The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutVail Village Inn Common Element (1984-1997 partial file documents) . � � �� lt TOWN OF YAIL � 7S So�Nh Fronin��e Rond Deparlmenl of Community Development Vnil. Colorndo 8/657 970-479-?13R/479-?139 FAX 970-479-345? Scptcmbcr 16, 1997 Stcvc and Elisabetta Vizion La Bottcga 100 East Mcadow Drivc Vail, Colorado 81657 Dcar Mr. and Mrs. Vizion: Thank you for thc submission of thc reviscd plot platl and thc inforcnation rcgarding thc convection oven. Thc reviscd plan shows a six burner stove under a hood, and a convection oven that is NOT undcr a vcntilation hooci. Thcrc arc a couplc of probicros with this. First, l havc chcckcd to sce if application has bccn madc for a mcchanical permit for thc Typc I hood systcm that would bc rcquircd for a six burncr stovc. Thc facility had an cxisting hood, but no information }�as bccn providcd regarding what typc it is or whcthcr it has a f re suppression systcm, Thc hooci must bc a Typc I with a firc suppression systcm if a stovc is placc undcr it that has an opcn flamc (gas fircd). A Typc II hood is rcquircd for any othcr typc stovc or ovcn. Thc information on thc Moffat Convcction Ovcn docs not providc anything about thc amount of hcat produccd (BTU's), nor docs thc installation manual, which was faxcd to mc by thc manufacturcr, indicatc whcthcr or not thc unit requiccs a hood. Thc instructions do indicatc that thc unit is cicctric, and is to bc uscd in a vcntilatcd room. This is inadcquatc information to make a dctcrmination about whethcr thc unit must be placcd undcr a Typc II hood. Generally, such a dcvicc would nccd to bc installcd undcr a Type lf hood, dcpcnding on thc amount of hcat, stcam, vapor, and odors produccd. Scction 2003(a)of thc Unifonn Mcchanical Codc, 1994, statcs that "hoods shall bc installcd at or abovc all cornmcrical-typc...ovcns...and si�niliar cquipment that procluccs comparable amounts of steam, smoke, greasc, or heat in a food-processing cstablishmcnt". Based on what has been submitted so far, 1 cannot approve thc facility with the type of equipment you have indicated. You need to do the following: 1. Provide information on the existing hood, its type, and adequacy for the equipment to be placcd under it. Mechanical plans need to be prepared by a qualified individual, and must be stamped. � • � 2. Provide adequate information rcgarding the Mof�t oven so that a determination can be madc about whcthcr or not it must bc placcd undcr a Typc I I hood. You arc approvcd to opcn, but without thc rcqucstcd information, you may not bring any cooking ec�uipment into the facility, or use it to prepare food. I will bc leaving my position with thc Town of Vail cffective Septcmber 19, 1997. You may contact Russ Forrest at 479-2146, for approval of your facility. Sinccrely, o��` �' � Lydia A. Stinemeyer Environmcntal Health Spccialist _. SEP-23-97 TUE 10�32 AM ROBINSON MECHANICAL FAX N0, 303 443 5507 P, O1/O1 .... �,,,� � �._._1��r��. . ROBINSON MECHANtCAL GOMPANY �"�� 8ta NobdnQhem Road,sw�Os N-1 cr►�cw�er '�� c G PO.8oX 8�159.Avon.C�81620 �p� pnte PBoM(9T�fi�s-02S9 Fax(s7�se5-8104 ;� �,:.�l:�c 1.� t . :. • . ,'•x�� .J .C�-'��k�'�Vl�'�' . ,}��, ./�c�. .��iO .�1 � •� � . . '� , '� �� tL . . . .. . , ... .U, . .��.�'°.5k. . ��'?'�c. ��t.�.� /, '�"f� . , . . � , . : . . .. �r/•�- � � �j, �� ( ./� . ,�? • • . -� �� . ,� � � . . . ._ . . . _ ._ .. � . � .._ . : . .- . . . .. . : .. .. . .. . . . . . . .. . . . , . . . . . . : ., . -�,��y�. . . . . , . .� ... ; ��`� . .. . ,�. . . . . .. .. _ . _ . . i .... , (�.��N��- .�� .j� . . J . � . :�G-�'��. . . . , . , . �. . .� � � �;� ..f . , . _�, . . , . � . . . �N�,-v�.�.xK�c�ST :.�� . . . . � ,_ �� , . . . . . .. �. ' ,� ,{; . . ,. . „ . tf . ._ , .. � . �'r . �xlb�'.I,,,� GE�1 M�Y .. . � .. � . . 1 1 �A� . . . • • . • .. . . �• • . ..•� ,• •. , •� • . �� . � . .�� • •��.� • �� •+• • . .. ,_ .. .. . . . .. - '� .Nr�v� �v'.'.xt a`'._w�.r�;b ... . . . .... . . . . ` .. . _ ,1'f'.�� •-•��'�� a%'F'�11` ~�... _ . . ' . �. . . . . .. .. .�vG��'..V�l� /�,��• �� '' . , • - . � . . � , . . '"'�. . .. � . . . . . . _ . . , ... . . . . ._. . .. ._ , ��,,�►i�,� .. . _ . _ . .. . . .. : . .:. . . .. . --- .._ . ,��.��`d�' .� 2» ._.. ., � . .T. . .._ . . .. , ' . . . . . �' ��p � Q�� o .� ,� � ``�� . . . .. . . . , . . . . . . . . . . . . ; ��.�. °�� . .. � .. . . . . . . . , �.q ,��. _ . . . . . . � ia,,,��KA1��,��' . • . , . � . ,�� ' . � • • ' �AUG 20 '97 05�20PM LONG &,A�oO`�A�ES JOB • La Bctega P.4i6 ' GREENHECK �,,- � ' � V P�� Vented Roaf Curb Standard Consvuction Features • Atl weldad consnuctlon in galvanized steel (1 Bga.) • Designed to provide requifed 40" minimum diacharge height abOVe roof line when used with Greenheck model CUBE fan per NFRA 96. A 1.5� �1.6 � � 0 � � � C 5 �— B Size A B C 22 21.75 31.75 24 26 � 25-75 35.75 24 30 29.751 39.75 20 34 33.75 d3_75 2� a0 39.75 49,75 20 46 45.75 55.75 20 52 51.75 61.75 20 58 57.75 67.75 20 NOTES : All dimensions shown are in units of inohes. CAPS v6.30� Drawln No.FA016-1-95 AUG z8 '97 04�1'rM LONG & ASSOCIATES P.2/3 ��c� ��N� �.�w��. �NFO�nn�T�oN ..... HOW TO USE TH�'S'CATALOG TO MAKE PROF'�R FAN SELECTIONS Of all tagineering prin�iples ossoc'wl�ed wifl�tl+e air-meving indushy, inshumenMalion,teckniquos,cdtulations and obse�valio�K,a}t,,vre in � the wbject oF sound loudnass {edd is probabiy the least underarood. acco�dancs with AMCA Stondard 300-85_Tl+ese octesw band onvlyses Sinte the introductien of fhe of fhe sene lovdness level,fhe enfire industry (expressed in wund powe�level�are avpilobk upon raquasf,!p�p fhs kas beneFitsd by ifs simplicity and eose af ha�dling.Unlike the decibsl, acoustical coosultantw{veth�morr seriousand diffuul�noiieproW�n,s. the sone�a1ua is pu.elr Iinaar.lF,is physical propeny makas it possible 10 The applicotion oF sone loudnass valoas ara basf ooflined o�►d destribad evoluaFe and compare fvudness levels by simple arithmetical means;ie_ in AMCA Applieafion Gvide-This bulletin provider. 1)Ihe tMoretical a bud�ess level oF 8 soRes is w7ce as loud as a level of 4 sones,or she definition of a sone,2)tabulated valuas of trpica!room loYdnes�tin�ns, relotionship between two sones can be exprsased in terms of a percan- 3)method oF combining two or more soae valuas,4}emrimnmenfol prp- toge of eacti ofher. ble m i nvolving roon�qcouslics and,5)el�et�s of fon speed vqriotior�s on 11ts Wln�la the sing{�"sone"loudness value�a relatively simple ro handle,its s'O"f V°��' c}erivafion is somewhaf inhicale_ It is eoleualed from an odave 6aed As a p►aceical means towo�d dete�n�ining satisfactory sou�d I�vels,and anolysis ond repiesenes o loudness level five(S�feer from the fa��nlet. opplying sona values ro Fan appficatioru,Penn Veo�'ia�or:engi�earing All sone rotings provided bAlow were dafennined by vsing mefhods department has prepared!he sound dassifitation guide sl+ow��elow. outlined in AMCA Standa►d 301-7b.The Unired Swtes Gove�nmen�uses 71+e designer can simply determins which sound raAng Is.el is required the decibel as the unitof maosure to defertnine tompliance with currenf by his insFallalian, and selec�Fans with a sone level�oting wM�ith foll (egislafior�ExisHng w�nd rafing proqrams based en fhe sone are being withi�t{wf category, revi�wed ond a�e subject ro revisan. CAUTION� , �:sene volues 1+ave been detenriined at a distanc�oF 5 All octave 6and analyses,from w4,ich sone levels shown in tl,is caralog ket from fan inlet in accordoncA with AMCA Standard 300. Don't be wero derived,were obroined irti,.,. _�:'.. reverb�rant chambor where misled by others who list sone values obtained af fwil+e�eJ'uMeces from tFie ian inlet. AREA NOISE deA SUGGESTED LOUDNESS LEV�LS SoNe cw��A �a� TYpE OF AREAS LEVEL p� NC 121 UP 32 35 Bingo Nall,Auction Room,Hotel Ballroom,Social Club,Rcception Room, MODEtL4TELY A ertment House,ProFeuionol Office,Su ervisor Office,Courmoom,School TO TO TO p P QUIEZ 9 Sd 60 °nd Classroom,Hospital Ward,Opsrati�g Room,Corc�tt�on Fctilif� SOUND 9.1 I SS b� �obbriCo��;dor, Spectator Area, Chicken House, Greenhouse, General � Open Office, Restovront, Night Club, Depi. Store, Ticket Sales OFfice, • � TO TO TO Casino, Spa, Control Room, Rail, Bus, 71ane, Bowling Alley, Pri�� $Iwp, AVERAGE 13 59 65 �isco,Drohing O�fice,Conv-Hall 13,1 60 66 WO�room and Toilet,Retail Shop,8us Terminal Lovnge,Foreman's O�tt, � Cotktoil lounge,OfFice Hall�Corridor,Tabula�ion�Compufation OFFice, TO TO TO �;tche�,Cufe�erie, Ho�el Goroge, Compurer Room,Worehouse,Bo�tery COMMERCWL 18 bA 70 Cfiar in Room 16.1 65 71 Genero�$to�oge Areo,Resrcuronr Bcnquet Room,Swimming Pool,Super- TO TO TO market, Hofal �tchen and Laundry,Welding Boo�h,��portmenf Stores H�GH ' 50 78 $d Main Floo�,Poin� Boorh,Heat Treating Plan�s,Tool Maintenance Area SC�UNQ„�,~;,�� ,,: 50.1 78.1 84,� Menuf.Area,Heavy Moch.Foundry,Assembiy line,Mochine Shop,Puncfi � PLUS TO Tp P�u Shop,Ligh�Mach.Area,Boiler Room,Emsrgenry Genara�or Room, H" '•��' Pump House,Power Plont,Tmnsfonner,Sleel Mill,Engine Test Room,Com- , �'+`�;t 85t' 90+' pressor Room,Steel Stamping �N� �i' (1) 5one Daw vakies ae roan loudness in sanec(2� t1G Gireria curvei bmed on xraw band sow�d prsssu�s Ierel,d6.(3) dBA mngsoF A...dg4rad sound b.els,in deobel=. 'Sound le.els f4ws I�gh L,bjett te OSFIA�,dords Forso�y,m.vell m stote aKl locd adineeKm.Saind a��wa�ion prwisions �ovld bs co�siderod.Source:ASHRAE,AMCA publicaho�s. ESTIMATED BELT DRIVE LOSSES � " �� Ths AMCA R�vww Commitro�has dweloped tha dtart sF�own f�re Eor the purpose of astima�ing � u bah driva bssas. �.+ ; io To<atcula�e lotai 9HP�i�cluding drive losses):Find ehe BHP ofyour operctting pointo�the X- � e Axis of�he chan. Fallaw the verycal line ro rhe li�es indicating the rangs oF drive losses. oe e lnok a►the Y-A�cis on 1ha left and find the drive less peresntag�Calcvlate the tofot BHP by � adding the drive loss percentage to Ihe operating point BHP.Fo� BHPs below.3,vsa tha � , -,� 3096. � ' �' � CA!lTION:for fotall�.endosed,explosiott proof,multi-spead and olher 1.0 Service Faefer p � '`••� n+etors,BHP�euld not ezceed�afed HP. W �3 > No�o:Fartsi:e�calculatea the drive losses for rou. � , 0 � . o— « �. . o vo R 6 d 6 0 AANpE OF DRNE 1,p$$iOR StAN0AR0 OELII �T� NeGMER fiMtS SPEEDS THiD 10 W1YE MIpM��OSSR �� TNAN LOWER fAN S►EE05 AT 1ME SAM!1100.5fPOMEIt ��M' ... , Paga 5 / MUb Cti "y� 104�1tiF'I'1 LUtYI, 2k H55UC.1HIt� ._.^•- - --' - , � .V l:t 1�.I 1_�Y :�r. ' ......Zy+�.....�w.,.,r..� . Sound data is presented in this cat�4eg to aid the system .. ' .�p ��•� rx��:n� �.•,��._•:� =',.,.,;• , designer in selecting a fan which will meet the desired sound SUGGESTED LtMtTS�OR M LO�ESS ��`�f'-:�'� � � , : M �y.�:,. , ' criteria. - � � �•'� � �. � ' �`, � ':,�s " ' � Sones� 'flBA�. ,�� '„ ., i a �.,. 1,3=.4. _ �32-48� ��rivate;-ho. , :,:;.:;;.,.' �.' Sone levels for selected operating points have been pro- . . � , , ,... . ; _,�,� ,, vided on the pertormance pages as a means of quickly �1.7-5 ', 36-51, Conference�ooms �: � '' �k :;;�,..;'_;;;'r: � evaluating the relative loudness of a particular fan seledion. 2-6- •'38-54 Hotel�roo�S�v�,��Srsn . �'e��.atTes;�,-:,; , � � 7he sone is a single numbe�sound pressure rating which ' �� ' '� ��ye�'�m�� .�:�.��•. �`:- � ' . ,�•., .i,,,,. '�.- indicates ihe total loudness of a sou�d source der'wed from ��-8 '.�4�-58 Schools;ar�d,class�ooi'1�s,;ho`spltal;,wards;'� the eight audible octave bands. Sone ievels are linea�to the � �� and operat'ing rooms :".,.�. �� ,':, .'• •. , ., human ear. A ta�{ated at ten sones is twice as loud as a 3-9 :44=60 Court rooms,museums;apartment h¢uses, fan rated at five sones. !n comparing sone fevels (with the , � . '. ,: ' p�ate�homes;`(urban�:<'y�l,i�;� ..,_:;,' ;; , � present state of the art)differences of 6'/a or less are not 4-12 °48-64 Restauranls,,lobbies:,genei'�l;open offces, ,��• :,; ; ,�, � : , u��a:; .,, ,;� : ., considered significant. 7he AMCA method of rating in sones � � ' ' � ,' ��-�� .��:�- ;�; ' � • is based on loudness as measured at a distance of five feet 5-15 51-67 "Comdors and}r�lls;coc�d�'1 Jou�ges::�.•��,." • from the un�t�n free space with no nearby reflecUng surfaces. � wash�QOms.and toilets�". ��'-�� :',.� �.��, �: , . The sou�d �evef of one sone has been compared in practical 7-21 56-72 Hotel kitChens and laundries,'superrnarlcets terms to the ioudness ot a quiet refrige�ator in a quiet 12-36 64-60 Light machinery; assemWy;:lines..�.�:r : , 15-50 6�•64 Machine shops, ~'�� k�tchen. �d;,; ;' �i • 25-60� 7487. ;Heavy mac „� �.��, �: ��;�-... . ., - . Fan sound ievels measured in sones do not acc�unt fo�the � Frorr►AMCA PubGCation 302s{A��O ,*.�-."' effects�ssociated with the fan's instaiiativn. The effects of for Nan Ducxed AiraNav�ng Dev�ces.�n Roo� on BA -... ductwork. ins�lation, ceiling and wall materials,etc_must be �Reiations) - considered, along with any other sound sources present. � � � �'' `;� ��• " Whi1e sones may be used to compare fans for selection NOTE: Vali,es above are for room loudness;and.are not fari.sound ratings. Room loudness is the resul�ng IevelLin a cond'�oned space . purposes, they cannot be used as an indication of the fan's "^'' t 11•^ � ��"��' " ° ' �atler the aooustical qtial'rties of.ttie roam have� een aCCOUnte�l,.for_. . loudness when installed. Most installations tend to reduce - : `_,•fs•:.�:W^,��.�::�_'-_• . sound cevels. � � C�CC�S COMPU7GRiZED FAN SELECTION Select Greenheck Model G and GB roof exhausters(and all other Greenheck fans)with CAPS—Greenheck's Computer Aided Product Seiection program. CAPS saves time and provides ali the information needed to make the rignt selection. It is also the most user frie�dly software in �he industry. This program is completely menu driven and is designed to keep keystrokes to a minimum. CAPS takes the guessworlc out of fan selection. �� This program automabcally interpolates to exaa performance data and corrects air density for non � sta�da�d e►evation and temperature. For easy comparison of multip{e selections,data for as many as six fan sizes can be displayed on the `.` screen at once. The program provides: `�� 1. Fan curve5 ;� 2. Complete pertormance information ' 3, Eight oaave band sound power, LwA,dBA and Sone values An unlimited number of fans can be selected and saved for a given job. Once all fans for that job have been selected,CAPS will generate a com- f plete.concise fan schedule. This eliminates the ' � time spent filling out fan schedules by ha�d. For information on how to obtain a �pEE copy of �� J.. , CAPSsofrivare,contactyourlocalGreenheckrepre- t--'�� sentative. � �GREENHECK �'�. �►. �✓ ,.,� t�--- 27'/2 � �.�5 . . . I� '-�� T-��- � v RPM- � �` `� �� S'�o BHP--- I 1.50 ---�--.-- • � "� ` ` �S - ___._. -�_ _' A \ •� � �\ � I _-__.._' \ .. 24,j.: � '5 .o . '9-S, m - �$��e , �'�o • � \ � y;,,; �� ---- �� I - ��, . � � 1.00 ':y� � � �s I � I � __ `� `h � �� \�f � t a � � 9 � c� ° � �'� � 2l - - y -�� _, �` m 0.,5 --- --_-- - � � � � � in � � �2s � ` 26 ---� � ° ��:��-s . . � ,o� `` .` ` AVG.VEL.AT DISCHARGE OF UNIT(FPM)-CFM/1.72 0.50 - --- � S \ MAXIMUM BHP AT A GIVEN RPM -(RPM/1726)' _ � 920 �� ` MAXIMUM RPM-1595 � �SS � \�� `� • MAXIMUM MOTOR FRAME SIZE-145T 0.25 - - . � � . � s90 � . Dimensional Data Metal Thickness qpprox. `� � �� Damper Roof Curb Windband Motor Weight 0.00 Opening Cap Compartment (Lbsi 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 �4 i6 18 20 22 24 26 28 30 16x16 18'Iz x18'/z .051 .051 040 60 CFnn x,o0 STATIC PRESSURE IN INCHES WG. MODEL RpNGE HP I RPM I TS 0.000 ' 0.125 ' 0.250 '� 0.375 '. 0.500 0.625 ! 0.750 0.875 1.000 �.250 i I Sone�BHP!Sone BHP I Sonel BHP So�el BHP Soeel BMP Sonel BHP I Sonei BFIP�Sonel BNP Sonei BNP'Sone BNP i 590 ! 2259 � 1068 851 � � 5.0 i 0.035 4.5 0.040 � � � 640 I 2450 � �159 967 ! 586 I I 5.4 i 0.0441 5.2 0.0501 4.1 0.0451 I ! i � ! 690 ' 2641 1249 ' 1076 I 805 I � i q_� � 5.810.0561 5.7 0.0621 4.7 0.062I I ' � I • 740 ' 2833 ��0 i 1182 I 963 ' � � 6.2 10.068 6.3 0.076 5.4 0.0791 � i ! 790 i 3024 1430 ' �285 ' 1093 747 ! CUBE I 6.6 0.0831 6.8 10.0911 6.1 10.096 5.3 OA i 140-4 I 1/4 840 � 3216 1521 1387 ' 1216 969 � I 7.1 � 0.101 7.3 0.11 ; 6.8 � 0.11 I 6.2 i 0.11 ! I ! I � 1612 ' �487 � 1333 I 1129 ' 890 3407 , I 7.7 '' 0.721 7.8 0.73' 7.5 OJ3 6.9 � 0.14 I � R-2 940 3599 1702 ' 1586 � 1444 ' 1268 996 8.310J41 8.4 0.151 8.2 I 0.16 7.8 0.161 7.3 0.15 990 I 3790 1793 I 1683 1552 � 1396 � 1184 8.9 I 0.161 9.1 0.17 8.9 0.18' 8.5 ' 0.19 8.2 OJ8 I ��0 I ggg� 1883 ' 1780 � 1658 � 1516 1342 1062 � 9.9 I 0.191 9.8 0.201 9.7 021 f 9.4 i 0.22 9.1 0.22 8.8 I 0.20 ' � 1105 I 4230 2001 I 1905 � 1792 1667 1515 I 1318 998 10.9 0.23' 10.8 0.24� 10.6 0.25 10.3 0.26 10.0 0.26 9.9 �0.26 9.6 ! 0.23' 2073 ! �982 ' 1874 1755 1617 1445 1190 CUBE R I3 ��3 I 1145 i 4383 I 11.41 0.25 11.3 0.271 11.0 0.28' 10.81 029 10.4 0.29 10.4 0.29 10.t i 0.27' I ' 1�� I 1210 I 4632 2191 2106 ! 2006 1895 1772 � 1628 1442 1158 � 12.2 0.30 12.2 0.31 ! 11 J 0.32 11.6 I 0.33 11.2 0.34 I 11.0' 0.34 10.9 0.3a' 10.6 I 0.31 ' �Z50 � y786 2264 ' 2182 ' 2086 I 1gg1 1865 ' 7731 1570 1348 i I 12.7� 0.33 I 12.7 0.34 I 12.1 0.36 12.1� 0.37 11.7 0.37 11.3 0.38 11.4 0.38 I 11.2 0.36 ' 1300 4977 2354 2277 2186 2085 � 1978 I 1857 1717 1535 1269 CUBE 13.3 0.37113.4 0.38 12.8 0.40112.71 0.41 12.4 0.42 12.0 0.43 122 0.43 11.9 0.42 11.5 0.39 ��$ R� 1/2 1350 5168 'I 2445 2370 2283 2188 2087 1975 1857 1695 I 1506 I I 14.1 i 0.42 14.1 0.43 1 13.5 0.44 13.0 0.46 12.8 0.47 12.4I 0.47 71.8 0.48I 11.8 0.47 11.5 0.46 1390 I 5322 2517 2445 2361 2270 2173 2068 1949 ! 1817 1642 � i 14.91 O.d51 14.7 0.47' 14.2 0.48 1 13.2 0.50 12.9 0.51 12.5 i 0.51 12.1�0.52! 11.4 0.52 11.01 0.51 1440 5513 2608 2538 2458 i 2372 , 2280 2182 2072 1948 1802 � 1354 16.0 0.50 15.5 0.52 15.2 0.53 14.2I 0.55 13.2 0.56 12.7I 0.57 12.2 0.58 11.9 0.58 11.4 0.57 10.1 0.52 1480 I 5666 2680 2612 2536 2453 2364 � 2270 2166 ' 2051 1927 1545 16.9 0.55 16.3 0.56 16.0 0.58 15.2 0.59 13.6 0.61 12.9 0.62 124 0.62!12.1 0.63 11.9 0.63 10.6 0.59 140-7 R-5 3/4 1515 5800 2744 2677 ! 2603 2523 2437 I 2346 2248 2140 2019 1709 17.8 0.59 17.0 0.60 16.7 0.62 16.4 0.63 14.2 0.65 13.1 0.66 126 0.67!12J 0.67 123 0.67 11.1 0.65 � 1555 5953 2816 I 2751 2680 ' 2603 2519 � 2432 2340 2237 2122 1839 18.9 0.64I18.0 0.65 17J 0.67 17.8 0.68 15.0 0.70 13.5 0.71 129 0.72 12.3 0.73 125 0.73 11.7 0.71 1595 6106 2889 ' 2825 2757 2682 2601 2517 2429 � 2331 2225 � 1967 20 I 0.69 19.0 0.70 18.5 0.72 19.5 0.74 16J 0.75 14.2 0.76 13.3 I 0.77, 12.6 0.78 12.3 0.79 I 12.6 0.78 PeAOrtnance shown is tor Model CUBE wnfaut oucts antl birascreen.BHP aoes not inciuoe dnve Iosses. The sound ratings shown were obiained in accortlance wrth AMCA Standard 300.Fig.x2A. �GREENHECK Loutlness values m sones at a tlistance of 5 leet were calculated in accordance wrth AMCA Standard 301.The AMCA Cenfied Ratings Sountl Seal applies to sone ranngs onty. 14 �-�� : . ,-�. . , � I , . � TOWN OF VAIL CONSTRUCTION PERPIIT 11 PARCEL ll: ,��U I - (}�j L.� ( - �� pERMIT APP ICATION FORM DATE:�-��/�Q� . APPLICATION MUST BE FILLED OUT COMPLETELY OR IT MAY NOT BE ACCEPTED � ************************�***** PERMIT INFORMATIO ***************************** [ ]-Building [ ]-Plumbing [ )-Electrical [ � -Mechanical [ ]-Other i �� , /� Job Name9 .�� Job Address: �(� � , �;��.��; � ��(r l/� � ��, Legal Des�Cription: Lot , Block Filing ' UBDIVISION: Owners Name. . � � � �- �,_ ;_� t< ' ��Cl � 1 l� i �� Address: �:�C� � �• ��' G(l/�.EIA��V-��Ph. �G'o�� Architect: �� 1,l14�� Address: ��.� ph. �,,� General Description: ^ �� `S-�'e #1/ ►� (,(. `�-. Work Class: [ ]-New [ ]-Alteration [�Cj-Additional [ )tRepair [ ]-Other Number of Dwellin Units: � g Number of Accommodation Units: N mber and Type of Fireplaces: Gas Appliances Gas Logs Wood/Pellet *****��********************** VALUATIONS ********************************* BUILDING: ; ELECTRICAL: � OTH�R: � PLUMBING: � MECHANICAL: � ��)Q�.L�� TOTAL: � *************************** C'pNTRACTOR INFORMATION **************,t************ Address•c�ntractor: �r %tiL V� Y� C F _ Town of Vail Reg. NO. • ��C' �� - � cC��2rr.nl I f - �' � � ' �,. Phone Numb _ er: %f 7L--�oZ�l ! Electrical Contractor: ��'SM� Address: Town of Vail Reg. NO. � Phone Number: . Plumbing Contractor: Town of Vail Reg. NO. Address: Phone Number: 4� - Addresscal Co tractor:C �� ` ' �' Town of Vail•Re . NO. I� � � �... ` � �C � � Phone Number. �/g�G I'�.�c7c% *******************�****�******* FOR OFFICE USE **�**************************** BUILDING PERMIT FEE: BUILDING PLAN CHECK FEEt PLUMBING PERMIT FEE: PLUMBING PLAN CHECK FEE: MECHANICAL PERMI'� FEE: MECHANICAL PLAN CHECK FEE: ELECTRICAL FEE: RECREATION FEE: OTHER TYPE OF FEE: CLEAN-UP DEPOSIT: DRB FEE: TOTAL PERMIT FEES: TYPE GROUP SQ.FT. VALUATION BUILDING: SIGNATURE: ZONING: Comments: SIGNATURE: �, ..,�_. nted by Mike Mollica 5/15 � 5 S:llam - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - � rom: Larry Grafel To: Holly McCutcheon, Pam Brandmeyer, Tom Moorhead Subject: fwd: Village Market /L�/�J'� � - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - �� I �' L /�/w^ - ===NOTE====------=====5/14/96==3 :55pm== � V The outdoor ��farmer� s markets�� in Europe and elsewhere are excitiong, vibrant experiences that are social, functional and convenient. Full of banners, tables, and baskets (dogs maybe? . People savoring the sights, smells, sounds, polcing, scratching, sniffing, tYiumping, peeling, and tasting. . . .the fruits and vegetables that is! Aaaaah what a picture, juice running down your face and arms from that delicious piece of watermelon! ! Anyway, I have some concerns 1 . There should be no interference with or for the in-town bus route, especially if tYie marlcet spills out onto Meadow Drive. 2 _ Delivery, unloading, set up, tear down especially in regards to access to the plaza_ Most vendors, I suspect, will want to drive to and from their "spot" _ S doubt tYiey will haul very mucYi, very far. How will tlzis be controlled? Then, where will tlzey parlc if they don� t leave their vehicles in the plaza? (pickups & trailers?) 3 _ Parlcing for customers_ Strolling "tourists" probably aren' t going to do much sYiopping for articYiokes, etc, so suspect locals will do wYiat they do best, parlc anywhere they want. What' s the plan to handle/controll tYiis at Craig's mar}cet or tYie hotel parlcing lot? 4 _ What will the operating hours be for the marlcet? Normal is sorta 8-2, but what' s normal in Vail? = hope you don' t thinlc this is a ��car wash" response, the farmers market has potential . Just thinlc PEC ought to be sensitive to these as well as other issues this activity might impact, positively or negatively. Yoursinfreshfruitandvegetables _ Fwd=by:=Pam=Brandmeye=5/14/96==4 : 09pm== Fwd to: Larry Grafel, Milce Mollica CC: Holly McCutcheon, Tom Moorhead • • • • - - - • - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Thanlcs for tl-ie quiclt reply to this afternoon' s work session_ I certainly agree w/ALL questions you raised. They must be addressed in conjunction w/the PEC process . MiJce, will tYiis be set for another DRT, I presume? And given your previous comments re: .7ohnathan - Staufer and his alleged proclivities toward procrastination_ . _does staff need ta help set tYie perameters as outlined above? Just wondering_ Thanks again, Larry, for bringning up tl-iese essential questions! Fwd=by:=Milce=Mollica___________________ Fwd to: Pam Brandmeyer • • • - • - - • - - • - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - • - - This will go to DRT, but only after JoY�nathan files an application and provides the details on the project_ I gave him the application form yesterday Page: 1 �?r�.n�ed by Mike Mollica 5/1� i 8:11am and "wallced" him through the entire � �rocess _ We also discussed similiar �ssues, and I aslced him to respond in writing, as a part of tYie application_ The ball is now in his court! - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Page: 2 Printed by Mike Mollica 5/17�"� 9:53am - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - �; F,�om: Desiree Kochera To: EVERYONE GROUP Subject: 5/14/96 Council Highlights - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - ===NOTE====------=====5/16/96==8 :36am== VAIL TOWN COUNCIL HIGHLIGHTS FOR MAY 14 Work Session Briefs Council members present: Armour, Jewett, Johnston, Kurz, Navas - -Site Visit Upon completion of a site visit to The Tyrolean at 400 East Meadow Drive, the Council voted 5-0 to approve a request to proceed through the design review process to remove two existing private stairways located on town-owned property and to replace them with one new private stairway to access a dwelling unit below the Tyrolean Restaurant. Upon Council approval, the project is now eligible for staff approval as provided by the town' s newly revised design review guidelines. For more information, contact Dominic Mauriello in the Community Development Department at 479 -2148 . - -Request to Hold Farmers Market/Jonathan Staufer The Council heard a proposal from Jonathan Staufer of the Vail Village Inn regarding his interest in sponsoring a farmers market this summer within the Village Inn Plaza area. With the necessary town approvals, Staufer wants to provide a venue for local and area vendors to sell fresh fruits, vegetables, flowers and possibly fresh meats on Saturdays beginning July 6 and running through September_ He said the activity was intended to benefit the 30 shops within the plaza area and to add an additional activity for the community_ During the discussion, it was noted 5taufer has at least two options in seeking approval from the town. One is to file a request for consideration as a permitted use under the existing zoning district, or file for a conditional use permit_ Either way, Town Attorney Tom Moorhead said a public process, including notification of adjacent property owners, would be necessary to move forward with the request. Staufer had been unsuccessful in processing a special events license for the event since the license applies only to events that occur on public property_ For additional details, contact Mike Mollica in the Community Development Department at 479 -2144 _ - -Information Update The Council work session for May 28 was canceled due to lack of agenda items _ Council members were encouraged to participate in Saturday' s annual Clean-Up Day_ Next, Andy Knudtsen, senior housing policy planner, gave a brief overview of the Vail Commons lottery criteria ranking_ of the 9 requests for the 16 3-bedroom units, applicant points range from a low of 4 to a high of 73 . For the 67 requests for the 37 2-bedroom units, applicant points range from a low of 4 to a high of 93 . Knudtsen is currently creating four tier groups for Page: 1 � (';rPY �� , � ,� � . �� TOWN OF VAIL � 75 South Frontage Road Department of Community Development Vail, Colorado 81657 303-479-2138/479-2139 FAX 303-479-2452 Mr. Bill Pierce Fritzlen Pierce Briner P.O. Box 57 Vail, CO 81658 RE: Vail Village Inn Dear Bill: This letter is in response to your memorandum dated May 25, 1994 regarding the potential availability of additional GRFA to enclose an exterior deck at Unit #307 (Phase V). I have once again reviewed the development statistics for the entire Vail Village Inn Special Development District (SDD). This analysis is attached for your information. In summary, Unit No. 307 is considered a dwelling unit, and as we have previously discussed, there is no available dwelling unit GRFA remaining at the Vail Village Inn. The only remaining GRFA available is for accommodation units. If you should have any further questions or comments regarding the Vail Village Inn GRFA analysis, please feel free to contact me at 479-2138. Sincerely, �2�� '��_ Mike Mollica Assistant Planning Director \I rd enclosure xc: Joe Staufer - - -- _ __ – ----_-- . ----- ._ . .�+. __ _ . i. .. . ,�a . � �,�s�,� ' ."� " ,��.!�'�°±'3C� E,1°' t�1 FritzlenPierceBriner �N-- �� ..._��,1;� ARCHITECTURE PLANNING INTERIORS r'�;,� ,'J�� ,, Y ,� - ,��v,p��' �� .G��1�` LETTER OF TRANSMITTAL To: �� Date: � � � C� ��-�✓ Job No. Re: ��"�>/�'�� . �N/% �� `7� Attn:j7'f%,l�-� i'�2 Z)C.--C,/C.4 Y �� f��-�'-�_� l,4(L� �� Attached Please Find: _ Progress Prints Specifications _ Plans Shop Drawings _ Other FC�C�,� �,q.r� �'.,.� U/Ul�-- Item No. No. of Copies Description The items listed above are: _ For Review and Comment � For Your Use _ As Requested Returned After Review Other — Remarks: l��•l�2 � �� — �}� J�7�".C��--l� ��-� !� �T�--� ,�� B �.;�� -J� /T-�� -�cv�urvr��`r�d L�v�/rT-- �� e.�i � - --- 1,� �r - �� By: .�i�� - �= Copies to: 1� ��;�_ ?age 1 ��rrs000.Doc POST OFFICE BOX 57 1000 LIONSRIDGE LOOP VAIL COLORADO 81658 303 476 6342 FAX 303 476 4901 v[n«►wracM wc.ca�rwrnu v�a oF.�cn � I II I _ h 7 6 ✓� � �� -_- V � j � , It .•.►3 d ''�r - � � � Q __ _ � l4 1 - `� �_ I� _ .. � - � • --- ' � t� . .l q i' T ' _ t----- i .G- l\` N_ � �� °' ' E�� _� �-j-`a�_ . �`F- \`�.� `\ >-�� _ - i - ! _ I 9� � �, � ' �-�-- - - , ,- � � � I ' y�,, � �� C e' p► � 0� -i ! � ' ;' ^ — Z ?; i.v � 1` � � I , - ! � �y �ry�l ; /1 /p'. C � ;,� A�'�"-P � ' I � --- f-- --- - - � V � � -9 � � � j , �- ;Q� � � o --�� 3�� 5� �u 5y2�� ' �� _ � i � % �. � x : Q_ �_ — _ � �t311 I 7�� u� �`_ 1 , _. - ! __ . ..__ _----- ----- �� N= i ..- - - --- —,� 3�':��4•8 , --�.�-.-- i ; ,� -- �1 \ i \��": ;Go rz. , � I � C I , � � i tli�� tl i su I �. 3� ,z.�� 3yZ 2-�e�, �_ � i � I .�---�� -- �_ ►.-�—,� � � i \ I �. � � ; �v i ' � � O �1' '�_ , - � - ; � I � , Z _, t` , , � 7 • I -l !ii �:, I (� h�� 1 _-—�� — '....__--- +-+- _ _ i__...� --- � - -- . --- —� `] 1 _ � i � � -„ '� U° 1 � , --�- � � "�` I I ,�I � � ri �� I ` � ��- '�� ►- � ��4 � a , � � � ,° i 1 � / V - � �'�'3�'� ��- 5-�i� 3�M ��_ � ,� , - I � i �.� / ' - -- _ _, i i � ` j � _ I l � _i�'� —--� I - � - �=o � - �,� { - - _ _ ;C I , e� l�_ 3 � M- T'- fi� . s � � - — _ ----�— � \ � ; _��ov � �rn J. � ��<� ;. ��1 : ' �N d' — �nci _ .' �"_ (� � ., i P �n �� , ; � -�1° Cp � �� ;\ n , -�Q(�i � • �T�1 ' , ��, \� 1 '�'O . � _ _ . y _ ,Y , -- _ �� O � , , � u� : i , � ;i� � V l� � / , � 3'-�,� .�z sf -o� ' Z�}� � � � p � � ...: --._�;. — i , � — � . . �l ,- � � C�i'- � - -i--_ _ -- - -- - /j � Gp Q I I ; -1. i � n �_ � � - 0 i 'I -- ;�v_,_ = i i ►3�- 10�� 3�u ----- � 5TO B (� ' ' l,� 5�� i 1 N�� - V' . _"/ - --- �.� —_ N_ —4 / _. � � - - ._..... _- •_�- I �� S � � \ � r�v� t�_ �- -- V,, -f� '� I � � f � � p Cl -----� � - ---- .___...___ - `i - - -- -- ;c� � �� ' ._i. �.__ � b � � r� � � c�• � � , .� �,_ � r_. �� I . � ' ` � w� ��'= I ' � � �\ 2 �j I � � O � �F b � Q'"8 0 ; I \" F `- _. _ �-----.. _ _ __ � ; ---t-�- -- - - - ----- --- ---��_�_� � i � �_ T � � � p ; � � �--- � , � . , _ F,... � ., i_ il I I � � i > � LI _.._ � �11 . � ..� 5 II 5/z 6 -2 8 3z `�, '�• � ' ; ------- _... ---- ---- _ _ ___-_ ------- - _ ,� • ,- tlii tl ii' - �� — t`''11��4 . �.... ----- ---- � - I ,�t � r ' _ � I -------.. --- v ._! _ � --�- _. _ `E.c-..G_:. JF c�ILv_.trcHV *;` 1 � �1 - � _ �-- , ,y �= C➢� ;5 O (yp _ ` .\`_ -- - - -�- i ,� �, '\ , \�_ � � / O � -�...._ L K, � Fritxfrn Pi �r4e Hrin�r 3�347b4991 P. 01 i � � j � �+ ` � .; � FritzlenPierceBriner : t � ARCIi �,TECTURE PLANtJIhG IFJTERIOR: i i . } . � 4/27/94 ; i . � � , ; '• ' Mike Mollica � � Town of Vail i Department of �o:nmunity Development � , 4 € � ; Re: Unit 307 �� ` Vail village Inn Phase V � I � � � : � . 1Kfke, � � � an behalt of Mrs. Karin Wagner, owner of unit 307, � Vail Village Inn Phase V, I request a formal response to - # : Mre. Wagners desire to enclose her deck. ; Per our recent discussian it is clear that the ; � dwelling uni� GRFA assigned to this SDD is currently ; constructed and no more i.s available. Ph�ase V units do � ; , have kitchens but are encumhered by deed restrictions � • limiting the owner's use during ski season. � It seems the space in this building must be either � aacommodation unit use ar dwellinq unit u�e. If it is � ; � , '. classified as accommodation unit use I believe that [ ; � : ' there is an abundance af GRFA available for this deck 1 � enclosure. If the building is classified as dwellinq � ` unit GRrF1�r, hy are there deed restrictions? � ` � R rds � i � � � � � � illiam Pierce i ' Archit � ; � . , � , ; , E � � ' cc: Karin Wagner � � a ' � ' � 1 � � . ' , S{e . � t . � � : � F y V � + } � ' � ', # 1 , 7 I ' � � . { ' { . � I � . � j P�ge 1 I �W14�GNER.DOC � . 27-Apr-94 , � : i POST OFFICE Bt�:K 57 1 UOU LIU�3SRlUGE LOOr V.4iL CGLO:�%+UO 81658 303 476 6342 �.4X��J3 476 4'30�� ; } i � + R[II_[14'E!N MC.M/.{III'2lCN MCTCf iRNC� . i F � , � � - • fILE COPY • .��. tow� ofi uaii �' 75 south frontage road office of community development vaii,colorado 81657 (303)479-2138 (303)479-2139 September 6, 1991 Ms. Lynn Fritrlen Mr. Biil Pierce Fritzlen, Pierce, Briner P.O. Box 57 Vail, CO 81658 Re: Vail Village Inn GRFA Analysls Dear Lynn and Bill: This letter is in response to our meeting on August 30, 1991, and your letter dated August 28, 1991. The Community Development Department has re-analyzed the GRFA allocated for the Vail Village Inn project. We have reviewed the recorded tapes of the PEC and Council minutes during the 1987 review of the VVI, and have also reviewed the staff memoranda and written minutes of all the public hearings for the VVI during this review process. Discussions - with previous Town of Vail planners and Planning Commission members who served during the 1987 review process for the Vail Village Inn have also occurred. As a result of the above research, it is the position of the Community Development Department that the GRFA analysis for ;he Vail Village Inn is as follows: ?. The total allowable GRFA for the entire Vail Vitlaga Inn project is 124,527 sq. ft. 2. The Phase V GRFA squals Q,972 sq. ft. 3. Phase V GRFA, which is specifically allocated to accommodation units and/or lockof�s, e�uals 3,364 sq. ft. 4. Tne allowabte GRFA remaining (to r.2 constructed) �or the VV! e�uai� �5,?21 sq. ft. This figure is based on the s�btraction of all the existing GRFA at the V�il Village !nr, (Phases I, II, III, IV and � from the total allowable GRFA. 5. Assu��ing that the existing Phase !V will be demolished when Phase IV is r�developed, 16,585 sq. ft. of GRFA can be added to the total remaining GRFA of 45,721 sq. ft., for a "potential available GRFA" figure of 62,306 sq. ft. 6. Ordinance No. 24, Series of 1989, maintained that, "a minimum of 67,367 sq. ft. of GRFA shall be devoted to accommodation units in Phases IV and V." Given that the existing accommodation unit GRFA for Phase V is 3,364 sq. ft., this leaves a requirement for the construction of 64,003 sq. ft. of GRFA specifically dedicated to accommodation units in Phases IV and V. . i �:i . � '+ • � � Ms. Lynn Fritrlen Mr. Biil Pierce September 6, 1991 Page 2 The end result is that there is not enough available GRFA to fulfill the Town's requirement to construct the minimum of 67,367 sq. ft. of accommodation unit GRFA in Phases IV and V. There is a shortaqe of 1,697 sq. ft. of GRFA for the proiect. Regarding the staff's analysis of the Phase V GRFA review, we believe we have given the most flexibility possible in calculating the AU versus DU GRFA. The staff has combined atl the AU and the lockoff GRFA in the Phase V building, and we have included those square footages as AU GRFA. Only the DUs, not including the lockoffs, were counted specifically as DU GRFA. Additionally, with respect to the calculation of the parking requirement, the staff added the square footage of the largest lockoff to each DU so that the most lenient parking calculation could be made. A discussion with Tom Braun, the previous Town of Vail planner who handled the VVI application in 1987, shed some light on.this issue. Tom recalled that the initial 1987 application was for a total of 14 dwelling units, each with a separate lockoff. During the planning review process, the applicant modified his application to provide for certain restrictions on the units, should they be condominiumized. Tom's opinion was that this change was made in order to make the application a little more palatable to the Planning and Environmental Commission and the Town Council. Tom also pointed out that, upon final approval of the project, the Town Council directed the staff to modify the ordinance which listed the required number of accommodation units, from 175 to 148, after this phase. The intent of this modification was to bring the required number of accommodation units in line with the remaining GRFA that would be available after the construction of Phase V. Tom pointed out that this reduction in the number of accommodation units in no way indicated that the Phase V building was approved as accommodation units. �n summary, the staff has found no conclusive evidence to indicate that all the units in the Phase V building of the VVI should be considered accommodation units. After having reviewed the floor plans, and completing a walk through of the building with Bill Pierce, the staff is comfortable in designating the units in the Phase V building as a combination of DUs and AUs. Attached is a copy of said floor plans for your files. Thank you for all your time and effort spent in researching this very complex GRFA analysis. If you should have any questions or comments regarding any of the above, please do not hesitate to contact me. Sincerely, l�1� �'1°�. Mike Mollica Assistant Director of Planning /ab Enclosure � cc: Kristan Pritr Shelly Mello Josef Staufer I I . . • � VAIL VILLAGE INN - DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS (updated - May 27, 1994) I. GRFA • Total aliowable GRFA (DU & AU) = 124,527 sq. ft. • Existing GRFA (Phases I,Ii,lll, IV & V) _ -78,806 sq. ft. • Existing GRFA (Phase IV-A/1992) _ -9,083 sq. ft. 36,638 sq. ft. • Credit for demolition of Phase IV" _ +16,585 sq. ft. 53,223 sq. ft. • Required AU GRFA in Phases IV and V (per Ordinance 2 of 1992)" = 64,267 sq. ft. • Existing Phase V AU GRFA = -3,364 sq. ft. • Existing Phase IV-A AU GRFA = -6.005 sq. ft. 54,898 sq. ft. Summary - there is a net shortage of 1,675 sq. ft. to provide the required AU GRFA. There is no DU GRFA available for the VVI. ' This assumes the Food and Deli Building is demolished and Phase IV-A remains. '* Per Town Council, the original AU square footage of 67,367 was reduced by 3,100 sq. ft. in 1992, to reflect the fourth floor condo. in Phase IV-A. GRFA Phase I* = 3,927 sq. ft. Phase II = 3,492 sq. ft. Phase III = 44,830 sq. ft. Phase IV = 16,585 sq. ft. Phase V = 9,972 sq. ft. 78,806 sq. ft. * includes Unit No. 30 . '! • . ! II. Commercial • Allowabie commercial area = 16,250 sq. ft. (approved 1985) • Existing commercial = -5,760 sq. ft. 10,490 sq. ft. remaining III. AU's • Required AU's = 148 units • Existing AU's - Phase IV = -62 units • Existing AU's - Phase V = -3 units • Existing AU's - Phase IV-A = -16 units _ 67 units = remaining � ��'�' ^�„� � � 199�; � , � . • � - f�ilen, pierce, briner �� ' August 2 8, 19 91 ' architecture, planning, interiors _..�.T_:__� p.o. box 5? Mr. Mike Mollica Town of Vai1 1000 lionsridge loop suite 1/d Department of Community Development vail, colorado 81658 75 S. Frontage Road 303-476-6342 fax 303-476-4901 Vail Colorado 81658 -.. . .,.. � ' .'._ 4 ,..... . . Re: SDD #6 : �_ !_. .__.�._ , �_ ____ �..: .. ' r--�- �__ ; _ , ._ ... Available Square Footage �` i '._._? .-_.t-; •--- ,. _� �_�. ,_ � , ,_T__. _ . : <_ ; , � +._ �.....1. ' '� � _. � � �� . . _ ,._.. _._ > . , i ,�... : . Y- .w _ �. . .�._.� , « ... ; Dear Mike, ,__ ; ._.__; ___..._ _ }�.� _ Here are portions of the tape recorded minutes of the ;__. , -�---�--� -- planning and Environmental Commission Meeting of 4/20/87 i }- � }�`- ' taken by Laura Nash, Fritzlen, Pierce, Briner. `- �"�` ___ �--e-- F � Review of Amendment to Special Development District #6, ' ----� ~ � known as Phase V. � fi . " ' Applicant: Joe Staufer _;_ �_,_ „_. Applicant's Representative: Jay Peterson - � -1- � � � � ' . , j 4 t - I t. ' � ..� . , -, � *�± Planner: Tom Braun �` � } -�� . -'__._l ,--, t�-E . . � -� a--� � Tom Braun states at the beginning review that there are ,-+ � - � `-` ` � three principal problems to be resolved: t- � ; . _. � � �� ' <.�. 1 . � _ � _ , 1 �. !_.__ r� -�-r-��--- 1. "ownership of condo units which could be �-- -� �r_- � -' mitigated quite easily° __ _ , � _�� , , � � ' ---I- �-; 2 . parking . , .1�,. !�._��'.� �...... i . �._ � �._.. z ..- 1_ .� ..}. y . . .. I � � �_.�..._�� .__. � _�, .-._.... i -t-+_ i..._..�... �.�. G E..... _ . �... .. . . .� 3. ski museum � � , , ._� , ,_, . r � � � . _:_ .�. �_� . _ . . _ _ �-_._ � _ � �� v; Tom states in regards to the first item: �i�. � ' }__ . ° , � � ��--;--�-i�� "The amendment that has been proposed first deals �� with density. The existing ordinance requires a �� _�.T; . minimum of 175 accommodation units, to assure that t -- � �- - � ; -�-- , , � accommodation units be developed with the property = -� -• ° ;;�� " j��' and not dwelling units, because the A.U.s are con- `�` � � �__ ._.. �_____� �_.._�,� sidered more valuable to the town to accommodate --- -.- . �- - T- ' --F-- �--i-7 overnight guests . ;---� --�- ' - , tt � �__ �_ �.� � t � � � e The amendment to the ordinance requests dwelling f---- �-.- units for this portion of the property. Granted � -�� they are small units with lock-offs . There are ; _' ; _ ; . fourteen ( 14) units that could be operated as ' + _ , twenty-eight (28) freestanding, 14 of these with t ' � . � �"� . � ` kitchens . ' } ' __Y_. . � �- f � �--- �. , �� -�- 1-� fi ; The issue is not whether the units are dwellinq -- `` + �` �-` ' units or accommodation units but ownership patterns � � � � �- �T E �_._ i � j , and the application has not indicated that the � -j-- +— units would be restricted, similar to the condo- ��t� l minium conversion ordinance. The building could be : � � developed and condominiumized with no restrictions Pg. 1 . : . � '_ , � : ierce, fritzlen, architects, inc. d.b.a. fritzlen, ierce,briner { � 08299046 .doc p p' - -� rt- _ � � formerly intratect des�gn group , : : � !... . � . , �- � _ , . ._ ._{ .... . . , � � ; �� ° �- j_� ._ ` � � �—, �- . t_. � � ,_ . . � ; . .. j: .. . ___ „ � . , . ` ._ . _ . . .._ _ �-. . .....<... -.—• .... �.....�.._.. :;... . _.}--. !_�._t i--1....... ... . . � r ; i I � � � . . �..._. _ ��,. . . '.__......-. __., � ._.; .... ...�-- . .. . `�y, � ._-,- �. ! .. � � - � -� f�ilen, pierce, briner - , � � *-' architecture, planning, interiors � _____ _ . _ .__ _. __ _ . , _ .� -+-�- i p.o. box 57 � �_�_ .� ;_. . ..__ ._:_ : __. ._�_ , ._:_ , __ _._� . !__ � �._! __, _ __ ' 1000 lionsridge loop suite 1/d �_. �-- , ,-�.;._,_. __._ _�_._ � � � T � _ _ � � � 4 � "� vail, colorado 81658 , � � � �� _,_�_�� r ._�_. _ . .�, �. _ _ .__ . _�: . �_ . w , . . � _� _.; __ , ;__ �� . ._..__ ._T . ._:_ ,__,_� �._ c ._ : _ F � . i-, 303-476-6342 fax 303-476-4901 , __ :__� ,- - T._. . ._ _ _ . ,._ . � _-- __ ;__. . � . .� : . . . . _, ,_ , 7_ . , .� ; , , _ : �.. � �: t ! i i ; = i � '} —�___... ..-� ... . .. � . . . . . . . .r...., _ �, �. �._ �-.,.�.T . --_� - . .. . .� .._...r .... __ . . .. : . ' � -� � of the use of units whatsoever. This is a departure -� from the intent of the original ordinance (but) is- � v` , --.--�- __ _ _ . +--� _ r sues can be mitigated and units be required to be -- - # '- -- , �- in a rental pool, (however) it is not stated in the *-- ��-` � application. The application is essentially the Y �_�_._ .�. ! . � � __.. _.__. same plan that was approved in 1985. " = ,--� = �_ :...._: { � - W-t �" *�"� ` ' Jay Peterson responded on behalf of the applicant: C � � , , .__r_:...� .__ , p � _. �..y. .y_ . �-'- -� --; " (The) proposal, as Tom says keeps the integrity of -?-- • � � � Special Development District #6 . . . . (in regards to) __� !� ; �_+. ' ._..� �-_- �-._, . the restriction concern, we will restrict units to �-- --.- -+ —�---�---f -�-�-- satisfy Tom's concern about free transfer of market �� .� < �`�' �i�`"" units . . .we do have the kitchenettes but they are � __,_ ��'. '__._ ,_ .,_;__;_._-�.._l 400 square foot rooms much like the Embassy Suites, ---Y " ��-f--�----1 --� -r Sheridan, Mariott and Westin has kitchenettes. When I -' �` � � �' � � �t the project is done we will have twelve ( 12) kitch- � ; i .. -.;�.�� .�_,._..� ens out of some 90 rooms . Andy (Norris) said it i-�- -� �~ �--�j--� ��--�- (the kitchenettes) was a good marketing tool. They �� ; �:_{__� � � ; can be booked as a suite; but we will restrict them � ..� E ---.�-. _, so the town is also (satisfied) . " ----� - , �� a � ��r� � Sid Shultz, Planning Commissioner, commented after the E Y�_.j . -:-_I- applicant's presentation: �- , __. � � -----r-_ � _,____ , � �._ � " (my) only concern is that units be somehow con- �, _ , -�--}-- I -�---; ,---�----t. ,--�--. -,-�--�-. trolled so when they are not in use by the owner ---�--- } a -+- T-f-�- j-�--` they be part of the rental pool of the hotel. ° � � �; ' .� _____� _._. _� � ._ �_}__._ , �_ a--l----}-� . This is all we have. Look forward to our meeting Friday � ��+- � -;--� ---�-�--�-- at 9:0 0 am. `-' ' - I�-:-�- - � _ , �� }4�.-L+-i-�--}- Sincerely, ! . _,__ �._.. . � �}'�� ' � � ; _4___, _� x � .._.�_ � .� _,_._ �-� � .. } — �.—•- .. �- s _._...t � � �.. �i i.- : � . �..` f �._l .�,.....� � y � '� � _. . 3 . �-..-;-. _(�_�� % �� ,_. . ..,., � . � i- � - } - � . �-- fi �-±�- ;---i . i i /� ' 7 � � t --� • L (� �_ . �- � .-� .._ } fi._} . + �� _.f� . l �_;_} _._ f 1--.- � � �._.: �� . � e ( �� _, , � � _�_-� y_Y � r _ ' . �--- ;-�-; �-� Lynn Fritzlen �.�,� � 1 .. ,. . , t � ._,. �.._, �-�- � ___. i �� .._e � , � ,_ .� � � �- �- ' Fritzlen, Pierce, Briner j_ { E_� �_.�� , � . � � �. , �_ . �� .r__ , � � �--- �-?-� �. . �� - :.-� ! � �� _-� f -� � �-� � -: � i . : � . .f_ : 1 _ � � , ; E , � -�-� -.—+- � ..._� _ . _� � _.... j .. �-_ _ . ..�_ . . �_ � _ . _ � :._, . ; �-� !� � � � �... � � � � � : , fi � _� �. _ 1 _,_ E._ ; _�_. ,—� . —.._._' � �..} .� ; ._. ,_� . _ . , . ; _ . .__� , �,_. . � . , � ! �_�— E a � �} � t � � t .�_�__.__j �. � .._� .�,_ �r ��. ..—; : � ` � � . � s�:_� � ��. � _ , � , � f , t I - - t� � �: � � � �_ j -F-,- �. � �_ -� t _-_ _.� � � �---�--�- ; -�- � �, , . : � .__._ �_ ;_. � �_.__. . � ; , � � --� __� . � �__ �:. � � �_ � � _ E � � � � f � � �� ._. .� . : � __.� � _ ; ; �j `--C � �-! ��.� � , � } . ..� I �. _. � . �, ; �_C ��1 .._�____. .� � : � � �� , , � � �_� � , -- � �.. _;� �_._ � } �� , .� �__ . � s_._ �_ �. � , i �� . ��. , � � . , , �--�- - � � � �. � . 3 � . _ � _ . �� _� � � . . � . . : _ _. 3 F r a I l , --, t � i +.. } t— }--�... � � � _ �_ � � . --Y -�-.; +-< ° .. -+- . :_ � . f } 7- f -i. . � .._1 . , ;_� . t � � � , � ` ' ?� �� _ r� . _� � _€ '� t . . . . ... . _._.a. . .__ __. .� __ .�.. :.. j _f . i i �----• {_�.... � � 1 � � } �. ....__}..,_ .._. 1_.� . '._. .��. -1 �---�-f �-.-i . �._.l._ �.._ �. _ <- .. .. � � � � ' L- � .-�.. , :— _ . � • _ . . _.-� _ . � . � . ; . , Pg. 2 . � .� �_ ._ . . , 0 8 2 9 9 0 4 6 .C�OC _1 � pierce, fritzlen, architects,inc. d.b.a. fritzlen, pierce,briner _ ; � ' ; _ ,__ formerly intratect design group t . i . '�� . _. � � _� _� � � ;— � ,_ � , i � ? ': � � _ ...�_,_,_ �..,__ t_ :,,... . �. �_ , , ; . , ___ ._ ,_�_. ._. :.__ . � . � • . !��}-��3`��}�� f�ilen, pierce, briner ---{ . t �.--.- . :- . architecture, planning, interiors '� ;��,. .�.. . P.o. box 57 �_. .__ ._ . _ . ._. : __ '� �.. . :_ � ._�, a--' 1000 lionsrid e loo suite 1/d ,.__ ; _ . �-_ : _._. _ , : � g P _ � :___ .�, .___ ._� .�_ T__. _. . . .� , � vail, colorado 81658 � 303-476-6342 fax 303-476-4901 �._ July 31, 1991 _ : t �_r_ � . �. � �-, _�. � _�_. , _�_j ._ � .: ..._ . ..---.- . :-.. . _ _: . :_-+-.. � { : ` Mike Mollica : - � .__ ' ___ . _l ._ . . . ,_.�. ;_._ ,_. ..� .—�-_ 4.W_ � ;......: _� : � Community Development . ;_ . �_r: � � ; � �_ �_ . - Town of Vail, Vail, CO ; � ----� � � {_._.__. ._ � - .__ Y , �_., �. ._ , . .._. . . _,. . � ,.. .., , ' 3 < < , . t-_ __� .._. t i - + �- -..._� _ . , ,._ _ _�-, � � , . �. . . __ � . � �-- - t � "_?" '.. -�- �......i �,� ....._ -� __ r_.._._i t -t_-+' ' . ' � � ( -�.-r-y-. -•-. '.. , ! � i, ( _ .. -.�-+ -�...._...._J. ._._.. ..._.� ,_-.i ._.._..., .._.�_....._._... >_.�. I � � , . � . - -._-� . .� , � -}-�-; � � ' Dear Mike: ._ � _ _. , _._ +__.._ -t.� � >_�_ < , ; � .--�- �-a- .--. �_ . � -_ - , -' Thank you for your positive approach and thoughtful - �_ ^r �--v evaluation in the review procsss of the Vail Village Inn � " ` � � remodel and addition. I have enjoyed working with you ;_-� . . �. �� . -..._}_._;_r �. and appreciated your guidance and hard work involved � - -�- � -� �---r-' with the resolution of numerous issues present in such a '" � � � Y �` ��' proposal, not the least of which is the parking study. � i-'- -,-_ . � _{ _r__. .;_._�_, -�- �--- I would very much like to complete the parking study �J} � � � -,-- 1 _� __ _ � € , prior to Design Review Board review procedures . The one _:� . { ,_ ,--�--- ,---. � .-#- -�-._ outstanding issue that limits my ability to finish the f_ --; -;-±--;-T-� -� study is the status of the residential units in Phase V. }�� r a ��`�'"; In the first Planning and Environmental Commission hear- :--�,- . .� . � -�-�-�---. . ing (June 10, 1991) you indicated a willingness to re- �--^ � °- --t-�- --+- , -�-° view the tapes of the approvals for Phase V to determine ' � � I �--� �._ . __ 1 the status of those units . Of course the question is ; _---�- t- _�—i�: whether the units are considered residential dwellings �-�- t -- r �,�--�-�----; or whether they are considered accomodation units . As '�"f � ' �� the status of these units are critical to making the fi- �-, .---;- -�--�-• -t--'- -�- nal parking study accurately reflect number of spaces �--- � �- -�--; -�--� ,-5-- required, I would ask that you provide me with your de- � ' � ' � ' �Y�_� _ termination as soon as possible. I think that the park- , -�---- � . - �-f-- ing study will be of great benefit to my Client as well ` ` -�-• ` ---!-� � as the Town. It has taken many hours of work on both 1 �' '�; � our parts, I would like to bring it to proper closure � ~ ' -�--- -�-± before the opportunity may pass . Please let me know if --�- �- ' � ---- ' ou need an thin that I ma be able to � ` ' Y Y J Y provide. . # � I� �, Again, thank you for your time and attention to this � proposal, and I look forward to your guidance in the De- }` , � ; ` sign Rev' w roces�s. u . , _M . . . ' . � -+- .-�- 1 1 ,� � . �.. � �. �/ i } . .-_.` �/' i -..� . ,� t. � t *.._,_(_ * . t f � t.._.j i- � {...._� � y -� . -`--E- � ..'� ._�. i....t..� . � � fi--.� �- �� "� }�F _.._ ' ..._ _ .� �.._ � . . � �..� ---,- + (�'_ � �� '�� t ' Pierce �hitect � �-�` � t _._� � �_._ � �_� _ € _ 1 _ 1 . �.� L�i_ , �;.. l ___�_ __ � � . �_ , . .� � � cc f ile `� -�� --j- �-_ _ -, � � , � � -� � . : :. , : � . � �-�-� � , � �. �_ � �_: ' �`� f , �� . � � . � � ��.;� �, �. � r �� . , , . _ � � . � _ : _ I , -� � � . � � �� . � , . � ; � e � . � . � � �� . � , + ._ � , ,__�_ � ._ , .__� . � �- . . ._ , � __�_ � ' � . . � . �.�a , . ___ , j _ r � � � ; 1 �--; �—. t�—` �� , �.—. .. �.! � � __ � � � . . � . , � j .�-} �- Page 3 � � �_ , .� r_' . � . 9 0 3 4 PKG.DOC pierce, fritzlen,architects,inc. d.b.a. fritzlen, pierce, briner _{ � y I : _. . .-.- , -�- . a formerly intratect design group ; � i... t i_ � € a � F_. , - . . : � _ r i : , �_. ,__ . , . _ ;: ..n _ r. , . _ F--;--�.. , • � � - MINUTES VAIL TOWN COUNCIL MEETING MAY 5, 1987 7:30 P.M. i{� . ��_. A regular meeting of the Uail Town Council was held on Tuesday, May 5, 1987, at 7:30 p.m. in the Council Chambers of the Vail Municipal Building. MEMBERS PRESENT: Paul Johnston, Mayor Kent Rose, Mayor Pro Tem Eric Affeldt Gail Wahrlich-Lowenthal Gordon Pierce John Slevin Hermann Staufer TOWN OFFICIALS PRESENT: Ron Phillips, Town Manager Pam Brandmeyer, Town Clerk The first order of business was a consent agenda for the following items: A. Approval of April 7 and 21, 1987 meetings minutes � B. Ordinance No. 11, Series of 1987, second reading, establishing a Town of Vail health insurance trust fund. C. Resolution No. 19, Series of 1987, authorizing the filing of applications with the Dept. of Transportation for financial assistance. Mayor Johnston listed the items in the consent agenda, including reading of the full title of the ordinance. There was no discussion by Council or the public. Hermann Staufer made a motion to approve the items, which was seconded by Kent Rose. A vote was taken and the motion passed unanimously 7-0. The second item was Ordinance No. 13, Series of 1987, first reading, authorizing the issuance of Town of Vail , West Vail Local Improvement District No. 1, special assessment bonds. The full title was read by Mayor Johnston. Charlie Wick gave brief background information on the issue. Mayor Johnston stated that there had been a discussion that afternoon at the Work Session with a representative from Kirchner- Moore regarding the state of the market. There was no discussion by the public or Council . A motion to approve the ordinance on first reading was made by Gordon Pierce and seconded by Kent Rose. A vote was taken and the motion passed unanimously 7-0. Gordon Pierce had to leave the meeting at this time. � The third item for discussion was Ordinance No. 14, Series of 1987, first reading, amending SDD No. 6 (Vail Village Inn) and requesting approval to phase the construction of the remaining phases of the project. Mayor Johnston read the full title. Tom Braun explained the history of SDD No. 6, what was requested of the Council that evening, and reasons why the staff recommended denial . Jay Peterson, representing the applicant, Vail Village Inn, addressed the issues in question and gave reasons why the ordinance should be approved. After some discussion by Council , Ron Phillips made comments on some of Jay's remarks, to which Jay responded. Jim Viele, Rod Slifer and Pepi Gramshammer stated they were in favor of the project and explained why. After more discussion by Council , Gail Wahrlich-Lowenthal made a motion to approve the ordinance with the following conditions: 1. Include language to the effect the Town be able to subdivide the 4,000 square feet portion of this phase given to the Town. 2. Joe Staufer reimburse the Town of Vail for improvements/move of the Ski Museum, up to $75,000 with the completion of Phase V. 3. Change required number of units from 175 to 148 after this phase. �" 4. In the event there is any future renovation or building, Joe Staufer would have to provide on-site parking compatible with the Town of Vail code requirements. j N /r ^ � � 5. The use restrictions of any condominium units would be as per the restrictions in effect at the time. Eric Affeldt seconded the motion. A vote was taken and the motion passed unanimously 6-0. . Next on the agenda was an appeal of the Planning and Environmental Commission's decision to approve a side setback variance for the Tennenbaum residence. Kent Rose had questions concerning the appeal , which Rick Pylman answered. Rick gave background information on �he issue, discussed the criteria used to review the variance request and why the staff recommended denial . There was some discussion by Council , and Kurt Segerberg answered questions. After more discussion, Kent Rose made a motion to uphold the PEC decision to approve the variance request, and John Slevin seconded. A vote was taken and the motion passed unanimously 6-0. The fifth item was the Vail Transportation and Parking Task Force interim report. Ron Phillips stated the report had been discussed in detail at the afternoon Work Session and briefly explained what the report covered. Kent Rose then made a motion to support the recommendations of the Task Force as stated in the April 28, 1987 memorandum, which Hermann Staufer seconded. A vote was taken and the motion passed unanimously 6-0. Under Citizen Participation, Rod Slifer asked that the construction fences in the Village be moved back as soon as possible. Ron Phillips stated he had only one item for the Town Manager's report. He noted • there was an article in the magazine Bus Ride which was very positive about the Town transportation system. There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 9:15 p.m. Respectfu]- submitted, '� .� �, � i Pa[rY" R. o ns n, Mayor , i ATTEST: l � �l�c.� Pamela A. Brandmeyer, own Clerk Minutes taken by Brenda Chesman � . - - ' ' ' 'yy . . { � • �/� � J � � ;./� �� y TOWN OF VAIL 75 South Frontage Road OJ,j`'ice of the Town Manager Vail, Colorado 81657 303-479-2105 / FAX 303-479-2157 F�`�— F` �� January 18, 1994 ��1J�. �� Mr. Josef Staufer � i Vail Village Inn ' '�^�C' 100 E. Meadow Drive Vail, CO 81657 Dear Mr. Staufer: This letter is in reference to snow removal maintenance on the west sidewal� adjacent to your property at the Vail Village Inn. It has come to my attention there is an on-gcir.g d�agreement between Leo Palmer, owner and developer of the Vail Gateway Building, and you as to who is responsible for maintaining this sidewalk during the winter. According to To�tin ordinance, this sidewalk is adjacent to your property; therefore, it is the responsibility of the v�.il Vi:lag� Inn to maintain. I understand Leo Palmer financed the construction of the sidewalk. However, �hat fact has no bearing on the interpretation of the ordinance. The Town of Vail has received numerous complaints regarding the lack of upkeep on this sidewalk. This increases your liability on slip-and-fall accidents and forces pedestrians to walk on Vail Road. This road experiences heavy vehicular traffic and congestion. I am e�remely concerned about this situation since it certainly affects the safety of our residents and guests traveling in this area. The Town of Vail Public Works Department has taken the time and effort to inform an�educate all businesses and property owners within Vail of their obligations regarding snow re:noval. I am requesting this situation be resolved immediately by having your staff maintain�he west sidewalk adjacent to your western property line. In failing to comply with the ordinanc�, yau will be in violation and will leave the Town no choice but to take corrective action. I would be happy to meet with you and discuss this matter with you in more detail if you desire. Please do not hesitate to call me directly at 479-2105 if you have questions or need additional information. Sincerely, /�;Yl�—' Bob McLaurin, Town Manager xc: Tom Moorhead, Town Attorney Larry Grafel, Director Public Works/'I�ansportation Jim Hoza, Street Superintendent Leo Palmer, Vail Gateway Building � � i , Project Application r " Date Project Name: t�/`- y � �v� Project Description: � � � Contact Person and Phone Owner, Address and Phone: Architect, Address and Phone: � . �.. 2�Y �Y� / � V � Legal Description: Lot Ib'�R� � , i ing , Zone r Comments: Design Review Board Date Motion by: Seconded by: �_" PROVAL DISAPPROVAL Summary: ` Y � � iV Town Planner taff Approval Date: � �eoPoS� � : ��N� � � � � �� - . _ : � ,� _ - - - , �r�� ' - � _ �, +� � � �c ��j� y�;�'l " �3``�'� ' + �, - - � �}!I� � �'�� — - -, ' � G � � � ..1 ��f'��I�� ••� �� ,�.I >� ${��' . _ �"s� � �� .�� r _ � � f I p!c � �E[ -� . i �►t�-� t�.H � f! i t � �� p�� "� %!':►'!�� '+1i4'�' �. ' �.�� ., , � ! � �' �t r !�' _ w' `��`'�i►�,��" ��;• ►` , ��:�-, �e�� `,�,, �rr.ea,.��.. � ��y � �' `t � � .� � �. �,� . . � r. � -. �.'� �a �_ , ' „i�t°+ � �i, + 5. �".,;��,�1�,: 3 Irr:e,��g r1 � `� �� '� p• : .`�I; {,�\ ��'� i� �.ifti .��`; . � � � � P-�-' 't' '� �� t � . ii-� . .�. .r`��" i �T� , �'��: . � ��. � ,'� �! 4i " ' � -�j��J=�Q�Yi �e-.; r. ♦�t`' rR'^ � ; ' � �� _.�, i...� �� . j i t, i w � { ,.r;"�. '�� ;� ��j �� } ±� � � ::��Y.,. •,t �`"�� !�,.,> '� ,' .� . �;: .. � � . . � �� a l {x.�i 1 t `�' i �'�+' - �,r„ y� ..�,� ':! . ��. C�l=' � '� �x „ � _ ♦t. �, f�.� - r � ��';� f', '_� � � � - = � „ F1 E C flPY ,� TOWN OF VAIL � 75 South Frontage Road Vai� Colorado 81657 303-479-2I00 FAX 303-479-2157 October 2, 1991 Mr. Biii Pierce Fritrien. Pierce, Briner � P.O. Box 57 Vail, CO 81658 Re: Vaii Viilage Inn GRFA Analysis Dear BiIL- Thank you for your letter, dated September 18, 1991, regarding the Town's calculations and analysis of GRFA for the Vail Village Inn project. We acknowledge the fact that you are not in agreement with the Town staff's conclusions regarding the overall GRFA for the WI. As you and I have discussed on numerous occasions, this GRFA analysis has certainly been extremely complex, given the past records with which we had to work with. Bill, I would like you to know that the Town staff is keeping an open mind with regard to this GRFA analysis. If you have any additional information regarding GRFA for the WI, which we have not previously discussed, we ask that you please present the information to the staff. I i will be happy to meet with you to discuss this issue and to discuss the staff's analysis of the GRFA for the Vail Village Inn. I know you do not consider this matter resolved, so please contact me so we may further discuss this at your convenience and hopefully come to a mutual agreement. Sincerely, ��',� �'I�. Mike Mollica Assistant Director of Planning /ab cc: Josef Staufer Kristan Pritz ; I --�_" .........- . ..-.-,-._ �.�.........r..-.--r ...�. "_ . . . . ......,�.. ..�__� r....��..... .. . . , . - ._...... ...�-.,._. . .- ...._�-.. . ' �:. . , . i....i.. . . . .3 .�__ '�, _ ' ` . . -.-- _r ''.r ' �{`t�a`7 �.., ..y ... � � a . ' �� '� �� - �-�-� f�len, pierce, briner � .. Sept. 18, 19 91 � � ' i . architecture, planning, interiors � Mike Mollica - ��'� �� p.o. box 57 � Town o f vai 1 1000 lionsridge loop suite 1/d Of f ice of Community Development vail, colorado 81658 75 South Frontage Rd. 303-476-6342 fax 303-476-4901 Vail CO 81657 Re: Letter of Sept. 6, 1991 regarding the V.V. I . GRFA - analysis Dear Mike, , , , . , �.., ;._-} . �_. , , �- ._._.�. ___ . I am in receipt of your letter above referenced. ' ` t :. __ . ! �_ �. ; I remain convinced that your conclusions are in error. - ' � ,...._ . I remain convinced that the Town's calculation of :--< �-, ;_; residential GRFA in Phases I, II, and III left no residential GRFA for the developm�ent of �hasz V. Fur- t " thermore, the use restriction placed on all residential .- . ! - units in Phase V is a strong indication that the intent �- ' � of the development was exclusively accommodation units . �~' + ` � +�_ _ � ;�� The use restrictions were not imposed on any other � *� - ! a - residential use GRFA in this SDD. � � � � �t � �__._ ._ �_ . � . � , , ��_�._. Based on your conclus ions, the Town would have i.mprop- --�- . -i-- � � -r-�-�-.-�-!-- erly issued a building permit for Phase V in that ' �t ` ' --t �� residential use GRFA would have exceeded the allowable Y � :__�.__. l.w: GRFA for that purpose. I also believe that the approval �.-� ,� � � ' --1--.- of Phase V reduced the required number of accommodation t � � ' -'�;� units in the overall SDD #6, thereby confirming my opin- � T � � ' �_� � ion that GRFA was f o r a c c o m m o d a t i o n u s e. ,;.-.-� _f .- �� _.:�.� �-.- r � a �� T± At this poi� I do not consider this matter resolved. � f � , ,--t---- ..� .._. � � ir�� 1 � � E �..� ,� ; " Y � ' _ . �. �.--�-' %' ; ;... _ y � � � � _......��. � ;�...� i _ .. � a �--��-}--� ; ; �� __ � ;. � . }_ � �: l , (_ � � � . � � � � ��__---1 I �--+ -!- � � t--� -±-- t-_-�_ � �_....�, � . . -� -� �1 iam F. Pierce . � { , --t -r-� —; --+- -+--' -�-- -+-• _ � _. : � � � � � `-�--• Fritzlen, Pierce � Briner Architects f^ ` - � ;} � ._ 'I""" _� :�. _ y ��._._; �� j i . � . .}._�.t '--? t —•_ +— —— � _ �.. . -�-- ,--,-±-�- c c: Joe Stau f er +--- + j�-� ;---,- � � ,-f �� ~--�- . f , -i--- ,-- s ,- � +- � � _} � , � -�` t-- _. __-• �-- - k -- • - I -� . ,.. � l 1 �_�- ��..� r ;� _ �_.7_� _T r .� ___ _ _, . �._ t �. ._.,� � �_�_� � ,_� _ �-_;._� . � � a l � � � � . �_�-__. .-� t_ � -�- � _-(... -r. _-,- -° � +-_._ , . : � �� , ,_� 3 1--� r- , -1- .... �_. ' � � . } , —�--, i_:.. � .._;—, _. � ..::� ,� . _ :.. �. �_ . .. ., _� — ' �— � , } --_,� � i _� a � � � , � � � ; � � — � - � -- �--t-i---�- . -�--'- �_-!-_ j {_._j s-_,- . .� ._ ---�- -� - � � } -i- ._{ ` � _�_� .f � �� }.__ . a. _i_ :. _ _ : , ! `:_ �. > -_-1 ...y_. ....,,.{_ _.:.-..�._t_...i__..L__ k »._ 3 .--�-..... 1 j _ T �-�- • Z ' � •_-t-.... �— i r_,.{.... «. 1 . . � �--- j `..—�.. � ---�—.—.— k � � _—�— .— � f_ a � 1 ._ F.__� t —'— _ f � .�._� � r k ._� :.—.� .� � # ._1 .� . —.— � E 'r � � �-- �_ � . �° � —+ � `� " ` � +�� > � _ , _� � � _�.._ � � � ., 7_ � } ! �_ < < . � � � , � t _.� �� .._ � � _ � ,_. � . , 3 � a_ � � } � . t € _ • —� _ � : � ~ €. _ . � -- � .�_l.. �.�...e a-_ -,-.-. �.. j .:_ , _ �... -� --.- 7 i- ,-_.i- � _-- --+ � . } ._ � -�-- +--j �-i- ! '_.._t �._<. ..;.._�. .-.� }__. �_._-� ! t- �_ i+-_. ....� _ E �-� ._ �_ � {_ ._} �- � ' , , , ` J , � -�--. _ ' �_ ;._.�_ �. �.�1..._ ,_. .�_ . �._. . , . 1 .,_� .�_ ��. _ '- -�-- �-�- �. .. � ..-1---' �-.:._ a __ .�_,_.� , � � .�_k �. . � ! , �.-�.._ � � � ! - �- . . ` L � , �:.E____� �� l_�.. � _.._ . _ � j� � __ � � ...._ . � ...�� + � � _.� �__.. � � �_..� . _�_ �r.., _ . � . ; _ ��..� .�� , _ �l E.� � � .. -� �_LL _� �-- � � '� � +. fi` � f_. , _ . ,_ � �__. . , � - -- �.. . . � _.�-� �.� �__� . }__ . � ._ . .. L__ . . � � � ; , � , �-� � . z � , . . , _ , i : f 1... � �__ �_�. � .�..! ..._... i . t i ± . � . - f 1 , • � , ��.. . _ ._.... . .. __ . ._ '-� ..__+ . . � -� -..._S � . , . . . a ��..^. � � ' i :: :� _""_ , � i_'� . t... y e +-� _��_f :�,�, � ..- q �... .- . �-� e _: . � � ! • �---�. .. .�—.� }�.r � _ � . _ .. . . ' . �. � ._�. . . _.. -. :.- .—. : . � _ ' t . . �'�_ . ..� »---t.. . -..._� . : _ , , . . . ,_ . _. . , ... . ._. _ . � . _ _ _ �..._ . P a e 1 __ : _ �._ , __. . . . . , � . _ 9 0 3 4 918 .C�OC pierce, fritzlen,architects,inc. d.b.a. fritzlen, pierce,briner � � � �_ . _ .._ . � __ formerly intratect design group ,_..� . � ,_.. . . _ _. ;_ � ; �� ,. . .; . . .._ . . �__._r .. , : � , , �i -L , < t , . . . �. . q. .— � i .. ... .. . , ... . . .. 7 _. � i ._ . .... � � r � , . , ... ,- ,_. , .� �. . . .-._ . - ..�a . � e...__.._ . �l . . ....-e- t _ . ... ... �� rl i � FILE COPY • �� _ '�� tow� ofi uaii 75 south trontage road office of community development vail,colorado 81657 (303)479-2138 (303)479-2139 April 3 , 1991 . i�`"� a��J�� Ms. Lynn Fritzlen Fritzlen, Pierce, Briner � . � �� P.O. Box 57 / �� n,;� Vail, CO 81658 ,// '`�� e� Re: Vail Village Inn GRFA Analysis Dear Lynn: In response to your letter dated March 25, 1991, and as a follow up to our meeting on March 29, 1991, I have now completed an entire GRFA analysis for the Vail Village Inn project and have determined the following: 1. The total allowable GRFA for the entire Vail Village Inn project is 124 , 527 sq. ft. 2. The Phase V GRFA equals 9,868 sq. ft. 3 . Phase V GRFA, which is specifically allocated to accommodation units and/or lockoffs, equals 3 ,951 sq. ft. 4. The allowable GRFA remaining (to be constructed) for the WI equals 45,395 sq. ft. This figure is based on the subtraction of all the existing GRFA at the Vail Village Inn (Phases I, II, III, IV and V) from the total allowable GRFA. 5. Assuming that the existing Phase IV would be demolished when , Phase IV is redeveloped, 16, 585 sq. ft. of GRFA can be added to the total remaining GRFA of 45, 396 sq. ft. , for a "potential available GRFA" figure of 61, 980 sq. ft. / • � '� � ' Ms. Lynn Fritzlen April 3, 1991 Page 2 6. The last Town of Vail approved ordinance for the WI, Ordinance 24, Series of 1989, maintained that "a minimum of 67, 367 sq. ft. of GRFA shall be devoted to accommodation units in Phases IV and V. " Given that the existing accommodation unit GRFA for Phase V is 3,951 sq. ft. , this leaves a requirement for the construction of 63,416 sq. ft. of GRFA specifically dedicated to accommodation units in Phases IV and V. I realize that all of this may sound a little confusing to you, however the end result is that there is not enough available GRFA to fulfill the Town's requirement to construct the minimum of 67,367 sq. ft. of accommodation unit GRFA in Phases IV and V. There is a shortaae of 1,436 sq. ft. of GRFA for the proiect. Based on the above calculations, the Town cannot approve the request of your client, Mr. Rojas, to add an additional 78 sq. ft. of GRFA to his dwelling unit, which is located in Phase II. Given the complexity of the GRFA calculations for the Vail Village Inn, I would be more than happy to meet with you to further discuss this issue. Sincerely, ��;�Q /" "/4� Mike Mollica Senior Planner /ab cc: Kristan Pritz Shelly Mello Josef Staufer �._ _ _. . . . _ , � _._, . , . __ � _ �, ��. ! �e ��; � ��_�_ �� . �� fr�len, pierce, briner � March 25, 19�L architecture, planning, interiors Mr. Mike Mollica, Ms. Shelly Mello p•o. box 5? Department of Community Development 1000 lionsridge loop suite 1/d Town of vail vail, colorado 81658 Vail Colorado 81658 303-476-6342 fax 303-476-4901 RE: Vail Village Inn Phase II , � -__ ,.-. Revisions to Unit 331 and 333 _: .__ Dormer Addition _. _:_ . ;:! �_� , __.;__. � Applicant: Red Sands Corporation �� `""�� `��- �-" � `�~ °�`-��r � � ° �' � ._.,_ � ...._ _. � . ,. . . � � , r Appl ic ant Rep. : Ale j andro Ro j as , �, �_. . ._<. . __ , � . �_ � � � �. " �� ,_ . y_�_ . ; . ___, , + " � ' Dear Ms . Mello and Mr. Mollica " `- ' ' � ° ' ' ' ` LL` ` # ` , � ... ._.� < , �--- • = Thank you for your letter of March 25, 1991. We under- " ��" �"" ` stand the departments need to undertake a more complete , r � ,� review of all phases of the WI . �x _ , :�_; � `�� ; `_ The current application is for an additional 78 sq. ft. f_�.. , ___; of GRFA. The applicant has pursued finishing contract , �- � � documents and structural engineering based on the Design -� � ��`" �� ' Review Board consent approval of November , 1990 . We are �"' -�� -.- !�� ready to submit for a building permit as soon as this �_ , . � {-�- :--� matter can be resolved. We had hoped to initiate con- � • y i # �`-" struction April 25, 1991 in order to minimize the impact �-��--.-� on the other residential and commercial condominium own- �-----r �---�- -� ers during the tourist season. - �� , - �__:_. �___..._; � � . , : r- -�-� � : � � =-�-; � Our office has prepared a GRFA analysis of existing - t -_ � � { - -�- � Phase V of the Vail Village Inn. This analysis is based --- � � ;- ' ; � ' "� � on the previously approved definition of Gross Residen- � � tial Floor Area which exempted fireplace and mechanical 3} � ,- � � -� ;-� -� chases . We are providing you with copies of marked up i � blueprints of floors two, three, four and five of the ` " � �A `___: ,- � _�. -� : - �. approved architectural plans prepared by Gordon Pierce � � -�-- � � �-=w--� -- Architect. The first floor and the basement have not � ' �� been included because they are restricted to parking and � ' T commercial use. .-t-_,.._y__.. 3_. . , . . . � ." ! "_�� . '. .. . . � �- `�` Our GRFA summary shown on the second level plan, high- ; �. > � : � lighted in yellow in the right hand corner, indicates that there is a total of 10, 177 sq. ft. of GRFA in Phase V. Approximately 50� of the 10, 177 GRFA would fall un- der th inition of lock off or ac�ommodation unit. This i 578 sq. ft. less than the 0755 s�q. ft. GRFA - that in ' ated in Mike Mollica'�i�i�' research of 2/13/91. • � _-�_�,;�i�,� _ ,�.u'�`�''''P-°1O"^''� , Assuming that our calculations are correct, we are re- questing the unused GRFA of Phase V be credited to the Rojas dormer addition. Thank you for your consideration. We look forward to meeting with you Friday March 29, 1991 at 9:00 am. , ; 1 � � _ =-- e = �� . � ierce, fritzlen, architects, inc. d.b.a. fritzlen, t A � 2 5 9 0 4 6 .DOC P' pierce,briner ,. , � formerly intratect design group � .�. .__.... , .._� , �_ ,_ , _.�_ r . _�. ._._�_ . ;.. �. , � � : � °— � �. , . , .�.. :._ � ;. � _ _ ..� _ _ , _�- , ....:. . . .._ . � ... . r_ .. :.__._ I. ..♦ .._.;. �. . ..... .. t -.._... i :._.__ . � - � T - � - -� �- �- � � fr�zlen, ierce, briner , P a .__-___ � . _ ._._. �� .__ � ' ' architecture, planning, interiors . 'y- . . .,.. . «..�. { -:.x . �d Y. �.- . �. , . . ; e - , ._ � e _ �.� ` . ox 57 � _ _ ._w� . --.. ,__ ...�� -w. ��._�� . .; . -� --E_ p.o b +- -•--- -- f- - � - � - -�- • -� � -{--- 1000 lionsridge loop suite 1/d -�-�-;---.--�-: ,� � :_ . ,_ . _ � _ , , . �� : ,�� _ �_, .._�. _� �__ . �-. , _ . _.._ _ .�� ;___ . . � ,._�m.�. � µ � :_ , vail, colorado 81658 � � � ; , �� `T � � . �, . �-. 303-476-6342 fax 303-476-4901 . ��_, . a._. . . _� �� __ . ��-- � . � ; . � :__ t _-� � �_, , , ._ � e : , .�., _ _. . :.� . _ :_ � . r_._ � � � � , '. . . . . _, . ._ . , ;._. . : , _ ._�_� _ __- ��-- , :_�__ �� , �--_ _._ e .� _, '.__.. .._..-. .....-. . �:.._ ...,_.� ......F � �... i -r-- �-:. � -, ...l. . .. � ....__.�.-� «-__.... -L_:_.._.!_�_ 1 .;..�k -'�-_ �-_.-�' -4 . .:..._..� t i.�.. -�- t -» .�.... . . .. � . . . � : , � _ ; ° . . _ � �- . �. �-. U_-'-__ - r ' -{ � . . .. . . ..., ...... .._"._. --.- .. -.-- «.—e- _._..Y W �.... ��..� :. i.. . --.- . -.-.... Y :_.--Y 9 .� �i } .�.._ . . ... � . RW — Sincerely � ' � r ._ . , , :__� , ,__. . _. .�. � __„ , _w.� _� t . _t.. . . �_. ,...__ G � . :_+�. �_.,. , t . , _ , . fi_: .� _. ___ . �- . . . _;._ . a _._ :_._� . _, .> ._._�_ j m ._.„_- s _ , _t _ ,�. � � � a � � � { � ,...�. ; � , .. _�. . � G _ �_ �' �--- � - � � Lynn Fritzlen Architect :�F-� � LL� � �+- -,- ' �.— - - �� ; � z . _ _ � . � .�. ,�.__ , .� ,. . ..___. .__ , _n- . w___.. � . :._.. * ° '~ '�'� ` Fritzlen Pierce Briner �� , , , _ :�. r �� ..�,� ; �--+- ---fi •--� . �_. 1__ ,..�_ .�.. , � e � ,_� ._. . �. :. � : , , < --__;-_.._} :. �__..� ,...� ��_; � � _;_.w . 1-� � �� ? � , _._.__ .,..� � � , .. . �..r : � . � , : : i .L�._ ,F.,..__.. a .,r_ ,. r.__-1- , t : ._--t-� . ..i.. <-..... ._°--_ i :,,.._t . -t � . . . � ! f ' cc: Joe Staufer - �-_, , � � b }_ f _ _r , .� �_ , --T - , - �. .�-� � - �-� , � '�� ' Vail Village Inn � � _� ' � � � L ' __-� � _ .._ ` � �; . _.. , �,.��s � ,�� +_ � ` Ale�andro Rojas <_-� _�_ F . --3 , � �--. . ,.�� f _.�; � ��._� _ � a r_.. ;w- � � � , '�� Red Sands Corporation �� " : � , '�` ' �` -� ° � � � , ,_ , : �--� . ._____ �-�. _ _ � �_, ,�.. F- -� � � � . _� � - � o , �- �- t . -� r _, � . ' _� , - _� � �_� �_. -�__-��-_r ._�-`?� ___ � a..�,; � — , 3 � . . .. �.. ,�. .... ' - { 1:_ t 1-- .._� _. : � z_ ....._� -L a.. _ r a _ - . � ,. _ . .. � , , • � ( � .�,}_...�._ F�... �..__....�� ..�.:._ �.....,._-L_. ._.�... :.._.{_.._. ..�., -+ , .-��_ ..-f....t -....={..-. _ - f _ ._t _ L�... i ___{ .�i_� _ i�.-�.<.... . . . , ; . .. :�. _,._ ,._ � � ( , -�- ,- ` , -�^-- � � � -�"�` �_ -�....._�._-�"'� .-•--- t ! -�-t _.,._. .,_...o. ._..._. .i._, �....� p_...{._t �#. �... . .-l-...._ r _ _.-r.. .r-�_. � � _ � , � . .....-I---S", ' - . _ 3 1 _ � -.....�..a�. . k d--'-•--�_.-"'--..._r ..�..�_ � ....., 1.....,.._.+ ._._..:_. . ...._�-a-. �,.'..-- _'..-....} ....e_ j �_-•- -._-� - -}, � d-,-.. j., . . � i � � ' � �-.,-.-�.. �_t__�--.._ .� �.T. . -}...�:...,._� ._..�--, t-._-�--.� ---r .�_..._ .-�,.. ..-i-� �._ ;.... .......t,_ ,C_i�� e �� . �_ . . � _ . ' _,.. }---°-- -'+-- �:.....} .� :....�.. _..�....�. ; _ { _,._� .;. ( l-_.•__t t � i d. , .� . .� . ..` .._. (".... r w�..!_.- i.�..._:_ - -�-t = _.._.%_....._-a- ._._},_. -_ E ��-•- .�....{.. ..t .,_...a � , .L_ '� --�-� : -�- ..._-• -.-.- - .. . -�--�. ! i - i . : _ � : � �� .. {. .�. .-.�_: � � _.� ._�. � . .__ 1.- S � 3 ,--t -q- r f � i _� � i � _ � � I � , - � , �. �.. = .__�__.� .�..� »_ F._ ,i...�i. J-. � � r i�.. � � � . _F �-_.. .�_ . ��;... _s_�_t.�.�. .-.,-_:_ ._.�. ....�_-ti-_._,. .r .. � , , . � � � m . t [ � � � , r � 3 I : E , . , � � � � i� 1� � .� . �_ t � 4 . #� �' � i: -*-T.........�,, fi __..... .,._.7_.t_.,..��..�r �__ .i-_.» ..� r -�- ... ...z �- r _-F _ . t ; � j � � � � ..___�__.___t-__' -1-�r-a-- #----- � --� • -�- � _ , � _�—� .�;. ..��_.� ! 1�._ ..----t. � � � ' � — � • � .._._,_ rt. , �_.._ �_..� i � �- � ^}- -� .� 'L } �_ _,__ , � , _.. �__ �� _i 7 , f � .�.--r'...�...,_ _.�._ ._... i..._.�._.f �_..y...,,_� 3---�--:�.-L- .......i,..... 4 ..�._i -F---•- c... .� ,j'--.- �__J. � E 1 ......."}. _ _ _ 1.-.-- . .�.. . . I 1 I . .�� ___:... �.. ^�'.- r--t-" ,�p"- '!^- �---•-- ...r.... i �..-.-I- �...,.I" {--'�""' y- � � ._�'_.- : i i � t ,}. -• - -• . .. . � l ` � ( ' � � -#- .,. t--1- �......�., • 1 -:.-} -..- i -�.--.« +-... ....� a �- d.-•--F � 4 ! .-V _ i �' . . _ ..... � . � � . . . . t i { � .,.�.. ..�.._' .F..y. ..j- ._" r'l -�---t f^-' _ � .� _ , ' °"_� i _ � . �- r----� -_ .... .i. . .-.t -._. -. € } . ± � ._. ,;_ . ',. � � , � -1--.•- . ' � - _ + + 3- t -•--- __.3.. �_. � -_ .r--.. ��.......E } _ f .. ^'�----� € e - --� r- � " ' a-^' * -�-_ _ .. . _ . . �.. . r } i I : . � ., � - . ' .. c , �`�{-'_ .�"- ;-- _.... �..... �.. .r..'�.".. -�-_._ .t"-{ -*-�-� -r '---{-- F �- d . � �.' ' ... . . � t { •t _�--�i_. �..�.. .,(,._.:...._�_ t_�w..s ._ ._.._-, :�...�.. �! ..�.....}.. #..__•_ j __,i._ .z. � . ;—�._j__;_ �_�_.} ; � ,� _ € _ ] � � 3 1 � , . . -}--'.j."'�-�. ..�......d. -..,.._... �-_�.. _.�.. ,f. :-.-r... . -�-....-_ �.. -Y t-�fi� �t--'- - • , _,._.��._ _ ;.�, .____� �' _. -�- _}-__._ �- � -� fi--= 3 : _� � � C , , , , � , #--� —r—_ � _ . . .� ,_.�_� _..� �___.__ _ �_ ,_ �_.. � _ t � � ,.. ;_� ! _ �_�_ _ , r . _ . , _�. 1� � 1 — —� � , _ . � . �. ._� __ e. i �_+ _�_ 1 , , , l-- . � . ._ ` f .� � , �' � � . � r � �._ : � � , `__,_ I �.._F � } �_....�. ,_;. . � e..... . :.__ , - .r. . � � i i '--'r- . f---__ -�.- - � � ! i . , � , r �...fi � . n�. . . : . } -.-} ��. ._:...... .. -1- ;_ -_..�. j--t- t--�- _•-,-i.._.. ..._._ . ..i._.. �---'--...�. -...- t - � �. +-_.} �-�- i-_ ._ r _ . �. .. . , �- �. � i. ! ' ' t ! ' �.-.- r 7 ._... } _`- ` . +-- �� --. t. .-._( ..�._. , _ f �.. .,..._� � :.�..�. . , . . ( - _.._. _ . . , . 1'-- .:� . ---"-.f • •--• � •--�1. . .�..�.' .-� t-.:. _.., �.. 6 ...; _ � .j. f A._ ._ ... . . � _r- » ��. ! : : T , .. , _.�..._< i- y . .}-a � - ._i.�_ .3 �� . ...__:_.._�,. .r -.... . _ � _ �, � -� -..� .-.- � �+ t-�_ t _ : .. . . : .. . -,- ---� _... � r. � T- �_ � ( § $ ' ( ._{ _ . � � ....� ..�, .♦ � j.. �.-'� �-a �.m -�. _i �l' , t- __ ,._{. . . . � *--� d � ..., �. �-- t ` i _ , � } � ._ , �� _ � _ � � �- 4 t... L � . � . �. _. , «_.� � ._ ._. r ,.... �,_ �__C . ; , ° i .` , `�j . . . ., ,�_ i ..t } < ..._._I- + �_,f�. . r i-- 1..:-_7 _ < � _ . :_. _ i . . � ... r � ' i � ; - �._.. .• ,_._ � ..� � �. � ._ � _-,_? .._� •_-a.- !_� t ;_�- - . . �� . ._... j � � � � � ' � } �. � _ _ -� - � .,..._. � , ,.�. r_. { 1�_ j. _.. :_ _ ._ .__, . ,-;.. . , �_i � , - '- ,- ' -�i --�--i . a .. €. � I , . _� � � _ t A f- • t-_.._-�-.._�_.... , -:- �,..,y.......� r_..} -.. -.-. . .-._r °- -�.'-.� , ..._-(- z . t - 1.-_ . . . . '_ 1'' t_ .._._ �_. � � � < + � � _ . > � �� _...-_• -.--.-{_...-. t-._._._ _ _"-_.--. t -..--.�_ .�..... �.....__. _� � _._�. , ... ( �_; �..i_. _..� d._ � 1 _ , ; _ ..... -,. � ;. ._ � ��- -i � �a -,-- •_-t- ._� . 1�. ._._ . � ._.... } ,. t L.� ..�� ,- --t.- _ .. �. . . � _ � .F-. �-•-.. ..... . F _.._ i .,.._�,. t-__ . _". t , ti - . _ . . . . .... .-. .. . .. ...... f � . }-.« { ¢ ....__. } ».. :.._ . ..}, .._.. . . . �- +- ..� < t •-� . .«..... �.. _.., _ f y � �. . � � .�-- �- p_ �- � �- , i . _.. ! . . . �. . # . ' ' ` _ _ . . . . , . . �.. :_..� . �_ . � a_...+ . � . �... .. , t G �� fi-` ; � � . i . :i . : � � `"' j �- : e � � . i . -: � 3 ' .. . < � - _._ . �. .� . �._. _ �_ �� __k ��.._ �__: . . . _ r _-.. _.. �..�_ 1 -t � � , , �� , , , ; • �--� i �_._.i � � ... . . _..,y .. ._. ...._-« . s,._:. .._....__. . ' �--{�..... ..._.a =_._..a- . L_.:. a_� ' � i i .. . . � �� .�� . . .�_� . .. . 2 ..__i . ,_.. � .___ . � . � e . � � _ 0 3 2 5 9 0 4 6 .D�C ; _ : pierce, fritzlen, architects, inc. d.b.a. fritzlen, pierce,briner , � ' � . � formerly intratect design group 7 ; � . � +_ <_ _ , _.. t. _. ;,_. . , ,._ : � + . _ . �_. , : ._ _.. _ ."'••�, � �•,,,�,► ...:.. , �,.j � � - ORDINANCE N0. 14 Series of 1987 AN ORDINANCE AMENDING ORDINANCE N0. 1, SERIES OF 1985 TO PROVIDE FOR THE AMENDMENT OF THE APPROVED DEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR SPECIAL DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT N0. 6; ADOPTING AN AMENDED DEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR PHASE IV OF SPECIAL DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT N0. 6, ELIMINATING CERTAIN REQUIREMENTS RELATING TO THE DISTANCE BETWEEN BUILDINGS FOR PHASE IU OF SPECIAL DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT N0. 6; CHANGING THE HEIGNT REQUIREMENTS FOR PHASE IV OF SPECIAL DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT N0. 6; CHANGING THE ALLOWABLE DENSITY ANO MODIFYING THE BUILDING BULK STANDARDS FOR PHASE IV OF SPECIAL DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT N0. 6; PROVIDING DIFFERENT PARKING AND LOADING REQUIREMENTS FOR PHASE IV AND V OF SPECIAL DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT N0. 6; AND SETTING FORTH DETAILS IN REGARD THERETO. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE TOWN COUNCIL of the Town of Vail as follows: Section 1 , Legislative Intent is hereby repealed and reenacted with amendments to read as follows: Section 1 . Legislative Intent A. In 1976, the Town Council of the Town of Vail passed Ordinance No. 7, Series of 1976, establishing Special Development District No. 6 to insur•e the unified and coordinated development of a critical site as a whole and in a manner suitable for the area in which it was situated. B. Special Development District No.6 provided in Section 14 that the Town Council reserved the right to abrogate or modify Special Deveiopment District No. 6 for good cause through the enactment of an ordinance in conformity with the zoning code of the Town of 1lail . C. In 1985, the Town Council of the Town of Vail passed Ordinance #1, Series of 1985, providing certain amendments to the developmert plan for SDD N0. 6. D. Application has been made to the Town nf Vail to modify and amend certain sections of Special Jevelopment District No. 6 which relate to Phase IV and which make certain chanyes in the development plan for Special Development District No. 6 as they relate to ?hase IU. E. The Planning and Environmental Commission of the Town of Uail has reviewed the changes submitted by the applicant and has recommended that Special Development District No. 6 be so amended. F. The Town Council considers that the amendments provide an even more unified and more aesthetically pleasing development of a critical site within the Town arid that such amendments are of benefit to the health, safety and welfare of the inhabitants of the Town of Vail . � � . r.,,,, z.. . � • . , �r.r' .. . \ ) � \ - Section 2. Section 18.50.020 Purpose is hereby amended to read as follows: A Special Development District is established to assure comprehensive development and use of an area in a manner that would be harmonious with the general character of the Town, provide adequate open space and recreation amenities, and promote the objectives of the Zoning�Ordinance of the Town. Ordinarily, a special development district will be created only when the development is regarded as complementary to the Town by the Town Council , Planning Commission and Design Review Board, and there are significant aspects of the special development which cannot be satisfied under the existing zoning. Section 18.50.040 Development Plan -- Contents is hereby amended to read as follows; The proposed development plan shall include, but is not limited to, the following data as supplemented by exhibits provided by consultants Royston, Hanamoto, Beck and Abey on February 12, 1976 for Phases I, II , III, and as supplemented by the exhibits of the development plan and the environmental impact report as prepared by Gordon R. Pierce, Architect, (plans dated February 19, 1987, revised April 14 and April 22, 1987) , and as given final approval through passage of second reading of this ordinance by the Town Council on May 19, 1987 for Phase IV and Phase V. This approval recognizes that Phase IV may be constructed in two phases with the first phase to be referred to as Phase IV and the final phase to be referred to as Phase V. Section 3. Section 18.50.040 E is hereby amended to read as follows: E. For Phases I , II, and III , a volumetric model as amended by consultants Royston, Hanamoto, Beck and Abey on February 12, 1976 of the site and proposed development documented by photographs at a scale of 1 inch equals 16 feet or larger, portraying the scale and relationship of those phases of the development to the site and illustrating the form and mass of structures in said phases of the development. For Phases IV and V, a volumetric model as amended by Gordon Pierce, Architect, of the site and the proposed development at a scale of 1 inch equals 20 feet, portraying the scale and relationship of the development on Phases IU and U, to the site and illustrating the form of mass of structures in said phase. Section 4. Section 18.50.050 Permitted Uses in Special Development No. 6 is hereby repealed and re-enacted with amendments to read as follows: 18.50.050 Permitted Uses The permitted uses in Phases I, II , III , IV and V of Special Development District 6 shall be in accordance with the approved development plans on file in ,.`__ l � • ' '�r.�►` �' .�.' � � ` - the Town of Vail Community Development Department. Section 5. Section 18.50.060 Conditional Uses in Special Development District No. 6 is hereby repealed and re-enacted with amendments to read as follows: 18.50.060 Conditional Uses Conditional Uses for Phases I, II, III, IV and V of Special Development District No. 6 shall be as found in Section 18.22.030 of the Vail Zoning Code and as below: A. A popcorn outside vending wagon that conforms in appearance with those existing in Commercial Core I and Commercial Core II . Except, no office uses, except those clearly accessory to a principal use will be allowed on the Plaza level of Phases IV and V. Section 6. Section 18.50.110 Distance Between Buildings is hereby amended to read as follows: 18.50.110 Distance Between Buildings For Phases I , II and III the minimum distance between buildings on adjacent sites shall be as indicated in the development plan, but in no case shall be less than 50 feet. For Phase IV AND V, the minimum distance between buildings on adjacent sites shall be as indicated in the development plan as submitted by Gordon Pierce, Architect, (dated February 19, 1987, revised April 14 and April 17, 1987) . Section 7. Section i8.50.120 Height is hereby amended to read as follows: A. For Phases I , II , and III the allowable heigh�s shall be as found on the development plan, specifically the site plan and height plan dated 3/12/76. B. For Phases IV and V, the maximum building height shall be as set forth in the approved development plan by Gordon Pierce, Architect (dated February 19, 1987, revised April 14 ar�d April 17, 1987) . Section 8. Section 18.50.130 Density is hereby amended to read as follows: The Gross Residential Floor Area (GRFA) of all districts in the Special Development District shall not exceed 120,600 square feet. There shall be a minimum of 148 accommodation units and 67,367 square feet of GRFA devoted to accommodation units in Phase IV and V of Special Develoment District 6. Section 9. Section 18.50.130 Building Bulk is hereby amended to read as follows: 18.50.130 Building Bulk Building bulk, maximum wall lengths, maximum dimensions for building elements, requirements for wall offsets and vertical stepping of roof lines for Phases I , II and III shall be indicated on the development plan submitted by consultants ', ••� .. � i � � �„� � Royston, Hanamoto, Beck and Abey on February 12, 1975. For Phases IV and V, building bulk, maximum wall lengths, maximum dimensions for building elements, requirements for wall offsets and vertical stepping of roof lines shall be as indicated as per the approved development plans submitted by Gordon R. Pierce, Architect (dated February 19, 1987, revised April 14 and April 22, 1987) . Section 10. Section 18.50.180 Parking and Loading is hereby repealed and reenacted with amendments as follows: 18.50.180 Parking and Loading Following the completion of Phases IV and V, there shall be not less than 12 surface parking spaces, 324 underground parking spaces, and 37 underground valet parking spaces as are existing and as provided on the development plan submitted by Gordon R. Pierce, Architect (dated February 19, 1987) . The proposed site plan dated February 19, 1987 reflects the interim parking plans between the development of Phases IV and V. Section 11 is hereby repealed and reenacted with amendments to read as follows: Section 11. Conditions of approval for the development plan of Phases IV and V of SDD6 as submitted by Gordon Pierce (dated February 9, 1985, revised April 14 and April 22, 1987) , shall be as follows: 1. That the developers and/or owners of Phases IV and V participate in and do not remonstrate against an improvement district for improvements to the intersection of Uail Road and Meadow Drive if and when one is formed. 2. That the developers and/or owners of Phases IV and V participate in and do not remonstrate against establishing a pedestrian linkage from Phases IU and V to a future commercial expansion at the Sonnenalp Lodge site if and when it is developed. 3. The developer receive approval from the State Highway Department for reconfiguration of the pull-off area from the Frontage Road to the entrance to the hotel prior to the issuance of a building permit for Phase U. 4. The developers and/or owners of Phase IV agree to transfer by general warranty deed to the Town of Vail free and clear of all liens and encumbrances, such condominium unit of approximately 3,986 sq. ft. in size and to be located as indicated on the plans and specifications submitted with the application. There shall be no provisions placed on the condominium unit restricting the Town of Vail 's use of the unit or the subsequent subdivision and/or sale of the unit. -4- . � •. , . • � � �'� .,' � � � � - 5. No grading permit, building permit or demolition permit relating to Phases IV or V of Special Development District No. 6 shall be issued until such time that reasonable evidence is provided the Town of Vail staff that construction financing for the improvements to be constructed as part of Phases IV or V has been obtained. 6. Restrictions on any units in Phases IV or V which would be condominiumized shall be as outlined in Section 17.26.075 of the Vail Municipal Code and any amendments thereto. � 7. Upon the issuance of a building permit for the construction of any phase of SDD#6 subsequent to Phase IU, the developer and/or owner of said phase shall reimburse the Town of Uail for expenses incurred in facilitating the relocation of the ski museum (into Phase IV) of an amount not to exceed $75,000. 8. Any remodel or redevelopment of the remaining portion of SDD6 commonly referred to as Phase V shall include parking as required by Ordinance 1 , Series of 1985. Section 12. If any part, section, subsection, sentence, clause or phrase of this ordinance is for any reason held to be invalid, such decision shall not affect the valildity of the remaining portions of this ordinance; and the Town Council hereby declares it would have passed this ordinance, and each part, section, subsection, sentence, clause or phrase thereof, regardless of the fact that any one or more parts, sections, subsections, sentences, clauses or phrases be declared invalid. Section 13. The repeal or the repeal and reenaction of any provisions of the Vail Municipal Code as provided in this ordinance shall not affect any right which has accrued, any duty imposed, any violation that occurred prior to the effective date hereof, any prosecution commenced, nor any other action or proceeding as commenced under or by virtue of the provision repealed or repealed and reenacted. The repeal of any provision hereby shall not revive any provision or any ordinance previously repealed or superseded unless expressly stated herein. � . , ' .. . �. � � � J �� = �� "�� : . :' INTRODUCED, READ AND PASSED ON FIRST READING THIS 5th day of May, 1987 , and a public hearing shall be held on this ordinance on the 19th _ day of May 1987 at 7:30 P.M. in the Council Chambers of the Vail Municipal Building, Vail , Colorado. Order�d pt.�,b"1 i she ,i n ul l th i s 8th day of May , 1987. i' � . A Paul R. Joh�'ton, Mayor AT ST: �-- � �. Pamela A. Brandmeyer, Town Clerk INTRODUCED, READ AND APPROVED ON SECOND READING AND ORDERED PUBLISHED in full this 19th day of May , 1987. / ', � �� l� . Paul R. J�oh ston, Mayor �� ST: �. Pamela A. Brandmeyer, Town Clerk .�, ,, � , � . A � ' � ORDIPdANCE NO. 24 Series of 19�39 AN ORllINANCE AT�I�NDIIdG SECTIUt1 8 OF ORDINIINCE NO. 14 SERIES OF 1987 TO PROVIDE FOR rl'F�E AM�NDI�IEN`1' C7F D�NSITY OF `I'IIE APPFtOVED DEVELOPMEIJ`l' PL,AN F'OR SPECIAL DEVELOPPIENT DISTRIC'i' NO. 6 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINEU BY TFIE TOWN CUUPJCIL OF THE TOWN OF VAIL, COLOFtADO, AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. Legislative Intent A. In 1976, the Vail Towri Council passed Ordinance No. 7 , Series of 1976, establishing Special Uevelopi�ient District Pdo. 6 to insure the unified and coordinated develpmen!� of a critical site as a whole and in a manner suitable for the area _in which it was situated. B. Spec?al Development Disl.rict I1o. 6 provided in S�CL10I1 14 that the Town Council reserve the right to aurogate or modity Special Development District No. 6 for good cause tYirough tlie enaci�ment of an ordir�ance in conformity with the zoning code of the Towti o£ Vail . C. In 1985, the Vail Town Council passed Ordinai�ce No. l, Series of 1985 providi»y certaiil amei�ametits to tlie clevelopineiit �lar� for Special Development District No. 6. D. In 1987 , the Vail Town Council passed Orc.linance Nu. 14 , Series of 1987 providing certain amendments to the developmF�nt plan for Special Development District No. 6 . E. Application lias been macle to the `i'own of Vail to modify atia amend Section 8 of Ordiiiaiice No. 14 , Series of 1987 which relates to the allowed detisity of the development plan for Special Developmetit District No. 6. F. The Plailning and Environmental Commission of the T'own of Vail has reviewed the changes. G. 'i'he Vail Town Council consiaers that the amenclmetits provicle a more unified and aesthetically pleasing developmei�t of a critical site within the Town and such amendments are of benefit to the healtil, safety, welfare of the inhabitants oF the Town of Va_il . Section 2 . A. 5ection 18. 50. 130 Density is here}�y amended to reacl as follows: ` . " � � � The gross residential floor area (GRFA) af all districts in the Special Development District shall no� exceea 124 , 527 square feet. There shall be a minimuin of 148 accommodation units ancl 67 , 367 square feet of GRFA devoted to accommodation units in Phase IV ancl Pliase V of Special Development District No. G. 3 , 927 square feet of GRFA shall be allocated to unit 30 of tiie Vail Villaye Plaza Condominiums only. II. Sectiot� 11 ot Urclil�ance 14 , Ser.i_es oL 19E37 is herel�y amenaecl by the addition of subsectioi� 9 whicll shall read as follows: 9 . Condominium unit 3U of the Vail Village Plaza Condomiiiiums sliall be subject to the restrictions of Section 17 . 26. 075 of the Town of Vail Subdivision Regulations if utilized for residential purposes. The Town Council liereby finds, determines and declares ttiat tliis orditiance is necessary and proper for the health, saFety aiicl welfare of tlie Town of Vail and the inhabitants thereof. Sectioi� 3 . If any part, section, subsection, sentei�ce, clause or phrase of tliis orclinance is for any reasot� helcl i:o be iiivalid, sucli decisivri shall not affect the validity of tlie remainiilg portioi�s of this o��diilance; and the Town Council hereby declares it would have passed tliis ordinance, aild each part, section, subsectiati, setitence, clause or phrase thereof, regardless of the fact that any one or more parts, sections, subsectiol�s, sentences, clauses or plirases be declared invalid. Section 4 . The repeal or the repeal atid re-enactment of any provisions of the Vail Municipal Cocle as providecl in this ordinailce shall I10� affect any right wliich lias accrued, any duty imposed, aily violation that occurred prior to the effective clate hereof, atiy prosecution commenced, nor ai�y other action or proceeding as commenced under or by virtue of the provision repealed or repealecl and re- enacted. The repeal of any provision hereby shall not revive any provision or any ordinance previously repealed or superseded unless expressly stated herein. � , ' � � � INTRODUCED, READ AND PASSED OP1 FIRST READIP�G THIS 7th day of Novembet° , 19a9 , and a puulic hearing sliall be tield oi� tti.i_s ordinance on the 7th day of November , 1989 at 7 : 30 p.m. in tlie Council Chambers of the Vail Municipal Buildiilg, Vail , Colorac3o. Ordered published in full this 7th day oi November , 1989. / �� Kent R. Rose, Mayor ATTEST: �`-y � . /7 Pamela A. Brandmeyer, Town Clerk INTRODUCED, RE11D �NU APPROVED ON SECONU READING ANU URULREU PUBLISIiP:D passed by title only tllis 21st day of November , 19F3y , -�%�2 ��-J v�' Kent R. Rose, M yo ATTEST: , � ��a�� Pamela A. Brandmeye , Town Clerk . • � •�,�,,, � ��U _ `o Owb as� mnmC oU p¢e �¢� ZmZr- D C W W9 LL ,��uN a >O.. O� � � q� OC� � w��= `~ a�N � � � m �-w � t Y . . a � eQWZ� �% �o� r �� O S p Z W D� C s C,�<Z . .. m N Z=O W v W W ��c`O�a � . U�=��Q� m WZJ b �� W u,�0 0'�'¢—� /�Z �c O� � �� i/S�Q Z�� O�W{y�>� �Z . O OUp¢ ��¢W� �Ya� c � O<}�'� -° �c¢z=� i=d� . h QOp�`QUS-'m=Um�' �� ¢eLL� '�� W� �a� OaOZ nv ma� adr � O�C�Z'in:?� � � in � O m � � �i'JN � p�Cilr`� �L �� - Q �N= NC�� -_� � p �j' � .. 0 N O� N ��„� � � p` � v��i L � � w `� � mUQO� �� ,�� 7 m O a C` $ �o� E �� N� m r L � j�� Y 0�� C` � � � � Q � � � >. ��,H�r�° >m c 3 0 � � m C 0 mL�� Q �� U C � � � � �p�oom�� y � ��I � � � Z o Eo�m`o � oy3 � � � � $ �� 0 � �23o��' c�'c a � o � o � � � C � O � y y � � � o�oaa> �o 3 � � �u� � � U� L O c^ N y N � � � a m-D��`a �3— `c 3 a � c Q. m —L �� m Ll' °' C' E C V m L �' � � QcpU� �L�p � ,? � r �, D � M �� . � 03.� 0� m � a � � E � � ,T LL J y�� O � �� m �ry v � � t7/ O j� m c Q� �� a ;� m ,� 0 � �'J� E �' �, ci' �,,aL > a—a� � a r 3 � � a � � ��om�� ° o m o L � m o m o �� oa= a�tyooa � � � d m d � � � � to��— � c� �� o r �„�'� w 8.�� c � ��'o �_ � � C � ° y � � �•�c3a��y �U � � c � p � � � m � cmE � /y�� J ,� O��i= � UO �!i� O � � � '� "' � � `C in � m � � .--� L� � Q� � p� QO � � � � � �.J+ � 0 O O � a 30�00�, �0� � m m � � � -�� o � , LL O a+ Cv� O Vp � ��L O � � � � ~ �i � � U E C .'J m `v� .� � � mL C� V � C O � m � C v � C V O p � N N � U � U _ =ao °�OC� o Q� � m c°� ° a\ S �'n N � ♦ � / �� '�r""'� � . . � � RESOLUTION N0. 2 Series of 1987 A RESOLUTION EXTENDING APPROVAL OF SPECIAL DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT N0. 6 (VAIL VILLAGE INN) FOR A PERIOD OF EIGHTFEN MON7HS WHEREAS, the owner of Phase 4 ofi Vail Village Inn has requested that the approvals granted by Ordinance #1 of 1985 be extended; and WHEREAS, the Planning and Environmental Commission has unanimously recommended that the Town Council extend this approval ; and WHEREAS, the development of this property as prescribed by Ordinance #1 of 1985 will be a benefit to the health, safety, and welfare of the inhabitants of the Town of Vail . NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE TUWN COUNCIL OF THE TOWN OF VAIL, COLORADO, THAT: � The approvals granted by Ordinance #1 of 1985 are herein extended for a period of eighteen (18) months. INTRODUCED, READ, APPROVED AND �DOPTED this bth day of January, 1987. �. . , �r/ \ , � Pat�—�.. �on,�la-yor � � , �, � ,�� /, �-- , ATTES ; ' � � Pamela A. Brandmeyer, T wn Clerk , '�� ' ; �� ..t » t� ' � � � T0: Planning and Environmental Commission FROM: Community Development Department DATE: December 22, 1986 SUBJECT: Request to extend an approval of SDD#6 (Vail Village Inn) for a period of 18 months. APPLICANT: Joe Staufer SDD zoning requests are approved with certain time limitations as prescribed in the zoning code. If construction is not commenced within 18 months of final approval of an SDD, the approval may be revoked or amended by the Town Council . Phase IV of the Vail Village Inn received their final approval from the Town Council on March 5, 1985. The applicant has requested review by the Planning Commission in order to formally extend this approval for another 18 month period. Review by the PEC is advisory and final decisions concerning this request will be made by the Town Council . BACKGROUND ON PREVIOUS APPROVAL The redevelopment of Phase IV of the Vail Village Inn involves the demolition of an existing structure that presently accommodates the Vail Village Inn hotel , the Village Inn Pancake House, and the Food and Deli . The approved structure has 175 accommodation units, approximately 16,000 square feet of retail space, and 324 underground parking spaces. The proposal also involved off-site improvements by providing space for the Colorado Ski Museum in a portion of the new structure on East Meadow Drive. The developer also agreed to fund the demolition of the existing ski museum building and landscaping of the site. These and other specifics concerning this development plan are outlined in the attached ordinance. The plans of the proposed project will be presented at the Planning Commission meeting for the benefit of those commissioners who were not on the board during the original review process in 1985. STAFF RECOMMENDATION The staff supports this request and would recommend that the Planning Commission pass along a recommendation to extend this approval for a period of 18 months. The applicant has presented the identical plan that was previously approved. As a part of the Vail Village ma$ter planning process, the staff has recommended that this site be developed in general compliance with the previously approved SDD. There was a lengthy and extensive review process involved in this project prior to its original approval in 1985. The staff has seen no change in this area that would suggest a need for amending or revoking this approval . , � �'�,� � `�,.,,r l y �,,,,� t�. . _. , • , ORDINANCE N0. 1 (Series of 1985) AN ORDINANCE AMENDING ORDINAfJCE N0. 28, SERIES OF 1976 TO PROVIDE FOR THE AMEfdDMENT OF THE APPROVED DEVELOP�IENT PLAN FOR SPECIAL DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT N0. 6; AMENDING THE PURPOSE SECTION OF SPECIAL DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT 6; ADOPTING AN AMENDED DEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR PHASE IV OF SPECIAL DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT 6; ELIMINATING CERTAIN REQUIREMENTS RELATING TO THE DISTAtJCE BETWEE�I BUILDINGS FOR PHASE IV OF SPECIAL DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT 6; CHANGIPJG THE HEIGHT REQUIREMENTS AND ALLOWABLE USES FOR PHASE IV OF SPECIAL DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT 6; INCREA�iivG THE ALLOI�IABLE DENSITY AND h10DIFYING THE BUILDIiVG BULK STANDARDS FOR PHASE IV OF SPECIAL DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT 6; PROVIDING DIFFERENT PARKING AND LOADING REQUIREMENTS FOR PHASE IV OF SPECIAL DEVELOP�1ENT DISTRICT 6; AND SETTING FORTH DETAILS IN REGARD THERETO. PdOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE TOWN COU�ICIL of the Town of Vail as �� f0110WS'"�'�'��y� �� ' �{ � - t'"`!�F{h i �� "�>�Y '�__..Q � Sec�ti on a�l :-�Cegi sl ative Intent. .r<= ��.; ,�,., A. In 1976, the Town Council of the Town of Vail passed Ordinance No. 28, Series of 1976, establishing Special Development District No. 6 to insure the unified and coordinated development of a critical site as a whole and in a manner suitable for the area in which it was situated. B. Special Development District P�o. 6 provided in Section 14 that the Town Council reserved the right to abroa�.+� �N mod;�'v c��cial �pvelooment District No. 6 for good cause through the enactment of an ordinance in conformity with the Zoning Code of the Town of Vail . C. Application has been made to the Town of Vail to modify and amend certain sections of Special DevelopmenL uistrict vo. 6 l�rhich relate to Phas� � . and �af�ich make certain changes in the development plan for Special Developr�ent District No. 6 as they relate to Phase IV. 0..� The Planning and Environmental Commission of the Town of Vail has reviewed the changes submitted by the applicant and has unanimously recommended that Special Development District No. 6 be so amended. E. The Town Council considers that the amendments provide an even more unified and more aesthetically pleasing develooment of a critical site within the Town and that such amendments are of benefit to the health, safety and welfare of the inhabitants of the Town of Vail . Section 2. Section 18.50.020 Purpose is hereby amended to read as follows : A Special Development District is established to assure comprehensive de��elopment and use of an area in a manner that would be harmonious with the general character of the town, provide adequate open space and recreation ,� � 'T i , , . �r•r�' -2`- � .> � . amenities , and promote the objectives of the Zoning Ordinance of the Tot,�n. Ordinarily, a Special Development District will be created only when the development is regarded as complementary to the Town by the Town Council , Planning Commission and Design Review Board, and there are significant aspecis of the special development which cannot be satisfied under the existing zoning. Section 18.50.040 Development Plan -- Contents is hereby amended to read as follows: The proposed development plan shall include, but is not limited to, the following data as supplemented by exhibits provided by consultants Royston, Hanamoto, Beck and Abey on February 12, 1976 for Phases I , II and III , and as supplemented by the exhibits of the development plan and the enviromental :-� impact report as prepared by Gordon R. Pierce, Architect, and as given final � �. a roval throu h s�� pp g passage of second reading of this ordinance by the Town Council on February 19, 1985 for Phase IV. Section 3. Section 18.50.040 E is hereby amended to read as follows : E. For Phases I , II , and III , a volum�±ric model ?: �m�nded by cor.��s?*'nts Royston, Hanamoto, Beck and Abey on February 12, 1976 of the site and proposed development documenzed by photographs at a scale of 1 inch equals 16 feet or� larger, portraying the scale and relationship of those phases of the develo^ment to the site and illustrating the form and mass of structures in said phases of the development. For Phase IV, a volumetric module =� - ��:� 5y �^r�r� - Pierce, Architect of the site and the proposed development at a scale of 1 inch equals 20 feet, portraying the scale and relationship of the development on Phase IV to the site and illustrating the form of mass of structures in said phase. Section 4. Section 18.50.050 Permitte�' ''�� r SDDb is hereby repealed and re-ena�ted with amendments to read as follows : 18.50.050 Permitted Uses . The Permitted Uses in Phases I , II , III and IV of Special Development �istrict 6 shall be in accordance with the approved development plans on file in the Town of Vail Community Development Department. Section 5. Section 18.50.060 Conditional Uses in SDD6 is hereby repealed and re-enacted with amendments to read as follows : 18.50.060 Conditional Uses Conditional uses for Phases I , II , III and IV of SDD6 shall be as found in Section 18.22.030 of the Vail Zonina Code and as below: . . . := �- �.,,,,, -3- ;�- � ; A. A popcorn outside vending wagon that conforms in appearance with tho�e existing in Commercial Core I and Commercial Core II . Except, no office uses, except those clearly accessory to a principal �� will be allowed on the Plaza Level of Phase IV. Section 6. Section 18.50.110 Distance Between Buildings is hereby amended to read as follows : 18.50. 100 Distance Between Buildings For Phases I , II , and III the minimum distance between buildings on adjacent sites shall be as indicated in the development plan but in no case shall b� ,�, less that 50 feet. For Phase IV, the minimum distance between buildings �n �� . .�, .,. � �:` adjacent sites shall be as indicated in the development plan as submitted �y .. ., ,.t;. Gordon R. Pierce, Architect. Section 7. Section 18.50.120 Height is hereby amended to read as follows: A. For Phases I , II , and III the allowable heights shall be as found on the development plan, specifically the site plan and height plan dated 3/12/76. B. For Phase IV, the maximum building height shall be as set forth in �he approved development plan by Gordon R. Pierce, Architect. Sec�ion 8. Section 18.50.130 Density is hereby amended to read as follows: The Gross Residential Floor Area (GRFA) of all districts in the Specia� Development District shall not exceed 120,600 square feet. There shall be a minimum of 175 accommodation unites and 72,400 square feet of GRFA devoted to accorr�odation units in Phase IV of Special Development District 6. Section 9. Section 18.50.130 Building Bulk is hereby amended to read as fo: iows: 18. 50.130 Building Bulk Building bulk, maximum wall lenghts, maximum dimensions for building elemQnts, requirements for wall offsets and vertical stepping of roof lines for Phases I , II and III shall be indicated on the development plan submitted by consultants ;�oysion, Hanamoto, Beck and Abey on February 12, 1975. For Phase IV, building bulk, maximum wall lenghts, maximum dimensions for building elements, requir�m?^±; for wall offsets and vertical stepping of roof lines shall be as indicated as per the approved development plans submitted by Gordon R. Pierce, Architect. . . . . � .' . � ;,�� -4- , ,� Section 10. Section 18.50.180 Parking and Loading is hereby repealed and re- enacted with amendments to read as follows : 18.50. 180 Parking and Loading There shall be no less than 12 surface parking spaces, 324 underground parking spaces, and 37 underground valet parking spaces as are existing and as provided on the development plan submitted by Gordon R. Pierce, Architect. Section 11 . Conditions of approval for the development plan of Phase IV of SDD6 as submitted by Gordon R. Pierce, shall be as follows : � 1 . That the developers and/or owners of Phase IV participate in and do not .�� remonstrate against an improvement district for improvements to the inter- section of Vail Road and Meadow Drive if and when one is formed. 2. That the developers and/or owners of Phase IV participate in and do not remonstrate against establishing a pedestrian linkage from Phase IV to a future commercial expansion at the Kiandra Lodge site if and �vhen it is developed. 3. The developer receive approval from the State Highway Department ;�+° � �- configuration of the pull -off area from the frontage road to the entrance to the hotel . 4. The board of directors of the Colorado Ski Museum and the developers co^e to agreement on terms for the relocation of the museum in Phase IV ofi �::e Vail Village Inn prior to the issuance of a building permit. In the event that the Ski Museum would vacate its space in Phase IU of the Vail Village Inn, the Town of Vail shall be given exclusive rights to assume the �k� Museum's lease of this space. It shall be understood that in the event the Town of Vail does assume the use of this space, all uses in the space shall be public purpose in nature. 5. The developer fund the demolition and landscaping of the museum site through one of two options : a) der�� -, � ;.:, �:-:� '�.,. .. �.. __.. :_ � �,000 to :;� _ _�_ by the Town to complete the work, or b) the developer submit a landscape plan to the Town for approval to be completed as an element of the overall plan for Phase IU. : ` � �� -5- � ��, t ; . � . 6. Pdo grading permit, building permit or demolition permit relating to Phase IV of SDD 6 shall be issued until such time that reasonable evidence is provided the Town of Vail staff that construction financing for the improvements to be constructed as a part of Phase IV has been obtained. Section 12. If any part, section, subsection, sentence, clause or phase of this ordinance is for any reason held to be invalid, such decision sliall not affect the validity of the remaining portions of this ordinance; and the Town Council hereby declares it would have passed this ordinance, and each part, section, subsection, sentence, clause or ohrase thereof, regardless of the � � ffact that any one or more parts, sections, subsections, sentences, clauses y� ; -. �= "�'�"`or phrases be declared invalid. Section 13. The Town Council hereby finds , determines and declares that this ordinance is necessary and proper for the health , safety and welfare of the Town of Vail and the inhabitants thereof. Section 14. The repeal or the repeal and reenactment of any provisions of the Vail Municipal Code as provided in this ordinance shall not affect any righ� which has accrued, any duty imposed, any violation that occurred prior to th� effective date hereof, any prosecution commencea, nor a�/ a�her ac�icn or proceeding as commenced under or by virtue of the provision repealed or re- pealed and reena�.�ca. ine repeal of any provision her��y shaii noi ��evive any provision or any ordinance previously repealed or superseded unless ex- pressly stated herein. INTRODUCED, READ Af�D PASSED ON FIRST READIfdG THIS 5th day of February, 1985, and a public hearing shall be held on this ordinance on the 19th day of February, 1985, at 7 :30 p. m. in the Council Chambers of the Vail P•1unicipal Building, Vail , Colorado. Ordered published in full this 5+:, �U� ,;�" ��:;, Udty, i965. �� v Ken R. Rose, Mayor Pro Tem ; � � � _ , � '� , � � -` � ATTEST: �. �l,�t� Pamela A. Brandmeyer, Town C1 k INTRODUCED, READ AND APPROVED ON SECOND READING AND ORDERED PUBLISHED IN FULL This 19th day of Febraury, 1985. �- ___� %� � ��< ' �� i - / �=,1�/j �r'� � 1'! / ` �// �i , Paul R. Johr�ston, Mayor , /�-� �, ? T ST: : . , Pamela A. Brandmeyer, To�ln Clerk •:. ',,-. "'', i�,,,.{ ` ,,�`. ) r .�'. , � � . � \. ,,. . � .. - ORDINANCE N0. 14 Series of 1987 AN ORDINANCE AMENDING ORDINANCE N0. 1, SERIES OF 1985 TO PROVIDE FOR THE AMENDMENT OF THE APPROVED DEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR SPECIAL DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT N0. 6; ADOPTING AN AMENDED DEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR PHASE IU OF SPECIAL DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT N0. 6, ELIMINATING CERTAIN REQUIREMENTS RELATING TO THE DISTANCE BETWEEN BUILDINGS FOR PHASE IV OF SPECIAL DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT N0. 6; CHANGING THE HEIGHT REQUIREMENTS FOR PHASE IV OF SPECIAL DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT N0. 6; CHANGING THE ALLOWABLE DENSITY AND MODIFYING THE BUILDING BULK STANDARDS FOR PHASE IV OF SPECIAL DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT N0. 6; PROVIDING DIFFERENT PARKING AND LOADING REQUIREMENTS FOR PHASE IU AND V OF SPECIAL DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT N0. 6; AND SETTING FORTH DETAILS IN REGARD THERETO. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE TOWN COUNCIL of the Town of Vail as � follows: Section 1 , Legislative Intent is hereby repealed and reenacted with amendments to read as follows: Section 1 . Legislative Intent A. In 1976, the Town Council of the Town of Uail passed Ordinance No. 7, Series of 1976, establishing Special Development District No. 6 to insure the unified and coordinated development of a critical site as a whole and in a manner suitable for the area in which it was situated. B. Special Development District No.6 provided in Section 14 that the Town Council reserved the right to abrogate or modify Special Development District No. 6 for good cause through the enactment of an ordinance in conformity with the zoning code of the Town of Vail . C. In 1985, the Town Council of the Town of Vail passed Ordinance #1, Series of 1985, providing certain amendments to the development plan for SDD N0. 6. D. Application has been made to the Town of Vail to modify and amend certain sections of Special Development District No. 6 which relate to Phase IV and which make certain changes in the development plan for Special Development District No. 6 as they relate to Phase IV. E. The Planning and Environmental Commission of the Town of Vail has reviewed the changes submitted by the applicant and has recommended that Special Development District No. 6 be so amended. F. The Town Council considers that the amendments provide an even more unified and more aesthetically pleasing development of a critical site within the Town and that such amendments are of benefit to the health, safety and welfare of the inhabitants of the Town of Vail . � � . �- ��, �� } �:; � . , � � - � �" - � , -- Section 2. Section 18.50.020 Purpose is hereby amended to read as follows: A Special Development Oistrict is established to assure comprehensive development and use of an area in a manner that would be harmonious with the general character of the Town, provide adequate open space and recreation amenities, and promote the objectives of the Zoning�Ordinance of the Town. Ordinarily, a special development district will be created only when the development is regarded as complementary to the Town by the Town Council , Planning Commission and Design Review Board, and there are significant aspects of the special development which cannot be satisfied under the existing zoning. � Section 18.50.040 Development Plan -- Contents is hereby amended to read as follows; The proposed development plan shall include, but is not limited to, the following data as supplemented by exhibits provided by consultants Royston, Hanamoto, Beck and Abey on February 12, 1976 for Phases I, II , III, and as supplemented by the exhibits of the development plan and the environmental impact report as prepared by Gordon R. Pierce, Architect, (plans dated February 19, 1987, revised April 14 and April 22, 1987), and as given final approval through passage of second reading of this ordinance by the Town Council on May 19, 1987 for Phase IV and Phase V. This approval recognizes that Phase IU may be constructed in two phases with the first phase to be referred to as Phase IV and the final phase to be referred to as Phase V. Section 3. Section 18.50.040 E is hereby amended to read as follows: E. For Phases I, II, and III, a volumetric model as amended by consultants Royston, Hanamoto, Beck and Abey on February 12, 1976 of the site and proposed development documented by photographs at a scale of 1 inch equals 16 feet or larger, portraying the scale and relationship of those phases of the development to the site and illustrating the form and mass of structures in said phases of the development. For Phases IV and V, a volumetric model as amended by Gordon Pierce, % Architect, of the site and the proposed development at a scale of 1 inch equals 20 feet, portraying the scale and relationship of the development on Phases IV and V, to the site and illustrating the form of mass of structures in said phase. Section 4. Section 18.50.050 Permitted Uses in Special Development No. 6 is hereby repealed and re-enacted with amendments to read as follows: 18.50.050 Permitted Uses The permitted uses in Phases I, II, III, IV and V of Special Development District 6 shall be in accordance with the approved development plans on file in . � • �_ � .��; - � � � � � r - the Town of Vail Community Development Department. Section 5. Section 18.50.060 Conditional Uses in Special Development District No. 6 is h repealed and re-enacted with amendments to read as follows: 18.50.060 Conditional Uses Conditional Uses for Phases I, II, III, IV and V of Special Development District No. 6 shall be as found in Section 18.22.030 of the Vail Zoning Code and as below: A. A popcorn outside vending wagon that conforms in appearance with those existing in Commercial Core I and Commercial Core II. Except, no office uses, except those clearly accessory to a principal use will be allowed on the Plaza level of Phases IV and V. Section 6. Section 18.50.110 Distance Between Buildings is hereby amended to read _ as follows: 18.50.110 Distance Between Buildings For Phases I, II and III the minimum distance between buildings on adjacent sites shall be as indicated in the development plan, but in no case shall be less than 50 feet. For Phase IV AND V, the minimum distance between buildings on adjacent sites shall be as indicated in the development plan as submitted by Gordon Pierce, Architect, (dated February 19, 1987, revised April 14 and April 17, 1981). Section 7. Section 18.50.120 Height is hereby amended to read as follows: For Phases I, II, and III the allowable heights shall be as found on the development plan, specifically the site plan and height plan dated 3/12/76. B. For Phases IU and U, the maximum building height shall be as set forth in the approved development plan by Gordon Pierce, Architect (dated February 19, 1987, revised April 14 and April 17, 1987). Section 8. Section 18.50.130 Density is hereby amended to read as follows: The Gross Residential Floor Area (GRFA) of all districts in the Special , Oevelopment District shall not exceed 120,600 square feet. There shall be a minimum of 148 accommodation units and 67,367 square feet of GRFA devoted to accommodation units in Phase IV and U of Special Develoment District 6. Section 9. Section 18.50.130 Building Bulk is hereby amended to read as follows: 18.50.130 Building Bulk Building bulk, maximum wall lengths, maximum dimensions for building elements, requirements for wall offsets and vertical stepping of roof lines for Phases I, II and III shall be indicated on the development plan submitted by consultants . t _ �• . •• �' ; �'' \. � ��. � � . • � � ' - Royston, Hanamoto, Beck and Abey on February 12, 1975. For Phases IV and V, building bulk, maximum wall lengths, maximum dimensions for building elements, requirements for wall offsets and vertical stepping of roof lines shall be as indicated as per the approved development plans submitted by Gordon R. Pierce, Architect (dated February 19, 1987, revised April 14 and April 22, 1987). Section 10. Section 18.50.180 Parking and Loading is hereby repealed and reenacted with amendments as follows: 18.50.180 Parking and Loading Following the completion of Phases IV and V, there shall be not less than 12 surface parking spaces, 324 underground parking spaces, and 37 underground valet parking spaces as are existing and as provided on the development plan submitted by Gordon R. Pierce, Architect (dated February 19, 1987). The proposed site plan dated February 19, 1987� reflects the interim parking plans between the development of Phases IV and U. Section 11 is hereby repealed and reenacted with amendments to read as follows: Section 11. Conditions of approval for the development plan of Phases IV and V of SDD bmitted by Gordon Pierce (dated February 9, 1985, revised April 14 and April 22, 1987) , shall be as follows: 1. That the developers and/or owners of Phases IV and V participate in and do not remonstrate against an improvement district for improvements to the intersection of Uail Road and Meadow Drive if and when one is formed. 2. That the developers and/or owners of Phases IV and V participate in and do not remonstrate against establishing a pedestrian linkage from Phases IV and U to a future commercial expansion at the Sonnenalp Lodge site if and when it is developed. 3. The developer receive approval from the State Highway Department for � reconfiguration of the pull-off area from the Frontage Road to the entrance to , the hotel prior to the issuance of a building permit for Phase V. � 4. The developers and/or owners of Phase IV agree to transfer by general warranty deed to the Town of Vail free and clear of all liens and encumbrances, such condominium unit of approximately 3,986 sq. ft. in size and to be located as indicated on the plans and specifications submitted with the application. There shall be no provisions placed on the condominium unit restricting the Town of Vail 's use of the unit or the subsequent subdivision and/or sale of the unit. -4- ' � � - � � , . • • � ' `'� � �.�'' \ ; ' : .- 5. No grading permit, building permit or demolition permit relating to Phases IV or V of Special Development District No. 6 shall be issued until such time that reasonable evidence is provided the Town of Vail staff that construction financing for the improvements to be constructed as part of Phases IU or V has been obtained. 6. Restrictions on any units in Phases IV or V which would be condominiumized shall be as outlined in Section 17.26.075 of the Vail Municipal Code and any amendments thereto. � 7. Upon the issuance of a building permit for the construction of any phase of SDD#6 subsequent to Phase IV, the developer and/or owner of said phase shall reimburse the Town of Vail for expenses incurred in facilitating the relocation of the ski museum (into Phase IV) of an amount not to exceed �75,000. 8. Any remodel or redevelopment of the remaining portion of SDD6 commonly referred to as Phase V shall include parking as required by Ordinance 1 , Series of 1985. Section 12. If any part, section, subsection, sentence, clause or phrase of this ordinance is for any reason held to be invalid, such decision shall not affect the valildity of the remaining portions of this ordinance; and the Town Council hereby declares it would have passed this ordinance, and each part, section, subsection, sentence, clause or phrase thereof, regardless of the fact that any one or more parts, sections, subsections, sentences, clauses or phrases be declared invalid. Section 13. The repeal or the repeal and reenaction of any provisions of the Vail Municipal Code as provided in this ordinance shall not affect any right which has accrued, any duty imposed, any violation that occurred prior to the effective date hereof, any prosecution cortxnenced, nor any other action or proceeding as commenced under or , by virtue of the provision repealed or repealed and reenacted. The repeal of any provision hereby shall not revive any provision or any ordinance previously repealed or superseded unless expressly stated herein. . ..+�•, f ( � � - � � + � � •' '' • � ; .• . • � • , . ..„ INTRODUCED, READ AND PASSED ON FIRST READING THIS 5th day of _ May, 1987 , and a public hearing shall be held on this ordinance on the 19th day of _ May 1987 at 7:30 P.M. in the Council Chambers of the Vail Municipal Building, Vail , Colorado. Order d �� tshe 'n ull this 8th day of May , 1987. � / . ._ � � . Paul R.� Joh'� ton, Mayor A ST: � . � �. Pamela A. Brandmeyer, Town Clerk � INTRODUCED, READ AND APPROVED ON SECOND READING AND ORDERED PUBLISHED in full this 19th day of May , 1987. �- -j I, , �� ._ Paul R. �oh ston, Mayor ST: �d. '�c,d.vl Pamela A. Brandmeyer, Town Clerk '�. .. ,'. , .• ' � , _ __. � � COVER SHEET FOR VAII_ VILLAGE INN SDD #6 PLEASE KEEP IN EACH FILE PLUS MASTER VVI FILE. Ord 1 of 1985 stipulates 120,600 sf of GRFA 9/88 reduce by 430 sf due to condo plat amendment 5/89 deduct �1 sf given to unit #26 of Phase II 1'1`1 r i! �� A �� •�, � i � �"'� `'� . TO: Planning and Environmental Commission � � � � ' FROM: Community Development Department `��`"4�`� w �� DATE: April 20, 1987 � �` ( SUBJECT: A request to amend Special Development District 6, Vail Village Inn, Phase 4 . Applicant: Mr. Josef Staufer Final approval for the last phase of Vail Village Inn (Phase 4 of SDD6) was granted by the Town Council in February of 1985. An 18 month extension of this approval was granted in January, 1987 for the exact plan that was previously approved. In general terms, the approval of Phase 4 involved the demolition of the existing hotel, Pancake House, and Food and Deli. To be constructed were 175 accommodation units, approximately 16, 000 square feet of retail space, and 324 underground parking spaces. The construction of this final phase was to have completed all development potential as established by ordinance, for this property. Application has been made for a number of amendments to the existing ordinance governing the development of this property, as well as approval for the phased development of the project. Planning Commission action on this request involves making recommendations to be passed on to the Town Council for their final review. The following memo outlines the issues related to these requests for both the proposed amendments and the proposal to phase the development of the project. DESCRIPTION OF THE PROPOSED PHASING PLAN The existing approval for Phase 4 was presented and approved to be constructed in one phase. The applicant has stated that it is his desire to complete this final phase in three separate phases as oppposed to one. However, at this time information is provided for only one of the three phases that are being contemplated. The first phase proposed involves the coristruction of a building located at the corner of Vail Road and East Meadow Drive. This structure would be connected to the existing Food and Deli portion of WI with a second and third floor skyway. The building closely resembles the previous approval in terms of design and how it would be connected to the main portion of the hotel. There are a number of issues that will need to be addressed relative to this phasing plan. They include the following: � 1 � � '' • � . . � � , . 1. Design A great deal of time and effort went into reviewing the massing and siting of this structure during the previous approval in 1985. The goal of these efforts was to ensure a design that was consistent with the original development plan adopted for this site in 1976. Generally, it was the intention of this plan for the property to be developed with greater densities and mass along the Frontage Road and a gradual "stepping down" of structures toward Meadow Drive. While this structure along Meadow Drive has been modified from the original approval, staff feels these design changes are minor and still in keeping with the intent of the original plan for SDD6. 2 . Interim Changes to the site in the area of the proposed Meadow Drive structure include a slight relocation of the access off of Vail Road, the introduction of a loading zone, and the removal of approximately 1, 000 square feet of landscaped area to provide additional surface parking. The proposed location for the loading zone is directly adjacent to Vail Road. From a design standpoint, this location is unacceptable to the staff. Concerns over this location center around the high visibility of the loading zone in relation to vehicular and pedestrian ways. There is also a strong concern over the removal of landscaped area to provide for surface parking. Th� introduction of additional surface parking is inconsistent with the desired goals for Vail Villag� as well as the previously approved plan for this project. The significance of this additional parking is magnified by the fact that mature evergreen traes would be removed to accommodate it. 3 . Parking The staff has a number of concerns with the parking solution as proposed with this phasing plan. These concerns center around the project's overall deficiency in providing parking on site, the utilization of a tremendous number of valet spaces during the interim plan, and the notion of adding additional development to this project with no appreciable gain in on-site parking. To date, this project has developed in three phases and over the course of this development has fallen short of its required on-site parking. Phases 1 and 2 (predominantly the commercial areas along Meadow Drive) were developed without on-site parking. The 2 . �,' �..ri � ' development of Phase 3 involved a total of 106 , structured spaces. These 106 spaces were over and above what was required for Phase 3 development � (condominiums along the Frontage Road) . It was intended that the development of the additional spaces would go toward making up some of the short fall that existed from Phases 1 and 2 . As the Planning Commission is probably aware, existing restrictions on access to this structure has limited the utilization of these spaces and, as a result, done little to make up for the existing short fall on the site. We are now asked to review additional development on the property, again with little actual new parking being provided. The following table outlines in greater detail the parking situation for the Vail Village Inn. EXISTING CONDITIONS (PARKING) Phase Use Sq Ft Spaces Req. Spaces Exist. 1 Comm. 16, 12 53 0 2 Comm. 6, 4 7 �'�`�� 21 0 Resid. 4 condos 8 _ �� p 3 Comm. 10, 600 34 106 (structure) Resid. 29 condos. 47 WI Hotel, Deli, etc. Com/rest 5, 610 � 23 65 (surface) Hotel 52 units 37 1.�3 � 171 'i 7 5 -� � -� lst phase of Phase 4 Comm. 4, 765 - 16 p Resi. 14 units 28 44 p ------------------ �� 267 171 r (multi-use credit) - 13 � ' 254 The information for this table was derived from data compiled during the last review of Phase 4 . The number of spaces provided do not reflect the valet spaces as proposed with this application. 3 '� � ,r The following table outlines in greater detail the proposed valet parking. The parking section of the zoning code requires clear and unobsructed access to on-site parking provided within a development. An exception to this can be granted when valet service is provided. There are no other standards related to the utilization of valet parking outlined in the code. As an interim solution to parking, the applicant has proposed the introduction of valet parking throughout the project. When considering these valet spaces, the following changes are made to the parking provided on site: PARKING PROPOSED WITH THIS PHASE Phase Total Clear Access Valet % # S aces Spaces S aces Valet 1 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 3 135 51 84 62% Surface 60 40 20 33% Spaces — 195 91 104 53% , f � �� , 2, s y /+c y,.�,�-�c(, < � As demonstrated by this table, over one half of the parking spaces provided on site will require valet service to be utilized. This percentage is unacceptable to the staff. While a portion of valet parking for a lodge is acceptable, it is infeasible to think that valet parking is workable or appropriate for meeting the demands for commercial space for this development. The realities of the existing situation on this property are that a maximum of 64 surface spaces are accessible for all the commercial uses on the site. This is assuming that the 106 spaces within Phase 3 are unaccessible to the general public. In addition, of the 64 surface spaces on site, a good percentage of those are restricted to specific tenants. For all practical purposes, there is no additional parking being provided for these commercial uses. Another aspect of the valet parking proposed on the surface lot is the amount of trip generation that will occur between the properties. Assuming that the valet service will be based out of the front desk of the hotel, the utilization of valet spaces adjacent to the Food and Deli would require a doubling of necessary trips through the 4-way stop. This trip generation is serving to congest an intersection that is already at capacity many times of the year. 4 . , � � �.�I' � , . . REQUESTED AMENDMENTS TO THE APPROVED DEVELOPMENT PLAN A number of amendments have been requested to Ordinance #l, 1985. This ordinance established the development plan, statistics, and conditions of approval relative to the initial review of this project. While many of these amendments are minor, a number of them have implications relative to the development of Phase 4 . The original ordinance and a copy of the applicant's amendments requested have been attached to this memorandum. The following is the staff's response to each of these amendments. Amendments 1, 2, 3 , 5 and 6 are merely housekeeping amendments to recognize the amended plans as submitted for this first phase of the competio�>of the project. In many cases the ordinance makes reference to the approved plans as previously submitted. These references address issues such as distances between buildings, proposed locations and design of structures, parking provisions, etc. The staff feels there are no pertinent issues relative to the above amendments. Amendment 4. This amendment refers to the density permitted within Phase 4 of the Vail Village Inn project. The existing ordinance reads as follows: The gross residence floor area (GRFA) of all districts in the Special Development District shall not exceed 120, 600 square feet. There shall be a minimum of 175 accommodation units and 72,400 square feet devoted to accommodation units in Phase 4 of SDD6. With respect to this particular section of the ordinance, the GRFA numbers were previously established with the 72, 400 square feet available in Phase 4 being the difference between what is existing in other phases and the overall allowable. A minimum of 175 accommodation units were specified in the ordinance to insure that accomodation units be provided in the development of Phase 4 . The amendment requested by the applicant would allow for the development of dwelling units in this phase of Phase 4 . As proposed, the second, third and fourth floors of this structure would accommodate 14 units, each with at least one lock-off unit. Staff concern with this approach centers around the utilization and ownership of these units. As per the written application we have received, the units could be condominiumized with no restrictions on owners' use or any requirements to manage these units in some type of short � �-�'�e e 5 /� � `i, term rental pool. While it is true that accommodation ' units could be condominiumized, the condo conversion ordinance establishes restrictions on owners' use as well as requiring the units to participate in a rental pool. As proposed, there are no assurances that these units would not be developed, sold to individual owners, and not participate in a rental pool. Under this scenario, this proposal is a dramatic departure from the intent of Ordinance #1, 1985 as it is presently written. Amendment #7 This amendment addresses the seven conditions of approval that were established during the last review of this proposal. Of concern to the staff are amendments proposed to conditions No. 5 and 6. These conditions address the relocation of the ski museum as part of the development of Phase 4 . The existing conditions are worded as follows: 4 . "The board of directors of the Colorado Ski Museum and the developers come to an agreement on terms for the relocation of the Museum in Phase 4 of the Vail Village Inn prior to the issuance of a building permit. In the event that the ski museum would vacate its space in Phase 4 of the Vail Village Inn, the Town of Vail shall be given exclusive rights to assume the Ski Museum's lease of the space. It shall be understood that in the event the Town of Vail does assume the use of this space, all uses in this space shall be of public purpose in nature. " 5. The developer fund the demolition and landscaping of the museum site through one of two options: a. Deposit to the Town a check for $15, 000 to be used by the Town to complete the work, or, b. The developer submit a landscape plan to the Town for approval as an element of the overall plan for Phase 4 . The relocation of the Ski Museum became an essential element of the redevelopment plan during the last review of this proposal. This was the result of trying to find a balance between the needs of the developer and the original design plan for this property. Generally speaking, the design plan adopted for this site emphasized the massing of structures to step down from the Frontage Road to East Meadow Drive resulting in a pedestrian scale of buildings along the Meadow Drive pedestrian corridor. In addition, this plan called for a substantial amount of landscaped open space at the southwest corner of the property. The developer's program for the building necessitated placing a structure in this portion of this property and the solution 6 . ` � � ' • � , .� , proposed was to relocate the Ski Museum to free up that site to be developed as a park. After much discussion, this was agreed to as a reasonable compromise maintaining the integrity of the design plan as well as meeting the needs of the developers. The two conditions of approval were designed to ensure that the Ski Museum would be relocated and that the site be landscaped in conjunction with the development of this project. These assurances came in the form of requiring the Ski Museum to agree to the move before construction was initiated and through the funding of improvements to the Ski Museum site. The commitment by the developer to provide these conditions was seen as a trade off for the opportunity to develop what was intended to be a landscape portion of the site. The applicant has proposed the following amendment to these conditions: "The developers and/or owners of Phase 4 agree to transfer by general warranty deed to the Town of Vail free and clear of all liens and encumbrances. Such condominium unit shall be approximately 3986 square feet in size and shall be located as indicated on the plans and specifications submitted with the application. " The applicant has also requested that Condition #5 (that the developer fund or provide the landscaping of the Ski Museum site) be completely deleted. While the developer is still proposing to provide the space for the Ski Museum, the Town has lost all assurances that the Ski Museum will in fact occupy that space and vacate its existing building. In addition, the burden of removing the existing Ski Museum structure and landscaping the site has now fallen on the shoulders of the Town or some other entity. Both of these conditions were established to accommodate the desires of the developer to construct Phase 4 in locations that were designated as open space. Two years ago during the final review of this project, it was agreed upon by all parties that the relocation of the Museum become the developer's responsibility. These conditions will effectively absolve the developer of that responsibility. STAFF RECOMMENDATION During the last review of this project in 1985, the staff strongly supported the approval of the project. That proposal involved predominantly structured parking to accommodate all phases of Vail Village Inn, a commitment to develop accommodation units, and strong assurances that the relocation of the Ski Museum woubd be provided in conjunction with this 7 � ' � . „�. .....••.i' development. The phasing proposal submitted at this time falls � short on each of these considerations. While it may be feasible to mitigate the issue over the units by instituting use restrictions, and the Ski Museum may be resolved through further negotiation between the developer and the Ski Museum, staff feels strongly that the issue of parking is not being solved through the implementation of valet service. We are bound to view this proposal as what possibly could be built out of the project. As a whole, the project has been deficient in parking for a number of years. To allow additional development on the site without additional parking would be nothing short of irresponsible. For years the parking that is not provided on this site has been made up somewhere within the Town. One can assume that adjacent properties and the Town parking structure have absorbed this burden. With the ever increasing utilization of the Town structure, it is simply infeasible that any additional burden be placed on this facility by allowing private development to proceed without carrying its fair share of the parking requirements. Although the staff remains positive regarding the quality of the overall previously approved project and we recognize that our concerns could be mitigated in the future by immediate follow- through with the next phase, it is our responsibiity to fairly evaluate this proposal as if this is the final product. With this in mind and to be consistent with our position on similar proposals, we cannot support the present proposal. Staff recommendation for this phasing program and the proposed amendments is denial. . ) �'s ; `� . : � Date of Appli�tion ; � APPLICATION FORM FOR SPECIAL DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT DE.VELOPMENT PLAN I. This procedure is required for any project that would go through the Special Development District Procedure. The application will not be accepted until all information is submitted. A. NAME OF APPLICANT Vail Villaae Inn, Inc. 100 East Nleadow Drive ADDRESS Vail, CO 81657 PHONE 476-5622 B. NAME OF APPLICANT 'S REPRESENTATIVE �ordon R. Pierce , Architect 1000 South Frontage oa �es ADDRESS Vail, CO 81657 PHONE 476-4433 C. AUTHORIZATION OF OP RT ER SIGNATURE V i 11 g Inn 476-4433 ADDRESS 1 0 Ea t e dow Drive PHONE Vail, O 8 657 D. LOCATION OF PROPOSAL ADDRESS 100 East Meadow Drive �Iai1 , CO LEGAL DESCRIPTION Lot M, Block 5-n, Vail Villaae First Filinq E. FEE $100. 00 PAID ° - � r _ �`'�� .. :� � F. A List of the name of owners of all property adjacent to the Subject property and their �ailing addresses. II. Four (4) copies of the following information: A. Detailed written/graphic description of proposal. g, An environmental impact report shall .be submitted to the zoning administrator in accordance with Chapter 18 . 56 hereof unless waived by Section 18 . 56 . 030 , exempt projects; �, An open space and recreational plan sufficient to meet the demands generated by the development withou� undue burden on available or proposed public facilities; (OVER) , � ' Application fo�,,Special Development Distr� Development Plan p, Existing contours having contour intervals of not more than five �ee� �r the a�;erage slope of the site is twenty percent or �ess, or with contour intervals of not more than ten feet if the average slope of the site is greater than twenty percent. E. A proposed site plan, at a scale not smaller than one inch equals fifty feet, showing the approximate locations and dimensions of all buildings and structures, usestherein, and all principal site development features, such as landscaped areas, recreational facili- ties, pedestrian plazas and walkways, service entries, driveways, and off-street parking and loading areas with proposed contours after grading and site development; F. A preliminary landscape plan, at a scale not smaller than one inch equals f ifty feet, showing existing landscape features to be retained or removed, and showing proposed landscaping and landscaped site development features, such as outdoor recreational facilities, bicycle paths, trails, pedestrian plazas and walkways, water features, and other elements; G. Preliminary building elevations, sections, and floor plans, at a scale not smaller than one-eighth equals one foot, in sufficient detail to determine floor area, gross residential floor area, interioi circulation, locations of uses within buildings, and the general scale and appearance of the proposed development. III. Time Requirements Th�___Planning and Environmental Comm2�ssion meets on the 2nd and 4th Mondays of each month. An application with the necessary accompanying material must be submitted four weeks prior to the date of the meeting. NOTE: It is recommended that before a special development district application is submitted, a review and comment meeting should be set up with the , Department of Community Development. • • � Application for Amendment for Special Development District No. 6 The purpose for this application is to amend SDD No. 6 to transfer 640 square feet of commercial space to Phase V from the remaining Phases IV and VI . This would increase the commercial square feet in Phase V to 5 ,105 in lieu of 4,765 by adding a loft at the west end of the ground level and by enclosing the arcade of the east end of the same level . Please see the attached drawings for further information. . Q- _w_____._.�__._.____.._ _ • � VAIL VILLAGE INN � � AMENDrfr.NT APPLICATION ADJACE�IT PROPERTIES AND ADDRESSES AUGUST 29, 1983 1. Village Inn Plaza Condominium Association c/o Cowperthwaite Company 3575 Cherry Creek North Drive Suite 200 Denver, Colorado 80209 2. �dr�Talismati Lodge and Condominium Association ��;?`- ' ��-�� 20 Vail Road � �;�-; .�:- �� Vail, Colorado 81657 ' 3. Holiday Inn and Holiday House Condominium Association 13 Vai1 Road �J� � � Vail, Colorado 81657 4. First Bank of Vail Attn: Rodger Behler 17 Vail Road Vail, Colorado 81657 5, Alpine Standard Attn: Conrad Sterkel / � �� r--a�+ 28 South Frontage Road West \„ �y ��.�- �% j Vail, Colorado 81657 ir�� ' �L � ,�e�� 6. Crossroads Condominium Association :��2� jJ p Attn: Merv Lapin % � � �,�1 � �`�' 143 East Meadow Drive S�v 0 ��J y � Vail, Colorado 81657 � �- � � � � �/ � � �� v � ' �Z C ��/�- �`us � , _� /� -s- L � �� S �� .��. �c� L ��i � � � ��..� ,��y-�c �-� �,.8.�� ,� � 1 �' � � � �� .� �. ;'1�� <ck�"�,� 1 z / � �i �- y�' x�o��-,�� ; '�,, • .�"E_ ♦ 4 ... r �,_.,. f APPLICATInN FnR AMFN�MRNT -•-------- �OR,SL�'�C�L DEVELOPMEIVT DISTR_��T_NO=_� 1. Name of Applicant: Vail Village Inn, Inc. Address: 100 East Meadow Drive, Vail, Colorado 81657 Phone: 476-5622 2. Name of Applicant 's Representative: Jay K . Peterson Address: P.O. Box 3149, Vail , Colorado 81658 Phone: 476-0092 3 . Authorization of Property Owner: � `/�" � �� - -------------- Josef �S a�fer 100 E�s Mead w Drive Vail, CO �165 476-5622 4. Location of Proposal: 100 E. Meadow Drive, Vail, Co 81658. 5. Legal Description: See attached plans. 6 . Fee: $100.00, Paid_='��3��7__�°�'��-� °� 7 . Adjacent property owners: See attached . 8. Attachments to Application: a. Adjacent Property Owners b. Written Addendum to Application c . Proposed Site Plan and Relationship to existing Phases of the Vail Village Inn and the Amoco Station. d . Proposed Site Plan showing additional parking places. e. Proposed Master Plan showing relationship of proposed structure to previously approved Phase IV of Special Development No. 6 . f. Existing Conditions Site Plan. g . Site Plan. h. Basement Level Plan for Proposed Building . i . Ground Level Plan for Proposed Building . j . Level 2 Plan f or Proposed Building . k . Level 3 Plan for Proposed Building . 1 . Level 4 Plan f or Proposed Building . m. North Elevation, South Elevation, West Elevation and East Elevation for Proposed Building . n. Staff Memorandums dated December 22, 1986 with attached Resolution No. 2 extending Approvals granted by Ordinance No. 1 of 1985 for a period of 18 months. o. Staff Memorandum dated January 7 . 1985 with attached Ordinance No. 1 Series of 1985. ' '`ir � .� . � AI�DF.IJDUM TQ AP��AT�ON�OI2_SL,PF��AL�S`TR��T_IJQ=_�, The purpose of this application is to amend Special Development District No. 6 to allow the completion of the Vail Village Inn to be done in three additional phases rather than one more phase as is currently indicated by Ordinance No. 1 Series of 1985. As you can see by the proposal the actual proposed Master Plan for the completion of Special Development District No. 6 is identical with the approved plan with the exception of minor changes in the proposed structure along East Meadow Drive. The square footage breakdown of the proposed structure is as follows: GRFA Square Footage 10,327 sq. ft. Approximately 50� of the square footage has been allocated to the hotel room with a kitchen area with the remaining portion being allocated to the lock off bedroom. Because of the kitchen, one of the hotel rooms technically under the ordinance becomes a dwelling unit and therefore Section 8 of Ordinance No. 1 Series of 1985 would have to be amended to allow such square footage as a dwelling unit rather than a accommodations unit. Commercial Square Footage 4,765 sq. ft. Ski Museum Square Footage 3 ,986 sq. ft. Storage Square Footage 2,368 sq. ft. Common Area Square Footage 1,739 sq. ft. The parking requirement is set forth on the proposed site plan. As those number indicate technically we are 14 spaces short because of the construction of the proposed structure. In reality however , we are only two spaces short in that twelve of those spaces have been dictated by the Ski Museum being located in the proposed structure. Currently the Ski Museum provides no parking of its own on the adjacent site, we are therefore only impacting the parking problem in that area by two spaces. In addition, Mr. Staufer is willing to open up all of his parking located in Phase III for the use of the hotel and the proposed structure. He is also purchasing approximately 14 spaces from the Bank which are currently sitting vacant on the lower level of Phase III . These spaces would also be used for the hotel and the proposed new structure. Currently those spaces sit vacant on a year round basis. The parking which will be provided in Phases V and VI of our revised plan will be the same as previously approved in proposal for Phase IV of SDD No. 6 . It is anticipated that the remaining portion of the old Phase IV will be completed in two stages which would be Phases V and VI. .• • � Those two phases are identical to the previously approved plans for Special Development District No. 6 . In summary at total build out the new Phases IV, V, and VI will in essence be identical to the old Phase IV which has previously been approved by the Town. Economic conditions have dictated that the redevelopment of the Vail Village Inn cannot be completed in one phase. We are therefore attempting to complete the pedestrianization of West Meadow Drive and the relocation of the Ski Museum. This would allow any further construction to be completed away from the pedestrian area and would be completed in the years ahead . If for some reason the last two phases of the Special Development District No. 6 could not be completed the Town still ends up with a totally viable project with a totally completed pedestrian street with parking in close conformity with the current regulations. Vail Village Inn will honor the prior commitment in relocating the Ski Museum into the proposed structure with one added benefit. The Vail Village Inn is proposing to transfer the area designated for the Ski Museum in the total square footage of 3 ,986 sq. ft. to the Town at no cost. This would allow the Town to relocate at its convenience the Ski Museum or if it so desired to use the space f or an information center or other public purpose until such time at the lease agreement with the Ski Museum has expired . . � . � '. � AQ�E�T1�T M TO APPL�CAT�OIV (Adjacent Property Owners) The adjacent property owners are the same as currently listed in the file with the exception of the Sonnenalp being the current owner of the old Kiandra. Sonnenalp Properties, Inc. Attn: Johannes Faessler 20 Vail Road Vail, CO 81657 (Peter okayed not listing all the adjacent property owners again as they are in the f ile) . . ~ � � Y , �;. S�E�QN� A1�QFNQ�TM TO A�PL��AT�ON �OR AMF��MENT�OR S�PE��AL�EVE_LOPMENT��S,�TR��T_NQ,�_� The following changes need to be made to Ordinance No. 1 Series of 1985 in order to proceed with the proposed structure to be located on Meadow Drive. 1. In Section 2 additional reference should be made to the current set of plans as submitted for the proposed structure located on Meadow Drive. I would assume that this could be called the new Phase IV and the remaining portion of the project would be referred to as Phase V. 2. In Section 6 the paragraph makes reference to Phase IV regarding the minimum distance between building , the only thing that should be added should be possibly a date of the current plans as submitted . 3 . In Section 7 Subparagraph B, once again Phase IV would be the current Phase IV with the plans dated accordingly. 4. In Section 8 the 120,600 sq.ft. of GRFA should remain the same, 175 accommodation units should also remain the same, however , the 72,400 sq.ft. should be reduced by the sum of 5�378 sq.ft. which represents one-half of the total square footage of GRFA in the current Phase IV. This amount of square footage has been devoted to units with a kitchen. The 72,400 sq.ft. should therefore be amended to read 67 ,022 sq.ft. 5. In Section 9 the language pertaining to Phase IV should once again make reference to the plans submitted by Gordon R. Pierce with the current date on such plans. 6 . Section 10 should be amended to reflect the current parking plan on the set of plans submitted with our application. 7 . In Section 11 regarding conditions of approval the f ollowing changes should be made: a. Once again Phase IV should be reflected by the current set of plans submitted by Gordon R. Pierce. b. Subparagraph one should remain the same. c . Subparagraph two should remain the same. d . Subparagraph three remains the same, however , we are not in need of such approval during this phase and that approval would only be necessary upon the development of the next phase. � -`� -- � � e. Subparagraph four should be deleted . The following language should replace the existing Subparagraph four: The developers and/or owners of Phase IV agree to transfer by General Warranty Deed to the Town of Vail free and clear of all liens and encumbrances. Such Condominium unit shall be approximately 3 ,986 sq.ft. in size and shall be located as indicated on the plans and specifications submitted with the application. There would be no restriction on the Deed f or the use by the Ski Museum, however , the space should be used for some public purpose by the Town of Vail . f . Subparagraph five would be deleted . g . Subparagraph six can stay the same. , � � � ' � VAIL VILLAGE INN PHASE V . - : - �� - _ , . � .. COMMERCIAL �UILDING � ', ` : -� �� . • • ' i. I ~� +y , . . . . . , . -. r- �. � � r) n N r_t � - � j � � � � �_ � « � a � _ c r- � cA � ' � r .� r I U L _ � � � cd cd � i � N a J i-+ � I � � � L_ 0� c � � . cd n ,.,a � ---. _t � �-fi � ,, .� � � 3 � � N o� � -- ' 1- 3 L_.� � --- - �'--t-� Z r- � r+ i � pp � � °-� � ----• c �. L--1� �-� � ~ c -- — , r- y Y r ---- � � � RS c .0 � L_� r a � u — � � � � 4 • ` � -y T0: Town Council FROM: Community Development De�artment DATE: February 19, 1985 SUBJECT: Proposed redevelopment of Phase IU of the Vail Village Inn. BACKGROUND OF THIS REQUEST The Town Council approved this proposed ordinance and related resolution at their February 5 meeting by a vote of 4-0-2 (Staufer and Pierce abstaining). There have been no substantial changes in either this proposal or the staff position since its first reading. The memo submitted in your packet for the February 5 meeting has been included in this week' s packet for your review. It should be noted that one change has been made to the previously proposed conditions of approval . This is relative to Condition No. 4 which read: The board of directors of the Colorado Ski Museum and the developers come to agreement on terms for the relocation of the Ski Museum in Phase IV of the Vail Village Inn prior to the issuance of a building permit. This condition has been reworded to solidify the Town' s position as the user of this spa�e if the Ski Museum should ever vacate its space. The change to this condition would read: The board of directors of the Colorado Ski Museum and the developers come to agreement on terms for the relocation of the Ski Museum in Phase IV of the Vail Village Inn prior to the issuance of a building permit. In the event that the Ski Museum would vacate its space in Phase IV of the Vail Village Inn, the Town of Uail shall be given exclusive rights to assume the Ski Museum' s lease of this space. It shall be understood that in the event the Town of Vail does assume the use of this space, all uses in the space shall be public purpose in nature. DESIGN STANDARDS FO4 SPECIAL DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT Section 18.40 of the Municipal Code ( Special Development Districts) requires that certain design standards be met to insure that the development is consistent with the public interest. These design standards are: A. A buffer zone shall be provided in any special development district that is adjacent to a low-density residential use district. The buffer zone must be kept free of buildings or structures, and must be landscaped, screened or protected by natural features so that adverse effects on the surrounding areas are minimized. This may require a buffer zone of sufficient size to adequately separate the proposed use from the surrounding properties in terms of visual privacy, noise, adequate light and air, air pollution, signage, and other adequate light and air, air pollution, signage, and other comparable potentially incompatible factors; � VV�'` 2/19/85 -2- . � B. A circulation system designed for the type of traffic generated, taking into consideration safety, separation from living areas, convenience, access, noise, and exhaust control . Private internal streets may be permitted if they can be used by police and fire department vehicles for emergency purposes. Bicyle traffic shall be considered and provided when the site is to be used for residential purposes; C. Functional open space in terms of: optimum preservation of natural features (including trees and drainage areas) , recreation, views, convenience, and function; D. Variety in terms of: housing type, densities, facilities and open space; E. Privacy in terms of the needs of: individuals, families and neighbors; F. Pedestrian traffic in terms of: safety, separation, convenience, access to points of destination, and attractiveness; G. Building type in terms of: Appropriateness to density, site relationship, and bulk; H. Building design in terms of: orientation, spacing, materials, color and texture, storage, signs, lighting, and solar blockage. I. Landscaping of the total site in terms of: purposes, types, maintenance, suitability, and effect on the neighborhood. It should be noted that these design standards were not specifically addressed at the Planning Commission review or the Council 's first reading of this application. The staff feels, however, that each of these criteria have been addressed through the review relative to the SDD6 or they are not applicable to thcis SDD. The staff would recommend that in their motion for this application that some reference be made to these design standards relative to how they are being addressed with respect to this proposal . STAF�' RECOMMENDATION , As was pointed out at our presentation during the first reading of this proposal , staff is very enthusiastic about the application before you tonight. Staff recommends this proposal be approved with the change made to Condition #4 (as noted above) and that the Council cite this proposal 's compliance with the design standards as outlined in the SDD section (18.40) of the zoning code. ` '' ,r � ` . � tl . k i 6� T0: Planning and Environmental Commission � � FROM: Department of Community Development DATE: January 7, 1985 SUBJECT: A request to amend the approved development plan for Special Development �;�, �,' �., {� :_�;�,. District No. 6 (Vail Village Inn), in the following areas: a revised ' � development plan to include changes in the site plan and heights , . , ', . 1 .. . •;, � . ;�, .�. of buildings, an increase in" allowable GRFA on the site,'the elimination of the required distance between buildings as well as on site parking for charter buses, to approve a conditional use permit for meeting room facilities, and futhermore, to request amendments to the Vail Village Urban Design Guide Plan. Applicant: Anthony Genth I• INTRODUCTION TO THIS PROPOSAL The staff has been working with the applicant on this proposal since late September. The Planning and Environmental Commission has been briefed on this application twice at work sessions during this process. Up until now, an emphasis has been placed on comparing this proposal to the submittal made in the fall of 1983. At this point the focus of review is on how this project relates to the original development plan for SDD#6, the Vail Village Urban Design Guide Plan, and other zoning code considerations. It is the purpose of this memo to determine how this project relates to these three factors. They are essentially the standards with which we have to evaluate the merits � of this proposal . This memo is outlined around these three factors (the SDD, the Guide Plan, zoning and other considerations). The applicant has requested amendmentS to specific sections of the original SOD. Each of these requests will be addressed individually. This project also impacts a number of sub-areas of the Urban Design Guide Plan. The relationship to these sub-areas will then be evaluated. Finally, there are a number of zoning and related issues that will be addressed. II. BACKGROUND ON SDD#6 AND THIS PROPOSAL SDDn6 was established in March of 1976. It is intended to provide for a compre- hensive development and use of an area that is compatible with the general character of Vail . Three phases of the SDD have been completed to date. The area has been developed as a residential and commercial activity center. The proposal before you is in keeping with the nature of existing development on the site. The proposed Phase IV would consist of 175 lodge rooms, a 5,600 square foot meeting room facility, approximately 16,000 square feet of commercial space (this figure includes restaurants) , and extensive underground parking. Con- struction is to be completed in one phase and would require demolition of � , •', •I. , � SDD6 /85 -2- . ;, , �. � . � the existing Vail Village Inn (the Pancake house, Food and Deli , etc). The main mass of Phase IU would extend along the Frontage Road from Phase IV to the Amoco site. It then extends diagonally around the Amoco Station to the intersection of Vail Road and East Meadow Drive. The layout and design of this proposal will be addressed in more detail later in this memo. r��,�a,��, . , ,�� III. REQUESTED� AMENDMENTS TO THE ORIGINAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN �}�� , , ,,�,� , '�� . � The following are the amendments requested to the original development plan of SDD#6: Section 18.050.040 Development Plan. This amendment merely recognizes the exhibits submitted by Gordon R. Pierce as elements of the development plans for SDD#6. Section 18.050.110 Distance Between Buildin s. This section of SDD#6 requires a 50 foot separation between buildings adjacent to SDD#6. The proposed amendment would omit this section entirely. Section 18.050.120 Hei ht. The approved development plan outlines heights for specific areas wi�hin the SDD. The intent of these height limitations was to maintain a view corridor from the 4-way stop to the mountain and to ensure a pedestrian scale along East Meadow Drive. The proposed amendment would eliminate the specific height limits in these areas and instead allow a maxi- C / mum "average height of the project not to exceed 45 feet. " The staff would prefer this section to read: "as per the approved development plan. " Section 18.050.180 Parkin . This amendment would eliminate the requirement that parking for charter buses be provided on site. 18.50.060 Conditional Uses. Conditional uses in this SDD are the same as those found in the P.A. zone district. The applicant has proposed a 5,600 square foot meeting room within Phase IV. This will require approval of a conditional use permit by the PEC. Section 18.50.130 Densit . Residential development of SDD#6 is restricted to 100,000 square feet of GRFA. Also, the GRFA devoted to accommodation units shall exceed the GRFA devoted to dwelling units. Additionally, if all GRFA is devoted to to accommoda��on uri�s, the �:um5er of a. �. 's shall not exceed 300. The applicant has requested that the "total GRFA of all buildings con- structed not exceed 120,600 square feet." This is the amount of GRFA that would be allowed on the site under Public Accommodation zoning. The following table summarizes the existing and proposed densities for SDD#6. � ��6 1/7/85 -3- , .�, � � _ � EXISTING DEVELOPMENT * Commercial ��s��Yt�� .. PhdSe I 16,128 :;��t��F�;�,��-�: Phase II 6,473 � � : , , � f.x.�:�;� , :� .��. Phase III 10,600 ,. _�,.��k�. �;ri;�+,:.', �,r � ,� ` ; j , �.�,,,,. ��a .. Deli 1 ,800 ) This space would be Swiss Hot Dog 150 ) removed to allow for Pancake House 3,010 ) construction of Phase IV. Stein Garden 800 ) bar Total 38,961 square feet existing commercial *Note that commercial square footage is not restricted under SDD#6. Residential � D.U. ' s A.U. ' s GRFA Phase I 0 0 0 Phase II 4 0 3,315 Phase III 29 0 44,830 *Vail Village Inn 0 52 16,585 Totals 33 52 64,332 * The Vail Village Inn will be removed for construction ot Phase IU. PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT Commercial Phase I, II , and III 33,201 (existing) Phase IV 16,250 (proposed) Total 49,451 �` Under this proposal , there will be a net gain of 10,490 square feet of commercial space. • : . �` SDD6� � '�5 -4- \►■.i Residential r D.U. 's A.U. ' s GRFA � Phase I 0 0 0 Phase II 4 0 3,315 Phase III 29 0 44,830 (Proposed) Phase IV 0 175 72,450 ��`� ' '�'� `�� 33 175 120,595 square feet .;s, _. As has been stated, the existing SDD limits GRFA to 100,000 square feet. Under this limitation, only 51 ,855 square feet of GRFA couid be developed on this SDD. GRFA being requested is 20,595 square feet over what is presently allowable. The number of units are within the number permitted by SDD �6. IV• REQUESTED AMENDMENTS TO THE URBAN DESIGN GUIDE PLAN There are five sub-area concepts that are affected by this proposal . They are: Sub-area concept #11 - Bus shelter � The applicant has proposed a bus shelter that will be integrated into the portion of Phase IV that fronis onto East Meadow Drive Sub-area concept #10 Plaza linkage across East Meadow Drive uniting commercial area. Feature area paving, planters, kiosks, benches, etc. Further study needed, integral to infill developement in #9. The developer has proposed an entryway to the Village Inn Plaza at approximately this location. This should provide an inviting pedestrian linkage off of East Meadow Drive. The developer has agreed to participate in funding a "plaza linkage" across Mea�ow Drive from VVI ±o a future commercial expansion at the Kiandra Lodge site. The following three sub-areas are, by the nature of this development, inter- related. They are: Sub-area #7 Landscaped open space, approved element of Vail Village Inn special development district. Pedestrian path connection to Frontage Road and Town Hall . � �� •, � � 1/7/85 -5- � Sub-area #3 Traffic circle turn-around to limit penetration of lost traffic. Convey a "dead-end" road closure appearance from the Frontage Road and at the sa:;;� time create a major landscape focal point for west end of East Meadow Drive =�:� as linkage to Lionshead. Traffic south of circle reduced by clear sign directives. -�;, Location of circle dependent on long-range plans for Ski Museum (see #5). Sub-area #5 Ski Museum site improvements. Outdoor display area framed by tree planting. Raised paving surface with planters on front (circle) side for low-maintenance entry. Pedestrian walk continues around to west. Long-term expansion potential limited. Further study needed to determine site suitability. These three sub-areas are inter-related by the development proposed for the southwest corner of this site. The original SDD#6 included a recommended land use, landscape, and building mass plan. This plan called out for a a large portion of this corner to be a landscaped zone. The Urban Design Guide Plan adopted this design consideration in its long range plan for the area. The applicant has proposed locating a building on a substantial portion of this corner. The staff has consistently raised this point as a significant issue of concern because of the lost landscaped area (Concept 7) and the � long range impact on the viability of completing the traffic circle turnaround (concept #3) . In response to this concern, the applicant has proposed providing a landscaped area on the site of the ski museum. This would serve as a replacement for the landscaped zone that is not provided on site. The developer is working with the museum directors and has proposed providing them space in Phase IV. The staff sees many positive aspects from this proposal . Foremost among these is that the building along East Meadow Drive will screen the loading and parking area of Phase IU. Secondly, it will allow for the removal of the ski museum building. This is seen as an advantageous move because of the building' s poor physical condition and its close proximity to the street. The other related sub-area concept is the turnaround circle. A preliminary study has been done concerning this proposal . If Phase IU were to be constructed as proposed, and the museum building removed, it would still be possible to install the turnaround circle. However, in meetings with Town of Vail department heads and adjacent property owners, it was gnerally agreed that the circle idea may not be functional . Regardless of this, the overall impact of this proposal will not be a negative one on this sub-area concept. The ski museum representatives are very enthusiastic about this proposal and details of the move are currently being worked on. The other related sub-area concept is the turnaround circle. A preliminary study has been done concerning this proposal . If Phase IV were to be constructed as proposed and the museum building removed, it would still be possible to � install the turnaround circle. However, in meetings with Town of Vail department heads and adjacent property owners, it was generally agreed that the circle idea may not be functional . Alternatives to the circle conc�pt ra�;e been �+i�- cussed and will receive further study in a long-term effort to improve the intersection. Regardless of this, the overall impact of this proposal will not be a negative one on this sub-area concept. ��.~��V�n,`��.. � i,t�w►�-�{ . >,�r . � ��,t �:4 r �.{ � E. ,,!il ' � f y '' { , .. . -}�F� `F��.lrY': 4�� +`?: �-3 I i. 1r �. r f � 4. _ a '� : � a ! ; � . t � `{ '�`. � r 7•^► � �. +�� 'i-_�rrv-sr -,-�'S� t`s 'S w � � � ,j,' � f , _""'"v ' � 7 ' i� �Z., � � r �� . � j f � '. . �t.Y C sl�� '4 ti { �` + �r .1, `t�t'`� r:� .t. i;'Y' �i�{ � � (fr. , : �r !+7 y�� r *, . � r� ' ti • . J.�et-r 1° ,'�� ?. � �. �c:�_ �#�� .�J' -'�+- �t :a 7'. �a� 7`i ♦��jil � �.�i,.J A s � -y' ±- � ��,. � ��.•. ;��.:� ��f`s..��1'.trw' �s�tt ��r,�,�}- ��1�'�� jr ' �?�� j�:�'r ��'f. F��fS�l. \::1'Y �-c,�' �iiri T.,_d{'"��' �� .yr �'l.�.,�e�'�� .rr-'� -y\ , ♦ � .f .� ' I.! ` �. � �� . .+{� ��..�; _,�� ", '�•.� ,- �F �Y :. f'�C,-�.^��,r ,y. � tia- rv.t �ar�.!. '�� .i } +'°3�' �.. � ,p � �t � "s.t. .ny� t' J�'2{� i . �''... •,t.,,., �- •��*aL 'T .�.��a�E f,�� '!'��? � �+ �j 't",jr��}1"a+f �:��`�ib�'�".r �•' � . �.X��x �r4`�✓ .�,�+ '-�IjV•t L �a.� �f C . .� �t 1 '�'.� .'-is��j'�jt,C�.�...�`i'��'�: .�743�"� .�;- �' ►�� t K . � '+� h'.i.: .i -; � J-K � y, '1 f1! Zi HY y� v �:'tt:� K";�;�`� , �. y t;� l�,l _}-�a�� f r� , � r'. ,.. t �V� . .r 6, +�i�i1r�.� s<,�;� 'S. h.�, at:� `� �� AF �� ,�,,, � =oiC�. K'!�. �"' a..,y� �"s;♦ .�j !�t� 'sw -aa��-i� r�'� Y� '� � �r:� sW�t' .x. y'<<' �l 1.�1 �, ��. �1�.. .� 'r � :j€ir4{� � 4u4 '...�j�r-�. �� ,} ��rt 1i ff �I�-a s��i�7►��•y;',�� +4ry1 '��, . �l.��`� s�•��{' rs •✓�1 �}M� � �y,'��i•'•�'�`��.':�Y .'.7 -�.r t� 41.fi f'I �T1 �r• -� '�` �T ;�^��:.��.�a {�K�(�`��}• - M - «�`i' 1 � � S�� .� ^ �f �'y y " 1�- ��s,a„w�� .�i.• � ��i ` S�r t ��^v 1 �,= � .l�i ,� `L�y � i �'t ''�t�{ ��t�r.i .� ,� �� ` t 4�,�--v :s�� ;�w - Y-.;.,� � -Y.`j*�. �`"7�;�et�. ,� �, _ .,� F 2 �ilt� r -. � '�+. {��. �. �ri.. � ,rr ►:<. -��`4 ti , °;r s;� w J� �� r Y`� , e, { ��_��>�,: r, � r�rP.ti-� `y*�a� � ._r+�7Pt �� .."�� .+ i F#�,fe.�T'�.�Z'Y �:��7 `��; - .• �'�.1; t",lt.•` "� ��( �; S � c+)�..� ! . Y..� r.� �r�:...'t ��," ��r :-f 1 y 'LL/J ��,,��: ,.,, ��. �-.. .��.,�,�> '��•....7 y� �a'�`�: .�( �Yi\�� 's� "t .�r �^r"_;. f _ / � ,i� .� �y{� • `� a „�.� �d�l iFj. �y► �`` ��_ � .}��-�.�e.;p� �L �+ � ♦'=r_ 'Y.7F��) �y4�:�:,� +- y.._` i- L' ' _v ��fkSt. ; 1�. ;� :r T '1� �..7�i�{ti�,. �,�:� ! i ry-�:�t ��r"5��,��°�,s� -X�a i��k+�� . i�„b�'�r.rF' � �i � '`� � 7� � r�� ,,<�L`:,;yy'+,"�.�.� '"4't 'cr-�t.- �+t'� ?�ila.9�-�`� -3r�.cJ:•t .+.:�� -rt'. . _... ;. �t `� �� .�� r_ -� y+}��tk`��.2�i'� .w, � ..�'t,.�-w}�G:` .yc,{rY,�y.+�`�`.�s�'��.1��;-�{'�I�i,�, t�� _�� . `-� �-��4`..�� ;� - � �-j��2:�'k,yT�f��.�{',� �(:�T"� '�.`'�'�^�.�1.J 4t°) a.-a";r!�}],��[ �;,��'f�t^ .;��/'t �t _r�-- �,� . i� f � _ -!;,, y<�^Y34a/r.. -Y�r �� M,f '��' E..t.= t.t �. �� ` � .• Et i� ��.��,�� •�SS��.i �'{� 2y N i\4TZ�1'� . � N��,��"�- � ` � L"y��Y... rt . � �� .'4f'�`-Ti�ar'�.}�'�i�&i. Y�� r'^4'��'," �,�:.�� Z��s� 'Y,.� i�+ ,��'��."' �� . �a+rt�'�.. �.: � r s.. . � , � �-r, �r '� ,af � �¢ r ,,� :.-t. � r�� ,� •z z c .s��-�, '� a�-.Y �7 Jly:��"i �f }i P,�„Je3r c 1 .tiS�'�i-t �'}� : t 3�_<. �y+�. �r1'�^^ �s -�,_1.S`.� c:-�i F• "a M .'� 1 -r� �s-��yi o" ky � T's-yiSK�Y�� ;� � �.►. �•:i� �{.. � .. 4. ��E � .-.� .�`i r t. ��„f[°c"�`j � +�i^S�j fr` �.¢�` �v�#}�4 :rty�..>',:.¢, �'-1t-�;_ A*'�"!� �S� '� -r '�" T:�.�� '� a4i_ n ��`.� �-� � �.� _, �+'r' ;Jf�'_v .-`i_ .ri..lf-3� r�'T.��_(� ' � S �'� �4. .��, l �J R � j� ._` � ��: �� Y l'. 'E*.r.� • � ¢Y+ � i%-+ "Y'� � t��h� _ �1� �... i� F.� }� '°+ �'.t �. �� t sw t 2.,.1� .. � ,t,��f � ti.s.`�'�ra '�rx,T �-'Z.' :'�." .ti� .7s � ��,� 1! `--.t�.�" �.j.r- ' _'��Q s-� . N �w -.?f -� a �.T �Y -�� f.��Y'�_.'T< � ��. �+��•� .�S� °�<''S�r�t v r�.� Y��+d. ±.,� .i,w �.� �� +.�'�'�, L . iy `F'�it_f..r J .2t,•-✓ st. -�7S �"'� s�'{RSy;{�:._c� - �. � . }1 i,.� � r . `�'�--�. . � af ��-i- :*� "��i�,9�f L*, � .,�2F �11 �c �-'�SYe:�n>r',rr y 1y _ -}�� '��` -'k s ��`�' *v-� t�€ ��'�'�• � a"'`... �``�i.,:�"-�` ��Sti � ..�� ' , �`�' , a .!ts��{:_ � ti" fi - - � �+�+'��4,r"�.� � ��'��}f.Xt -A--YSJ}`� E. �� '� � .�. �G�!Y�l'rO� ..y� a �R 'crt. �-i�� .��.-F ti-��r;;7� r t��,.�s�.%y) 1�y .1w��. .•r�r! 1 '' i� j3_7 �_`;-a t��ti"� '� � .:w , �'�"'^ � :ri }.i � . r�,►+' �-t� , a'�� "'"i�` F ...+ . .' � _ ��. a�'s�''�t� 1� �- s�`•#� c�,.�,�, �� - .Y�r .�t ;4� ��s�tl i+.tr�. � x4r-��'� ?��ax ?,tit� � r"- ,l �,t •--ri� -a,�,�°''+� ,. '�.. r S, '� � � z- ►ti� ',; t . ,,,_,�». � . � � y : f '�~ . �,!' ad ,,.� '� � s -.��t ��sa, a �.,�.. '� `,�. �:r�+.. €t Y t �� '�''� �.: a a''°�` ��;. - - , ��4:.11.�-.y.-,�j'Y'_ -.w� '� ��L j • ` ... _ . �>? .��'J' ��r L` 4; � _. � �� Y �I { � �!�d �ky.�Y.Z .if�`..�� ,2+,'a��i`7��•` �.- ��-%''�Y""'►T*�pR�s�,'L: � r� , a � �: �f`� � , .; ��"� < a�l.� , .1\�, 4*- _ � ':a�-'F7 �}-< .�, �`}. �j�, `t R I Y.- ��4� r`'riil� I `Z �, i�yx•'�y�� `�t . .� 'ti �i i`fi J ;=�•' ,t F. ,,�_, _ .�i'Y^J,,� �Y14' ./�°q-7��_+{� Q. iY� Y=Yi•-�i t .:y� P r3 .c.i Y : C: ti� � � `�f ��'4 =: �,;.s•.tA�+�� Sta-1'�`3�i�_ Y`D.t�'2,� �-N" '4,,, >>-}''�'y � ",h n K' ' �� -� ��_,. �. � �� t. - a �♦ � t �S ��r �q�I'_ {4s s. � .� �•• �i_.'' Y ,. �7 'S..t�1�_ � .'� � � �: p '�' y �J"'��„�.t�3r =.��'�2'� F ��"��._��. { .�!-�t�{> � ie��*��a,.L,' ��' +�+ k '?''� � .L e, l y � �. j :� .t'si,�'�Y t�_,y �,2��-'r:f��i= ,e�.�i-.- �� c-�i' -,�� k.S ��'- .� . •�`�'?' � - u�'"r'x� 'f ��±� ��' r,.s-K ik '� E.. �= �.:- -. �r .�� a ��J?2'.�r� � 'X � fi�� `�y •r �' �k` ,,L"`'r'' '/-i i +5b.��; �a�° -� � t:�)�"-�r 4�:' �-�. <�` �y�yj•S"�'�`tts.�,,�l:,s'�t�. � {!'t .� -.� f 1 s -��::`'�'�� -'• ' � '`'� .��++�1-1.� ��`i f_�.:Y . �1-� ��,.h- ?. �Z-`� r.-��4� .�..,� , �� _ =�-v,j�'�.J•'A"4-��s ..P - � t�i '-..I �Y , �,�_ at:.� . 1 �� ;, ,� �G�-�,Z � K__ - {� c r,<` r � ��-'�5- :�.,_; .. ..'. . �°�� ",£-"x. �^'!t s . �,, i ' i .. .3ti,�y' y��t} l�e`��.0 `•�`-�= -+�x,�� 'r: e r .ir�. . �a:l �F� ,�i,� '� T� ~ � `� ��'��yt'��-4,'��1�t � f tx . s � ��a v �rtd r� �`r��. �. � � } l� " -. � 'C`�y.,.;i,�� 4 �,_+ �_� � ��. � "trl."'f�'a ��yt- �a��'?�x��y. � ,7i �.?-�r �.yr�'� �J-:-P � .rt � a.`� � i.F?-f' w' _ +��' 'S*�l.�'"�F`'' y:-�Y � - i��a�. y,I'"ti� }'.� s.' � • �� - �•�� -�a.r��t�+. F-��--� ,,� . Y� "`-ti�.` -ti,��i<K��,. `t� ,y� �-"�:t'fYl� .- � . ^ ;�: �� ..� �,-��.. ��'��:.�t � � ,. '°�� k=-�•�.� -��a ;��,�"��.�:� � ,��,,'� r��,,� t: . - �, � ' f C�}�S:< �Y 1+, 1 j ic.,�,�aan. .,�w�s+ .,, . °$ � �"�'+r�wt�e,��.� �=S.�.*�,�� ,� � i- s'r� :,,.�a��°..r,�,�.,�;c�� •�'`��' _��,� 2-'"r'^"�t. _ t � r�a.�.. � :'ykk�t,v_�J��~� tl��te�� a-'{ `,YS'�`� �� -S'-c`,� ` .L� � , �.� a � .��s",��+' � .. i i ' .-:.ti �, n�~ •��s�• y� e� '�} �� r-`• �' . -I' ;� -7. � � � - �� - ' ��i' '� �,� � " `�l. '°?��s` �- '� ��:,' - �t zk� ��.;✓?" _ ` � _ � 'S 3��-�'�..��,�.ck� iK� �-- � '� � � .� ' ` ' " '- -,r•:.'�.'� , ,.s:I,. �i �'� l t�'��' .1��'� }�°l �•. .�+ . -<'" "s f.. ��:;} �F �� .. �� l j" �,k�� -�.~.�,� _.k}�,�Y`'s4' r�� ``- v-- .Y -' -/ � 'k^' �t�_ . ,, , _ �. � Y:�;��# r-ss-,�. { _:x, -g�;. r ��,�r r',t'd,,,'�7,=, t_. , r _ 3�..t i �y' � � r-�z'i"s ?....1! �:��-��' `-� _ ��,u. � �'- r��%i�.� � {_� � �i� c� _ _ �'�'�_�.._ -s,�".t• �' ,^_��'^. :.� - "�', :�� 1 .�,� �� .�.; f' r '� .a~ �S..�/� -��:�..;_..... ..l.�,°-� �F=:::S'�, �i4�: i ��'�"1 � ^r.. �' j�'!�{C �F - O_ r< ::�:::: �i;;�; 'k'.:^�jrr� , .a,±, :�-t�'' .�i l� �,�,r'." � �. � ��4��i.`,-Y %' s-t!'.,.1. i -.�.• - :1�", . t S '�F' ;�� .ot: - . . .. ( � .''"'.:1�]% _ . ' '`:'r�:+�� ;r��-ro`�' ' �� ..c �C , �!c��l��.. Yy. .�a ,5 �� ,"'tsciAk=r� :.?=- ^�-�-i.Y�t:, ii•"'SZM=-`'q" � ti :.i'= :t'� " j Lf�r'�.x y�i; '�. ty,�� {y �'� � f _ ;i, -�� c �.,","ri`-ry�� _;., .�'� `}i,ti �}�p,.�•`Ys�:� ,� "i�'r�t;�::i�LS ;t:.3: ' •y .t` _ • y"�cy �1a�}-..i. i. ,�js� .(,,_1 ` .`�' . _ .tV' 1j_ �5��,::"•' , . , ;�*�;_ ; '7Y}. e� . - '�: �_ �' r r:. � ... , ,�'R`'�'�` " 5 ".�i?� 7l��+��... ��;�. � -^� �. _ �.�� s jjjjjj�� r-� �l� '�.�i'�' �_- .w~ .�� ' ..�,-:��I ~::"tL- �' ��'��`F�- -� ��0.4�,1;� ��,L �� - �;'t .�.� ��.Y�y �'- ��t'`� � ^#;t.7:�'Y:�J::',:' -�,�:.��4t�.a✓:, tt��' �;..1 T��M�,�� .�.; 1Y.� Yo-7�� _ � ��,,J :�si `� aj r1S f y^�"�.� �:�''�`f�a_:'� ,S�'�(�1�/. _ .t-,^ r�1 `i� �{/.7�� ;f:,r '�Y �r�'N. _' 1 ::yt]:. . � ' _ ":�wR L J(1 _ K. ��a. �"+��. � :i':'�I.".--1 'w�,.��w � ili.��t� x- '� M��T •- i �" �. � �.. �� :L'1:.L-'_t...':::,:::: �o� '� t _, �s ., --91 �� „ � .. ..'� � :�' �:_;:. ' .� � +f .�a •R,;�t,' '. j-'�i� � 3�_S,fi �o�t d. .� rE"' i �•.,:=�? •�•-• �t � :-t .+ ' � 1Y"` � j'V T'�s � ..r 1 t`� 'C:t ��.�"'�: k 4!� ` }�'(' .�.,. -,tfa'YJyn�,. ''S`' ' �...2 �y-��. �,j �y Yt.-- = i ` � . ti. )�v_ +' .r� �.� �'Ix:��. ,��,^S"�-�t` t �� ,i, ~ .� �''; .�� ~ .� �.4�.t " t- ? �,'[ s i .f�� . � . �. -��_1 � � yJ� `s� ��.( �cn r .,,_;�� 3^�,� �i$. ], t 1 r� ,x i�-' _ Yi,�!r :°f"�?s"b'�..';.'3�.7�f' �� Y�c�art y }.�-�. " ��[a � � 7' � � �� y � t�t 2� � � �f r�� VA;��F. ''��cl ��..��t'S1i��{` ��.'• L�'?t'. /..0 -�t; �2��,, `-�i i...t.TL .)..'�t.� � �t -�,�•`'�_l'2� -_ :,t��.�'� ��:�►.i3'Z�S!��Sd'�'4e�� X� '"Y�1- ��k,«'Y��.- S.i:� C �{'4'��- •.: -ft:::�-�"'��`�':i�:e::.. _r.� C �'�:�k.� ��,�.�_ .'S�r rr . � 'Fr fdthC.ai-'},��' �;Z�`,�``�5��'�{�''��y.�,'��I��S�+s }� -�t� ^i: ' i �,A�� "5:.: '; it:2::�ir:f•...S �tc [�.� �� Is�:".4f�' 3.'„� .�;,�,7: ;�; . y7_• ,�,,• r i�� ;. c� r�, ��,. r ` � � • :':::,c:_!:. ir �. r: v r �� .p *; :'�� ,� .� � L' '�y"� � X �� t ;,f'',.s : �� .e� �` �ii�J Y •�c s� --�i-<c. * ti��L s cs ' '� -} 4? � �.� � �:.��, ,x� '��,: �' �� tn' . E� ',�r e ir i �)';�r�..`�� `x....,^.•t..i,.4�`-;_. C �'� �'�_..: '.. i \ �� [ Y ,a� . t � l.:'T"::1.;: ,� � �� . ��'�:�k � i��• "`,��r'�. �'� v w , �� a • :•� 1� , �I'i' �� .Y � +�.{' ±� S �Z:`��r� �S' sr�' r�l�' tl: ,1...�:_..:.'T;,,�i tn�.r � � � H/j{..��, �! .4:.', �• � \>` .�� `t� � � �t�1�:sii "","ii:.i: �r'' � � �,''�1�� + +:x'•��:4 �,� i {J�:.'. 1!, �c � �f�• ' .1 . . � � � r�.lr �l. 1 �t ..ry �-aY.�F t , f'. .+�� . 1 4,�yj^�� g }z l. ';�t � .~ t . f�.� .c t ^ i •,,-r. �f �;3�. �t - `' ,}. ;� � � .� + �' r �. � + . ' �2• �r_ � t i �r �! *�i 4i' Y �� e/-'�. �,' �!5' .y/� i a !�.-�,�r� *.► " � �tir. � ' ��r;�"j t�`S�,f� ��t1 � x� �/ �y? R ti 't{��,bTti ` s.�� r � * t �, _ �r� �� f 1.:.' � 11��Jf �,r _ S. -�y`�� ., � }� aj� �.�,s. �.� -2.- � .. ,t' .r. � � �.L "3 • �� tiK,t'+FR ..w-f� -rri '�� '�+ +�'j-� ,�,.A�-.�� '�'��j ��`- �J ' �� C1�., t,t.•� ti ,'t,�� .��` � � ! r Y �i>'Y r�� :�- . :�(d-�ir4 ��'tJ �'fni-.-.. .�. ��.' �,�`v� �y� ��. � •.ir,� .( t.� �`7 �.. j , . +"..� �.. J �.� �:. r� �:�.��.t �S�. J ttt---rrr it1 Y� � ,l '• � i-.� l.:ri. c "� �`t ,.�, :`S� •�_?(' 1S/�y',�.'{f,ij� c�r�4 F i 'r. fil ,r��, �� s T � ,�.�'„} - �j�� 1 . ��y� • ^` t .S � Yt-�r. ,`�: � ! '� ''� � l A Yx�� r�}'r. � 7' � �� *�- ti�� 1,� �� ,, v��r , � '�' � f '�►��' '.6 { � �`.�' 1!� �� ; „c 'L .'? 1 f ,p�7'(. � �. ' , :� � . ��ti-` ti� . � �:,. - f1�_ .�. � .�`1 .�t��.� -�;Il��;y , ;� �• � 3 _ �� t; � �• . � � � ,; - :� , `� �� ' • v , �`�� r^'�••►RK1 ;.t�,`s,� �• � .!"� - t •� ,t,' . .� �^ 11��!• � j„ yc• # � ,�i � �ti��j•K;.��k -15. Z - �� y N �; f� '� � t�'�t�• V� �� :i: x'` t�i'1- .` f•T/\ ,.Y'�� _'{ '�v'�'}•��j�`� �� ( L.� '�' ��-� -.l�� .�' •�• •�' " 1 9� l� �� '/ ��, '�'�'fS4 .��.=� � !�y}'�yso�' iw�'�)� '-,�.� S ��` ,'r '... �� `�j y.+►? J�.4.�. c. � t �.1 . d '4��. t .-.J�I'1� �'^C, ` l�� '�j� a~�' ��n . .y Y .'�; . � .�'� � . ' .'1�,t tT 4' r . - � r �� ... F . �/r •� ' ^�� 1� `�� :;t �` �" ,`2. �,� _ ,�, � �,a.'.n. ,.�'. � '4 -� �.'�_ . . {f ��`1'�t� i:.`l'r,�y , �''��►�ib�tbt;?��'�� t.tV`�.;rY, ,��.., r ' �t.4 �:.. ;'`.:..+h� �l j., ,�!.'r � � _.'� _l.;�'�• .t..i ')}'L y+`,�"il�I i:,�i�.'��'� iv'L�,,,t ' �� f�,Y •rj�:�:r� ,..� .�.I�. c . :"7i; � . '�.� ti . � ..� ' -. , - � �� , ' � �,! � ,M 7,�C, �7.'f�;'� .} d { rR�f�'.�'�r'��' ��n��F �'t� � �' �� '� ; �� .S ��; .�f F• � .t��' �t • �'• � + .v.15�r1: �'��r,r.r. d-'.-+� �' ��Y� 5 �- �}�r �� „�''��/ i� �,;u 7 a ��" � t �' � / _ ,f � y�,� �� 1' 'S� . ..1 . ..'� ..... . . ._ •`•�i1 � _ ., � � :,�.�!v.��l ��v,_ �:•.'� «�.��:�� •�.. ... ' �" ;,L ��f� . .- . ` -� , . ,� -,,. • SDD6 1, � � -6- . , , ,�� ..`�, .� V. ZONING CONSIDERATIONS � The zoning considerations that are not addressed through the adopted develop- ment plan for SDD6 include the following: Setbacks �a��,�� aur.�„�+ There are no required setbacks in SDD6. It is specifically stated in the � ,��,��,t development plan that portions of commercial space may abut the southerly _ property line. Otherwise, setbacks shall be such as to provide adequate space for plantings and acceptable relationships to adjacent properties. � Parking and Loadinq Required on-site parking for SDD6 is to be calculated with respect to all phases of development. The following table outlines the required parking for SDD6. Summary of Parkinq Requirements Phase I commercial 53 spaces Phase II commercial 21 residential g Phase III commercial 34 residential 47 Required parking for Phases I, II, and III = 164 � Proposed Phase IV lodge rooms 145 commercial 36 restaurant/lounge 44 *meeting room 24 249 � I64 (existing demand) 413 - 41 (10 reduction for multi-use) 372 Total parking for entire SDD = 372 Spaces existing in Phase III = 109 263�Parking provided in Phase IV = 252 11 spaces deficit Composition of Phase IV spaces: compact 41 regular 174 valet 37 *This figure includes a 50% reduction for meeting room facilities due to � the mixed use nature of the meeting room (part of the hotel operation). ' ; � SDD6 � '84, -7- As indicated by this table, SDD6 will have a deficit of 11 spaces upon completion � of Phase IV. It is the feeling of the staff that these 11 spaces could be accom- modated in the VUI facility using valet parking services. Staff is of the opinion that this project can meet its parking requirement as established in the zoning code. We feel the parking proposal is a strong one and no parking problems will be created by the proposal . ,^ `��-,;,, The applicant has proposed three loading bays for Phase IV. One of these will � .� �, . . be for trash removal . As proposed, this project would be required to have five ' " " loading bays as per the parking standards in the` zoning code. The staff feels the loading facilities proposed will be adequate to serve this development. One issue of concern with respect to the loading and delivery to this site is the ability of 18-wheel vehicles to maneuver on the property and not cause conges- tion on Vail Road. The applicant has submitted drawings demonstrating how an 18-wheel vehicle can service this development without backing off of Vail Road. While the turns for the vehicles will be tight, it appears as though this mar�euver can be accomplished on the surface parking area. This should solve what was a major concern with potential blockage of traffic on Vail Road. VI. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT The EIR submitted for your review is the second revision to this document. Initially submitted in December, the staff returned to the applicant a long list of questions and concerns related to tnis reporL. A second draft of this document was completed and submitted to the staff last week. While time constraints have not allowed � for a thorough review of this revision, the staff feels a reasonable job has been done in addressing our previous concerns. If this proposal is to be recom- mended for approval by the Planning Commission, staff recommendation is that this document be included as an element of the approved development plan. Included in this EIR is a traffic study done by Centennial Engineering. This report recommends left turn lanes and other modifications should be made to Vail Road in order to accommodate increased traffic load. The applicant and staff concur with this recommendation and would encourage the Planning Commission to include this document as an element of any approved deve�opment p�an. VII. STAFF RESPONSE TO REQUESTED AMENDMENTS There have been a number of amendments requested to both the original development plan of SDD6 and to the Vail Village Urban Design Guide Plan. The staff generally views these requests favorably. However, a number of these request� are very significant and merit further comment. Amendments to the Urban Desiqn Guide Plan The staff has continually felt strongly that a landscape zone be provided as called out for in the original SDD and in the Urban Design Guide Plan. It is felt that the applicant' s proposal to relocate the Ski Museum and provide this � : . . �� nD6 1/7/85 -8- ',, � landscaped space adjacent to this site is a good one. Allowing development out to the southwest corner of this site provides a natural beginning point to the Village. There are also design considerations that make this an improved solution. The proposed vehicle turn-around circle could be impacted by the design of Phase IV. �� {f{' With the museum building removed, this circle could be accommodated in a somewhat :�t`j�}°' n�� altered form. However, preliminary study indicates that there is not a great ��"�''�`'` ` deal of support for this concept. The relocation of the Museum, demolition of the building, and landscaping of the Museum site is a very positive aspect of this development proposal . The staff is in support of these requested amend- ments to the Urban Design Guide Plan with the conditions outlined in the staff recommendation of this memo. Conditional Use for Meetinq Room Facilities The staff supports the request for meeting room facilities in this project. See accompanying memo for staff response to this conditional use request. Distance Between Buildinqs The applicant has requested omitting the required 50 foot separation between buildings on sites adjacent to this SDD. The staff finds it difficult to justify this requirement. In reviewing the recommended land use plan for this SDD, access points to the building' s underground parking facilities were initially designated to be located on either side of the gas station site. This created � a natural separation of 50 feet between the gas station and development on the SDD. It should be emphasized that this plan was very conceptual , and not to be considered a firm document. For example, the plan made no provisions for loading facilities. The plans before you today offer a much improved circulation program than one that could be provided using access points outlined in the original SDD. Assuming that these proposed access points are not a wise solution, there is little reason to enforce a 50 foot separation between development on this SDD and adjacent structures. He�ghts As previously stated, the intent of the recommended height limitations on this SDD was to ensure a view corridor from the 4-way stop to the mountain and a pedestrian scale along West Meadow Drive. The result of this objective is that higher densities were proposed for the area along South Frontage Road (i .e. Phase III ). While there are some deviations from the recommended building massing in the approved SDD, the proposal before you today is generally in keeping with the intent of the height limitations. The staff considers the key factors to be the pedestrian scale along Meadow Drive and the view corridor from the 4-way stop to the mountains. The scale of the buildings along Meadow Drive is in comp� iance with the recommended heights in the SDD and compatible with development in Phases I and II. While the angle of the view corridor has been shifted slightly, the height of the buildings in this area are in compliance with the maximum heights outlined in the SDD ( development plan. 1_ , � SDD6 1/7/85 -9- . ; �r..- ..� The most significant deviation from the recommended heights in the original � SDD are along the frontage road and a portion of the building off of Vail Road. The SDD allows for a maximum height of 158 feet for the buildings along the frontage road. As proposed, the original elevation for Phase IV would be 165 feet. While greater than the height allowed for in the original develop- ment plan, this height is equal to the existing elevation of Phase III. The SDD also requires this portion of the building to step down as it approaches "�r' the Amoco site. While the staff is comfortable with the transition between ;�.: - this wing of the building and the Amoco station, the building does exceed the height outlined in the SDD as 'it approaches the station. A similar situation exists with the portion of the building adjacent to Vail Road and the south property line of the Amoco site. In this area the building exceeds the height by 8 feet and has a less gradual "step down" toward Vail Road. Here again the staff is comfortable with this transition from the building down to Vail Road. Dens�ty As has been stated, this request is for 20,595 square feet of GRFA over what is allowed under the existing SDD. This is the amount of GRFA that would have been allowed under this site' s previous Public Accommodation zoning. It is the staff' s position to support this requested GRFA if it can be demon- strated that the site can adequately handle it. In weighing this issue, the following factors must be corsidered: 1 ) The applicant has not asked for an increase in numbers of rooms allowed under existing zoning. 2) The amount of GRFA requested does not exceed what would be allowed under PA zoning. ( 3) There appears to be some merit to the property owner' s argument that the �� 100,000 square foot figure was selected somewhat arbitrarily in 1976. 4) The architect has demonstrated how this building with 100,000 square feet could be constructed with virtually no less of impact of bulk and mass. 5) Market studies indicate an increased demand for larger, luxury type of hotel accommodations. 6) This type of upgrading is indicative of the redevelop- ment that is desired for Vail Village and called for in the Community Action Plan. The staff feels the applicant has adequately demonstrated that this site can handle the development proposed. Consequently, we support this request for additional GRFA on this site. VIII. IMPACTS OF THIS PROPOSAL ON ADJACENT PROPERTIES As you may recall , when this propos?d redevelopment was reviewed in 1983 it included the Amoco station site. The Amoco site is not included in this proosal , and the proposed development has some direct impacts on the station. The most significant of these are the circulation and access problems that will be created by the construction of Phase IV. The applicant has proposed the construction of a wall along its westerly most property � ine adjacent to the gas station site. This will eliminate circulation around the station that is presently accommodated by encroaching onto the Vail Village Inn property. In addition, this proposed development will eliminate access to the Amoco � � . • SDD6 1/" - -10- • , `�... �-,�,� station that has historically taken place over UVI property. The remaining � access point off of the frontage road will be a steep grade (as it always " has been) that will be difficult to use in the winter months. While the impacts on the Amoco station are unfortunate, it appears as though the Amoco station has little option but to endure these consequences and seriously consider some alterations to their own site. ��;� �� IX. TOWN "OF VAIL INTER-DEPARTMENTAL REVIEW 4 ;, ,�. �, �� }�.�r i�j:: u ' The Public Works , Police, and Fire Departments have all been involved in the review of this application. The Police Department has given their support to the project as presented. Public Works and the Fire Departments have approved these plans with the condition that more detailed information be submitted at the Design Review Board review and at the time a building permit be issued. Further information needed includes items such as locations of fii�e hydr�;,��, details on curbs and sidewalks, and more specific drainage plans. These items are ordinarily addressed at DRB and building permit stages. X. ISSUES ON THE DESIGN OF PHASE IV The issue of design becomes a factor in a project that goes through as extensive review as this application has. Of issue of concern here is that the role of the Design Review Board is not being assumed by the staff, PEC and Council . While the site plan and basic design of Phase IV should not change between now and DRB review, the staff would encourage the DRB to look closely at various aspects of this design. Of particular concern is the "hardness" of the plaza area. While acknowledging that this is a DRB issue, the staff feels strongly that a softer treatment be given to this area. The PEC is encouraged to give their opinions on this and any other design issue to be passed along to the DRB. XI. STAFF RECOMMENDATION The Department of Community Development strongly recommends approval of this development proposal . We find the proposal to be a very positive one for the community as well as the site. This type of quality redevelopment in our lodging is needed in Vail if we are to remain the best. The project has been through extensive reviews by many different groups of interested parties and virtually ail problems have been solved, as this memo indicates. The development of this project will enhance Vail ' s entry and overall image. Our recommendation for approval is conditional on the following: 1 . That the deveiopers and/or owners of Phase IV participate in and do not remonstrate against an improvement district for improvements to the intersection of Vail Road and Meadow Drive if and when one is formed. 2. That the developers and/or owners of Phase IV participate in and do not remonstate against establishing a pedestrian linkage from Phase IU to a future commercial expansion at the Kiandra Lodge site if an when it is developed. � . • � � SDD6 1 5 -11- � ..'r �.► � 3. The developer receive approval from the State Highway Department for ( reconfiguration of the pull-off area from the frontage road to the entrance E to the hotel . 4. The board of directors of the Colorado Ski Museum and the developers �ome to agreement on terms for the relocation of the museum in Phase IV of l� .��, : the Vail Village Inn. :� �,..,...�..;�' r 5. The developer fund the demolition and landscaping of the museum site through one of two options: a) deposit to the Town a check for $15,000 to be used by the Town to complete the work, or b) the developer submit a landscape plan to the Town for approval to be completed as an element of the overall plan for Phase IV. The staff would like to note that the developer has agreed to each of these conditions as presented in this memo. � � n �� w.�• , ,�., "'"" Ross Davis, Jr. Attorney at Law � Ross Davis, Jr. Cyrus G. rVlen III Suite 307 Jacqueline A. Flater Vail National Bank Bldg. P.O. Box 190 December 17, 1984 vail, Colorado 81658 ��;�� 'r x�� Telephone: `'�t�'` y,�'.'"= �, :N��.��-� 5 (303) 476-2414 _�.��.„M..,>: , Mr. Peter Patton Director of Planning Town of Vail 65 S. Frontage Rd. W. Vail, Colorado 81657 Re: Vail Village Inn Redevelopment Dear Peter: This letter will serve to confirm my representation of Mr. Conrad Sterkal, owner of the Amaco service station site adjacent to the Vail Village Inn. This letter will also serve to confirm Mr. Sterkal 's concerns with the proposed development plans, particularly as they directly concern and impact his property. � The plan of the site appears to have the building built to a three story level at a point within several feet of the lot � line adjacent to his property. As the existing station building comes to within a few feet of his property line, this situation would not provide access around this portion � of the property and does not provide adequate separation of the hotel area from the hazardous materials and chemicals stored in the station. In the event that there was a fire or similar problem, emergency vehicles would be unable to operate effectively in the immediate vicinity. Of more concern to my client is the intended construction of ; a retaining wall to the street along the lot line. This would cut off the historical usage of that area as a mutual access to the below grade entrance to the Vail Village Inn as well as to the station from the East. An attempt to cut of the access through this area would severally inhibit our usage of the �astern entrance to the property,'in violation of the historical cross easement that has existed between � the owners of the property. This usage has been open and notorious since the construction of the existing buildings in 1962 and has been used continously by both owners during that entire period of time. The curtailment of the usage as seems to be planned would greatly increase the steepness of the entrance ramp to the � � ., ,�.. , •� ' • � . � station from the east and in certain weather conditions result in the loss of that access to the station. Additionally, the great hight of the intended building would result in a severe ice buildup problem along the Frontage Road adjacent to the Vail Village Inn, the existing station :" and four way stop. °� �� ;:; ' .,��1: � :.�, �z�_ . .;� � . ��":�# �i� . . I agree with your;=recommendation �that`a meeting be set up between Mr. Sterkal, representatives of the developer, and you and myself at some time in the near future. Please contact my office some time after the first of the year to set up a mutually agreeable time and place for such a meeting. Thank you very much for your prompt attention to this matter, if you have any questions or require additional information, feel free to contact my office. Sinc S� �/�� '"� - '�' rco � ► J r. RD/dd � cc: Conrad Sterkal � k � � � �� ' � � • � �� .- ti GRFA CALCULATIONS FOR SDD#6 November 14, 1984 The following figures summarize the existing GRFA in Phases I, II, and III, as well as the proposed GRFA for Phase IV. Phase I A.U. p D.U. p GRFA p Phase II A.U. p . D.U. 4 GRFA 2917 sq ft* * As per T.O.V. files, applicant has indicated 3315 sq ft are existing. Phase III A.U. p D.U. 2g GRFA 49,806 sq ft** **As per T.O.V. files, applicant has indicated 44,830 sq ft are existing. � � �� ,�,; :t,,��-�� a . ��c� �;�.ci Proposed Phase IV �-� - A.U. 165 D.U. p Employee Units 3 GRFA 72,450 sq ft*** (employee units) 2,700 sq ft *** as per applicant. Summary Total units = A.U. 165 165 i�� * D.U. 36 x 2 = 72 ' 201 237 ' * Includes 3 employee units . "" ,-�;:�c:��fi:'. • }r�?� e S� ;�f Vs`��E ,; -°3: , c ,� . � � � � ^ 3 T 4 r � �r j ..�:L?�.:::+�ey�"..�.,.:..�'.:_cfiic�$eec1G 1. h{ �. �� x.;��'^��Y ..�.�-Ja�ib�f��ii�:�' '��a'+I�RI.,.�i�.y.��+.s!`';,�,�"7i'�'�'�9Li��.Wr,�Sei.d"L��«,�x":ii'.�`.��iV.�"�c'�1"�;t��z�y�a.�:. r � � . � . Total GRFA: Phase I - 0 Phase II - 2,917 Phase III - _��,8@5-�`��,;��`� *Phase IV - 75,150 Total 127,873 sq ft *as submitted by applicant, includes GRFA for employee units. -,-�� -�o�ti.� J,��5 �:.ltij,r,, KM,c�-� Cti. � ,,/�� r�� ,) As proposed, Phase IV would be 27,873 square feet over the allowed 100,000 square feet of GRFA for the entire SDD#6. t �•� , . ; ,�`:�� . -�.;. - ,p � ��'� . ' i t ;ir! - x ��i:�;�-.� . . . _ .. ...." +- I d'� '�"a{:-.: - � � ,� x,�s -t. ..�a� M�,y,q=4 ... . . . ., . ..., .. . ,�. , -- ' �� T - ..� � . ' . ,� s - ; �;��yf r .; ,- . . ..: �;.us.�. . -''G i.t��{�'��,'.• , r.� e..! .� : '!i': , '�- ++ i �... y� -� � '�-,+�,k�.��+, -'sgP ,r,s �t .. �5. -.i ;_! `�.. I:L_ : � � �: �-1JB8:'�royp,�.:�..aacrellfi�GGL�.:� i.9�l�A^1liM►`l1�,�45`��..x+ii'�dlrY+�i,^ .,e�l�li�f*" L..��.iK�tX'�i'��ei.d�1'��iit'�;r ^ �'s�+�i�k'�:.�5a.:;�R'�'e.ree��+Fis.:>9t+�' ��i�ti.,..��...,` �4 ..,.�,-.°� � ' � PRELIMINARY PARKING CALCULATIONS FOR SDD#6 November 14, 1984 Required parking is to be determined with respect to the entire SDD#6. This involves an inventory of the existing situation with respect to Phase I, II, and III, and the impacts of the proposed Phase IV. Based on information in our files, the following is a preliminary inventory of required and existing parking for Phase I, II, and III. Parking Spaces Phase I Required Accommodation Units - 0 p Dwelling Units - 0 0 Commercial space, 16,128 sq ft 53.76 53.76 (Commercial demand is calculated without consideration given to � — restaurant/bar uses, consequently this is not a "hard" number. ) / ' f� - , , � �-''�-� G� �� Phase II Accommodation Units - 0 p , Dwel l i ng Uni ts - 4 � 2- = 4 '� �Z�`° �C g Commercial space, 6,473 21 .57 25.57 (Commercial demand is calculated without consideration given to restaurant/bar uses, consequently this is not a "hard" number. ) Phase III _ Accommodation Units - 0 p , Dwel l i ng Uni ts - 29 -._-_-------� 47, ? �Glx Z � �� Commercial - �10,000 sq ft , 34 81 � � . �I:rj � ;i ;r, , .� , .. , � (Parking required as calculated in 1980. ) TOTAL REQUIRED FOR PHASES I,II,III = 160.33 ,. Parking provided in Phase III 109 ; Existing deficit for Phases I, II, � � and III 51 .33 � _.«_�.�. -�'_tv siJ . -�#4,' `:..�. ��. a ' ' ;,y�"�, ��r:. � .;.t,'.:; ' :� � s,�s' b - � '.: a y t � r ^, . .�,: �� ;� .�� r�c �v �Sr+�`er 5 r.: � . �� „1' . yy.,i.S, (' t i�i+aeii.:rs.'�,f.��.+�;:�.:�x.�".�^�1'�'lti: `�H��..'''�s..�;''Y+Sl��• y�x'�w�Mffl�t�'?�'"��+`��.4r,�'+.,4..u:,r 3.F�lc`4id..�l,. �.�5��:-� s_^_. k � . r� .w . . .s5w. xc;ab_.1�.. ✓ � � �� -- � s . , , . — .. _. Proposed Phase IV i i..;� Accommodation Units,--fi6�� 13�;�- �`l '' Dwelling Units, 3 - � Commercial Space, 22,522 sq ft 75.07 (Commercial demand is calculated without consideration given to restaurant/bar uses, consequently this is not a "hard" number. ) Meeting Room 5,750 = 15 = 383 seats 383 seats : 8 = 47.9 �� ru�*� �,S"�j �. l�/.c,�ti;, ��'�� 266.0 Summary of Demand Phase I = 53.76 . Phase II = 25.57 Phase III = 81.00 Phase IV = 266.80 427. 13 = Total required parking for SDD#6 _ _. _ ;_�. � 3�� -� � �`� '' �' Parking spaces existing in Phase III = 109 Proposed spac�s in Phase IV = 172 Total existing and props�d 2g1 _ As proposed, Phase IV would result in an overall deficit of 140 spaces. With the 10% multi-us�_ credit allowed, this deficit is reduced to: \ � 427.13 146 � -281 - 43 � � 146 103 �et deficit ___- ��S � ) °�_ �y -f " . '. 13� � \jS . T �� 4 s � ,: �:x� �;';i'F,r'�t:•� ;,t'. . � - � � - k�s#t3 . ti' t2: �' +a"v �.r �I��.�r r ,-.,. s` } t . YN q � r �f` L p r�6y x ��.L :�� ,ry;- x�-��°";r�?��ti .�:a�lr.%�7�zi�=�rSFk1.`S»Y�t.��..k.:,.��r��i�l:e.��:'�a,��w.a:::� `�! '�4a�'S:"�r�u�"�As,��`baP..#,h:.'`"wY+�`ifia'�.�d�.�.Y�a.�'^"...,��'.,!'LS�.-*=.