TC Council Packet 03-27-2001Town Council Meetings
Roll Call Check Sheet
Date: 3/27/01
Michael Brown
Debbie Buckley
Peter Buckley
Rick Cuny -`
Mac McDevitt
Buz Reynolds
Judy Yoder
/
r
lllllillli
Roll calls are called at start of meeting and for Ordinances. Do not call Mayor except for
meeting roll call or to break a tie vote.
Seating arrangements from west to east: P. Buckley, Reynolds, Cuny, Yoder, McDevitt,
D. Buckley, Brown
Staff Present:
Bill Efting
Larry Brooks
?v Burt Levin
L' Kris Nash
Jacquie Halburnt
Scott Wright
Jeff Layman
Charlie Moore
Norm Wood
Meryl Jacobs
Bob Reed
Harry Taylor
Mike Matzko
Other Staff:
STATE OF COLORADO )
COUNTY OF EAGLE )
TOWN OF AVON )
SS
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN THAT A WORK SESSION OF THE TOWN COUNCIL
OF THE TOWN OF AVON, COLORADO, WILL BE HELD MARCH 27, 2001, AT
3:15 PM IN THE MUNICIPAL BUILDING, 400 BENCHMARK ROAD, AVON,
COLORADO FOR THE PURPOSE OF DISCUSSING AND CONSIDERING THE
FOLLOWING:
3:15 PM - 3:30 PM 1.) Land Negotiations (Executive Session)
3:30 PM - 4:00 PM 2.) ECO Trails (Ellie Caryl),
4:00 PM - 4:15 PM 3.) P&Z Guidelines Update
4:15 PM - 5:15 PM 4.) Town Center Plan Kick Off Meeting
5:15 PM - 5:30 PM 5,) Staff Updates
Consent Agenda Questions
Council Committee Updates
AND SUCH OTHER BUSINESS AS MAY COME BEFORE THE COUNCIL
THIS MEETING IS OPEN TO THE PUBLIC /
AVON,COLORADO
BY:
a Nash
Clerk
POSTED AT THE FOLLOWING PUBLIC PLACES WITHIN THE TOWN OF AVON
ON MARCH 23, 2001:
AVON MUNICIPAL BUILDING IN THE MAIN LOBBY
AVON BEAVER CREEK TRANSIT BUS STOP AT AVON CENTER
AVON RECREATION CENTER
CITY MARKET IN THE MAIN LOBBY
'trails ... .... 40"" g ol's
.. .. .
999,1,690 eagle county regional trails system
Memorandum
Date: February 28, 2001
To: Town of Avon
From: Ellie Caryl, ECO Trails Planner
Eagle County Regional Transportation Authority (ECO)
RE: Eagle Valley Regional Trails Plan
Please find the attached review draft of the Eagle Valley Regional Trail Plan. The plan
outlines the route, costs and design for a regional trail that connects the communities
from Dotsero to Vail to Red Cliff. The implementation of the plan will be a joint effort by
all of the communities working together.
This draft is the result of a combined effort by the planning, engineering or management
staff at Gypsum, Eagle, Avon, Vail, Minturn, Red Cliff, and Eagle County and included
input from the citizens and elected and appointed officials and citizens involved with
town and county councils, boards and planning commissions. The citizen volunteer
Eagle Valley Trails Committee and ECO Trails staff have acted as facilitators of the
planning process.
At this time, we request your comments on the draft plan. We are meeting with each of
the participating jurisdictions to review the plan after which we will prepare the final
version and present it to you for adoption.
A complete map set (31 maps) will be presented at the meeting but in the interest of
reducing bulk and waste, we have inserted only the maps pertinent to your community in
this review copy. We hope that is acceptable but we are also able to provide you with a
complete set upon request.
At your meeting on Tuesday, March 27, we will make a presentation about the plan
contents, discuss the trail maps specific to your town and surrounding area, and ask for
your comments.
Please take a moment to review the plan prior to the meeting. While we would like as
many comments as possible at the meetings, March 28, 2001 has been set for receipt of
all comments (see fax/address information below) on the draft plan.
Thank you for your time and we look forward to meeting with you on Tuesday, March 27.
• .... • . • • • • • ... • • . • • .. • .. eagle county regional transportation authority
3289 Cooley Mesa Road, PO Box 1070, Gypsum, CO 81637 tel: 9701328-3520 fax: 9701328-3539 email:.mobility@vail.net
Eagle Valley
Regional Trails Plan
BraIN2
F.40m, ry28, 2001
FOR PUBLIC INPUT
EAGLE VALLEY REGIONAL TRAILS PLAN
Table of Contents
Chapter 1 Plan Overview Page
Introduction 1-1
Geographic Scope of the Plan 1-1
Location Map 1-2
Goals of the Eagle Valley Regional Trails Plan 1-3
Types of Trails 1-4
Types of Trail Users 1-5
Implementation of the Regional Trails Plan 1-6
Relationship to Other Planning Documents 1-7
Amendment of the Regional Trails Plan 1-7
Recommended Related Studies 1-7
Trails Plan Process 1-8
Funding the Trails System Construction 1-8
Chapter 2 Estimated Costs and Construction Priorities
Summary of Estimated Costs of the Planned Core Trail 2-1
Criteria for Core Trail Construction Priorities 2-2
Core Trail Construction Priority Projects 2-3
Priorities for Shared Road Improvements 2-4
Chapter 3 Planning Maps for the Eagle Valley Regional Trails System 3-1 to 29
Chapter 4 Design and Construction Standards
Introduction 4-1
Fundamentals of Trail Design 4-1
Design Standards 4-2 to 15
Chapter 5 The Railroad Corridor as a Trail Corridor
Background 5-1
Options for Trail Use of the Corridor 5-1
Summary of Options 5-2
Analysis by Section 5-3
Summary of Rail Corridor Analysis 5-7
Chapter 6 Trail Maintenance
Recommended Core Trail Maintenance Program 6-1
Other Considerations 6-2
Appendices:
A Detailed Cost Estimates by Trail Section
B Trail Plan Process Participants
C References
D Recommended Core Trail Furniture and Accessories
CHAPTERI
Plan Overview
Introduction
As the population of Eagle County has grown over the last twenty years, so has the demand for walking
and bicycle trails for transportation or recreation. This regional trails plan was created to specifically
describe the vision for an Eagle Valley Regional Trails System that will connect the communities of the
Eagle River and Gore Creek Valleys.
The primary focus of this Plan is the creation of a paved arterial "core" trail, the Eagle Valley Trail, that will
span the county from Vail Pass at the east end to Glenwood Canyon at the west end. The Plan also
depicts a major "spur" trail traveling from Dowd Junction to the town of Red Cliff, through Minturn.
Additionally, links to other existing or planned public trails, paved and unpaved, are included in the Plan
information. Shared use of roads by bicycles, pedestrians and motor vehicles is also an important part of
the total system.
Together, these components will create a network of non-motorized transportation routes and recreation
opportunities throughout Eagle County.
Geographic Scope of the Plan
The Eagle Valley Regional Trails Plan pertains to the portion of Eagle County that coincides with the
watershed boundaries of the Eagle River and part of the Colorado River valley. The specific focus of this
Plan is the Interstate 70 and Highway 24 corridors.
The Roaring Fork River and Fryingpan River watershed area of Eagle County is not included in this plan.
That portion of Eagle County is addressed in separate Eagle County or Town of Basalt planning
documents specific to the Roaring Fork Valley side of Eagle County.
The following map depicts that area that is specifically addressed by this plan, the valleys of the Eagle
River and Gore Creek, but the mission to create a safe and enjoyable trails network applies to the whole
of Eagle County.
Ch. 1 Pg. 1
O
O
t/? J
> L
ID
C3
r
20 01
s
OZ2#
ILI
Goals of the Eagle Valley Regional Trails Plan
A,
This plan is intended to:
1. Promote COOPERATIVE PARTNERSHIPS for trail planning, funding, design, construction and
maintenance between local governments, organizations, businesses and citizens.
2. Provide ALIGNMENT AND DESIGN DETAILS for a valley-wide, shared use, non-motorized off-road trail
system that is safe and enjoyable.
3. Promote IMPROVEMENT OF LOCAL ROADWAYS and revision of standards to accommodate certain types
of non-motorized uses. This plan promotes both the creation of a valley-wide trail system and the
improvement of local roads with wider shoulders, bike lanes or bike routes to improve safety
overall.
4. Provide information on TRAIL SEGMENT CONSTRUCTION COSTS for capital improvement budgeting and
annual work programs. This baseline information is formatted for periodic updating, every three
years recommended.
5. Provide a PRIORITIZED LIST OF CONSTRUCTION PROJECTS which can be periodically evaluated and
updated as necessary.
6. Provide recommendations and GUIDANCE FOR LAND USE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW by local governments and
supports the goals of existing land use plans regarding provision of trail facilities.
7. Provide documentation that can be referenced and presented while FUNDRAISING from private
sources and grant agencies.
8. Serve as a PUBLIC INFORMATION AND SUPPORT BUILDING TOOL for efforts by ECO Trails, the towns and
Eagle County.
Ch. 1 Pg. 3
Types of Trails
For the purpose of this plan, the word "trail" is used to refer to both paved and unpaved routes, and the
exact type differentiated as necessary in the text. Path is commonly used to describe paved bike trails
(e.g. bike paths) but for consistency in this plan, only the word "trail" is used.
The regional trail system is planned to be a three season system, with some sections remaining usable
throughout the year. Types of trail in the system include:
Off-Road Shared Use Trail - typically a paved trail from
which motor vehicles are prohibited and is shared by
bicycles, pedestrians, joggers, equestrians, in-line skaters
and other non-motorized users. Where such trail or path is
part of a highway right-of-way, it is separated from the
roadway and from motor-vehicle traffic, by an open space,
grade separation, or barrier. A 2000 report issued by the
Colorado Department of Transportation documents that
paved off street bike paths are preferred over roadways for
recreation or commuting by bicycle.
UnpauedTralls - In Eagle County, hiking trails on U.S. Forest
Service or Bureau of Land Management public lands are the
most common form of this trail type. Most common use is for
recreation. Some jurisdictions in Eagle County have
constructed unpaved nature walks or pathways along
waterways which are typically narrow and meandering and
not open to bicycle use. Trail links to, and into, the
backcountry are shown on the trail plan maps and additional
backcountry detail is available on other maps prepared by
Eagle County and ECO Trails. Some sections of the core
trail route may remain unpaved until demand warrants the expense but at eight to ten feet, the
planned core trail and the major spurs will be much wider than the typical unpaved hiking or nature
trail.
Shared Roadways - most roads in Eagle County are open to both
motor vehicle and bicycle or pedestrian travel. In some
locations, signed bike lanes or bike routes (see Chapter 4 for
definitions) exist but generally travel is relegated to the
shoulder of the road which is not specifically designed or
striped to accommodate non-motorized users. Sidewalks are
also part of a shared roadway system but are typically for
pedestrian traffic only. Users of shared roadways include all
types - commuters, fitness trainers and for casual recreation.
r
Ch. 1 Pg. 4
Types of Trail Users
The following types of users will be considered during the planning, design and management of the Eagle
Valley Regional Trail system: Pedestrians, joggers or runners, equestrians, in-line skaters, cross country
skiers, hikers, fishermen, boaters and bicyclists. These user types can be grouped into four distinct
categories based on the type of use, why they choose that type of use and where they prefer to do it:
The 'Recreational" trail or shared-road user primarily includes walking or cycling children and families
or adults out for social or exercise reasons. Recreational users are generally local residents but
may include tourists from outside of the area that want to enjoy some exercise and exploration. In
general, recreational users prefer separated trails and low volume streets. Children account for a
large percentage of users in neighborhoods and on routes to schools, recreation areas and some
commercial centers. Typically, a large percentage of children under 16 ride or own a bike.
The "Trainer" category defines cyclists training for
competition who generally prefer to travel faster and longer
distances than the recreational cyclist. Trainers tend to
prefer roads over shared-use trails separated from roads
because of allowable higher speeds, fewer intersections
that require the road traffic to stop, and conflicts with other
paths users. Once in motion, trainers like to keep up their
momentum. The Trainer category also applies to runners,
joggers and in-line skaters. Those users have influenced
shared-use trail design in the last ten years to include
adjacent soft-surface running paths or increased width to
accommodate in-line skating patterns.
The "Commuter" or "Utility" user walks or bikes to work or school on a trail or road. This category is
usually local residents and they prefer the most direct routes with the least stops and delays. Low
volume streets or trails are ideal but a high volume street may be part of their route because of
being more direct. Utility trips include trips to the store, library, bank, etc. The perceived benefits of
bike and pedestrian commuting includes financial savings, improving health and environmental
stewardship.
The "Equestrian" trail user warrants specific mention because they have different needs or
preferences than the other user types. Equestrians generally prefer not to mix with vehicular traffic,
especially avoiding busy roads. Horses and bicycles, or horses and pedestrians with pets are
sometimes not compatible. Paved trails are generally not designed for use by horses and not
preferred by riders. Surface maintenance issues may also arise if the trail is swept on an infrequent
basis. Opportunities do exist within the proposed system to construct bridle paths alongside the
core trail but located at a safe, compatible distance. The planning maps identify trail sections
where a bridle path or horse trailer parking can likely be accommodated. The use and enjoyment of
horses is a large part of the region's history and present day lifestyles and this plan advocates
accommodating that use where compatible with more common types of users listed above.
Ch. 1 Pg. 5
Implementation of the Regional Trails Plan
Implementation of this plan will require close coordination among local, state and federal government
agencies and private interests.
There are essentially two methods through which the public trails system will be developed:
Initiated by Local Government on private land with public use easements or on public land, including
road rights-of-way. Local government includes towns, Eagle County, metropolitan districts and the
multi-jurisdictional ECO Trails program of the Eagle County Regional Transportation Authority. ECO
Trails acts as the general coordinating agency to facilitate communications between all involved
parties regarding trail issues, but will also be available for specific project tasks such as design
coordination, grant applications, construction management, etc. Trail construction will be managed
as applicable by towns, county or ECO Trails.
2. Initiated by Private Land Development, either voluntarily or as part of an approved development. The
specific requirement for trails shall be determined by the local jurisdiction based on the criteria in their
land use regulations and typically linked to the scale of the development and it's associated impacts.
Either a trail easement or trail easement and construction may be required.
Existing trail connections to public lands should be identified on development plans and jurisdictions
are encouraged to require retention or replacement of the existing access trails. Creation of new
access to adjacent public lands is also encouraged where none exists, provided it is compatible with
the character of the public land. Paved surfacing is not recommended for this type of trail.
This Plan identifies potential trail routes but options are not restricted to what is shown on the planning
maps. If other opportunities present themselves or obstacles prevent implementation, the route is flexible.
The core trail and spur trail alignments depicted within this Plan are conceptual until constructed.
If a trail alignment is shown on the following route maps as traveling through a property, the trail should be
included as part of the overall development plan. The development plan should also show how the trail,
sidewalk and shared road circulation system internal to the property will link to the overall trails system.
Areas Outside of the Core Trail Corridor:
If a developing area is not addressed by this plan (i.e. tributary side valleys), the specific local government
land use plan for that area should be consulted for guidance. If no specific guidance exists, trail
construction and/or easements should be required if trail sections exist in that area to which connections
can eventually be made and/or a new trail connection is warranted by the scale of the development project.
As stated in the design standards in Chapter 4, spur trails should be at least eight feet wide and the
minimum recommended trail easement at least 20 feet wide unless exceptionally wide road rights-of-ways
can accommodate a portion of the trail corridor without future road widening threatening the trail.
Ch. 1 Pg. 6
Relationship to other Land Use Management Plans
Existing land use and trail plans for local governments in the Eagle Valley were consulted as part of this
plan preparation, including the Eagle County Trail Plan 1993, Town of Vail Comprehensive Open Lands
Plan 1994, Minturn Parks and Recreation Master Plan 1992 and Town of Avon Recreation Master Plan
1992.
This plan is intended to replace the specific trail component of the existing plans, particularly to clarify the
location of the core trail route, for the purpose of coordinating local efforts. If a conflict is found to exist
between any of the above referenced documents and this plan, the underlying jurisdiction will need to
evaluate and render the necessary decisions. The language in the adopting Inter-Governmental
Agreement shall provide further guidance.
Amendment of the Regional Trails Plan
Trail alignments may be subject to change for a variety of reasons such as establishing more effective
connections, protection of natural resources, elimination of conflicts, better land use buffering or siting, or
because of difficulties in construction or acquisition. As a policy document, this Plan must be open to
amendment in order to accommodate changing conditions and remain viable.
Minor amendments, such as altering an alignment in order to improve it's usability or mitigate a land use
issue, will be reviewed and acted upon through the standard development review process or through
administrative review that can be thoroughly documented and defended as meeting the following criteria:
1. There is justification for the proposed change
2. The proposed change conforms with the goals of the Trails Plan
3. The proposed change would be compatible with existing and planned surrounding
land uses.
Review of the plan should take place every seven years, or more frequently if necessary (e.g. revise the
maps to show significant alignment changes or construction accomplishments, etc.). Major revisions
should be processed through the same type of inter-governmental agreement process as this original
version.
Recommended Related Studies
BadcountryTrails: The effort to document and plan new routes to and from the public lands in Eagle
County, referred to commonly as the "backcountry" , should be continued and gradually integrated with this
plan through updated mapping. As the population grows, there will more use demand on existing
backcountry trails and increased pressure for new trails to be created. The term "frontcountry" trails which
appears in this plan refers to trails that may be located on undeveloped or lightly developed private land
between the densely populated urban area and the public lands.
Tributary Valley Trails: This current planning effort is very specific to the main valley of the Eagle River.
However, all tributary valleys and the Colorado River valley should be included in future trails planning
Ch. 1 Pg. 7
efforts given the aggressive rate of development and population growth in those valleys which include:
• Lake Creek Valley
• Brush Creek Valley
• Gypsum Creek Valley
• Colorado River Valley, including Dotsero, Burns, McCoy and Bond
A recommended project is the mapping of all existing trail sections and easements in these areas (and
currently there are few). This project should be undertaken in the next two years (by 2003).
For the short term, the process outlined in the previous Plan Implementation section should be followed for
making trail decisions or recommendations for land development in the tributary valleys.
Trail Plan Process
The Eagle Valley Regional Trail Plan process began in January 2000 and was initiated by a request made
by the Eagle Valley Trails Committee to the ECO Trails staff.
The Eagle Valley Trails Committee, created in 1996 as part of the passage of the 1/2% mass
transportation sales tax served as primary steering committee for the creation of this plan. The Committee
membership represents bicycling, pedestrian, equestrian and family interests. The Committee works with
the staff and board of the Eagle County Regional Transportation Authority, known as ECO, to accomplish
it's mission to develop, promote and cooperatively maintain a scenic and safe urban and backcountry multi-
use, non-motorized trail system throughout Eagle County.
County and town government staff contributed specific information and guidance on feasible and preferred
routes. Public meetings were held at the outset of the process with elected officials from each of the
partners in the planning effort which included the towns of Gypsum, Eagle, Avon, Minturn, Red Cliff, and
Eagle County. Representatives from state and federal government agencies provided valuable input as
well. The local engineering firm was hired to create planning maps and prepare cost estimates of each
segment.
Final map work was performed by the Eagle County Geographic Information Systems (GIS) department. A
complete list of participants is included in the Plan Appendix B.
After a series of final public worksessions and hearings with each of the partner jurisdictions, the collective
adoption of the Plan through intergovernmental agreement was completed on (date to be filled in), 2001.
Funding the Trails System Construction
Paying for the creation of the trail system will require a combination of funding sources and methods since
no existing single source can fully pay for the estimated cost to complete the system. It will require
partnerships, creativity and aggressive fundraising.
Ch. 1 Pg. 8
Sources of funding include:
Local Governments:
10% of the revenues from the local mass transportation sales tax, as authorized by Eagle
County voters, managed by Eagle County and available to the towns and county for trail
projects
Matching funds from the towns and county towards building trails sections within their
jurisdictions
Matching funds from other local governmental entities such as metropolitan districts
Grants, including:
• Colorado State Trail Program Grants
• Great Outdoor Colorado grants from lottery proceeds
• Colorado Department of Transportation "Enhancement" grants
• Federal cost sharing grants (i.e. through Forest Service or BLM)
• Private local, state or national foundations such as the Vail Valley, Gates or Taylor
Foundations
Contributions from citizens, businesses or corporations of cash, labor or supplies.
Incidental projects such as development, highway projects, utility projects or improvement districts may
also help facilitate construction of some sections of the trail.
Other potential funding methods that have been or can be explored further include:
• Voter approval for bonding for the final sections of the trail. The possibility of selling bonds
to raise funds for construction was explored in 2000. Study determined that annual revenues
did not generate enough income to pay off a 20 year debt, if bonding for entire cost of the
trail system. The final decision was to remain with a "pay-as-you-go" approach and revisit
bonding at a later date.
• Dedicate annual lottery entitlements received from the state by the towns and county to fund
local trail projects
• Adopting development impact fees for trail construction (sometimes combined with parks
and recreation or open space fees) within each jurisdiction
• Bicycle registration fees
• Trail use fees
• "Sale" of trail items such as benches or landscaping in return for a plaque on that item
• Sales of trail program items (t-shirts)
• Non-profit group events that name the trail project as the funding recipient and trail race
sponsorship.
Ch. 1 Pg. 9
CHAPTER 2
Estimated Costs and Construction
Priorities
The following information includes a summary of the estimated cost of construction of specific sections of
the planned core trail, the list of construction priorities through the next five years and a summary of the
priorities for road improvements that would augment the regional trails system and core trail route in
particular.
Summary of Estimated Costs of the Planned Core Trail:
The boundary limits of each cost-estimated trail section is marked on the maps in Chapter 3. See
Appendix A for the detailed cost estimates for each section. The estimates include design and construction
costs.
Trail Section Core Trail
GLENWOOD CANYON to DOTSERO $7,791.00
DOTSERO to GYPSUM $2,075,832.00
Colorado River to west boundary of Gypsum
TOWN of GYPSUM $261,664.00
from west boundary to Jules Drive
GYPSUM to EAGLE $809,240.00
from Jules Drive to connection with existing
County Fairgrounds trail
TOWN of EAGLE $1,230,454.00
from County Fairgrounds trail to current
end of Chambers Road
EAGLE to WOLCOTT $8,227,668
from end of Chambers Road to Highway 131
intersection
WOLCOTT to WEST EDWARDS combined with above figure
WEST EDWARDS to AVON $400,000.00
Hillcrest Drive to west boundary of Avon
TOWN of AVON $500,000.00
from West Beaver Creek Boulevard to end
of Hurd Lane trail
AVON to DOWD JUNCTION $2,233,758.00
from end of Hurd Lane trail to Dowd pedestrian bridge
through planned Village at Avon project
DOWD JUNCTION THROUGH VAIL to VAIL PASS
Missing links:
a. Vail Valley Drive Separated Trail $1,300,000
to Vail Valley Drive East
b. Lionshead Bypass $225,000
c. Vail Village Bypass $40,000
d. Golf Course Separated Path $260,000
DOWD JUNCTION to MINTURN $725,000.00
from Dowd pedestrian bridge to
downtown Minturn
TOWN of MINTURN $917,599.00
from downtown Minturn to base of Battle Mountain
MINTURN to RED CLIFF $933,100.00
Battle Mountain to downtown Red Cliff
TOTAL $19,040,106
Criteria for Core Trail Construction Priorities
In establishing the priorities for trail system construction, the following criteria were reviewed by the team
working on the Plan including local government staff and the Trails Committee. The projects were
compared to these criteria but it is also important to note that priorities do change - opportunities arise,
funding abilities are limited, or incidental issues create obstacles or amend the timing of the project. The
list of priorities that follows this criteria should be considered as a conceptual list, based on current desires
and available funding.
1. Links population centers (communities, neighborhoods) and traffic generators (commercial centers,
schools, recreation sites)
2. Minimal physical constraints (low level of natural hazards, amenable topography, room for re-
vegetation and stabilization, etc.)/construction will not be extremely difficult
3. Minimal ownership constraints and disruption of existing property use
4. Accommodates a mix of user groups/benefit the most people
5. Improves existing safety issues by reducing conflict with automobiles and incorporate design
features that mitigate hazardous conditions
6. Without immediate acquisition/construction, is lost as an opportunity
7. Multiple entities can share costs, design, construction, signs, maintenance, right-of-way, etc.
8. Creates no or minimal impact on the area's wildlife or habitat
9. Is critical link in the establishment of a continuous system or connects existing trails
10. Services an existing heavy demand by commuting or recreation traffic
11. Maximizes opportunities to view or pass through scenic features such as unique land forms,
waterways, vistas, vegetation, wildlife
12. Provides non-motorized, appropriate access to public lands (open spaces, trailheads, waterways)
13. Can be constructed and maintain at a relatively reasonable cost in a reasonable amount of time
14. Creates a variety of trip options via connections
15. Meets funding agency criteria
16. Provides an-opportunity for historic or natural feature interpretation without disturbance
17. Is able to be used year round or at least in three seasons
18. Facilitates the development of a inter-county or statewide non-motorized network of trails.
PRIORITY TRAIL CONSTRUCTION PROJECTS - Five Year Plan
Potential
Trail Section Location Partners
GYPSUM TO EAGLE - PHASE I Gypsum & County Town of Gypsum
$440,000 (2001 estimate) Maps # 5 & 6 Eagle County
Red Table Acres to Gateway Center ECO Trails
DOWD JUNCTION TO MINTURN - PHASE I Town of Minturn Minturn
$125,000 (2001 estimate) Map #20 ECO Trails
Minturn North Bridge to Downtown
WEST AVON - PHASE II Avon Town of Avon
$400,000 (2001 estimate) Map #17 ECO Trails
West Beaver Creek Blvd to Avon Road
VAIL CORE TRAIL MISSING LINKS Town of Vail Vail
Costs vary, see previous list Maps #25,26,27 ECO Trails
WEST EDWARDS TRAIL - PHASE II Eagle County Eagle County
$300,000 (2001 estimate) Map #15 Edwards Metro
from Trailer Park to Hillcrest Drive ECO Trails
AVON TO DOWD - PHASE 1 Town of Avon & County Avon
$1,200,000 (2001 estimate) Maps #18 & 19 Developer
through proposed Village at Avon Eagle County
to River Run Apts entrance ECO Trails
GYPSUM TO EAGLE - PHASE II Town of Eagle & County Eagle
As part of 1-70 interchange project Maps #6 & 7 Eagle County
Gateway Center to Brush Creek Road State/Federal
through County fairgrounds. ECO Trails
AVON TO DOWD - PHASE II Eagle County Eagle County
$1,200,000 (2001 estimate) Map #19 ECO Trails
River Run Apts. entrance to State
Dowd Junction Pedestrian Bridge
DOWD JUNCTION TO MINTURN - PHASE II Town of Minturn & County Minturn
$650,000 (2001 estimate) Map #19 Eagle County
From Pedestrian Bridge to North Bridge ECO Trails
in Minturn over Eagle River
Remaining Trail Sections to Prioritize:
1. Eagle through Wolcott to West Edwards
2. Downtown Eagle
3. North Minturn to and base of Battle Mountain
4. Battle Mountain to Red Cliff
5. Dotsero to Gypsum
6. Gypsum to Glenwood Canyon
Priorities for Shared Road Improvements:
To resolve safety issues on shared road improvements, the following list is provided as a record of what the
participants in this planning process, some of them frequent users of local roads for running, biking or walking,
believe to be the highest priorities for widened shoulders, bike lanes or bike routes on the primary local travel
routes through the length of the Eagle Valley:
Highway 6:
1. Avon to Edwards
2. Eagle to Gypsum
3. Edwards to Wolcott
4. Wolcott to Eagle
5. Gypsum to Dotsero
Highway 24:
1. Minturn to Red Cliff
Highway 131:
1. Wolcott to State Bridge - widened shoulders
Other Major Roadways:
2. North and South Vail Frontage Roads - Ford Park to East Vail Exit - shoulders
3. Pedestrian Bridge to Main Vail Roundabout on North Frontage Road - shoulders
4. Brush Creek Road -shoulders and/or separated trail
5. Lake Creek Road - shoulders and/or separated trail
6. Colorado River Road - shoulders
"Share the Road" Sign Priorities:
1. Highway 6 from Gypsum to Glenwood Canyon
2. Lake Creek Road
3. Brush Creek Road
4. Highway 131
All local roads administrated by town or country government should be evaluated for bicycle and pedestrian issues
when improvements are under consideration. This includes widening with either asphalt or recycled asphalt
(rotomill), improved signing, removing hazards such as grates, ditches, drop-offs, revised striping and timing chip
seal projects to accommodate other users besides vehicles.
CHAPTER 3
Planning Maps for the
Eagle Valley Regional Trails System
Edwards trailside park
Planned trail route near Dowd Junction
Planned trail route from Minturn to Dowd Junction
Riverwalk pedestrian bridge in Edwards
Trail at Eagle River Villas in Eagle
Old Highway 24 near Gilman
Hurd Lane trail in Avon
@COtrails
CORE TRAIL
Index Sheet
Entrance of Glenwood
Canyon to East Vail
Legend
Proposed Core Trail
Alternative to
Proposed Core Trail
Existing Core Trail
Proposed Spur Trail
Existing Spur Trail
,%, Contrained for Rail and
Trail Shared Corridor
Railroad - Rail and Trail
Can Share
Proposed Backcountry Trail
/\/ Existing Backcountry Trail
? Exhibit Index
¦ Trails Plan Area
Town Boundary
0 Eagle County Boundary
State of Colorado
BLM
z USFS
M, ? Wilderness
N
Y1, =1000'
GIS Department
This map was produced by the Eagle
County GIS Department in cooperation
with Johnson, Kunkel and Associates.
Use of this map should be for general
purposes only, Eagle County does not
warrant the accuracy of the data
contained herein.
Map Revised: 2.22-00
e:lspec_projsleoo_lrai Isllrai Islplanl
ecoproject_folderlecotrai Iscd t _revis.apr
COtrails
CORE TRAIL
Exhibit 16
Edwards to Avon
Sheet 16 of 29
t
LEGEND
Proposed Core Trail
N Existing Core Trail
Existing Spur Trail
' Proposed Spur Trail
Railroad - Rail and Trail
Can Share
Constrained for Rail and
Trail Shared Corridor
r Busy Intersections
Bridge/Underpass
® Public Park
® USFS
? Town Boundary
Contours are at 10' Intervals
A
N
1' =1000'
a
.7 17t.011011",
GIS Department
This map was produced by the Eagle
County GIS Department in cooperation
with Johnson, Kunkel and Associates.
Use of this map should be for general
purposes only. Eagle County does not
warrant the accuracy of the data
contained herein.
Map Revised: 2-22-00
e:lspec_projsleco_tra ilsltrailslp lanl
ewyrojed_folderlecotrai Iscdl _revi s. ap r
ecotrajis
CORE TRAIL
,. s, <<yq,yY
n , Xr?? f zxl , ?? J , z Exhibit 17
x f r 1
,? 7 y h r Edwards to Avon
Sheet 17 of 29
??„r? ?\ ? "J ?M+y, ?? •? ^Q'.. yr ?lx'
LEGEND
'i\tXr
^/ Proposed Core Trail
46
? Alternative to
??" ?' ? ? Proposed Core Trail 51
Existing Core Trail
T6 Existing Spur Trail
®
Trail becomes sidewalk on r' Town of
71
?'. "d'b?„? "",Nm„ y„ '.?.y,?. y._r s?,_,,.•. vehicular bridge. Planned to 's? 4?t? r} }rod r r!,+.'? ` icF Proposed Spur Trail
ceMineasse aratedl0'trail. 4 AVON
? ,,;;' tt ?" -_ ,rte ? ? ?'"` ? :. • w ? ? ? ?d:`S ?^ '4? \ ? r ? ? ?' ? ?. ? 7
='?w?L_ - ^' ,?' f,-' •,?: > u o , n.: ?4 ^/ Railroad - Rail and Trail
Can Share
111 Extensive sidewalk system
s t e w? 1?jt f?a lc Ir G, ??
' throughoutdowntownAvon. a ter; ? Constrained for Rail and
Sta West * t "? , a
Edwards to Avon ° 6 Trail Shared Corridor
boat rampl sr s ? ' , , .r
. ti estim \ lw? - ">rM r .. + E%isting
cost ate potential trail park h A
p Start Town of <+ ^? Z? „ G "- ` { \, i Y yi L T
Avon cost Driveway
t y,.. estimate. nrrG rw: t r •y.; ?'* Zs; .,,, c ?7 ir`7i'.9 ?,' .?? ri'v f
''`? r,r `'? 4?tr'hrr"??.:. 1 ,, ° • Intersecting Roads
} %g,r of .Y'7?s.: v ` '-xy7 r.; ?+• ..,?. ?'; r !\ ._';i \'`., `? ,a1. ??1ili?•,''?y} ?'y lA '? ..,
f• ,, '?<?? ??- ? ;, ?... Bridge/Railroad Crossing
?` 1? s 4 '?? )? J.>pa? M' ?/fNi`? r v 1 4 ? :5. ` r!x• , 1 ,?A ;=Jo c¢ . n?„.. .,
Pursue relocation of core trail route to north
??r t 4 Yti3 5t r ? ? s f 'ar f t, w S ., ?* ) rJ w side of tracks. EaglebendDrivedevelopment ?i Public Park
t r *r i. ?? a «e f y limits the ability to continue separated trail. 77,
USFS
Existing B' paved trail on They
i? N?.it { F 'ti?'?k vw Y? ! x it ltc. Paved trail to Beaver Creek Confluence property. Possibly
,C t Yf d + widen to 10' at further date.
k ' 4 yw r 's"'• r' , ! f, t R L Not in public ownershipat ?r t> -" '!"{?- m, Town Boundary
Fx.. ?. ?. '? •..,r :v: .. _ .. Y xa. i. ?....... .. _..k; t this time%
Contours are at 10 Intervals
Travels under Bob the Bridge. Steep "? am'? 4• u - '
switchback up to Hurd Lane. Retrofit in
future with more gradual ramp or swithbacksr ,? ?? A t !
?rJ R A{ f b f IS7 tx
(?1 ? ,rlj'4ri. t?r "74 r'ft *' J ttr ,t i
'Existing trail attached to curb for
Hurd Lane. Several intersecting
driveways impede smooth flow.
r.' r b?3
? ?, ? .. .s...•' :y... ? ' Win' ?'." :-? •« t S ??y t ?? rev ?, .'arX`;<. X .x.' X ., i?. ..
t` a4 3 ' .h ^i
N
1' =1000'
GIs Department
s
n This map was produced by the Eagle
\ n, County GIS Department in cooperation
with Johnson, Kunkel and Associates.
Use of this map should be for general
purposes only. Eagle County does not
warrant the accuracy of the data
contained herein.
Map Revised: 2-22-00
e:Aspecyrojs\eco_trailsltrailslolanA
ecoyrojeci_iolderlecotraiis.dl_ evls apr
e , ?? ? ?C Exist
u`. 'V[ ryn bac
BCOtrails
CORE TRAIL
Exhibit 18
Avon to Vail
Sheet 18 of 29
LEGEND
^/ Proposed Core Trail
^/ Existing Core Trail
Existing Spur Trail
Proposed Spur Trail
Railroad - Rail and Trail
Can Share
Constrained for Rail and
Trail Shared Corridor
/"\// Existing Backcountry Trail
Driveway
Intersecting Roads
Busy Intersections
Bridge/Underpass
® Public Park
® USFS
=1 Town Boundary
Contours are at 10' Intervals
?a?lc COUP/?.
N
1' =1000'
GIS Department
This map was produced by the Eagle
County GIS Department in cooperation
with Johnson, Kunkel and Associates.
Use of this map should be for general
purposes only. Eagle County does not
warrant the accuracy of the data
contained herein.
Map Revised: 2-22-00
e:lspec_projaleco trailsltrailslplanl
eco project_folderiecotrailscd1_revis.apr
ecaras
CORE TRAIL
Exhibit 19
Avon to Vail
Sheet 19 of 29
LEGEND
*V Proposed Core Trail
Alternative to
Proposed Core Trail
Existing Core Trail
N Railroad - Rail and Trail
Can Share
? Constrained for Rail and
Trail Shared Corridor
Existing Backcountry Trail
Busy Intersections
Bridge/Underpass
Z Railroad Bridge
® Public Park
State Land Board
® USFS
0 Town Boundary
Contours are at 10' Intervals
N Y
1' =1000'
GIs Department
This map was produced by the Eagle
County GIS Department in cooperation
with Johnson, Kunkel and Associates.
Use of this map should be for general
purposes only. Eagle County does not
warrant the accuracy of the data
contained herein.
Map Revised: 2-22-00
e:lspec_projsleco_trai Is\trai Is\p la nl
eco_project_folderlecotrailscdl revis.apr
CHAPTER 4
Trail Design and
Construction Standards
Introduction
Core Trail at Riverwalk in Edwards
This chapter includes recommended standards for design and construction of the Regional Core Trail and
connecting Spur Trails that are separated from roadway and offer a transportation option and recreation
opportunity. These trails are intended for use by the public. Also addressed in this section are standards for
unpaved trails, private trails, sidewalks, and safely sharing roadways with non-motorized uses.
Fundamentals of Trail Design
These standards are based primarily on the 1999 guidelines from the American Association of State
Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO) for the development of bicycle facilities, particularly their
recommendations regarding shared use paths and shared Roadways. Several other studies and standards
resources were consulted in the formulation of this chapter as well (see References, Appendix C) .
In addition to following the detailed design recommendations, implementation of this plan should reflect
several basic design philosophies. In developing the route for the Core Trail, these philosophies were
considered:
CONSIDER THE POTENTIAL USER RANGE OFABILITIES, and carrying capacity when designing a trail
segment. Trail width, slope, surface and accessibility determine the type of trail user (e.g.
road bike vs. mountain bike) and overall carrying capacity (e.g. 6' trail vs. 10' trail). The Core
Trail project, for example, is being designed with a certain user in mind - a family on a bike
ride with children either in a burley or on their own bikes. That image helps define the level
of safety, grade, design speed, and overall quality of experience.
2. LOCATE TRAILS IN THE MOST EFFICIENT, DIRECT TRAVEL ROUTE WHERE POSSIBLE except where the
purpose of the trail has been determined to be primarily scenic and recreational.
3. DESIGN TO AVOID OR MITIGATE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS by not encroaching upon wetlands or
riparian corridors, critical habitat areas, and erosive landforms. Follow natural contours to
minimize cut and fill activities. Meander around fragile or established features. Make every
effort to preserve existing vegetation. If environmental impacts are unavoidable, mitigate with
proven successful methods. Where possible, utilize areas of existing disturbance such as
utility line easements, abandoned rail corridors or ditches.
Ch. 4 Pg. 1
4. MINIMIZE OR MITIGATE IMPACTS OF TRAIL UPON ADJACENT LANDOWNERS. Some trail sections may be
in close proximity to residential, commercial, industrial or agricultural development. These
conflicts must be identified as part of the analysis for each trail segment. Mitigation
measures shall be identified and may include but are not limited to realignment, fencing,
berming, and screening. This aspect of the trails segment analysis and design is very
important to the community success of the system. The "good neighbor" policy is
particularly important during the construction period.
5. MAXIMIZE SCENIC VIEWS. Site the alignment to view scenic features while actively using the trail
and at rest stops.
6. CONSIDER SAFETY IN ALL LEVELS OF SITING AND DESIGN. Safety is the primary focus of the following
recommended design standards.
7. DESIGN FOR EASE OF USE AND NAVIGATION. Keep construction (uniform surface type and width)
and accessories (signs, striping, lighting, striping, trailheads) consistent throughout the
system to promote an image of reliability and ease of use.
8. DESIGN FOR EASE OF MAINTENANCE. If possible, avoid constructing trail sections through areas of
poor drainage, unstable soils, rock or snow slide areas, through shaded icy spots,
immediately adjacent to winter sanded roadways, vehicular use areas or snow storage sites,
or in areas of mature vegetation that is prone to deadfall, debris or surface roots. Consider
vandalism susceptibility and prevention when selecting materials and accessories (lighting,
bollards, furniture, etc.).
9. DESIGN AS A FOUR-SEASON TRAIL, if possible, in the most heavily populated areas. This will
require prior commitment to winter maintenance by the managing agency and mitigatable
wildlife issues.
Design Standards For Trails
In certain cases, deviation from these recommended standards should be allowed by the managing
jurisdiction where safety or user experience are not compromised, and the rationale for the deviation is
defensible. For example, narrowing the core trail to less than the recommended width in areas where
there are exceptional property or environmental impacts may be allowable if minimized to the greatest
extent possible.
For more specific guidance or for items not addressed in the following standards, consult the most current
American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials and Colorado Department of
Transportation guidelines.
Trail Width:
10 feet wide for the majority of the Core Trail System for medium levels of use by a variety of user
types, with 1 to 2 foot clear areas, graded for drainage, on each side of the trail.
8 feet wide for Spur Trail sections connecting to the Core Trail, or on other public trails where traffic
is expected to be moderate, even on typical peak days during peak hours, and there are safe
opportunities to pass. Provide 1 to 2 foot clear areas, graded for drainage on each side of the trail.
Ch. 4 Pg. 2
TYPICAL TRAIL CROSS SECTION
_ IA• 10• WIDE ASPHALT BIKE PATH
SHOULDER
O 2% MIN - 2X CROSS SLOPE
3" ASPHALT MAT
BASE COURSE SHOULDER
SUBGRADE COMPACTED TO 95% MINIMUM
1.0•
SHOULDER
O 25 MIN
MINIMUM 6" BASE COURSE CRUSHED STONE
COMPACTED TO 95% OPTIMUM.
• 12 feet wide for trail sections with expected heavy use by a variety of user types (pedestrians,
bicycles, occasional maintenance vehicles, cycling two abreast, roller skaters), with 1 to 2 foot clear
areas graded for drainage on each side of the trail.
• For any width of trail listed above, where demand exists and budget allows, a 3 to 5 foot soft surface
trail is recommended for separate jogging use, either immediately adjacent to the trail or separation.
AdiacentSlopes
• Adjacent uphill slopes, 3:1 preferred, 1:5:1 maximum
• Adjacent downhill slopes, 3:1 preferred, 2:1 maximum. Railing, fence or dense landscape barrier
required for greater than 2:1 slopes.
Surfacing:
• A minimum of 3 inches Bituminous Asphalt over 6 inches of compacted CDOT Class 6 aggregate base
course (ABC) over a compacted subgrade. A soils report is advisable to determine appropriate
pavement and submaterial thickness.
• Concrete trails are encouraged when feasible and constructed with 4 inches of reinforced 3,000 psi
concrete over 6 inches of compacted CDOT Class 6 ABC. In areas prone to erosion or flood, concrete
may be required.
• Transitions between different surfacing types (e.g. new asphalt to existing asphalt, asphalt to concrete,
asphalt to base course) should be flush with no more than a 1/4" differential.
Compaction:
• All asphalt, base course (including shoulders) and subgrade material to be compacted to 95% of
maximum density obtained at optimal moisture content as determined by AASHTO T180-57, Method
Ch. 4 Pg. 3
A, Testing. Subgrade and base course must be dry and free of frost when asphalt is placed.
Shoulders may require additional treatment to retain compaction and methods include adding lime or
sakrete to base course in areas where shoulders are exceptionally prone to erosion.
Design Speed:
20 mph for the paved trail specified above/15 mph for unpaved paths
Bicyclists can travel faster than 20 mph but it is inappropriate to do so in a mixed-use setting.
Meanders may be used to encourage reduced bicycle speed. Raised surface methods, such as speed
bumps and upright barriers, such as bollards, should not be used to reduce speeds as they create
more of a hazard than a deterrent. (See Barriers section below).
Sight Distance:
All alignments should incorporate safe sight distance in compliance with the AASHTO design
guidelines, especially at narrow sections, intersections, curves and shall give special attention to wet,
shaded, unpaved or otherwise hazardous sections.
Minimum Curve Radius:
The recommended minimum curve radius for a 20 mph design speed is 36 feet, based on a 15 degree
lean angle.
When substandard radius curves must be used on shared use trails because of right-of-way,
topographical or other considerations, standard curve warning signs and supplemental pavement
markings should be installed. It is advisable to widen the trail in order to increase the lateral space
available to bicyclists as they lean to the inside of the turn.
Cross Slope:
2 - 3% maximum cross slope, may be increased to up to 5% on curves but overall disabled access
should be evaluated as part of the design decision.
Grade:
2% to 3% slope preferred, 1 % acceptable but drainage should be considered.
Grades on shared use trails should be kept to a minimum; especially on long inclines. Grades should
be kept to 5% or less as much as possible. On shared use paths, where terrain dictates, designers
may need to exceed the 5% grade recommended for bicycles on some short section.
Ch. 4 Pg. 4
Acressibitity:
The summarized American with Disabilities Act trail guidelines adopted in 2000, are as follows and
should be accommodated. This list also includes AASHTO standards for the category of 5% to 8.33%
which are not specifically addressed by the ADA standards.
• 5% grade or less for any distance
• 5-6% for up to 800 feet (per AASHTO)
• 7% for up to 400 feet (per AASHTO)
• Up to 8.33% grade for 200 feet maximum. Resting intervals no more than 200 apart.
• Up to 10% for 30 feet maximum. Resting intervals at 30 feet.
• Up to 12.5% maximum. Resting intervals at 10 feet.
• No more than 30% of the trail may exceed a running slope of 8.33%
• Passing Space: provided at least every 1000 feet where trail width is less than 5 feet.
• Signs shall provided indicating the length of the accessible trail segment. Good signing at
trail access points that identify situations that could be difficult to negotiate will help users
determine for themselves whether to use the trail.
ADA guidelines recognize that in some cases it may be difficult to meet the recommended standards.
It is understood that it may be very difficult to build fully accessible trails but every effort should be
made in design and construction to accommodate disabled access.
Excessive grades may be mitigated by widening the trail, signing to alert trail users to grades and
allowable speeds, providing longer sight distance and wider clearance, installing railings, or
incorporating short switchbacks where possible.
Equestrian Trails/Bridle Paths:
Bridle paths separated from paved shared use paths are recommended because of potential conflicts
between horses, bicycles, dogs, in-line skaters and pedestrians
Recommended width is 5 to 8 foot, graded to drain properly. Surfacing should be soil, fine gravel,
crusher fines or wood chips.
Recommended separation between a paved shared use trail and a bridle path is 10 feet or greater.
Standard Trail Easement Width:
• 20 foot minimum for off-road, paved trail
• 30 foot minimum for combination paved, off-road trail and unpaved, equestrian trail
• It may be acceptable to request less than 20 feet, depending on the location.
• Abandonment of any easement required for a portion of the trail system may be requested by the
property owner or initiated by the local government if it is determined that the easement and trail
segment are no longer necessary as part of the trails system.
Ch. 4 Pg. 5
Clearance:
Lateral: 1 foot to 2 foot graded clear area with a maximum 6:1 slope
should be maintained adjacent to both sides of the trail. 3
feet or more is desirable to provide clearance from trees,
poles, retaining walls, fences, railings, guardrails or other
lateral obstructions.
Where the trail is adjacent to ditches or slopes down steeper than 3:1, a wider separation should be
considered. A 5 foot separation from the edge of pavement to top of slope is desirable. Depending on
height of embankment, and condition at bottom, a physical barrier such as a railing, fence or dense
shrubbery may need to be installed (see Railings/Fences section below).
Vertical: 10 feet or higher is optimum, 12 feet minimum for equestrians for passing under structures
or vegetation.
For existing structures (i.e. bridges, underpasses) with substandard clearances, hazard signs and
dismount signs should be posted where necessary.
Railings/Fences:
• 54 inches (4.5 feet) minimum height recommended.
• Smooth surfaces recommended including sanded and painted steel or wood or vinyl coated chain link.
• An attractive yet safe railing and fence design should be selected for the Core Trail and used
consistently throughout.
• Railing or fence should extend 4 to 8 feet beyond the edge of the drop-off or hazard area.
• Railing ends should be flanged or flared to prevent users from colliding with the exposed of the railing.
The flanged end also helps to visually tie the railing to the site (also see Bridge section below).
Separation from Adjacent Roadway:
10 foot minimum, wider separation strongly recommended. 5 foot minimum from parking lot and trail
separation.
In extreme cases of less than a 10 foot separation, a barrier a maximum of 42 inches high such as
guardrail or shrubs may be required. Attention must be paid to sight distance during design and
placement. Other structures designed to withstand vehicular impact may also be used, upon review
and approval.
Ch. 4 Pg. 6
Troll and Poad or Driveway Intersections:
• Crossings should be 90 degrees and feature a flat approach.
• Trail users should come to a complete stop at appropriately signed intersections. Signs will include
Stop Ahead, Stop and for minor driveways (i.e. single family residences), Yield.
• Establish exceptionally clear sight lines to and from roadway for safe crossing. Remove or mitigate
visual obstructions.
• For crossings of high traffic roadways, consult AASHTO for detailed guidelines. Traffic control devices
such as timed or user-activated signals may be necessary at certain crossings.
• Where possible, trail crossings should be placed at existing stop-signed or signalized road
intersections.
• Commercial or Industrial driveways that are paved as part of the trail should be evaluated to determine
need for thicker pavement to withstand higher loading, a wider path section to prevent edge raveling
and curve radius to prevent scattering of road shoulder gravel across the path by motor vehicles.
• Overpass or underpass structures, while the optimum method of crossing high volume roadways, are
often cost prohibitive. If an overpass or underpass becomes a real option, consult AASHTO and
CDOT standards (see section on Underpasses/Tunnels below).
Drainage:
Sloping in one direction at an optimum of 2% (5% on curves) is preferred over crowning to provide
drainage and simplify construction and maintenance (see section on Cross Slope above).
Hillside trails may require drainage swales on the uphill side to intercept downhill drainage. Swales
should be located outside of the shoulder area. An exception to this recommended
guideline is when the area available to construct the trail is
very constrained and the trail must be narrowed for a distance.
The uphill shoulder could be deleted and the uphill disturbed
area revegetated to the edge of asphalt. The revegetation will
control some drainage and debris coming from the uphill
side prior to sheet flowing across the path.
Design should include retention of natural groundcover or
revegetation to aid in drainage retention.
Catch basins and cross culverts may be necessary. Culvert
openings should be protected and hidden if possible. Stone
facings are recommended but flared end sections shall be used at minimum.
Clearance between the
edge of the culvert and the trail surface should be 3 feet so as not to create a hazard.
When box culverts are used as part of the trail system, drainage must be considered in design or
retrofitting.
Ch. 4 Pg. 7
Erosion Control:
Erosion control regulations and best management practices adopted by the pertinent jurisdiction shall
be adhered to during the trail construction.
Barriers to Motor Vehicles:
• Shared use trails may occasionally need some form of physical barrier at highway intersections to
prevent unauthorized motor vehicles on the trail. Because barriers are sometimes a hazard, they
should only be used where encroachment by vehicles is a chronic problem, enforcement is difficult
and they can be clearly seen by trail users.
• Common barrier types in include bollards, boulders, low landscaping, plastic breakaway posts or
fencing and should be at least 3 feet tall. Barrier selected should be vandal resistant and able to be
moved.
• Bollards should be of the removable, lockable variety to permit authorized vehicles.
• All barriers other than landscaping should be reflectorized for visibility and a painted a bright color for
daytime visibility. Striping an envelope around the barrier is recommended.
• Barriers should be spaced to allow wheelchairs and bicycles with trailers to pass through.
Utility Structures:
Utility structures such as valve boxes, manhole frames, lids and grates, sanitary sewer clean outs and
storm drain inlets shall be located outside of the trail corridor. If they cannot be removed, they shall be
flush with pavement, non-skid and bicycle safe. All other utility structures should conform to the
lateral clearance standards noted above.
Bridges:
New bridges should be 2 to 4 feet wider than approaching path and a
minimum of 12 feet for shared pedestrian/bicycle bridges.
The top horizontal rail should be a minimum of 54 inches high (4.5
feet). Rub (hand) railings mounted below should be a minimum of 42
inches high (3.5) and of a smooth material such as sanded, stained
wood or steel.
Bridge railings should extend a minimum of 5 feet beyond end of
bridge and flare out away from the bridge and match the approach
grades. Longer approach rails between 12 to 15 feet are
recommended when the connecting path is on an incline.
Ch. 4 Pg. 8
• New bridges should be built for weight loads associated with maintenance vehicles, a minimum of
10,000 pounds with the weight limit posted. 12,500 pounds is preferred.
• Decking shall be of a high friction type and laid perpendicular to the direction of travel. Joints should
be bicycle safe. Drainage off of the bridge must be considered in the bridge design.
• Bridges shall be designed in accordance with local flood regulations and other pertinent state and
federal regulations. Clearance for rafting and other watercraft should be considered in the site design.
• Highway bridges undergoing renovation or reconstruction should be designed to accommodate bike
traffic if a bike lane or route leads bikes to that bridge.
Underpasses or Tunnels:
• Minimum width should be 10 feet with 12 feet or more desirable.
• Minimum overhead clearance should be 10 feet or more if vehicles
will use the structure, 8 feet is sufficient if no vehicles likely.
• Walls should be coated with epoxy paint for easy graffiti removal.
• Include gutters on one or both sides for drainage.
• Where possible, vandal resistant lighting should be mounted on the
walls.
• Signs shall be mounted in the approach zones to warn of hazards.
• All of the above should be considered in retrofitting existing underpasses (e.g. box culverts) but if
minimum width and height will remain substandard, reflectors and black and yellow hazard symbols
and signs should be posted.
At-Grade Railroad Crossings:
Crossings are typically subject to specific standards per railroad policy and state regulations. Signs,
signalization, widths and type of crossing will typically be specified in the railroad's conditions of
approval.
In making a proposal for a crossing, design the trail crossing at a right angle to the railroad tracks and
with a flat approach (0.5% to 2%) to the crossing.
Lighting:
Lighting of the entire Core Trail system is not proposed. However, lighting of certain sections that will
service commuting traffic or are areas of potential hazard or conflict (tunnels, road intersections)
should be considered. Placement should be considerate of adjacent land uses.
Ch. 4 Pg. 9
Light standards should be at a scale appropriate for pedestrian uses (e.g. 12' high posts with lights
shielded to shine downward upon the path), meet minimum clearances and be vandal proof if
possible. Maintenance responsibility for the lights must be established prior to installation.
Style of lighting fixtures should be remain consistent throughout the system.
Signs:
The Core Trail system is proposed to pass through several jurisdictions and consistency of sign type
and design becomes an important issues in order to promote reliability and continuity particularly since
one goal of the system is to link existing and proposed trail systems together.
Construction plans for each trail segment should include specifications for location and type of signs
necessary for the specific trail. There are generally three types of sign types: Safety (Caution or
Regulatory), Etiquette, and Information.
18" x 18", 24" x 24" or 12" x 18" are the standard sizes for trail safety signs, per the MUTCD.
r?l
NO
MOTOR
VEHICLES
Regarding the Core Trail Sign Plan:
• The current Manual of Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD) should be followed as closely
as possible for standard sizes, colors, and shapes but custom signs are sometimes necessary
to address a specific trail situation.
• Trailhead signs should be coordinated for similar design and content along the trail with the
pertinent jurisdictions.
• A Core Trail symbol should be affixed to select signs at various intervals along the Core Trail
route to promote the identity and continuity of the trail system e.g. 4" x 4" rounded edge square
with name of trail - The Eagle Valley Trail - inscribed.
• Post mile markers approximately every two miles in rural areas and every mile in developed
areas. However, sign clutter should be avoided and the mile marking program should not
commence until several long sections (3+ miles) have been established.
• Signs to community centers should be installed at select locations along the Core Trail
including mileage.
Ch. 4 Pg. 10
Locations where the trails ends temporarily, informational signs should be installed to direct
users to the safest route through the gap in the system
Signs should be installed in a consistent manner along the trail according to the following
specification for free standing poles. Low profile monument signs may be appropriate in
certain locations such as for trailhead signs or at activity center entry points. Signs will be
placed to avoid conflicts with vegetation growth.
Each trail segment should be evaluated for appropriate signs, such as the following commonly used
caution or regulatory signs: Slow, Hill Ahead, Curve symbols, Posted Speed, No Motor Vehicles,
Railroad/Road Crossing, Trail Narrows, Narrow Bridge, Bridge and Trail May be Icy, Rough Pavement,
Low Clearance, Trail Ends Ahead, Trail Ends, Stop, Yield, Signs advising motor vehicles of trail
(Watch for Pedestrians or Trail Crossing).
Common information and etiquette signs are: Bikes Yield to Peds, etc., Keep to the Right, Name of
Trail, Bridge, River or Creek, Share the Trail, Directional Signs to Towns, Activity Centers, City Limits,
Please No Trespassing, Trailhead Signs.
Off-road paved trails that end and become either shared road trails or unpaved trails should include a
Trail Ends warning sign. Depending on the particular location, a directional sign may also be
warranted to direct users to the next section of trail.
sign Installation:
Core Trail sign installation should remain consistent with the following installation specifications:
• Signs should be mounted on 4" by 4" treated posts that are either pretreated or coated with
sealant prior to installation.
• Post will be six feet measured from ground level.
• Post should be buried at least 2 to 3 feet in the ground.
• Top of backfill should be ramped slightly away from post for drainage.
• Mix dry cement into backfill before filling in the hole And tamp.
• Top of sign shall be flush with top of post.
• Sign will affixed with lag bolts, vandalism proof variety recommended.
Trail Accessories:
See Appendix B for styles selected for the Core Trail System. Place furniture to meet the
recommended clearance of 3' feet or farther from the trail.
Bicycle racks - at trailheads and access points. Developers shall be encouraged to provide
bicycle racks where applicable.
Furniture - Benches and picnic tables should be made of durable material, in a style that
reflects the natural setting and is consistent throughout the system. Benches should be placed
at rest areas and at trailheads along the trail.
Trash containers - located in rest areas and at trailheads, made of a durable material and
consistent in style throughout the system.
Ch. 4 Pg. 11
• Trash containers - located in rest areas and at trailheads, made of a durable material and
consistent in style throughout the system.
• Restrooms - locate facilities or direct trail to public restroom facilities at 10 mile intervals.
Design should be easily maintained, environmentally sound and reflect the natural
surroundings (e.g. no blue plastic "porto-potties").
• Drinking Water - facilities or access to potable water every 10 miles. Where restrooms with a
water and sewer system are proposed a spigot, handpump or post type is acceptable.
• Pet Waste "Stations" - dispenser for bags to pick up pet waste so not left on trail or in
shoulders.
Trailhead or Rest Area Design:
• Trailhead sites should be selected based on access, least impacts on adjacent neighborhood, ease of
maintenance and no environmental impacts. Parking lots, restrooms, signs, etc. should be sited so as
not to obstruct scenic views. Construction materials should blend in with the adjacent surroundings.
Rest areas along the trail should be located in areas of likely need, such as at the end of an incline or
at a shady spot after an exposed stretch, but they should also be considerate of
the view opportunities.
Trailhead accommodations will vary but the following items should be considered:
• trailhead sign
• parking
• bike racks
• trash receptacles
• benches
• picnic tables
• landscaping
• restrooms
• drinking fountains
• Trailhead Signs should include pertinent usable or interesting
information such as a trail map with distance information, Trail }? r~`
Rules, Contact Information, Flora and Fauna information, Trail
.
Fs J.
Contact Information (e.g. for comments or reporting maintenance a ,
or enforcement issues), Special Considerations i.e. handicapped
accessibility, hazards or interpretation, rest room or rest area sj t : dry
locations .
Landscaping: LI?Y .. .??...?? .tf:
Construction plans for each trail segment shall address landscaping. Prominent existing vegetation
shall be indicated on the plan in relation to the trail location and protected in the field for preservation.
Areas of landscaping for mitigation or general beautification (e.g. around rest areas or restrooms) shall
also be identified on the plans with emphasis on native, low maintenance species. Supplemental
irrigation to aid in plant establishment and first year survival must be specified on the plans.
• All areas disturbed during construction shall be revegetated with an appropriate groundcover seed mix
(see Appendix C for sample mixes). Steep areas may require additional stabilization (fiber matting,
etc.) during plant establishment.
Ch. 4 Pg. 12
Pavement Striping:
• In areas where traffic is steady or high at peak hours, a center stripe is recommended.
• Center striping is also recommended on curved or straight inclines to manage flow of uphill and downhill
traffic.
• Crosswalks should be painted at all road and major driveway intersections.
Maintenance and Emergency Access:
• If new trails are designed with proper clearances, bridge weight loads and trail width, trail maintenance
should be efficient and relatively uncomplicated. However, special attention should be paid to
maintenance vehicle access points and turnarounds and turning radius for vehicles through trail curves.
• Emergency Access points should be identified during planning for construction of each segment, if a not
within 100 feet of a roadway.
Standard Specifications and General Notes for Trail Construction Plans:
• Available from the ECO Trails Program for inclusion in construction plan set. Use of similar construction
techniques and management practices is encouraged among jurisdictions cooperating in the trail
building program outlined by this plan.
As-built Construction Drawings:
• Shall be required at the discretion of the particular jurisdictions. As-builts should at a minimum include
the surveyed final path location described by centerline or edges, culverts with inverts and sign location
and type.
Private Trails:
• Designers of trails which are contained within a new or existing development and are for the exclusive
use of its residents or owners are encouraged to use these standards for design.
Unpaved Trails:
• These standards are for trails not built adjacent to a paved trail but built as independent hiking, biking or
equestrian trails in the frontcountry or backcountry.
• Desired minimum width is 3 feet. Overhead clearance for bike use is 8 feet. Maximum sustained
grades should not exceed 10%, for stretches of less than 150 feet, grades should not exceed 15%.
• Include structures necessary to prevent erosion of surface material, such as concrete pans at cross
drainage locations and water bars or short paved sections on slopes.
• Accessibility to these types of trails should be evaluated per current ADA standards and designed
accordingly.
Ch. 4 Pg. 13
Shared Roadways:
• For the purposes of this plan, shared roadways refers to essentially all roads in all jurisdictions in Eagle
County except those where non-motorized users such as pedestrians and bicyclists are expressly
prohibited.
• Non-motorized users are typically not in the vehicle travel lanes but on the edges of the road platform in
the shoulder, or on bike lanes or a bike route. These terms are often used interchangeably, but are
defined as follows by the Colorado Department of Transportation Bikeway Design Guidelines:
Bike Lane: "A portion of a roadway which has been designated by striping, signing and
pavement markings for the preferential or exclusive use by bicyclists". Bikes lanes should be
incorporated where possible into new street design or retrofit of existing streets. The minimum
width of any bike lanes should be 5 feet excluding the gutter pan. Additional widths are
desirable when substantial truck traffic, parallel parking, speeds over 55 mph or curves are
present. Bike lanes should travel in one direction with traffic. Two way bike lanes on same
side of roadway are not recommended. Consult current AASHTO or local road standards for
bike lane specifications.
Bike Route: "A roadway distinguished by (bicycle-related) signs only, which
provides continuity to other bicycle facilities, or is designated as the proposed
(bicycle) route through high demand corridors". Each jurisdiction is #
encouraged to incorporate bike routes into their comprehensive streets plan.
Establishing bike routes, that are fairly direct, with relatively few stop signs or
intersections and well signed, can reduce hazards to bicyclists on other;]
shared routes. Signs and symbols painted on the road surface will also
improve vehicle awareness of alternative modes of transportation. Shoulders often function as
a de-facto bike lane or bike route and should be inspected for hazards prior to establishing a
route (manholes, sewer inlets, blind driveways, etc.). Bike routes should travel in one direction
with traffic. Incorporating bike routes into a streets system is typically easier than a bike lanes
system because it utilizes existing pavement. Consult current AASHTO or local road
standards for bike route specifications.
Shoulder: "That portion of a roadway exclusive of the travel lane designated and ordinarily used
for vehicle travel. It is that portion of the roadway to the outside of the white line. Colorado
Bicycle Law 42-4-106.5-(5) states "...where a paved shoulder suitable for bicycle riding is
present, persons operating bicycles shall ride on the paved shoulders." A paved shoulder is a
de facto bikeway when present, but is different from a Bike Lane in that it is not signed nor
meant exclusively for the use of bicycles". Shoulders should be provided and maintained on
roads where is anticipated that cyclists will ride, pedestrians may walk and no off road facilities
are available. A minimum of four feet of shoulder width is recommended, 6 feet or greater is
preferred. If rumble strips are present, that area should be not be included in the above
widths. If funding or right-of-way is limited, shoulder widening should occur first on uphill
sections of roadway. Consult AASHTO or local road standards for additional specifications.
Sidewalks:
• Sidewalks are typically intended for pedestrians, built in conjunction with a roadway and generally six
feet wide or less. Bicyclists are typically not legally permitted on sidewalks. Sidewalks are not
considered safe for higher speed use because of width, pedestrian conflicts, copious intersections, poor
sight distance and inconsistent maintenance levels.
Ch. 4 Pg. 14
• Sidewalk design standards are not addressed in this plan. Sidewalks are encouraged throughout the
developed areas of Eagle County as conduits to and from neighborhoods, community centers and other
activity areas. Direct sidewalk connections to the Core Trail and Spur Trail system are also encouraged.
Consult the pertinent Town or County improvement standards for sidewalk requirements.
• The requirement for a sidewalk system (generally 6' wide or less) or a separated trail system (8' wide or
greater) or a combination of both shall be the decision of the individual jurisdiction.
Retrofitting Existing Facilities:
Non-compliance with the recommended standards listed here does not imply that an existing trail facility
is unsafe. It may be very serviceable for the level of use or compared to other trail systems. These
standards are primarily a guideline for new trail development. Retrofitting of trail segments and
structures throughout the entire system is encouraged over time. Retrofitting will most often apply to
these items: curb ramps, clearance to obstructions or marking as unavoidable hazards, signs,
intersections, edge drop offs, bridges without bicycle or pedestrian facilities.
Wildlife Protection:
Trails improperly located or designed can have negative impacts upon resident wildlife including the initial
impacts of construction disturbance, trampling of habitat, fragmentation of habitat and introducing humans
into areas previously not accessible. The Colorado Division of Wildlife recommends the following design
and management principles for the regional trail system to help reduce impacts on wildlife. The intent is to
cause no significant impacts on our local wildlife population and if impacts are not mitigatable, the route
should not be pursued:
• Try to locate trails in already disturbed areas
• Disturb as narrow an area as possible when constructing the trail
• Consider screening trails with vegetation in known habitat areas
• Try to curb opportunities to create casual spurs off of the main trail, particularly along stream
banks
• Be particularly sensitive to wildlife routes to local water sources and avoid crossing those
routes
• Include interpretive displays along the trail about respecting wildlife and habitat
• Trails traveling through winter range should be closed during the critical survival period of
December 1 to April 30. If a trail is adjacent to a major roadway, closure may not be necessary
• Dogs should be restricted or not allowed in sensitive habitat areas
• Railing and fences should be constructed to not impede wildlife movement
• Riparian corridors and wetlands should be protected during and after construction, with no
negative impacts to these prime habitats
• Bear proof trash cans should be installed if trash cans are included trailhead or trail rest area
facilities
Ch. 4 Pg. 15
CHAPTER 5
The Railroad Corridor
as a Trail Corridor
The intent of this chapter is to identify how the rail
corridor, if available for lease or purchase in all or
part, could be incorporated into the core trail route.
A range of potential scenarios is described below
and each section of the corridor evaluated for
feasibility as either a part of the core trail route or
replacing the core trail route.
Background
The Union Pacific Railroad and Southern Pacific Railroad were approved for merger in 1997 by the
federal government's Surface Transportation Board (STB). Included in the merger application was a
request to abandon the 179-mile Tennessee Pass line from Canon City, Colorado to Sage (Gypsum),
Colorado. Operational difficulties associated with the high altitude portion of the line were cited as the
major reason for the abandonment request.
The merger was approved but the abandonment was not. The STB questioned Union Pacific's ability to
reroute traffic from the Tennessee Pass line to other track lines north and south of Colorado. The STB
stated that they would reconsider the abandonment after the traffic rerouting had successfully occurred.
Despite solving problems associated with that transition, UP has opted to not resubmit their request for
abandonment of the Tennessee Pass line because of concerns about future demands for service and
issues related to the Moffat Tunnel near Winter Park, Colorado.
At this time, the portion of the line through Eagle County remains wholly under the ownership of Union
Pacific Railroad (UP).
Options for Trail Use of the Rail Corridor
Each of the options defined below is entirely dependent on approval action from UP as current owners of
the corridor. As of October, 2000, representatives stated that the company is not interested in selling
the entire corridor at this point in time. However, if their position were to change at some time in the
near (1-5 years) or long term (5+ years), the following options could become possibilities:
Option 1: Railroad sells to another railroad or non-railroad private sector owner.
Impact on Core Trail Plan: The Core Trail can be constructed without using the
rail corridor, but along many sections would be more expensive and less direct than if
railroad corridor were available. The Core Trail Plan does depend on obtaining
Ch. 5 Pg. 1
permission to cross the railroad corridor in a minimum of four locations so cooperation
from the railroad or other owner is critical for implementation. If a private, non-railroad
party were to acquire ownership, negotiations for purchase of sections, edges or
crossings would occur with that entity.
Option 2: Railroad corridor is acquired by state or local government and the existing rails remain intact for
future commuter rail use and some possible freight traffic.
Impact on Core Trail Plan: There are many locations along the length of the track line
through Eagle County where rail and trail can share the corridor. There are other
sections where it is extremely difficult or impossible. The section by section analysis
below addresses those locations.
Option 3: Railroad corridor is acquired by state or local government and the rails are removed but future
rail transit use is planned. Trail shares the corridor.
Impact on Core Trail Plan: Same comments as above.
Option 4: Railroad corridor is acquired by state or local government and rails are permanently removed
with no future plans for rail. Bridges can be easily retrofitted if only for trail use. All other
constraints can be addressed with the exception of the contamination and hazard issues
that exist in the area of the Gilman mines.
Impact on Core Trail: Trail could be constructed directly on existing rail platform. From a
trails implementation viewpoint, this is the ideal scenario.
Option 5: Railroad agrees to sell selected portions of the corridor to local government for purposes of
completing critical sections that are difficult to construct along the non-rail core trail
alignment.
Impact on Core Trail Plan: This option would allow bottlenecks in the core trail route to
be resolved. By purchasing outside edges of the corridor in key locations, the rail
operations would not be impacted and the trail implementation would not be curtailed or
halted in certain areas such as Avon, Sage to Eagle or Minturn.
Summary of Options:
Option 4, trail on rail corridor after rails removed, is most ideal from a trail building perspective and since
is the easiest option to implement, it is not part of the section by section analysis that follows.
If at any point in the life span of this plan any of the above options become available, the rail corridor
should be employed as the way to close the gaps that remain in the trail system at that time. Option 2
and 3 feature transit options which can blend easily with trails, although a freight component complicates
matters.
The following summarized analysis identifies issues that would be faced under Option 2 and 3 Trail with
Rails; and Option 5, pursuing purchase of narrow corridors on the outside edge of the corridor in the
most critical locations.
Ch. 5 Pg. 2
Analysis by Section:
The majority of the corridor can accommodate the rail and trail together but in many areas a separation
barrier should be installed and in all cases minor and larger bridges will require retrofitting.
There are some segments where it is not feasible for the rail and trail to share the corridor due to severe
constraints such as steep banks above and/or below the platform, sensitive areas such as wetlands on
both sides, or hazard areas such as in Gilman and Belden. In these areas, it would be necessary for the
trail to depart the corridor and be located in another alignment in existing road-rights of way or on private
property easements. These areas include Eagle-Vail to Minturn North Bridge and Battle Mountain to
Red Cliff.
The railroad was evaluated from Sage to Red Cliff. Red Cliff to Tennessee Pass was not included in this
evaluation because trails in the populated areas are the priority focus of the current version of this trails
plan. Each section of railroad corridor was evaluated in the field and with railroad maps for widths
(varies from 75 feet to 250 feet), terrain constraints, demand for trail from the surrounding population,
cost to mitigate shared rail impacts or costs to retrofit for trail, comparative cost of the non-rail core trail
route, and ability to transition back and forth from the rail corridor to the core trail, if necessary.
Sage to Downtown Eagle [Eby Creek Road]:
Railroad corridor is very conducive to shared use with trail on outer edge of corridor, northern edge best.
Rail power lines located on south side from Sage to Brush Creek. Width is 100' for the majority of the
distance between Sage and Eagle. _ .....
There are some short sections of double track line.
Obstacles include narrow Brush Creek railroad bridge
and Eagle River railroad bridge, bridge over Eby
Creek Road and two other small bridges/box culverts
along the route.
There is high demand by the local population to link
Gypsum and Eagle via a trail. Non-railroad Core
Trail routes are hampered by timing issues (e.g.
airport interchange in 2004, Cooley Mesa Road in
2003) or property ownership issues (e.g. Highway 6
trail near airport).
Eagle [Eby Creek Road] to Wolcott:
The railroad corridor is generally very conducive to shared use with trail on outer edge of corridor, best
on the northern edge because of railroad power lines along the south side of tracks. Width varies from
100 feet to 200 feet, with a section of 60 feet on the west side of Red Canyon, but the terrain is relatively
flat through the 60 foot wide section.
Pockets of wetlands exist on the north side of the tracks, including man-made near irrigated fields and
natural wetlands near Milk Creek.
Ch. 5 Pg. 3
Small bridges and box culverts do exist along this
stretch including one bridge over a perennial stream,
Milk Creek. It is possible to retrofit all spans for
shared trail use. Closer to Wolcott, a bigger
challenge exists to retrofit two Eagle River rail bridge
crossings between Milk Creek and Wolcott.
Also just west of Wolcott, the rail corridor is
constrained by steep slopes on the north side of the
river near the BLM campground and across from the
Department of Transportation yard.
At this time, there is low demand for this trail section
for transportation purposes because there is no
nearby population center. This section would function primarily as a very scenic recreational route for
the foreseeable future.
If the corridor is not available, there are Core
Trail route options through planned development in
the Red Canyon area east of Eagle. Public land
through Red Canyon and into Wolcott could
accommodate some sections of the core trail, but in
several locations it would have to follow the
Highway 6 corridor because of the steep terrain and
narrow valley through this area.
Wolcott to Edwards:
The railroad corridor through this section is the best route option for the trail because of the narrowness
of the valley from Wolcott to Edwards. The other
routes for the core trail are very constrained by
the locations of Highway 6, Interstate 70, the
Eagle River, and the hilly terrain. There are
several constrained areas along this portion of
rail corridor but they appear to be mitigatable.
Obstacles include the Eagle Springs Golf Club,
cliff areas and close proximity to the river in a
few locations. There are no major railroad bridge
crossings of the Eagle River on this section that
would require a bridge retrofit to accommodate
the trail. Width varies between 100 feet to 200
feet. The south side of the tracks is more
54
conducive to a trail platform. At this time, this
section ranks as low demand because there is
Ch. 5 Pg. 4
not a population center nearby but it is very likely that Wolcott will experience development within the life
of this plan and demand for a trail route will increase substantially.
Edwards to Avon:
If the railroad corridor were to become fully available for public uses, this section would be part of
providing a continuous trail experience through the valley. If it is an interim matter of purchasing the
outside of edge of the existing corridor to create links between communities, this section is not a high
priority for acquisition because a continuous separated trail that parallels Highway 6 and the Eagle River
will exist from West Edwards to West Beaver Creek Boulevard in West Avon by mid- 2001.
Avon to Eagle-Vail:
Use of a few select portions of the rail corridor in Avon would
be very helpful in creating a continuous trail through Avon to
Nottingham Ranch Road such as near the wastewater
treatment plant in West Avon and crossing Avon Road.
Otherwise, a significant portion of the trail through the town
of Avon can be realized through development that is planned
on land adjacent to the railroad corridor. At least one
crossing of the railroad corridor will be necessary to create a
continuous system in the Chapel Square area. Because
Avon is a population center, the dormant track line already is
heavily used by pedestrians. The corridor through Avon is
predominantly 100 feet wide with short 200 feet wide
sections. The railroad power lines are generally located
along the north side of the tracks making the south side more
viable for locating the trail.
Eagle-Vail to Dowd !unction
Pedestrian Bridge:
This rail corridor section is seriously
constrained by either man-made or natural
obstacles including Interstate 70 structures
causing narrow underpasses, cliffs, falling rock,
steep river banks, retrofit of long railroad
bridges and adjacent cut slopes. Widths vary
from 100 feet wide to 200 feet wide.
Ch. 5 Pg. 5
Demand is very high for a safe trail route through
this narrow area of the valley but if the corridor
must be shared with rail, it is impossible except for
a few short stretches.
The non-rail core trail route in this area is also very
difficult and will involve expensive construction but
few route options exist through this area.
Dowd !unction Pedestrian Bridge to Downtown Minturn:
This rail corridor section is physically too narrow for a shared rail and trail location until it intersects with
the County Road bridge over the Eagle River. At that point, the rail corridor is wide and level, ranging
from 100 feet wide to over 250 feet wide. There are multiple track lines because of the rail switching
yard that formerly operated in Minturn but the corridor could be shared and still maintain distance
between all of the track lines in place and a trail. The corridor is already used by pedestrians, bicyclists
and even vehicles. Demand is high and constraints to construction are minimal. The other Core Trail
routes are difficult because of terrain, such as on the Highway 24 side of the Eagle River, or would be
relegated to following the right-of-way of the county road on the east side of the railyard. The ideal
location for the trail, as reflected on the core trail maps in Chapter 3 is on the western edge of the
railroad property, paralleling the Eagle River.
Downtown Minturn to Battle Mountain:
At the south end of the railyard, the rail corridor
becomes constrained by cliffs on the east side for
approximately % mile. It becomes more conducive
for shared use after that cliff section and remains
viable until west of the Two Elk trailhead area where
there is another cliff area. These two sections
could possibly be mitigated for shared use (e.g.
cantilevered trail or separated by fence) depending
on the type of rail use. Otherwise it requires costly
sections of trail to be built away from the rail corridor
on the hillside benches above. The rail corridor
through this portion of Minturn ranges between 100,
200 and 250 feet wide. Demand is potentially high.
Dormant corridor already heavily used by local
residents walking, driving or snowmobiling.
Ch. 5 Pg. 6
Rattie Mountain to Red Cliff:
This section of rail corridor is very dramatic and scenic but
also features several types of natural and man-made
hazards including cliffs, rock fall, mining shafts, mine
building and hazardous or "hot" tailings piles. For much of
the distance between the base of Battle Mountain and Red
Cliff, there is a track on both sides of the Eagle River which
would seem to allow for train traffic to occur on one side
while a trail occupies the other side but the issues noted
prevent that seemingly simple solution.
The corridor through this section is 200 feet wide. The use
would be as a recreational route as opposed to
transportation although a few hardy citizens may use it to
commute to and from Red Cliff in the summer season.
Winter use of this section would not be recommended due
to avalanche hazards.
The other Core Trail route into Red Cliff features it's own
set of issues, primarily navigating around or through the abandoned mining town of Gilman, also a
hazardous waste site. In this case, the issues associated with the Core Trail route may be easier to
overcome than those that accompany the rail corridor down in the canyon.
Red Cliff to Tennessee Pass:
This section is very scenic and it would function as a recreational route only since it is well removed from
population centers. There are sections of the corridor that lend itself to shared use and others that are
constrained by adjacent slopes. Additional study would be required on this section, if it were to become
available for rail with trail or trail only use. The majority of the corridor through this section is 200 feet
wide.
Summary of the Rail Corridor Analysis:
At this point in time, the highest demand for Core Trail completion is in the Minturn to Edwards area and the
Gypsum to Eagle area.
If the entire rail corridor is not available, and only narrow edge portions of these individual sections can be
obtained (as depicted by the illustration below) from the railroad either by lease or purchase, the
recommended priorities for partial acquisition are:
1. Dowd Junction to Downtown Minturn through the railyard
2. West Avon from West Beaver Creek Boulevard to Avon Road
3. Sage to Downtown Eagle
Ch. 5 Pg. 7
If the entire rail corridor is available and it is not financially or physically feasible to develop the trail as
one project, the recommended priorities for construction of a trail with or without the tracks left in place
are:
1. Dowd Junction to Downtown Minturn
2. West Avon to Avon Road
3. Sage to Downtown Eagle
4. Minturn to Battle Mountain
5. Wolcott to Edwards
6. Eagle to Edwards
Finally, if neither of the two above scenarios materialize within the life span of this plan, at minimum the
following at-grade trail crossings are needed to successfully complete the Core Trail on it's non-rail
corridor route through the valley:
1. East of Eagle at Red Canyon (convert existing private crossing to public)
2. From Hurd Lane to proposed Village of Avon (new pedestrian only crossing)
3. West of Dowd Junction, across the river from the Colorado Department of Transportation yard
(new crossing)
Ch. 5 Pg. 8
CHAPTER 6
Core Trail Maintenance
Maintenance of the trails systems is essential for safe and
enjoyable use. And if not maintained properly over the long
term, the infrastructure of the trail system may be become a
wasted investment of invaluable financial and natural
resources.
Spring Clean-up on the Vail Pass Trail
The Core Trail Maintenance Program envisioned by this plan is comprised of two basic approaches:
1. A short term maintenance program for the core trail system
2. A long term maintenance program for the core trail system after it has attained some
connectivity
For the purposes of this plan and it's described system, trails other than the Core Trail and select spur
trails, shall be the responsibility of the entity that constructed, currently maintains or otherwise controls
that route.
It is not the intent of this planning document to recommend a method of maintenance for every paved
or unpaved, urban or backcountry trail or neighborhood sidewalk in incorporated and unincorporated
Eagle County. The program recommended below applies to the core trail and select spurs only.
Recommended Core Trail Maintenance Program
Short Term: up to 5 years:
Each jurisdiction that is part of cooperative effort to construct the core trail system will
be responsible for the maintenance of the portion of the core trail located within their
boundaries.
Long Term: 5 years +
Cooperatively develop a single-entity maintenance program to serve the need for
coordinated multi-jurisdictional trail maintenance. Work towards combining equipment
needs through the different jurisdictions and hire the necessary staff to handle
associated maintenance tasks.
Recommended Maintenance Schedule:
Sweep trail once a month, starting in April, but sweep sections that are heavily
impacted by debris from adjacent road, hillsides, etc. every two weeks as
needed.
Inspect trail surface, shoulders and structures such as bridges, walls, sign posts,
etc. periodically using a checklist, every two weeks is suggested. A meticulous
inspection should take place in the spring after the snow has fully melted and
the path has been swept for the first time.
• Perform weed and vegetation control including mowing up to 2 feet on each side
of the trail as needed.
• Repair and retrofit trail surface cracks or holes, shoulder erosion, structure
damage, etc. or arrange for repair as needed.
• Clean culverts as needed.
• Install or replace signs and trail furniture as needed.
• Empty trash containers as needed.
• Remove trash from adjacent ground as needed.
• Repaint trail or road crosswalk striping as needed.
• Plowing is left up to the discretion of the individual jurisdiction.
• Seal coating is left up to discretion of the individual jurisdiction but is encouraged
every 5 years minimum.
Other Considerations:
The Eagle County Regional Transportation Authority is currently committed to an annual per
mile contribution to individual town and county jurisdictions to maintain their sections of core
trail, subject to approval by the Authority Board. Authority partners may also request
maintenance contributions as necessary for periodic overlays or reconstruction.
2. The Authority will coordinate annual forums with maintenance personnel to review the core trail
maintenance program, issues and funding. The towns and county will collectively determine
when it is financially feasible to create an independent maintenance entity to care for the
entirety of the core trail system.
Annual inspections of the trail should be performed by each jurisdiction to determine potential
internal budget issues and Authority trail maintenance funding requests for the following year.
4. Non-public sections of the core trail should be converted to public sections through grant of
easement to the underlying jurisdiction to eliminate issues of inconsistent or inadequate
maintenance and potential loss of access. Trails should be brought into conformance to safety
standards prior to acceptance. Endowment for maintenance from the grantor should be sought
to defray the additional costs of maintenance for the responsible jurisdiction. Current non-
public trail examples include core trail sections in The Edwards Riverwalk, Avon Confluence
and along the frontage of Arrowhead in Edwards.
5. Jurisdictions should avoid responsibility for the maintenance of trail easements until a trail has
been constructed upon them. Until that time, easement maintenance (weeds, drainage, etc.) if
necessary, should be the responsibility of the easement grantor unless otherwise specified by
the easement document.
6. In the case of widened shoulder or specially designated bike lanes on Town, County, State or
Federal roadways, maintenance should include increased attention to debris clearing,
pavement repair of edges and potholes, and scheduling of chip seals.
7. Volunteer maintenance shall be encouraged wherever appropriate. Volunteer efforts may be
limited to clean-up of trash, sign and trail accessory placement or vegetation control, but certain
minor construction or drainage projects could be undertaken by volunteers at the discretion of
the pertinent jurisdiction.
8. Maintenance responsibility should be determined as part of the construction planning process
and publicly documented.
Appendix A
Detailed Cost Estimates by Trail Section
TRAIL SECTION
GLENWOOD CANYON TO DOTSERO
Item Estimated Quantity Units Unit Price in Yr 2000 Estimated Cost
PLANNING AND DESIGN
ROW and Land Purchase AC $0.00
ROW and Land Easement (survey, legal, etc.) EA $0.00
Permit Processing 1 LS $2,000.00 $2,000.00
Engineering/Design (typ. 12% const. cost) 1 LS $186.00 $186.00
GENERAL CONSTRUCTION COSTS
Bonds and Insurance (typ. 3%) 1 LS $47.00 $47.00
Mobilization (3K - 5K) 1 LS $1,000.00 $1,000.00
Clean Up 1 LS $1,500.00 $1,500.00
TRAIL CONSTRUCTION COSTS
Clear and Grub - AC $0.00
Topsoil (Removal and Stockpile) - Cy $0.00
Unclassified Excavation - Cy $0.00
Embankment - Cy $0.00
Subgrade Grading - Sy $0.00
Base Course, Class 6 - 6" - TN $0.00
Asphalt Pavement - 3" - TN $0.00
Topsoil Slopes - Cy $0.00
Revegetation - AC $0.00
Traffic Control Signage 6.00 LS $175.00 $1,050.00
Stripping - LF $0.00
DRAINAGE CONSTRUCTION
Culvert, CPP - 18" - LF $0.00
End Section, CMP - 18" - EA $0.00
Rip Rap - Cy $0.00
Erosion Control - LS $0.00
STRUCTURES AND SPECIAL FEATURES
Guard Rail Railing - LF $0.00
Guard Rail End Anchors - EA $0.00
Crossing Warning Lights 1.00 EA $500.00 $500.00
RR Crossing (At-Grade) - EA $0.00
Bridges (10' width standard) - LS $0.00
Bridge Abutment and Wing Walls - Cy $0.00
Retaining Walls - SF $0.00
Tunnels - LS $0.00
Relocate Utilities - LS $0.00
INDIRECT CONSTRUCTION
Surveying ( typ. 5%) LS $205.00
Material Testing (typ. 5%) LS $205.00
Construction Management (typ. 2%) LS $82.00
TOTAL PLANNING AND CONSTRUCTION ESTIMATE $6,775.00
TOTAL PROJECT CONTINGENCY (15%) $1,016.00
TOTAL PROJECT COST ESTIMATE $7,791.00
TRAIL SECTION
DOTSERO TO GYPSUM
Item Estimated Quantity Units Unit Price in W 2000 Estimated Cost
PLANNING AND DESIGN
ROW and Land Purchase AC $0.00
ROW and Land Easement (survey, legal, etc.) EA $0.00
Permit Processing 1 LS $6,000.00 $6,000.00
Engineering/Design (typ. 12% const. cost) 1 LS $169,036.00 $169,036.00
GENERAL CONSTRUCTION COSTS
Bonds and Insurance (typ. 3%) 1 LS $42,259.00 $42,259.00
Mobilization (3K - 5K) 1 LS $3,000.00 $3,000.00
Clean Up 1 LS $1,500.00 $1,500.00
TRAIL CONSTRUCTION COSTS
Clear and Grub 13.10 AC $2,000.00 $26,200.00
Topsoil (Removal and Stockpile) 2,100.00 CY $5.00 $10,500.00
Unclassified Excavation 850.00 CY $4.50 $3,825.00
Embankment 850.00 CY $2.50 $2,125.00
Subgrade Grading 38,000.00 SY $1.25 $47,500.00
Base Course, Class 6 - 6" 16,000.00 TN $20.00 $320,000.00
Asphalt Pavement - 3" 5,350.00 TN $50.00 $267,500.00
Topsoil Slopes 2,100.00 CY $7.00 $14,700.00
Revegetation 5.20 AC $4,000.00 $20,800.00
Traffic Control Signage 57.00 LS $175.00 $9,975.00
Stripping 360.00 LF $0.50 $180.00
DRAINAGE CONSTRUCTION
Culvert, CPP - 18" 855.00 LF $35.00 $29,925.00
End Section, CMP - 18" 114.00 EA $200.00 $22,800.00
Rip Rap - Cy $0.00
Erosion Control 1.00 LS $3,000.00 $3,000.00
STRUCTURES AND SPECIAL FEATURES
Guard Rail Railing 600.00 LF $20.00 $12,000.00
Guard Rail End Anchors 4.00 EA $650.00 $2,600.00
Crossing Warning Lights - EA $0.00
RR Crossing (At-Grade) - EA $0.00
Bridges (Colorado River, RR) 1.00 LS $575,000.00 $575,000.00
Bridge Abutment and Wing Walls - Cy $0.00
Retaining Walls 2,000.00 SF $20.00 $40,000.00
Tunnels - LS $0.00
Relocate Utilities - LS $0.00
INDIRECT CONSTRUCTION
Surveying ( typ. 5%) LS $72,769.00
Material Testing (typ. 5%) LS $72,769.00
Construction Management (typ. 2%) LS $29,108.00
TOTAL PLANNING AND CONSTRUCTION ESTIMATE $1,805,071.00
TOTAL PROJECT CONTINGENCY (15%) $270,760.00
TOTAL PROJECT COST ESTIMATE $2,075,831.00
TRAIL SECTION
TOWN OF GYPSUM
Item Estimated Quantity Units Unit Price in Yr 2000 Estimated Cost
PLANNING AND DESIGN
ROW and Land Purchase AC $0.00
ROW and Land Easement (survey, legal, etc.) EA $0.00
Permit Processing 1 LS $2,000.00 $2,000.00
Engineering/Design (typ. 12% const. cost) 1 LS $23,991.00 $23,991.00
GENERAL CONSTRUCTION COSTS
Bonds and Insurance (typ. 3%) 1 LS $5,998.00 $5,998.00
Mobilization (3K - 5K) 1 LS $3,000.00 $3,000.00
Clean Up 1 LS $1,500.00 $1,500.00
TRAIL CONSTRUCTION COSTS
Clear and Grub 2.40 AC $2,000.00 $4,800.00
Topsoil (Removal and Stockpile) 400.00 CY $5.00 $2,000.00
Unclassified Excavation 500.00 CY $4.50 $2,250.00
Embankment 500.00 CY $2.50 $1,250.00
Subgrade Grading 7,100.00 SY $1.25 $8,875.00
Base Course, Class 6 - 6" 3,000.00 TN $20.00 $60,000.00
Asphalt Pavement - 3" 1,000.00 TN $50.00 $50,000.00
Topsoil Slopes 400.00 CY $7.00 $2,800.00
Revegetation 1.00 AC $4,000.00 $4,000.00
Traffic Control Signage 12.00 LS $175.00 $2,100.00
Stripping 750.00 LF $0.50 $375.00
DRAINAGE CONSTRUCTION
Culvert, CPP - 18" 165.00 LF $35.00 $5,775.00
End Section, CMP - 18" 22.00 EA $200.00 $4,400.00
Rip Rap - Cy $50.00 $0.00
Erosion Control 1.00 LS $3,000.00 $3,000.00
STRUCTURES AND SPECIAL FEATURES
Guard Rail Railing 300.00 LF $20.00 $6,000.00
Guard Rail End Anchors 2.00 EA $650.00 $1,300.00
Crossing Warning Lights 2.00 EA $500.00 $1,000.00
RR Crossing (At-Grade) - EA $0.00
Bridges - LS $0.00
Bridge Abutment and Wing Walls - Cy $0.00
Retaining Walls 2,000.00 SF $20.00 $40,000.00
Tunnels - LS $0.00
Relocate Utilities - LS $0.00
INDIRECT CONSTRUCTION
Surveying ( typ. 5%) LS $10,521.00
Material Testing (typ. 5%) LS $10,521.00
Construction Management (typ. 2%) LS $4,208.00
TOTAL PLANNING AND CONSTRUCTION ESTIMATE $261,664.00
TOTAL PROJECT CONTINGENCY (15%) $39,249.00
TOTAL PROJECT COST ESTIMATE $300,913.00
TRAIL SECTION
GYPSUM TO EAGLE
Item Estimated Quantity Units Unit Price in Yr 2000 Estimated Cost
PLANNING AND DESIGN
ROW and Land Purchase AC $0.00
ROW and Land Easement (survey, legal, etc.) EA $0.00
Permit Processing 1 LS $4,000.00 $4,000.00
Engineering/Design (typ. 12% const. cost) 1 LS $65,450.00 $65,450.00
GENERAL CONSTRUCTION COSTS
Bonds and Insurance (typ. 3%) 1 LS $16,363.00 $16,363.00
Mobilization (3K - 5K) 1 LS $3,000.00 $3,000.00
Clean Up 1 LS $1,500.00 $1,500.00
TRAIL CONSTRUCTION COSTS
Clear and Grub 7.40 AC $2,000.00 $14,800.00
Topsoil (Removal and Stockpile) 3,960.00 CY $5.00 $19,800.00
Unclassified Excavation 250.00 CY $4.50 $1,125.00
Embankment 250.00 CY $2.50 $625.00
Subgrade Grading 43,200.00 SY $1.25 $54,000.00
Base Course, Class 6 - 6" 1,820.00 TN $20.00 $36,400.00
Asphalt Pavement - 3" 610.00 TN $50.00 $30,500.00
Topsoil Slopes 3,960.00 CY $7.00 $27,720.00
Revegetation 3.70 AC $4,000.00 $14,800.00
Traffic Control Signage 65.00 LS $175.00 $11,375.00
Stripping 110.00 LF $0.50 $550.00
DRAINAGE CONSTRUCTION
Culvert, CPP - 18" 975.00 LF $35.00 $34,125.00
End Section, CMP - 18" 130.00 EA $200.00 $26,000.00
Rip Rap - Cy $0.00
Erosion Control 1.00 LS $3,000.00 $3,000.00
STRUCTURES AND SPECIAL FEATURES
Guard Rail Railing 400.00 LF $20.00 $80,000.00
Guard Rail End Anchors 4.00 EA $650.00 $2,600.00
Crossing Warning Lights - EA $0.00
RR Crossing (At-Grade) 1.00 EA $20,000.00 $20,000.00
Bridges (Brush Creek) 1.00 LS $90,000.00 $90,000.00
Bridge Abutment and Wing Walls - Cy $0.00
Retaining Walls - SF $0.00
Tunnels 1.00 LS $150,000.00 $150,000.00
Relocate Utilities - LS $0.00
INDIRECT CONSTRUCTION
Surveying ( typ. 5%) LS $28,314.00
Material Testing (typ. 5%) LS $28,314.00
Construction Management (typ. 2%) LS $11,326.00
TOTAL PLANNING AND CONSTRUCTION ESTIMATE $703,687.00
TOTAL PROJECT CONTINGENCY (15%) $105,553.00
TOTAL PROJECT COST ESTIMATE $809,240.00
TRAIL SECTION
TOWN OF EAGLE
Item Estimated Quantity Units Unit Price in Yr 2000 Estimated Cost
PLANNING AND DESIGN
ROW and Land Purchase AC $0.00
ROW and Land Easement (survey, legal, etc.) EA $0.00
Permit Processing 1 LS $6,000.00 $6,000.00
Engineering/Design (typ. 12% const. cost) 1 LS $99,773.00 $99,773.00
GENERAL CONSTRUCTION COSTS
Bonds and Insurance (typ. 3%) 1 LS $24,943.00 $24,943.00
Mobilization (3K - 5K) 1 LS $3,000.00 $3,000.00
Clean Up 1 LS $1,500.00 $1,500.00
TRAIL CONSTRUCTION COSTS
Clear and Grub 3.40 AC $2,000.00 $6,800.00
Topsoil (Removal and Stockpile) 550.00 CY $5.00 $2,750.00
Unclassified Excavation 400.00 CY $4.50 $1,800.00
Embankment 400.00 CY $2.50 $1,000.00
Subgrade Grading 9,750.00 SY $1.25 $12,187.50
Base Course, Class 6 - 6" 4,100.00 TN $20.00 $82,000.00
Asphalt Pavement - 3" 1,400.00 TN $50.00 $70,000.00
Topsoil Slopes 550.00 CY $7.00 $3,850.00
Revegetation 1.40 AC $4,000.00 $5,600.00
Traffic Control Signage 15.00 LS $175.00 $2,625.00
Stripping 300.00 LF $0.50 $150.00
DRAINAGE CONSTRUCTION
Culvert, CPP - 18" 225.00 LF $35.00 $7,875.00
End Section, CMP - 18" 30.00 EA $200.00 $6,000.00
Rip Rap - CY $0.00
Erosion Control 1.00 LS $3,000.00 $3,000.00
STRUCTURES AND SPECIAL FEATURES
Guard Rail Railing 200.00 LF $20.00 $4,000.00
Guard Rail End Anchors 2.00 EA $650.00 $1,300.00
Crossing Warning Lights 1.00 EA $500.00 $500.00
RR Crossing (At-Grade) 1.00 EA $20,000.00 $20,000.00
Bridges (Brush Creek, Eagle River-2) 1.00 LS $390,000.00 $390,000.00
Bridge Abutment and Wing Walls - CY $500.00 $0.00
Retaining Walls 3,000.00 SF $20.00 $60,000.00
Tunnels 1.00 LS $150,000.00 $150,000.00
Relocate Utilities - LS $0.00
INDIRECT CONSTRUCTION
Surveying ( typ. 5%) LS $43,044.00
Material Testing (typ. 5%) LS $43,044.00
Construction Management (typ. 2%) LS $17,218.00
TOTAL PLANNING AND CONSTRUCTION ESTIMATE $1,069,960.00
TOTAL PROJECT CONTINGENCY (15%) $160,494.00
TOTAL PROJECT COST ESTIMATE $1,230,454.00
TRAIL SECTION
EAGLE (Chambers Road) to WOLCOTT
Item Estimated Quantity Units Unit Price in Yr 2000 Estimated Cost
PLANNING AND DESIGN
ROW and Land Purchase AC $0.00
ROW and Land Easement (survey, legal, etc.) EA $0.00
Permit Processing 1 LS $6,000.00 $6,000.00
Engineering/Design (typ. 12% const. cost) 1 LS $112,740.00 $112,740.00
GENERAL CONSTRUCTION COSTS
Bonds and Insurance (typ. 3%) 1 LS $28,185.00 $28,185.00
Mobilization (3K - 5K) 1 LS $5,000.00 $5,000.00
Clean Up 1 LS $1,500.00 $1,500.00
TRAIL CONSTRUCTION COSTS
Clear and Grub 14.10 AC $2,000.00 $28,200.00
Topsoil (Removal and Stockpile) 2,300.00 CY $5.00 $11,500.00
Unclassified Excavation 1,000.00 CY $4.50 $4,500.00
Embankment 1,000.00 CY $2.50 $2,500.00
Subgrade Grading 40,800.00 SY $1.25 $51,000.00
Base Course, Class 6 - 6" 17,200.00 TN $20.00 $344,000.00
Asphalt Pavement - 3" 5,750.00 TN $50.00 $287,500.00
Topsoil Slopes 2,300.00 CY $7.00 $16,100.00
Revegetation 5.60 AC $4,000.00 $22,400.00
Traffic Control Signage 30.00 LS $175.00 $5,250.00
Stripping 200.00 LF $0.50 $100.00
DRAINAGE CONSTRUCTION
Culvert, CPP - 18" 930.00 LF $35.00 $32,550.00
End Section, CMP - 18" 124.00 EA $200.00 $24,800.00
Rip Rap - CY $0.00
Erosion Control 1.00 LS $3,000.00 $3,000.00
STRUCTURES AND SPECIAL FEATURES
Guard Rail Railing 650.00 LF $20.00 $13,000.00
Guard Rail End Anchors 4.00 EA $650.00 $2,600.00
Crossing Warning Lights 1.00 EA $500.00 $500.00
RR Crossing (At-Grade) 1.00 EA $20,000.00 $20,000.00
Bridges - LS $0.00
Bridge Abutment and Wing Walls - CY $0.00
Retaining Walls 3,500.00 SF $20.00 $70,000.00
Tunnels - LS $0.00
Relocate Utilities - LS $0.00
INDIRECT CONSTRUCTION
Surveying ( typ. 5%) LS $48,709.00
Material Testing (typ. 5%) LS $48,709.00
Construction Management (typ. 2%) LS $19,484.00
TOTAL PLANNING AND CONSTRUCTION ESTIMATE $1,209,827.00
TOTAL PROJECT CONTINGENCY (15%) $18,148.00
TOTAL PROJECT COST ESTIMATE $1,227,975.00
TRAIL SECTION
WOLCOTT TO WEST EDWARDS (at Hillcrest Drive Bridge)
Item Estimated Quantity Units Unit Price in Yr 2000 Estimated Cost
PLANNING AND DESIGN
ROW and Land Purchase AC $0.00
ROW and Land Easement (survey, legal, etc.) EA $0.00
Permit Processing 1 LS $8,000.00 $8,000.00
Engineering/Design (typ. 12% const. cost) 1 LS $189,878.00 $189,878.00
GENERAL CONSTRUCTION COSTS
Bonds and Insurance (typ. 3%) 1 LS $47,469.00 $47,469.00
Mobilization (3K - 5K) 1 LS $0.00 $0.00
Clean Up 1 LS $0.00 $0.00
TRAIL CONSTRUCTION COSTS
Clear and Grub 6.00 AC $2,000.00 $12,000.00
Topsoil (Removal and Stockpile) 970.00 CY $5.00 $4,850.00
Unclassified Excavation 3,400.00 CY $4.50 $15,300.00
Embankment 3,400.00 CY $2.50 $8,500.00
Subgrade Grading 17,500.00 SY $1.25 $21,875.00
Base Course, Class 6 - 6" 7,350.00 TN $20.00 $147,000.00
Asphalt Pavement - 3" 2,475.00 TN $50.00 $123,750.00
Topsoil Slopes 970.00 CY $7.00 $6,790.00
Revegetation 2.40 AC $4,000.00 $9,600.00
Traffic Control Signage 27.00 LS $175.00 $4,725.00
Stripping 300.00 LF $0.50 $150.00
DRAINAGE CONSTRUCTION
Culvert, CPP - 18" 405.00 LF $35.00 $14,175.00
End Section, CMP - 18" 54.00 EA $200.00 $10,800.00
Rip Rap - CY $0.00
Erosion Control 1.00 LS $3,000.00 $3,000.00
STRUCTURES AND SPECIAL FEATURES
Guard Rail Railing 400.00 LF $20.00 $8,000.00
Guard Rail End Anchors 2.00 EA $650.00 $1,300.00
Crossing Warning Lights 1.00 EA $500.00 $500.00
RR Crossing (At-Grade) - EA $0.00
Bridges (Eagle-2) 1.00 LS $510,000.00 $510,000.00
Bridge Abutment and Wing Walls - CY $0.00
Retaining Walls 34,000.00 SF $20.00 $680,000.00
Tunnels - LS $0.00
Relocate Utilities - LS $0.00
INDIRECT CONSTRUCTION
Surveying ( typ. 5%) LS $81,489.00
Material Testing (typ. 5%) LS $81,489.00
Construction Management (typ. 2%) LS $32,596.00
TOTAL PLANNING AND CONSTRUCTION ESTIMATE $2,023,236.00
TOTAL PROJECT CONTINGENCY (15%) $303,485.00
TOTAL PROJECT COST ESTIMATE $2,326,721.00
TRAIL SECTION
WEST EDWARDS TO TOWN OF AVON
Item Estimated Quantity Units Unit Price in Yr 2000 Estimated Cost
PLANNING AND DESIGN
ROW and Land Purchase AC $0.00
ROW and Land Easement (survey, legal, etc.) EA $0.00
Permit Processing 1 LS $0.00 $0.00
Engineering/Design (typ. 12% const. cost) 1 LS $0.00 $0.00
GENERAL CONSTRUCTION COSTS
Bonds and Insurance (typ. 3%) 1 LS $0.00 $0.00
Mobilization (3K - 5K) 1 LS $0.00 $0.00
Clean Up 1 LS $0.00 $0.00
TRAIL CONSTRUCTION COSTS
Clear and Grub - AC $0.00
Topsoil (Removal and Stockpile) - CY $0.00
Unclassified Excavation - CY $0.00
Embankment - CY $0.00
Subgrade Grading - SY $0.00
Base Course, Class 6 - 6" - TN $0.00
Asphalt Pavement - 3" - TN $0.00
Topsoil Slopes - CY $0.00
Revegetation - AC $0.00
Traffic Control Signage - LS $0.00
Stripping - LF $0.00
Curb and Gutter - LF $0.00
DRAINAGE CONSTRUCTION
Culvert, CPP - 18" - LF $0.00
End Section, CMP - 18" - EA $0.00
Rip Rap - CY $0.00
Erosion Control - LS $0.00
STRUCTURES AND SPECIAL FEATURES
Guard Rail Railing - LF $0.00
Guard Rail End Anchors - EA $0.00
Crossing Warning Lights - EA $0.00
RR Crossing (At-Grade) - EA $0.00
Bridges - LS $0.00
Bridge Abutment and Wing Walls - CY $0.00
Retaining Walls - SF $0.00
Tunnels - LS $0.00
Relocate Utilities - LS $0.00
INDIRECT CONSTRUCTION
Surveying ( typ. 5%) LS $0.00
Material Testing (typ. 5%) LS $0.00
Construction Management (typ. 2%) LS $0.00
TOTAL PLANNING AND CONSTRUCTION ESTIMATE $0.00
TOTAL PROJECT CONTINGENCY (15%) $0.00
TOTAL PROJECT COST ESTIMATE $0.00
TRAIL SECTION
TOWN OF AVON
SECTION: West Beaver Creek Boulevard to end of Hurd Lane Trail at Eagle Bend
Item Estimated Quantity Units Unit Price in Yr 2000 Estimated Cost
PLANNING AND DESIGN
ROW and Land Purchase AC $0.00
ROW and Land Easement (survey, legal, etc.) EA $0.00
Permit Processing 1.00 LS $2,000.00 $2,000.00
Engineering/Design (typ. 12% const. cost) 1.00 LS $19,707.00 $19,707.00
GENERAL CONSTRUCTION COSTS
Bonds and Insurance (typ. 3%) 1.00 LS $4,927.00 $4,927.00
Mobilization (3K - 5K) 1.00 LS $3,000.00 $3,000.00
Clean Up 1.00 LS $1,500.00 $1,500.00
TRAIL CONSTRUCTION COSTS
Clear and Grub 2.20 AC $2,000.00 $4,400.00
Topsoil (Removal and Stockpile) 350.00 CY $5.00 $1,750.00
Unclassified Excavation - CY $0.00
Embankment - CY $0.00
Subgrade Grading 6,300.00 SY $1.25 $7,875.00
Base Course, Class 6 - 6" 2,650.00 TN $20.00 $53,000.00
Asphalt Pavement - 3" 900.00 TN $50.00 $45,000.00
Topsoil Slopes 350.00 CY $7.00 $2,450.00
Revegetation 1.00 LS $4,000.00 $4,000.00
Control Signage 10.00 EA $175.00 $1,750.00
Stripping 3,000.00 LF $0.50 $1,500.00
Curb & Gutter 2,500.00 LF $17.00 $42,500.00
DRAINAGE CONSTRUCTION
Culvert, CPP - 18" - LF $0.00
End Section, CMP - 18" - EA $0.00
Rip Rap - CY $0.00
Erosion Control - LS $0.00
STRUCTURES AND SPECIAL FEATURES
Guard Rail Railing - LF $0.00
Guard Rail End Anchors - EA $0.00
Crossing Warning Lights - EA $0.00
RR Crossing (At-Grade) - EA $0.00
Bridges - LS $0.00
Bridge Abutment and Wing Walls - CY $0.00
Retaining Walls - SF $0.00
Tunnels - LS $0.00
Relocate Utilities - LS $0.00
INDIRECT CONSTRUCTION
Surveying ( typ. 5%) LS $8,683.00
Material Testing (typ. 5%) LS $8,683.00
Construction Management (typ. 2%) LS $3,473.00
TOTAL PLANNING AND CONSTRUCTION ESTIMATE
TOTAL PROJECT CONTINGENCY (15%)
TOTAL PROJECT COST ESTIMATE $500,000.00
TRAIL SECTION
AVON TO DOWD JUNCTION
Item Estimated Quantlty Units Unit Price in Yr 2000 Estimated Cost
PLANNING AND DESIGN
ROW and Land Purchase AC $0.00
ROW and Land Easement (survey, legal, etc.) EA $0.00
Permit Processing 1 LS $2,000.00 $2,000.00
Engineering/Design (typ. 12% const. cost) 1 LS $182,141.00 $182,141.00
GENERAL CONSTRUCTION COSTS
Bonds and Insurance (typ. 3%) 1 LS $45,535.00 $45,535.00
Mobilization (3K - 5K) 1 LS $5,000.00 $5,000.00
Clean Up 1 L.S $1,500.00 $1,500.00
TRAIL CONSTRUCTION COSTS
Clear and Grub 9.30 AC $2,000.00 $18,600.00
Topsoil (Removal and Stockpile) 1,500.00 CY $5.00 $7,500.00
Unclassified Excavation 3,200.00 CY $4.50 $14,400.00
Embankment 3,200.00 CY $2.50 $8,000.00
Subgrade Grading 26,950.00 SY $1.25 $33,687.50
Base Course, Class 6 - 6" 11,350.00 TN $20.00 $227,000.00
Asphalt Pavement - 3" 3,800.00 TN $50.00 $190,000.00
Topsoil Slopes 1,500.00 CY $7.00 $10,500.00
Revegetation 3.80 AC $4,000.00 $15,200.00
Traffic Control Signage 41.00 LS $175.00 $7,175.00
Stripping 1,500.00 LF $0.50 $750.00
Curb and Gutter 2,500.00 LF $17.00 $42,500.00
DRAINAGE CONSTRUCTION
Culvert, CPP - 18" 615.00 LF $35.00 $21,525.00
End Section, CMP - 18" 82.00 EA $200.00 $16,400.00
Rip Rap - CY $0.00
Erosion Control 1.00 LS $3,000.00 $3,000.00
STRUCTURES AND SPECIAL FEATURES
Guard Rail Railing 500.00 LF $20.00 $10,000.00
Guard Rail End Anchors 4.00 EA $650.00 $2,600.00
Crossing Warning Lights - EA $0.00
RR Crossing (At-Grade) 2.00 EA $20,000.00 $40,000.00
Bridges (Eagle, Railroad) 1.00 LS $325,000.00 $325,000.00
Bridge Abutment and Wing Walls - CY $0.00
Retaining Walls 26,200.00 SF $20.00 $524,000.00
Tunnels - LS $0.00
Relocate Utilities - LS $0.00
INDIRECT CONSTRUCTION
Surveying ( typ. 5%) LS $78,494.00
Material Testing (typ. 5%) LS $78,494.00
Construction Management (typ. 2%) LS $31,397.00
TOTAL PLANNING AND CONSTRUCTION ESTIMATE $1,942,399.00
TOTAL PROJECT CONTINGENCY (15%) $291,359.00
TOTAL PROJECT COST ESTIMATE $2,233,758.00
TRAIL SECTION
DOWD JUNCTION TO MINTURN
Item Estimated Quantity Units Unit Price in Yr 2000 Estimated Cost
PLANNING AND DESIGN
ROW and Land Purchase AC $0.00
ROW and Land Easement (survey, legal, etc.) EA $0.00
Permit Processing 1 LS $6,000.00 $6,000.00
Engineering/Design (typ. 12% const. cost) 1 LS $51,957.00 $51,957.00
GENERAL CONSTRUCTION COSTS
Bonds and Insurance (typ. 3%) 1 LS $12,989.00 $12,989.00
Mobilization (3K - 5K) 1 LS $3,000.00 $3,000.00
Clean Up 1 LS $1,500.00 $1,500.00
TRAIL CONSTRUCTION COSTS
Clear and Grub 1.20 AC $2,000.00 $2,400.00
Topsoil (Removal and Stockpile) 100.00 CY $5.00 $500.00
Unclassified Excavation 2,700.00 Q,-v $4.50 $12,150.00
Embankment 2,700.00 CY $2.50 $6,750.00
Subgrade Grading 3,500.00 SY $1.25 $4,375.00
Base Course, Class 6 - 6" 1,500.00 TN $20.00 $30,000.00
Asphalt Pavement - 3" 500.00 TN $50.00 $25,000.00
Topsoil Slopes 100.00 CY $7.00 $700.00
Revegetation 0.30 AC $4,000.00 $1,200.00
Traffic Control Signage 38.00 LS $175.00 $6,650.00
Stripping 100.00 LF $0.50 $50.00
DRAINAGE CONSTRUCTION
Culvert, CPP - 18" 60.00 LF $35.00 $2,100.00
End Section, CMP - 18" 4.00 EA $200.00 $800.00
Rip Rap - CY $0.00
Erosion Control 1.00 LS $3,000.00 $3,000.00
STRUCTURES AND SPECIAL FEATURES
Guard Rail Railing 300.00 LF $20.00 $6,000.00
Guard Rail End Anchors 2.00 EA $650.00 $1,300.00
Crossing Warning Lights - EA $0.00
RR Crossing (At-Grade) - EA $0.00
Bridges (Two Elk Creek) - LS $0.00
Bridge Abutment and Wing Walls - CY $0.00
Retaining Walls 16,500.00 SF $20.00 $330,000.00
Tunnels - LS $0.00
Relocate Utilities - LS $0.00
INDIRECT CONSTRUCTION
Surveying ( typ. 5%) LS $22,523.00
Material Testing (typ. 5%) LS $22,523.00
Construction Management (typ. 2%) LS $9,009.00
TOTAL PLANNING AND CONSTRUCTION ESTIMATE $562,476.00
TOTAL PROJECT CONTINGENCY (15%) $84,371.00
TOTAL PROJECT COST ESTIMATE $646,847.00
TRAIL SECTION
TOWN OF MINTURN
Item Estimated Quantity Units Unit Price in Yr 2000 Estimated Cost
PLANNING AND DESIGN
ROW and Land Purchase AC $0.00
ROW and Land Easement (survey, legal, etc.) EA $0.00
Permit Processing 1 LS $6,000.00 $6,000.00
Engineering/Design (typ. 12% const. cost) 1 LS $84,276.00 $84,276.00
GENERAL CONSTRUCTION COSTS
Bonds and Insurance (typ. 3%) 1 LS $21,069.00 $21,069.00
Mobilization (3K - 5K) 1 LS $4,000.00 $4,000.00
Clean Up 1 LS $1,500.00 $1,500.00
TRAIL CONSTRUCTION COSTS
Clear and Grub 6.00 AC $2,000.00 $12,000.00
Topsoil (Removal and Stockpile) 1,400.00 CY $5.00 $7,000.00
Unclassified Excavation 2,000.00 CY $4.50 $9,000.00
Embankment 2,000.00 CY $2.50 $5,000.00
Subgrade Grading 25,200.00 SY $1.25 $31,500.00
Base Course, Class 6 - 6" 10,600.00 TN $20.00 $212,000.00
Asphalt Pavement - 3" 3,550.00 TN $50.00 $177,500.00
Topsoil Slopes 1,400.00 CY $7.00 $9,800.00
Revegetation 3.40 AC $4,000.00 $13,600.00
Traffic Control Signage 38.00 LS $175.00 $6,650.00
Stripping 200.00 LF $0.50 $100.00
DRAINAGE CONSTRUCTION
Culvert, CPP - 18" 570.00 LF $35.00 $19,950.00
End Section, CMP - 18" 76.00 EA $200.00 $15,200.00
Rip Rap - CY
Erosion Control 1.00 LS $3,000.00 $3,000.00
STRUCTURES AND SPECIAL FEATURES
Guard Rail Railing - LF $0.00
Guard Rail End Anchors - EA $0.00
Crossing Warning Lights - EA $0.00
RR Crossing (At-Grade) 1.00 EA $20,000.00 $20,000.00
Bridges - LS $0.00
Bridge Abutment and Wing Walls - CY $0.00
Retaining Walls 8,000.00 SF $20.00 $160,000.00
Tunnels - LS $0.00
Relocate Utilities - LS $0.00
INDIRECT CONSTRUCTION
Surveying ( typ. 5%) LS $36,443.00
Material Testing (typ. 5%) LS $36,443.00
Construction Management (typ. 2%) LS $14,577.00
TOTAL PLANNING AND CONSTRUCTION ESTIMATE $906,608.00
TOTAL PROJECT CONTINGENCY (15%) $135,991.00
TOTAL PROJECT COST ESTIMATE $1,042,599.00
TRAIL SECTION
MINTURN TO REDCLIFF
Item Estimated Quantity Units Unit Price in Yr 2000 Estimated Cost
PLANNING AND DESIGN
ROW and Land Purchase AC
ROW and Land Easement (survey, legal, etc.) EA
Permit Processing 1 LS $6,000.00 $6,000.00
Engineering/Design (typ. 12% const. cost) 1 LS $75,199.00 $75,199.00
GENERAL CONSTRUCTION COSTS
Bonds and Insurance (typ. 3%) 1 LS $18,800.00 $18,800.00
Mobilization (3K - 5K) 1 LS $5,000.00 $5,000.00
Clean Up 1 LS $1,500.00 $1,500.00
TRAIL CONSTRUCTION COSTS
Clear and Grub 3.00 AC $2,000.00 $6,000.00
Topsoil (Removal and Stockpile) 460.00 CY $5.00 $2,300.00
Unclassified Excavation 2,250.00 CY $4.50 $10,125.00
Embankment 2,250.00 CY $2.50 $5,625.00
Subgrade Grading 44,150.00 SY $1.25 $55,187.50
Base Course, Class 6 - 6" 7,200.00 TN $20.00 $144,000.00
Asphalt Pavement - 3" 1,200.00 TN $50.00 $60,000.00
Topsoil Slopes 460.00 CY $7.00 $3,220.00
Revegetation 6.00 AC $4,000.00 $24,000.00
Traffic Control Signage 66.00 LS $175.00 $11,550.00
Stripping 200.00 LF $0.50 $100.00
DRAINAGE CONSTRUCTION
Culvert, CPP - 18" 990.00 LF $35.00 $34,650.00
End Section, CMP - 18" 132.00 EA $200.00 $26,400.00
Rip Rap - CY $0.00
Erosion Control 1.00 LS $3,000.00 $3,000.00
STRUCTURES AND SPECIAL FEATURES
Guard Rail Railing - LF $0.00
Guard Rail End Anchors - EA $0.00
Crossing Warning Lights 1.00 EA $500.00 $500.00
RR Crossing (At-Grade) - EA $0.00
Bridges (Two Elk Creek) 1.00 LS $90,000.00 $90,000.00
Bridge Abutment and Wing Walls - CY $0.00
Retaining Walls 7,500.00 SF $20.00 $150,000.00
Tunnels - LS $0.00
Relocate Utilities - LS $0.00
INDIRECT CONSTRUCTION
Surveying ( typ. 5%) LS $32,598.00
Material Testing (typ. 5%) LS $32,598.00
Construction Management (typ. 2%) LS $13,039.00
TOTAL PLANNING AND CONSTRUCTION ESTIMATE $811,392.00
TOTAL PROJECT CONTINGENCY (15%) $121,708.00
TOTAL PROJECT COST ESTIMATE $933,100.00
TRAIL SECTION
TOWN OF VAIL IMPROVEMENTS
Item Estimated Quantity Units Unit Price in Yr 2000 Estimated Cost
PLANNING AND DESIGN
ROW and Land Purchase AC $0.00
ROW and Land Easement (survey, legal, etc.) EA $0.00
Permit Processing 1 LS $2,000.00 $2,000.00
Engineering/Design (typ. 12% const. cost) 1 LS $11,337.00 $11,337.00
GENERAL CONSTRUCTION COSTS
Bonds and Insurance (typ. 3%) 1 LS $2,834.00 $2,834.00
Mobilization (3K - 5K) 1 LS $3,000.00 $3,000.00
Clean Up 1 LS $1,500.00 $1,500.00
TRAIL CONSTRUCTION COSTS
Clear and Grub 1.50 AC $2,000.00 $3,000.00
Topsoil (Removal and Stockpile) 250.00 CY $5.00 $1,250.00
Unclassified Excavation - CY $0.00
Embankment - CY $0.00
Subgrade Grading 4,500.00 SY $1.25 $5,625.00
Base Course, Class 6 - 6" 1,900.00 TN $20.00 $38,000.00
Asphalt Pavement - 3" 630.00 TN $50.00 $31,500.00
Topsoil Slopes 250.00 CY $7.00 $1,750.00
Revegetation 1.00 AC $4,000.00 $4,000.00
Traffic Control Signage 7.00 LS $175.00 $1,225.00
Stripping 300.00 LF $0.50 $150.00
DRAINAGE CONSTRUCTION
Culvert, CPP - 18" 105.00 LF $35.00 $3,675.00
End Section, CMP - 18" 14.00 EA $200.00 $2,800.00
Rip Rap - CY $0.00
Erosion Control 0.50 LS $3,000.00 $1,500.00
STRUCTURES AND SPECIAL FEATURES
Guard Rail Railing - LF $0.00
Guard Rail End Anchors - EA $0.00
Crossing Warning Lights - EA $0.00
RR Crossing (At-Grade) - EA $0.00
Bridges - LS $0.00
Bridge Abutment and Wing Walls - CY $0.00
Retaining Walls - SF $0.00
Tunnels - LS $0.00
Relocate Utilities - LS $0.00
INDIRECT CONSTRUCTION
Surveying ( typ. 5%) LS $5,090.00
Material Testing (typ. 5%) LS $5,090.00
Construction Management (typ. 2%) LS $2,036.00
TOTAL PLANNING AND CONSTRUCTION ESTIMATE $127,362.00
TOTAL PROJECT CONTINGENCY (15%) $19,104.00
TOTAL PROJECT COST ESTIMATE $146,466.00
Appendix B
Trail Plan Process Participants
Eagle Valley Trails Committee
Dick Cleveland
Ginny Culp
Louise Randall
Amy Losa
Fred Haslee
Thomas Gutherie
Paul Gotthelf
John Bailey
Buff Arnold
Ken Rhoads
Jeff Auxier
Leslie Kehmeier
Bill Fisher
Mike Toughill
Martha Miller
Kip Mayer
Chip Tallon
Katherine Nannin
Eagle County Regional Transportation Authority
Kevin Foley, Town of Vail
Debbie Buckley, Town of Avon
Bob Mcllveen, Beaver Creek and Town of Avon
Larry Grafel, Beaver Creek
Willy Powell, Town of Eagle
Donna Meyer, Town of Eagle
Tom Stone, Eagle County
Mike Gallagher, Eagle County
George Roussos, Eagle County
Jeff Shroll, Town of Gypsum
Francis Barela, Town of Gypsum
Jim Kleckner, Town of Minturn
Alan Lanning, Town of Minturn
Robert Slagle, Town of Red Cliff
Private Sector Participants:
Johnson and Kunkel Engineering
Monroe and Newell Engineering
Union Pacific Railroad
The Citizens Serving on the:
Eagle County Board of County Commissioners
Eagle Town Board
Eagle Town Planning Commission
Gypsum Town Council
Gypsum Town Planning Commission
Avon Town Council
Avon Planning Commission
Vail Town Council
Vail Planning Commission
Minturn Town Council
Minturn Planning Commission
Red Cliff Town Council
Red Cliff Planning Commission
Eagle County Planning Commission
Local, State and Federal Government Staff:
Norm Wood, Town of Avon
Anne Martens, Town of Avon
Vern Brock, Town of Eagle
Larry McKinzie, Town of Eagle
Lisa DeGraaf, Town of Minturn
Greg Hall, Town of Vail
Gregg Barrie, Town of Vail
Brent Wilson, Town of Vail
Brad Higgins, Eagle County
Bob Narracci, Eagle County
Joe Forinash, Eagle County
Keith Montag, Eagle County
Helen Migchelbrink, Eagle County
Peter Sulmeisters, Eagle County
Mike Gruber, Eagle County
Leslie Kehmeier, Eagle County GIS
John Staight, Eagle County GIS
Sean Koenig, Eagle County GIS
Ellie Caryl, ECO Trails
Janet Field, ECO
Ann Allums, ECO
Bill Heicher, Colorado Division of Wildlife
Bill Andree, Colorado Division of Wildlife
Keith Powers, Colorado Department of Transportation
Brian Hopkins, US Bureau of Land Management
Beth Boyst, US Forest Service
Joe Doerr, US Forest Service
AppendixC
References
• AASHTO Guide for the Development of Bicycle Facilities, 1999
• Florida Bicycle Facilities Planning and Design Manual 1996, Florida Department of
Transportation
• Colorado Department of Transportaton's Bikeway Design Guidelines, 1994
• Bicyclinginfo.org website, Produced by the Pedestrian and Bicycle Information Center, Exerpts
from January, 2001
• National Bicycle and Pedestrian Clearinghouse, Technical Assistance Series Number 9, August
1996
• Successful Strategies for Trail Development, Rails-to-Trails Conservancy, Workshop
Proceedings, November, 1998
• Commentary and Text, Section 14, ADA Accessibility Guidelines
• Bicycle Facility Planning, Planning Advisory Service, Report Number 459, American Planning
Association, 1995
• Summit County Recreational Pathways Master Plan, 1989
• Trails 2000 Program, Jefferson County Open Space Master Plan, 1998
• Scottsdale (Arizona) Bike Path Improvement Study, 1992
• Historic Union Pacific Rail Trail Master Plan, 1991
• Heart of the Rockies Historic Corridor, Trail Feasibility Study, 1996
• Eagle County Land Use Regulations 1998
• Eagle County Trail Plan 1993
• Town of Vail Comprehensive Open Lands Plan, 1994
• Minturn Parks and Recreation Master Plan, 1992
• Town of Avon Recreation Master Plan, 1992
• Boulder's Stream Corridors Design Guidelines, 1989
• Bicycling and Walking in Colorado, Colorado Department of Transportation, 2000
• Yampa Valley Trails and Recreation Conceptual Plan, 1992
• The Intermountain Connection, Rails and Trails Report, 1998
• Glenwood Springs Park, Recreation, Open Space, Greenway and Pathway Master Plan, 1998
• Heart of the Rockies Historic Corridor Trail Feasibility Study, 1996
• Planning Trails with Wildlife in Mind, Colorado State Parks, 1998
Appendix D
Recommended Core Trail Furniture and Accessories
Recommended Picnic Table Style
Order in Forest Green Recycled Plastic with galvanized base for low maintenance.
Anchored in concrete to discourage vandalism.
Available from RJ Thomas Manufacturing DBA Pilot Rock Products.
Recommended Bench Style
Order in Forest Green Recycled Plastic with galvanized base for low maintenance.
Anchored in concrete to discourage vandalism.
Available from RJ Thomas Manufacturing DBA Pilot Rock Products.
( insert photos of garbage can, lighting, bike rack here)
Memo
Date: March 21, 2001
To: Honorable Mayor and Town Council
Thru: Bill Efting, Town Manager
Thru: Mike Matzko, Community Development Direct
From: Tambi Katieb, Planner I
Re: Design Review Guidelines Project
Introduction:
Last summer, the Planning and Zoning Commission asked staff to investigate the
possibility of updating our Design Review Guidelines. In general, both staff and the
Commission agreed that we should be able to create depth, clarity, and detail through this
revision process while at the same time preserving the flexibility that the development
community desires in producing varied and high quality designs in the Town.
Community Development staff applied for and received a 2001 NWCCOG technical
assistance grant for $2,000 to assist staff in revising the guidelines. The monies will
allow us the to hire a qualified architectural professional consultant to assist with
graphics illustration and final review of our draft. The grant requires that the Town
complete this project by December 31, 2001. The Planning and Zoning Commission
requested a joint worksession early in the revision process to provide an opportunity for
direction from Town Council.
Discussion:
The Town of Avon Planning and Zoning Commission act as both a traditional planning
commission and a design review board. Like other burgeoning mountain resort
communities, it is difficult for regulations and development guidelines to keep pace with
demand and the potential for redevelopment. Though our Design Review Guidelines
were first adopted in 1992, then reformatted in 1998, they lack the clarity and
sophistication necessary for a Town that since 1998 has almost doubled its boundaries.
As competition among mountain resort communities increases, so does the importance of
factors such as appearance and design. Beyond appearance, the economic well being of a
municipality such as ours is critical. Effective design. standards are a key part of creating
an attractive setting that is economically viable as a resort destination and year round
community.
The following are staff's suggested goals for the revision:
• Revise the building site design standards to provide applicants with more clarity
on what is required on a site plan.
• Require pre-application meetings with staff to avoid lengthy delays in processing
from incomplete or insufficient submittals and to provide feedback regarding
design prior to significant investment by the applicant.
• Revise the building design standards to articulate desirable design features while
at the same time allowing enough flexibility for varied, high quality design
proposals. This is particularly important as the Town anticipates redevelopment
of properties in the near future.
• Revise and clarify application, scheduling, and processing requirements to
`streamline' the application process and thus avoid lengthy delays in construction
at either the design or the building permit phases.
• Revise and clarify access, parking, fire and engineering standards in a format that
is easily interpretable.
Conclusion:
Staff anticipates providing a rough draft to the Planning and Zoning Commission by mid-
May. We are well on our way to completing this task at the present time. After several
iterations we anticipate that staff and the Planning and Zoning Commission will be ready
to adopt new Design Guidelines package by early Fall.
Town Manager Comm nts.:¢ L/
/`7 awl ???? ,??????? .??? /?' ? G?'-?
?`7
Memo
Date: March 21, 2001
To: Honorable Mayor and Town Council
Thru: Bill Efting, Town Manager
Thru: Michael Matzko, Director of Community Developmen
From: Tambi Katieb, Planner I
Re: Town Center Plan Kickoff Presentation
Introduction:
At the Tuesday, March 27 work session, Pat Dawe of RNL Design will present to Town
Council an overview of issues and objectives for the Town Center Plan. The presentation
will also include an updated project schedule. This kickoff meeting is consistent with the
schedule proposed by RNL in February.
Discussion:
RNL Design has prepared a brief outline (attached) of this initial issues and objectives
identification meeting. We have scheduled an hour for the presentation and ensuing
discussion .
Attachments:
RNL Design `Town Center Plan Scope of Services' timeline.
Avon Town Center Plan `Issues and Objectives' presentation outline
Avon Town Center
Issues and Objectives
Powerpoint
Title Text Graphics
Avon Town Center RNL Design
Felsburg Holt & Ullevig
BBC Research
Aerial drawing of
Town Center
Goal To create a lively & attractive focus of
day and nighttime activity for the valley,
attracting skiers, valley residents & other
visitors
Objectives Coordinate major owner/developer projects
with private projects
create active street fronts
coordinate pedestrian/vehicle access
Realign & create new street framework
Develop new parking resources
Extend transit service into Town Center
Coordinate pedestrian connections in &
beyond Town Center
Issues Streets: Main Street, Benchmark Road
Alignments
Widths
Owner/developer projects
Parking
Transit
Pedestrian Connections
Railroad crossing
To East Avon
U
O
Z
O
H
a
C
O
co
L?
7
c
a
0
C
d Q
a
in.
E
a..
C
V ca
c ?
3
cV
d
a' co
J 0.. N
CL
A= •U
c
_ E
0 -0
fl O O
3 co L)
------------ N lL
O N
Co . '? D
E c
D
CL
0 'Tp
co U?l1
O
t U C N
Y Q
F
U
-
7 _U
E
a. o
r- CL c
? U
C a? Y
O N O
L a.a?
%0
U
(/? 7 M
3 °
ai U
0 w
0
U N
Y
TOWN OF AVON
REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING AGENDA
March 27, 2001- 5:30 PM
1. Call to Order/Roll Call
2. Citizen Input
3. Ordinances
First Reading of Ordinance No. 01-03, Series of 2001, An Ordinance Repealing and Re-
I Enacting Section 15.28.080M of the Town Code Concerning Temporary Signs (Eric
Johnson)
4. Resolutions
5. Unfinished Business
6. New Business /K
a.) Nottingham Road Bike Path Contract
7. Town Manager Report
8. Town Attorney Report
9. Mayor Report
10. Other Business
11. Consent Agenda
a.) Approval of the March 13, 2001 Council Meeting Minutes
` b.) Contract for Noah's Ark Petting Zoo for Easter Event
N? c.) Financial Matters
12. Adjournment
2
Memo
Date: March 22, 2001
To: Honorable Mayor and Town Council
T h ru : Bill Efting, Town Manager
From: Michael Matzko, Director of Community Development
Re: Ordinance 01-03, Repealing and Re-Enacting Section 15.28.080M of the Avon
Municipal Code to Clarify the Allowances for Temporary Signs
Summary:
Recently, there have been opinions expressed that our temporary sign code is too restrictive. The
current guideline for a temporary sign is one week, for one event, once a month, including a
$97.50 fee. Many businesses are unwilling to pay the fee for only one week of temporary
signage.
We are proposing a revision to Section 15.28.080M of the Avon Municipal Code to improve the
allotted time for temporary signs. This revision will also clarify the use of temporary signs
during the installation and approval process for permanent signs.
Recommendation:
Approve Ordinance 01-03 on first reading, repealing and re-enacting Section 15.28.080M of the
Avon Municipal Code to clarify the allowances for temporary signs in the Town of Avon.
Alternatives:
1. Approve ordinance.
2. Amend ordinance.
3. Deny ordinance.
Recommended Motion:
I move to approve Ordinance 01-03, repealing and re-enacting Section 15.28.080M of the Avon
Municipal Code to clarify the allowances for temporary signs in the Town of Avon.
Town Manager Comments-
Attachments:
A. Ordinance 01-03.
B. Memo to Planning and Zoning Commission on March 1, 2001.
ORDINANCE NO. 01-03
SERIES OF 2001
AN ORDINANCE REPEALING AND RE-ENACTING
SECTION 15.28.080M OF THE TOWN CODE
CONCERNING TEMPORARY SIGNS.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE TOWN COUNCIL
OF THE TOWN OF AVON, COLORADO:
Section 1. Section 15.28.080M of the Avon Municipal Code is
repealed and re-enacted to provide as follows:
15.28.080 M. Temporary Signs. Temporary signs are permitted, provided that:
1. A business may display, on a one time basis for not more than thirty days, one
temporary sign per calendar year. Such temporary sign shall have a
maximum area of not more than thirty-five square feet.
2. In addition to permissible temporary signs as set forth in subsection 1 hereof,
during the permitting and installation process for a business's permanent
identification sign, such business may display one temporary sign with a
maximum area equal to the business's permanent identification sign's
allowable square footage. Such temporary sign will be allowed to remain in
place for not more than thirty days.
3. The sign administrator may issue a permit for a temporary sign meeting the
criteria in subsection 1 and 2 hereof without Planning and Zoning
Commission review.
4. Temporary signs not meeting the criteria in subsection 1 and 2 may be
approved by the Planning and Zoning Commission only upon a determination
by the Commission that a variance should be granted pursuant to Section
15.28.090.
INTRODUCED, APPROVED ON FIRST READING, AND ORDERED
PUBLISHED IN FULL AND POSTED, this day of , 2001, and a
public hearing on this ordinance shall be held at the regular meeting of the Town Council
of the Town of Avon, Colorado on the _ day of , 2001, at _.m. in
the Municipal Building of the Town of Avon, Colorado.
1
TOWN OF AVON, COLORADO:
Mayor
ATTEST:
Town Clerk
INTRODUCED, APPROVED ON SECOND READING, AND
ORDERED PUBLISHED AND POSTED this _ day of , 2001.
TOWN OF AVON, COLORADO:
Mayor
ATTEST:
Town Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
Town Attorney
2
Memo
To: Planning and Zoning Commissioners
From: Eric Johnson, Planning Technician
Date March 1, 2001
Re: Sign Code Amendment, Temporary Signs
Summary: Recently, there have been opinions expressed regarding the Town's
policy towards temporary signs (banners) being too strict. The current guideline for a
temporary sign permit is one week, for one event, once a month. The fee for a
temporary sign permit is $97.50. Many businesses are unwilling to pay the fee for
only one week of additional signage. The following is the section of the Sign Code
governing temporary signs.
15.28.080 M. Temporary Signs. Temporary signs are permitted, provided that:
1. One temporary sign, with a maximum area of thirty-five square feet, is
allowed to remain in place for not more than one week for any one event.
2. Temporary signs may be displayed for only one event in any thirty-day
period.
3. The sign administrator may issue a permit for a temporary sign meeting
these criteria without Planning and Zoning Commission review.
4. Temporary signs not meeting these criteria may be approved by Planning
and Zoning only upon a determination by the Planning and Zoning
Commission that a variance should be granted pursuant to Section
15.28.090.
Recommendation: Staff recommends that the Sign Code be amended to clarify the
temporary signs section with regard to the following items: duration, frequency, and
include temporary signs during the installation and approval process for permanent
signs. If the Commission finds the following changes acceptable, Staff will present it
to the Town Council so that it may be adopted into the Ordinance. Staff would like to
amend the Sign Code as it pertains to temporary signs with the following sections.
15.28.080 M. Temporary Signs. Temporary signs are permitted, provided that:
1. A business may display one temporary sign per calendar year with a
maximum area of thirty-five square feet. The temporary sign is
allowed to remain in place for not more than thirty days.
,,
Sign Code Amendment, Temporary Signs memo
March 1, 2001, Page 2
2. During the permitting and installation process for a business's
permanent identification sign, a business may display one temporary
sign with a maximum area equal to the business's permanent
identification sign's allowable square footage. The temporary sign is
allowed to remain in place for not more than thirty days.
3. The sign administrator may issue a permit for a temporary sign
meeting these criteria without Planning and Zoning Commission
review.
4. Temporary signs not meeting these criteria may be approved by
Planning and Zoning only upon a determination by the Planning and
Zoning Commission that a variance should be granted pursuant to
Section 15.28.090.
MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE TOWN COUNCIL
HELD MARCH 13, 2001
A regular meeting of the Town of Avon, Colorado was held in the Municipal Building,
400 Benchmark Road, Avon, Colorado in the Council Chambers.
The meeting was called to order by Mayor Judy Yoder at 5:30 PM. A roll call was taken
with Councilors Mike Brown, Debbie Buckley, Peter Buckley, Rick Cuny, Mac
McDevitt and Mayor Protem Buz Reynolds present. Also present were Town Manager
Bill Efting, Town Attorney Burt Levin, Assistant Town Manager Larry Brooks, Town
Clerk Kris Nash, Police Chief Jeff Layman, Town Engineer Norm Wood, Recreation
Director Meryl Jacobs, Public Works Director Bob Reed, Community Development
Director Mike Matzko, Transportation Foreman Jeff Wetzel as well as members of the
public.
Other Business:
Councilor Peter Buckley commended the Public Works department for all their hard
work on cleaning up the streets as well as promptly removing the aspen trees that were
destroyed in a car accident last week.
Consent Agenda:
a.) Approval of the February 27, 2001 Council Meeting Minutes
b.) Swift Gulch Road Realignment - Inter-Mountain Engineering Design
Services Proposal
c.) Storm Drainage Improvements, Metcalf Basin Phase I - Inter-Mountain
Engineering Design Services Proposal
d.) Reapproval of the Final Plat for Mountain Vista Resort Subdivision, A
Resubdivision of Lot C, A Final Plat and Resubdivision of Lots B and C,
Avon Center at Beaver Creek, Benchmark at Beaver Creek, Amendment
No. 4, Town of Avon, Eagle County, Colorado
e.) Contract with Western Enterprises for July 4th Fireworks
Mayor Protem Reynolds motioned to approve the Consent Agenda. Councilor Cuny
seconded the motion. The motion carried unanimously.
There being no further business to come before the Council, Councilor Cuny motioned to
adjourn the meeting. Councilor McDevitt seconded the motion. The motion carried
unanimously and the meeting adjourned at 5:33PM.
TFULLY SUBMITTED:
Nash, Town
APPROVED:
Michael Brown
Debbie Buckley
Peter Buckley
Rick Curly
Mac McDevitt
Buz Reynolds
Judy Yoder
Regular Council Meeting
March 13, 2001
Memo
r
March 15, 2001
To: Meryl
From: Ron
RE: Contract for Noah's Ark Petting Zoo (Easter)
Summary
Attached please find the agreement between Noah's
Ark Petting Zoo and Pony Rides, Inc. and the Town of
Avon for having petting zoo services for April 14, 2001.
Recommendation
recommend that Council approve and sign the
attached agreement for Petting Zoo services in the
amount of $650.00
Town of Avon 9 P.O. Box 975 9 Avon, CO 81620 9 970-748-4032
mar in ul 11:`ua
Noah's Ark Petting Zoo & Pony Rides, Inc.
8330 Country Circle
Elizabeth, Co. 80107
Phone: 303/646-3932
Fax :303/646-0286
E-mail: infolanoahszoo.com
P. r
Contract
Date of event: _Aic\ NA-NNN ao
Event Name: ?er oz\- V" y or,
Location:
Contact: Zo r? o r e O
Address: t'? 0 3Olt Q15 JOr\ S-0
Phone: 1I -) O - "4A S - A D S to
Noah's Ark Agrees to provide "Noah's Ark Petting Zoo" free admission exhibit for this event with the following requirements.
1. Sponsor agrees to provide the following exhibit area at no cost to Noah's Ark
A. indoor space on a reasonably level surface equal to the agreed upon petting zoo dimensions.
Noah's Ark to provide all tarps, animal bedding and feed required.
B. outdoor space on a reasonably level surface equal to the agreed upon petting zoo dimensions.
Noah's Ark to provide all tents, animal bedding and feed required.
_ 20' X 20' Petting zoo
20'X 30' Petting Zoo
20'X 40' Petting Zoo
20' X 60' Petting Zoo
2. Sponsor agrees to provide the following electrical, water and trash requirements at no cost to Noah's Ark:
A. two 30 amp 110 volt outlets
B. four 30 amp 110 volt outlets
C. six 30 amp 110 volt outlets
D. full access to water hookups with 100' of the petting zoo
E. full access to trash receptacles within 100' of the petting zoo
Mar 15 01 11:48a P • ,J
Page 2
3. Sponsor agrees to provide the following parking and admission requirements at no cost to Noah's Ark.:
A. RV parking space for one 35' travel trailer with electric, water and sewage hookups. This site must be
located as close as possible to the exhibit area
'1,, B. Parking space for one 24' horse trailer. This equipment must be located adjacent to the exhibit at all times.
C. Two permits/passes for passenger/cargo vehicle entry into parking lots and exhibit areas.
D. Admission tickets/passes for all petting zoo staff for each day of the scheduled event
4. Sponsor agrees to have exhibit site available to Noah's Ark for the following setup requirements:
A. Indoor Setup: one day prior to opening day.
B. Outdoor Setup: two days prior to opening day
C. Day of the event
5. Sponsor agrees to allow Noah's Ark at no cost to include an area within the exhibit space for the purpose of selling
animal feed and animal related items.
6. Hours of operation: Noah's Ark agrees to operate the exhibit using the same schedule as published for the event unless
otherwise noted.
Weekday hours of operation
on \ 0 p, rr\ - ?? t`^
Weekend hours of operati
Special promotion days hours of operation
7. Sponsor agrees to pay Noah's Ark the following fee for each day of the scheduled event:
00 p'? ?JO r ?? fro V ? d t'
Exhibit rate per day: (0 5 0 ` o
PtiCt-onc0? A-V ?o?1S for
Number of Days: 1
Total Amount due: G SO
8. Sponsor agrees to at no cost to include an area for Noah's Ark Pony Rides to set up and operate with the following
space requirements:
A. Not Applicable
B. 40'X 40' space
C. 30'X 30' space
Noah's Ark agrees to provide pony rides at a fee to the public, and at no cost to the sponsor. The pony ride hours will
correspond with the hours of the petting zoo up until 9pm unless otherwise agreed upon by both parties.
Mar 15 U1 11:4ba
Page 3
P. -t
In the event of severe weather or any situation beyond Noah's Ark's control that may result in closure of this event for any
amount of time the sponsor agrees to provide full payment at the above rate. Payment is due immediately upon completion of
the event.
Either party with 14-day advance notice may cancel this contract.
gsN o ? '
President Noah's Ark
3? \ a\ o 1
Date
Sponsoring Organization
Address
Signature/ Title
Date
FINANCIAL MATTERS
March 27, 2001
1. Detail - Building Activity Report
2. Detail-Real Estate Transfer Taxes
3. Detail-Sales Tax Update
4. Detail-Accomodations Tax Update
Town of Avon 970-748-4030
P.O.Box 975
Avon, Co. 81620
748-4094 For Inspection Request
Permit Tally Printed:3/1/01
For: February, 2001 Pagel of 1
Permit Purpose: Repair/Remodel Comm/Indust
Public: Bldg. Construction Value: $.00
# of Bldgs: # of Units: Permit Charges: $.00
Private: 1 Construction Value: $500,000.00
# of Bldgs: 1 # of Units: Permit Charges: $8,256.39
Permit Purpose: Repair/Remodel SF Residential
Public: Construction Value: $.00
# of Bldgs: # of Units: Permit Charges: $.00
Private: 4 Construction Value: $40,800.00
# of Bldgs: # of Units: 4 Permit Charges: $1,372.38
Permit Purpose: Tenant finish
Public:
# of Bldgs: # of Units:
Private: 1
# of Bldgs: 1 # of Units:
Construction Value: $.00
Permit Charges:
Construction Value: $4,600.00
Permit Charges:
$.00
$183.56
Totals:
Public:
# of Bldgs:
Private: 6
# of Bldgs:2
Construction Value: $.00
# of Units: Permit Charges: $.00
Construction Value: $545,400.00
# of Units: 4 Permit Charges: $9,812.33
Town of Avon
Real Estate Transfer Tax Transactions
Calendar Year 2001
Purchaser Amount of RETT
Name Property Received
$83,089.62
Sanchez Avon Crossing #4209 $980.00
Wolf Mountain Star #70 $23,500.00
Ammaturo Properties Metcalf Commercial #1&2 26,000.00
Solomon Canyon Run #1202 104.00
Avitia Eaglebend Lot 16 6,800.00
Roettjer Chapel Square #206 2,640.00
Isaacs Sunridge #M302 360.00
Betz/Kulanda Stone Creek #106 660.00
Shoulders Sunridge #13204 3,700.00
Total through February
$147,833.62
1
TOWN OF AVON
SALES TAX BY MONTH
1997 96'-97'% 1998 97'-98'% 1999
Change Change
January 377,597.32 13.67% 379,424.41 0.48% 384,939.69
February 362,516.58 10.86% 378,112.00 4.30% 397,323.16
March 468,675.51 14.88% 460,191.56 -1.81% 474,933.06
April 265,356.48 4.91% 310,197.72 16.90% 302,864.19
May 241,012.56 8.53% 249,079.90 3.35% 265,405.35
June 313,116.79 5.031% 337,562.03 7.81% 395,755.68
July 353,101.99 5.37°% 370,086.73 4.81% 395,954.38
August 338,134.48 4.22% 363,110.96 7.39% 366,648.94
September 319,410.91 5.58% 333,508.38 4.41% 364,432.54
October 263,685.99 -0.89% 305,035.11 15.68% 295,541.62
November 339,200.41 18.94°% 335,073.59 -1.22% 320,335.28
December 533,904.08 4.860% 550,077.22 3.03% 564,813.35
YTD Total 4,175,713.10 8.10% 4,371,459.61 4.69% 4,528,947.24
98'-99'% 2000 99'-00'% 2001 00'-01% Total 5-Yr
Change Change Change % Increase
1.45% 359,721.88 -6.55% 408,217.16 13.48% 14.8,,.-
5.08% 397,291.59 -0.01% - -100.00% 33.94%
3.20% 457,053.94 -3.76% - -100.00% 22.22%
-2.36% 337,087.43 11.30% - -100.00% 48.55%
6.55% 286,191.36 7.83% - -100.00% 42.52%
17.24% 398,869.89 0.79% - -100.00% 48.93%
6.99% 415,978.51 5.06% - -100.00% 45.42%
0.97% 400,447.52 9.22% - -100.00°% 40.46%
9.27% 375,400.90 3.01% - -100.00% 39.83%
-3.11% 320,796.00 8.55% - -100.00% 44.16%
-4.40% 329,170.99 2.76% - -100.00% 26.14%
2.68% 607,777.58 7.61% - -100.00% 36.55%
3.60°% 4,685,787.59 3.46% 408,217.16 12.85°% 35.92%
Monthly Collections for January 1997-2001
410,000.00
400,000.00
390,000.00
380,000.00
370,000.00
360,000.00
350,000.00
340,000.00
330,000.00
YTD Through January Collections 1997-2001 1
1997 1998 1999 2000 2001
TOWN OF AVON
ACCOMMODATIONS TAX BY MONTH
1997 96'-97% 1998 97'-98% 1999 98'-99% 2000 99'-00'% 2001 00'-01'% Total5-Yr
Change Change Change Change Change % Increase
January 39,958.27 5.75% 39,357.21 -1.50% 41,102.99 4.44% 24,753.92 -39.78% 35,913.75 45.08% -34.49%
February 45,305.47 6.89% 42,769.24 -5.60% 36,985.03 -13.52% 32,158.10 -13.05% - -100.00% -24.13%
March 63,054.38 12.83% 51,035.34 -19.06% 42,018.24 -17.67% 42,385.82 0.87% -100.00% -24.15%
April 11,850.40 -0.34% 13,556.94 14.40% 11,609.15 -14.37% 10,166.11 -12.43% - -100.00% -14.51%
May 8,759.53 30.67% 5,762.93 -34.21% 6,117.50 6.15% 5,712.27 -6.62% -100.00% -14.79%
June 13,982.39 10.68% 12,609.03 -9.82% 14,958.28 18.63% 15,610.67 4.36% -100.00% 23.57%
July 21,298.64 6.76% 20,845.64 -2.13% 21,120.57 1.32% 21,769.19 3.07% -100.00% 9.12%
August 22,365.12 9.68% 22,875.39 2.28% 16,452.89 -28.08% 17,093.13 3.89% -100.00% -16.17%
September 11,173.41 -14.66% 11,262.18 0.79% 10,300.61 -8.54% 12,810.60 24.37% -100.00% -2.16%
October 8,819.05 -18.59% 8,315.76 -5.71% 7,258.18 -12.72% 9,139.51 25.92% -100.00% -15.63%
November 12,112.05 -5.56% 10,813.22 -10.72% 7,889.97 -27.03% 10,233.40 29.70% -100.00% -20.21%
December 40,000.05 18.97% 32,602.89 -18.49% 25,606.29 -21.46% 32,309.50 26.18% -100.00% -3.91%
YTD Total 298,678.76 7.44% 271,805.77 -9.00% 241,419.70 -11.18% 234,142.22 -3.01% 35,913.75 45.08% -15.78%
YTD Through January Collections 1997-2001
45,000.00
40,000.00
35,000.00
30,000.00
25,000.00
20,000.00
15,000.00
10,000.00
5,000.00
1997 1998 1999 2000 2001
Year