HomeMy WebLinkAboutVAIL LIONSHEAD FILING 3 BLOCK 1 LOT 8 LION SQUARE NORTH COMMON 3t
Detailed
Section 5,12 ol the Lionshead Redevelopment Master Plan addresses the
entirety of fhe Lion Square Lodge (North, East, and South buildings). This
detailed plan recommendation was drafted prior to the review and approval of the
Arrabelle dqvelopment project. ln Section 5.12, concerns were noted about the
no longer txisting vehicular traffic through the Lion Square Lodge site and
recommen{ations were made for an improved pedestrian connection between all
the Lion SqUare Lodge buildings. With the cunent Arrabelle project, a significant
portion of tfe vehicular circulation through the Lion Square Lodge is now located
below gradp. The pedestrian connection between all three buildings and the
pedestrian connection to the Lionshead ski yard and mall have also been
enhanced.
Section 5.1 also discusses the screening of parking at lhe Lion Square Lodge
East and Soulh building's surface lot). The applicant is proposing(primarily
to below grade structured parking and surface parking with a sod roof
cover to the new parking.
Design Guidelines' Ghapter 6:
The Lion Sfruare Lodge North building has coordinaled with the Arrabelle project.to improveithe pedestrian circulation and access adjacent to..this site. The
applicant is proposing sidewalk, landscaping, and lighting consistenl wilh the
Lionshead $treetscape design.
Chapter 7: Development Standards
This propoped major exlerior alteration request conforms lo the development
standards Qf both the Lionshead Redevelopment Master Plan and the Lionshead
Mixed Use 1 District.
Ghapter 8: Architectural Design Guidelines
In addition to the Planning and Environmental Commission's review of a major
request, the Town of Vail Design Review Board will also be
revrewrng
design gu
proposal for compliance wilh both the Town of Vail's general
and the archilectural design guidelines of lhe Lionshead
ent Master Plan. Since the Board has conceptually reviewed this
proposal the Board's initial response was very favorable, a more detailed
review has entalively been schedule for July 5, 2006.
involves the renovation of an existing building, rather than the
of a new building, the Lionshead Redevelopment Master Plan
review of the applicant's requesl on "a case-by-case basis, with
of compliance based upon whether the building meets the general
Guidelines and the tenants descibed herein" ralher than the strict
and literal qompliance with the guidelines.
Staff belieVes the applicant's proposal is consistent with the architectural style
encouraged by the master plan and the character of the recently developed/re-
developed fdjacent Antlers, Marriotl, Montaneros, and Arrabell.
Chapter 5:
requires
intent of
Plan Becommendations
I t.t r ! 4rt *...nti ler4Nq .ll.r
13
There are several "quantitative criteria" outlined in Chapter 8 of the Lionshead
Redevelopment Master Plan related to building eaves, wall surfaces, wall spans,
ridge heights, building materials and colors, and roof dimensions and pitches.
This major exterior alteration conforms to the guidelines for wall spans, building
materials and colors, roof dimensions, and roof heights. The proposal does not
conform to the roof eave heighls, roof forms, wall surface, or wall span
requirements. Staff believes these deviations are caused by the existing building
lorm and design. Staff believes the applicant's request meets the intent of these
guidelines, and is in keeping with the architectural and aesthetic qualities
encouraged by the master plan.
For example, the entirety of the existing Lion Square Lodge North building has a
flat roof. The master plan guide lines requke pitched roof buildings with only
secondary flat roof elements limited to 500 sq. ft. in size. The proposed new
elements of the building (i.e. the two 'tower-like' elements) comply with this
standard. To upgrade the existing building to meet the intent, not the strict
requirement, ol this guideline the applicant is proposing to construsl new
mansard and hipped roofs features. These mansards and hipped roofs will mask
the existing large flat roof, give the appearance of a pitched roof building, and
improve the overall aesthetic quality of the building.
3. That the proposal does not otherwise have a significant,negative"etfeCLonrur4,drr.!!,r'i'r.
the character of the neighborhood; and,
Statf Response:
Staff has reviewed the proposal in an attempt to identify any significant negative
impacts that may be created on the character of the neighborhood as a result of
the construction of the project. The proposal conforms to the development
standards of the Lionshead Mixed Use 1 District. Statf believes the proposal is in
keeping with the general architectural style encouraged by the Lionshead
Redevelopmenl Master Plan and the general character of the recently
redeveloped adjacent propefties including Antlers, Marriottt, Arrabelle, and
Montaneros.
As with other redevelopment projects in Lionshead, such as the Arrabelle, this
proposal will affect sun/shade and the private mountain views of those adjacent
properties located to the north. The proposed major exterior alteration will cast
more shadow on the adjacent Montaneros buibing and pool compared to the
existing Lion Square Lodge North building. However, the non-conforming, close
proximity of the Monlaneros building to the Lion Square Lodge North property
line (less than 1 foot) and the location of the Montaneros swimming pool patio (6
feel from the property line, 3 feet from the easement) exacerbate the shading
effect of this proposal. Staff believes the applicant's two "tower-like" elements
will have less impact to sun/shade and private views than other design
alternalives allowed by zoning and the Town's Comprehensive Plan.
Neither the Vail Town Code, nor lhe Vail Comprehensive Plan, regulate or
protect private views. The Planning and Environmental Commission is only
charged with preserving "public" view corridors adopted by Chapter 12-22, Yiew
Corridors. Vail Town Code.
14
*,,t*
This proposal is subject to review by the Town of Vail Design Review Board. The
Board is charged with ensuring that this proposal complies with bolh the Town's
general design guidelines and the architectural design standards of the Lionshead
Redevelopment Master Plan.
Based upon a tratfic study prepared by Kimerly Horn, which has been reviewed
and approved by the Town of Vail Public Works Department, there will be an
increase of 7 vehicle trips to the Lion Square Lodge North sile at peak times. The
applicant has been assessed a traffic impact fee by the Town of Vail to mitigate
this increase in traffic. Staff does not believe this increase of 7 vehicle trips will
have a significant negative effect in comparison to existing tratfic conditions.
In summary, Staff does not believe this proposal will have a significant negative
effect upon the character of the neighborhood; instead this proposed major
exterior alteration will redevelop the Lion Square Lodge Norlh to be more in
keeping wilh the intent of the Lionshead Redevelopment Master Plan.
4. That the proposal substantially complies with other applicable elements of
the Vail Comprehensive Plan. :
Staff Response:
Staff has reviewed the Vail Comprehensive Plan to determine which elerments'of,,' , ". r'rrerrelr
the Plan apply to lhe review of this proposal- Upon review of the Plan, Statf has
determined that the following elements of the Plan apply:
. Transportation Master Plan (adopted 1993). Lionshead Redevelopment Master Plan (adopted 1998)
This proposal conforms to the Town of Vail's transportation and engineering
standards. The applicant has also agreed to make a financial contribution to the
Town of Vail in the form of traffic impact fees in accordance with the
recommendations of the Transportation Master Plan. Therefore, Staff believes
this proposal substantially complies with the applicable elements of lhe
Transportation Master Plan.
Staff also believes this proposal complies with the applicable elements of the
Lionshead Redevelopment Master Plan (refer to criteria #2 above).
In summary, Slaff believes that the applicant has presented evidence that the proposed
major exterior alteration is in compliance with the purposes of lhe Lionshead Mixed Use
1 District, that the proposal is consistent with applicable elements of lhe Lionshead '
Redevelopment Master Plan, that the proposal does not otherwise have a significant
negative effect on the characler of the neighborhood, and that the proposal substantially
complies with other applicable elements of the Vail Comprehensive Plan.
MITIGATION OF DEVELOPMENT IMPACTS
Emploveg Housino
As indicated in a number of the goals and objectives of the Town's Master Plans,
providing affordable housing for employees is a critical issue which should be
addressed through the planning process for major exterior aleration proposals.
l5
tv.
:-1rtl,t l15'L-'l|{'
In reviewing the proposal for employee housing needs, staff relied on the Town
of Vail Employee Housing Report. This report has been used by the staff in the
past to evaluate employee housing needs. The guidelines contained within the
report were used most recently in the review of the Austria Haus, Marriottt, Four
Seasons, Manor Vail Lodge, Vail Village Inn, Crossroads, Ritz Carlton, Arrabelle,
etc. development projects.
The Employee Housing Report was prepared for the Town by the consulling firm
Rosall, Remmen and Cares. The report provides the recommended ranges of
employee housing units needed based on the type of use and lhe amount ol floor
area dedicated to each use. Utilizing the guidelines prescribed in the Employee
Housing Report, staff analyzed lhe incremental increase of employees (square
footage per use) that resulls from the redevelopment.
The figures idenfified in the report are based on surveys of the commercial-use
employment needs of the Town of Vail and other mountain resort communities.
As of the drafting of the report, Telluride, Aspen and Whisller, B.C. had
"employment generation" ordinances requiring developers lo provide affordable
housing for a percentage of lhe new employees resulting from commercial
development. "NeW' employees are defined as the incremenlal increase in
employment needs resulting from commercial redevelopment. Each of the
communities assesses a different percentage of affordable housing a developer
must provide for lhe new employees. For example, Telluride requires developers ..'.:,,vi.?,':ii
lo provide housing tor 401" (0.40) of the new employees, Aspen requires that
60% (0.60) of the new employees are provided housing, and Whistler requires
that 100% (1.00) of the new employees be provided housing by the developer.
In comparison, Vail has conservatively determined that developers shall provide
housing tor 157" (0.15) or 30% (0.30) of the new employees resulting from
commercial development. When a project is proposed to exceed the densily
allowed by the underlying zone district, the 30% (0.30) figure is used in the
calculation. lf a project is proposed at, or below, the density allowed by the
underlying zone district, the 15% (0.15) figure is used. Since this proposal
complies with the allowed density, the 15% figure has been used.
Emolovee Generation Calculations
a) Multi-Family (Dwelling Units)
9 new units proposed @ (0.4/unit)
b) Retail
650 sq. ft. @ (s.0/1000 sq. ft.)
= 3.6 employees
= 3.25 employees
6.85 employees
x.15
1.03 employees
According to the calculalions above, the applicant must establish 1 new deed-
restricled employee bed ("pillows"). The applicant is proposing to provide the
required deed-restricted employee housing unit off-site by purchasing and deed
restricting a unit of no less than 700 sq. ft. with no less than one bedroom. The
Town of Vail Housing Coordinator has reviewed the applicant's employee
_to
housing mitigation proposal and has determined that proposal meets the Town of
Vail's employee housing requirements and is consislenl with other miligation
proposal approved for similar development projects.
Parkino
The Lion Square Lodge North has 29 exisling, functional parking spaces. The
original approval of the building required 38 parking spaces for the existing 26
dwelling units; however, lhe configuration shown on the original condominium
plat of the project was nol constructed. With this major exterior alteration
proposal, the applicant will be providing the required parking for lhe new retail
space and the I new dwelling units. Additionally, the applicanl will be
constructing 9 additional new parking spaces to remedy the existing parking
shortfall.
As part of this major exterior alteration, the applicant is proposing lo conslruct a
lotal of 53 parking spaces with 29 constructed in a below grade structure and 24
constructed above on a surface lot. The majority of the surface spaces will be
screened from view by the installation of a sod roof covering.
Traffic
The proposed new dwelling units and retail space will likely increase the traffic
flow to and from the Lion Square Lodge North site. To mitigate the effects of this
increased traffic, the applicant will be making a financial contribution to the Town
of Vail in the form of a traffic impact fee of $45,500. This fee is based upon an
assessment of $6,500 per increased traffic trip at peak hour. A traffie sludy by
Kimerly Horn, which has been reviewed and approved by the Town of Vail Public
Works Department, has determined that at peak hour this proposal will add 7
new vehicle trips.
Landscaoi no/Streetscaoe
As noted above, the applicant is proposing to install a sod roof covering over the
majority of the parking area lo screen it from view.
The existing Lion Square Lodge North has minimal existing landscaping, which
primarily consists of a grass lawn. As part of this major exterior alteration
request, the applicant is proposing to re-landscape the site (including trees,
shrubs, planting beds, sod, etc.) to provide both screening of the building and an
improved street presence for lhe property. The applicant will be coordinating the
installation of landscaping with the Arrabelle development project.
Coordination with Other Redevelopment Proiects
As noted by the applicant, Lion Square Lodge North has granted easements and
access agreemenls to Vail Resorts for pedestrian and vehicular circulation,
conslruclion staging, water retention, and utility upgrades associated with the
Arrabelle redevelopment project. The applicant will also be coordinaling the
installation of their proposed landscaping wilh the Arrabelle development project.
17
New Retail Use
The existing Lion Square Lodge North consists of only dwelling units. As part of
this requested major exterior alteration, the applicant is proposing to conslrucl a
new 650 sq. ft., firsl floor, retail space adjacent to the pedestrian path on the east
side of the building. This new retail space lransforms this existing wholly
dwelling unit building into a mixed-use project in keeping with the intent of the
Lionshead Redevelopment Master Plan.
Art in Public Places and Off-Site Road/Slreetscape lmorovements
At this time the applicant is not proposing specific contributions 1o art in public
places or off-site roacl/streetscape improvements adjacent to the Lion Square
Lodge North (currently being constructed and lunded by Vail Resorts as part of'
the Arrabelle development project).
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends the Planning and Environmental Commission evaluale if a
contribution to art in public places and/or the off-site road and streetscape improvements
along Lionshead Place (currently being funded by Vail Resorts) are necessary as
mitigation of this proposal's development impacts.
Staff also recommends the Planning and Environmenlal Commission consider
forwarding a recommendation to lhe Vail Town Council to amend the "build-to-lines" of
the Lionshead Redevelopment Master Plan to allow the applicant to construct lhe
proposed parking area sod roof within the required selback. Slaff believes extending the
sod roof and creating a continuous lawn/landscape area between the Lion Square Lodge
North and the Montaneros better meets the intent of the Lionshead Redevelopment
Master Plan than the strict application of the 10 foot setback requirement prescribed by
the Lionshead Mixed Use 1 District. Slaff believes such an amendment to facilitate a
conlinuous lawn/landscape area would create a '1ryin-win-win" for the Montaneros, Lion
Square Lodge North, and the Town of Vail's citizens and guests.
The Community Developmenl Department recommends that the Planning and
Environmental Commission approves with conditions the request for a final review of
a major exlerior alteration, pursuanl to Section 12-7H-7, Major Exterior Alterations or
Modifications, Vail Town Code, lo allow for the renovation of the Lion Square Lodge
North, located at 660 West Lionshead Place/Lot 8, Block 1, Vail Lionshead Filing 3, and
setting lorth details in regard thereto. Staff's recommendation is based upon the review
of the major exterior alteration review criteria outlined in Section Vlll of this
memorandum and lhe evidence and testimony presenled at the public hearing.
Should the Planning and Environmental Commission choose to approve this major
exterior alteration request with conditions, Staff recommends the Commission make the
following findings part of the motion:
"Pursuant to Section 12-7H-8, Compliance Burden, Vail Town Code, the applicant
has proven by a preponderance of the evidence before the Planning and
Environmental Commission and the Design Review Board that the proposed
major exterior alteration is in compliance with the purposes of the Lionshead
Mixed Use 1 zone district, that the proposal rs conslstent with applicable elements
of the Lionshead Redevelopment Master Plan and that the proposal does not
l8
otherwise have a significant negative effect on the character of the neighborhood,
and that the proposal substantially complies with other applicable elements of the
Vail Comprehensive Plan."
Should the Planning and Environmental Commission choose to approve this major
exterior alteration request, Staff recommends the following conditions:
' Prior to Aoplication for Buildinq Permits
1) Prior to application for building permits, the developer must obtain Town of Vail
Design Review approvalof this proposal.
2) Prior to application for building permits, the developer must obtain Town of Vail
Public Works Department approval of a construction s@ing plan for this
proposal.
3) Prior to application for building permits, the developer must obtain Town of Vail
Public Works Department approval of civil engineering construction plans and
off-site improvement plans for this proposal.
Prior to Reauestino.a Temwrarv Certificate of Occuoancv
4) Prior to requesting a temporary certificate of occupancy for this proposal, the
developer shall provide one deed-restricted employee housing of no less than
700 sq. ft., with no /ess than one bedroom, that complies with the Town of Vail
Employee Housing requirements (Chapter 12-13, Vail Town Code), and that
said restrictions shall be made available for occupancy, prior to the issuance of
a temporary certificate of occupancy. ln addition, the deed-restrictions shall be
legally executed by the Developer and duly recorded with the Eagle County
Clerk & Recorder's Office, prior to the issuance of a temporary certificate of
occupancy.
5) Prior to requesting a temporary certificate of occupancy for this proposal, the
developer shall be assessed a transportation impact fee in the amount of
$6,500 per increased vehicle trip in the peak hour generated by this proposal.
Per the Traffic Study dated June 15, 2006, this major exterior alteration will
result in 7 additional vehicle trips in the peak hour. Therefore, the applicant
shall pay a transportation impact fee of $45,500. At the sole discretion of the
Town of Vail Public Works Director, said fee may be waived in full, or part,
based upon the completion of ceftain off-site improvements.
For the Life of the Proiect
6) For the life of the project; the development shall install, operate and maintain
an approved intelligent transportation sight distance system. This shall include
adequate detection devices and warning system. The system shall address all
turning movements that have inadequate sight distance.
19
New RetailUse
The existing Lion Square Lodge North consists of only dwelling units. As part of
this requested major exterior alteration, the applicant is proposing to construct a
new 650 sq. ft., first floor, retail space adjacent to the pedestrian path on the east
side of the building. This new retail space transforms this existing wholly
dwelling unit building into a mixed-use project in keeping wilh the intent of the
Lionshead Redevelopment Master Plan.
Art in Public Places and Off-Sile Road/Streetscaoe lmorovements
At this time the applicant is nol proposing specific contributions to art in public
places or off-site road/streetscape improvements adjacent to the Lion Square
Lodge North (currently being constructed and funded by Vail Resorts as part of
the Arrabelle development project).
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends the Planning and Environmental Commission evaluate if a
contribution to art in public places andior the off-site road and streetscape improvements
along Lionshead Place (currently being funded by Vail Resorts) are necessary as
mitigation of this proposal's developmenl impacts.
Slaff also recommends lhe Planning and Environmental Commission consider
forwarding a recommendation to the Vail Town Council to amend the "build{o-lines" of
the Lionshead Redevelopment Master Plan to allow the applicant to construct lhe
proposed parking area sod roof within the required setback. Slaff believes extending the
sod roof and creating a conlinuous lawn/landscape area between the Lion Square Lodge
North and the Montaneros better meets the intent o{ lhe Lionshead Redevelopment
Master Plan than lhe strict application of the 10 foot setback requirement prescribed by
the Lionshead Mixed Use 1 District. Staff believes such an amendment to facilitate a
conlinuous lawn/landscape area would create a "win-win-win" for the Montaneros, Lion
Square Lodge North, and the Town of Vail's citizens and guests.
The Community Development Department recommends that the Planning and
Environmental Commission approves with conditions the request for a final review of
a major exterior alteration, pursuant 1o Section 12-7H-7, Major Exterior Alteralions or
Modifications, Vail Town Code, to allow for the renovalion of the Lion Square Lodge
North, located at 660 West Lionshead Place/Lot 8, Block 1, Vail Lionshead Filing 3, and
setting forth details in regard thereto. Staff's recommendation is based upon the review
of the major exterior alteration review crileria outlined in Section Vlll of this
memorandum and the evidence and testimony presented at the public hearing.
Should the Planning and Environmental Commission choose to approve this major
exterior alteration request with conditions, Staff recommends the Commission make the
following findings part of the motion:
"Pursuant to Sectio,n 12-7H-8, Compliance Burden, VaitTown Code, the applicant
has proven by a preponderance of the evidence betore the Planning and
Environmental Commission and the Design Review Board that the proposed
major exterior alteration is in compliance with the purposes of the Lionshead
Mixed Use 1 zone district, that the proposal is consistent with applicable elements
of the Lionshead Redevelopment Master Plan and that the proposal does not
l8
housing mitigation proposal and has determined that proposal meets the Town of
Vail's employee housing requirements and is consistent with other miligation
proposal approved for similar development projects.
Parkino
The Lion Square Lodge North has 29 existing, funclional parking spaces. The
original approval of the building required 38 parking spaces lor the existing 26
dwelling units; however, the configuration shown on the original condominium
plat of the project was not constructed. With this major exterior alteration
proposal, the applicant will be providing the required parking for lhe new retail
space and the I new dwelling units. Additionally, the applicant will be
constructing 9 additional new parking spaces to remedy the existing parking
shortfall.
As part of this major exterior alteration, the applicant is proposing to construct a
total of 53 parking spaces with 29 constructed in a below grade structure and 24
construcled above on a surface lot. The majority of the surface spaces will be
screened from view by the installation of a sod roof covering.
Traffic
The proposed new dwelling units and retail space will likely increase the traffic
flow to and from the Lion Square Lodge North site. To mitigale ihe effects of this
increased tratfic, the applicant will be making a financial contribution to the Town
of Vail in the form of a traffic impact fee of $45,500. This fee is based upon an
assessmenl of $6,500 per increased traffic trip at peak hour. A traffic study by
Kimerly Horn, which has been reviewed and approved by the Town of Vail Public
Works Department, has determined that at peak hour this proposal will add 7
new vehicle trips.
Landscapi no/Streetscaoe
As noted above, the applicant is proposing to install a sod roof covering over the
majority of lhe parking area to screen it lrom view.
The existing Lion Square Lodge North has minimal existing landscaping, which
primarily consists of a grass lawn. As part of this major exterior alteration
request, the applicant is proposing to re-landscape the site (including trees,
shrubs, planting beds, sod, etc.) to provide both screening of the building and an
improved slreet presence for the property. The applicanl will be coordinating the
installation of landscaping with the Arrabelle development project.
Coordination with Other Redevelooment Proiects
As noted by the applicant, Lion Square Lodge North has granted easements and
access agreements to Vail Resorts for pedestrian and vehicular circulation,
construclion staging, waler retenlion, and ulility upgrades associated with the
Arrabelle redevelopment project, The applicant will also be coordinating the
installation of their proposed landscaping with the Arrabelle development project.
11
-i'"rlf l+f n-tiiljt{-
'':/!"'
In reviewing the proposal for employee housing needs, slaff relied on the Town
of Vail Employee Housing Report. This report has been used by the staff in the
past to evaluate employee housing needs. The guidelines contained within the
report were used most recently in the review of the Austria Haus, Marriottt, Four
Seasons, Manor Vail Lodge, Vail Village Inn, Crossroads, Ritz Carlton, Arrabelle,
etc. development projects.
The Employee Housing Report was prepared for the Town by the consulting firm
Rosall, Remmen and Cares. The report provides the recommended ranges of
employee housing units needed based on the type of use and the amount of floor
area dedicated to each use. Utilizing the guidelines prescribed in the Employee
Housing Report, staff analyzed the incremental increase of employees (square
footage per use) that results from the redevelopment.
The figures identified in the report are based on surveys of the commercial-use
employment needs of the Town of Vail and other mountain resort communilies.
As of the drafting of the report, Telluride, Aspen and Whistler, B.C. had
"employment generation" ordinances requiring developers to provide affordable
housing for a percentage of lhe new employees resulting from commercial
development. "NeW' employees are defined as the incremental increase in
employment needs resulting from commercial redevelopment. Each of the
communilies assesses a different percentage of affordable housing a developer
must provide for the new employees. For example, Telluride requires developers ",,, 'v..,'-.i.to provide housing tor 40o/o (0.40) of the new employees, Aspen requires thal
60% (0.60) of the new employees are provided housing, and Whistler requires
that 100% (1.00) of the new employees be provided housing by the developer.
In comparison, Vail has conservatively determined that developers shall provide
housing tor 15/" (0.15) or 30% (0.30) of the new employees resulting from
commercial development. When a project is proposed to exceed the density
allowed by the underlying zone districl, the 30% (0.30) figure is used in the
calculation. lf a project is proposed at, or below, the density allowed by the
underlying zone district, the 15% (0.15) figure is used. Since this proposal
complies with the allowed density, the 15% figure has been used.
Emolovee Generation Calculations
a) Multi-Family (Dwelling Units)
9 new units proposed @ (0.a/unit)= 3.6 employees
Retail
650 sq. it. @ (5.0/1000 sq. ft.)3.25 employees
6.85 employees
x.15
1.03 employees
According to the calculations above, the applicant must establish 1 new deed-
restricted employee bed ("pillows"). The applicant is proposing to provide the
required deed-restricted employee housing unit off-site by purchasing and deed
restricting a unit ol no less than 700 sq. ft. with no less lhan one bedroom. The
Town of Vail Housing Coordinator has reviewed the applicant's employee
b)
l6
:!dr$sGtilf)t}lt"
This proposal is subject to review by the Town of Vail Design Review Board. The
Board is charged with ensuring that this proposal complies with both the Town's
general design guidelines and the architectural design standards of the Lionshead
Redevelopment Master Plan.
Based upon a traffic study prepared by Kimedy Horn, which has been reviewed
and approved by the Town of Vail Public Works Department, there will be an
increase of 7 vehicle trips to the Lion Square Lodge North site at peak times. The
applicant has been assessed a tratfic impact fee by the Town of Vail to mitigale
this increase in traffic. Staff does not believe this increase of 7 vehicle trips will
have a significant negative etfect in comparison to existing traffic conditions.
In summary, Staff does not believe this proposal will have a significant negative
effect upon the character of the neighborhood; instead this proposed major
exterior alteration will redevelop the Lion Square Lodge North to be more in
keeping with the intent of the Lionshead Redevelopment Master Plan.
4. That the proposal substantially complies with other applicable elements of
the Vail Comprehensive Plan.
Staff Response:
Staff has reviewed the Vail Comprehensive Plan to determine which elernents'rof ', , ,.-r.rrt+rrer
lhe Plan apply to the review of this proposal. Upon review of the Plan, Staff has'
determined that the following elements of the Plan apply:
. Transportation Master Plan (adopted 1993). Lionshead Redevelopment Master Plan (adopted 1998)
This proposal conforms to the Town of Vail's transportation and engineering
standards. The applicant has also agreed to make a financial contribution to the
Town of Vail in the form of traffic impact fees in accordance with the
recommendations ol the Transportation Masler Plan. Therefore, Stafl believes
this proposal substantially complies with the applicable elements of the
Transportation Master Plan.
Staff also believes this proposal complies with the applicable elements of the
Lionshead Redevelopment Master Plan (refer to criteria #2 above).
In summary, Staff believes that the applicanl has presented evidence that the proposed
major exterior alteration is in compliance with the purposes of the Lionshead Mixed Use
1 Dislrict, that the proposal is consistent with applicable elements of the Lionshead
Redevelopment Master Plan, that the proposal does not otherwise have a significant
negative effecl on the character of the neighborhood, and that the proposal substantially
complies with other applicable elements of the Vail Comprehensive Plan.
MITIGATION OF DEVELOPMENT IMPACTS
Emolovep Housino :
As indicated in a number of the goals and objectives of the Town's Master Plans,
providing affordable housing for employees is a critical issue which should be
addressed through the planning process for major exterior aleration proposals.
l5
tv.
There are several "quantitative criteria" outlined in Chapter 8 ol the Lionshead
Redevelopment Master Plan related to building eaves, wall surfaces, wall spans,
ridge heights, building materials and colors, and roof dimensions and pitches.
This major exterior alteration conforms to lhe guidelines for wall spans, building
materials and colors, roof dimensions, and roof heights. The proposal does not
conform to the roof eave heights, roof forms, wall surface, or wall span
requirements. Staff believes these deviations are caused by the existing building
form and design. Staff believes the applicanl's request meets the intent of these
guidelines, and is in keeping with the architectural and aesthetic qualilies
encouraged by the master plan.
For example, the entirety of the existing Lion Square Lodge North building has a
tlat roof. The master plan guide lines require pitched roof buildings with only
secondary flat roof elements limited to 500 sq. ft. in size. The proposed new
elements of the building (i.e, the two "tower-like" elements) comply with this
standard. To upgrade the existing building to meet the intent, not the strict
requirement, of this guideline the applicant is proposing lo construct new
mansard and hipped roofs features. These mansards and hipped roofs will mask
the existing large flat roof, give the appearance of a pitched roof building, and
improve the overall aesthetic quality of the building.
That the proposal does not otherwise have a significant negative*etfectcoorirr'rrr*nn"r'
the character of the neighborhood; and,
Staff Response:
Staff has reviewed the proposal in an attempt to identify any significant negative
impacts that may be created on the character of the neighborhood as a result of
the construction of the project. The proposal conlorms to the development
standards of the Lionshead Mixed Use 1 District. Staff believes the proposal is in
keeping with the general architectural style encouraged by the Lionshead
Fledevelopment Masler Plan and the general character of the recently
redeveloped adjacent properties including Antlers, Marriottt, Arrabelle, and
Montaneros.
As wilh other redevelopment projects in Lionshead, such as the Arrabelle, this
proposal will affect sun/shade and the privale mounlain views of those adjacent
properties located to the north. The proposed major exterior alteration will cast
more shadow on the adjacent Montaneros building and pool compared to the
existing Lion Square Lodge North building. However, the non-conforming, close
proximity of the Montaneros building to the Lion Square Lodge North property
line (less than 1 foot) and the location of the Montaneros swimming pool patio (6
feet from the property line, 3 feet from the easement) exacerbate the shading
effect of this proposal. Staff believes the applicant's two 'tower-like" elements
will have less impact to sun/shade and private views than other design
alternatives allowed by zoning and the Town's Comprehensive Plan.
Neither the Vail Town Code, nor the Vail Comprehensive Plan, regulate or
protect private views. The Planning and Environmental Commission is only
charged with preserving "public" view corridors adopted by Chapter 12-22, Yiew
Corridors, Vail Town Code.
t4
o
Ghapter 5: Detailed Plan Recommendations
Section 5.12 of the Lionshead Redevelopment Master Plan addresses the
entirety of the Lion Square Lodge (North, East, and South buildings). This
detailed plan recommendation was drafted prior to the review and approval of the
Arrabelle development project. In Section 5.12, concerns were noted about lhe
no longer existing vehicular traffic through the Lion Square Lodge site and
recommendations were made for an improved pedestrian connection between all
the Lion Square Lodge buildings. With the current Arrabelle project, a significant
portion of the vehicular circulation through the Lion Square Lodge is now located
below grade. The pedestrian connection between all three buildings and the
pedestrian connection to the Lionshead ski yard and mall have also been
enhanced.
Seclion 5.12 also discusses the screening of parking at the Lion Square Lodge
(primarily the East and South building's surface lot). The applicant is proposing
to construct below grade struclured parking and surface parking with a sod roof
cover to screen the new parking.
' Chapter 6: Site Design Guidelines
The Lion Square Lodge North building has coordinated with the Arrabelle project
d.,,*i":n.1r1{r,n}r\'. to improve the pedestrian circulation and access adjacent to this site. The
applicant is proposing sidewalk, landscaping, and lighting consistent with the
Lionshead streetscape design.
Chapter 7: Development Standards
This proposed major exterior alteration request conforms to the development
standards oJ both the Lionshead Redevelopment Masler Plan and the Lionshead
Mixed Use 1 District.
Chapter 8: Architectural Design Guidelines
ln addition to the Planning and Environmental Commission's review of a major
exlerior alteration request, the Town of Vail Design Fleview Board will also be
reviewing this proposal for compliance with both the Town of Vail's general
design guidelines and the architectural design guidelines of the Lionshead
Redevelopment Master Plan. Since the Board has conceptually reviewed this
proposal and the Board's initial response was very favorable, a more detailed
review has tentatively been schedule for July 5, 2006.
As this proposal involves lhe renovation of an existing building, rather than the
construction of a new building, the Lionshead Redevelopment Master Plan
requires the review of the applicant's request on "a case-by-case basis, with
determination of comp.liance based upon whether the building meets the general
intent of these Guidelines and the tenants described herein" ralher than the strict
and literal compliance with the guidelines.
Staff believes the applicanl's proposal is consistent with the architectural style
encouraged by the master plan and the character of the recently developed/re-
developed adjacent Anllers, Marriott, Monlaneros, and Arrabell.
l3
Attachment: A
I
(oooc{
+c{
o.
I
OCuoo'6
o. .9!EstoofioE69--
JOlntratEi.i O'tctu
Eco
o)
.=cc'od
s*.Loz
ou'EoJ
oLo5uop
troIIJ
I
xt.ATTAGHMENTS
A. Vicinity Map
B. Applicant's Zoning Calculations
C. Applicanl's Master Plan Compliance Analysis
D. Applicant's Mitigation of Development lmpacts Letter
E. Applicants Employee Housing Mitigation Letter
F. Applicanfs Letter about Communication wtth Adiacenl Properties
G. Proposed Alchiteclural Plans
H. Adjacent Property Ovyners' Conespondence
20
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
o
MEMORANDUM
VailTown Council
Department of Community Development
August 1, 2006
An appeal, pursuantlo Section 12-3-3, Appeals, VailTown Code, of theTown of Vail
Planning and Environmental Commission's approval, with conditions, of a major
exterior alteralion, pursuant to Section 12-7H-7, Major Exterior Alterations or
Modifications, Vail Town Code, to allow for the renovalion of the Lion's Square
Lodge North, located at 660 West Lionshead Place/Lot 8, Block 1, Vail Lionshead
Filing 3, and setting forth delails in regard thereto. (PEC06-0019)
Appellant: Vail Town Council and Montaneros Condominium Association, Inc.Planner: BillGibson
[.
SUBJECT PROPERW
The subject property is located at 660 West Lionshead Place/Lot 8, Block 1, Vail Lionshead
Filing 3.
STANDING OF APPELLANT
Pursuant to Section 1 2-3-3, Appeals, Vail Town Code, the Vail Town Council has standing to
"calFup" any action taken by the Planning and Environmental Commission.
As an adjacent property owner, the Monlaneros Condominium Assocation, Inc. has slanding
to file an appeal of the Planning and Environmental Commission's action.
REQUIRED ACTION
The Vail Town Council shall uphold, overturn, or modify the Town of Vail Planning and
Environmental Commission's approval, with conditions, of a major exterior alteration,
pursuant lo Section 12-7H-7 , Major Exterior Alterations or Modifications, Vail Town Code, to
allow for the renovation ol the Lion's Square Lodge North, located at 660 West Lionshead
Place/Lot 8, Block 1, Vail Lionshead Filing 3, and setting forth details in regard thereto.
Pursuanl to Sub-section 12-3-3-C5, Vail Town Code, the Town Council is required to make
findings ol fact in accordance with the Vail Town Code:
The Town Council shall on all appetals make specific tindings of fact based directty
on the particular evidence presented to it. These findings of fact must support
conclusions that the standards and conditions imposed by the requirements of this
title (i.e. Title 12, Zoning Regulations, Vail Town Code) have or have not been met."
|[.
lv.BACKGROUND
For a description of the Lion Square Lodge North major exterior alteration requesl, please
refer to the attached June 26, 2006, Staff memorandum to the Planning and Environmental
Commission (Attachment D).
On June 26,2006, the Planning and Environmental Commission approved, wilh conditions,
the major exterior alteration request for the addition to, and renovation of, the Lion Square
Lodge North by a vote of 5-1-0 (Cleveland opposed). When making his dissenting vote,
Commissioner Cleveland noted that the proposal was in compliance with the provisions of
the Lionshead Mixed Use 1 Districtt however, in his opinion the required one employee
housing bed should be provided on-site ralher than at an off-site location. An excerpt from
the meeling action minutes ol ihe Commission's June 26, 2006, hearing have been attached
lor reference (Attachment C).
On July 5, 2006, the Town of
'Vail Design Review Board approved the design review request
associated with this Lion Square Lodge North major exterior alteration request by a vote of
4-0-0.
On July 11,2006, the Vail Town Council "called-up'(i.e. appealed) the Planning and
Environmental Commission's June 26, 2006, approval, with conditions, of the Lion Square
Lodge North request by a vote ot 4-2-1 (Newbury and Moffet opposed, Hitt abstained). An
excerpt from the Council's July 11, 2006, hearing highlights have been attached for
reference {Attachment A).
On July 14,2006, the Montaneros Condominium Association, Inc. submitted an appealof
the Planning and Environmental Commission's June 26, 2006, approval, with conditions, of
the Lion Square Lodge North request. The Montianeros Condominium Association's July 14,
2006, appeal and a subsequent July 26, 2006, letter have beeri attached for reference
(Attachment B).
prscussroN rssuEs
The following relates lo recent Town Council policy discussions concerning development
and redevelopment projects in the Lionshead area:
Policy Objective of 2.3.3, Stronger Economic Base through lncreased Live Beds, Lionshead
Redevelopment Master Plan has been a topic of much recent discussion by the Town
Council. The Lion Square Lodge North redevelopmenl proposal involves the construction of
new dwelling units and a new retail space; however, the proposal does not include the
construction of any new accommodation or fractional fee units. While this proposal was
submitted for review prior lo the Town Council's adoption of a temporary developmenl
moratorium and the Lionshead Mixed Use 1 District does not require the construction of
accommodation or fraction fee units, the applicant must still demonstrate compliance with
Policy Objective 2.3.3. The Planning and EnvironmentalCommission considered this topic
as part of its review ol this major exterior alteration request. The exisling Lion Square Lodge
North dwelling units (no accommodation units or fraction fee units exist) currently are often
short-lerm rented and function as "warm beds". The Commission determined that this
proposed major exlerior alteration would not change lhe "warm bed" function of the Lion
'Square Lodge North.
V.
The following is a brief summary of the concerns raised as part of the Montaneros
Condominium Association's appeals:
c Montaneros right to a full and fair hearing.
Staff response: While not required by any provision of the Town Code, the Town
Staff strongly encourages all development proposal applicant(s) to be "neighborl/'
and communicale privately and directly with the property owners in their
neighborhood. On numerous occasions, Statf encouraged both and applicant and
the individual owners of the Montaneros to communicate directly and anempt to
address each other's concerns related to the Lion Square Lodge North proposal.
Since these discussions are nol a formal part of the development review process
and outside the formal public hearing setting, Staff is typically not privy to the
substance or results of these private discussions. While the Staff consistently
fonivarded the most current proposed archilectural plans to the Montaneros
Condominium Association's representative;the Montaneros contends the applicant
may not have presented the most current information in their private discussions.
The linal architectural plans reviewed by the Planning and Environmental
Commission at its June 26, 2006, hearing were included in the Staff memorandum
and made part ol the public record, with no revision submitted at hearing.
. The East tower of the Lion Square Lodge North Building, as approved by the PEC,
is an impermissible expansion of a noncontorming structure.
Staff response: The applicanfs initial design did include the construction ol the east
tower at the north property line, In this initialdesign, the applicant contended that the
Lion Square Lodge Norlh's easement area, localed on the Montaneros lot, served as
the practical property boundary and addressed the 1 0 ft. setback requirements of the
Lionshead Mixed Use 1 District.
The applicant then revised the design of the proposed east tower by shifting this
building element south into compliance with the '10 ft. setback requirement from the
actual north property boundary, not the easement area. The applicanl also proposed
to only maintain and upgrade the exterior finishes of the existing structure located
within the easement area. This was the design proposal reviewed and approved by
the Planning and Environmental Commission at its June 26, 2006. No setback
variances were required for the Lion Square Lodge North proposal.
Please note that the Town of Vail is not party to, nor responsible for enforcing, any
provision of a private easemenl agreements between the Montaneros Condominium
Association and the Lion Squa.re Lodge North.
. The parking structure of the Lion Square Lodge North Building, as approved by the
PEC, violates the setback requirements of Section 12-7H-l 0 of the Code.
Staff response: Pursuant to Title 14, Development Standards Handbook, roof
overhangs and retaining walls are both permitted to be constructed within the 'l0 tt.
setback area. No setback variances were required for the Lion Square Lodge North
proposar.
I o
The location of the westtower of the Lion Square Lodge North Building, as approved
by the PEC, violates the spirit of the setback requirements of Section 12-7H-10 of
the code.
Staff response: The Lion Square Lodge North proposal complies with the setback
requirements of the Vail Town Code and no setback variances were required. The
existing Montaneros buiHing is legally non-conforming in regard to its required
setback from the property boundary with the Lion Square Lodge Norlh. According to
the submitted topographic survey, the southwest portion of the existing Montaneros
building is located only 0.8 fl. (e.9. 972 inches) from its southern property boundary
and the existing Montaneros pool deck is located within 6 feet of the southern
property boundary (e.9. 3 ft. from the Lion Square Lodge North's easement area).
The approved Lion Square Lodge redevelopment is contrary to the various
provisions of the Lionshead Redevelopment Master Plan...
While the Vail Town Code and the Lionshead Redevelopment Master Plan both
address the preservation of critical "public" view corridors lhal have been surveyed
and adopted in the Town Code; neither explicitly protects any "private" views,
whether perceived or addressed in a formal private agreement between property
owners.
The approved Lion Square redevelopment fails to mitigate development impacts as
required by Section 12-7H-18 of the Code.
Statf response: The applicant has proposed adequate enclosed parking to comply
with the provisions of the Lionshead Mixed Use 1 District and revised its inilial
designs to now cover the majority ol the proposed upper parking lot wilh a sod roof .
Structural engineering drawings for proposed development projects are not required
by the Town of Vail as part of a design review or major exterior afteration application.
Structural engineering plans are required as part ol a building permit application.
The Planning and Environmental Commission found that the mitigation efforts
proposed by the applicant addressing employee housing, parking, traffic,
landscaping/streetscaping, new retail spaces, and coordination with the Arrabelle
project adequately addressed this requirement of the Town Code.
The approved parking plan is not wokable and violates the Town's Development
Standards.
Slaff response: The proposed parking plan was reviewed and approved by the
Town of Vail Public Works Department.
Applicant wiil need to obtain easements from appellant for construction.
Staff response: The Staff has communicated the appellanl's concerns about
construction access and the possible need for access easements to lhe applicant.
The applicant has verbally indicated lo Staff that they are aware of lhese issues and
will use construction methods which do not require access lo Montaneros property.
A construction staging plan will be required as part of the applicant's building permit
application.
Again, the Town of Vail is not party to, nor does it enforce, any private agreements
belween private propeny owners.
The Lion Square Lodge North Building redevelopment, as approved, violates the
Protective Covenants of the Vail/Lionshead, Third Filing (the "covenants').
Staff response: Again, the Town of Vail is not party to, nor does it enforce, any
private agreements between private property owners including covenants.
As noted by a member of the PEC, applicant's proposal for employee housing may
not satisfy Title 12, Chapter 1 3 of the Code.
Staff response: Staff shares Commissioner Cleveland's concerns about employee
housing associated with Lionshead developmenVredevelopment projects being
located off-site. Staff believes it is not only important that housing opportunities for
locals exist within walking distance of their place of employment, but thal housing for
locals within the commercial cores adds a sense of liveliness and vitality that is
critical to these areas.
The Vail Local Housing Authority and the Vail Town Council have not yet adopted a
formal policy prescribing the location of required employee housing unils lor
developmenVredevelopment projects in the Lionshead Mixed Use 1 District. When
the Antlers was redeveloped in lhe early 2000's, employee housing was conslructed
on site. However, the more recent Gore Creek Townhomes, Arrabelle, and Ritz
Carlton development projecls were each approved to address their employee
housing requirements off-site. The recent Marriott and Montaneros redevelopment
projects did not generate additional employee housing needs.
The Town of Vail Housing Coordinator reviewed and approved the Lion Square
Lodge North's proposal to address its employee housing requirement otf-site, as it
was consistent with the recent employee housing proposals approved for the
Crossroad redevelopment project (i.e, Solaris) and the Cascade Townhouses (i.e.
the "Ruins").
vt.APPLTCABLE REGULATTONS OF THE TOWN COpE
Chapter 12-3. Administration and Enforcement (in oart)
Section 12-3-3:Appeals (in part)
C. Appeal A Planning And Environmental Commission Decisions And Design
Review Board Decisions:
1. Authority:The Town Council shall have the authority to hear and decide appeals
from any decision, determination or interpretation by the Planning and
Environmental Commission or the Design Review Board with respect to the
provisions of this Title and the standards and procedures hereinafter set forth.
2. lnitiation: An appeal may be initiated by an applicant, adjacent property owner, or
any aggrieved or adversely affected person from any order, decision,
determination or interpretation by the Planning and Environmental Commission or
the Design Review Board with respect to this Title. "Aggrieved or adversely
vil.
affected person" means any person who will suffer an adverse effectto an interest
protected or furthered by this Title. The alleged adverse interest may be shared in
common with other members of the community at large, but shall exceed in
degree the general interest in community good shared by all persons. The
Administrator shalldetermine the standing of an appellant. lf the appeilant objects
to the Administrator's determination of standing, the Town Council shall, at a
meeting prior to hearing evidence on the appeal, make a determination as to the
standing of the appellant. lf the Town Councildetermines thatthe appellant does
not have standing to bring an appeal, the appeal shall not be heard and the
original action or determination sfands. The Town Council may also call up a
decision of the Planning and Environmental Commission or the Design Review
Board by a majority vote of those Council members present.
5. Findings: The Town Council shall on all appeals make specific findings of fact
based directly on the particular evidence presented to it. These findings of fact
must support conclusions that the standards and conditions imposed by the
requirements of this Title have or have not been met.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
The Community Development Departmenl recommends the Vail Town Council upholds the
Town of Vail Planning and Environmenlal Commission's approval, with conditions, of a
major exterior alteration, pursuant to Section 12-7H-7, Major Exterior Alterations or
Modif ications, Vail Town Code, to allow for the renovalion of the Lion's Square Lodge North,
located at 660 West Lionshead Placeil-ot 8, Block 1, Vail Lionshead Filing 3, and setling
forth details in regard thereto.
On an appeal, the Town Council shall make specific findings of fact based directly on the
particular evidence presenled to it. These findings of fact must support conclusions that the
standards and conditions imposed bythe requirements of Title 12,Zoning Regulations, Vail
Town Code, have or have not been met.
Should the Town Council choose to uphold the Town of Vail Planning and Environmental
Commission's approval, with conditions, of a major exterior alteration; pursuant to Section
'12-7H-7, Major Exterior Alterations or Modifications, Vail Town Code, to allow for the
renovation of the Lion's Square Lodge North, located at 660 West Lionshead Place/Lot 8,
Block 1, Vail Lionshead Filing 3, and setting forth details in regard thereto; the Community
Development Department recommends the Town Council make the following findings:
"Pursuant to Section 12-7H-8, Compliance Burden, VailTown Code, the applicant
has proven by a preponderance of the evidence before the Planning and
Environmental Commission that the Noposed major exterior alteration is in
compliance with the purposes of the Lionshead Mixed Use I zone district, that the
proposal is consrbfenf with applicable elements of the Lionshead Redevelopment
Master Plan and that the proposal does not otherwise have a significant negative
effect on the character of the neighborhood, and that the proposal substantially
complies with other applicable elements of the Vail Comprehensive Plan."
However, should the Town Council choose to overturn the Town of Vail Planning and
Environmental Commission's approval, with conditions, of a major exterior alteration,
pursuant to Section 12-7H-7 , Major Exterior Alterations or Modifications, VailTown Code, to
allow for the renovation of the Lion's Square Lodge North, located at 660 West Lionshead
Placeilot 8, Block 1, Vail Lionshead Filing 3, and setting forth details in regard thereto;the
Community Development Department recommends the Town Council make the following
findings:
"Pursuant to Section 12-7H-8, Compliance Burden, Vail Town Code, the applicant
has not proven by a preponderance of the evidence before the Planning and
Environmental Commission that the proposed major exterior alteration is in
compliance with the purposes of the Lionshead Mixed Use 1 zone district, that the
proposal is conslstenf with applicable elements of the Lionshead Redevelopment
Master Plan and that the proposal does not otherwise have a significant negative
effect on the character of the neighborhood, and that the proposal substantialty
complies with other applicable elements of the Vail Comprehensive Plan."
VIII. ATTACHMENTS
A. Town Council Highlights July 11, 2006 (excerpt)
B. Montaneros Condominiums Association, Inc. Appeal
C. Planning and Environmental Commission April 10, 2006 agenda results (excerpt)
D. Planning and Environmental Commission April 10,2006 memorandum
E. 3D Model lmages
F. Public Notice
*
I Attachment: A
MEDIA ADMSORY
July 'l 1, 2006Contact CoreySwisher,4T9-210o
Town Manage/s Office
VAIL TOWN COUNCIL HIGHLIGHTS FOR JULY 11
Wod( Session Briefs
Council members present Foley, Gordon, Fltt, Newbury, Moffet, Slifer, Logan
-Planning and Environnental Commission (PECyDesign Review Board (DRB) Update
Duing a review of the npst recent neetings of the PEC and DRB, Chief Planner George
Ruther answered questions regarding the latest proposals to go beforc lhe two boards.
Gordon rmved to call up an item from the June 26 PEC neeting involving e*erior
renovation of the Lion Square Lodge North, located at 660 West LiorsHead Place, with
Foley seconding. The motion passed 4-2 with one abafenlion; Newbury and Mofiet
opposed. Hitl abstained as he was not in atendance during dsclrssion of the item. For
mcre information, contiad George'Ruther d 479-2145.
-Black Gore Creek Uodate
Representing the Eagle River Watershed Council, Camline Bradford and U.S. Forest
Service representative Cal Wetbtein explained the monitoring efforts associated with the
inpad of traction sand upon Black Gore Ceek Wettstein said Gore Creek has
experienced a decrease in irsects normally associated with pistire streams. 'All
retrics show that the aquatic commrnity in Gore Creek flowing through Vail is in an
inpaired condtion. Particularly interesting, is the lack of sbnefly insects in lower Gore
Creek in both 20Ol and 2005." Bradford emphasiad the sand collection features abng
l-70 has Gduced a lot of souce pollution. Wetbtein tten comrnented, 'There is still a
slug of sand beti,veen Vail pass and East Vailthat is rircrking its way down (partialty due
to beaver dam degradation caused by high runcff due to record snowfall)." Hitt
confirned the majority of the pollntion was cqrring from l-70. MofGt clarified cunent
projects were "making a deril" inthe pollntion poblem. Bradford invited Courrilto atte nd
a tourof Black Gore Creek on July 14. Representing the Vail Village Honeowners
Association, Jim Larnont inquired about the bcation of possiHe dversion structures and
the status of the sand berm (created from captured traction sand) in East Vail. Larnont
then encouraged Council to use Real Estate Transfer Tax funds to restore Gore Creek
For details, contaci Bill Garlson at 479-2333.
-Wildlif e Ordinance Discussio n
Police Commander Steve Wright explained recent events regarding a problem bear in
West Vail have again brouglrt to the forefront wildlife issues within the town. In August,
2002, Council passed an ordnance intended to reduce interactiors between bears and
cilizers and guests. Wrigtrt reported 408 wildlife raarnings and 13 citatiors had been
written to date. "We have done a good job extending the education component of our
wildlife ordi nance... lf s ncw ti me to start e rforcing the existi ng ord nance.' Wrigtrt
remmmended dumpsters in centralzed refuse areas be bear resislant. "The Police
Department's last reconvnerdalion would be tlpt all citizens rnaintain bear
resistanVproof containers.' Detective Ryan Millbem said bear resistant @ntainers have
inproved over the years. Millbern reported bear resistant containers were available from
local trash haulers for $160-$360. Town Attorney lilatt Mire explained the cr,rrent
Attachment: B
Appeals Form
DeparBneflt of Community Development
75 South kontdge Road., Vail, Cotorado 81657
tel: 970-479.2139 fax: 970.479.1452
web: www.r,r"lhw.com
General lnformationt
Trus rorm Ir rEqulred for fiFng an appeal of a staff, Deggn Reviot, Boar4 or Hanning and Environmenbl
commisslon adiorvdecision A complete form and asicuted requ!€rnenB must be $Jbmitt€d to theCotnmunity Devdopment Deparsnent wlttrin twefity (?0) calendar d'ays of the dlsputed action/decision.
of the Vail Tovrn
Dateaf Action/D*ci.1s1; June 26, 2006
Board or SAft person tenderlng action/declslon: Plannlng end ErMron4e-nld Commissbn
Doer thls appeal Involve a sped{ic parcel oftand? (ycs) ,flril
lf Ves, are ysu an adjrcent propertl, owner? (yes) (6gf
t{ame of Appelbnt(s)i Montansros Condominlum Association, Inc.
Physicat Ad.tr€ss 1n Y3;1' 64 | W.Vail. Colorado 81857
Legal D€scrlpuon of Lot:-glock- Subdlvlgon:Montaneros Cgndominiums
Appsltan{s} SIgnature(s):
if more slace is requl|ed). AlexanderA. Preiser
Submlttal [tequlremerts: Attomey for App€llant
l. od a .sepa6te sheet or sepaGte sheers of paper, provide r deb ed aoarEuon of ttaw you are an:aggriqred or adversdy affe€Ed person.,z. on a sep.a.ate sheet or sepBrah sheeE of paper, speciry tlre preclse nature of the appeat. pleare
- cib speci$c code secgons hivir€ relevance b tfre adton being jppeated.
3. Provlde a list of names and addr€sses (both malling anO phy-Sdi aOOresses in Vait) of alt or ners ofproFerty rvho are the subject of -ttE appear and all adracent prop€rty oivners linclrrdlng owerswhose pfopefties are sepaftrted trom the subJect propedy by a'right-of-way, itreaq ir ooerhtervening barrier) !4, Provide 6tnmped, addressed envelopes for each property owner llsted in (3.).
Acdon/Decieion belng appealed3 Afproval of maior extedor altqrellqlrllllllqgant to Section 1Z:ZH-7
PTE SE SUBMIT lfits FoRM AND Atl SUBMmtr REq[,IRe4ENts T0;
To\,r/it oF VAIL, DEPARTMENT OF COMTiUNITY DE\'E Opr4${r,
75 SOUr}I FROTTAGE ROAD, VAIL @LORATD 81657,
at 660 Westto allow for the renovation of the Llon,s
p1616; Q70-477-?2!O
eeewx: j/tq/ob Acrvrty No.:
tr-CIErv=1il
ruL 14 2o06
U,,J
T'OWN OF VAIL-
h)
hl
12-6.2005
I.
Iodge-North
Montaneros
in Appellant's
Ifin4?r3"t I tl
On a separate or sqtarate sheets of paper, provide a detailed uplanation of
how you are or adversely alfected person".
of Appellant, Montaneros Condominium Associatioq
Inc., are all of the of the units located in Montaneros Condominiums
f'Montaneros'). M is located in Lionshead adjacent to and immediately north
of Lion Square North iums. As approvod, the renovation of Lion Square
will have substantial and sigrificant negative impacts on
and its ormers and guests, all as more particularly described
to ItemNo.2 below.
2. On a separate sheet or separate sheets ofpaper, specifu the precise nature ofthe
appeal. Please cite specific code sections having relevance to the ac,tion being
appealed.
r Appellant was denied its right to a fulI and fair hearine. In accordance
with Section 12-3-6 of the Vail Towu Code (the "Code'), hearings are to
"be conducted in such a mannsr as to afford an applicant orpetitioner and
all interested parties the opportunity to submit exceptions to the record,
contentions, and arguments with respect to the issues entailed ."
Applicant, Lion Square Lodge North Condominium Association
(*Applicant') submitted revised plans to the Town dated June 2, 2006.
Subsequently, on June 22,2006 Appellant and Applicant had an extensive
conference regarding the project during which those plans reviewed and
discussed. However, the next day Appellant leamed that Applicant had
submitted revised plans for the consideration by the Planning and
Environmental Commission ("PEC") prior to that conference. Appellant
was not provided.with a copy of the revised plans submitted by Applicant
until the June 26* hearing approving those plans. Notabty, the PEC was
not aware ofchanges to the plans at its June 26* hearing until counsel for
Appellant noted that changes had been made. Failure to deliver revised
plans to Appellant in advance of the hearing denied Appellant the
opportunity to be firlly and fairly heard on the matter as required by the
Code.
Moreover, Applicant, as part of the public hearing process on June 26t,
demonstrated the project to the PEC on the public record via a three
dimensional video model. Appellant requested Applicant to provide a
copy of the model following the hearing. This request was denied by
Applicant.
. The east tower of tlie Lion Square Lodge - North Buildins. as approved
bv the PEC. is an imgermissible expansion of a nonconformine structure.
The stated purpose of Title 12, Chapter 18 of the Code, goveming
nonconforming structures, is to limit the number and extent of
nonconforming structures by prohibiting or limiting their enlargement,
their reestablishment after abandonment, and their 'restoration after
substantial destruction (Code Section 12-18-1). Applicant proposed to
erect a six-story tower atop an existing one-story |uilding which is built to
the property line, and the deck of which encroaches onto Appellant's
property. Engineering of the east tower will undoubtedly dictate, at a
minimum, substantial reconstruction of the existing nonconforming
building to support the east tower. Therefore, the east tower is not an
"enlargement" of a nonconforming structure, as contemplated by Section
12- 1 8-5 of the Code, but rather a substantial reconstruction of the existing
nonconforming building. Such reconstruction of the existing building is
not permitted under the Code without a variance permitting the building to
be located along the property line within the 10 foot setback. No variance
(00042137 / r l
o
has been requested by Applicant pursuant to Title T2,Chapter 17 ofthe
Code.
The parkinq structure of the Lion Sauare Lodge - North Buildins. as
approved by the PEC. violates the setback reouirements of Section l2-7H-
l0 of the Code. The roof and/or retaining wall of the parking structure
encroaOh into the l0-foot setback area mandated by Section l2-7H-10 of
the Code. No variance has been requested for this encroachment pursuant
to Title 12,Chapter l7 of the Code.
The location of the west tower of the Lion Square Lodge - North
Buildi
Section 12-7H-10 of the
Code requires minimum building setbacks of ten feet. The intended result
of this setback is to provide at least twenty feet between buildings. More
than thirty years ago, the prior owner ofAppellant's properfy carved offa
portion of its property for the Lion Square development based upon plans
for building as currently located. Currently, there is an approximate 60
foot separation between Appellant's and Applicant's buildings according
to Applicant's submittal. The plans approved by the PEC permit the
construction of an 82 foot building just ten feet from the west units of
Appellant's building, violating spirit of the setback requirement.
The aDproved Lion Square redevelopment is contrary to various
provisions of the Lionshead Redevelopment Master Plan ("Master Plan")
including the following:
r Section 8-4.2.3 of the Master Plan provides that the building faces
for this project may have a maximum initial eave height of 60 feet,
at which point those faces must step back a minimum of 12 feet.
The east and west towers of the approved redevelopment, which
have an absolute building height of 82 feet, do not appear to
comply with this step back requirement.
. Development should connect Lionshead physically and visually to
the mountain landscape (Master Plan, Section 2.5). The approved
redevelopment will physically and visually cut off much of
Lionshead, including Appellant's property, from the mountain
landscape.
r As development and redevelopment occur in Lionshead, it will be
vital to protect visual connections to the ski mountain (Master
Plan, Section 4.3.1). The approved redevelopment plans interfere
with visual connections to the ski mountain by creating two 82 foot
to.wers between Appellant's propefiy and the ski mountain.
{0ffi42t31 / tI
. All private development and redevelopment should endeavor to
create visual connections from and through their properties (Master
Plan, Section 4.3.1.1). As indicated above, the towers of the
approved redevelopment interfere with the visual connections
tbrough Applicant's property
. North-south orientation of building masses to accomplish several
objectives including sun access and views from existing buildinp
(Master Plan, Section 4.3.1.2)- As shown on the. sun shade
analyses submitted to the PEC, the approved redevelopment will
virtually engulf Appellant's property and building, including its
pool, in shade.
The approved Lion Souare redevelonment fails to mitigate develonment
impacts as required by Section 12-7H-18 of the Code. In a preliminary
hearing on this matter, the PEC noted that the proposal did not provide
public amenity improvements as required by the Code and that surface
parking in Lionshead would be a poor use ofspace that could otherwise be
used for a public amenity. In response, Applicant revised its plans to
cover the parking structure with a sod roof. This seemingly does not
create an ame-nity and does not mect the objective of the PEC. No other
public amenities will be provided. Moreover, no details were provided
regarding the engrneering of the sod roof (e.g., growth of sod, drainage).
Appellant is concemed about the possible impacts of this structure located
immediately adjacent to its property.
The approved parking plan is not workable and violates tle Town's
Development Standards. (1) Parking spaces are smaller than that required
by Development Staadards. (2) The proposed valet parking plan is
impractical, as sufficient space to move caxs has not been provided.
(3) No explanation was provided as to how the valet parking would be
staffed or operated, creating potential problems.
Apolicant will need to obtain easements from Appellant for construction.
As recognized by Tom Kassmel, Town Engineer, in his May 16, 2006
memorandum, Town approval should have been conditioned upon
recordation of all necessary pennanent and temporary easements for
construction. Applicant has acknowledged this requirement, but, notably,
has not requested any easements from Appellant. Appellant is unwilling
to grant easements to Applicant for the project as approved, which
Appellant considers in violation of the Code, the Master Plan and the
covenants encumbering the Lion Square property and detrimental to its
property and to the Town and its residents and guests as a whole.
The Lion Square Lodge - North Building redevelopment. as approved.
violates the Protective Covgnants of Vail/Lionshead" Third Filine (the
"Covenants"). The Covenants benefit and burden all properties located
10m4213',7 | t|
o
within the Vail/Lionshead Third Filing which includes both Appellant's
and Applicant's properties. The Covenants were adopted, ia part, to
establish and maintain the character and value of property in the
Vail/Lionshead, Third Filing area. Appellant understands tlat the Town
considers enforcement of covenants to be a private contract issue which
does not involve the Town. Nevertheless, Appellant notes that the
approved redevelopment violates various provisions ofthe Covenants and
fails to consider the effect of any proposed improvement on the outlook of
any adjacent or neighboring property as required by the Covenants.
housing mav not satisfv Title 12. Chapter 13 of the Code. Section l2-13-l
of the Code recognizes the importance of providing quality living and
working conditions for the community's work force. Appellant urges
Town Council to ensure that Applicant complies with the Town's
employee housing requirements to assist in the fulfillment this critical
objective.
[00042r37 / l ]
3. Provide a list of names and addresses (both mailing and p|rysical addresses in
Vail) ofall owners ofpropertywho are the subject ofthe appeal and all adjacent
property owners (including owners whose properties are separatedform the
subject property by a right-of-way, stream, or other intervenifg barrier).
Pursuant to the instructions of Town Planner Bill Gibson, all of the foregoing
information is contained in the Town's records relating to this matter and is, thus, not
{00042137 / l }
o
I
4. Provide stampd, addressed mvelopes for each property owner listed in (3).
Pursuant to thelinstuctions of Town Planner Bill Gibson, the Town will provide
all items necessary to deliver proper notice of this qppeal. Please contact counsel for the
Appellanq Alexander A. Preiser, at (303) 442-L900, if any further ikms are required
from Appellant in connection withthis appeal.
{00042137 / l )
Attaghnl: e _oLION SOUARE LODGE - NORTH-
Zoning Calculetions
61208
Allqwable Units
Exi$ling Unils
Propoiod Unlt8
ExistirE
New Rcqulrsd
Retail
25% max, 8x16
9x1g
50% max, gr18
Compacts
Full
Valel
Total Provided
500 sf root Ere€ or
Prepared by Melir( Associ{es
MELtCt( AssOctATEs I Aftachment C
Troffic Concems -
The vehiculor circulotion wos primorily deoll with by Voil Resorts during the opprovol process for
the Arrobelle proiecf. Sife occess vio lionsheod Ploce wos reoligned to occommodoie bofh
surfoce ond sub lerroin rirccess to fhe Arrobelle proiecf for both lodging vehicles ond delivery
vehicles. A new curb cut wos odded olong the soulh of Lionsheod Ploce to serve os the new
fronf door lo the Lion Squore Lodge providing goted ond porking occess for the focility. A curb
cut hos been odded olorig the south propefi line of the North proiect to provide occess lo the
new lower level of porkiipg. The existing curb cul olong fhe wesl property line of lhe North
proiecl hos been mointoined ond shifted opproximolely five feet to the north fo provide occess
to lhe surfoce porking. $ervice vons will use this enlry point, under lhe wesl building, to service
the building.
A troffic impoct study been provided by Kimerly Hom lo sfudy the troffic impocts of odding
nits to lhe North proiect. They olso provided the troffic impoct sfudynine new condominium
for the Arrobelle so they re fomilior wifh lhe surroundings. Their reporl sloles lhof no
infrostructure upgrodes required os long os no more thon 13 unifs ore odded fo fhe proiect.
Pedesfrion occess the Moin Building ond fhe North Building wos primorily deolt with by
Vqil Resorts during the olprovol process for the Arrobelle project. A cross wolk hos been
provided ocross Lionshe{d Ploce between lhe lwo properties thot ties inlo fhe sidewolk olong
fhe north side of fhe reoligned Lionsheod Ploce. The primory pedesirion enfronce to the Norlh
proiect is the eosf lobby in lhe eosl lower olong the eosf side of fhe property. This
provides o cleor pedesirion conneclion ond defined vehiculor corridor between lhe Moin
Building ond ihe Norlh proiect.
Ski Yord Pedeslrion wos primorily deolt with by Voil Resorts during lhe opprovol process
for the Arobelle proiect Aicess lo the ski yord is obloined from norlh ond soulh of the Eost
ing proiect does nol impoct ski yord pedestrion occess.Building. The Norih
The North proiect is moior exterior renovolions with the oddition of lwo new
been designed within tho ollowoble requirements of the Lionsheod Mixed Use I (Lr\,iU-l )
Dislricf.
AR,CI.IITECTURE
INTERIORS
PLANNING
www.MELtcK.coM
25I07 GENESEE TRAIL R,D
sum fue xuxoari oNe
cotPEN co 8o4or
rEt fo3.534. r 93O
FAX 303,53,1.193 t
tION SQUARE ODGE - NORTH
6/2/06 Submittol to unily Developmenf for lhe PEC ond DRB opprovol process
CHAPTER 6 - SITE DESIGN GUIDETINES
Primory Pedestrion Moll - nof ooolicoble
Seeqrulsq/ Ledestrion Moll - not opplicoble
Primory Pedeslrion Wolk -
Voil Resorls is providing lhe snowmehed sidewolk olong lhe north edge of Lionsheod Ploce os
porl of the Arrobelle proiect. The North proiecl will be providing o londscope buffer belween
the sidewolk ond fhe unik fo fhe norlh. This londscoping will be ochieved with o mix of
deciduous ond evergreen lrees fo protecf views ond sun exposure. Ornomenlols, perenniols
ond onnuol flowers will be provided for o wide voriety of foclures ond seosonol color. The
londscope moleriols will not inlerfere with the pedestrion wolk or snow storoge requiremenfs ol
molure growth.
Secondorv Pedestrion Wolk - not opplicoble
Vehiculor Pedesliion Retoil Street - not opplicoble
Pedestrion Pofh -
The North proiect is odding o pedesfrion polh for occess lo fhe firsf floor unils thof will nol be
snowmelled. The moteriols will be integrolly colored slomped concrele consislenl with the
surfoce finishes being used of fhe Moin Building pool deck. The width of lhis secondory
pedeslrion wolk will be five feel. Lighfing long this poth is provided with low polhwoy bollqrds
consistent wilh the orchilec{urol design guidelines. A lown will be provided to fhe south of the
polh os o fronsilion lo lhe bermed londscoping to lhe south olong Lionsheod Ploce. This zone
will be defined by o low stone woll.
Fences ond Enclosures -
Service functions for the Norlh pfoiecf ore being ochieved within the building foofprint ond
fherefore will nof require supplemenlol fencing, The oufdoor hot tubs will be screened ond
privotized with the use of ferroced stone wolls softened with londscoping lo the soufh of the
wesf fower. A new fronsformer will be locoled lo flie wesi of lhe wesl lower ond will be
screened ond softened with the use of londscoping.
Complionce with Town of Voil Streelscope Mosfer Plon -
CHAPTER 7 - DESIGN STANDARDS
Londscooe A,reo -
A minimum of 2070 of the site will be londscoped os required. (see colculotions ottoched)
Sile Coverooe -
A moximum ol7Q% of lhe site will be covered by slruclures os required. (see colculolions
ottoched)
Sefbocks -
A minimum of o ten fooi sefbock will be provided o9 required. The existing one sfory slruclure
in the Prescriplive Eosemenl olong the norlh property line will be lefl in ploce ond reclod with
stucco lo be in keeping with the new design.
Gross Residenliol Floor Areo (GRFAI -
The GRFA will not exceed 250 sf of GRFA for eoch 100 sf of buildoble site oreo. (see
colculolions ond drowings depicting limits ottochedl
Densitv -
The density will not excebd 133% of rhe exisling number of unils. (see colculofions otloched)
New Unit Definition - nof opplicoble
Buildino Heiohr - olso s{e Chopler 8
The building height will hol exceed 7l feef (overoge) ond 82.5 feet (moximum).
CHAPTER. 8 - ARCHITEC]ruRAI- GUIDEttNEs
Architeclure -
The form ond mossing o1f the building provides for o comforfoble pedesirion scole ond olso
breoks down lhe scole of the building utilizing o bose, middle ond fop.
Buildinq Heioht -
The building height fits .lvirhin rhe moximum ollowoble of 7l feet (overogef ond 82.5 feel
(moximum). The moximum initiol eove height folls within fhe ollowoble for 'remoining building
fronloge'. The verticol ryoll foce dimensions ore.broken with horizonlol sfeps, chonges in
moieriol ond color ro brfok down fhe mossing of the building in order fo provide for o higher
quolity ond more inlere$ling orticulotion.
Exlerior Wolls -
The exterior wolls ore dcsigned with o bose, middle ond fop. The rhythm ond order of lhe
renovofed exferior on ttr{e existing building ore dictoled by the existing condifions, An efforl hos
been mode to breok lhq roof lines ond decks. Goble roof forms hove been odded ot the deck
elemenls to breok lhe cirnlinuous horizontol line on ihe building ond fo provide on A, B rhythm.
This is olso enhonced wlth the use of poinled mefol roilings ond bolusfers of lhe bolcoriies. A
monsord roof elemenl hos olso bean odded olong lhe perimeler of lhe building, belween fhe
goble roof forms over lfle decks, lo soflen ond provide detoil to the new elevolions. The eosl
ond west ends of the exlsting building ore olso defined with o higher roof forms ond differenl
yel compotible orticulolion. This orticulofion ond vocobulory of moleriols ond freotmenl ore
whot define lhe eost onH wesl lowers lo provide for o uniform treolmenl of lhe building
exferior.
Moleriols ond Colors -
roof qnd chimney All lrims, eoves, rokes, frims, doors, ond fimber elemenfs ore while.
Window clodding is The colors were chosen to blend wilh the surrounding slruclures
while providing o ond psychologicol wormlh lo pedeslrions.
All windows hove o of size ond proportion lhroughout the elevolions. Operoble
windows will be The windows will be oluminum clod, bronze. All windows will be
lrimmed, lhe color
The bolconies hove locoted lo provide funclionol ouldoor spoce ond olso lo provide
oeslhelic benefit ond il to fhe building exlerior. Where bolconies ore nol procticol, they
hove been odded to ihe building o<lerior os o 'romeo ond iuliet' bolcony lo provide visuol deloil
The bose is defined either with o differenl dorker stucco color or slone, os well os o breok in
plone. The middle is d$fined by o lighfer color of slucco. The top is defined by o chonge in
moleriol ond fexture wilh verlicol siding lhe some color os fhe 'middle' slucco olong with the
ond interest fo the buil{ing exlerior. The moteriols lo be used for fhe hondroil, pickers ond
posfs will be pointed mbtol. The design of the roiling system is potterned ofter the order of lhe
building exterior elevolions.
Roofs -
The roof forms being used include monsord roofs ol fhe existing flol roofs, goble roofs over
exisling bolconies, ond hipped roofs with gobled roofs copping lhe new sfrudures. The
mqnsord roof form on lhe exisling building is o procficol meons of iying lhe exisfing structure
inlo the new design elemenk of the renovofed exlerior ond new lowers. The slruclurol copocity
of the existing building will not tolerote the oddilion of o full pifched roof. Adding o full pilched
roof to the exisling building would olso greotly diminish lhe view corridor being mointoined
between the two new lowers for the properlies fo lhe norfh. The predominonl goble roof forms
being used loke lheir cue from the simple, frogmenled, goble roof forms of Europeon villoges.
Roof overhongs will be conslructed wifh the minimum 30 inch eove ond roke overhongs olong
wifh the minimum of l8 inches of secondory roof forms. Ridge beoms ond oulriggers,nitt U"-
visuolly slurdy members of 6x or 8x minimums. Rofter toils ore nol porl of fhe exferior building
vocobufory ot this time. The roof pilch will be o 12212 occepl os noted otherwise on fhe
drowings. Snow fences ore being provided in locofions lo prolect pedeslrions below from
folling snow ond will be poinfed melol. Gutters ond downspouts ore plonned fo be integrol lo
lhe roof forms with inlerior downspoufs.
Fireploces ond Chimnevs -
Slucco chimneys with open melol cops lo promole oir flow ond screen spork orreslors ore being
provided for fireploce chimneys.
Porkino -
Porking Struclure Design
1. Surfoce Porking - 22 surfoce porking spoces ore provided with occess from lhe romp
olong lhe north property line.
2. Porking Decks - 34 porking spoces ore provided in fhe lower porking level wifh occess
from lhe romp from lhe soulh opposite fhe Antlers curb cut. The decks ore primorily flot
excepl for whol is required io properly droin the decks.
3. Slruclured Porking
o. Porking Spoces - The enclosed porking spoces ore 90 degrees to lhe drive oisle
ond 9' x 19', with 8' x l6' compoct porking spoces nol exceeding 25oA ol the
totol of lhe lotol required porking spoces. Volet porking (13) spoces ore 8' x l8'
ond do nol exceed 50% ofrhe required porking.
b. Heighl Cleoronce - The heighf cleoronce of the porking sfruclure will be o
minimum of 7' cleor.
c. Drive Aisles - The drive oisles ore lwo woy ond 24' wide.
d. Romps - The romps belween levels ore 24'wide with l2% slope.
4. Porking Needs Assessmenl ond Vehiculor Circulolion Porking
o, Porking Count
Moinioin Existing 38
New for New Condos l3 (l .4 spoces for eoch unit)
Retoil 2 (2.3 spoces per 1000 sfl
Totol Porking Count 53
5. Circulolion
o. Existing curb cul ond romp locolion lo remoin bosicolly lhe some.
b. New romp info the new lower level porking slrucfure is locoted opposite the
curb cul lo lhe Antlers.
c. 24' wide two-woy drive oisles occommodote 90 degree porking stolls.
Grodino -
L Moximum Finished Grode - The moximum finished grode does nol exceed o 2: I slope.
The nolurol slope of lhe sife is relolively flol. New groding lo occommodole droinoge
will be blended into the noturol topogrophy.
2. Conslruction Fence - The conslruction site will be properly surrounded by o non-
removoble conslruclion fence during the consfruction process.
3.Erosion Conlrol Erosion control meosuras will be ufilized using lhe besf monogemenl
procthes. The conlrol plon will be prepored by o regisfered Colorodo
Profussionol
Retoinino Wolls -
l. The reloining
wolls will be
of the site
veneered wilh
The site does
or wetlonds.
will be designed qnd slomped by o licensed P.E. Terroce londscope
fhe 4'- 6' morimum height ronge, Due,lo lhe relotirrely fltrl nofure
wclls will nol exisl on slopes o<ceeding 30%. There wolls will be
contoin rnow ovolonche, debris flow, rock fioll, unsloble soils or sloP€s
o Attachment: D
YIELE DEVELOPMENT, LLC
1000 S. FRoNTAGE RoAD WEsr, Sulrr 202
YATL,CoLoRADo 81657
Telephone: (970) 476-3082
Eax (97o) 476-3123
June 20, 2006
Bill Gibson, AICP
Planner II
Town of Vail Planning Department
75 South Frontage Rd. West
Vail, Colorado 81557
REz Mitigation oJ Development lmpacts
Dear Mr. Gibson:
Per the request of the Town of Vail Planning and Environmental Commission and per Section 12-
7H-18, Vail Town Code, the following list represents the proposed measures to be taken by our
development team to mitigate the impact of the re-development of the Lion Sguare North Building:
MITIGATIoN oF DEvELopMEI.rr IMpAcrs
I'iew Retail Use
550 square feet of retail space will be added to tfie North-East corner of the East Tower. The
current building does not have a retail or commercial use on the property. This new use will
provide increased vitality to the west end of the Arrabelle Hotel. The space will be situated across
from the rflestern pedestrian tunnel of the Arrabelle, thereby extending the retail mall.
Employee Housing
An off site employee housing unit will be purchased and deed restricted by the developer. The unit
will have a minimum of one bedroom and 700 square feet and will be located in the town of Vail.
Parking / Sod RooJeiI Courtyatd
The redevelopment of the Lion Square North Building will bring the current parking situation into
compliance with the Lionshead Master plan and LMU zoning. At current, the property has 29
functioning parking spaces where 38 are requhed. The building has been non-compliant since
initial occupancy of the building n 197+. The redevelopment will provide the required 38 parking
spots for the existing building in addition to the 15 new spaces required by the incremental increase
in density and retail use on the property. The parking will consist of one level of under-ground
parking and a level of surface parking to be covered by a sod roof, to the extent allowed by the
zoning standards, which will integrate with the adjacent property to the North tlereby creating a
landscaped courtyard between the two buildings.
tlIIlttl
EIVE
212006
OF VAIL
Lt= \\,
JUN
TOWN
E
ilt
I
vIEtE DEVELOPMENT, LLC
1000 S. Fnourecr Roeu Wrsr, Sutrr 202
VAIL,CoLoRApo 81657
Telephoner (97 0) O 6-t0e2
Fax (970) a76-3423
Pedestrian Access
In 2005, an access easement was granted to Vail Resorts by tlre Lion Square North Building HOA
to allow for vehicular and pedestrian tralEc across the south side ofthe Lion Square North
Property. This easement was granted with the expectation that the redevelopment of the Lion
Square North Building would be occurring in tlle near future and the pedestrian access across the
Lion Square North prop+ty would add vitality to dre area and provide greater access to the new
Arrabelle Square.
Landscaping
ln an effort to provide a pedestrian experience in keeping wit} the natural environment that
surrounds our village, the pedestrian access tlrough the south side of trhe Lion Square North
property will be heavily landscaped and will have a berm to provide for separation from the Lion
Square North Building and the pedestrian way. On the North side, a sod roof will be built over the
first level parking deck to the extent allowed by zoning, thereby creating a landscaped plaza that
integrates into the adjacent property's landscaping.
Streetscape and Street Lighting
The pedestrian access arpr:nd the south side ofthe Lion Square North property will have a
streetscape consistent with the streetscape built by Vail Resorts for the Arrabelle project. In
addition, tlle sidewalks rivill have site lights in keeping with the Lionshead Master Plan.
Traffic Impact Fee
The developer will provide the Town witl improvements to the adjacent roadways and streetscape
egual to dollar amount delined by Town of Vail planning staff and consistent with trafnc impact
fees of other approved projects.
Benefits provided to Y,ail Resofi to Enable Aruabe|Ie and Lionshead Redevelopment:
Numerous easements arird access agreements were provided to VaiI Resorts to allow for pedestrian
and vehicular circulation, construction staging, water retention and utility upgrades throughout the
core of Lionshead. All were granted with the eraectation and understanding that the
redevelopment of Arrabelle was in and of itself a benelit to the community and tJrat each easement
and favor granted would in turn benefft the community of Lionshead as a whole.
2 of4
o
VIELE DEVELOPMENT, LLC
1000 S. FRoN'rAGE RoAD WEsr, SuIrE 202
Ver6Coronepo 81657
Telephone: (970) 176-3082
Fax (970) 476-3423
Conorr,rnv eENEFrrs oF LroN Squenn NorrH REDEvELoIMENT
Under Utilization of Development Potential
69L. .qfs6lrial evaluation, the Lion Square North HOA and the developer chose not to maximize
redevelopment to t}e extent possible by zoning standards in an effort to maintain as much of the
current character ofthe neighborhood as possible. The Lionshead Master plan allows for
considerable bulk and mass: the re-development plan, as proposed, amounts to a fraction of what
could be built on the progerty under current zoning. The proposed project has less than 47% of the
GRFA allowed on the site and is 73% of the average height allowed. While development options
remain for the property, current design makes a redevelopment beyond the proposed scope
unlikely.
Great care and attention was paid to respecting dre scale and character of the neighborhood,
specifically with regard to adjacent property owners. The design as contemplated ensures the
maj ority of views from the North will be maintained and preserved.
Aesthetic and Functional Upgtade to the Propetty
While the direct benefft of the proposed redevelopment will accrue to the property owners of t}re
Lion Square North Building, the plan provides for a needed upgrade to an old and architecnrrdly
unappealing building. The Lionshead Master Plan was created with the intention of providing
owners and developers with the incentive to upgrade and improve their properties such that the
entire community of Lionshead and Vail as a whole would.benefit. We feel the proposed design
achieves that goal and will provide a substantial upgrade while creating additional economic vitality
to the area.
Ilpgraded Fire and LiJe SaJety System:
We recognize that the benefft of an improved and code compliant system will accrue to *re owner
and is mandated by the Town of Vail. However, it is important to note that this redevelopment is
allowing tiat to happen in a timely manner, with a minimal impact to dre surrounding areas.
Simply put, t}re economics of the proposed plan allow for this upgrade. Given the increasing fire
danger in our region and the ability ofa ffre to spread quickly in our Valley, each and every upgrade
can be viewed as benefiting tfie whole.
3 of4
o o
LC
202
vIELE DEVELOPMENT, L
10U) S. FRoNTAGE RoAD WEsr, SUITE
vAu, CoLoRADo 81657
Telephone: (9701 47 6-1082
Fax(nA)476-3123
The proposed development plan represents over live years of planning and numerous iterations of
development proposals investigated by tJre Lion Sgua.re North HOA. The plan as proposed was
recently voted on by each of the individual owners of tie Lion Square North Building. The project
received unanimous support from owners, with 100% of the 27 owners voting in favor of the
project.
The current plan complies with the Lionshead Master Plan and exceeds t}e requirements set forth
for development impact filitigation efforts. We have included a retail use that cwtently does not
exist on the property, have covered the parking to the extent zoning currently allows, we have
developed less than half of the GRFA we are allowed rmder current zoning and are 30% below the
average height requirements. In summary, we have gone to great lengths to be mindful of adjacent
property owners and have made major modi.6cations to our design in an effort to address some of
the concerns that tley have raised. Most importandy, we have maintained a view corridor through
tlre Lion Square North property.
We look forward to the opportrmity to present this project to the Planning and Environmentd
Commission, Thank you for your time and consideration.
Best Regards,
David Vi€le
Manager
SuMMARY
4of4
Attachment E
YIELE DEVETOPMENT, LLC
1000 S. IRoNTAGERoAD WEsr, SurrE 202
VAII, Cor.oRADo 81657
Telepbon ez (970) 47 63082
Rax(97o)4J63a23
Jrure 15, 2006
Bill Gibson, AICP
Plariner II
Town of Vail Planning Deparhent
75 SoutL Frontage Rd. West
Yail, Colorado 81657
RE: Iion Squarc Lodge - Nort: Enployu Housing
Dear Mr. Gibson:
Per ow discussiors .with t[e Town of Vail Planning Stalf and with tle Town of Vail Housing
Deparbnent regarding the Employee Houiing Requirement for the redevelopment of the Lion
Square Lodge Nortl building, we ProPose to Provide an off-site solution to rieet our employee
housing requirenent. Our interpretation of the employee housing regulations for the Torvn of
Vail, speciffc to the Lionshead Master Plan, is as follows:
.4 per unit
x 9 units
= 3.6 Employees Generated
Modi-&er = 157o as the project complies with Zoning
Employee Housing Requirenent for Cosdoninium Uses: 3.5 r .15 = .54 Beds
Requfuement: Prwide One Employee Bei!
Retail/ Commercial Requirement:
5-8 per 1000 SF
8/1000
* 550 SF of Commercial Space
= 5.2 EmPloYees Generated
ModiAer = 157o as the project complies wi& Zorring
Employee Housing Requirement for Retail Uses: 5.2 * .15 = .78 Beds
Aequirement: Ptoviile One EmploSree Bed
Per the above calculations, we have determined that the development, as proposed, will require an
errployee housing unit with two beds. We propose to provide an off-site type III or IV Employee
EMPLoYEEGENERATION:
Multi Family Re quirement:
VIELE DEYETOPMENT, LLC
1fi)0 S. FRol{rAGE RoAD WEsf,, Sum 202
VATLTCoLoRADo 81657
Telcphone (nO)1763082. Pax.(n0r476,71ts
Housing tlnit with one bedrooor, wit&iu tlc towri of Vait. Tbe unit witl bs l rni'lir-r'rn of 700
souare feet,I
Please call with any Erestioos related to tbir pro'posal.
Best Regards,
>Jbi
DavidVielc
Manager
Attachment: F
vIELE DEVELOPMENT, LLC
1000 S. FRoNrecr Rolo Wrsr, SUITE 202
Vert,Coronloo 81657
Telephone: (97 O) 47 5-3082
Fax (97O) {15-3+23
June 23, 2006
Bill Gibson, AICP
Planner II
Town of Vail Planning Departnent
75 South Frontage Rd. West
Vail, Colorado 81657
RE: Summarv oJ {ot nade to communicate with odjacent ptoperrl owne$
Dear Mr. Gibson:
Per your recommend.ation, the following list highligha the eJforts that have been made by our
development team and the Lion Square North Home Owners Association to communicate our
plans for redevelopment with adjacent property owners.
ErroRrs er CoMMUNICATION wrrH ADJACENT pRopERy owNERs
Prior to the involvement of the current development team, rurmerous meetings were held
between the Lion Square North HOA and owners of adjacent property.
Upon the engagement of the cunent development team, an initial meeting between
representatives of the Lions Square North HOA, the development team and adjacent
property owners was held.
Upon completion of the initial design submitted to the Town of Vail Planning Staff for
review, the development team placed a call to the president of the adjacent ProPerty's
HOA whereby the project was explained in detail and an offer of further communications
was made.
Following the initial review of the project by the PEC, members of the development team
and the Lion Square Lodge initiated a conference call with a designated committee
representing adjacent property owners. The design was discussed in detail.
Immediately after a revision to the plans was completed (5/2/06) and forwarded to the
Town of Vail Planning Staff, said revision was sent to representatives of the adjacent
property owners. Said revision rellected a number of changes to the building suggested by
the adjacent property owners.
0
VLE
?006
VAIL
23
OF
JUN
TOWN
vIEtE DEVELOPMENT, LLC
1000 S. FRoNTAGE RoAD WEsr' SUIrE 202
VATL,CoLoRADo 81657
Telephone: (9?0) 47 6-3082
Fax (970) 476-3423
At the time of distribution of the plans to the adjacent property owners, the development
team expressed ari interest in discussing the plans with the adjacent property owners.
A conference call was conducted on5/?2/06 with representatives from ttre development
team, the Lion Square HOA and adjacent property owners' The revisions to the plans
were discussed and exalained.
REyrsroNs ro THE DEsrcN RELATED To CoMMuNIcArroNs wrrH ADJACENT pRopERTY OwnEns
Numerous design concepts were considered by this development team and others prior to tlle
decision to move forward with the current design concept. tt should be noted that one of the
primary reasons the current model was selected was the limited impact the project had on the
adjacent property owners, as represented by the substantial amount of density and height that will
be undeveloped.
The following design modilications have been a resu]t of communications with adjacent property
owners:
r The entrance to the first level of parking has been moved to under the West tower. This
change allows for a landscaped separation between the proposed North tower and the
adjacent propertlr which sits within 4 feet of the property line.
The Lion Square North Building currently extends onto an adjacent property through an
easement. The portion of the building that currendy extends onto the easement as well as
the portion of the building that is currendy in the setback will remain in place with no
modification to tlre strucftte of the building other tlran material application to its exterior.
A sod and landscaped deck/terrace has been designed that will cover'tJre parking on the
ground level adjacent to the property line to the extent possible by current zoning
The West tower was initially designed l0 feet off the setback, or 20 feet from the property
line as a consequence of the adjacent properry's close proximity (within 4 feet) to the
property line.
r The mechanical units on the roof of the building have been covered by a mansard roof.
2 of3
I
vIEtE DEVELOPMENT, LLC
1000 S. FRoNTAGE RoAD'WEsr, Sunr 202
YATLTCoLoRADo 81657
Telephone: (970) 47G3082
Ezx (970) a76-7a21
SUMMARY
The design as proposed r€presents a fraction of what the current zoning allows anil complies with
zoning at every level. The HOA of the Lion Square North and the development team have been
mindful of the impact this project will have on adjacent property owners from the beginning of the
design process and have taken great ellorts to preserve as mucb of the current character of the
neighborhood as the economics of this project allow. In additiou, the development team and the
Lion Square North have been proactive in initiating a discourse with adjacent property owners and
have made numerous design changes in an effort to limit the impact of the development on adjacent
ProPerry owners.
' We look forward to the opportunity to present this project to the Planning and Environmental
Commission. Thank you for your time and consideration.
Best Regards,
Dj/(fu
David Viele
Manager
3 of3
t Attachment G
oJ
t.'\
5,t "l9tr=\eziq9 /
z/
,/"
!itlrlll
llt;
iiii
ll
I
"'/./ ,/
--'--=--'---
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
IL-
,-t N
z F"t9)q *rv
lp
IE?
IEE:lEic!
luEiio
IRE!:l:u :tt9 .
t?tr
lo
lqttzlol5 l
ao
-\a
-=1=
zooe
9.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
i
I
I
I
I
,tl
I
-i*' /
/l///. ///
,//
,//' ,/
I o
\l\\rt\
13..
EZz=50
e2ZQo(J
\
)
iiit
lllil:il
rt+J /
///////,/.//,//,,, ,/.,. ,/'...,.
]o
\\
\\'.\
\\\
\ t\\l
le\.
3E
s,9.
58t!6/z/
t';tittilltlltllrrliiit1l
II
li \ - r\II \ L- Lli \ tni | \ [- i]irll \ -'nil \ --[!l \ J:ir \ Ilt \ i
rl \tt\lrr-lllin,r I Ili I (iilriirlirllItii ,'l: ,/|L- ,-"../l- --
----"
---.----'.?.
,r"'{ i'
.,,, .l'
,,/
"\i
,,,/.\\
'-:-'+-
"--t--
..--.r:-\:
lli
iiirrr=-==rrr.-ra-=-r =az;-aaa==.--z;.-a.i=-;azaaa;.--.';'.-.aa;-.=--1-.------:---.-.,
./l
,:. -/
,./L ' -,r''
i\\
t o
2
-tz=
e86Zzoo(J
o
I
I
I
\r
\--- I\1\lt, I
!, *-
|',. I
',1\l
liirilil
i--_-.r
ll
ilil
ir
___-__-______-_---.ir
t,' ii
,/. ,,i'/
1 ., .l'-;2"
-;/./r.r,un'
GJ
;
-+
;
9
\9
:(:,
/a
:
o
L:/
o
I
)
\I.l
I
t,
I
;i{.,iE
sqzoouff
e
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
J
I
I
\\
o
9c
EE3F
Ez
I
ooz8r
5Eiz
.-.------.-
oo
iiiiiil*ih iiiri
4i
lr:
&rii
x39rl?b';(:
l* l
iiiri
,ll$'JI tt @
\rlr1r|t
I tt\lr
-\ rl I
\ll I\l'\ /
14;6 f
lP''el Illc\ \ |
li 6l \l
1i;'r\
-l9l
lllllllI\ \ll I
ll'
o o
Tfl
tgl
lsl! tl
bij
I
s
Il
!EtIIll
)
itlll
{t t
oa
zlolgEl
H:I
;1 Fl
lll Rltit El| 9l
| !l
tElI El
lgti
*il ilil il*t+ t ++l +++
I
I
I
I
)
6l
sl
6l
rl
a
tltlttlr tl
a o
I tl
tilMI tlI rl
lltl
arl
$
il
d
fl
s
n
f,
pl
,<l
EI
H
8l
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
oo
A
tl
oo
olz-lFItnl
><lIIJ I
OIzl
FIt/,l*llu I
el
ol
ELIa'tl
e.lCLI
UJ
o
o4o-
olzl
FIalxluJI
EItnlol
AIelo-l
c
tr!
Andrew D. Hudders
718 Broadway - 38
New York, New York 10003
and
Unit 311
641 West Lionshead Circle
Vail. Colorado 81657
June 19,2006
Town of Vail
Planning & Environmental Commission
75 South Frontage Road
Vail, CO 81657
Dear Committee Members:
Please consider this letter with other letters from unit owners in Montaneros as a petition
opposing the proposed expansion submitted by Lion Square Lodge - North Building (hereinafter
referred to as "LSN"). We the undersigned are owners of units in the Montaneros Condominium
building, and taxpayers in the Town of Vail. The proposed expansion is contrary to the intent
and purpose of the Lionshead Redevelopment Master Plan (hereinafter the "Master Plan") and
violates the Developrnent Ordinances of the Town of Vail. The proposed construction which
includes two towers, 82 feet in height, and increases ofthe height ofthe center section portion of
the building fiom the existing 35 feet to 42.5 feet, will substantially and adversely irnpact
Montaneros, its owners and all of the guests who visit Vail and stay at Montaneros.
A. LACK OF STINLIGI-IT
With regard to the sun/shade analysis presented by LSN, it indicates that at the present time the
e4isting LSN building has no impact on tire Montaneros propefty during either the summer or
winter. If the proposed rnassive expansion is approved, the Montaneros building and units will
bc engulfed in shade throughout the day during the winter rnonths. The pool and hot tub which
are used by owners and guests will be in the shade, rather than the sunshine. Because much of
the area will be always in the shade, ice will not melt causing potentially dangerous conditions.
During the summer months, the pooi will be in the shade and additionally, we believe that the
sun/shade analysis for the proposed building presented to the Board is incorrect and insufficient
because it only shows the sun and shade analysis on two specific dates. Additionally, the
increased shade created by the towers wiil cause the pedestrian walkway between LSN and the
new Arabelle project to be in shade during the latter portion of the winter days. The Town of
Vail has r^ecognized both in its Development Ordinances and Master Plan that among their
purposes is to ensure adequate light, air, open space and other appropriate amenities to maintain
tlre desirable qualities of Lionshead. Specific purposes as set forth in l2-1-2:b of the Zoning
10004r066/3i
r56198. I
light..." and to "conserve and maintain established
This proposed project eliminates adequate light and
One of the primary le qualities which Vail desires to be preserved is the view of the
mountain and its beauty. At the present time, the Montaneros unit owners have an
expansive view of the
destroy these mountain
untain and sky. The proposed building expansion by LSN would
These views are one of the primary reasons for ownin! property
in Vail, or visiting Vail.
Section 4.3.1.1
Visitors come to Vail to enjoy this experience. The Master Plan in
public view corridors to protect views in public areas and suggests
that "all private develo and redevelopment should endeavor to create visual connections
from and through their pfoperties." The Master Plan further provides in Section 4.3.2, "physical
conlections to the naturpl environment are essential to the experiential quality of a mountain
resort." The vision of the architectural design guidelines in the Master Plan also
addresses specific considerations "such as addressing views." The purpose of the
architectural design gui as set forth in Section 8.2 is to "enhance the existing experience
ve the quality of life, focus direction for future growh, create visual
harmonv and imDrove values for businesses and homeowners." The proposed massive
expansion by LSN than creatins visual harmony and connections to the mountain and
creating connections to j the environment as part of the experiential quality of a fust class
mountain resort, eli visual connections. In section l2-l-2:la of the zonins ordinance of
C. SETBACKS
t56t98.l
which provides for the limitation of the number and extent of nonconforming uses. Therefore,
construction of the east tower of the proposed LSN redevelopment without a variance, which
caunot be justified under these circumstances, violates the Town Code. Further. the easement
which allowed for the existence of the existing structure is for that purpose only. To change the
use now existing in any way would be a violation of that easement.
The western tower appears to be less than 20 feet from the properfy line. As the PEC is aware,
the properties upon which Montaneros and LSN are located, formerly were one lot. Montaneros
was already constructed at the time a portion of its lot was transferred to the builders of LSN.
Although Montaneros' westem section is irnmediately adjacent to the property line, it was not
when built. Accordingly, rather than a l0 foot setback, LSN should be compelled to have at least
a 20 foot setback frorn the property line to the west to meet the intent and purpose of the zoning
ordirrance.
Finally, the plans provide for a covered parking structure, the walls and roofofwhich encroach
into the mandatory l0 foot setback. A 20 foot setback also should be required for this structure.
D. PARKING AND INGRESS/EGRESS
With regard to parking and access to the parking lot, we strongly object to the location of parking
spaces within the mandatory 10 foot setback. In its plans, LSN proposes to eliminate all of the
existing green area between its building and Montaneros and replace it with a building,
ingress/egress ramp and a paved parking lot. This is clearly contrary to the interest and purpose
of the Master Plan and Development Ordinance. It is requested that any addition to parking be
ber.reath the Lions Square condominium building in accordance with the off street parking and
loading requirements set forth in the Ordinance. According to the ordinance, the purpose of off
street parking is insulating surrounding land uses from the impact of the parking area and
requiring parking to be within the main building in order to avoid or minimize the adverse visual
impact of large concentrations or exposed parking (see l2-10-l). LSN should be required to
have all its parking within the main building to avoid the exposed parking. It should also be
required to conform with all parking and loading zone requirements. Additionally, LSN is
proposing a valet parking system that would require numerous attendants and far more space than
currently contemplated in order to be able to access several ofthe contemplated parking spaces.
ln reality, the parking structure proposed by LSN is not only in violation of the Ordinance but
fiuther, it is not a reaiistic and viable way to park cars.
E. NECESSARY EASEMENTS
As recognized by Tom Kassmel, Town Engineer, in his May 16, 2006 memorandum, Town
approval should be conditioned upon recordation of all necessary permanent and temporary
easements for construction. In his June 2,2006 coruespondence to Bill Gibson, Town Planner,
Mr. Viele acknowledges this requirement. However, notably, LSN has not requested easements
frorn Montaneros which would undoubtedly be required for the proposed LSN redevelopment,
and Montaneros ,is not willing to grant such easements for the current plan which it considers
i00rJ41066 / 3 |
156198.1
detrimental to the M
and guests as a whole.
Similarly, Montaneros
occur on Montaneros
For each ofthe foregoing
Thank you.
100041066/31
| 56198. I
property, the Montaneros owners and the Town and its residents
not approve, or grant easements for, excavation shoring which must
to suppofi the current proposed LSN redevelopment.
we request that the LSN application be denied.
Very truly yours,
Unit Owner/Tax Payer
54Or EAsr Rrvep Roap .
(00041066 i 3)
Rupv Boscrrwltz
tHniteh fitatl*- fitnatt
(197a - 1991)
June 21, 2006
Town of Vail
Planning & Environmental Commission
75 South Frontage Road
Vail, CO 81657
Dear Committee Mernbers :
Please consider this letter with other letters from unit owners in Montaneros as a petition
opposing the proposed expansion submitted by Lion Square Lodge - North Building (hereinafter
referred to as "LSN'). We the undersigned are owlers of units in the Montaneros Condominium
building, and taxpayers in the Town of Vail. The proposed expansion is contrary to the intent
and purpose of the Lionshead Redevelopme,nt Master Plan (hereinafter the "Master Plan") and
violates the Development Ordinances of the Town of Vail. The proposed construction which
includes two towers, 82 feet in height, and increases ofthe height ofthe center section portion of
the building from the existing 35 feet to 42.5 feet, will substantially and adversely impact
Montaneros, its owners and all of the guests who visit Vail and stay at Montaneros.
A. LACK OF SUNLIGHT
With regard to the sun/shade analysis presented by LSN, it indicates that at the present time the
existing LSN building has no impact on the Montaneros property during either the summer or
winter. If the proposed massive expansion is approved, the Montaneros building and units will
be engulfed in shade throughout the day during the winter months, The pool and hot tub which
are used by owners and guests will be in the shade, rather than the sunshine. Because much of
the area will be always in the shade. ice will not melt causing potentially dangerous conditions.
During the summer months, the pool will be in the shade and additionally, we believe that the
sun/shade analysis for the proposed building presented to the Board is incorrect and insufficient
because it only shows the sun and shade analysis on two specific dates. Additionally, the
increased shade created by the towers will cause the pedestrian walkway between LSN and the
new Arabelle project to be in shade during the latter portion of the winter days. The Town of
Vail has recognized both in its Development Ordinances and Master Plan that among their
purposes is to ensure adequate light, air, open space and other appropriate amenities to maintain
the desirable qualities of Lionshead. Specific purposes as set forth n l2-L-2.'b of the Zoning
Ordinance are "to provide for adequate light..." and to "conserve and maintain established
community qualities and economic values. This proposed project eliminates adequate light and
air.
MrNNeepoLrs, MN 55421 o (765) 57 1-2636 o Fex (763) 57 1-34t1
E-MAIL: RBOSCHWITZ@AOI.COU
One of the primary le qualities which Vail desires to be preserved is the view of the
mountain and its natural beauty. At the present time, the Montaneros unit owners have an
expansive view of the mluntain and sky. The proposed building expansion by LSN would
destroy these mountain views. These views are one of the primary reasons for owning property
in Vail, or visiting Vail. Visitors come to Vail to enjoy this experience. The Master Plan in
Section 4.3.1.1 establishe5 public view corridors to protect views in public areas and suggests
that "all private developrqent and redevelopment should endeavor to oreate visual connections
from and through their pr$perties." The Master Plan furlher provides in Section 4.3.2, "physical
connections to the naturall environment are essential to the experiential quality of a mountain
resort." The vision statEment of the architectural desip guidelines in the Master Plan also
addresses specific desigri considerations "such as addressing views." The purpose of the
architectural desigrr guidetines as set forth in Section 8.2 is to "enhance the existing experience
within the community, improve the quality of life, focus direction for future growth, create visual
harmony and improve prdperry values for businesses and homeowners." The proposed massive
expansion by LSN ratheq than creating visual harmony and connections to the mountain and
creating connections to fhe environment as part of the experiential quality of a first class
mountain resort, eliminatds visual connections. In section l}-l-Z:la of the zoning ordinance of
the Town of Vail, the Tofwn has recognized that the ordinance's general purpose is to promote
development of the Town that "will conserve and enhance its natural environment and its
established character as a resort and residential community ofhigh quality: Specific purposes as
set forth in l2-1-2:b of the Zoning Ordinance are "to provide for adequate light..." and to
"conserve and maintain e$tablished community qualities and economic values. It is clear that the
proposed expansion by LSN is contrary to the intent and purpose ofboth the zoning ordinance
and the Master Plan as it relates to views of the mountain, light and air and maintaining
economic values.
C. SETBACKS
With regard to the LSN proposed building itself, we strongly object to any building that is in
violation of any section of the zoning ordinances, including the setback requirements. LSN
proposes to build an 82 foot eastem tower atop an existing one-story building which is built to
the property line and has an easement for a deck overhang onto the property of Montaneros.
Montaneros disputes thqlt LSN has a prescriptive easement on Montaneros property for this
encroachment or for any bther purpose. It has been indicated to the Town that it is no longer the
intent of LSN to rebuils the existing one-story building but rather to "leave it in place."
However, construction o{the proposed multi-story tower atop the existing one-story building will
undoubtedly require, at alminimum substantial reconstruction of the existing building. This type
of reconstruction of a npnconforming structure is not merely an enlargement of the existing
structure as may be pen{itted under the Town Code, but rather is contrary to the Town Code
which provides for the lirnitation of the number and extent of nonconforming uses. Therefore,
construction of the east [ower of the proposed LSN redevelopment without a variance, which
cannot be justified undef these circumstances, violates the Town Code. Further, the easement
{00041066 / 3 }
which allowed for the existence of the existing structure is for that purpose only. To change the
use now existing in any way would be a violation of that easement.
The western tower appeaxs to be less than 20 feet from the property line. As the PEC is aware,
the properties upon which Montaneros and LSN are located, formerly were one lot, Montaneros
was already constructed at the time a portion of its lot was transfened to the builders of LSN.
Although Montaneros' w€stem section is immediately adjacent to the property line, it was not
when built. Accordingly, rather than a 10 foot setback, LSN should be compelled to have at least
a 20 foot setback from the properfy line to the west to meet the intent and purpose of the zoning
ordinance.
Finally, the plans provide for a covered parking structure, the walls and roof of which encroach
into the mandatory l0 foot setback. A 20 foot setback also should be required for this structure.
D. PARKTNG AND INGRESSiEGRESS
With regard to parking and access to the parking lot, we strongly object to the location of parking
spaces within the mandatory 10 foot setback. In its plans, LSN proposes to eliminate all of the
existing green area between its building and Montaneros and replace it with a building,
ingress/egress ramp and a paved parking lot. This is clearly contrary to the interest and purpose
of the Master Plan and Development Ordinance. It is requested that any addition to parking be
beneath the Lions Square condominium building in accordance with the off sheet parking and
loading requirements set forth in the Ordinance. According to the ordinance, the purpose of off
street parking is insulating surrounding land uses from the impact of the parking area and
requiring parking to be within the main building in order to avoid or minimize the adverse visual
impact of large concentrations or exposed parking (see l2-10-l). LSN should be required to
have all its parking within the main building to avoid the exposed parking. It should also be
required to conform with all parking and loading zone requirements. Additionally, LSN is
proposing a valet parking system that would require numerous attendants and far more space than
currently contemplated in order to be able to access several ofthe contemplated parking spaces.
In reality, the parking structure proposed by LSN is not only in violation ofthe Ordinance but
further, it is not a realistic and viable way to park cars.
E. NECESSARY EASEMENTS
As recognized by Tom Kassmel, Town Engineer, in his May 16, 2006 memorandum, Town
approval should be conditioned upon recordation of all necessary permanent and temporary
easements for construction. ln his June 2,2006 correspondence to Bill Gibson, Town Planner,
Mr. Viele acknowledges this requirement. However, notably, LSN has not requested easem€nts
from Montaneros which would undoubtedly be required for the proposed LSN redevelopment,
and Montaneros is not willing to grant such easements for the current plan which it considers
detrimental to the Montaneros property, the Montaneros ovr'ners and the Town and its residents
and guests as a whole.
{00041 066 / 3}
Similarly, Montaneros
occur on Montaneros
For each ofthe foregoing
Thank you.
{00041066 / 3}
o
not approve, or grant easements for,
to zupport the current proposed
we request that the LSN
shoring which must
(since
was constructed)
MN 1978-91)
to the UN Commission
RiShts
303 442 01 91 Johnson & Repuccl LLP
O
Malcolm D. Weiss DO.
Board Certilied in Family Practice
ll89 Detwiler l)rive
York, Pennsykufu17402
June 19,2006
From; Property owner unit 210 Montaneros Condominium
Town of Vail
Planning & Environmcntal Commission
75 South Frontag€ Road
Vail, CO 81657
Dear Committcc M embers:
Please consider this letter with 'othcr letterc .fiom unit owners in Montaneros as a petition
oppositrg the proposed expansion submitted by Lion Square Lodge - North Building (hereinafter
refcrrcd to as "LSN"). We the undersigned af,e owners of units in thc Montancros Condominium
building, and taxpaycrc in the Town of Vail. The proposed expansion is contrary to the intent
and purpose of the Lionshead Redcvclopmeat Master Plan (hereinafter the "Master Plan") and
violates the Development Ordinanoes of the Town of Vail. The proposed construction which
includes two towsrs, 82 feet in height, and increases ofthe height ofthe center section portion of
tbe building from the cxisting 35 feet to 42.5 feet, will substantially and advcrscly impact
Montaneros, its owners and all of the gucsts who visit Vail and stay at Montaneros.
ths mandatow l0 foot sctback. A 20 foot setback also should be recuired for rhis structure.
D. PARKING AND TNGRISS/EGRESS
With regard to parking and access to the pmking lot, we strongly object to the location of
parking spaces within the mandatory l0 foot setback. In its plans, LSN proposes to eliminate all
of the existing grccn area bctwccn its building and Montaneros and replace it with a building
ingresVegress ramp and a pavcd parking lot. This is clearly contary to the interest and purpose
A. LACKOF SIINLIGHT
0U3 a. tn. 06-23-2006 10 /61
winter. If the proposcd massive expansion is aporoved. the Montaneros buildine and units will
100041066/31
Johnson & Repucct LLP O f
:1 6 a.m. 06-23-2006
be eneulfed in shade throughout the day during the winter months. The pool and hot tub which
arc used by owners and guests will be in the shade. rathcr than the sunshine. Because much of
B. MOUNTAINVTEWS AND CONNECTIONTO NATURAL E}WIRONMENT
One of the primary desirable qualities which Vail desires to be preserved is the view of the
rnountain and its natural beauty. At thc present time, tbe Montaneros unit owners have an
expansive view of the mountain and sky. The proposcd building expansion liy LSN w.ould
destroy thcsc mountain views. These vicws are one of the primary reasons for owning propertytl V.nil' or visiting Vail. Visitors conre to Vail to enjoy this experience,- The Master Plan.in
Section 4'3. 1. 1 establishes public view coridors to protect views in public areas and Sqggests
that "all privatc development and redevelopment should endsavor to create visual connections
from and through their properties." The Master Plan further provides in Section 4.3.2, t'physical
connections to the natural environmeut are essential to the experiential quality of a mountain
resort." The vision statement of the architectural design guidelines in the Master Plan also
addresses specific desigrr considerations "such as addressing views," The purpose of the
architectural design guidelines as sei forth in Section 8.2 is to "enharicc. thc existing gxperiense
within the community, improvc the quality of life, focus direction for future growth, creaie visual
harmony and improve property values for businesses and homeowners." The proposed massivc
expansion by LSN rather than creating visual harmony and connections to the mountain and
creating connections to the environment as part of the cxpericntial quality of a first slass
mountain resort, climinates visual connections, In section l7-1.2:la of thc zoning ordinancc of
the Town of Vail, thc Town has rccognized that the ordinance's general pu-rpose-is to promotc
development of the Town that '\vill conscrye and enhance its natural environment and its
established character as q resort and residential community of high quality: .Specific purpos€s as
sct forth in l2-l-2:b of the Zoning Ordinance are "to providc for adequatc ligbt,..i' and to
"conserye and maintain established community qualities and economic values. j It is clear that thc
proposed expansion by LSN is contrary to thc intent and purpose ofboth the zoning ordinance
and tbe Master Plan as it relates to views of thc mountain, light and air and maintaining,
cconomic values.
11 161303 442 01 S1
new Arabcllc proiect to be in shade duriqg tbe latter oortion of the wintcr davs. The Town of
DurDoses is to ensure adequate liEiht. air. open space and other aoorooriate amenities to maintain
{00041066 /3)
303 442 01 91 Johnson & Repuccl LLP
O
0U0 a.m. 06-23-2000
C. SETBACKS
Witb rcgard to the LSN proposed building itsel{, we strongly objcct to any building that is in
violation of any section of the zoning ordinances, including the setback requirements. LSN
proposes to build an 82 foot eastem tower atop an existing one-story building which is built to
the properfy line and has an easement for a dcck overhang onto the prop€rty of Montaneros.
Montaneros disputes that LSN has a prescriptive eascment on Montaneros property for this
encroachmcnt or for any other purpose. It has been indicated to the Town that it is no longer the
intent of LSN to rebuild the existing ore-story building but rather to "loave it in ptace."
However, construction of the proposed multi-story tower atop the eiisting one-story building
will undoubtedly require, at a minimum substantial rcconstmction of the existing building. This
t5rpe of reconstruction of a nonconforming structure is not merely an cnlargcment of the existing
stnrcture 8s may bc permittcd under the Town Code, but rather is contrary, to thc Town Code
which provides for the limitation of thc nrrmber and extent of nonconforming uses. Therefore,
construction of the east tower of thc proposcd LSN rcdcvelopment wilhout a variance, whish
cannot be justified under these circumstances, violates thc Town Codo. Further, the easement
which allowcd for the existencc of the existing sEucture is for that purpose only. To cbange thc
use now existing in any way would be a violation of that easemenL
Thc westem tower appears to be less than 20 feet from thc propcrty linc. As the PEC is aware,
the properties upon wbicb Montaneros and LSN are located, formerly wcre one,lot. Montaneros
was already constructed at the time a portion of its lot was transferred to the builders of LSN.
Altho'sh Montaneros' west€rn scction is immediately adjacent to the properly line, it was not
'when built. Accordingly, rather than a 10 foot sctback, LSN should be compelled to have at
least a 20 foot setback from the prqperty line to the west to mect the intent and purposc,of the
zoning ordinance.
Finally, tbe plans provide for a covered parking sfiucturc, thc walls and roofofwhich encroacb
into of the Master Plan and Development Ordinance. It is requcsted that any addition to parkiug
be beneath thc Lions Squarc condominium building in aocordance with the offstreet parking and
loading requirements set forth in the Ordinance. According to the ordinance,,the purpose of off
street parking is insulating sunounding land uses from the irnpact of the parking area,and
rcquiring parking to be within the rnain building in order to avoid or minimize tbe adverse visual
impact of largc concenhations or exposed parking (see l2-10-l). LSN should be requircd to
have all its parking within thc main building to avoid the exposed parking. It should also be
required to conform with all parking and loading zone requirements. Additionally, LSN is
proposing a valet parking system that would requitc numcrous attendanis and far more space
than currently contemplated in ortler to be able to aca€ss several of the contemptated parking
spaces. In reality, the parking structure propused by LSN is not only in violation of the
Ordinance but fiirther, it is not a rcalistic and viable way to park cars.
E. NECESSARYEASEMENTS
As recognized by Tom Kassmcl, Town Engineer, in his May 16, 2006 memorandurq, Town
approval should be conditioned upon recordation of all nccessary pcrmanent and temporary
eascments for construction. In his Jrme 2, 2006 conespondencc to Bill Gibion, Town Planner,
Mr. Viele acknowlcdges this rcquirement. However, notably, LSN has not requested eas€mcnts
12 161
f00041066 / 3l
303 442 01el Johnson & Repuccl LLP
ftom Montaneros which
and Montaneros is not
detrimental to the
and gresE as a whole.
. Similarly, Montaneros
occur on Montancros
For cach of the forcgoing
Thank you.
{00041066/3}
:04 a.m.06-23-2006 13 /61
undoubtcdly bc rcquircd for tte proposed LSN redeveloprnent,
!o grant such easements for the cur€ot plan which it considers
propertyr the Montaneros owner:i and thc Town and its rcsidcnts
not qPprove, or grant sasemcnts for, crccavation shoring yhich must
'to zupport the current proposed LSN redcvelqmcnt.
wc rEqur$t tlret $e LSN opplication bo dsricd.
Very truly you$,
Malcolm D. & Deborah A. Wcies .
Unit Olvnecflax Paycr ,
June 19,2006
Town of Vail
Planning & Environmental Commission
75 South Frontage Road
Vail, CO 81657
Dear Committee Members:
Please consider this letter with other letters from unit owners in Montaneros as a petition
opposing the proposed expansion submitted by Lion Square Lodge - North Building (hereinafter
referred to as "LSlrf'). We the undersigned are owners of units in the Montaneros Condominium
building, and taxpayers in the Town of Vail. The proposed expansion is contrary to the intent
and purpose of the Lionshead Redevelopment Master Plan (hereinafter the "Master Plan") and
violates the Development Ordinances of the Town of Vail. The proposed construction which
includes two towers, 82 feet in height, and increases ofthe height ofthe center section portion of
the building from the existing 35 feet to 42.5 feet, will substantially and adversely impact
Montaneros, its owners and all of the guests who visit Vail and stay at Montaneros.
A. LACK OFSUNLIGFI
With regard to the sun/shade analysis presented by LSN, it indicates that at the present time the
existing LSN building has no impact on the Montaneros propefty during either the summer or
winter. If the proposed massive expansion is approved, the Montaneros building and units will
be engulfed in shade throughout the day during the winter months. The pool and hot tub which
are used by owners and guests will be in the shade, rather than the sunshine. Because much of
the area will be always in the shade, ice will not melt causing potentially dangerous conditions.
During the summer months, the pool will be in the shade and additionally, we believe that the
sun/shade analysis for the proposed building presented to the Board is incorrect and insufficient
because it only shows the sun and shade analysis on two specific dates. Additionally, the
increased shade created by the towers will cause the pedestrian walkway between LSN and the
new Arabelle project to be in shade during the latter portion of the winter days. The Town of
Vail has recognized both in its Development Ordinances and Master Plan that among their
purposes is to ensure adequate light, air, open space and other appropriate amenities to maintain
the desirable qualities of Uonshead. Specific purposes as set forth in I2-1-2:b of the Zoning
Ordinance are "to provide for adequate light..." and to'tonserve and maintain established
community qualities and economic values. This proposed project eliminates adequate light and
air.
B. MOUNTAIN VIEWS AND CONNECTION TO NATURALEI.N4RONMENT
One of the primary desirable qualities which Vail desires to be preserved is the view of the
mountain and its natural beauty. At the present time, the Montaneros unit owners have an
{00041066/3}
expansive view of the mpuntain and sky. The proposed building expansion by LSN would
destroy these mountain vidws. These views are one of the primary reasons for owning property
in Vail, or visiting Vail. Visitors come to Vail to enjoy this experience. The Master Plan in
Section 4.3.1.I establisheq public view corridors to protect views in public areas and suggests
that "all private developnlent and redevelopment should endeavor to create visual connections
from and through their properties." The Master Plan further provides in Section 4.3.2, "physical
connections to the natural environment are essential to the experiential quality of a mountain
resort." The vision statelnent of the architectural design guidelines in the Master Plan also
addresses specific desigrl considerations "such as addressing views." The purpose of the
architectural design guidelines as set forth in Section 8.2 is to "enhance the existing experience
within the community, improve the quality of life, focus direction for future growth, create visual
harmony and improve properfy values for businesses and homeowners." The proposed massive
expansion by LSN rathert than creating visual harmony and connections to the mountain and
creating connections to the environment as pan of the experiential quality of a firsr ciass
mountain resort, eliminates visual connections. In section l2-l-2:la of the zoning ordinance of
the Town of Vail, the To[vn has recognized that the ordinance's general purpose is to promote
development of the Touln that "will conserve and enhance its natural environment and its
established character as a lresort and residential community of high quality: Specific purposes as
set forth in l2-I-2:b of lthe Zoning Ordinance are "to provide for adequate light..." and to
"conserye and maintain egtablished community qualities and economic values. It is clear that the
proposed expansion by LpN is contrary to the intent and purpose of both the zoning ordinance
and the Master Plan as it relates to views of the mountain, light and air and maintaining
economic values.
C. SETBACKS
With regard to the LSN [roposed building itself, we strongly object to any building that is in
violation of any section of the zoning ordinances, including the setback requirements. LSN
proposes to build an 82 {oot eastem tower atop an existing one-story building which is built to
the property line and has an easement for a deck overhang onto the property of Montaneros.
Montaneros disputes thalt LSN has a prescriptive easement on Montaneros property for this
encroachment or for any other purpose. It has been indicated to the Town that it is no longer the
intent of ISN to rebuild the existing one-story building but rather to "leave it in place."
However, construction of the proposed multi-story tower atop the existing one-story buildingwill
undoubtedly require, at ajminimum substantial reconstruction of the existing building. This type
of reconstruction of a nonconforming structure is not merely an enlargement of the existing
structure as may be perrhitted under the Town Code, but rather is contrary to the Town Code
which provides for the lilmitation of the number and extent of nonconforming uses. Therefore,
construction of the east tower of the proposed LSN redevelopment without a variance, which
cannot be justified undef these circumstances, violates the Town Code. Furlher, the easement
which allowed for the e$stence of the existing structurc is for that purpose only. To change the
use now existing in any vyay would be a violation of that easement.
The western tower appe4rs to be less than 20 feet from the propefly line. As the PEC is aware,
the properties upon whicfr Montaneros and LSN are located, formerly were one lot. Montaneros
{00041066 / 3}
was already constructed at the time a portion of its lot was transferred to the builders of LSN.
Although Montaneros' westem section is immediately adjacent to the property line, it was.not
when built. Accordingly, rather than a 10 foot setback, LSN should be compelled to have at least
a 20 foot setback from the property line to the west to meet the intent and purpose of the zoning
ordinance.
Finally, the plans provide for a covered parking structure, the walls and roof of which encroach
into the mandatory l0foot setback. A 20 foot setback also should be required for this structure.
D. PARKING AND INGRESS/EGRESS
With regard to parking and access to the parking lot, we strongly object to the location of parking
spaces within the mandatory 10 foot setback. In its plans, LSN proposes to eliminate all of the
existing green area between its building and Montaneros and replace it with a building,
ingress/egress ramp and a paved parking lot. This is clearly contrary to the interest and purpose
of the Master Plan and Development Ordinance. It is requested that any addition to parking be
beneath the Lions Squarg condominium building in accordance with the off street parking and
loading requirements set forth in the Ordinance. According to the ordinance, the purpose of off
street parking is insulating surrounding land uses from the impact of the parking area and
requiring parking to be within the main building in order to avoid or minimize the adverse visual
impact of large concentrations or exposed parking (see 12-10-1). LSN should be required to
have all its parking within the main building to avoid the exposed parking. It should also be
required to conform with all parking and loading zone requirements. Additionally, LSN is
proposing a valet parking system that would require numerous attendants and far more space than
currently contemplated in order to be able to access several of the contemplated parking spaces.
In reality, the parking structure proposed by LSN is not only in violation of the Ordinance but
further, it is not a realistic and viable way to park cars,
E. NECESSARYEASEMENTS
As recognized by Tom Kassmel, Town Engineer, in his May 16, 2006 memorandum, Town
approval should be conditioned upon recordation of all necessary pemanent and temporary
easements for construction. In his June 2,2006 correspondence to Bill Gibson, Town Planner,
Mr. Viele acknowledges this requirement. However, notably, LSN has not requested easements
from Montaneros which would undoubtedly be required for the proposed LSN redevelopment,
and Montaneros is not willing to grant such easements for the current plan which it considers
detrimental to the Montaneros properfy, the Montaneros owners and the Town and its residents
and guests as a whole.
Similarly, Montaneros will not approve, or grant easements for, excavation shoring which must
occur on Montaneros property to support the current proposed LSN redevelopment.
For each of the foregoing reasons, we request that the ISN application be denied.
Thank you.
{00041066 / 3}
{m)41066 / 3l
Unit0wner/Tax Payer
t
100041066 / 3l
{000.+1066 / 3}
a
D. PARKING AND INGRESS/EGRESS
With regard to parking and access to the parking lo! we strongly object to the location of parking
spaces wifhin the mandatory 10 foot setback. In its plans, LSN proposas to eliminate all of the
existing green area between its building and Montaneros and replace it with a fo1filding,
ingresVegress ramp and a paved paxking lot. This is clearly conhary to the interest and purpose
of the Master Plan and Development Ordinance. It is requested that any addition to parking be
beneath the Lions Square condominium building in acpordance with the off sheet parking andloading set foflh in the Ordinance. According to the ordinance, the purpose of off
sheet parking is insulating land uses from the impct of the parking area and
requiring parking to be within the main building in order to avoid or minimize the adverse visual
impact of large concenhations or orposed parking (see 12-10-1). LSN should be required to
have all its pmking within the rnain lsildfug to avoid the exposed parking. It should also be
required to confomt with all parking and loading mne requirements. Additionally, LSN is
proposing a valet parking system ttrat would require nurnerous atlendants and far more space than
currently contemplated in order to be able to access several of the contemplated parking spaces.
In reality, the parting structure prcposed by LSN is not only in violation of the Ordinance but
further, it is not a realistic and viable way to park cars.
E. NECESSARYEASEMENTS
As recognized by Tom Kassmel, Town Engineer, in his May 16, 2fi)5 memorandum, Town
approval should be conditioned upon recordation of all necessary pcrmanent and te,nporary
easements for consfuction. In his June 2, 2006 correspondence to Bill Gibson" Tovm Planner,
Mr. Viele acknowledges this requirement. Howwer, notably, LSN has not requested ea:iemeNrts
ftom Montanreros which would udoubtedly be re.quir€d for the proposed LSN redevelopment
and Montaneros is not wilting to grant such easements for the qnrent plan which it considers
detoimental to the Montaneros properly, the Montaneros owners and the Tonm and its residents
and guests as a whole.
Similarln Montaneros will not approve, or grant easements for, excavation shoring which must
occur on Montaneros property to zupport the current proposed LSN redevelopment.
For each of the foregoing reasons, we request that the LSN application be denied-
Thankyou
Very truly yours,
npe u/,^-/ q/6
{0004r066 / 3)
Unit Owner/Tax Pavet
must occuron
For each ofthe
Thankyou.
prop€rty to support fhe cunent proposed LSN rcderclop,ment
rcasoffi, ure request tliat the I.SN application be &nied-
Verytulyyurs,
{7iffi u,/",,,4Y Unitoumer/IaxPayer
iprT
SirnilarlS Montaneros will not approve, or grant easements for, excavation shoring which must
occur on Montaneros properly to support the current proposed LSN redevelopment;
For each ofthe foregoing reasons, we request that the LSN application be denied.
Thank vou.
Very truly yours, ./
dfudl/b
Dianal. HucHe
Uuit Owner/Ta:< Payer
#306
{00041066 / 3}
must ogcur on property to support the cun€nt proposed LSI.I redevelopme,nt.
For each ofthe foregoing reasons, we request that the LSN application be denied-
Thank you.
,I a-n &
A'/l/ bwWl /a/'1Ja6"l
*/r*, q(fi*-"t"-'-
aO= +le Ot S', Johns()n & Repuccr *"
O
osCtea.m.
such easements for the current plan which it considers detrimental to the Montaneros
property, the Montaneros owngrs and the Town and its residents and guests as a
whole.
Similarly, Montaneros wlll not approve, or grant easements for, excavation shoring
which must occur on Montanoros prope0 to support the curent proposed LSN
redevelopment.
For each of the foregolng reasons, we reguest that the LSN application be denied.
Thank you.
Very truly yours,
',j<?.ii' /c,'u/-*'ru-
Maxine Gleicher.
kJt ' /t/.-ti1.e-fu1+
Unlt Owner/Tar Payer
Montaneros Gondominium Association
Unit 414
06,23-2006 61 /61
Montaneros - Pso0on lo PEC.DOC Page 4 of 4
303 442 Olsl Johnson & n"nrccr f-r-ef f :39 a.m. 06-23-2006 57 t61
such easements for the curent plan which it considers detrimental to the Montaneros
property, the Montaneros owners and the Town and its residents and guests as a
whole.
Similarly, Montianeros wlll not approve, or grant easements for, excavation shoring
which must occur on Montaneros property to support the cunent proposed LSN
redevelopment.
For each of the foregoing reasons, we request that the LSN application be denied.
Thank you.
Very truly yours;
&,,Q- qG,il*
Ghick Gleicher
Unit Owner/Tax Payer
Montaneros Gondomlnium Association
Unit 316
Montaneros - Pe0tion lo PEC-DOC Paga 4 ol 4
sos +az ot et
FRTI.I
Johnson & Repuccl LLP
LFRRY RI.ID'LYN HIC1(S
Thank you
t000{1066 / r}
FRX r{o. : 3S39866299
As rcogrdzed b-y-Tonr Knsacrl, Torn F*giaocr, iu hir lvley 16, 2006 mcrnoran&rn, Torral gpplpyol
**Jd F oonditisred upcr r.,coodarioc ;f ill'rG.r', ard r.ltrporery eaaslae tucoastudioa In his .frro. a.?006_ crtcepondcnocl 6 'Bilt Gibc{nr, f"*riil"io.r, lvrr., vislc*91*:.+t reeuirmcnt . However. o*,uiy, LSN b"r ;; *+i; eas€mcd* ror'rvrol*EoErst wDlch wo$ld undoubtcdly bc rcquircd fa thc prroposed LIN rcdcvolopnor4 anaj!*f- : -"* u'illing.to grut ouchca*nrerie f; &c curr.ril plan wu*r i
"ouriesrn
d€tL!.D11lIo. Els MoDteneroo P86P€r'ly' tltc Mootaaeror orulcrs af,d the To*D arr<t its rssidputs *d E ,rst* ;;fqEOte,
I
Simihrly, Morcaaqol will not *ppa-ovc, or tFa easemds forr exoavationr Soriag $tlch ailrst opou.on Mormanelos poopcrtyto
'oppora
rb. ;*n;rt proporga tmr rrarurdud. - - '--":]-':vt'+
Fc each ofthc forEgo[1g roaaons, rm rcguett that the LSN ap,plicrtion be dcoied. ,
Oqf,;52 a.m. 06-23-2006 4 !4
- Jun. 23 Z% 19: A7fl't nr
y* _Tpf! to .pgthiqg- aad agrs! to rbe_ ger&ing IoA wc srTqty ogbct ro rhp tocariqr of pa*iqsrpces wrlhin thc uandrray r0 foot seeb'arrc- fr G prmr,-ffiii fiil; il;firdr$, rlr of tbeextutlug g*etr erca bttnvcca in $:ctu .rol,i*t irr*-:.rd ,.,pr"*ia ii,t h , t r1iil,g, i'sr*n egrooraup npd a piygd porkinr Ltr-.Ti. is-clerrty-*tryto rbs inreron r,ud purp,xc of rhe llastcr planand Deveropnent orainrioc. rt irr"r,,:.*{GG;id,nr.;;;ilG'##firbs r.iou sg'arecsndqdrium b"dldts in accodanco'with Ur. .el6".t-p.r*i"g fi ,CG-rrs"t
"tu.rrr, set fortr inttre Gdin*rco. aoo"iinctothe *dt*il;ilpfiil.."r"ri*op;$jrEi"-il;I-"irtsrrro.odrngI"9 Y tg'1" rrpecro! tre par{iG;!##;riri"e e!*i!8i"-beiftrui]i, ,*io ruildins insrd€r to rvoid or aininrize g j:ae ;i"d inplci;I*g. aonosrrrctiors or oxposcd parkine (tccl2-t0-l)' ISN rhould be requirod to barrc alt its pErting wtfrin 6s main build;"s to av.oid tbseryored psrldne. Itr &ould:Fg t" *qoircJ i; ;nf"*r with eil ga;<irg aod roding zonct quir@fib. -Additimatlv, IJN is prupoiingt, ,:ori pu*rrg syyn ilr thrt wouid rcqube uurcqous*Td"qt and &r mooe tploc ttran c,t-*iruv intcnrplaied ia ocler to be ablc ro .accc*s s?vrral oftlc
_T$_tnt"t1 pgS3e Bpb
^
t1 *1io., Gniii"s d"."1hry propc.d by L$N is nor otrry invioLrtior of&o ordinmcc h:t fimlrcr, h ic aot a iouti*riiand viebr.'t*ri to p# *rsl
vsrytrulyl,rlrr+
g a -.Zaur.n -. C. frn
un;t 3 \ti
5 161n4s2 r.rn: 06-23-2006vJohneon & FteP|r", *t lf
j
I
i
I
l
303 442 0191
PeterV. Browning
It4ansgiog Psr6€r * '
VailPartnusllC :
Owuers ofMontaneosunits 418 and 420
And TaxPayer i
to0o41066 / 3)
303 442 019l Johnson & Repuccl LLPJUH-z1-2906 12 r9E all
Thanlcpu.
ogu4 a.m. o6-2s-2006
, - ulo,u,
ar PaYcr
a 20 foot stback fton thc property lino to tho urcst to tnrct thc lnant aad purpose of the zonlng
ordlnanoo.
Ftnally, thc planr prorlidc for r covcred pc*lnf rtrrBtscr lho walb md roof of whtoh cnofosr.b
toto tl$ mandabry l0 fu rctbrclg A 20 Sot tctbrck rlso should b€ rcqulrcd fc thil !ilnsfidc.
D. PARKTNC AhID INGRESS/BcRESS
With rcgad to pEddng rud scsese to lhe pa*itg lot, we stongly object to the location of pui' :rg
rpaccs withia thc rnudatory l0 foot sebeclr tn itl pans, I.SN propoccc to Gllmirule all of thc
cxlrrlag grcln atla htwssn. lu buildlng and Moota,nerpa and rcplrcc it with r bulldinS'
lngrcsdcgrul ramp end a pntcd pa*ing lot. This is clcarly contary to ttrc iniqcgt ald purporo
of 6e $lasrer Plen $rd Drvolopment Ordlnanoe, It ls rpqueeted that any addition to parlinS bo
bcocrth thc Lionr Sqrrarc condominium buildiDg il aoooirdamo with thc ofr srtreot parklag and
loading rcquircnrilE sct forth iu rhc Oldinanco. Aoooding to thc ordlaanc,c, lhc prtpoac of o'f
rteet psrkiDg ir insulartng rurounding land usas fmm thc imp*t of the parldng srr rnd
reqrftfng parHng to bG wlthtn lb6 nrrn lsillilg in ildEf fo avoid or minlmlze the advome vlcual
tmpact of largc solccnbaflon3 or aposed porlciag (see 12'lG1). LSN choUld be roqulrd ro
havc all tts pa*iDg within fhe nrtn hrlldhg !o 6/otd thc c*porad prrkiag. It should dro bs
rcqulred !o -aonform wtth .ll ea*hg md todlns rone Equlrcanentc. Addldondln LSN b
propodns e rnlct pertcirrg qrsbn tbat uurld requhc nuurcrour attcodadr aad fr mort rpaoc than
orrrutly cosffiplafiod in ordcr to bc rblo ro aoocsr rsvsml of,6c contcmlaned parHng sFacs.
Itr tlslig, tho partiog rbucturc propoacd by LSN is not only fur vloledoo of thc'Ordlaanoc but
ftrthcr, lt ls nbt a Falistic and visbls wty !0 !ot* adt.
E, NECESSARY FASEMENTS
As recognized by Tom l(assmcl, Torm Engiaoq, in his May 16, 2006 ncooraadumn Tc',n
approv"t should-be oordifionsd upon rrcordadou of dl npccssery pcamancnt an! tcutpo,tary
ca$mcnte for conrtruc,tlon. ln hlc Junc 2, 2006 corrtcpondoncc to Bill Oibsonr Tovnr Plannclr'
Mr. vlcle ackuowtedges thia rcqulrtoent. Howsvrr, notsbty, tsN hls not r€qucstcd gasfitmts
firon Montrrcror uftich would rmdoubtodly bc rcqufu€d for the pmposcd t',SN redewJoP|Ircrl
ard Mogtan€rcg is not wllltng to gnnt cncrh oascEncnts br thc ounsnt ghn utlch lt conddon
dchinrqrtgl to ihc Montaocrot ptoX,crty, thc Montoercs owlcro snd thc Tova and itg rc3ld€nb
ad guxts ar a wholc.
Stnlirrly, Monlancros wlll aot slrprow, or grail €aroments fur, oxcavatlon $orbg vihlch must
occru on lvloolrocrot psopcrty to npport thc crunnt poposod LSN tc&ttclopoat
Forcach oftho folcgoingrEaEong $/c r.qucdrhtfthc LSN appltcatioa be daariod.
I
gl€gtfa Rttvtoc,ti
uN rt 2-aL
Lr-*f\t Ppo?ERf t€9{00041066 / 3)
parking lot. This is clearly contrary to the interest and purpose of the Master Plan and Development
Ordinance. It is requested that any addition to parking be beneath the Lions Square condominium
buildrng in accordance with the off street parking and loading requirements set forth in the Ordinance.
According to the ordinance, the purpose of off street parking is insulating surrounding land uses from the
impact of the parking area and requiring parking to be within the main building in order to avoid or
minimize the adverse visual impact of large concentrations or exposed parking (see 12-10-1). LSN
should be required to have all its parking within the main building to avoid the exposed parking. It
should also be required to conform with all parking and loading zone requirements. Additionally, LSN is
proposing a valet parking system that would require numerous attendants and far more space than
currently contemplated in order to be able to access several of the contemplated parking spaces. In
reality, the parking structure proposed by LSN is not only in violation of the Ordinance but further, it is
not a realistic and viable way to park cars.
E. NECESSARY EASEMENTS
As recognized by Tom Kassmel, Town Engineer, in his May 16, 2006 memorandurn, Town approval
should be conditioned uppn recordation of all necessary permanent and temporary easements for
construction. In his June 2,2006 correspondence to Bill Gibson, Town Plarurer, Mr. Viele acknowledges
this requirement. However, notably, LSN has not requested easementE from Montaneros which would
undoubtedly be required for the proposed LSN redevelopment, and Montaneros is not willing to grant
such easements for the curent plan which it considers detrimental to the Montaneros property, the
Montaneros owrers and the Town and its residents and guests as a whole.
Similarly, Montaneros will not approve, or grant easements for, excavation shoring which must occur on
Montaneros propefy to support the current proposed LSN redevelopment.
For each ofthe foregoing reasons, we request that the LSN application be denied.
Thankyou.
{ery kuly yours, n
)"*J;"/S$*;
acqueline E. Irwin Revocable Trust
Jacqueline E. kwin, Trustee
Unit 421
[00041066 / 3]
303 442 0191 JohnEon & Reorccl LLP Aev vr,ur !r... 'r.tlg!4glF_ r.t|t
ou56 a.m. ou-r"-toouroon 44 t61
Eutt oaqr 6, MoDtNtrErus grogaty to lrppct tb cncd proposcit l,SN rcdcvdqDomd
For cph of tho ftrogoirg ftas6+ ut rEquost {hd fto LSN eppticetiou bc daclo.L
Tbokpu
Vcrf'truIYYo'r+
fia,w,/,;'.-h. ret?Y UaitoqlnrffaxPq/E
t
E.
D. PARKING AND INGRESS/EGRESS
With regard to parking and access to the parking lot, we strongly object to the locafion of parking
spaces within the mandatory 10 foot setback. In its plans, LSN proposes to eliminate all of the existing
green area between its building and Montaneros and replace it with a building, ingress/egress ramp and
a paved parking lot. This is clearly contrary to the interest and purpose of the Master Plan and
Development Ordinance. It is requested that any addition to parking be beneath the Lions Square
condominium building in accordance with the off street parking and loading requirements set forth in
the Ordinance. According to the ordinance, the purpose of off street parking is insulating surrounding
land uses from the impact of the parking area and requiring parking to be within the main building in
order to avoid or minimize the adverse visual impact of large concentrations or exposed parking (see
12-10-l). LSN should be required to have all its parking within the main building to avoid the exposed
parking. It should also be required to conform with all parking and loading zone requirements.
Additionally, LSN is proposing a valet parking system that would require numerous attendants and far
more space than currently contemplated in order to be able to access several of the contemplated
parking spaces. In reality, the parking structure proposed by LSN is not only in violation of the
Ordinance but further, it is not a realistic and viable way to park cars.
As recognized by Tom Kassmel, Town Engineer, in his May 16, 2006 memorandum, Town approval
should be conditioned upon recordation of all necessary permanent and temporary easements for
construction. In his June 2, 2006 correspondence to Bill Gibson, Town Planner, Mr. Viele
acknowledges this requirement. However, notably, LSN has not requested easements ftom Montaneros
which would undoubtedly be required for the proposed LSN redevelopment, and Montaneros is not
willing to grant such easements for the current plan which it considers detrimental to the Montaneros
property, the Montaneros owners and the Town and its residents and guests as a whole.
Similarly, Montaneros will not approve, or grant easements for, excavation shoring which must occur
on Montaneros property to support the current proposed LSN redevelopment.
For each ofthe foregoing reasons, we request that the LSN application be denied.
Thank you,
zh->r"1^*
{00041066 / 3)
z.<-/a-t- -'Ctz^-f7 tP
Finally, the plans provide for a covered parking structure, the walls and roof of which encroach
into the mandatory 10 foot setback. A 20 foot setback also slrould be required for this structure.
D. PARKING AND INGRESSiEGRESS
With regard to parking and access to the parking lot, we strongly object to the location ofparking
spaces within the mandatory 10 foot setback. In its plans, LSN proposes to eliminate all of the
existing green area between its building and Montaneros and replace it with a building,
ingresVegress ramp and a paved parking lot. This is clearly contrary to the interest and purpose
of the Master Plan and Development Ordinance. It is requested that any addition to parking be
beneath the Lions Square condominium building in accordance with the off street parking and
loading requirements set forth in the Ordinance. According to the ordinance, the purpose of ofl
street parking is insulating surrounding land uses from the impact of the parking area and
requiring paxking to be within the main building in order to avoid or minimize the adverse visual
impact of large concentrations or exposed paxking (see 12-10-1). LSN should be required to
have all its parking within the main building to avoid the exposed parking. It should also be
required to conform with all parking and loading zone requirernents, Additionallg LSN is
proposing a valet parking system that would require nu Frous attendants and far more space than
currenlly contemplated in order to be able to access several ofthe contemplated parking spaces.
In reality, the parking structure proposed by LSN is not only in violation of the Ordinance but
firther, it is not a realistic and viable .#ay tg park cars.
E. NECESSARY EASEMENTS
As recognized by Tom Kassmel, Town Engineer, in his May 16, 2006 memorandunl Town
approval should be conditioned upon recordation of all necessary permanent and temporary
easements for construction. In his June 2, 2006 correspondence to Bill Gbson, Town Planner,
Mr. Viele acknowledges this requirement. However, notably, LSN has not requested easements
from Montaneros which would undoubtedly be required for the proposed LSN redevelopment,
and Montaneros is not willing to grant such easements for ttre current plan which it considers
detrimental to the Montaneros property, the Montaneros owners and the Town and its residents
and guests as a whole.
Similarly, Montaneros will not approve, or grant easements for, excavation shoring which must
ocflr on Montaneros property to support the current proposed LSN redevelopment.
For each ofthe foregoing reasons, we request that the LSN application be denied.
Thank you.
Montbneros, Unrtzl2
Unit Owner/Tax Payer
{00041066 / 3)
{00041065 /3}
Verytrulyyours,
Unit Owner/Tax Payer
s U^t Jt/
Verv Fulv vours.e*"^{rq
Unit Owner/Tax Payer
#r//
{00o11066 / 3)
303 442 o',t 91 Johnson & Repuccl LLP oe]l a.m
Alsxarttlcr A. Pr.risor.
aa prc.irc.r@i-rla w..r(rnr
and strengthening of tlre physical and visual connections to the natural environment of (.iore
Creek arld Vail Mountain. This concept is rcpeatedly emphasized throughout the Master plan.
Sinrilarly, thc Town's Zoning Regulations recognize the importance ot'ensuring adcquate light.
air. open space and othcr amenities within the LMU- I Zone District. Nevcrthciess, the Lioi
Square Rcdevelopment Proposal continucs to ignorc these furrdamental design objectives. The
rcvisions to the Lion Square Redevelopment Proposal inctucte no charrges to address the
conccrrs previously raised by the Associalion relaled to eliniination of both view corridols aird
sun access. This is readily apparent from a rcview of the sun shade analyses included in the
retbrenced June 2, 2006 submittal.
2. The Lion Square Redevelopment prooosaf co tyejlZoning Re eulations.
(a) East 'l'ower. Presumably in rcsponse to Association's objcction to the
imploper use of the e€lsement conveyed by thc Association to Lion Square North Condominium
Association some 30 years ago, as more particularly described in prior communications to the
100041t.14 / tl
JoHNsow I Rnpuccr Llp
.,trroRNEys ANI) CorNsl:r.()RS
^'t'
l.Aw
2521 BR(r Dv/rri S rfii A
B(x rl,DtiR, C()1,(TRADO 903{H
Ttil,t:r'r tr)Nti 3tt3.442- I 90t
Tlit.tit.^x 3{r3./r4?-01 9t
wwv.i-rlaw,corn
June 23, 2fi)6
VIA ELECTRONIC MAIL
BillGibson
Plarrncr ll
Town of Vail
75 South Frontage ltoad
Vail, Colorado 81657
LMU-I
Zone District. As noted in our prior correspondence" the Master Plan promotes the enhancernent
Re: Lion Square Lodge - North Building, June 2, 2006 Revised Drawings
(PEC06_00te)
Dear Bill:
As you are aware, this firm represents Montaneros Condonrinium Association, Inc. ,
(the."Association'). This letfer follows up on our April 21, 2006 correspondence to you :
outlining the Association's objcctions to the proposed Lion Square Lodge - North B;ilding
redevelopment (the "Lion Square Rcdevclopment Proposal") and supplJments the objectio-ns of
thc individual owners of units in Montaneros condominiums. we arc in receipt of thl
referenced reviscd drawings, and, for t$e rea$ons more particularly dcscribcd in this letter, the
Association continues to oppose thc Lion Square Redevelopment Froposal.
00-23-2006
llo t,rnin
IgtivrrR ITARK
303 442 0191 f,tu " . 06-23-2000
Bill Cibson
June 23. 2006
Page 2 l
Town,.the plans. for t.4* cast tower of the Lion Square Redevelopmedt Proposal have been
leyised so that the existiri8 one-story building located on the boundary of the Montaneros and
Lion Squarc propcrties u,iill, according to tbe developer, rcmain in place and thc tower will be
crected th9reon. Nevertliclc.ss, engineering of lhe proposed east tower will uncloubtedly dictate,
at a minirnurn, substant(l rec_onstruction of the existing building to support the proposcd east
towcr. Any reconstructign of the existing building violates the Zonirrg RegulationJapplicable to
noncontbrming_structurep and imperrnissibly expands the use of thc casement grarrted by the5 \:r,r.LrrJrrII\,p.(rrru || trpsl rrrlDD|ury cAIr4Ir(
Association and' thus, slould bc denied by the pEC.
. -
(b) , Pdrkine Srructurc. In rcsponse to the Town's concerns regarding thc
parking plan for the Lio{ Square Redevelopment Proposal, the parking has bsen reconfrgured in
the.revised plans to include a covcred parking struc re, However, thc roof of the propose{
parking structure encroarihes into thc rcquircd ten foot setbaok area, We understand fiom Mr.
Vicle that this overhang pvill be removed, but the Association continues to object to the current
plans provided. ln addition, we understand that there will be a rctaining wall which is either part
of, or immediately adjacpnt to, the parking structure, as well as a fence atop thcreof', located
approxirnately l8 to 24 ifiches from thc property line within rhe l0 foot seiback r.rrea.
Moreover, we note lhat the proposecl parking plan, including the valer ilarking
sy,stcm, appcars impractical, unworkable and not in compliancc Town's Developrnent Standards.
We urge you and the PEE to carelirlly rcview tlris proposal. , I
(c) Vhrianccs. 'l'he revised plans for the east tower and.pafking structurc of
the Lion Squarc Redevef opment Proposal arc clearly impcrnrissiblc under Cpplicable zoning
regulations, and, as morf particularly detaited in oui April ?a ,20e6 corresi:oirdence, there are no
grounds to support thc i.tsuance of variances to permit these structures.
Johnson & g"pr".f LLPj
3.
(a) EFsements, Despite Mr. Vicle's statements to rhc contrary, based upon
our review of thc Lion $quare Redevelopment Proposal, we belicvc that hoth teinpolar"y and'
permanent easenlents orier Montaneros property will be required for such redevclopmint, We:
see no way thal the proflosed structures can bc crected without crossing onto Montaneros
proPcrty rrnd thr.rs requirling easements, More importantly, thc Association has serious concerns
about Mr. Viele's clainrh that no excavation shoring will be required offsitc, and. thus, no
easements ate rcquircd for this putposc. 'l'he wall of the Lion Square parking strusture is
proposed to be located *ithin a few feet of the Montancros building, seerningly requiring at a
mjnimum temporary, arld possibly perrnarrent, eascments for excavation shoiing to-protect the ,
Monlaneros bui.lding.
Please bd atJvised that thc Association will not approve any work on its property,
or grant eascnrents to Llon Square for any pufpose, in conncction with thi currcntly cxisting - :
Lion Square Redevclopl-nent Froposal.
"0"
*, o, n,ouo r.m. 06-23-2006
Bill Cibson
June 23, 2006
Page 3
(b)
WecorrtinuetotrgetlreTown,as8pgrfywithenforccmeni'ighNffi
Covenants, to take into considEration the criteria for approval ofdevelopment ptans dictated by
the Covenonts, which criteria include "the effect ofany proposed improvcmeni on thc outtook of
any adjacent or neighboring property."
On behalf of the Association, wc thank you fbr youl continued time and assistance with
matter.
Johnson E Repuccl LLP ()414
this
Matt Mire
Rick Travcrs
Montaneros Condominium Association
Town of Vail Planning and Environmental Commission,
5
Dr. and Mrs. Michael Clayman
1440 Church Street' N.W.
Apartment 504
Washington, DC 20005
phone 202-265-5556 fm 202-26547 49
Montaneros #214 Vail, CO
cmail elaine@cosmeticdds.com
May 4,2006
Town of Vail
Planning and Environmental Coromission
75 South Frontage Road
Vail, Colorado 81657
Dear Commission Merhbers;
We are writing to expfess our opposition to the proposed expansion by Lions Square North. We
purchased a condomi;rium in Montanems a year and a half ago. We iue a couple nearing
retiremen! and we plhn to spend or:r flrnmerq and a portion of the winter in Vail. Beautiful
views and bright sunshine are what attracted us to Montaneros. We sit on our balcony, looking
out on the mountains, igreeted by a sweeping vista of ski runs and blue skies. Our condo is on the
2nd floor. If Lions Sqlrare North proceeds a.s planned, our views, wamtth and sunshine will be
gone. Every homeowper in Montaneros recently paid an assessment to upgrade our building's
exterior. We hope thht Lions Square Norttr will do an exterior upgrade as well. However, it
should not do so at the expense ofits neighbors. Any changes to Lions Square North that increase
the height of the building will adversely affect Montaneros. Certainly, the addition of the towers
will change everythin!. The Montaneros pool area will become a shaded and much less desirable
place to relan and enj[y. The quality of our desired experience will be permanently downgraded.
We have just compleied interior rcnovations to oru condo unit in anticipation of spending more
time in our Vail hon1e. Our expenditures-the initial investment" and the cost of upgrading our
condo-were based on the assumption that our property would hold its value. It is most
disconcerting to contdrnplate the negative impact of the Lions Square Nodh new construction on
our properfy's value.
The Lionshead Redefelopment Master Plan (the LRMP) expresses concern with such issues, In
Section 4 of the LRI,|P, Recommendations - Overall Study Area", the Town determined:
"
Visual connections
o
environment should be established utilizing the following
techniques: 4.3.1.1 View Conidors. Creating and establishing view corridors is
an effective way to link the urban core of Lionshead to the natural environment of
GorE Creek and the mountain. The master plan is recommending the creation of
several dedicaled public view corridors. In,addition. all private develooment
and redevelonment should endeavor to create visual connections from and
tFrough their nrooerties." @mphasis added)
The LRMP recognizes in Section 4.3.1.2 the east-west orientation of buildings in Lionshead and
proposes a solution to their inpeding views of Vail's natural environment. It states:
The predomir.rant east-west orientati,on of buildings iS Lionshead acts a visual and
physical barrier. interruntins the coflnection 1o the natural environment. It should
be the prioritv in future development to oriqnt vertical building masses alone a
north-south axis w.henever possible. Ihis will heln. accomnlish,the followinq
obiectives: a Sun Acceps. b. View from New Buildings, e. Views from Existing
Buildings, d. Creation of Sheets. (Emphasis added)
It seems clear that theproposed changbs to Lions Square Nonh do not meet these objectives.
Quality of life is why we have chosen Vail. Everything in life is pot about ma:<imizing mon€tary
profit. Lions Square North can accomplish building upgades without doubling in height and
irreversibly impacting Montaneros. We are asking for your assistance in preserving that special
quality of life for the Montaneros homeowners.
Sincerely yours,
E/a;,.e-- C!-4?-a4-;
^a.'n@.O@^y--
f,,lainc Clayman cJ
Michael Clayman
May 11,2006
Torn of Vail
Planning and Environmental Commission
75 South FronEge Road
Vail. CO 81657
RE: Lion Square Norh Remodel
Dear Sir or Madam:
We have reviewed Lion Square North's Preliminary plans for remodel and we for the bregoing reasons
most vehentendv protest the approval of such plans.
We are the or,|rners of unit 208 Monbneros, wtrici is on the loler leveljust above the parking garage.
The unit is locabd on the eastem section of the complex. The Arrabelle project has blocked all vieua
to the east lf tre Lbns Square North project is appFved it will block our southem or mounbin vbw.
The combination of both plans will significanty diminish the value of our investmenl
In addition to the above we are concemed for he encroachrnent of fre property and the shading of he
common area which includes he pool, hot fub and landscapirq.
Thank you br your consideration.
t*tDDilQ
MarkD. O'Dell
13101Highway 33
Keamey, MO 64060
Tele 816€28S668
cc: Alexander A Peiser
Johnson and Repucci LLP
2521 Broadway, Suite A
BoHer, CO 80304
3o3 442 oJ1::, !,. "..,'i3h.Tf"*T"ry",? l5[.O oo.-03 a.m, oo-as_2oo6g
oo3 / ogio
,u,
Lruns qurur tAHtJ
.Ir Jsmes L. Johnson Bucinocs Pbonc & Addrsss'
-(60t) 754-1159 ' FA)( (6oE) ?54a288
lvlay 19,2006
Pluuing qrd Ecommb Dweto'pn€nt Comissiotr
DgpatlD.d of Co",rnrnity Dernlopmmt
TounofVail
75 S. Frodago Rosd
Vail,CO 81657
Dear Comnission Ltedaq
Ag oqsg sf Mouses Urtt #30t Ei$bofiry tb prcpoacd Lion'r Squaro Indgn
NotttltQiorEKcrior Altcration rs prcacqfrd byvktloDevolopEed, ue wat to go on
rword ar STRONGLY OPPOSED to frb plojccr rs pscssutc( . It ruuld hryp a n{or
rc3diw i4act qrou ourPloPcfty.
Or olfccdon to th3 pllns ss picrcdcd arc bascd on sl lcasttbc bllo*in-gm{or bqB:l. Propcrty lb cctbacl ad moacbcor upoa our D[rpett!/.2. Mqioriryactrpoaouviewc.
3. Mqim ilprct on sn shrding on orn prcperty - eryecir$r orn pool bot tub,
ad,$.udcgkarcs.
4. lvlqior ncaatiw iagaot duriag oorstnlstion.
5. Thoso plans rc rct ary n6y m sdi4bg tbc Lfoorhd Rodcrclopoeat
lvtastcr PleD.
Ifthfu proporal wEc to br rppovc( tbc logilive h4sct br us would not onb iqede
te personal afoyncm of otr propat;r d Moatoncros, hrt *ruld severely twt remal
rgtru& &r rrs {s well How docs Vbb eqlect to hd[ str,h s Eolrtlosly to ud ovrr
otu pool rrca without shutiing ut dorvn? Wc will not sgttG to gtegiog solftuhg sd
oonrFuction cqui.pmflt ud mrtcrlds o oru pool ard dackt
As you kroq urc just coaplaed last prr a 'r'dor rcdcrclopracct aqd c*tedor rwvufha
of our llomus Fsopcrty. On p|ats erd coilUctod g'rojcct hrd rrd pegatirc iffirct on
our ochtrborrl Oalyporitirc aocthcric tnforete toorr Liodsd nof,Ehbo*ood
wcrt accorrpEsbed, uhbh beoef,rs evqtbody.
Sircarolyyours,
dqf'J4'^ fdh*
Im9AnuJohsoa
/
1307WOODIViAN nD. . P.O. BOX3,00 . JantESwLLE, WI 5354?-3tq)
Scott Wilmoski
10655 West,192nd Place
Spring Hill, Kansas 66083
i
May 11, 2006
Town of Vail
Planning and Environmental Commission
75 South Frontage Road
Vail, Colorado 81657
Re, lropor"d Expansion / Remodel
Lionsquare North
Commissioners:
I have been the owner of Montaneros #21 7 since I 990 and have enjoyed all of the attributes the
town of Vail and, specificblly, I,ionshead, affords me when I stay in my condo. I also find the
unique size and setting of Montaneros to be very appealing.
It has come to my attentio[r that Lionsquare North is considering a significant expansion and
remodel. I have thoroughly reviewed the proposed drawings that have been submitted for
consideration. While I applaud this building's efforts to update their facility more in line with the
Vail theme, I find the proposed expansion to absolutely disregard the impact on the entire
Montaneros complex. Thlis expansion would virtually eliminate my view of the Vail Mountain. It
would shade our pool area and landscaping that we have spent an exorbitant amount of money,
time and planning to create an eye appealing and useful green space. This complex is expanding
vertically, as well as horidontally, and creates very little useful green space like most other
developments in the Lionhead area. It takes on an appeal more like you would find in Manhattan,
New York, than in an Alpine Village.
I am appealing to your lohg-range planning as you review the Lionshead area to reject this
expansion proposal as sulmitted due primarily to its material impact on an existing revitalized and
remodeled structure (Montaneros), as well as the lack of accompanying green space for a
development of this size.
Should any of you need to discuss this issue in greater detail with me, I will make myself
available. I can be reached at9131592-2767 or swilmo@aol.com.
Mr. Alexander A. Preiser
Johnson & Repucai, LLP
2521 Broadway, Suite A
Boulder, Colorado 80304
Sincerely,
W ffi ffi ffi ffi $fg f#il i+.t :ii ,. '
qeLV.etsLdewce
froj qawLeg eiver >rLve
.Stowe Movw*ALw, qA 3OOry
77o-+JL-73es
Fax77o9s8-oL53
G - n* aLL : v aLL+ vts A@ c o n tc a st. wet
Town of Vail
Planning and Environmental Commission
75 South Frontage Road
Vail, Colorado 81657
Dear Commission Members;
I am writing this letter as an owner of a condo in the Montaneros for the past I 3 years.
My concern centers around the massive expansion plans now being considered at the Lion
Square North building.
As you are fully aware, the Lion Square North building is directly south of our building and
if the current plans are made a reality, our pool and plantings will be in the shade in the
prime summer months. I realize that our view corridor is not protected, but a major draw
to renters and owners in our building is the view of the mountain we currently enjoy. The
expansion of Lion Square will totally obliterate these and, as a result, the value of our
property. At issue is also an encroachment onto our property and proposed exposed
parking spots.
All of our owners are in total agreement with the idea of improving the appearance of
Lionshead and, to this end, as owners in Montaneros, took on a major assessment to
improve our building's exterior and install a sprinkler system. The owners of Lion Square
North could have followed our lead, paid an assessment and improved the exterior
appearance of their building. Instead, they have opted to turn over their building to a
contractor and ignore their neighbors to the north.
disreg would never happen in Aspen. Please, do not let it happen in
Unit 2l I
Montaneros
Cc: Mr. Bill Gibson and Alexander A. Preiser
for neighbors
05/1S/200S l3:46 FA}( 608754328O
.H James L. JohnSon
LII]NS QUICK tiABTS @002/002
Business Phone & Address
(60s) 754.1159. FAX (608) 754-3288
planning and Ecooomia Devehpmcd Cornmission
Depntment of Commrnfty Darelopmeut
TownofVail' 75 S. Frontage Road
lvlay 19,2006
Vsil, CO 81657
Desr Connission tvlembers'
As oumcrs of Montaneros Unit #308 *ighbotiog th" proposd Lion's Sqrure Lodge
North Mqior Exterbr Alteration as preseated by Viele Dorelopnent welprt to go on
recorO as
-STRONGLY pPPOSm io this projeC as prese$ed, . It would have a major
negative iryoct upon olr propertY.
Our objeotioa to thc ptnns as pr€scdtcd 8E based oo at least the fr[owiDg major iswes:
l. Property lin$ setback and enaroashrrnt uPon our Propcrty'
2. tvlajor impa4t upon otu views.
3. Major inia4t on s* sbading on our gropefty - especially orn pool, hot tub,
an,l sun deck areA-
4. Major ncgative iryact dldng construction
5. Thcse ptans af,e not any way Dsaf sadss/iDg ths tionsbsad Reileveloprrat
Master PIan,
Iftbis proposal wer€ to be approve4 tbc neg*ira iry8ct frr us would Dol onty iaedc
thc peisoiat enjoynreoi of ou property et Moutargroq but would severcly hurt remal
rerrenue for us as wetl How docsViele e,Qest to bnild srch a monstosity to aod ovcr
our pool area without ,in mtg us dorrm? Wo will uot agrc to stagiDg sosftlding and
mnsnrction equipmeui andmaterials on ourpoolud dcok!
As you lcn+w, we just tomplcted last year a mqjor rcdevelopmed an l cxterior renovation
of our Modarrros property, Orn llars snd oonpleted proiect had Do neqalive imPagt on
orn neishbors! O"'ly p[#it" issthEtic improve.nents to orn Liorxhead neigbborhood
were acconplisbe{ urbioh bencfits arerltbody.
Sincerelyyourg
6g"t4'^,f}h*-Jimar/anuJohson /,/
130? WOODMAN RD . P.O. ROX3lOO .JANE.SVILLE. lVI 53547.3100
From:
To:
Date:
Subject:
Bill Gibson
Leslie Tillman
081231200612:59:56 PM
Fwd: Lions Square North
>>> "Hudders, Andrew" <AHuddeg@gIeCbardcglp 061201200O 9:16:20 AM >>>
Dear Mr. Gibson:
Attached is a copy of my petition opposing the redevelopment of Lions Square North. In addition to the
statements of the formal petition, I just want to let pu know that I purchased my unit a couple of years
ago, before all the redevelopment plans started to become public. Since then, I have become increasingly
upset by the amount of building and the sizes of the buildings proposed and being built in the Lionshead
afea.
I live in New York City, and I have the impression th;t the Lionsquare area is becoming a much more
urban development in a very short timeframe than the village in which I originally bought. Overall, my
impression and belief is that the quality of life and holiday experience is decreasing. I find that I am taking
my vacations elsewhere rather than going to Vail as a result of all the changes around my unit. When I go
to the troubfe of flying to go skiing or biking I want to get away from the big city environment that is some
much a part of my life in New York. Yes, Vail - Lionshead is not the concrete jungle of New York City, but
it is no longer the mountain village of several years ago.
I am not against the overall intent of improvement of the Lionshead area. But the Lions Square Lodge
development is purely for pecuniary gain of that complex and the builders and related industries. The
expansion, to my mind is not contributing to the betterment of the services of the area. Rather, it is merely
a further impingement on the environment and my complex at the cost of both. lt will mean more cars,
more noise, more pollution in the immediate area, less light, impaired views if any are left and greater
urbanization of the village. There is an overall acceptance and encouragement of urban sprawl that is
occurring in Vail. I cannot see that there is a need for more residential or rental units in the immediate
area of the gondola at the cost of the aforementioned factors. I urge that general development be
encouraged down valley or on the north side of l-70 and improvement to the public transportation of the
town and county that would make those areas more accessible to the central village and the ski resources
such that residents and visitors living and staying in those other areas would not believe or feel
themselves isolated.
I urge you and the planning commissions of the town of Vail to reconsider the proposal of Lions Square
Lodge and deny them.
Andrew Hudders
Andrew D. Hudders
Graubard Miller
The Chrysler Building
405 Lexington Avenue
NewYork, NY10174-1901
Phone: 212-818-86'14
Fax 212-818-8881
Visit our web site at www.qraubard.com
The information contained in this e-mail message is privileged and confidential information and is intended
only for the use of the individual or entity named above. lf the reader of this message is not the intended
recipient, or is the employee or agent responsible to deliver it to the intended recipient, you are hereby
notified that any dissemination, distribution or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited. lf you
Attachment: E