrigation use to just what is needed by the plants -Not watering pavement -Reusing water where possible (recycling car washes) -Water efficient fixtures (one flush = 1 gallon, instead of 3 gallons) 6 Efficiency: ensuring water is used for a specific need, and not expended in ways that have no value. Efficiency is the opposite of waste. Definitions and Concepts Conservation: reduce water use by changing the way we use water. Examples of water conservation efforts: •Replace old fixtures with water- efficient fixtures •Convert formal landscaping to native and drought tolerant plants 7 Definitions and Concepts •New Growth/Development: newly-approved zoning requiring a new commitment of water supply. 8 The Model •Complex logic program and database •Standardized format for QA/QC, calibration and confirmation •Risk -based analysis •Weather and streamflows are difficult to predict 9 Model Data 10 •Water rights decrees •Streamflow gage data •Historical water diversions •Aggregated customer use data •Forecasted diversion rates and customer demand •Climate change model information •50-year planning period Model Output 11 •How much of our water supply meets the 95% criterion •Help us see what options we have to meet future needs •Are our system operations protective of streamflows •Various “what-if” scenarios (droughts, climate change) Model Assumptions •Hot/dry climate model •Annual long-term growth rate: 1.1% for ERWSD, 2.1% for UERWA •1.5% annual water conservation •Strategic Reserve Target is 10% of customer need •Bolts Lake is constructed and online in 2030 12 Model Conclusions 13 Model Conclusions 14 Water Resources Master Plan: objective To ensure a reliable physical and legal water supply to existing and approved development and adequate future water supply to meet the land use goals of local land use authorities (LUAs), while protecting environmental and recreational uses of streamflows. 15 Photo credit: Chris MacLennan Six Major Aspects of the Plan 16 Strategy Policy Tools (Model and Reports) Resources (Funding and People) Programs Projects Outreach Plan Aspects 17 •The 95% reliability target and a target strategic reserve of 10% of customer demand •Water conservation goals, %/year •Definitions of reasonable, inefficient, and unsustainable water use •Priority lists and timelines for Programs and Projects Policy Plan Aspects 18 •The model •Data reports •Goals •Performance metrics Plan Aspects 19 •Budgeted funds •Grants •Additional in-house skills Resources (Funding and People) Plan Aspects 20 •Eliminate water use in billing tiers 4 and 5 (unsustainable) •Reduce water use by subdivisions that are using more water than they are entitled to •Water Budgeting Programs Plan Aspects 21 •Political unification of the District and Authority •Bolts Lake Projects Plan Aspects 22 •Land Use Agencies •Customers •We are never done communicating the importance of water to our community Outreach Timeline 23 Master Plan Outcome 24 Questions/Discussion 25 970-300-4373 pwisor@garfieldhecht.com TO: Honorable Mayor Smith Hymes and Council members FROM: Paul Wisor, Town Attorney RE: Ordinance 21-06 DATE: April 20, 2021 SUMMARY: Ordinance 21-06 amends Chapter 13.04 of the Avon Municipal Code (the “Code”) to enforce water conservation of the Town’s water resources and water restrictions when required due to drought conditions. These Code amendments update and clarify the Town’s legal authority to enforce water restrictions in addition to the authority of the Upper Eagle Regional Water Authority (“Water Authority”) to do so. The Town’s authority to restrict water usage during drought conditions is intended to be complementary to the Water Authority and to enable the Town, in cooperation with the Water Authority, to curtail and restrict non- compliant water usage during drought restrictions. The Code amendments also clarify waste caused by breach of agreements with the Town related to water rights and water use constitute a nuisance. The Water Authority has requested the Town delay approval of Ordinance 21-06 so the Water Authority may update its drought restrictions and so it may have additional time to further comment on the ordinance. BACKGROUND: The State of Colorado, including the Town of Avon, is in the midst of a twenty year drought with some of the most intense portions of the drought occurring within the last eighteen months.1 The current drought is the second worst 20-year period in the past 1,200 years.2 While the current conditions have yet to reach the depths of the severe winter drought of 1976-77 that sent shock waves through Colorado as ski slopes laid bare and reservoirs empty, increasing aridification poses a significant challenge to the long-term viability of the Town’s water resources. Addressing water shortages through water conservation is one method by which the Town can address the many challenges posed by persistent drought conditions. Since at least 1996, Chapter 13.04 of the Code has provided the Town with the authority to impose watering restrictions on residential and commercial property owners alike. However, the current Code does not fully recognize the Water Authority now controls the Town’s water system. In addition, the Eagle River Water and Sanitation District (the “District”), as administrator for the Water Authority, has promulgated Rules and Regulations for Water and Waste Water Service, which includes a Water Supply Response Plan (the “Response Plan”) to address drought issues. ANALYSIS: Ordinance 21-06 is drafted to conserve water for the protection of the Town’s water resources and protect the health and quality of the Eagle River while providing consistency with the Response Plan in order to minimize confusion and promote compliance with the Response Plan among Avon residents. Ordinance 21-06 incorporates the Response Plan by reference to establish new stages of restrictions that differ from those currently set forth in Chapter 13.04, The General Manager of the District is responsible, 1 https://www.drought.gov/states/colorado 2 https://yaleclimateconnections.org/2021/01/drought-stricken-colorado-river-basin-could-see-additional-20- drop-in-water-flow-by-2050/ Page 3 of 3 pursuant to the Response Plan, for making the declaration of a Water Emergency and which level of response is appropriate. While the Water Authority is able to impose fine for violations for the Response Plan, Ordinance 21-06 gives the Town Manager the authority to declare a violation of the Response Plan a nuisance and abate such nuisance as further provided in the nuisance section of the Code. Ordinance 21-06 also empowers the Town Manager to declare a nuisance where there is a breach of an agreement with the Town related water rights or water use. In addition, any person deemed responsible for a violation of these provisions may be prosecuted in municipal court for a civil infraction subject to a civil fine of not more than $2,650.00 plus costs, damages and expenses, the amount of the fine and the charging of costs, damages and expenses to be in the discretion of the Court. FINANCIAL CONSIDERATIONS: There is no financial impact to the Town. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends continuing the public hearing on Ordinance 21-06 in order to allow the Water Authority to update its Response Plan and further comment on Ordinance 21-06. PROPOSED MOTION: “I move to continue Second Reading of Ordinance 21-06, amending certain portions of Chapter 13.04, until May 11, 2021.” Paul Wisor ATTACHMENTS: Ordinance 21-06 Ord. 21-06 Water Restrictions [4/4/21] Page 1 of 4 ORDINANCE 21-06 Amending Chapter 13.04 of the Avon Municipal Code Pertaining to Water Use Restrictions and Incorporating Article XI of the Eagle River Water & Sanitation District’s Rules and Regulations WHEREAS, the Town of Avon, Colorado (the "Town") is a home rule municipality existing pursuant to the laws of the Colorado Constitution, the Colorado Revised Statutes (“C.R.S.”), and the Town's Home Rule Charter; and, WHEREAS, the Town currently receives water service from the Upper Eagle Regional Water Authority (the “Authority”); and WHEREAS, the Town currently receives waste water service from the Eagle River Water & Sanitation District (the “District”); and WHEREAS, these administrative responsibilities of the Authority and the District are performed by the District, by which administrative and operations personnel implement these rules and regulations for both the Authority and the District; and WHEREAS, the Town has consulted with experts and understands that the Western Slope of Colorado is in a drought cycle and it appears that it will remain in such cycle for the foreseeable future; and WHEREAS, the District has adopted a Water Supply Response Plan to address drought conditions pursuant to those certain 2017 Rules and Regulations for Water and Waste Water Service, last update February 25, 2021; and WHEREAS, the Water Supply Response Plan outlines guidelines to manage the regional water supply and water use during times of actual or anticipated water shortages; and WHEREAS, the primary goals of this Water Supply Response Plan are to maximize the available water supply, reduce water use, and optimize streamflow’s when necessary to protect the environment and preserve the health of the stream; and WHEREAS, if the General Manager of the District determines a declaration of a Water Supply Emergency is appropriate due to low river flows, or impairment of the water supply quantity and/or quality, the General Manager of the District may implement one of three levels of response depending on the severity of the situation; and WHEREAS, the Town wishes to be proactive in its efforts to address the drought cycle and be consistent with the Authority and the District in such efforts so as to avoid confusion among Avon residents and promote responsible water use to the greatest extent possible; and WHEREAS, Section 31-16-202, C.R.S. provides a municipality may enact any ordinance which adopts by reference any statute, rule, regulation, or standard adopted by the federal Ord. 21-06 Water Restrictions [4/4/21] Page 2 of 4 government or the state of Colorado, or by any agency of either of them, solely by referring to such statute, rule, regulation, or standard in the text of such ordinance; and WHEREAS, the Town enters into certain agreements related to water rights and water use for the purpose of, among other things, conserving the Town’s water resources, and a breach of such agreements resulting in the waste of water constitutes a nuisance; and WHEREAS, the Town Council of the Town of Avon finds and determines that the Town's Municipal Code should be revised as hereinafter set forth. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE TOWN COUNCIL OF THE TOWN OF AVON, COLORADO: Section 1. Chapter 13.04 Sections 120-150 of the Avon Municipal Code are hereby repealed and reenacted in their entirety to read as follows (Sections following shall be renumbered accordingly upon codification): CHAPTER 13.04 USE OF WATER SYSTEM Section 13.04.120 – Water Supply Response Plan The Town hereby adopts incorporates by reference the Water Supply Response Plan contained in Article XI of the 2017 Rules and Regulations for Water and Wastewater Service for the Eagle River Water Sanitation District, as amended (the “Response Plan”). Section 13.04.130 – Water Supply – Nuisance (a) No person shall perform any act or acts constituting a violation of the Response Plan or any agreement with the Town related to water rights or water use, and such violations shall constitute a nuisance under Chapter 8.24, nor shall any person create, keep, maintain or allow, or cause to be created, kept, maintained or to exist any violation of the Response Plan or agreement with the Town related to water rights or water use, which violation shall constitute a nuisance within the Town under Chapter 8.24. (b) The Town Manager or any person specifically authorized by the Town Manager shall investigate into every violation of the Response Plan within the Town of any agreement related to water rights or water use, and the Town Manager shall have the power to abate such nuisance as further set forth in Chapter 8.24. Section 13.04.140 – Water Agreements - Nuisance (a) No person shall person shall perform any act or acts constituting a breach of any agreement with the Town related to water rights or water use, and such breach shall constitute a nuisance under Chapter 8.24. (b) The Town Manager or any person specifically authorized by the Town Manager shall investigate into every breach of any agreement related to water rights or water use, and the Town Manager shall have the power to abate such nuisance as further set forth in Chapter 8.24. Section 13.04.150 – Violations, Penalties and Civil Infractions. Ord. 21-06 Water Restrictions [4/4/21] Page 3 of 4 (a) Any person violating any of the provisions of the Chapter shall be subject to the penalties contained in Chapter 1.09 of this Municipal Code. Any remedies provided for in this Section shall be cumulative and not exclusive and shall be in addition to any other remedies provided by law. The imposition of any penalty under this Chapter shall not preclude the Town or affected property owner from instituting any appropriate action or proceeding to require compliance with the provisions of this Chapter. (b) Every person violating any provision of this Chapter shall be deemed to have committed a civil infraction for each and every day or portion of a day during which any infraction is committed, continued or permitted and shall be subject to the penalties contained in Chapter 1.09 of this Municipal Code. Section 2. Codification Amendments. The codifier of the Town’s Municipal Code, Colorado Code Publishing, is hereby authorized to make such numerical and formatting changes as may be necessary to incorporate the provisions of this Ordinance within the Avon Municipal Code. The Town Clerk is authorized to correct, or approve the correction by the codifier, of any typographical error in the enacted regulations, provided that such correction shall not substantively change any provision of the regulations adopted in this Ordinance. Such corrections may include spelling, reference, citation, enumeration, and grammatical errors. Section 3. Severability. If any provision of this Ordinance, or the application of such provision to any person or circumstance, is for any reason held to be invalid, such invalidity shall not affect other provisions or applications of this Ordinance which can be given effect without the invalid provision or application, and to this end the provisions of this Ordinance are declared to be severable. The Town Council hereby declares that it would have passed this Ordinance and each provision thereof, even though any one of the provisions might be declared unconstitutional or invalid. As used in this Section, the term “provision” means and includes any part, division, subdivision, section, subsection, sentence, clause or phrase; the term “application” means and includes an application of an ordinance or any part thereof, whether considered or construed alone or together with another ordinance or ordinances, or part thereof, of the Town. Section 4. Effective Date. This Ordinance shall take effect thirty (30) days after final adoption in accordance with Section 6.4 of the Avon Home Rule Charter. Section 5. Safety Clause. The Town Counsel hereby finds, determines and declares that this Ordinance is promulgated under the general police power of the Town of Avon, that it is promulgated for the health, safety and welfare of the public, and that this Ordinance is necessary for the preservation of health and safety and for the protection of public convenience and welfare. The Town Council further determines that the Ordinance bears a rational relation to the proper legislative object sought to be obtained. Section 6. No Existing Violation Affected. Nothing in this Ordinance shall be construed to release, extinguish, alter, modify, or change in whole or in part any penalty, liability or right or affect any audit, suit, or proceeding pending in any court, or any rights acquired, or liability incurred, or any cause or causes of action acquired or existing which may have been incurred or obtained under any ordinance or provision hereby repealed or amended by this Ordinance. Any Ord. 21-06 Water Restrictions [4/4/21] Page 4 of 4 such ordinance or provision thereof so amended, repealed, or superseded by this Ordinance shall be treated and held as remaining in force for the purpose of sustaining any and all proper actions, suits, proceedings and prosecutions, for the enforcement of such penalty, liability, or right, and for the purpose of sustaining any judgment, decree or order which can or may be rendered, entered, or made in such actions, suits or proceedings, or prosecutions imposing, inflicting, or declaring such penalty or liability or enforcing such right, and shall be treated and held as remaining in force for the purpose of sustaining any and all proceedings, actions, hearings, and appeals pending before any court or administrative tribunal. Section 7. Publication. The Town Clerk is ordered to publish this Ordinance in accordance with Chapter 1.16 of the Avon Municipal Code. [EXECUTION PAGE FOLLOWS] Ord. 21-06 Water Restrictions [4/4/21] Page 5 of 4 INTRODUCED AND ADOPTED ON FIRST READING AND REFERRED TO PUBLIC HEARING on April 13, 2021 and setting such public hearing for April 27, 2021 at the Council Chambers of the Avon Town Hall, located at 100 Mikaela Way, Avon, Colorado, or by virtual meeting as may be conducted under public health orders. BY: ATTEST: ____________________ ____________________ Sarah Smith Hymes, Mayor Brenda Torres, Town Clerk ADOPTED ON SECOND AND FINAL READING on April 27, 2021. BY: ATTEST: ____________________ ____________________ Sarah Smith Hymes, Mayor Brenda Torres, Town Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: _______________________ Paul Wisor, Town Attorney 970.748.4413 mpielsticker@avon.org TO: Honorable Mayor Smith Hymes and Council members FROM: Matt Pielsticker, Planning Director RE: Planning and Zoning Commission Appointments DATE: April 20, 2021 SUMMARY: There are four open seats on the Planning and Zoning Commission (“PZC”). The seats are for two-year terms, ending May 2024. Four applications were received for the four seats, all by existing members. The applicants have been asked to be made available during the meeting in case there are any questions from Council. Staff recommends that the Town Council reappoint these four individuals. SOLICITATION: Since February, the Town has continually posted the opening on Avon.org/jobs as well as the Vail Daily job classifieds. A press release, social media posts, and ongoing paid advertisements in the Vail Daily have been active. In addition to these avenues, staff recently e-blasted a notification to local architecture firms and designers who hold Avon business licenses. PZC COMPOSITION: Below is a summary of the continuing members and applicants, their professions, place of residency and time on PZC: CONTINUING MEMBERS WITH TERMS EXPIRING MAY 2022: Name Profession Residency Notes Donna Lang Interior Design Eagle-Vail First Term Sara Lanious Construction Manager *Edwards First Term Trevor MacAllister Construction Manager Avon First Term APPLICANTS: Name Profession Residency Notes Jared Barnes Planning Manager Avon 2 ½ Terms Anthony Sekinger Construction/Data Anlst. Avon Since 2/2021 Martin Golembiewski Civil Engineer Avon 2+ Terms Steve Nusbaum DRB/Metro Dist. Edwards 3 Terms *Resided in Avon at time of appointment. OPTIONS: • Fill all 4 vacancies with (re)applying candidates; or • Fill 1-3 seats: or • Delay appointments until next meeting QUALIFICATIONS: The PZC serves as the Town’s zoning and design review board, charged with reviewing long range planning and policy documents. Their role is more completely defined in Avon Municipal Code (“AMC”) Section 7.12.040 . The AMC states that PZC shall be seven persons, and requires that at least five (5) members shall be registered electors of the Town at the time of their appointment. The AMC recommends a balance in membership (professional vs. lay) and that a minimum of two industry professionals hold positions at all times, and that these professionals be architects, landscape architects or designers. The AMC guides and prioritizes appointments in the following prioritization: 970.748.4413 mpielsticker@avon.org 1) Industry professionals (architects, landscape architects, or designers); 2) Registered electors; and then 3) Persons having special skills and experience of value to PZC over persons who do not. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: I recommend that the Town Council appoint all four applicants by motion and vote. While there are no “design professionals” as defined by the AMC, most of the continuing members and some of the applicants have extensive experience with development review and design review procedures for Avon and neighboring jurisdictions. My recommendation is also for the Town Council to consider a code amendment that could reduce the size of the board to 5 persons. I also ask to consider relaxing the Avon residency requirement with a potential future code amendment process. ATTACHMENTS: Applicant Cover Letters and Resumes April 17, 2021 Mr. Matt Pielsticker Planning Director Town of Avon 100 Mikaela Way, PO Box 975 Avon, CO 81620 Dear Mr. Pielsticker, I am very pleased to present you with this cover letter and my resume for consideration in your search for the best candidate to fill the Planning and Zoning Commissioner position. Performing in this capacity for the past five years and upon re-reading the job description,I am confident that my professional planning experience and education provide a perfect match for this position. As outlined in my attached resume,I will continue to bring to the Town of Avon a broad range of skills and firsthand knowledge of the development issues facing our community, including: ●Experience as a Town Planner and Transportation Planner which are skill sets not otherwise represented on the Planning and Zoning Commission (PZC)and will assist the Town and applicants in receiving comprehensive and well-rounded feedback on the variety of proposals presented to the board; ●As a professional planner,a comprehensive understanding of the roles and relationships between the Town Council, Staff, Applicants,and the PZC; ●Detailed knowledge of the Avon Municipal Code,Avon Development Code and the processes therein; ●Recognition of the codified language and design standards,as well as their intent, and the ability to apply those standards to applications under consideration of the PZC; ●Comprehensive understanding of and the ability to implement the existing Avon Comprehensive Plan,West Town Center District Investment Plan,East Town Center Plan,Avon Comprehensive Transportation Master Plan,Harry A. Nottingham Park Master Plan, and other long range planning efforts; and, ●As chairperson,focused on running efficient and effective meetings that are fair and equitable for applicants and the public. I sincerely ask you for the opportunity to discuss my credentials,and ability to enhance the PZC. I appreciate your time and consideration. Respectfully yours, Jared Barnes, AICP Jared Barnes 971 West Beaver Creek Boulevard, Unit B4 PO Box 7684 Avon, CO 81620 Phone: 970.331.3999 Email: Jared_Barnes@yahoo.com PROFESSIONAL EXPERIENCE Eagle County, Colorado December, 2013 – Present Planning Manager ▪Grant writing for ECO Transit and ECO Trails. ▪Construction management for bus shelter and stop improvements for ECO Transit. ▪Construction management for trail maintenance projects for ECO Trails. ▪Master planning updates for ECO Trails to catalogue existing and proposed improvements to the Eagle Valley Trail to comply with MUTCD and ADA standards. ▪Managed master planning efforts for ECO Transit, including a Transit Development Plan and First Mile/Last Mile Plan. ▪Prepare and present project proposals to Town Boards,and Commissions. ▪Prepare and present legal agreements on behalf of ECO Transit and ECO Trails to the Eagle County Commissioners and Town Councils throughout Eagle County. ▪Eagle County liaison on regional planning efforts for transportation and trails master planning. Town of Avon, Colorado January, 2007 – December,2013 Planner ▪Evaluate and manage development applications, zoning modifications, and subdivision applications related to municipal codes, sub-area plans, and design standards. ▪Manage long range planning efforts, including adoption of and updates to sub-area master plans and comprehensive plans, in collaboration with community stakeholders, consultants, and internal committees. ▪Prepare and present project proposals and recommendations to the Planning Commission and Town Council. ▪Advise members of the public regarding zoning, code enforcement, building, and subdivision regulations. ▪Manage electronic archiving of building permit plan sets, building permit files, and planning /zoning files. ▪Core team member in the adoption of a unified development code incorporating zoning, subdivision, and design review standards, partnering with community stakeholders. ▪Town liaison on regional planning efforts for transportation and county master planning, as well as county code enforcement. ▪Streamlined the process for accepting and routing applications for review, while simplifying interfaces between town staff and applicants. ▪Implemented a permit tracking software system. Customized it to interface with development review, code enforcement and billing system. City of Louisville, Colorado January,2005 – January, 2007 Planning Intern ▪Created a tracking system for archiving planning files. ▪Researched and drafted the new sign code adopted by the city. ▪Provided zoning compliance review for current planning projects. ▪Advised members of the public regarding zoning and code enforcement regulations. City of Portage, Michigan May, 2004 – August,2004 Planning Intern ▪Updated ArcGIS layers. ▪Facilitated Municipal Code amendments by surveying other jurisdictions. ▪Performed site inspections for new construction. ADDITIONAL EXPERIENCE Town of Avon, Colorado May, 2016 - Present Planning and Zoning Commissioner; Vice Chair/Chair (2019-present) Bridgewater Terrace Homeowners Association April, 2009 - Present Board Member EDUCATION University of Colorado at Denver January, 2018 – May 2020 Masters of Public Administration Emphasis: Local Government University of Colorado at Boulder August, 2002 – December, 2006 Bachelor of Environmental Design in Planning /Urban Design Minor in Geography Related Coursework: Real Estate SOFTWARE SKILLS ESRI ArcGIS, Google SketchUp, Adobe InDesign, Adobe Photoshop, Adobe Illustrator, Google Suite, Microsoft Office Suite, and LaserFische. MEMBERSHIPS & ACTIVITIES ▪American Planning Association; Colorado Chapter (#181924) ▪University of Colorado Alumni Association Dear Town of Avon, As a homeowner in Avon, I find myself rooted deeper in our community. Being a part of the decision-making process and leadership team of organizations is something that I seek. I believe that my abilities to listen, communicate and empathize make me a great candidate to support our community from this position of service. My degree in Construction Management will be very much relevant, and I will be able to tell my parents I am using it (lol). There are a few present/past service-based responsibilities that I have not listed on my resume:  Vice President of Sonnen Halde HOA (current)  Community Engagement chair (past)  Free Website Support for Non-Profits (past) In the recent years, I have become more interested in working on behalf of our community and being a steward to our citizens. Thank you for your consideration. Anthony Sekinger ANTHONY SEKINGER CONTACT PHONE: 970-312-9894 EMAIL: Tonysek511@gmail.com ANTHONY SEKINGER Avon, CO 81620 Mobile: 970-312-9894 tonysek511@gmail.com BUSINESS DEVELOPMENT, CUSTOMER CARE & PROJECT MANAGEMENT PROFESSIONAL SUMMARY OF EXPERIENCE  Results driven professional with sales, management, and service in the Construction & Software industry.  Proven track record with successfully closing deals and receiving high scores in client surveys.  Success in co-managing commercial construction projects, large and small, and delivering per specifications and within budget.  Unique ability to develop strong working relationships with clients, executive management, business partners and vendors. PROFESSIONAL EXPERIENCE RESORT DATA PROCESSING- Avon, CO 2015 – 2020 Director of Business Development  Build proactive sales systems and solutions to drive revenue.  Work alongside sales team to optimize the sales database and create targeted marketing campaigns.  Contract vendors and act as visionary to build creative content.  Collaborate with marketing partners to create brand marketing content; digital and physical.  Foster strengths and values of the organization and market the company to aligned partners.  Network at conferences and industry events as the face of the organization. Outside Sales Representative  Create, Seek and Maintain relationships with customers who are interested in upgrading their current solutions. Guiding decision makers through the buying process.  Build sustainable relationships, internally and externally, of trust through open and interactive communication.  Manage new projects and account satisfaction for up to 3 years, acting as the buyer’s agent.  Collaborate with sales team to create new revenue streams and optimize internal systems in place.  Perform onsite demonstrations of software for prospective clients and their decision makers. Project Coordinator  Coordinate, schedule and manage full implementation lifecycle efforts for an existing client base of approximately 700 clients to include: implementing new software upgrades and interfaces, migrating client platforms from an on-premises solution to a hosted solution, managing the upgrade process from beta phase to market ready and managing the training efforts on the new versions.  Manage 3rd party vendor relationships and coordinate new development efforts for software upgrades.  Train team members on new features and upgrades for new software versions. ANTHONY SEKINGER Page 2 of 2 Support Technician  Perform software installations for clients for both new implementations and upgrade projects.  Train clients on software and business workflows to ensure functional optimization.  Provide first level contact for clients to include: resolution management, walk clients through problem solving process, ensure timely follow up with clients and effective communication.  Track, escalate, and redirect problems to correct resources.  Issue and management tracking to include proper recording, documentation and closure. RIDGEMONT COMMERCIAL CONSTRUCTION- Dallas, TX, 2012 – 2014 Assistant Project Manager  Coordinated work with project own representatives, architects, engineers, inspectors, and site subcontractors.  Managed estimating and bidding processes and tracked costs to manager project budget.  Wrote contracts and purchase orders using company templates and language to document all ordered work, schedules, projected costs, change orders and technical specifications.  Participated in meetings to coordinate work and manage labor concerns.  Implemented project schedules including each task associated with project completion.  Documented the technical, financial and personnel aspects of each project.  Reviewed project drawings, specifications, submittals and change orders.  Provided field support to construction superintendents to help ensure contract compliance, quality control and maintenance of safe work site.  Tracked project phase completion against milestones. SOUTHLAND INDUSTRIES- Dallas, TX, 2011 – 2011 Intern/Project Engineer  Performed job set-up duties such as forms, cost estimating, and baseline scheduling.  Served as contract administrator for contract and subcontract agreements.  Fostered and enhanced owner, architect, subcontractor and vendor relations.  Developed, updated, and communicated Master Project Schedule.  Worked with preconstruction team in development of project.  Managed the quality assurance/quality control program.  Provided management with status reports on progress of project and budget through regularly scheduled Operation Review Meetings. EDUCATION Oklahoma State University, Stillwater, OK Bachelors in Engineering Technology, Construction Management Technology VOLUNTEER EXPERIENCE  Ute Springs Experiential Learning Center – Website content management (WordPress), Eagle CO  Hearts and Hammers Residential Project – Dallas, TX  Custer Road United Methodist Church - Camp Counselor, Crossville TN P.O Box 539 Avon, CO 81620 (970) 376-3128 April 20, 2021 Dear Sir or Madam, I am writing to express my interest for the Town of Avon Planning and Zoning Commission Member position. I am a current Town of Avon resident and first move to Avon in the fall of 1998. I am very familiar with the Town of Avon as I live, work and enjoy the many activities in the Town and the surrounding area. I am a Civil Engineer with a strong knowledge of civil engineering principles and practices. I possess a Professional Engineering License and a Bachelor of Science from Syracuse University in the field of Civil Engineering. I have experience as a design engineer and I also have construction experience working in the field of land and site development. I believe my eagerness and desire to learn, combined with the knowledge I have gained from working in development would make me a valuable asset to the Town of Avon. I am looking forward to discussing this opportunity with Town Staff in the near future. Thank you for your time and consideration. Sincerely, Martin Golembiewski Martin M. Golembiewski, PE P.O Box 539, Avon, CO 81620 (970) 376-3128 martygolembiewski@hotmail.com Qualifications · Licensed Professional Engineer in the State of Colorado and the State of Montana. · Strong background in civil engineering design for land development, site development, utility, transportation, grading, drainage, surveying, soil analysis, construction documents, and construction support. · Residential, commercial, municipality, ski resort, and golf course design experience. · Experienced working in a team environment where communication and understanding of other disciplines is essential to the overall success of the project. · Construction management experience including design, permitting, installation, inspection, billing, MSHA and OSHA procedures. · Town of Avon, Colorado, Planning and Zoning Commission. · OEC and EMT, First Responder Training and Experience, Vail Ski Patrol. · Sherwood Meadows Association, Board Member and President. Experience Senior Engineer Avon, CO Inter-Mountain Engineering June 2014 – October 2019 · Manage and oversee site development, land development throughout Eagle County, Colorado. · Experience with redevelopment of existing streetscape projects and utility rehabilitation. · Manage construction projects for municipal and private sector clients. · Work closely with architects, clients and office staff to develop engineering plans and project timelines. · Provide internal technical, software, and project management consultation. · Ensure overall completion of project deliverables. Tailing/Civil Engineer Climax, CO Freeport McMoRan Copper & Gold, Inc. September 2011 – December 2012 · Provide project management for various construction projects for mine facilities and throughout mine property for Climax Molybdenum Mine startup. · Responsible for construction and management of tailing ponds for mine. · Oversee operators and develop management plans for tailing pond construction and maintenance. Associate Engineer Santa Cruz, CA Robert L. DeWitt and Associates, Inc. December 2008 – August 2011 · Manage and oversee site development, land development and utility design projects. · Work closely with architects, clients and office staff to develop engineering plans. · Provide internal technical, software, and project management consultation. · Ensure overall completion of project deliverables. Project Engineer Vail, CO McBoyd Builders, Inc. June 2008 – November 2008 · Coordinated and supervised commercial and residential construction projects including HVAC upgrade, remodel, and tenant finish. · Performed various other construction tasks as requested by clients. Staff Engineer Bozeman, MT Stahley Engineering, Inc. November 2007 – March 2008 · Designed road, water, sewer, utility, grading, and drainage infrastructure for Moonlight Basin ski area. Mountain Planner Vail, CO Vail Resorts June 2007 – October 2007 · Mountain Planner involved with the layout of ski trails, ski lifts, roads and buildings on Vail and Beaver Creek Mountains. · Design work consisted of utilizing AutoCAD and field fitting. Construction Manager Vail, CO Eagle River Water and Sanitation District April 2005 – December 2006 · Managed all phases of construction projects from design to final billing. · Oversaw contractor performance within scope of water, sewer, and various other construction projects. Staff Engineer Avon, CO Marcin Engineering, LLC March 2002 – Nov 2004, Aug 2014 – Nov 2014 · Civil Engineer using extensive AutoCAD to expedite various residential and commercial projects in and around Eagle County. · Project experience on Sky Legend at Cotton Ranch in Gypsum, CO, Chatfield Corners in Gypsum, CO, Sheraton’s Mountain Vista in Avon, CO and Traer Creek in Avon, CO. Staff Engineer Edwards, CO Alpine Engineering Inc. October 1998 – October 2001 · Civil Engineer involved in land development and site development in Eagle County. · Design involvement with sanitary sewers, storm sewers, water lines, shallow utilities, roadways, drainage analysis, grading, and surveying. · Project experience on Eagle Ranch, Ritz-Carlton Bachelor Gulch, Red Sky Ranch, and Arrowhead Mountain. Education B.S. Civil Engineering, Syracuse University, 1998 Computer Skills AutoCAD Civil 3D, Land Development Desktop, MS Project, MS Office 1 Matt, Please accept this email as notification of my intent to seek reappointment to the TOA Planning and Zoning Commission. My resume is attached. As a current member of the PZC, I believe that my knowledge and experience in both the planning and design realms complement the skills and knowledge of my fellow commissioners and welcome the opportunity to continue working together towards meeting the goals and objectives of the Town of Avon. Steve Nusbaum Steven L. Nusbaum 0015 Red Barn Street, Edwards, CO 81632, Ph. (970) 331-1959 slnvail66@yahoo.com ______________________________________________________________________ Objective To obtain a position in community management that will allow me to utilize my experience and education in assisting communities to meet and exceed their immediate and long-range financial and service goals. Skills Summary  Unique combination of leadership, financial, and technical skills leading to improved efficiency.  Ability to coordinate and execute public consultation programs including open houses and town hall style meetings.  Excellent oral and written communication skills resulting in improved relationships with internal and external customers.  Proficiency in a variety of software applications including MS Office Suite (Word, PowerPoint, Excel, Access).  Possess strong commitment to team environment dynamics with the ability to contribute expertise and follow leadership directives.  Ability to collaborate with key members of the community and local leadership to develop and implement improved processes and increase service levels. Employment 2004 – Present Vail Resorts Management Co. Avon, CO Manager/Director, Design Review Administration  Develop and administer design regulations for the communities of Bachelor Gulch, Beaver Creek, Arrowhead at Vail and Red Sky Ranch.  Work with Master Associations, HOAs, Metropolitan Districts and Vail Resorts to ensure community financial, service and sustainability goals are met.  Develop and maintain functional relationships with internal and external clients through consistent interpretation, communication and enforcement of community governing documents and state/local regulations.  Develop and administer departmental budgets ($700K) for four operating groups.  Research, conceptualize, plan and write reports related to planning, design and permitting.  Mediate and resolve conflicts with property owners/developers and Design Review Board approved plans and process to ensure completion and avoid remediation process.  Work with developers, contractors and architects to ensure as-built conditions are consistent with approved plans and community goals. 2003 - 2004 EchoStar Communications Corp. Denver, CO Operations Analyst/ Program Manager  Responsible for analyzing and reporting on field operations.  Responsible for field related forecast models and long range planning. 1995 – 2001 Vail Resorts, Inc./Smith Creek Metro District Avon, CO Municipal Services Manager  Supervised staff of 12 for all day-to-day and seasonal operations.  Responsible for developing specs and obtaining bids from subcontractors for District contracted construction projects.  Actively participated in new equipment acquisition, specs and budgeting.  Liaison between Operations staff and Homeowners’ Associations. Education/Certifications  Eagle County Planning Commission (2010-2012)  Town of Avon Planning and Zoning Commission (2016-Present)  BS Computer Information Systems – Colorado State University  BS Finance - Colorado State University (970) 748-4087 ewood@avon.org TO: Honorable Mayor Smith Hymes and Council members FROM: Elizabeth Wood, Communications & Marketing Manager RE: Community Survey Work Session DATE: April 19, 2021 SUMMARY: This report introduces the draft 2021 Community Survey questions to the Avon Town Council. The Town of Avon is conducting a community survey to gauge citizen and business opinion regarding services, activities, and policy direction of the Town. Engage.Avon.org, the Town’s new Community Engagement platform will be used to design and issue the survey. SCHEDULE: A timeline for completion of the 2021 Town of Avon Community Survey is provided below: • April 27, 2021 Work Session with Council: First Draft • April 30 – May 5, 2021 Focus Group Test Survey • May 11, 2021 Work Session with Council: Final Draft • May 17, 2021 Launch 2021 Avon Community Survey • June 18, 2021 Close Survey • July 13, 2021 Present Survey Results to Council SURVEY INSTRUMENT: A first draft of the survey is included as Attachment A. The survey asks different types of questions including “rate the level of satisfaction” with many Town services and departments. Each section also includes the opportunity for open-ended responses. Staff developed the themes and essential questions for the survey based on previous years and created policy questions at the direction of the Town Manager. The survey is structured to ask (1) demographic questions, (2) satisfaction of Town’s basic services which will reoccur on each survey to develop trend data, and (3) specific policy questions which are intended to provide guidance on pending policies, programs and strategies of the Town. Consideration is also given to the length of the survey with a desire to limit the survey to 50 questions or less and a required time of approximately 20-30 minutes to complete the survey. Following this work session, a revised draft will be circulated for focus group testing from April 30th to May 5th to give residents, businesses and community stakeholders an opportunity to provide their ideas and input for the survey instrument. A final draft will be prepared and presented to Council on May 11th. DISTRIBUTION METHOD: The survey link will be available publicly to those who provide an email address. The link will be advertised through Vail Daily, digital marketing, Town newsletters and website, press releases, radio advertisements, interviews and social media promotion. The online survey will allow participants to choose their preferred language at the onset of the survey experience. Respondents can complete the survey from any device: computer, tablet or mobile phone. To incentivize the survey, Town staff is investigating the option to purchase an e-bike from an Avon retailer as a grand prize. Other smaller prizes will be issued, including Avon Recreation Center punch cards, Avon t-shirts and sweatshirts, and gift cards to local businesses. Page 2 of 2 FINANCIAL CONSIDERATIONS: The community survey will be conducted internally using the Engage.Avon.Org platform and administered by Town Staff. The cost of this community survey effort is primarily the direct cost of mailings, cost of notices and advertisements, and the cost of providing raffle type prize incentives, which is estimated to be under $12,000. In comparison, the 2015 and 2018 surveys cost approximately $25,000 each. MANAGER’S COMMENTS: We narrowed down demographic questions to questions that we expect to use as filters (i.e. renter versus own, age) and dropped demographic questions from past surveys that were not used as filters and which we do not intend to use (i.e. income, marital/household status). There was discussion about asking more detailed questions on special events; however, I believe those questions will be more meaningful in two years when the Town has conducted two full event seasons rather than asking now when most special events were cancelled last year. There was also discussion about asking more detailed questions on the Recreation Center Facility and Programs; however, that will be more meaningful and efficient to conduct a survey of Recreation Center patrons sometime next fall or winter once the Recreation Center has returned to full opening and programming. REQUESTED COUNCIL DIRECTION: Council direction and input is desired on the whether to revise the wording of any of the questions or whether to add additional policy questions. Thank you, Liz ATTACHMENT A: Community Survey Draft 2021 Town of Avon Community Survey Questions – DRAFT 4.12.21 Page 1 of 11 2021 Community Survey Questions - DRAFT Welcome to the 2021 Town of Avon Community Survey! Your input is very important. This Community Survey asks a series of questions about Town services, programs and policies. The results will be compiled and posted on the Town of Avon’s website. This survey should take about 20 minutes to complete. At the end of this Community Survey you may register to win an e-bike, gift vouchers, and other community prizes. Thank you again for taking the time to share your thoughts and input on our community. [NOTE: Answer choices will appear in the actual survey] DEMOGRAPHIC QUESTIONS 1. Please describe your relationship with the Town of Avon (check all that apply) (1) Full time resident (11 months or more per year) (2) Part time resident (goes to Q2) (3) Employed in Avon (4) Owner of business/commercial property (5) Live/work in Eagle County (6) Visitor/Guest (7) Landlord/Rental property owner 2. How many months a year do you spend in Avon? 3. In which neighborhood do you reside or own property? (for Q1 answers a & b) (1) East Avon (valley floor east of Avon Road – Chapel Square) (2) Town Core (between Avon Road and Nottingham Park) (3) Nottingham Park/Lake area (4) West Avon (valley floor west of Avon Elementary – Sunridge/Aspens/Liftview) (5) Hurd Lane/Eaglebend (6) Village at Avon: Piedmont/Buffalo Ridge (7) Mountain Star (8) Wildridge/Wildwood (9) Nottingham Road 4. Do you own or rent your residence? (1) Own (2) Rent 5. What is your age? (1) 20 or younger (2) 21-35 (3) 36-50 (4) 51-65 2021 Town of Avon Community Survey Questions – DRAFT 4.12.21 Page 2 of 11 (5) 65 or older GENERAL QUESTIONS 6. Please rate your level of satisfaction (1-5) with the Town of Avon in the following areas: [1 = Often Dissatisfied, 2 = Sometimes Dissatisfied, 3 = Neutral/No Opinion, 4 = Sometimes Satisfied, 5 = Often Satisfied] (1) Citizen Engagement (2) Business Support and Economic Development (3) Council Leadership (4) Pedestrian Friendly (5) Bike Friendly (6) Road Conditions (7) Climate Action (8) Special Events and Community Activities (9) Cleanliness of Public Places COMMUNICATION 7. Please rate your level of satisfaction (1-5) with Town of Avon communications. 8. Do you prefer to receive information in English or Spanish? [English; Spanish; Both] 9. What are your top sources for news and information about the Town of Avon? (check all that apply) INFORMATION FROM THE TOWN OF AVON (1) E-Services (e-Newsletter, news releases, agendas) (2) Avon.org (3) Engage.Avon.org (4) Social Media (5) Digital signs around Town (6) Sandwich board signs around Town (7) Attend or watch meetings INFORMATION FROM OTHER SOURCES (1) Vail Daily (2) Business Briefs (3) Local Radio (4) Local Television (Channel 5) (5) A website or blog (6) Posters, banners or other informational signage (7) Other: FILL IN BLANK 10. Are you currently registered for the Avon Heartbeat newsletter? (If no, Q13. If yes, skip Q13.) 2021 Town of Avon Community Survey Questions – DRAFT 4.12.21 Page 3 of 11 11. Please enter you email if you wish to subscribe to the monthly newsletter. [OPEN COMMENT] Please provide any comments, suggestions or questions regarding Communication & Marketing services in the Town of Avon. SPECIAL EVENTS 12. The Town of Avon provides a variety of special events throughout the spring, summer & fall. How often do you attend Town Events? (1) 5-7 days per week (2) 2-4 days per week (3) 1-4 days per month (4) 1-10 days per year (5) I do not attend Town Events (if answer is (e) skip to Q19) 13. What is your level of satisfaction with Town of Avon events program? (1) Extremely Satisfied (2) Satisfied (3) Neutral (4) Dissatisfied (5) Extremely Dissatisfied 14. What type of events would you like Avon to offer in the future? (check all that apply) (1) Multi-day Festivals (2) Ticketed Shows that Offer Big Name National Bands (3) More Free Concerts with National Bands (4) More Concerts with Local Bands (5) More Dance Performances (6) Outdoor Theater (7) Story Telling Events (8) More Kid Friendly Events (9) Farmers Market (10) Athletic Race Events like Colorado Classic Bike Race (11) Other [allow text entry] 15. In your opinion, where do you believe the Town could improve on events? (check all that apply) (1) More Events (2) Better Talent Line Up (3) Food & Beverage Options (4) More Activities for Children (5) Marketing & Promotion of Events (6) Parking for Events (7) Public Transportation to/from Events (8) Security at Events (9) More Dog-Friendly Events 2021 Town of Avon Community Survey Questions – DRAFT 4.12.21 Page 4 of 11 (10) Other [allow text entry] 16. How do you typically learn about Town events? (check all that apply) (1) Town Website (2) Facebook (3) Instagram (4) Local Radio (5) Town Electronic Newsletter – The Avon Heartbeat (6) Vail Daily (7) Word of Mouth (8) Other [allow text entry] 17. Please describe why you do not attend Town events? (check all that apply) (1) Recently moved / New in Town (2) Parking too difficult (3) I don’t have time to attend (4) I don’t enjoy the events offered (5) I attend events in other towns (6) Other [allow text entry] [OPEN COMMENT] Please provide any comments, suggestions or questions regarding Town of Avon Special Events. PUBLIC WORKS The Public Works Department provides maintenance of public areas including minor road repairs, crack sealing and patching, striping, signage, snow removal, landscaping maintenance on all public streetways, public parks and public facilities, park grounds, equipment and playgrounds, Harry A. Nottingham Lake ice skating, Harry A. Nottingham Lake beach area, pedestrian paths, regional recreation trails, West Avon Preserve, playground equipment, public trash and recycling cans, litter pick-up on public ways and I-70, Lot 5 recycling center, spring clean-up and wildfire mitigation debris pick-up, Christmas tree pick-up, support and set-up for special events, Richardson ground squirrel control, and much more. 18. Please rate your level of satisfaction (1-5) with services and/or maintenance in the following areas: (1) Snow Removal (2) Road/Streets (3) Harry A. Nottingham Park (4) Harry A. Nottingham Park Restrooms (5) Harry A. Nottingham Park Picnic Area/Playground (6) Harry A. Nottingham Lake & Beach (7) Pocket Parks (8) Paths and Trails (9) Signage 2021 Town of Avon Community Survey Questions – DRAFT 4.12.21 Page 5 of 11 [OPEN COMMENT] Please provide any comments, suggestions or questions regarding Avon Public Works services and/or maintenance. RECREATION Recreation encompasses a multitude of recreational activities, opportunities and offerings within and adjacent to the Town of Avon, including the Avon Recreation Center facility, Harry A. Nottingham Park, outdoor courts, recreational trails, access to U.S. Forest Service lands and access to the Eagle River. The Avon Recreation Center was constructed in 1994 for $5.6 million ($2 million in cash and $3.6 million in bond financing). The bond financing was paid-off in 2014. The Avon Recreation Center was voted the best place to work out in 2019-2020. Prior to the coronavirus pandemic, the annual admissions at the Avon Recreation Center were $1,006,000. We recognize that the coronavirus pandemic and related public health orders imposed significant restrictions and operational changes for the Avon Recreation Center. Please answer the following questions without regard to the pandemic (i.e. in the context of pre-Covid/post-Covid, normal times). 19. Describe how you use the Avon Recreation Center (1) I have a monthly membership to the Avon Recreation Center (2) I have a punch card for the Avon Recreation Center (3) I purchase day passes to the Avon Recreation Center (4) I do not use Avon Recreation Center If answer is (a), (b) or (c) go to next question (22). If answer is (d) go question (25) 20. Describe how often you use the Avon Recreation Center (1) 5-7 days per week (2) 2-4 days per week (3) 1-4 days per month (4) 1-10 days per year 21. Describe which areas or programs you use at the Avon Recreation Center (check all that apply) (1) Fitness Areas (2) Fitness Classes (3) Lap Pool (4) Leisure Pools and Jacuzzi (5) Steam Room (6) Sauna Room (7) Climbing Wall (8) Adult Programs (9) Youth Programs (10) Shower/Locker Room Only 22. Describe what improvements, if any, you desire for the Avon Recreation Center (check all that apply) (1) More youth activities or programs (2) More adult activities or programs (3) More fitness classes 2021 Town of Avon Community Survey Questions – DRAFT 4.12.21 Page 6 of 11 (4) More senior programs (5) More family aquatic features (slides and water features) (6) Additional lap pool lanes (7) Separate adult only jacuzzi (8) Indoor walking/running track (9) Full-size multi-purpose gym (basketball, pickleball, volleyball, gymnastics, special events, etc.) (10) Full-size climbing wall (11) Childcare services during patron use (12) Expanded hours (13) Other [allow text entry] [Only Q21 – answer (d) go to Q25] 23. Describe why you do not use the Avon Recreation Center (1) Admission fee is too expensive (2) I don’t exercise/I don’t have time to exercise (3) I don’t like to exercise indoors (4) Lack of childcare services (5) I use another recreational facility (6) The facilities or programs I desire are not available or offered (7) Other reason(s) [allow text entry] [OPEN COMMENT] Please provide any comments, suggestions or questions regarding the Avon Recreation Center. HARRY A. NOTTINGHAM PARK: Harry A. Nottingham Park is the recreational centerpiece of the Avon community. It is the primary place for recreation, outdoor gathering, events and enjoyment of Avon’s unique four-acre lake. The following questions ask about your usage and opinions on Harry A. Nottingham Park. 24. How often to you visit Harry A. Nottingham Park? (1) 5-7 days per week (2) 2-4 days per week (3) 1-4 days per month (4) 1-10 days per year (5) 0 days in the last year If answer is (e) skip to question 28 25. Describe the recreational activities you enjoy in Harry A. Nottingham Park (check all that apply) (1) Walking (2) Walking Dog (3) Running (4) Biking (5) Slackline (6) Outdoor Fit Court (7) Basketball 2021 Town of Avon Community Survey Questions – DRAFT 4.12.21 Page 7 of 11 (8) Pickleball (9) Tennis (10) Soccer (11) Frisbee (12) Swimming (13) Stand Up Paddle Boards (14) Kayak (15) Peddle Boats (16) Fishing (17) Beach Volleyball (18) Sitting/relaxing at beach (19) Sitting/relaxing anywhere in Park (20) Picnic/Grill (21) Playground (22) Ice Skating (23) Sledding (24) In-line skating (25) Long boarding/skateboarding Usage of Harry A. Nottingham Park has increased significantly this summer due in part to the coronavirus pandemic. Also, the Town of Avon permitted open container and public consumption of alcohol in Harry A. Nottingham Park through the summer. 26. Describe how you feel the capacity of the lake and beach were last summer (1) Never felt too crowded (2) Sometimes at capacity, but rarely too crowded (3) Often at capacity (4) Sometimes too crowded and often at capacity (5) Often too crowded and always at capacity (6) No opinion 27. Indicate which statement best describes your opinion on open container and public alcohol consumption in Harry A. Nottingham Park (1) Everyone was well-behaved and it was a welcome change (2) There were occasional concerns but generally it was appropriate (3) There were too many instances of bad behavior that impacted the family atmosphere of the Park (4) Open container and public alcohol consumption are not appropriate and should not be allowed 28. Indicate the additional improvements or facilities you desire in Harry A. Nottingham Park (check all that apply) (1) Expanded beach area (2) More food and beverage opportunities at the Park during the summer (3) Full-service restrooms in North Nottingham Park to serve the beach area (4) Improved parking and pedestrian safety on West Beaver Creek Blvd to serve the beach area (5) Full-service restrooms in West Nottingham Park to serve the courts and lower soccer field area (6) Additional full-service restrooms in East Nottingham Park to serve special events 2021 Town of Avon Community Survey Questions – DRAFT 4.12.21 Page 8 of 11 (7) More playground equipment or areas (8) Additional grills, picnic tables, or picnic shelters (9) More recycling containers (10) Additional formal landscaping (i.e. flower beds and gardens) (11) Tennis/Pickleball complex (12) Skatepark (13) More quiet, passive, unprogrammed spaces (14) Other [allow text entry] [OPEN COMMENT] Please provide any comments, suggestions or questions regarding Harry A. Nottingham Park. POCKET PARKS: There are several neighborhood pocket parks in Avon, including O’Neal Spur Park, the Wildridge Fire House Park, and the playground at the east end of Hurd Lane. [OPEN COMMENT] Please provide any comments, suggestions or questions regarding Pocket Parks in Avon. WEST AVON PRESERVE: The Town acquired the 400-acre West Avon Preserve in 2014 and constructed a series of passive recreation trails. 29. How often to you visit the West Avon Preserve? (1) 5-7 days per week (2) 2-4 days per week (3) 1-4 days per month (4) 1-10 days per year (5) 0 days in the last year 30. How do you use the West Avon Preserve? (1) Biking (2) Hiking (3) Dog Walking (4) Other [allow text entry] [OPEN COMMENT] Please provide any comments, suggestions or questions regarding West Avon Preserve. POLICE The Avon Police Department provides safety patrols and traffic control, responds to calls for services, and conducts a variety of community policing and community outreach activities. 31. Please rate your level of satisfaction (1-5) with the Avon Police Department in the following areas: (1) Professionalism (2) Traffic Control (3) Community Policing (4) Community Education & Outreach 2021 Town of Avon Community Survey Questions – DRAFT 4.12.21 Page 9 of 11 32. Do you feel safer or less safe in Avon over the past three years? (1) MUCH SAFER (2) SOMEWHAT SAFER (3) ABOUT THE SAME (4) LESS SAFE (5) MUCH LESS SAFE [OPEN COMMENT] Please provide any comments, suggestions or questions regarding Avon Police Department services. COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT The Community Development Department administers the Avon Development Code, reviews development applications and provides professional guidance to the Avon Planning and Zoning Commission and the Avon Town Council on implementation of the Town of Avon Comprehensive Plan. 33. Rate your level of satisfaction (1-5) with Avon’s review and approval of new development. [OPEN COMMENT] Please provide any comments, suggestions or questions regarding Avon Community Development Services. MOBILITY The Mobility Department provides free bus transit on the valley floor area of Avon, including the Blue line, Red line and Night Rider, and partners with Beaver Creek Resort Company to provide a free skier shuttle to Beaver Creek. The Mobility Department also oversees parking management, . 34. Do you use the free Town bus? IF YES: Please rate your level of satisfaction in the following areas: i. IF YES: Do you ride in the winter/summer/both? (1) Cleanliness of Busses (2) Cleanliness of Bus Stops (3) Implementation of COVID-19 Safety Protocols (4) Ease of Accessing of Transit Route and Schedule Information (5) Friendliness of Staff (6) Frequency of Red/Blue Routes (7) Frequency of Skier Express Shuttle (8) Frequency of Night Rider Route IF NO: Why don’t you use the free Town bus? (1) Routes aren’t convenient (2) I need my car for work (3) Layover is too long (4) Insufficient frequency (5) Not available in my neighborhood (6) I bike or carpool to work 35. Avon strives to be pedestrian and bike friendly community. How would you rate your level of satisfaction (1 – 5) with pedestrian and bike safety in Avon? 2021 Town of Avon Community Survey Questions – DRAFT 4.12.21 Page 10 of 11 [OPEN COMMENT] Please provide any comments, suggestions or questions regarding mobility, transit and/or parking in Avon. POLICY QUESTIONS A series of policy questions related to pending goals, strategies and programs of the Town of Avon are asked next. CLIMATE ACTION In 2016, the Avon Town Council unanimously voted to adopt the Climate Action Plan for the Eagle County Community. The Climate Action Plan for the Eagle County Community calls for greenhouse gas emission reduction targets of 25% by 2025 and a minimum of 80% by 2050. Energy use, transportation use, commercial buildings, waste and energy sources are all addressed within the plan, which is focused on climate mitigation. In order to meet the established targets, the plan also contains project recommendations for the community, including businesses, towns, county government, nonprofits, and other partners to begin immediate climate action. 36. Are you familiar with the Eagle County Climate Action Plan? 37. Do you support Avon’s efforts to implement the Climate Action Plan? 38. Would you support the Town providing financial incentives for residents to purchase electric vehicles and/or electric bicycles? [OPEN COMMENT] Please provide any comments, suggestions or questions regarding Climate Action in Avon. COMMUNITY HOUSING The Town of Avon adopted the Avon Community Housing Plan in 2018. The Community Housing Plan identifies the goal to maintain approximately 50% of Avon’s housing stock as occupied by full-time residents. 39. Do you feel there are sufficient housing opportunities for locals in Avon? 40. Should the Town of Avon prioritize investment in Community Housing to increase Community Housing opportunities? [OPEN COMMENT] Please provide any comments, suggestions or questions regarding housing in Avon. RAILROAD There have been two separate proposals over the last several years to reactive the Tennessee Pass rail line which runs through the Town of Avon for freight hauling. The Town of Avon is actively monitoring these proposals as well as researching the federal and state approval process and potential alternatives to freight hauling on the rail line. 41. What is your preferred future use of the Union Pacific Railroad Line (Tennessee Pass)? (1) Recreation/Rails To Trails (2) Freight 2021 Town of Avon Community Survey Questions – DRAFT 4.12.21 Page 11 of 11 (3) Combined Passenger And Freight (4) Passenger Only (5) Combined Recreation/Passenger/Freight FINAL QUESTIONS 42. What do you like best about Avon? [OPEN COMMENT] 43. What do you think is the single most important aspect for Avon to improve? [OPEN COMMENT] [OPEN COMMENTS] Please provide any final comments, suggestions or questions regarding the Town of Avon. Thank you for completing this survey! Prizes are available to Avon residents and property owners. Please register to win a prize. [Enter name, email, and physical property address (winning entrants will be verified for eligibility)] 970-748-4055 swright@avon.org TO: Honorable Mayor Smith Hymes and Council members FROM: Scott Wright, Asst. Town Manager / Finance Director RE: 2021 Supplemental Budget Amendment, Resolution 21-10 DATE: April 22, 2021 INTRODUCTION AND ACTION BEFORE COUNCIL: It has been the historical practice to adopt a supplemental budget amendment in order to update beginning fund balance estimates and generally recognize revisions to the budget that were not identified at the time the budget was originally adopted. These resolutions amend the General Fund, Community Housing Fund, Disposal Paper Bag Fee Fund, Mobility Fund, Equipment Replacement Fund, and Capital Projects Fund. PROPOSED MOTION "I move to approve Resolution No. 21-10, A Resolution Amending the 2021 Town of Avon Budget." Below is a summary of the proposed budget revisions and the estimated impacts to fund balances. General Fund The following are proposed revisions to expenditure appropriations in the General Fund: • Increase of $3,724 for the purchase of Council iPads; • Increase of $11,968 for telephone-related expenditures inadvertently excluded from the 2021 budget; • Carryover of $25,000 of unspent marketing funds originally approved in 2020 in the amount of $40,000; • Salary adjustments of $29,173; • One-time employee payments of $80,000; • Additional shared costs for Eagle County Ranger program of $4,074; • Legal fees of $30,000 for the Tennessee Pass project and $20,000 for Sales Tax Code update; • PTS wages of $8,250 for a Child Care Relief Grant for Youth Programs. This is offset by $8,250 in grant revenues; • Contribution to the Colorado Fallen Hero Foundation - $3,000. The Colorado Fallen Hero Foundation (CFHF) is a 501(c)(3) non-profit organization made up of Colorado law enforcement officers and civilian personnel who serve in a voluntary capacity. When a line of duty death occurs, the Colorado Fallen Hero Foundation can assist, support, and provide resources for a host agency In addition to providing line-of-duty death response and memorial planning, the CFHF provides peer support and mental health resources for agencies that do not have access to such resources. CFHF services are provided at no cost to the agency or the family. • Special Event costs of $397,356. The following are proposed revisions to revenue estimates: • Special event fees and charges of $82,100 • Sales tax, accommodation tax, cigarette excise tax, and tobacco add-on sales tax of $875,450. These revisions increase the estimates for these taxes up to the amounts actually received in 2020. • Transfers-in from Capital Projects Fund of $94,334. This increase is a result of the Capital Projects Fund covering the cost of hiring another Project Engineer to assist with capital projects. The revised fund balance of the General Fund shows a total of $9,061,184 which is $1,570,371 higher than the original projected ending fund balance for 2021. Of this amount, the 27% reserve is $4,975,346, $805,865 is in the 3% TABOR emergency reserve and the remaining amount of $3,279,973 is undesignated and unreserved and can be used for any legal purpose. 970-748-4055 swright@avon.org Capital Projects Fund The changes to the Capital Project Fund are as follows: • Carried forward DOLA Broadband grant of $25,000 from 2020; • Added electric vehicle charging stations of $55,000 and added the Colorado Energy Office Charge Ahead Grant of $44,000; • Revised RETT revenues based on the 10-year average of $3.3 million per year; • Revised transfers-in from the General Fund for the new engineer position; • Added $100,000 in transfers-out to the Mobility Fund for the acceleration of the receipt of the diesel buses from 2022 to 2021; • Moved the B/C Blvd. parking improvements from 2022 to 2021. Also reduced the project from $350,000 to $150,000 and added funding from the URA; • Added Yoga Studio bathroom conversion of $25,000; • Added Wildridge Emergency Warning Siren for $26,000; • Added $30,00 for Hybrid Meeting Technical Improvements; • Carried-forward all remaining project budgets from active projects from 2020 to 2021. The revised fund balance of the Capital Projects Fund shows a total of $6,888,922 which is $3,860,037 higher than the original projected ending fund balance for 2021. Of this amount, $450,230 is reserved for asphalt overlay projects in the Village at Avon, $899,108 is reserved for Tract G/URA projects. The remaining amount of $5,539,584 can be used for capital improvements as defined by the municipal code and up to 10% of real estate transfer tax revenues can be transferred to the Community Housing Fund. Community Housing Fund The revisions to the Community Housing Fund are as follows: • Reappropriation of 2020 unexpended funds from the Mi Casa program in the amount of $185,232; • Rebate of permit fees to Walking Mountains of $21,499. This was previously approved by Town Council in 2020 by Resolution 20-11. • Reduced bond issuance fees to actual amount - $486. The revised fund balance of the Community Housing Fund is estimated at $1,120,376. Disposal Paper Bag Fee Fund The amendment to the Disposable Paper Bag Fee Fund is for an additional appropriation of $31,000 for recycle cans and labels. The revised ending fund balance of the Disposable Paper Bag Fee Fund is $34,100. Mobility Fund Revisions to the Mobility Fund include the following items: • Additional FTA Grant funding of $100,000 for CARES Act Phase III and $867,728 for the Coronavirus Response and Relief Supplemental Appropriations Act (CRRSAA); • Appropriation of $500,000 in capital outlay due to the acceleration of the receipt of the 2 new diesel buses original due to be received in 2022. This is offset by the transfer of $400,000 from 2022 to 2021 for the FTA 5339 Grant for Buses and Bus Facilities and $100,000 in matching funds from the Capital Projects Fund. • Additional appropriations of $126,367 in Transit Operations for clothing and uniforms for addition drivers ($3,000), fleet repairs including bus wrap ($13,500) and painting ($50,000), safety vision camera repairs and upgrades ($48,195), replacement of driver seats ($3,000), radio repairs and replacements ($5,500), and salary increases ($3,172). 970-748-4055 swright@avon.org The revised fund balance of the Mobility Fund shows a total of $1,463,113 which is $1,061,268 higher than the original projected ending fund balance for 2021. Equipment Replacement Fund Appropriations in the Equipment Replacement Fund are being increased by $150,000 for pool replastering at the Avon Recreation Center. Funds for this project have been reserved for in prior years but the project was not included in the original 2021 budget. The revised fund balance of the Equipment Replacement Fund shows an estimated fund balance of $3,156,010 which is a decrease of $23,263 from the original budget. Thank you, Scott ATTACHMENTS: Attachment A. Resolution 21-10 Attachment B. General Fund Supplemental Amendment No. 1 Attachment C. Capital Projects Fund Supplemental Amendment No. 1 Attachment D. Community Housing Fund Supplemental Amendment No. 1 Attachment E. Disposable Paper Bag Fee Fund Supplemental Amendment No.1 Attachment F. Mobility Fund Supplemental Amendment No. 1 Attachment G. Equipment Replacement Fund Supplemental Amendment No. 1 Res. No. 21-10 April 27, 2021 Page 1 of 3 TOWN OF AVON, COLORADO RESOLUTION NO. 21-10 SERIES OF 2021 A RESOLUTION TO AMEND THE 2021 TOWN OF AVON BUDGET WHEREAS, the Town Council of the Town of Avon has previously adopted the 2021 budget; and WHEREAS, the Town Council has reviewed the revised estimated revenues and expenditures for 2021; and WHEREAS, the Town Council finds it necessary to amend the 2021 budget to more accurately reflect the revenues and expenditures for 2021; and WHEREAS, the Town Council has caused to be published a notice containing the date and time of a public hearing at which the adoption of the proposed budget amendment will be considered and a statement that the proposed budget amendment is available for public inspection at the office of the Town Clerk located in the Avon Town Hall during normal business hours, and that any interested elector of the Town of Avon may file any objection to the proposed budget amendment at any time prior to the final adoption of the proposed budget amendment; 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 funds are revised as follows for 2021: Original or Previously Amended 2021 Budget Current Proposed Amended 2021 Budget General Fund Beginning Fund Balance Revenues and Other Sources Expenditures and Other Uses $ 8,447,722 16,857,754 17,814,663 $ 9,578,754 17,909,638 18,427,208 Ending Fund Balance $ 7,490,813 $ 9,061,184 ATTACHMENT A Res. No. 21-10 April 27, 2021 Page 2 of 3 Original or Previously Amended 2021 Budget Current Proposed Amended 2021 Budget Capital Projects Fund Beginning Fund Balance Revenues and Other Sources Expenditures and Other Uses Ending Fund Balance $ 7,222,383 3,398,500 7,591,998 $ 3,028,885 $ 12,098,283 4,267,500 9,476,861 $ 6,888,922 Community Housing Fund Beginning Fund Balance Revenues and Other Sources Expenditures and Other Uses $ 1,986,773 61,736 900,000 $ 2,165,857 61,250 1,106,731 Ending Fund Balance Disposable Paper Bag Fee Fund Beginning Fund Balance Revenues and Other Sources Expenditures and Other Uses Ending Fund Balance $ 1,148,509 $ 76,787 0 36,000 $ 40,787 $ 1,120,376 $ 101,100 0 67,000 $ 34,100 Mobility Fund Beginning Fund Balance Revenues and Other Sources Expenditures and Other Uses $ 496,615 4,468,750 4,563,520 $ 716,522 5,936,478 5,189,887 Ending Fund Balance Equipment Replacement Fund Beginning Fund Balance Revenues and Other Sources Expenditures and Other Uses $ 401,845 . $ 3,030,717 1,210,789 1,062,233 $ 1,463,113 $ 3,157,454 1,210,789 1,212,233 Ending Fund Balance $ 3,179,273 $ 3,156,010 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. ATTACHMENT A Res. No. 21-10 April 27, 2021 Page 3 of 3 Section 3. That the budget hereby approved and adopted shall be signed by the Mayor and made part of the public record of the Town. ADOPTED this 27th April, 2021. AVON TOWN COUNCIL By:___________________________ Attest:________________________ Sarah Smith Hymes, Mayor Brenda Torres, Town Clerk ATTACHMENT A Original Amended Difference Actual Budget Budget Increase 2020 2021 2021 (Decrease) REVENUES Taxes 14,463,649$ 13,525,678$ 14,401,128$ 875,450$ Licenses and Permits 328,922 300,100 300,100 - Intergovernmental 1,747,716 1,009,480 1,009,480 - Charges for Services 933,829 1,059,782 1,141,882 82,100 Fines and Forfeitures 39,694 46,900 46,900 - Investment Earnings 218,938 150,000 150,000 - Other Revenue 650,265 488,500 488,500 - Total Operating Revenues 18,383,013 16,580,440 17,537,990 957,550 Other Sources Transfer-In From Community Enhancement Fund - 30,000 30,000 - Transfer-In From Capital Projects Fund 247,314 247,314 341,648 94,334 Total Other Sources 247,314 277,314 371,648 94,334 TOTAL REVENUES 18,630,327$ 16,857,754$ 17,909,638$ 1,051,884$ EXPENDITURES General Government 4,847,910$ 4,851,740$ 5,449,823$ 598,083$ Community Development 509,129 544,161 544,161 - Public Safety 3,984,465 4,188,557 4,191,557 3,000 Public Works 4,330,597 4,788,045 4,788,045 - Recreation 1,703,007 1,742,160 1,753,622 11,462 Total Operating Expenditures 15,375,108 16,114,663 16,727,208 612,545 Contingency - - - - Other Uses Transfers-Out to Affordable Housing Fund 250,000 - - - Transfers-Out to Transit 1,150,000 1,300,000 1,300,000 - Transfers-Out to Fleet Maintenance 475,000 400,000 400,000 - Total Other Uses 1,875,000 1,700,000 1,700,000 - TOTAL EXPENDITURES 17,250,108 17,814,663 18,427,208 612,545 NET SOURCE (USE) OF FUNDS 1,380,219 (956,909) (517,570) 439,339 FUND BALANCES, Beginning of Year 8,198,535 8,447,722 9,578,754 1,131,032 FUND BALANCES, End of Year 9,578,754$ 7,490,813$ 9,061,184$ 1,570,371$ FUND BALANCES: Restricted For: 3% TABOR Emergency Reserve 805,865$ 693,001$ 805,865$ 112,864$ Unassigned: 27% Minimum Reserve Balance 4,590,029 4,809,959 4,975,346 165,387 Undesignated, Unreserved 4,182,860 1,987,853 3,279,973 1,292,120 TOTAL FUND BALANCES 9,578,754$ 7,490,813$ 9,061,184$ 1,570,371$ Fund Summary General Fund #10 Supplemental Amendment No. 1 ATTACHMENT B Original Amended Difference Account Actual Budget Budget Increase Number Description 2020 2021 2021 (Decrease) Taxes: 51101 General Property Tax 2,041,834$ 2,045,905$ 2,045,905$ -$ 51102 General Property Tax - Delinquencies - 500 500 - 51103 General Property Tax - Interest 3,128 1,500 1,500 - 51104 General Property Tax - Abatements - - - - 51201 Specific Ownership Tax 114,434 115,000 115,000 - 51301 Sales Tax 9,104,790 8,476,984 9,104,790 627,806 51302 Utility Tax 102,442 115,000 115,000 - 51303 Accommodation Tax 1,217,531 1,040,789 1,217,531 176,742 51304 Penalties and Interest 46,899 35,000 35,000 - 51305 Sales Tax Audit Assessments 67,230 10,000 10,000 - 51307 VAA Retail Sales Fee 870,964 855,000 855,000 - 51308 Cigarette Excise Tax 250,995 210,000 250,995 40,995 51309 Tobacco Add-on Sales Tax 214,907 185,000 214,907 29,907 51402 Franchise Fees 428,495 435,000 435,000 - 51000 Total Taxes 14,463,649 13,525,678 14,401,128 875,450 Licenses and Permits: 52101 Liquor Licenses 5,663 12,500 12,500 - 52102 Business Licenses 95,900 75,000 75,000 - 52103 Contractor's Licenses 14,190 12,000 12,000 - 52104 Tobacco/Cigarette Licenses 1,750 1,500 1,500 - 52105 Booting/Towing Licenses 600 500 500 - 52201 Building Permits 205,299 190,000 190,000 - 52205 Road Cut Permits 5,170 8,000 8,000 - 52207 Mobile Vendor Cart Permits 350 600 600 - 52000 Total Licenses and Permits 328,922 300,100 300,100 - Intergovernmental: Federal Grants: 53106 Click It or Ticket 5,500 3,000 3,000 - 53107 Ballistic Vests 2,206 2,000 2,000 - 53108 CARES Act 713,837 - - - 53204 LEAF Grant 1,916 - - - State Grants 53206 High Visibility Grant 24,882 20,000 20,000 - 53207 POST I70 Training Grants 37,717 21,000 21,000 - 53208 DOLA Grants 4,215 47,000 47,000 - 53209 Avon's Best and Brightest 23,591 - - - 53299 Other State Grants (DOLA)6,173 - - - Local Government/Other Agency Revenue Detail General Fund Supplemental Amendment No. 1 ATTACHMENT B Original Amended Difference Account Actual Budget Budget Increase Number Description 2020 2021 2021 (Decrease) Revenue Detail General Fund Supplemental Amendment No. 1 53405 El Pomar Grant 2,500 - - - 53900 Other Local Grants 6,804 5,000 5,000 - State/County Shared Revenue: 53301 Conservation Trust 67,312 73,500 73,500 - 53302 Motor Vehicle Registration 24,472 24,800 24,800 - 53303 Highway User's Tax 168,012 168,430 168,430 - 53305 County Sales Tax 507,823 500,000 500,000 - 53306 Road & Bridge Fund 150,268 144,000 144,000 - 53308 State Severance Tax 488 750 750 - 53000 Total Intergovernmental 1,747,716 1,009,480 1,009,480 - Charges for Services: General Government: 54102 Photocopying Charges - 100 100 - 54103 License Hearing Fees - 100 100 - 54104 Other Fees and Charges 2,418 2,000 2,000 - 54105 CC & Paper Filing Fees 2,281 2,500 2,500 - Special Events 54672 Concession Sales - - 54,400 54,400 54676 Sponsorships - - 10,000 10,000 54678 Event Fees 550 400 13,600 13,200 54679 Special Event Admission Fees - - 3,000 3,000 Community Development: 54201 Plan Check Fees 122,058 120,000 120,000 - 54672 Subdivision Review Fees - - - - 54203 Design Review Fees 19,282 15,000 15,000 - 54204 Animal Control Fees - 150 150 - 54206 Fire Impact Fee Administration Fees 1,624 1,500 1,500 - Public Safety: 54301 Police Reports 1,286 1,000 1,000 - 54302 Off-duty Police Employment 25,172 25,000 25,000 - 54303 Fingerprinting Fees 740 500 500 - 54304 VIN Inspection Fees 2,440 1,800 1,800 - 54305 False Alarm Fees/Misc Police Dept Fees 5 75 75 - 54306 National Night Out 1,500 1,500 1,500 - 54399 DUI Reimbursement 10,043 15,000 15,000 - Avon Recreation Center: 54601 Admission Fees 432,963 550,000 550,000 - 54602 Program Fees 15,170 7,945 7,945 - 54603 Facility Rentals 2,717 - - - 54604 Merchandise Sales 2,804 4,596 4,596 - 54606 Rec Center Services 3,970 5,004 5,004 - 54607 Fitness Program Revenues 11,712 12,000 12,000 - 54610 Swim Team Revenue 38,629 50,112 50,112 - 54611 Private Lessons 13,174 21,000 21,000 - General Recreation: 54651 Adult Program Revenues 6,554 - - - ATTACHMENT B Original Amended Difference Account Actual Budget Budget Increase Number Description 2020 2021 2021 (Decrease) Revenue Detail General Fund Supplemental Amendment No. 1 54652 Cabin Equipment Rentals 59,151 60,000 60,000 - 54653 Athletic Field Rentals 490 2,000 2,000 - 54680 Youth Program Revenues 156,541 160,000 160,000 - 54680 Pavillion Rentals 555 500 2,000 1,500 54000 Total Charges for Services 933,829 1,059,782 1,141,882 82,100 Fines and Forfeitures: 55101 Court Fines - Traffic 24,661 23,000 23,000 - 55102 Court Fines - Criminal 6,201 10,000 10,000 - 55103 Court Fines - Parking 4,185 6,700 6,700 - 55105 Court Costs 2,586 4,000 4,000 - 55106 Jury Fees - 100 100 - 55107 Bond Forfeitures - 100 100 - 55110 Police Training Surcharge 2,690 3,000 3,000 - 55120 Police Forfeiture Revenue (629) - - - 55000 Total Fines and Forfeitures 39,694 46,900 46,900 - 57101 Investment Earnings 218,938 150,000 150,000 - Miscellaneous Revenues: 58101 Recreational Amenity Fees 310,984 305,000 305,000 - 58201 Lease of Town-Owned Property 31,525 58,500 58,500 - 58999 Miscellaneous Nonclassified Revenues 307,756 125,000 125,000 - 58000 Total Miscellaneous Revenues 650,265 488,500 488,500 - ATTACHMENT B Department Expenditure Summaries Original Amended Difference Dept./Div.Actual Budget Budget Increase Number Description 2020 2021 2021 (Decrease) General Government: 111 Mayor and Town Council 279,585$ 292,101$ 295,825$ 3,724$ 113 Town Attorney 212,972 205,000 255,000 50,000 115 Town Clerk 132,617 135,652 135,652 - 121 Municipal Court 93,189 134,547 134,547 - 131 Town Manager 364,058 423,644 517,382 93,738 133 Community Relations 202,096 248,119 276,740 28,621 134 Economic Development - 158,700 162,774 4,074 136 Special Events 825,625 514,898 912,254 397,356 137 Community Grants 197,117 94,150 94,150 - 138 COVID19 - - - - Subtotal General Government 2,307,259 2,206,811 2,784,324 577,513 Human Resources: 132 Human Resources 511,699 593,786 593,786 - Finance and IT: 141 Finance 926,999 994,292 1,002,894 8,602 143 Information Systems 459,548 457,892 457,892 - 149 Nondepartmental 642,405 598,959 610,927 11,968 Subtotal Finance and IT 2,028,952 2,051,143 2,071,713 20,570 Total General Government and Finance 4,847,910 4,851,740 5,449,823 598,083 Community Development: 220 Boards and Commissions 329,204 21,177 21,177 - 212 Planning 298,600 298,600 - 213 Building Inspection 179,925 224,384 224,384 - Total Community Development 509,129 544,161 544,161 - . Police Department: 311 Administration 825,044 844,494 844,494 - 312 Patrol 2,851,415 3,009,938 3,012,938 3,000 313 Investigations 308,006 334,125 334,125 - Total Police Department 3,984,465 4,188,557 4,191,557 3,000 Public Works Engineering: 412 Engineering 265,778 270,215 270,215 - 418 Buildings and Facilities 1,278,756 1,282,870 1,282,870 - Roads and Bridges: 413 Roads and Bridges 2,283,864 2,615,781 2,615,781 - 415 Parks and Grounds 502,199 619,179 619,179 - Total Public Works Department 4,330,597 4,788,045 4,788,045 - General Fund Supplemental Amendment No. 1 ATTACHMENT B Department Expenditure Summaries Original Amended Difference Dept./Div.Actual Budget Budget Increase Number Description 2020 2021 2021 (Decrease) General Fund Supplemental Amendment No. 1 Recreation Department: 514 Administration 246,864 263,139 263,139 - 515 Adult Programs 52,994 35,703 35,703 - 516 Aquatics 686,992 623,524 626,736 3,212 518 Fitness 137,542 125,677 125,677 - 519 Guest Services 347,129 350,061 350,061 - 521 Youth Programs 149,110 187,286 195,536 8,250 523 Community Swim Programs 82,376 156,770 156,770 - Total Recreation 1,703,007 1,742,160 1,753,622 11,462 TOTAL OPERATING EXPENDITURES 15,375,108$ 16,114,663$ 16,727,208$ 612,545$ ATTACHMENT B Fund Summary Proposed Original Revised Difference Actual Budget Budget Increase 2020 2021 2021 (Decrease) REVENUES Taxes 5,998,950$ 2,500,000$ 3,300,000$ 800,000$ Intergovernmental 32,040 - 69,000 69,000 Investment Earnings 92,480 50,000 50,000 - Other Revenue 770 - - - Total Revenues 6,124,240 2,550,000 3,419,000 869,000 Other Sources: Transfer In from Other Funds 700,000 848,500 848,500 - Total Other Sources 700,000 848,500 848,500 - TOTAL REVENUES AND OTHER SOURCES 6,824,240 3,398,500 4,267,500 869,000 EXPENDITURES Capital Improvements: Facilities 490,210 1,484,840 2,439,863 955,023 Land and Land Improvements 79,006 968,000 988,705 20,705 Roads and Streets 1,109,419 2,367,000 2,558,373 191,373 Utility Projects 289,803 - 285,894 285,894 Communications and Technology 142,756 357,000 594,534 237,534 Debt Service: Capital Leases 81,999 81,999 81,999 - Total Expenditures 2,193,193 5,258,839 6,949,368 1,690,529 Other Uses Operating Transfer-Out - General Fund 247,314 247,314 341,648 94,334 Operating Transfer-Out - Debt Service Fund 1,007,801 967,385 967,385 - Operating Transfer-Out - Mobility Fund - 500,000 600,000 100,000 Operating Transfer-Out - Fleet Maintenance Fund - 193,460 193,460 - Operating Transfer-Out - Equipment Replacement Fund - 425,000 425,000 - Total Other Uses 1,255,115 2,333,159 2,527,493 194,334 TOTAL EXPENDITURES AND OTHER USES 3,448,308 7,591,998 9,476,861 1,884,863 NET SOURCE (USE) OF FUNDS 3,375,932 (4,193,498) (5,209,361) (1,015,863) FUND BALANCE, Beginning of Year 8,722,351 7,222,383 12,098,283 4,875,900 FUND BALANCE, End of Year 12,098,283$ 3,028,885$ 6,888,922$ 3,860,037$ Fund Balances Restricted For: Asphalt Overlay 657,821$ 108,421$ 450,230$ 341,809$ Assigned For: Tract G/URA Projects 484,108 1,040,000 899,108 (140,892) Unreserved 10,956,354 1,880,464 5,539,584 3,659,120 Total Fund Balances 12,098,283$ 3,028,885$ 6,888,922$ 3,860,037$ Capital Projects Fund #41 Supplemental Amendment No. 1 ATTACHMENT C Proposed Original Revised Difference Account Actual Budget Budget Increase Number Description 2020 2021 2021 (Decrease) Taxes: 51401 Real Estate Transfer Tax 5,976,990$ 2,500,000$ 3,300,000$ 800,000$ 51304 Penalties and Interest 21,960 - - - 51000 Total Taxes 5,998,950 2,500,000 3,300,000 800,000 Intergovernmental: Federal / State: DOLA - Broadband Grant - - 25,000 25,000 Colorado Energy Office - 2020 Charge Ahead Grant 32,040 - - - Colorado Energy Office - 2021 Charge Ahead Grant - - 44,000 44,000 53000 Total Intergovernmental 32,040 - 69,000 69,000 Investment Earnings: 57101 Interest Earnings 92,480 50,000 50,000 - 57000 Total Investment Earnings 92,480 50,000 50,000 - Other Revenues: 58999 Nonclassified Revenues 770 - - - 58000 Total Other Revenues 770 - - - Other Sources: Transfer In from Avon URA: 59201 Tract G Projects 700,000 700,000 700,000 - Transfer in from Community Enhancement Fund 59201 West Avon Preserve Trail Improvements - 28,500 28,500 - 59201 Powerline Undergrounding - 120,000 120,000 - 59000 Total Other Sources 700,000 848,500 848,500 - 50000 TOTAL REVENUES 6,824,240$ 3,398,500$ 4,267,500$ 869,000$ Revenue Detail Capital Projects Fund #41 Supplemental Amendment No. 1 ATTACHMENT C (1)(2)(3)(4)(1+2+4) Proposed Revised 2019 and Original Amended Estimated Difference Account Prior Actual Budget Budget Project-to-Date Increase Number Description Actuals 2020 2021 2021 Expenditures Current Proposed (Decrease)Project Status CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS Facilities: General Government Facilities: 11009 Town Hall Control System -$ 10,924$ -$ -$ 10,924$ 10,715$ 10,715$ -$ Completed - 2020 11012 Tenant Finish Construction - NTH 4,864,853 22,914 - - 4,887,767 4,774,516 4,774,516 - Completed - 2020 11020 Fiber - Pavilion to NTH 46,192 6,247 - 17,561 70,000 70,000 70,000 - Carryover. To Be Completed - 2021 11021 Level 2 EV Charging Station - NTH - 5,322 - - 5,322 5,000 5,000 - Completed - 2020 11022 New Town Hall Security Upgrades - 105,423 - - 105,423 125,000 125,000 - Completed - 2020 11023 New Town Hall 2nd and 3rd Floor Updates - 3,335 100,000 96,665 100,000 100,000 100,000 - Carryover. To Be Completed - 2021 Old Town Hall Site: 11019 Utility Upgrade - 144,169 - 305,831 450,000 450,000 450,000 - Carryover. To Be Completed - 2021 11024 Asbestos Mitigation / Demolition - 1,200 525,000 523,800 525,000 525,000 525,000 - Carryover. To Be Completed - 2021 11025 Restrooms - Nottingham Park OTH Site - - 85,000 85,000 85,000 935,000 935,000 - New Project 2021 Public Safety Facilities: 12006 PSF Parking Lot Canopy Design - - 20,000 20,000 20,000 20,000 20,000 - New Project 2021 Wildridge Emergency Warning Siren - - - 26,000 26,000 - 26,000 26,000 New Project 2021 Transportation Facilities: 14010 Fleet Maintenance EPDM Roof Replacement - - 300,000 300,000 300,000 300,000 300,000 - New Project 2021 14019 Bus Shelter - Piedmont Apartments - - 30,000 30,000 30,000 30,000 30,000 - New Project 2021 Cultural and Recreational Facilities: 15018 Pavilion - Retractable Door 252,195 40,574 - - 292,769 290,700 290,700 - Completed - 2020 15019 Pavilion - Deck Railing and Floor Replacement - 95,434 - 330,166 425,600 425,600 425,600 - Carryover. To Be Completed - 2021 15020 Recreation Center Weight Room Expansion 456,983 3,565 - - 460,548 500,000 500,000 - Completed - 2020 15021 Recreation Center Locker Replacement - - - 200,000 200,000 200,000 200,000 - Carryover. To Be Completed - 2021 15023 Recreation Center HVAC Upgrade - - 250,000 250,000 250,000 250,000 250,000 - New Project 2021 15024 Recreation Center ADA Parking - - 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 - New Project 2021 Recreation Center Yogo Studio Bathroom Conversion - - - 25,000 25,000 - 25,000 25,000 New Project 2021 Project Expenditures Total Project Budget CIP Projects Inventory Capital Projects Fund #41 Supplemental Amendment No. 1 ATTACHMENT C (1)(2)(3)(4)(1+2+4) Proposed Revised 2019 and Original Amended Estimated Difference Account Prior Actual Budget Budget Project-to-Date Increase Number Description Actuals 2020 2021 2021 Expenditures Current Proposed (Decrease)Project Status CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS Project Expenditures Total Project Budget CIP Projects Inventory Capital Projects Fund #41 Supplemental Amendment No. 1 15025 Metcalf Family Cabin Feasibility Analysis - - 20,000 20,000 20,000 20,000 20,000 - New Project 2021 Other Facilities: 13013 Swift Gulch Housing Design - - 120,000 120,000 120,000 120,000 120,000 - New Project 2021 19005 2120 Saddle Ridge Loop (Fire Station) Improve.36,160 - 24,840 24,840 61,000 61,000 61,000 - Carryover. To Be Completed - 2021 19006 DC Fast EV Charging Station - Tract A - 51,103 - - 51,103 75,000 75,000 - Completed - 2020 Level 2 Charging Station and DC Fast EV Charging Statio - - - 55,000 55,000 - 55,000 55,000 New Project 2021 Land and Land Improvements: 21022 Eagle River Whitewater Park Repair 215,758 20,200 - - 235,958 245,758 245,758 - Completed - 2020 21027 O'Neil Spur Park Improvements Design 1,988 - - 18,012 20,000 20,000 20,000 - Carryover. To Be Completed - 2021 21053 Resurface Pickleball Courts - - 100,000 100,000 100,000 100,000 100,000 - New Project 2021 21054 Wildland Fire Mitigation - 22,859 40,000 40,000 NA NA NA - Ongoing 21055 Power Line Undergrounding - - 120,000 120,000 120,000 120,000 120,000 - New Project 2021 21056 West Nottingham Park Improvements/Soccer Field - 9,307 268,000 270,693 280,000 280,000 280,000 - Carryover. To Be Completed - 2021 21057 O'Neil Spur Park Parkiing Lot Rebuild - - 100,000 100,000 100,000 100,000 100,000 - New Project 2021 21058 Restrooms - Nottingham Lake Beach - - 50,000 50,000 50,000 500,000 500,000 - New Project 2021 21059 Nottingham Park Benches - 26,640 - - 26,640 26,640 26,640 - Completed - 2020 21060 Nottingham Park Light Upgrade- Phase 2 - - 190,000 190,000 190,000 190,000 190,000 - New Project 2021 21061 Beach Expansion - - 100,000 100,000 100,000 100,000 100,000 - New Project 2021 Roads and Streets: Streetscape Improvements 31030 Mall Activation Elements - 15,088 - 14,912 30,000 30,000 30,000 - Carryover. To Be Completed - 2021 31031 Avon Rd./I70 Aesthicis Improvements 8,465 44,668 900,000 995,112 1,048,245 1,048,245 1,048,245 - Carryover. To Be Completed - 2021 ATTACHMENT C (1)(2)(3)(4)(1+2+4) Proposed Revised 2019 and Original Amended Estimated Difference Account Prior Actual Budget Budget Project-to-Date Increase Number Description Actuals 2020 2021 2021 Expenditures Current Proposed (Decrease)Project Status CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS Project Expenditures Total Project Budget CIP Projects Inventory Capital Projects Fund #41 Supplemental Amendment No. 1 Annual Street Maintenance and Repair: 32026 Retaining Wall Repairs - Nottingham & Swift Gulch Rd.- - 150,000 150,000 150,000 150,000 150,000 - New Project 2021 33219 Annual Guard Rail Improvements - 38,668 40,000 40,000 NA NA NA - Ongoing 33103 Eaglebend Dr. Resurfacing 1,040 189,189 - - 190,229 225,000 225,000 - Completed - 2020 32028 Yoder Ave. Asphalt Overlay 3,930 202,611 - - 206,541 550,000 550,000 - Completed - 2020 32034 Buck Creek Repairs - 11,651 800,000 788,349 800,000 800,000 800,000 - Carryover. To Be Completed - 2021 32031 Mikaela Way and Benchmark Rd.- - 400,000 400,000 400,000 400,000 400,000 - New Project 2021 32032 Hurd Lane Intersection Improvements - - 20,000 20,000 20,000 20,000 20,000 - New Project 2021 Street Improvements 32029 Benchmark Rd. On-street Parking 37,952 552,940 - - 590,892 600,000 600,000 - Completed - 2020 Multi-Modal/Alternative Mobility: 34033 East and West B/C Blvd. Street Rebuild 3,988,243 2,140 - - 3,990,383 4,025,943 4,025,943 - Completed - 2019 34040 West B/C Blvd./ Beach On-steet Parking Imp.- - - 150,000 150,000 350,000 150,000 (200,000) New Project 2021 Recreational Trails Program: 34043 West Avon Preserve Trail Improvements - 52,464 57,000 - 52,464 57,000 57,000 - Completed - 2020 Utility Projects: 21026 Nottingham Rd. Debris Flow Improvements and Water Qua 164,303 35,831 - 224,866 425,000 425,000 425,000 - Carryover. To Be Completed - 2021 21028 Avon Road Water Quality Vault Projects - 253,972 - 61,028 315,000 484,000 315,000 (169,000) Carryover. To Be Completed - 2021 ATTACHMENT C (1)(2)(3)(4)(1+2+4) Proposed Revised 2019 and Original Amended Estimated Difference Account Prior Actual Budget Budget Project-to-Date Increase Number Description Actuals 2020 2021 2021 Expenditures Current Proposed (Decrease)Project Status CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS Project Expenditures Total Project Budget CIP Projects Inventory Capital Projects Fund #41 Supplemental Amendment No. 1 Communications and Technology: 81011 Broadband - - - 125,000 125,000 125,000 125,000 - Carryover. To Be Completed - 2021 81012 Fiber - CDOT Hand hold to PSF - - 80,000 80,000 80,000 80,000 80,000 - New Project 2021 81013 RR Bridge LED Messaging Boards - - 75,000 75,000 75,000 75,000 75,000 - New Project 2021 81014 Permanent Variable Message Boards (3)- - 150,000 150,000 150,000 150,000 150,000 - New Project 2021 81015 Finance/Comm Dev. ERP System - 142,756 - 82,534 225,290 225,290 225,290 - Carryover. To Be Completed - 2021 81016 Mini-split NTH Data Center - - 20,000 20,000 20,000 20,000 20,000 - New Project 2021 81017 Firearms Simulator - - 32,000 32,000 32,000 32,000 32,000 - New Project 2021 81018 Hybrid Meeting Technicl Improvements - - - 30,000 30,000 - - - New Project 2021 Total Capital Improvement Projects 10,078,062$ 2,111,194$ 5,176,840$ 6,867,369$ 18,915,098$ 20,852,407$ 20,589,407$ (263,000)$ ATTACHMENT C Original Amended Difference Actual Budget Budget (Increase) 2020 2021 2021 Decrease REVENUES Charges for Services: Rental Revenues - Employees 49,384$ 49,068$ 49,068$ -$ Investment Earnings 151 32 32 - Other Revenue: Bond Issuance Fees 9,768 10,000 9,514 (486) Loan Principal Repayment 3,589 2,636 2,636 - Miscellaneous Nonclassified Revenues 1,499,700 - - - Total Operating Revenues 1,562,592 61,736 61,250 (486) Other Sources Operating Transfers-In: General Fund 250,000 - - - Total Other Sources 250,000 - - - TOTAL REVENUES 1,812,592 61,736 61,250 (486) EXPENDITURES General Government: Community Housing 479,329 900,000 1,106,731 206,731 Total Operating Expenditures 479,329 900,000 1,106,731 206,731 TOTAL EXPENDITURES 479,329 900,000 1,106,731 206,731 NET SOURCE (USE) OF FUNDS 1,333,263 (838,264) (1,045,481) (207,217) FUND BALANCES, Beginning of Year 832,594 1,986,773 2,165,857 179,084 FUND BALANCES, End of Year 2,165,857$ 1,148,509$ 1,120,376$ (28,133)$ Fund Summary Community Housing Fund #25 Supplemental Amendment No. 1 ATTACHMENT D Original Amended Difference Actual Budget Budget (Increase) 2020 2021 2021 Decrease REVENUES Other Revenues Disposable Paper Bag Fee 27,066$ -$ -$ -$ Total Operating Revenues 27,066 - - - TOTAL REVENUES 27,066 - - - EXPENDITURES General Government: Waste Reduction and Recycling 14,699 36,000 67,000 31,000 Total Operating Expenditures 14,699 36,000 67,000 31,000 TOTAL EXPENDITURES 14,699 36,000 67,000 31,000 NET SOURCE (USE) OF FUNDS 12,367 (36,000) (67,000) (31,000) FUND BALANCES, Beginning of Year 88,733 76,787 101,100 24,313 FUND BALANCES, End of Year 101,100$ 40,787$ 34,100$ (6,687)$ Fund Summary Disposable Paper Bag Fee Fund #28 Supplemental Amendment #1 ATTACHMENT E Original Amended Difference Actual Budget Budget (Increase) 2020 2021 2021 Decrease REVENUES Taxes 41,634$ 41,597$ 41,597$ -$ Intergovernmental 646,470 2,245,980 3,613,708 1,367,728 Charges for Services 263,715 273,930 273,930 - Other Revenues 106,112 107,243 107,243 - Total Operating Revenues 1,057,931 2,668,750 4,036,478 1,367,728 Other Sources Sales of Capital Assets 2,379 - - - Transfers In from General Fund 1,150,000 1,300,000 1,300,000 - Transfers In from Capital Projects Fund - 500,000 600,000 100,000 Total Other Sources 1,152,379 1,800,000 1,900,000 100,000 TOTAL REVENUES 2,210,310 4,468,750 5,936,478 1,467,728 EXPENDITURES Administration 272,110 270,058 270,058 - Transit Operations 1,204,636 3,757,918 4,384,285 626,367 Washbay 175,737 222,169 222,169 - Mobility Programs 326,591 313,375 313,375 - TOTAL EXPENDITURES 1,979,074 4,563,520 5,189,887 626,367 NET SOURCE (USE) OF FUNDS 231,236 (94,770) 746,591 841,361 FUND BALANCES, Beginning of Year 485,286 496,615 716,522 219,907 FUND BALANCES, End of Year 716,522$ 401,845$ 1,463,113$ 1,061,268$ Fund Summary Mobility Enterprise Fund #52 Supplemental Amendment #1 ATTACHMENT F Proposed Original Amended Difference Acct.Actual Budget Budget (Increase) Number Description 2020 2021 2021 Decrease Taxes: Property Taxes 51101 Property Tax/ Gates GID 41,597$ 41,597$ 41,597$ -$ 51103 Current & Delinquent interest 37 - - - 51000 Total Taxes 41,634 41,597 41,597 - Intergovernmental: Federal Grants: 53104 FTA Formula Grant for Rural Areas - 5311 245,980 245,980 245,980 - 53199 FTA Grant for Buses and Bus Facilities - 5339 - 400,000 800,000 400,000 53199 FTA Low or No-Emission Vehicle Program 533 - 1,600,000 1,600,000 - 53199 FTA - CRRSAA - 5311 - - 867,728 867,728 53199 CARES Act Grant Phase I 228,279 - - - 53199 CARES Act Grant Phase II 172,211 - - - 53199 CARES Act Grant Phase III - - 100,000 100,000 53000 Total Intergovernmental 646,470 2,245,980 3,613,708 1,367,728 Charges for Services: Transportation: 54501 Beaver Creek 119,660 127,000 127,000 - 54507 Wash Bay Services- External 106,242 100,000 100,000 - 54902 Wash Bay Services- Internal 37,813 46,930 46,930 - 54000 Total Charges for Services 263,715 273,930 273,930 - Other Revenues: 58201 Lease of Town-owned Property 82,431 82,790 82,790 - 58215 Sale of Electricty 10,877 21,453 21,453 - 58995 Bus Advertising Revenue 8,636 2,000 2,000 - 58996 Miscellaneous Reimbursement 108 - - - 58999 Miscellaneous Nonclassifed Revenue 4,060 1,000 1,000 - 58000 Total Other Revenues 106,112 107,243 107,243 - Other Sources: 59101 Sales of Capital Assets 2,379 - - - 59201 Transfers In from General Fund 1,150,000 1,300,000 1,300,000 - 59201 Transfers In from Capital Projects Fund - 500,000 600,000 100,000 59000 Total Other Sources 1,152,379 1,800,000 1,900,000 100,000 50000 TOTAL REVENUES 52$ 4,468,750$ 5,936,478$ 1,467,728$ Revenue Detail Mobility Enterprise Fund #52 Supplemental Amendment #1 ATTACHMENT F Original Amended Difference Actual Budget Budget (Increase) 2020 2021 2021 Decrease REVENUES Charges for Services: Equipment Replacement Charges -$ 750,789$ 750,789$ -$ Other Revenue Insurance Claim Reimbursements 28,615 - - - Total Operating Revenues 28,615 750,789 750,789 - Other Sources Transfers-In from Capital Projects Fund - 425,000 425,000 - Sales of Fixed Assets 78,393 35,000 35,000 - Total Other Sources 78,393 460,000 460,000 - TOTAL REVENUES 107,008 1,210,789 1,210,789 - EXPENDITURES Capital Outlay: Fleet and Heavy Equipment 95,880 990,505 990,505 - Recreation Center Equipment 46,854 3,331 153,331 150,000 Computer and Office Equipment 84,509 24,499 24,499 - Machinery and Equipment - 43,898 43,898 - Heat Recovery - - - - Total Operating Expenditures 227,243 1,062,233 1,212,233 150,000 TOTAL EXPENDITURES 227,243 1,062,233 1,212,233 150,000 NET SOURCE (USE) OF FUNDS (120,235) 148,556 (1,444) (150,000) FUND BALANCES, Beginning of Year 3,277,689 3,030,717 3,157,454 126,737 FUND BALANCES, End of Year 3,157,454$ 3,179,273$ 3,156,010$ (23,263)$ Fund Summary Equipment Replacement Internal Service Fund #63 Supplemental Amendment #1 ATTACHMENT G 970-748-4045 jhildreth@avon.org TO: Honorable Mayor Smith Hymes and Council Members FROM: Justin Hildreth, Town Engineer RE: West Beaver Creek Boulevard On-Street Parking Project DATE: April 20, 2021 SUMMARY: Staff requests Council direction on construction of temporary improvements to widen the existing shoulder on the north side of West Beaver Creek Boulevard with a gravel surface to better accommodate visitors to the beach area within Harry A. Nottingham Park. DISCUSSION: Initial design concepts include approximately seventy (70) angled parking spaces along an area 500’ either side of the existing Lot 16 crosswalk on West Beaver Creek Boulevard. Concepts also include a pedestrian path north of the parking area and enhanced signage and lighting. During a discussion of the Capital Improvements Projects Plan in a work session at the October 27, 2020 Town Council meeting, Council expressed desire to prioritize/accelerate parking for the beach within Harry A. Nottingham Park over other CIP items and subsequently allocated funds in the 2021 Capital Improvements Project plan. As outlined in a written report dated March 1, 2021 by Mobility Director Eva Wilson, and included in the March 9, 2021 Council packet, when the Project site and preferred design concepts were studied, it became apparent that a portion of the work would encroach upon the Colorado Department of Transportation (“CDOT”) I-70 right-of-way. Due to encroachments into the CDOT I-70 right-of-way and timeline of the required CDOT permit approval process, it is not possible to start construction of the preferred design in 2021. Also in the March 1, 2021 report, Town Manager Eric Heil directed Staff to proceed with design of the preferred angled parking concept and CDOT permit process for construction in 2022. Staff was also directed to explore possible widening of the existing shoulder on the north side of West Beaver Creek Boulevard with a gravel surface this spring and install additional signage to mark the boundaries for on-street parking and potentially enhance the existing crosswalk to improve safety. The interim work consists of gravel shoulder widening to 7-FEET to allow vehicles to parallel park completely off the existing asphalt and bike lane, re-routing the existing drainage ditch and relocating drainage structures. Engineering has reached out to local civil contractors and received two (2) proposals to complete the temporary shoulder widening project. The proposed widening would have an expected lifespan of one (1) to two (2) years and would be constructed on a time and materials basis with a cost not to exceed $99,000. CONSTRUCTION SCHEDULE: Both contractors have indicated they have resources available to begin the work in early May and complete the project by June 1st. FINANCIAL CONSIDERATIONS: The current Capital Projects Fund (“CPF”) budget includes $350,000 for the overall project in 2022. A Capital Projects Fund budget amendment will be required to move funds to 2021 for the interim shoulder widening project. Thank you, Justin ATTACHMENTS: Attachment A: March 1, 2021, Council Written Report from Eva Wilson Attachment B: April 16, 2021, WBCB Parking Public Notification Attachment C: Public Comments received via email and Engage Avon (970) 390-2014 ewilson@avon.org TO: Honorable Mayor Smith Hymes and Council members FROM: Eva Wilson, Mobility Director RE: Nottingham Park On-Street Parking Update DATE: March 1, 2021 SUMMARY: This report provides an update to Council on the status of the West Beaver Creek Boulevard on-street parking improvements north of the beach in Harry A. Nottingham Park. Council identified the need to improve on-street parking to incorporate pedestrian safety measures for beach goers parking on West Beaver Creek Boulevard. Over the last several summers, on-street parking on West Beaver Creek Boulevard during busy days extends far on either side of the Lot 16, North Nottingham Park pedestrian crossing. There is virtually no room outside the vehicle travel lane for beach/park patrons to walk from their car along West Beaver Creek Blvd to the pedestrian crossing. Council has recognized the need to improve the parking on the north side of Nottingham Park so that parking and pedestrian access to the beach/park area is safer, especially for households with children. View on West Beaver Creek Boulevard looking West above, looking East below. ATTACHMENT A: Page 2 of 3 Initial concept ideas include approximately 1,000’ of parking (approx. 70 angled parking spaces), a pedestrian path on the outside of the parking area along West Beaver Creek Blvd., and a pedestrian crossing at the Lot 16, North Nottingham Park with enhanced crossing signage and lighting. Council indicated a strong desire to complete this project in spring of 2021 and allocated funds in the 2021 Capital Improvements Project plan. The Colorado Department of Transportation (“CDOT”), controls the I-70 right-of-way adjacent to and on the north side of the proposed parking on West Beaver Creek Blvd. Due to required encroachments into the I- 70 CDOT right-of-way and the CDOT permit approval process for such work, it is not possible to start construction this project in 2021. LAND SURVEY: Preliminary Land Survey and Soils Investigation were commissioned as soon as possible last fall after Council provided direction to accelerate construction of this project. The survey and soils investigation work were completed in December 2020. The Land Survey findings: 1.There is a storm drain line and an Xcel high pressure gas line in the project area 2.The current edge of pavement is estimated as 22’’ from the I-70/CDOT Rights-of-Way (“ROW”) and is actually to the south of the existing wildlife fence. 3.A retaining wall may be needed, which may increase cost The proposed project would require 21’ for vehicles plus 6’ for pedestrian walkway plus 2’ for landscaping or retaining wall, for a total of 29’. The potential encroachment in the I-70/CDOT right-of-way may be 4-6’’. ATTACHMENT A: Page 3 of 3 REQUIRED STATE PERMIT APPROVALS: Any improvements by the Town of Avon that encroach into the I-70/CDOT ROW will require prior review and approval for Environment Clearance and Federal Highway Administration (“FHWA”) ROW encroachment approval. The state and federal process typically requires at least 6 months and may require as much as 18 months before a permit issued. Due to the current level of staffing, pending projects, and complexity of submitting a encroachment permit application to CDOT and FHWA, the Town would issue a Request for Qualifications to hire a traffic engineering firm with this expertise. FINANCIAL CONSIDERATIONS: The full cost of construction of paved angle parking, pedestrian path, improved pedestrian crossing and related retaining wall or landscaping is $1,200,000. Costs can be reduced by as much as half if the parking area is unpaved. The cost of the traffic engineering services is estimated to range from $50,000 to $130,000. The range is wide because we don’t know what work may be required by CDOT, FHWA and Xcel Energy. OPTIONS: The following options may be considered: 1.Construct parallel parking on West Beaver Creek Boulevard within the available right-of-way. This would include widening the shoulder approximately 4’. 2.Restripe the vehicle travel lanes 3’ feet to the south, which would eliminate the bike lane on the southside and allow 3’ more feet on the north side. 3.Apply to CDOT and FHWA for approval to encroach in the I-70/CDOT ROW and construct the project as initially planned, conduct a boundary survey, and retain the services of a traffic engineering and design firm. MANAGER’S COMMENTS: Due to the other investments in Harry A. Nottingham Park, I am proceeding with Option 3 with paved improvements so that this parking area is the safest, most convenient for beach/park goers, and consist with the high quality improvements planned throughout the Park. I will explore with Staff if it is possible to widen the existing shoulder on the north side of West Beaver Creek Boulevard with a gravel surface this spring, install additional parking signage to mark boundaries for on-street parking, and potentially improve the crossing area to improve safety. Thank you, Eva ATTACHMENT A: NOTICE OF NEIGHBORHOOD MEETING RE: WEST BEAVER CREEK BOULEVARD PROPOSED PARKING IMPROVEMENTS Notice is hereby given that the Community Development Department of the Town of Avon will host a virtual neighborhood meeting to solicit and receive public comments on proposed parking improvements on West Beaver Creek Boulevard. MEETING DATE: April 26, 2021 – 5:00pm VIA ZOOM – REGISTRATION AT WWW.AVON.ORG, DAY OF MEETING PLEASE CHECK TOP OF WEBSITE FOR ZOOM REGISTRATION SUMMARY/DESCRIPTION OF IMPROVEMENTS: Parking improvement options are proposed for the area of West Beaver Creek Boulevard immediately north of Harry A. Nottingham Park. Park users have been utilizing on-street parking for the past several years. The existing parking area spans approximately 1,300’ on the north side of West Beaver Creek Blvd, roughly centered at the park access/parking property (“Lot 16”). The goal of each option is to increase pedestrian safety for park users while minimizing negative impacts to the adjacent residential neighborhoods. Both options propose reducing and limiting the extent of parking on West Beaver Creek Boulevard to 1,000 linear feet. Both options would include enhancements for a pedestrian crossing at Lot 16, such as pedestrian crossing signs with pedestrian activated flashing lights. The options are described as follows: PHASE I: Parallel Off-Street Parking: This concept moves the current parking configuration [west bound parallel parking] immediately off the asphalt and bicycle lane, widening the shoulder by 7’. Approximately 42 spaces would be available in this arrangement. The parallel parking spaces would be constructed with crushed asphalt millings and compacted. Parking in this area would only be available in summer months. Initial construction estimates for this parking improvement is $150,000. The timeframe for this option is accelerated and could be constructed by potentially early June since none of the improvements extend into CDOT property. PHASE 2: Diagonal Off-Street Parking: This option would include approximately 80 diagonal spaces that would center on Lot 16. Diagonal Off-Street Parking would encroach slighting onto the CDOT/I-70 right-of- way, which would require a CDOT permitting and review process that could take 9-15 months. The spaces would be designed in 2021 and constructed as soon as Colorado Department of Transportation provides approval. There is no guaranteed approval, and initial design and construction estimates are over $1,200,000 for these spaces. ATTACHMENT B: VICINITY MAP: PUBLIC COMMENTS: You are welcome and encouraged to attend the scheduled Neighborhood Meeting via Zoom on the date and time stated above and you may submit public comments under EngageAvon on the Avon.org website or you may submit comments to Town Clerk Brenda Torres at btorres@avon.org, or Town of Avon, P.O. Box 975, Avon, CO 81620. Please contact Town Planner Matt Pielsticker, at mpielsticker@avon.org or (970) 748-4413, with any questions concerning these parking proposals. THANK YOU FOR YOUR INTEREST AND PARTICIPATION!! ATTACHMENT B: TO: Honorable Mayor Smith Hymes and Council members RE: Public Comments Received WBCB Parking DATE: Compiled on April 23, 2021 Council has received multiple public comments via email and through Engage Avon. The various comments are compiled below in chronological order. Private email addresses and phone numbers have been removed. From: Mbeded Sent: Tuesday, April 20, 2021 Engage Avon Guestbook Submission We need more parking in general. It’s already hard to find a spot on some days and when there’s an event you can find yourself circling the park multiple times looking for something. That side of the road is dead space anyway so the more we can maximize it the better. I’m willing to wait for Phase 2 than settle for phase 1. And if Phase 1 is going to end in the same amount of spaces or less than the current situation, I say skip it and don’t waste money on that. I don’t see any major benefits with Phase 1. From: Suzanne Fast Sent: Wednesday, April 21, 2021 1:50 AM To: Brenda Torres <btorres@avon.org> Subject: W beavercreek blvd parking To whom it may concern, I’m writing about the proposed changes to parking on west beavercreek blvd. I notice no option for moving the road closer to the highway and putting parking on the North side of the road. I have small children and meet other families of small children there every Monday during the summer, to enjoy some time at the beach. We come with strollers, wagons, chairs, bikes and toys. Navigating kids and all the stuff across a busy road is scary. I’ve tried using the 10 minute unloading parking , but I’m not going to leave a 2 and 4 year old unattended with all the stuff, while I park the car. Thanks for the consideration. -Suzanne Michlitsch ATTACHMENT C: Page 2 of 2 From: Johnny Brenner Sent: Thursday, April 22, 2021 5:01 PM To: Brenda Torres <btorres@avon.org> Subject: Avon New Parking Proposal Dear Brenda, I live at Beaver Bench Condos, but will not be able to attend the Zoom meeting. I would like to express my concerns. Proposal 2 for diagonal parking is an absolutely a terrible idea!!! People would be backing out on Beaver Creek Blvd., even if there is room to do otherwise. This would create huge clusters. What about emergency vehicles? What about bikers? I can’t believe this is even being considered, and at a ridiculous cost to tax payers. Do we really need extra parking in that specific area? Is it really even necessary to get more people around the lake on a daily basis? This is trying to expand this area beyond its functional capacity. Are the locals in the area even being considered? NO to additional parking on Beaver Creek Blvd. From: Barb Layman Sent: Thursday, April 22, 2021 Engage Avon Guestbook Submission I prefer Phase 2 but owning a place at the end of the road makes it very difficult to drive on the road and there are many safety concerns with cars travelling by while parked car people are unloading their cars and have car doors open and trying to cross the street at all locations - it seems like an accident waiting to happen. I can't tell from the diagrams but possibly the parking could be moved to the lake side of the road, so the children and others don't have to cross in front of traffic? ATTACHMENT C: AVON REGULAR MEETING MINUTES TUESDAY APRIL 13, 2021 SETUP AS A VIRTUAL MEETING VIA ZOOM DUE TO COVID-19 1. CALL TO ORDER AND ROLL CALL Video Start Time: 00:01:31 Part One The meeting was hosted in a virtual format, using Zoom.us. Mayor Smith Hymes called the meeting to order at 5:00 p.m. A roll call was taken, and Council members present by video/audio were Lindsay Hardy, Scott Prince, Tamra Underwood, RJ Andrade, and Amy Phillips. Councilor Thuon was absent. Also present were Town Manager Eric Heil, Town Attorney Paul Wisor, Chief of Police Greg Daily, Planning Director Matt Pielsticker, General Government Manager Ineke de Jong, and Town Clerk Brenda Torres. Councilor Thuon joined at 5:01 p.m. EXECUTIVE SESSION FOR THE PURPOSE OF RECEIVING LEGAL ADVICE CONCERNING WATER RIGHTS AND WATER AGREEMENTS PURSUANT TO § 24-6-402(4)(B), C.R.S. Video Start Time: 00:00:01 Part One Mayor Pro Tem Phillips moved to move into Executive Session for the purpose of receiving legal advice concerning water rights and water agreements pursuant to § 24-6-402(4)(b), C.R.S. Councilor Underwood seconded the motion and the motion passed with a vote of 7 to 0. The time was 4:00 p.m. For the record, Mayor Smith Hymes said there will not be any action taken and that Executive Session is simply to receive legal advice. Council went into a different Zoom link for the virtual Executive Session. The Executive Session started at 4:05 p.m. The Executive Session ended at 4:48 p.m. 2. APPROVAL OF AGENDA Video Start Time: 00:02:15 Part One Mayor Pro Tem Phillips moved to approve the agenda as presented. Councilor Andrade seconded the motion and the motion passed with a vote of 7 to 0. 3. DISCLOSURE OF ANY CONFLICTS OF INTEREST RELATED TO AGENDA ITEMS Video Start Time: 00:03:03 Part One Town Attorney Paul Wisor expressed he will recuse himself from agenda item 5.1 work session on off- road vehicles and Road 779 as his parents live next to the road. His colleague Andrea Bryan from the G&H office will be available to assist with legal advice for this agenda item. Town Attorney Paul Wisor than disclosed that for agenda item 5.5 Riverfront Lot 1 Townhomes discussion it is possible that any realtor in future can get monetary gain from this once the units go on the market. He suggested Council to make a motion to let Councilors Thuon, Phillips and Prince be part of the discussion as they will have the same opportunity as any other realtor in the valley. Mayor Smith Hymes moved to waive any conflict of interests that may arise by Councilors Thuon, Phillips and Prince being compensated in the future in connection with any transaction related to Riverfront Lot 1 Townhomes, pursuant to section 2.30.060 (11) of the Avon Town Code. Councilor Hardy seconded the motion and the motion passed with a vote of 4 to 0. Councilors Thuon, Phillips and Prince abstained from the vote. AVON REGULAR MEETING MINUTES TUESDAY APRIL 13, 2021 SETUP AS A VIRTUAL MEETING VIA ZOOM DUE TO COVID-19 Councilor Hardy disclosed she is directly involved in the project for agenda item 5.5 Riverfront Lot 1 Townhomes and asked to be recused. Councilor Prince moved to recuse Councilor Hardy from item 5.5. Mayor Pro Tem Phillips seconded the motion and the motion passed with a vote of 6 to 0. Councilor Hardy abstained from the vote. 4. PUBLIC COMMENT Video Start Time: 00:12:03 Part One Mayor Smith Hymes explained to the public how to participate via video/audio, via telephone, or via email for public comments. Ruth Stanley, an Avon Resident, commented. She asked about the status of the West Beaver Creek Boulevard parking. She mentioned she is extremely concerned about people speeding up coming from the park and that she almost got hit yesterday. Staff explained they are looking at options and rough sketches to be used for community outreach are currently in the works. Ruth Stanley also wanted to know about the lights in the park that have been out for a few weeks and wondered when the electricity will come back on. Staff explained the contractor that was doing the utility work at old Town Hall fell behind and was fired. The new contractor is trying to finish as quickly as possible, and we expect the power will be back on by Thursday. Councilor Thuon got disconnected at 5:18 p.m. 5. BUSINESS ITEMS 5.1. WORK SESSION: OFF ROAD VEHICLES (CHIEF OF POLICE GREG DALY) Video Start Time: 00:21:27 Part One Town Attorney Paul Wisor recused himself from this item and Andrea Bryan joined at 5:20 p.m. Chief Daly and Planning Director Matt Pielsticker joined the meeting. There was an extensive Council discussion on covenants, status quo and what the status was when Wildridge homeowners bought their residence. Councilor Thuon rejoined at 5:38 p.m. Councilor Underwood got disconnected but quickly rejoined at 5:50 p.m. Mayor Smith Hymes asked for public comments and several public comments were made. Robert Tadlock, with Rocky Mountain Sport Riders, said he is in support of legitimizing Off Highway Vehicles (OHV) on roads. He said it works well in Gypsum and Eagle and allows for proper education. He offered his support with education. Charley Viola, a Wildridge resident, said he is support of the continued use of OHV on roads. He said that for people who bought a Wildridge home while it was prohibited, it was still common practice, and it should not be a grey area. AVON REGULAR MEETING MINUTES TUESDAY APRIL 13, 2021 SETUP AS A VIRTUAL MEETING VIA ZOOM DUE TO COVID-19 Dee Wisor, a Wildridge resident, said he opposes to OHV on roads. He said this is about use of the roads, not jurisdiction over 779 or 719 and that this involved Wildridge covenants and State law/statute. He said the Town has the right but not the obligation to enforce the covenants. Dave Dantas and Devon DeCrausaz, Wildridge residents, said they are in support of allowing OHV to get to the trailhead. Jack Gardner, a Wildridge resident, said the focus seems to be on Wildridge streets, but what about other streets in Avon. He mentioned he objects OHV on roads for safety concerns. He said licensing is a big step and is important and that often OHV users go high speeds and are underaged drivers. He has concerns about the non-complying users. Craig Lathram, a Wildridge resident, echoed comments in support of allowing OHV to get to the trailheads and thanked Council for taking up the issue and getting something formalized. James Harris, a Wildridge resident, said he is in support of allowing OHV. He said that signage about laws/ordinance may slow down the kids that are now doing this illegally and are perhaps trying to get to their house very quickly as they know they are not officially allowed to do this. Spencer Ball, a Wildridge resident, said he is also in support of an ordinance to allow OHV on roads. He said he is in support of educating kids about speeds and noise. Tisch Plavec, a Wildridge resident, said he is also in support of an ordinance to allow OHV on roads. Avon prides itself on activities and recreation for all which includes OHV. She said that cars also speed up/down the road, it is not just motorcycles. James Harris made a quick second comment and said his neighbor is selling his house because there is no more snowmobile access from Wildridge. Mayor Smith Hymes got disconnected at 6:29 p.m. and rejoined at 6:31 p.m. Councilor Hardy expressed that if the Town enforces this part of the covenants, others should also be enforced. Council asked staff to draft an ordinance at which point Council can further discuss. 5.2. WORK SESSION: REAL ESTATE TRANSFER TAX (TOWN MANAGER ERIC HEIL) Video Start Time: 0 1:41:07 Part One Andrea Bryan got disconnected and Town Attorney Paul Wisor rejoined at 6:39 p.m. Town Manager Eric Heil took Council through the PPT included in the packet for the benefit of the public. The presentation was a group effort of several staff members. Staff is looking for direction on whether any information is missing and needs to be added and direction on whether this should go out in a mailer or via website/social only. AVON REGULAR MEETING MINUTES TUESDAY APRIL 13, 2021 SETUP AS A VIRTUAL MEETING VIA ZOOM DUE TO COVID-19 Councilor Underwood would like to add more analysis on property taxes in Avon and clarified that RETT is not a property tax. She suggested that in the slide of the map of RETT/RETA to add pink circles with Mills. She also suggested to start education on the Town’s website and on Engage Avon and launch digitally first so staff can filter questions before making potential changes and printing anything. Councilor Andrade agreed with a digital launch to filter questions from the public before printing brochures. Councilor Hardy agreed education will be important. Councilor Prince suggested creating a scenario sample purchase and add the numbers to the slide on Exemptions 17/18/19. Secondly, he suggested to move the CIP slide to the front of the presentation. Thirdly, he wondered if RETT has detracted buyers in Avon but said he was not sure how we quantity that or make it scientific. Fourthly, he wondered if peer communities have exemptions like Avon does and can the Town add that because if it is just Avon, that should be highlighted. He agreed to start distribution in digital form. Mayor Pro Tem Phillips said she liked the suggestions offered of getting a press release out and starting digitally. She would like staff to call out bike lanes besides roads as projects funded by the RETT. She said that, on a future Council agenda, she would like to reevaluate the $700K cap under exemption 19. Mayor Smith Hymes agreed with the comments. Mayor Smith Hymes asked for public comments and no public comments were made. 5.3. WORK SESSION: REC CENTER MURAL INSTALLATION (CASE MANAGER DANITA DEMPSEY) Video Start Time: 02:19:39 Part One CASE Manager Danita Dempsey joined the meeting and took Council through the approach, process and design selection for the Avon Recreation Mural Project as included in her report in the packet. Jury members joined and commented. Andrew Pranger expressed how much work CASE Manager Danita Dempsey and the jury panel put in the process to eventually make this final selection. Pedro Campos echoed Andrew Pranger’s comment on the great organization and leadership of this process. Kathy Ryan also echoed Pedro Campos’s comments and she said she enjoyed the diverse population on the jury panel and said it was a great group with great experience. She wanted to tell Council to prepare themselves as not everyone will like it and there will be some resistance. Councilor Underwood asked about timeline and preparation of the concrete block. Councilor Prince asked about paint colors and future touch-ups. Mayor Smith Hymes asked for public comments and no public comments were made. 5.4. FIRST READING OF ORDINANCE 21-06 AMENDING CHAPTER 13.04 OF THE AVON MUNICIPAL CODE PERTAINING TO WATER USE RESTRICTIONS (TOWN ATTORNEY PAUL WISOR) Video Start Time: 00:00:01 Part Two Town Attorney Paul Wisor explained the ordinance and the mechanism to enforce the rules. He said the Town ’s regulations would be automatically amended as the regulations of the Water Authority continue to change. Councilor Prince asked about enforcement. Mayor Smith Hymes wanted to express that water is not a right but a responsibility. AVON REGULAR MEETING MINUTES TUESDAY APRIL 13, 2021 SETUP AS A VIRTUAL MEETING VIA ZOOM DUE TO COVID-19 Councilor Underwood got disconnected at 7:36 p.m. and rejoined at 7:38 p.m. Mayor Smith Hymes asked for public comments and no public comments were made. Councilor Underwood moved to approve on First Reading Ordinance 21 -06 amending certain portions of Chapter 13.04 of the Municipal Code and setting a public hearing for second reading on April 27, 2021. Councilor Hardy seconded th e motion and the motion passed unanimously. 5.5. P UBLIC HEARING: MAJOR D EVELOPMENT PLAN FOR RIVERFRONT LOT 1 TOWNHOMES – PHASE I (PLANNER DAVID M CWILLIAMS) Video Start Time: 00:09:30 Part Two Councilor Hardy disconnected at 7:45 p.m. as she recused herself from this item . Planner David McWilliams presented . Jim Telling, Pedro Campos and Dave Kaselak made a brief presentation and answered Council questions , mainly regarding parking and landscaping. Mayor Smith Hymes asked for public comments and no public comments were made. Councilor Underwood asked staff to expedite the pedestrian crossing safety situation from Riverfront L ane to Avon Road now that more residents will be moving into this area and more people will be crossing. Councilor Underwood moved to approve Case #MJR20006 an application for Major Design and Development Plan for Lot 1 Riverfront Subdivision Phase I, together with the Findings and Conditions as recommended by staff. Mayor Pro Tem Phillips seconded th e motion and the motion passed with a vote of 6 to 0. Councilor Hardy was absent from this item. 5.6. RESOLUTION 21-08 WILDWOOD SOUTH TOWNHOMES TAX AND FEE WAIVER (PLANNING DIRECTOR MATT P IELSTICKER) Video Start Time: 00:58:00 Part Two Councilor Hardy rejoined at 8:33 p.m. Planning Director Matt Pielsticker joined and explained the tax and fee waivers for this project. Denise Gallagher joined the meeting and explained the timeline of this project/process. Mayor Smith Hymes requested to change some language in the Deed Restri ction. Mayor Smith Hymes asked for public comments and no public comments were made. Mayor Pro Tem Phillips moved to approve Resolution 21 -08 approving the fee waiver and rebate request to perform capital improvements at Wildwood Townhomes South. Councilor Prince seconded th e motion and the motion passed unanimously. 5.7. RESOLUTION 21-09 REPEALING EMERGENCY ORDINANCE 20-08 CONCERNING INDOOR FACE COVERING REQUIREMENTS (TOWN MANAGER ERIC HEIL) Video Start Time: 01:13:23 Part Two Town Manager Eric Heil explained this resolution and expressed that by repealing the Town's AVON REGULAR MEETING MINUTES TUESDAY APRIL 13, 2021 SETUP AS A VIRTUAL MEETING VIA ZOOM DUE TO COVID-19 emergency ordinance, the Town will comply with the regulations at County and/or State level and allow for simplicity rather than keeping up with changes at the County/State leve l. The Town would follow up with messaging that masks are still required but the Town will simply follow the county/state regulations instead of imposing its own regulations. The Town signs would have to be retired in the near future. Mayor Smith Hymes asked for public comments and no public comments were made. Mayor Pro Tem Phillips moved to approved Resolution 21-09 repealing the Emergency Ordinance No. 20 -08 concerning indoor face covering requirements. Councilor Hardy seconded the motion and the motion passed unanimously. 5.8. WORK SESSION: OPEN CONTAINER REGULATIONS (TOWN MANAGER ERIC HEIL) Video Start Time: 01:19:02 Part Two Town Manager Eric Heil explained this topic was a crowd pleaser last spring as the Town Manager and Town Council can allow open containers on Town property. He is proposing open container only in Harry A. Nottingham Park and not on the Main Street Mall for this summer. Council agreed that glass containers will not be allowed. Council asked to allow this in the other pocket parks in Town. Mayor Smith Hymes asked for public comments and no public comments were made. Town Manager Eric Heil a said public notice will go out tomorrow. Council would like staff to check -in in October to potentially continue to allow this year -round rather than to end this on November 1 st. 5.9. QUARTERLY UPDATE ON 2021 DEPARTMENT GOALS (TOWN MANAGER ERIC HEIL) Video Start Time: 01:30:52 Part Two Town Manager Eric Heil expressed this is a quarterly update /check-in with Council and said staff anticipates a very busy summer and is working to get as much as possible done in April & May. Mayor Smith Hymes asked to eliminate goal #6 under Community Development as she thinks the old Town Hall is not an appropriate place for a Convention Center. Other Councilors agreed. She asked if Council is interested in staff studying a recycling ordinance, there was no Council support at this point. 6. MINUTES 6.1. APPROVAL OF MARCH 23, 2021 REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES (TOWN CLERK BRENDA TORRES) Video Start Time: 01:38:35 Part Two Councilor Underwood moved to approve the minutes as presented. Councilor Hardy seconded th e motion and the motion passed unanimously. AVON REGULAR MEETING MINUTES TUESDAY APRIL 13, 2021 SETUP AS A VIRTUAL MEETING VIA ZOOM DUE TO COVID-19 7. WRITTEN REPORTS 7.1. April 6th Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Abstract (Planner David McWilliams) 7.2. March 18th CASE Committee Draft Meeting Minutes (General Government Intern Emily Myler) 7.3. Upper Eagle Regional Water Authority Mar 25, 2021 Meeting Summary (Mayor Smith Hymes 7.4. Eagle County Regional Transportation Authority Mar 17, 2021 Meeting Minutes (Mayor Smith Hymes) 7.5. Capital Improvements Project Update (Town Engineer Justin Hildreth) 7.6. Manhole Adjustments in Roadway (Town Engineer Justin Hildreth) 7.7. Home Occupation License Report (General Government Intern Emily Myler) 7.8. Community Survey** (Communications Manager Elizabeth Wood) 8. MAYOR AND COUNCIL COMMENTS & MEETING UPDATES Video Start Time: 01:39:20 Part Two Mayor Smith Hymes expressed she was scheduled to testify for HB-1162 regarding regulating plastic products, but never got a chance to as the hearing ran late. Town Attorney Paul Wisor clarified that the language of the bill has changed since it was first presented, and it is a work in progress and now is a step backwards from where we began. Councilor Thuon asked if anyone knows the source of the power outage on Eaglebend Drive. Secondly, he wanted to put his heart out to the people in Sunridge who have been displaced due to the fire on Sunday. He asked if there is anything we can do as a Town to support these people. Mayor Smith Hymes expressed the importance of the broadband survey. Mayor Pro Tem Phillips suggested to change the graphic to stimulate a better response rate. Mayor Pro Tem Phillips announced the first ECO-Transit zero-emissions bus is out and being tested. Secondly the EGE Air Alliance now offers daily direct flights to Dallas, Atlanta & Chicago starting in June. She asked when Town Hall will be reopened and Town Manager Eric Heil confirmed the plan is to reopen on Monday May 3rd. Councilor Underwood wanted to read two comments from constituents. The first comment was about lights in the park. He wanted to use this as an example that everything that the Town does, Council and staff, matters and we need to keep this in mind. The second comment was about the I-70 underpass project, this person expressed he is not in favor of making this a landscaping project and to do nothing on the East side. She made an inquiry about when the I-70 bridge is scheduled to be replaced by Colorado Department of Transportation (CDOT). Third a policy question from Northwest Colorado Council of Governments (NWCCOG) meeting about the federal bill called Ski Area Fee Retention Bill and whether the Town/CAST/NWCCOG take a position on this bill. Mayor Smith Hymes will follow up on the status of the letter submitted from CAST. AVON REGULAR MEETING MINUTES TUESDAY APRIL 13, 2021 SETUP AS A VIRTUAL MEETING VIA ZOOM DUE TO COVID-19 Councilor Thuon expressed we should keep an eye on the “trillion-dollar” budget for road and bridge improvements and see if I-70 bridge can be part of that and see how Council can key in on that. Councilor Hardy quoted a part of the Wildridge covenant, cats and dogs are discouraged in Wildridge. She said this was her point earlier, how can the Town enforce one part of the covenants and not others. Councilor Prince asked for an update on the utilities project at the old Town Hall. Town Manager Heil clarified that the new contractor said they can finish in about 2 weeks and the power should be restored on Thursday. He also said the asbestos removal contractor is on track to finish by June. Town Attorney Paul Wisor clarified that any potential delta in cost of the old contractor and new contractor will be due by the old contractor, the Town will be seeking damages against the contractor and is working with a bond company. Mayor Pro Tem Phillips asked Town Manager Eric Heil and Town Engineer Justin Hildreth to send Council a note/update on the exact electricity status in the park on Friday. Mayor Smith Hymes said that the engineering cartridges are still sitting at old Town Hold and need to be recycled properly. Councilor Underwood requested to salvage a corner stone and the brass plaque from old Town Hall as memorabilia / time capsule. 9. ADJOURN There being no further business before Council, Mayor Smith Hymes moved to adjourn the regular meeting. The time was 9:33 p.m. These minutes are only a summary of the proceedings of the meeting. They are not intended to be comprehensive or to include each statement, person speaking or to portray with complete accuracy. The most accurate records of the meeting are the audio of the meeting, which is housed in the Town Clerk' s office, and the video of the meeting, which is available at www.highfivemedia.org. RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED: Brenda Torres, Town Clerk APPROVED: Sarah Smith Hymes ___________________________________ Amy Phillips Chico Thuon Scott Prince Tamra Underwood Lindsay Hardy RJ Andrade PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING ABSTRACT TUESDAY, APRIL 20, 2021 1. CALL TO ORDER AND ROLL CALL Chairperson Jared Barnes called the meeting to order at 5:07 p.m. A roll call was taken, and Planning Commission members present were Steve Nusbaum, Marty Golembiewski, and Anthony Sekinger. Also present were Town Planner David McWilliams, Planning Director Matt Pielsticker, and Town Attorney Paul Wisor. 2. APPROVAL OF AGENDA Action: Commissioner Nusbaum motioned to approve the agenda. Commissioner Golembiewski seconded the motion and it carried unanimously 5-0. Commissioners Donna Lang, and Trevor MacAllister joined the meeting. 3. DISCLOSURE OF ANY CONFLICTS OF INTEREST OR EX-PARTE COMMUNICATION RELATED TO AGENDA ITEMS Action: No conflicts or communication were disclosed. 4. BUSINESS I TEMS 4.1. 5151A LONGSUN LANE – LOT 48A BLOCK 4 WILDRIDGE SUBDIVISION - PUBLIC HEARING – MINOR DEVELOPMENT PLAN AND ALTERNATIVE E QUIVALENT C OMPLIANCE FOR A SPLIT RAIL FENCE WITH MESH THAT DOES NOT COMPLY WITH AVON DEVELOPMENT CODE STANDARDS (TOWN PLANNER DAVID MCWILLIAMS AND ALEXESS REA SMITH). Public Comment: None. Action: Commissioner Golembiewski motioned to continue the item to the May 4, 2021 PZC meeting, pending design changes. Commissioner XXX seconded the motion and it carried 5-1, with Commissioner MacAllister voting in opposition. 5. CONSENT AGENDA 5.1. MEETING MINUTES - APRIL 6, 2021 5.2. RECORD OF DECISION - 42 RIVERFRONT LANE - MJR21004 – MAJOR DEVELOPMENT PLAN Action: Commissioner Barnes noted a correction for staff. Commissioner Golembiewski motioned to approve the consent agenda with the modification. Commissioner Lang seconded the motion and it carried unanimously 6-0. 6. S TAFF UPDATES Action: Staff mentioned projects including the West Beaver Creek Boulevard parking, old town hall demolition, Nottingham Park West improvements, and PZC appointments. 7. ADJOURN There being no further business before the Commission adjourned the meeting at 6:01 p.m. RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED: David McWilliams, Town Planner CASE COMMITTEE MEETING MINUTES THURSDAY, APRIL 15, 2021 VIRTUAL ZOOM MEETING CASE COMMITTEE MEETING MINUTES, APRIL 15, 2021 PAGE 1 | 4 1. ROLL CALL Present- Committee Members: Pedro Campos, Chris Cofelice, Justin Chesney, Ruth Stanley, Kathy Ryan and Thomas Walsh Town Council: Mayor Pro Tem Amy Phillips Town Staff: Cultural, Arts and Special Events Manager Danita Dempsey, Town Manager Eric Heil, Planning Director Matt Pielsticker, General Government Manager Ineke de Jong and General Government Intern Emily Myler Absent- Committee Chair Lisa Mattis Late Arrival- Council Member Lindsay Hardy General Government Manager Ineke de Jong asked the record to reflect the meeting was called to order at 12:32 p.m. 2. APPROVAL OF MINUTES Committee Member Chris Cofelice moved to approve the CASE meeting minutes from March 18, 2021. Committee Member Ruth Stanley seconded the motion and Acting Committee Chair Pedro Campos took a vote. The motion passed unanimously. 3. PUBLIC COMMENT No Public Comments were made. 4. CURRENT ACTIVITY Town Council Member Lindsay Hardy joined the call at 12:40 p.m. CASE Manager Danita Dempsey shared her screen and told the Committee that Council has approved the full events calendar and her department is moving full steam ahead. Harry A. Nottingham Park Improvements Planning Director Matt Pielsticker joined from the audience to discuss the Harry A. Nottingham Park and old Town Hall site improvements that will affect the Committee’s work. The plan is to include a dedicated events space in the improvements and balance events with recreation and general park use. The Committee will be able to provide input on the project at the CASE meeting on May 20, 2021. The Committee Commented/Inquired: A. Will any more trees be cut down during the work? B. Is there a conflict of interest in Committee Member Campos working for the company contracted for the improvements? C. What sort of feedback from the Committee is helpful? Planning Director Pielsticker said the plans consider the health and abundance of trees in the Park. Town Manager Heil said that there are some requirements to leave space between the buildings and trees, but most large mature trees will be saved. There is no conflict of interest in this case since the Committee will not be making decisions on the improvements, only providing feedback on the plans from a special events perspective. CASE COMMITTEE MEETING MINUTES THURSDAY, APRIL 15, 2021 VIRTUAL ZOOM MEETING CASE COMMITTEE MEETING MINUTES, APRIL 15, 2021 PAGE 2 | 4 Committee Member Campos said that his team will provide four conceptual options for the Park which the Committee can give feedback on. It is important to balance all the uses of the Park and meet restroom, storage and parking needs. The final design will go before Town Council in July 2021. Mayor Pro Tem Phillips suggested the Committee meet in the park once the Town Hall building is gone to get a visual of the space without it. Planning Director Matt Pielsticker left the meeting at 1:00 p.m. Chair and Vice Chair Nominations and Voting CASE Manager Danita Dempsey moved to voting for Committee Chair and Vice Chair. She asked members to email her their votes and she can announce results later in the meeting. Committee Member Ruth Stanley asked the other members to speak up if they are interested in either position. Each member nominated incumbent Lisa Mattis to continue as Chair. For Vice Chair, incumbent Pedro Campos said he would take the roll but suggested a new member take the spot. Committee Member Justin Chesney said he supported Pedro Campos for the role but would also be open to taking on the role. Committee member Kathy Ryan was concerned that the Vice Chair should have more experience with the Committee. Danita Dempsey said she would tally votes and will let the Committee know by email after the meeting: CASE Member Chair Nomination Vice Chair Nomination Ruth Lisa Mattis Justin Chesney Pedro Lisa Mattis Justin Chesney Justin Lisa Mattis Pedro Campos Kathy Lisa Mattis Pedro Campos Chris Lisa Mattis Justin Chesney Thomas Lisa Mattis Justin Chesney Lisa - Pedro Campos 2021 Community Survey CASE Manager Danita Dempsey moved on to discussion of the 2021 Community Survey. She went over how the 2021 Survey will be designed and implemented as well as comparisons with Community Surveys from 2015 and 2018. She asked the Committee’s thoughts on proposed questions for the 2021 Survey. The Committee Commented/Inquired: A. Most respondents seem to be satisfied with events so far. B. There should be questions that dig into why respondents are satisfied or dissatisfied. C. Does each department have questions on one survey or across multiple surveys? D. It would be valuable to know the ages of people who attend events. E. There can be a broad question at the beginning to capture demographics while avoiding asking about income. F. Why is there an option for 5-7 events per week when there aren’t ever that many planned in one week? CASE COMMITTEE MEETING MINUTES THURSDAY, APRIL 15, 2021 VIRTUAL ZOOM MEETING CASE COMMITTEE MEETING MINUTES, APRIL 15, 2021 PAGE 3 | 4 G. The Survey should be clear that changes will not be implemented this year as events are already planned. H. Can we ask people which event was their favorite so the Town can match expenditure with favorite events? I. There should be a question about dogs at events. Town Manager Eric Heil said that the Community Survey will bring together questions from multiple departments on one survey along with some demographics questions. The Town is discussing doing surveys at each event to gauge who is attending and the age question fits better there. He said that the Town likely will not use information about participant age enough to merit including it in the Community Survey. General Government Manager Ineke de Jong said the Town will publish a timeline to make it clear how long the survey will be open, when it will be closed and when feedback results will be available. CASE Manager Danita Dempsey was not sure how learning about resident’s favorite events could be used. Town Manager Heil agreed but said in the next couple years the Town could certainly ask residents to rank events. Current Art Projects CASE Manager Danita Dempsey moved on to the Recreation Center Mural Project. She shared the mockup of the mural chosen by the jury. The work should begin around June 1 and be completed within two weeks. She also updated the Committee on the Art Around Avon program. The jury has selected artists and are ready to start contracting and work to be complete for the Art Walk event June 11. The Committee Commented/Inquired: A. Committee Member Kathy Ryan suggested the project be named something like the “Avon Art Trail” B. Will the art be up by July 4? C. Can the Committee schedule its own tour? D. Will the Town do a press release on the art before or after the Art Walk? CASE Manager Danita Dempsey said she is happy to discuss more catchy names for the Art Around Avon project. All the art will be up by the first AvonLIVE! concert on June 23. The Committee members are invited to the official art walk but she can also schedule a private tour if they want. She said she would like to announce the art before it is officially unveiled to build awareness, even though the surprise will be diminished a little by the official Art Walk. 5. PLANNING CASE Manager Danita Dempsey said things are moving quickly for this year’s events. She is interviewing for two Special Event Coordinators and bar staff for events. She is trying to rebuild the volunteer program after an off year in 2020. The Committee Commented/Inquired: A. Where does money from selling alcohol go? CASE Manager Dempsey said the alcohol funds go into the Town’s coffers and she is hoping it will be redirected back towards events. CASE COMMITTEE MEETING MINUTES THURSDAY, APRIL 15, 2021 VIRTUAL ZOOM MEETING CASE COMMITTEE MEETING MINUTES, APRIL 15, 2021 PAGE 4 | 4 5. CLOSING COMMENTS Committee Member Thomas Walsh commented that the recycling center area in town is dismal looking and most people seem to not know how to recycle well. He suggested the Committee work on a project to add some art that is also informative in the area, perhaps made by local students. Town Manager Heil said that he agrees recycling is an issue but there is a lot of complexity that makes it complicated to educate people. Committee Member Walsh also commented that Avon does not have welcome signs on Highway 6 and the Committee has an opportunity to use art to create an entry to Town that stands out. Committee Member Ruth Stanley said that the Committee had discussed doing streetlight banners that can advertise current events in Town. CASE Manager Dempsey said that the “lifestyle” banners already on the light poles are usually evergreen to save money of changing them frequently. She knows there are some banners already made for recurring events. Town Manager Heil suggested the banners display art rather than event information. The most they should be changed is seasonally, but they can reinforce signature events rather than generic lifestyle promotion. 6. ADJOURNMENT The meeting adjourned at 2:00 p.m. Respectfully submitted by: Emily Myler General Government Intern 970-748-4019 jmccracken@avon.org TO: Honorable Mayor Smith Hymes and Council members FROM: Joel McCracken, Senior Accountant RE: Financial Report February and March 2021 Revenues DATE: April 19th, 2021 SUMMARY: The content of this report will reflect the revenues for sales, accommodations , tobacco and cigarette tax for the period of February 2021. Further, revenues for real estate transfer tax and recreation admissions & program fees for the period of March 2021 will be reported upon. This is submitted as a written report and no action by Council is being requested. BACKGROUND: The Town’s 2021 budget was adopted in December 2020. The percentage variance, or comparative change is reflected in the analysis portion of this report in respect to each individual section for the periods of February and March revenues in 2021. Tax revenues are not budgeted on a monthly basis. However, for purposes of analysis, monthly budget variances are based on a 5-year average of actual revenues. ANALYSIS: Sales Tax Revenues – February 2021 February 2021: February sales tax revenues totaled $883,364. This is an increase of $62,747 or 7.65% compared to February 2020 sales tax revenue of $820,617. FEBRUARY 2020 v FEBRUARY 2021 SALES TAX COMPARISON BY INDUSTRY February 2020 February 2021 Increase/Decrease Home/Garden $53,136.97 $63,680.84 $10,543.87 Grocery/Specialty/Health $191,204.04 $206,162.55 $14,958.51 Sporting Goods Retail/Rental $120,159.82 $112,229.06 ($7,930.76) Miscellaneous Retail $23,296.38 $25,312.13 $2,015.75 Accommodations $221,896.80 $207,304.99 ($14,591.81) Restaurants/Bars $124,113.61 $117,113.48 ($7,000.13) Other $6,129.94 $9,332.85 $3,202.91 Service Related $15,931.04 $29,955.46 $14,024.42 Liquor Stores $18,365.56 $39,768.04 $21,402.48 E-Commerce Retail $12,880.60 $33,668.07 $20,787.47 Manufacturing/Wholesale $8,871.84 $9,135.72 $263.88 Construction Related Services $20,106.18 $21,810.45 $1,704.27 Digital Media Suppliers/Sellers $3,592.66 $7,021.83 $3,429.17 Page 2 of 7 Commercial/Industrial Equipment $932.00 $868.29 ($63.71) Special Events $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 TOTAL $820,617.44 $883,363.76 $62,746.32 February 2021 Proposed Budget v Actual Collections: February 2021 sales tax revenues totaled $883,364. This is an increase of $88,363 over the proposed February 2021 estimates of $795,001. This is 11.11% over the 2021 proposed budget, which is calculated based on a 5-year average. FEBRUARY 2020 v FEBRUARY 2021 PROPOSED BUDGET v ACTUAL COLLECTIONS - SALES TAX 2021 Budget 2021 Actual Dollar Variance Percentage Variance Sales Tax $795,001.27 $883,363.76 $88,362.49 11.11% NOTE: The Sales and Use Tax Simplification system (“SUTS”) in addition to the adoption of Ordinance No. 20-09 continues to generate many new registered out-of-city businesses, which has resulted in a significant increase to the amount of sales tax collected for the E-Commerce Retail industry type. 798,923 785,412 809,166 820,617 883,364 -1.69% 3.02% 1.42% 7.65% $700,000 $720,000 $740,000 $760,000 $780,000 $800,000 $820,000 $840,000 $860,000 $880,000 $900,000 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2017 -2021 Februay Sales Tax Revenue Trend Page 3 of 7 Accommodation Tax Revenues – February 2021 February 2021: Accommodation tax revenues totaled $154,288 for the month of February. This is a decrease of $62,781 or 28.92% compared to February 202 0 accommodation tax revenues, which totaled $217,069. Accommodation tax collections by industry type for February 2021 compared to February 2020 reported a decrease for Vacation Rentals, Time Shares and Hotels. FEBRUARY 2020 v FEBRUARY 2021 ACCOMMODATION TAX COMPARISON BY INDUSTRY February 2020 February 2021 Increase/(Decrease) Timeshares $49,866.83 $38,184.49 ($11,682.34) Hotels $127,888.12 $83,962.78 ($43,925.34) Vacation Rentals $39,314.70 $32,141.14 ($7,173.56) TOTAL $217,069.65 $154,288.41 ($62,781.24) February 2021 Proposed Budget v Actual Collections: February 2021 accommodation tax revenues totaled $154,288. This is an increase of $121 over the proposed February 2021 estimates of $154,167. This is 0.08% over the 2021 proposed budget. 2021 PROPOSED BUDGET v ACTUAL COLLECTIONS - ACCOMMODATIONS TAX 2021 Budget 2021 Actual Dollar Variance Percentage Variance Acc. Tax $154,167.30 $154,288.41 $121.11 0.08% NOTE: With Council’s adoption of Emergency Ordinance No. 21-02, OTCs were required to begin collecting Accommodation tax, in addition to sales tax. Finance staff has been working assiduously with OTCs to ensure proper reporting. Majority of OTCs have begun to fo llow the protocol imposed by the Town, however, as this was a major overhaul for their systems, these changes weren’t implemented until April 2021. Accommodation tax is expected to report a significant increase in the following months’ packet. Page 4 of 7 Tobacco & Cigarette Tax Revenues – February 2021 February 2021: Tobacco tax revenues totaled $25,322 and cigarette tax revenues totaled $19,602 for February 2021. Compared to February 2020 revenues, this is an increase of $13,109 for tobacco tax revenues, which totaled $12,213 and an increase of $2,226 for cigarette tax revenues, which totaled $17,376. 194,805 186,147 203,190 217,070 154,288 -4.44% 9.16% 6.83% -28.92% $100,000 $120,000 $140,000 $160,000 $180,000 $200,000 $220,000 $240,000 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2017-2021 February Accommodation Tax Revenue Trend 23,742 17,376 19,602 -26.81% 12.81% - 5,000 10,000 15,000 20,000 25,000 2019 2020 2021 2019-2021 February Cigarette Excise Tax Revenue Trend Page 5 of 7 February 2021 Proposed Budget v Actual Collections: February 2021 tobacco and cigarette tax revenues totaled $25,322 and $19,602, respectively. This is an increase of $7,564 over the proposed February 2021 budget for tobacco tax and an increase of $440 over for the proposed February 2021 budget for cigarette tax estimates, which is based on a 5-year average. 2021 PROPOSED BUDGET v ACTUAL COLLECTIONS - TOBACCO AND CIGARETTE TAX REVENUES 2021 Budget 2021 Actual Dollar Variance Percentage Variance Tobacco $17,758 $25,322.03 $7,563.64 42.59% Cigarettes $19,162.24 $19,602.00 $439.76 2.29% $8,003.40 NOTE: We believe the adoption of similar tobacco and cigarette taxes in neighboring jurisdiction resulted of purchasers to Avon. Real Estate Transfer Tax Revenues – March 2021 March 2021 March 2021 Real estate transfer tax totaled $497,158. Compared to March 2020, which totaled $113,350 , this is an increase of $383,808 21,145 12,213 25,322 -42.24% 107.34% - 5,000 10,000 15,000 20,000 25,000 30,000 2019 2020 2021 2019-2021 February Tobacco Tax Revenue Trend Page 6 of 7 Recreation Center Revenues – March 2021 Admissions & Program Fees March 2021: Recreation admission revenues for March 2021 totaled $34,869. This is an increase of $228 compared to 2020, which totaled $34,641. This is $11,874 under the original 2021 budget estimates, which is $46,743 which is calculated based on a 5-year average. Recreation program fee revenues for March 2021 totaled $14,918, an increase of $329 compared to March 2020, which totaled $14,590. This is $5,955 under the original 2021 budget estimates of $20,873. $254,738 $344,557 $180,820 $113,350 $497,158 26.07% -90.55% -59.52% 77.20% $0 $100,000 $200,000 $300,000 $400,000 $500,000 $600,000 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 Real Estate Transfer Tax March Revenue Trends 76,023 79,071 78,825 34,641 34,869 3.86% -0.31% -127.55%0.65% - 10,000 20,000 30,000 40,000 50,000 60,000 70,000 80,000 90,000 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 Recreation Admissions March Revenue Trends Page 7 of 7 FINANCIAL CONSIDERATIONS: This is submitted as a written report and there are no financial considerations for Council. RECOMMENDATION: This is submitted as a written report; therefore, I have no recommendations for Council. Thank you, Joel McCracken $29,016 $28,669 $27,281 $14,590 $14,918 -1.19%-4.84% -46.52% 2.25% $0 $5,000 $10,000 $15,000 $20,000 $25,000 $30,000 $35,000 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 Recreation Program Fees March Revenue Trends 970-748-4019 jmccracken@avon.org TO: Honorable Mayor Smith Hymes and Council members FROM: Joel McCracken, Senior Accountant RE: 1st Quarter RETT Sales and Exemption Report DATE: April 19th, 2021 SUMMARY: The 1st quarter of 2021 has generated significant RETT revenues compared to prior years. While there has been a significant amount of revenues generated through RETT, two primary exemption was applied for in the 1st quarter of 2021. In addition to the single primary residence exemption granted in the 1st quarter, two Mi Casa application was approved in the 1st quarter of 2021. BACKGROUND: Prior to 2020, section 17 and 18 were the only primary residence exemptions available to buyers in Avon. On November 12th, 2019, Council adopted Ordinance 19-05 which provides a 3rd primary residence RETT exemption. Under this new exemption, purchasers may apply for an exemption up to $240,000 of consideration paid, or up to $4,800 in RETT Relief. There are new conditions which must be met in order to qualify for section 19, which are highlighted Attachment A, SUMMARY OF PRIMARY RESIDENCE RETT EXEMPTIONS. In 2020, Mi Casa was approved to provide $650,000 in funds to qualifying participants. Of the $650,000 approved, $464,760 was contributed by the Town for 8 properties. In 2021, Council approved $900,000 in funds for Mi Casa with the goal to provide financial assistance for 12-16 homebuyers in 2021, this is an increase of $250,000, compared to 2020. ANALYSIS: RETT Exemptions Granted 2019 – 2021 In 2021, two primary residence exemption was granted in the 1st quarter. This is a decrease of 6 exemptions granted in the 1st quarter of 2019 and decrease of 3 exemptions granted in the 1st quarter of 2020. In the 1st quarter of 2021, $9,600 was granted in RETT Relief, which is $5,355 less than 2020, which granted $14,955 and $14,900 less than 2019, which granted $24,500. RETT Exemptions Granted 1st Quarter Trend Exemption Type 2019 2020 2021 Section (17) 8 5 0 Section (18) 0 0 0 Section (19) 0 0 2 Total 8 5 2 Page 2 of 4 1st Quarter Primary Residence Exemptions Granted Month Avon Neighborhood Purchase Price of Property Exemption Section Amount Exempt January Wildridge $385,000 19 $4,800 January Wildridge $500,000 19 $4,800 Total 2 $9,600 1st Quarter Activity Actual RETT revenue for the 1st quarter of 2021 totaled $1,066,362, This correlates to a total of $53 million in property sales. Total RETT Activity – 1st Quarter 2021 January February March Total RETT Revenue $219,256 $349,948 $497,158 Total Exemptions $9,600 $0.00 $0.00 Total RETT $228,856 $349,948 $497,158 Total Sales $11,442,800 $17,497,400 $24,857,900 24,500 14,955 9,600 -63.82% -55.78% - 5,000 10,000 15,000 20,000 25,000 30,000 2019 2020 2021 1st Quarter RETT Relief Granted Page 3 of 4 3-Year Average RETT Activity Based on a 3-year average, January, February, and March 2021 RETT revenues reflect a positive variance of 39.52%, 1.27%, 88.48%, respectively. 3-Year Average RETT Revenue Trend 2019-2021 January February March Total RETT Revenue $157,149 $345,568 $263,776 Total Exemptions $9,234 $3,200 $3,919 Total RETT $166,383 $348,768 $267,695 Total Sales $8,319,150 $17,438,400 $13,348,750 % Variance 39.52% 1.27% 88.48% FINANCIAL CONSIDERATIONS: This is submitted as a written report and there are no financial considerations for Council. RECOMMENDATION: This is submitted as a written report; therefore, I have no recommendations for Council. Thank you, Joel McCracken ATTACHMENT A: SUMMARY OF PRIMARY RESIDENCE RETT EXEMPTIONS Page 4 of 4 ATTACHMENT A: SUMMARY OF PRIMARY RESIDENCE RETT EXEMPTIONS Exemptions Section (17) Section (18) Section (19) Amount $160,000 $160,000 $240,000 Home Value Cap None None $700,000 Eagle County Employee N/A Yes Yes Affidavit of Primary Residence Yes Yes Yes Promissory Note 1 year 1 year 3 years Lien Yes Yes Yes