HomeMy WebLinkAboutVAIL'S FRONT DOOR PART 2 OF 3 LEGAL.pdfVail's Front Door
DEV04-0001
(Environmental lmpact Report
January 6, 2003)
763
aoF)
o"*"-"iI:y
VAIL'S FRONT DOOR
VAIL, COLORADO
E nvircnme ntal Impac t Report
Subminal To The Town of Vail
Submined by Van- Rrsonrs DevEropMENT Ccvpemy
January 6,2Q03
o Lodge at Vail
. Vista Bahn Park
o Residence Club
. Ski Club
o Lots P-3 &J
Environmental Impact Report
Vail's Front f)oor
Lodge at Vail/Vista llahn ParVResidence Club/Ski Club/P3&J
Addendum I
27 July 2003
As a result of design development for Vail's Iiront Door and P3&J, we respcctively
submit the fbllowing Addendurn to the llnvironmental Impact Report dated January 06,
2003.
Project Description:
The following summarizes changes to the proposed development plan that havc
been made since the original EIR was prepared and submitted on January 6' 2003:
The Residence Club will remain as 5 duplexes and I triplex, but the units will bc whole
ownership, in lieu of fractional ownership units. The total area for thc residential units is
56,900 square feet. Below the residences, the private parking garage with mechanical
area is 21,880 square feet. I'he Skier Services Building has been reduced in area to
I 5,000 squarc feet at grade, with no change to area bclow grade. With the creation of the
Town of Vail Centralized Loading Facility at the Front Door, loading at the underground
dock will include 7-12'x35' loading spaces. 4-12'x47 loading spaces, and 3-12x57'
loading spaccs. These loading spaces will not only scrvice the front Door, but will also
selice the core area of the Vail Village. The total area for the parking, loading' and
underground lbrest service access road is 95,200 square fbet. The Ski Club Building, and
additions to the Lodge at Vail have not changed from thc initial report. With a reduction
in area to the Skier Service Building, the Vista Bahn Parks has been revised to allow
better circulation.
Due to the creation of the Central Loading Facility at the Front Door, loading has been
removed from the P3&J site. This site now is proposed with 108 whole ownership
parking spaces, 26 parking spaces for the Christiania Lodge, but no loading spaces. The
rest ofthe project remains unchanged.
Based on thcsc changes, amendments to the following sections of the EIR have been
prepared:
Amendment to Appendix C: Air, Noise,
As a rcsult of the traffic study, Greystone
initial report. and has provided a narrative
and Odor Impact Assessment
Environmental Consultants has reviewed their
to address the impact on air quality, noise, and
Vail's Front Door
Lodge/Vista Bahn Park/Residcnce Club/Ski Club/P3&J Summary
Environmental Impact Report
Addendum l/Pagc I
Addcndurr l.etter {)-l072l.doc
odor as a result of creating the Central Loading Facility. Refer to attached narrative
addendum included in Appendix C-Addendum l.
Amendment to Appendix I: Traffic Impact Study
To determine the affect of creating a Centralized Loading Facility at Vail's Front Door,
and to respond to specific questions of the Town Staff, the traffic report by Kimley Horn
has been updated and reissued in its entirety. Refer to attached report included in
Appendix I-Addendum l.
Vail's Front Door
Lodge/Vista Bahn Park/Residence Club/Ski Club/P3&J Summary
Environmental Impact Report
Addendum k'er030723.doc Addendum llPage2
Addendum I
AIR, NOISE, AND ODOR IMPACT ASSESSMENT
PROPOSED VAIL'S FRONT DOOR
DEVELOPMENT PROJECT IN VAIL, COLORADO
DELIVERY VEHICLE ASSESSMENT
Preparedfor:
Vail Resorts Development Company
137 Benchmark Road
Avon. Colorado 81620
Prepared by:
Greystone Environmental Consultants
5231 South Quebec Street
Greenwood Village, Colorado 801I I
July 2003
Vail's Front Door
Environmental Impact Report
Addendum l/C-l
1.0 lntroduction
As described in "Vail's Front Dot.rr - Traflic Study" (Kimley-Hom 2003), delivery
vehicles arc currently distributed at the Lodge or at businesses throughout the Villagc.
Under the front Door redevelopntent plan, these vehicles will be routed to a central
loading and delivery facility that will be located under the Ski Club. Although. this
t-acility will provide l4 delivery vehicle spaces. it is expected that l2 spaces would serue
the peak delivery vehicle volume.
Although the amount of delivered goods is expected to slightly increase due to the
additional services provided at the lrront Door Project, the antount ofdelivery vchicle
tratlic is not expected to change from the existing delivery vehicle traffic volume. This is
due to the fact that the additional goods will more than likely be delivered in a vehicle
cunently making deliveries to Vail. Therefore, the only change will be a shift of the
existing delivery trafltc towards the central loading and dclivery facility.
Concerning impacts to local air quality, noise, and odor, it is expected that shilling the
delivery traffic to the central loading and delivery facility will result in a net reduction of
these impacts in the Village and throughout the Vail Valley.
2.0 Air Quality lmpacts
With the current delivery system, the delivery vehicles distribute their goods at each of
the businesscs within the village. This system requires these vehicles to park and
potentially idle at cach delivery stop.
With the proposed central loading and delivery facility, the vehicles will complete their
deliveries at one location thus eliminating idling time. In addition, the engine running
time betwcen deliveries will be eliminated. In the central facility, all vehioles will shut
off their engines during unloading. Therefore it is expccted that the ovcrall emissions of
air pollutants from the dclivery vehicles will be reduced frorn existing levels.
Delivery vehicle exhaust emissions within the central facility will be vented to a
ventilation exhaust stack on thc roof of the Ski Club building. This will result in
additional lowering of the existing ground level air pollutant concentrations within the
Village by providing additional elevation for dispersal of the pollutants. Atmospheric
inversions during the winter season rnay limit the dispersal of these pollutants because
these are associated with a lack of wind, but the thermal buoyancy of the vehicles'
exhaust will allow the pollutants to rise thus limiting ground level concentralions.
In addition. at the average level of60 delivery vehicles per day, thc vehicles' exhaust will
be vented liom thc facility's exhaust stack lbr only approximately 90 minutes over a 24-
hour period. This duration of exhaust emissiotrs is based on thc fbllowing factors:
o From the ctrtry tunnel 1o the far erld of the loading dock is -500 fcct.
Vail's Front Door
Environmental lmpact Report
Addendum l/C-2
. At l0 miles per hour. a truck would take 14 seconds to drive in and 34 secottds to
drive out.
o Assume 22 seconds to park, maneuvcr, etc.
o 'l'otal running time in facility per delivcry vehicle would be 90 seconds.
. With 60 trucks. each running for 90 seconds, the total daily running time would
be 90 minutes.
At the peak delivery vehicle level (108 vehicles per day) the total exhaust tirne is
cstimated to be only 2.7 hours per day.
Given the limited amount of emissions from the central loading facility, it is anticipated
that air quality in the area ofthe vent will not be adversely affect by the project.
The shift in delivery vehicle traffic to the central facility may increase exhaust emissions
at locations that currently have less delivery vehicle traffic along the associated entrance
and exit routes. Overall, though, air pollutant emissions from these vehicles within the
Village and within Vail Valley in general will be reduced.
3.0 Noise lmpacts
Because the central loading and delivery facility will be enclosed, overall noise impacts
from delivery vehicles will bc reduced from cument levels within the Villagc. The shift
in delivery vehicle traffic to the ccntral facility may incrcase noise levels at locations that
currently have less delivery vehicle traffic along the associated entrance and exit routes
while reducing existing noise levels within the Village.
4.0 Odor lmpacts
Odor impacts frorn the delivery vehicles would be similar to the air quality impacts since
these impacts are related to the vehicles' exhaust. With the central loading and delivery
f'acility, odor impacts from the delivcry vehicles within the Village will be reduced
because of reduced engine idling and run timc. As discussed above for the air quality
impacts, emissions from the central facility's ventilalion exhaust stack will result in lower
ground level pollutant concentrations thus resulting in lower ground level odor impacts
lhan the current delivery system.
The shift in delivery vehicle traflic to the central facility may increase odors from
delivery vehicle exhaust at locations that currently have less delivery vehicle traffic along
the associated entrance and exit routes. Overall, though. exhaust odors from these
vehicles within the Village, and within Vail Valley in gcneral, will be reduced.
5.0 References
Kimley-Horn antl Associates. 2001. Vail's Irront Door Traftic Study.
Vail's Front Door
Environmcntal lmpact Report
Addendum l/C-3
TRAFF c
Vail's Front Door - Traffic Study
Vail, Colorado
Prepared for
Vail Resorts Development Company
137 Benchmark Road
P.O. Box 959
Avon, CO 81620
Prepared By
Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc.
950 Seventeenth Sheet
Suite 1050
Denver, Colorado 80202
(303) 228-2300
(303) 446-8678 FAX
Y
Vail's Front Door
Environmental ImPact RePort
Addendum 1/I-l
fuly 2003
o NOTICE
Please note that the findings contained in this report are based on the conditions at the time of
the study. Should development occur that is significantly different than the assumptions that
were made in the sfudy, further review and analysis may need to be performed.
This report has been prepared in accordance with the professional standard of care. No other
warranties or guarantees, express or implied, are rnade or intended. This report has been
prepared solely for Vail Resorts, and the Town of Vaif Colorado for the purpose stated herein
and should not be relied upon by any other party for any other purpose. The conclusions in this
rePort are based on the limited information described above. Any reliance on this report by any
party other than Vail Resorts and the Town of Vail shall be without Iiability to Kimley-Horn
and Associates, lnc. or its employees. If you have any questions or require any additional
informatiory please contact us.
Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc.
VaiI Resorts' Front Door Redeuelooment
Vail's Front Door
Environmental Impact RePort
Addendum l/I-2
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1.0 EXECUTTVE SUMMARY................. .................. 1
2.oINTRODUCTTON .........................3
2.1 Purpose and Need....... .....................3
2.2 Project Description... ........................3
3.0 EXISTING AND FUTURE CONDITIONS................... .........6
3.1 Existing Roadway Network and Conditions ................................6
3.2 Existing Traffic Volumes along Vail Road............... .....................6
3.3 Existing and Future Delivery Vehicle Volumes and Traffic Patterns.......................................6
4.0 PROIECT TRAFFIC CHARACTERTSTICS....... ...................1.4
4.1 Trip Generation/Automobiles.... .........................14
4.2Trip Generation/Delivery Vehicles......... ............76
4.3 Trip Distribution and Assignment/Automobiles.................. ............................16
4.4Trip Distribution and Assignment/Delivery Vehicles .............77
4.3 Total Background Plus Peak Season Site Generated Traffic ............ ................20
5.0 TRAFFIC AND CENTRAL LOADING FACILITY OPERATIONS ANALYSES .......22
5.1 Roadway Segment/Arterial Level of Service Analysis ............22
5.2 Delivery Demands and Observations ................. ........................23
5.3 Delivery Elevator Capacity Discussion..... ..........24
6.0 CONCLUSIONS............ ..............28
APPENDICES
Appendix A - Delivery Counts within Vail Village
Appendix B - Trip Generation Worksheets
Appendix C - Roadway Segment Analysis Worksheets
Kimley-Hont and. Associates, Inc.
Vail Resorts' Front Door Redzuelonment
Vail's Front Door
llnvironmental Impact RePort
Addendum l/I-3
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 1 - Site Location...................... ................................4
Figure 2 - Service Area for the Central Loading Facility........... ...........s
Figure 3 - Existing Traffic Volumes........ ........................7
Fig-ure 4 - Truck Exiting Altematives at Central loading Facility........... ..,..............10
Figure 5 - Existing PIus Approved Background Development .........13
Figure 6 - Peak Season Site Generated Traffic........ ..:..........................19
Figure 7 - Peak season site Generated Traffic plus Existing Traffic volumes................................21
Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc.
Vail Resorts' Front Door Redeuelooment
Vail's Front Door
Environmental Impact Report
Addendum l/I-4
I.O EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Vail Resorts has proposed a redevelopment project in Vail Village, commonly referred to as the
Front Door. The Front Door involves a number of projccts located at the base of Vail Mountain
- an expansion of the Lodge at Vail to include remodeled hotel rooms and a new spa, a ski club,
a skier service building, a rc-designed ski yard, 13 dwelling units and a Town of Vail central
delivery/loading facility. Another element of the Front Door project is the development of a
public park and a parking structure at lots P3&J. A traffic analysis for P3&J has been prepared
and submitted to the Town under separate cover. For the purposes of this report, the Front
Door project is limited to the development located at the base of the mountain.
This report has been prepared to provide the results of Kimley-Horn and Associatcs, Inc. traffic
analysis for the proposed Vail's Front Door development by Vail Resorts. Per the Town of
Vail's request trip generation calculations were conducted to determine the volume of new
trips expected from the Front Door project. In addition, peak season holiday weekend daily
delivery vehicle volumes were evaluated to address any possible increase or change in volumes.
Therefore, the purpose of this study is to identify traffic generation characteristics, idcntify
potential traffic related impacts on the local street system, to develop mitigation measures
required for identified impacts, and to evaluate thc conceptual design and operational
feasibility of the central loading facility.
During a peak holiday weekend, thc Front Door is expected to generate approximately 63 new
peak hour trips and 294 daily automobilc trips added to the surrounding street network. Only
a nominal increase in new dclivery vehicle volume is expected from thc Front Door. The
proposed central loading facility will redistribute existing delivery vehicle traffic that will
access Vail Village via VaiI Road. It is anticipated that the existing deliveries occurring within
the Village are anticipated to remain constant. Howcver, the redevelopment project may
increase thc amount of goods each delivery vehicle will be transporting to the Village core.
Kintley-Horn and Associates, Inc.
Vail Resorts' t^ronl Door Redeuelonnent
Vail's Front Door
Environmental Impact Report
Addendum 1/I-5
New traffic generated by the Front Door will be successfully incorporated into the future traffic
operations without any necessary roadway modifications. The existing street system can
accommodate site generated traffic. The level of service (LOS) of VaiI Road north of Meadow
Drive is expected to be LOS C with or without the addition of peak season site generated traffic.
The level of service of Vail Road south of Forest Road is expected to be LOS A with or without
the addition of peak season site generated traffic. These are very acceptable level of service
conditioru. [n addition, Vail Road north of Meadow Drive is expected to be at only
approximately 63 percent of capacify. South of Forest Road, Vail Road is expected to be at only
approximately 16 percent of capacity.
Based on this analysis, 12 delivery spaces are expected
By removing delivery vehicles from Gore Creek Drive,
expected to improve through the Village core.
Kimley-Honr and Associates, lnc.
Vail Resorts' Front Door Redcuelounent
to adequately serve loading dcmands.
the pedestrian environment would be
Vail's Front Door
Environmental Impact Report
Addendum l/I-6
2.0INTRODUCTION
2.1 Purpose and Need
Kimley-Hom and Associates, Inc. (Kimley-Hom) has been retained by Vail Resorts to prepare
this report to document the results of a Traffic Impact Study of future traffic conditions
associated with the proposed redevelopment project in Vail Village located adjacent to the
Lodge at Vail, herein referred to as the Front Door. The vicinity map illustrating the project
location is shown in Figure 1.
Per the Town of Vai(s request, this report provides the results of trip generation calculations of
new automobile trips expected from the project. In addition, daily delivery vehicle volumes
were evaluated to address any possible increase or change in volumes and circulation.
Therefore, the purpose of this study is to identify traffic generation characteristics, identify
potential trafJic related impacts on the local street system, to develop mitigation measures
required for identified impacts, and to evaluate the conceptual design and operational
feasibility of the central loading facility.
2.2 Project Description
The Front Door includes the following elements:
. an exPansion of the Lodge at Vail to include remodeled hotel rooms and a new spa
. a ski club and associated parking for club members
. a skier services building
. 13 new residential units, and
. a loading and delivery facility that will providc loading for the Front Door (and the
Lodge at Vail) as well as Town of Vail central loading that will serve the core area of Vail
Villagc.
Figure 2 illustrates the areas within Vail Village that this central loading facility is c'xpected tcr
serve.
Kinley-Horn and Associates, lnc.
Vail Resorts' Front Door Redeoelownent
Vail's Front Door
Environmental Impact Report
Addendum l/l-7
tnVo\'H .---,.a( )\Y
itF )tL
,a4 lt,t7\'*
]\J
\F
-
LEGEND
O Study tuea Key Segment
VAIL'S FRONT DOOR
VICINITY MAP
\
NIOFITH
l|1S 067867001
Vail's Front Door
Environmental Impact RePort
Addendum 1/I-8
FIGURE 1
=n xlll'i',H*,,,,
Central Loading Study
Vail Village
rF
II
NIORTH
Ill 007867001
Central t ading Facility
Tn rk Route
Hand Carts
Vail's Front Door
Environmental Impact RePort
Addendum l/I-9
FIGURE 2
VAIL'S FRONT DOOR
SERVICE AREA FOR THE
CENTRAL LOADING FACILITY
=n xlll'i"'H,..,*
3.0 EXISTING AND FUTURE CONDITIONS
3.1 Existing Roadway Network and Conditlons
Regional access to the proposed Front Door redevelopment area will be provided by I-70.
Primary access will be gained from Vail Road. Vail Road is a two lane roadway with a speed
lindt of 15 miles per hour. Vail Road becomes one-way at the Lodge and provides exiting traffic
movements along Willow Road, which is also one-way. This in effect creates counter-clockwise
traffic movements in this area of the village.
3.2 Existing Traffic Volumes along Vail Road
Counts were obtained from the Town of Vail for Vail Road north of Meadow Drive and south of
Forest Road. Felsburg, Holt, & Utlevig, acting as the Town's Traffic Engineer provided daily
volumes for a weekend day and weekday. These counts were conducted on Saturday, February
19,2000, and Monday, February 21,2000, which corresponded with president's Day Holiday
weekend. A summary of these counts is illustrated in Figure 3.
Recent counts were also conducted along VaiI Road north of Meadow Drive and south of Forest
Road on saturday, July 5h and Monday, July 7th, 2009. These counts actually reflected a
decrease in traffic from the winter counts in February of 2000, therefore the winter counts were
used within this analysis. The February 2000 counts and the existing counts represent both
automobilc and delivery vehicle tr#fic along Vail Road.
3.3 Existing and Future Delivery vehicle Volumes and Traffic patterns
Delivery vehicles are currently allowed to enter thc Villagc core via Vail Road to access Gore
Creek Drive/International Bridge or via Vail Valley Drive and Hanson Ranch Roatl to access
P3&J loading and delivery spaces. Deliverics thcn occur either at the Lodge or to the businesses
throughout the Village. These delivery vehicles exit the Village core by using either Willow
Road to the west, wilkrw Bridge Road to the north, or Gore Creek Drive to thc cast.
Kimley-Horn and Associatcs, Inc.
Vnil Resorts' Front Door Radeuelootnent
Vail's Front Door
Environmental Impact Report
Addendum l/I-10
LEGEND
O Study tu€a Key Segment
_ WKDY(SAT) Average DalV Trafflc Volumes
lxxrx(xEo({ Traffic Volumes Vohires por Day (vpd)
{both direc.tions}
VAIL'S FRONT DOOR
TRAFFIC COUNTS
MONDAY, FEBRUARY 21, 2OOO
SATURDAY, FEBRUARY 1 9, 2OOO
t\oFt-rH
lrs 067867001
Vail's Front Door
Environmental Impact Report
Addendum l/I-ll
FIGURE 3
=n I]]l'?,#*',*
Delivery vehicle counts were conducted at the Town of Vail's request to determine existing
delivery vehicle volumes for Vail Village. Delivery vehicle counts were completed on ]uly 3,
2002, from 6:00 a.m. until 6:00 p.m. at two stations along Gore Creek Drive. This is the time
period during which deliveries are allowed in the area. One observation/count point was
conducted at Checkpoint Charlie, while the other observation/count point was conducted at
the exit of the pedestrian area at the P3&J parking lot at Gore Creek Drive and Hanson Ranch
Road. These counts were completed to determine the number of delivery vehicles using
existing loading zones along Gore Creek Drive, within the main Lodge parking lo! through the
rest of the pedestrian/delivery zone area of the Village core and around the P3&J parking lot.
Delivery vehicle counts and observations conducted at the Checkpoint Charlie Station included
a count and time observation of deliveries into and out of the Lodge main parking lot, entrance
time of delivery at Checkpoint Charlie, notation of whether or not the delivery was being made
to The Lodge along Gore Creek Drive, and possible exit time along Willow Bridge Road. The
counts and observations conducted at P3&J included a count and time observation of vehicles
exiting the delivery zonc along Gore Creek Drive, as well as dwell time of delivery adjacent to
the P3&J parking lot.
In order to provide a conservative analysis, delivery vehicle counts were completed prior to the
Fourth of July holiday long weekend on July 3,2002. As requested by the Town of Vail, this
date was selected assuming a higher demand for deliveries prior to a peak sununer holiday
weekend. The total number of deliveries to the Village at both locations on July 3.a was 83
vehicles (58 of these deliveries occurring at the Lodge and Checkpoint Charlie).
This delivery vehicle volume was compared with additional peak season information provided
from the Town of Vail during the winter that indicated that 108 daily deliveries were counted
into and out of the Village on February 15 and '16, 2OO'1. This information is included in
Appendix A. Inspection of the delivery vehicle count volumes provided by the Town of Vail
indicated that the winter season deliveries on a peak holiday weekend exceed those for a peak
suruner season holiday wcekend. To ensure this data represented a peak condition, thesc
counts were compared to additional information provided by the Town of Vail that stated
Kimley-Honr and Associates, Inc.
Vail Resorts' Front Door Redeaelopment
Vail's Front Door
Environmental Impact RePort
Addendum 1/I-12
approximately 50 to 70 deliveries per day would be expected in Vail Village. This information is
also included in Appendix A. Therefore, it can be assumed that the counts conducted in
February of 2000 represent a peak season condition.
Based upon observations during the peak suruner season,30 percent of deliveries occurred at
P3&J and 70 percent passed through Checkpoint Charlie. Therefore, of the 108 delivery vehicles
observed during the peak winter seasory it can be assumed from the peak summer season
observations that 32 would have been expected to occur at P3&f, while 76 would pass through
Checkpoint Charlie and delivery on Gore Creek Drive or other pedestrian areas within the
Village core.
ln the future, delivery vehicles are expected to continue to arrive to the Village area by Vail
Road. tn addition, current deliveries being made at the P3&J area are expected to be rerouted to
Vail Road. All deliveries to the core area of the Village would then occur within the central
loading and delivery facility being developed as part of thc Front Door project. This will reduce
and potentially all but eliminate delivery vchicle traffic in the east village neighborhood along
the pedestrian contained area of the Villagc. These delivery vehicles will then have the
capability of exiting the loading facility and leaving the Village using Vail Road, Willow Road,
Willow Bridge Road, or Gore Creek Drive as shown in Figrue 4. For analysis purposes, this
study evaluated the condition that all delivery vehicles would enter and exit using Vail Road.
Kimley-Horn and Associates, Irtc.
VaiI Resorts' Front Door Redeuelottrncnt
Vail's Front Door
Environ mental Impact Report
Addendum liI-I3
Truck Exiting Alternatives
Vail Villaee
*
II
t\IOFTTH
lils 0G7867001
Central Loading Facility
Altemate Truc* Routes
Vailos Front Door
Environmental Impact RePort
Addendum l/I-14
FIGURE 4
VAIL'S FRONT DOOR
TRUCK EXITING ALTERNATIVES
CENTRAL LOADING FACILITY
fi\Nntt'
lJltllu\'7mmn
=n lll'i'#iln',,
3.4 Approved/Unbullt Development Proximate to Front Door
The Town of Vail requested that future traffic volumes from approved but un-built
development be included in the analysis. Three recently approved yet un-built projects are
located proximate to Vail Road. These includc the new Four Seasons, Sonnenalp Resort
expansion, and the new Vail Plaza Ilotel. None of these developments are believed to
significantly impact the existing traffic condition of Vail Road. The following provides a
sununary of each project.
Sonnenalp Resort
The Sonnenalp Resort was approved for development by the Town of Vail in June of this year.
The project includes the demolition of the existing Swiss Haus Hotel which contains 59 hotel
rooms and 2 dwelling unils. The existing building is being replaced with 8 condominiums and
14 fractional fee unils with its own front desk and portc cochere. Access to this building will no
longer be provided by Vail Road; instead access to the redeveloped Swiss Haus Hotel building
will be provided directly from Willow Bridge Road. Additionally, the project includes an
expansion to the existing Sonnenalp Hotel which adds 35 hotel rooms to the hotel. Access to the
Sonnenalp Hotcl will continue to be provided along Vail Road. However, there will be no new
trips added to Vail Road due to this development as these trips were being previously
generated by the 59 hotel rooms and 2 dwelling units at the Swiss Hotel. The new hotel rooms
added to the Sonnenalp Hotel (35 rooms) are less than the 59 hotel rooms plus 2 dwelling units
removed from the Swiss Haus thus resulting in a net decrease in traffic to Vail Road.
Four Seasons
ln |une of 2003 the Vail Four Season's project was also approved by the Town of Vail. This
project is a redevelopment of the existing Chateau at Vail hotel and the Alpine Standard gas
station/ automotive repair facility. The Chateau at Vail currently provides 120 rooms. The Four
Seasons project will include 119 hotel rooms, 66 beds of employee housing and 40
condominiums/fractional fee units. The devclopment of this projcct will includc thc rcmoval of
the Alpine Standard gas/automotive repair facility. It was determined in the traffic study
completed previously for this development that there will be an overall decrease in the nurnber
Kimley-Horn and Associates, lnc.
Vail Resorts' Front Door Redeuelonment
Vail's Front Door
Environ mental I mpact Report
Addendum 1/I-15
of triPs generated as a result of the approved project. In addition, with the development of the
project site access will be removed completely from Vail Road.
Vail Plaza Hotel
According to a revised traffic report dated September 27,1999, the Vail Plaza Hotel located on
the east side of Vail Road is expected to generate approximately 4L5 net new daily trips along
Vail Road, north of Meadow Drive. For the total haffic analysis, these traffic volumes were
added to the existing daily traffic volumes in Figure 3 to determine the existing plus approved
development volumes along Vail Road shown in Figure 5.
Kimley-Horn and. Associates, lnc.
Vail Resorts' Front Door Reileuelopment
Vailts Front Door
Environmental Impact Report
Addendum l/I-16
LEGEND
O study Area Key segmenl
_ WKDY(SAT) Average Dally Traffic Volum€s
lxru((xxx,({ Traffic Volumes Vehicles psr Day (vpd)
(both directions)
Ib
r\\ _q vQJ
VAIL'S FRONT DOOR
EXISTING PLUS APPROVED
BACKGROUN D DEVELOPMENT VOLUMES
I\IOFITH
{t:; 067667001
Vail's Front Door
Environmental Impact RePort
Addendum l/I-17
FIGURE 5
l*4,tl I \5 r: -D \l 6
s."\v<
=n llil'i',1'#*,,,
4.0 PROJECT TRAFFTC CHARACTERTSTTCS
4. I Trip Generation/Automobiles
Site-generated traffic estimates are determined through a process known as trip generation.
Rates are applied to proposed land uscs to estimate traffic generated by developments during a
specific time interval. The acknowledged source for trip generation rates is the 6ft Edition of the
Trip Generation Report published by Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE). ITE has
established trip rates in nationwide studies of similar land uses. Based upon a request from the
Town of Vail for this study, Kimley-Hom used ITE Trip Generation Report trip rates that apply
to Recreational Homes (260) for traffic associated with the development. Trip generation
estimates for the Ski Club were developed based upon expected program development. The
following paragraphs describe the project by development area, as well as project traffic
volumes associated with the redevelopment project (calculations provided in Appendix B).
Resort Residences
A trip generation estimate has been prepared for the proposed 1.3 new resort residences at Vail
Village using the ITE Land Use Codc 260 - Recreational Homes. A trip generation worksheet
showing trip generation rates and directional distribution of trips is attached to this report. The
proposed residential units are expcctcd to generate four (4) new peak hour trips, 42 datty
wcckday trips, and 40 daily Saturday trips.
gpg
The spa is not expected to generate new vehicles to Vail's Front Door as this is anticipated to be
an amenity to the hotel and skiers and will not be open to the public. As such, it will not attract
outside trips. Therefore, trip generation calculations were not prepared for this use.
Skier Services
As in the case of the proposed
amenity to the hotel and skiers.
additional parking spaccs to be
spa, the new skier services Iacility
Howcver, the skier service building
used by cmployccs. It is cstimated
is also anticipated to be an
does generate a need for 31
that approximately 90% of
Vail's Front Door
Environ mental I mPact RePort
Addendum l/I-18
Kimley-Hont and Associates, brc.
VaiI Resorts' Front Door Redeaelopment
these new employees will arrive during the peak hour, generating approximately 27 new peak
hour trips with an overall daily estimate of.62 trips on weekdays and Saturdays.
Resort Hotel Rooms
Two new hotel rooms are proposed at the Lodge at Vail with the redevelopment project;
however three existing rooms will be removed resulting in a net decrease of one hotel room. As
such, no new traffic demand is created.
Ski Club
The proposed ski club is anticipated to have 300 members who will have parking privileges at
the Front Door. These club members will be allocated 95 parking spaces within the parking
structure behind Lodge. On a typical busy weekend day, all parking spaces are anticipated to
be occupied. Therefore, the parking spaces are expected to attract 95 entering and 95 exiting, or
190 total trips per day. To determine the number of trips that would occur during a cofiunon
peak hour, information was obtained relative to anticipated club member/skier activity. Based
upon information from Vail Resorts, it is expected that approximately 33 percent of skiers arrive
within a corunon peak hour. Therefore, the resultant hip generation for the Lodge Ski Club
would be 32 vehicle trips during the peak hour.
Trip Generation Summary
The following table summarizes the estimated new traffic generation into Vail Village for the
redevelopment. The trip generation worksheets are included in Appendix B. These
calculations illustrate the rates used, directional distribution of hips, and number of daily trips.
It can be expected that 63 new automobile trips would be generated during the peak
hour and 294 new automobile trips daily.
Kimley-Horn and Associates, lnc.
Vail Resorts' Front Door Redeaelopment
Vailts Front Door
Environmental Impact Report
Addendum l/I-19
Front Door Redevelopment New Project Peak Season Traffic Generation
Development Peak
Hour
Weekday
Daily
Saturday
Daily
Resort Residences 4 42 40
Resort Hotel Rooms 0 0 0
Skier Services Building 27 62 62
Ski Club 190 190
Total 53 294 292
4.2 T rip Generatlon/ Delivery Vehtcles
As there is no increase in delivery vehicle volume expected with the actual
development of the project, no trips are expected to be added to the street network. The
same number of delivery vehicles are anticipated to access the Village core in the future.
However, due to the redevelopment project at the Lodge the amount of goods each
delivery vehicle will be transporting to the core may increase. There is, however, an
expected shift in the delivery vehicle traffic volumes in the future with consfruction of
the Town of Vail central loading/delivery facility. This is discussed within Section 4.4
regarding trip distribution and assignment of delivery vehicles.
4.3 Trip Distribution and Assignment/Automobiles
It is expected that automobile traffic generated to the development at the Lodge would
arrive and depart using vail Road. Therefore, based upon the new trip generation, it
could be expected that there would be an increase of 63 peak hour automobile trips on
Vail Road. This corresponds to an added 294 daily automobile trips io Vail Road. It is
important to note that the majority of new trips generated by the project are seasonal in
nature. For example, during the summer peak season very few trips would be expected
as a rcsult of the parking spaces associated with the ski club membership or the skier
services building.
Kimley-Hom and Associates, Inc.
Vail Resorts' Front Door Redeueloprnent
Vail's Front Door
Environ mental Impact RePort
Addendum l/I-20
4.4 T rip Distrlbution and Assignment/ Delivery Vehicles
As discussed previously in Section 3.3, delivery vehicles are currently allowed to enter the
Village core via Vail Road to access Gore Creek Drive/lntemational Bridge or via Vail Valley
Drive and Hanson Ranch Road to access P3&J loading and delivery spaces. Deliveries then
occur either at the Lodge or to the businesses throughout the Village. These delivery vehicles
exit the Village core by using either Willow Road to the west, Willow Bridge Road to the north,
or Gore Creek Drive to the east.
There is an expected reroute of existing delivery vehicle movements in the Village area based
upon the conshuction of the central loading facility. Since P3&f is proposed to no longer allow
deliveries, the existing peak daily delivery volume of 32 vehicles would be rerouted to the
central loading facility. This would be expected to add 32 daily entering delivery vehicle hips
on Vail Road during peak conditions.
Since the majority of detvery vehicles today do not exit thc Village via Vail Road, this changc in
delivery vehicle circulation would add approximately 108 exiting daily trips on Vail Road
during peak conditions. These exiting trips consist of the 32 exiting daily delivery vehicles
rerouted from the removal of the P3&J facility and the 76 exit,ng daily delivery vehicles that
currently exit either along Gore Creck Drive, Willow Bridge Road, or Willow Road. Therefore,
during a winter season holiday weckend, there may be an additional 140 delivery vehicle trips
occurring on Vail Road (32 entering and 108 exiting). Of course, it is important to note that
these are not new hips to the street nctwork, but rather rerouted trips. Further, these 140 daily
trips have been removed from the surrounding street network on the east side of Vail Village.
It can be expected that when considering the component of delivery time duration within the
Village, the current proposal with the central loading and delivery facility would greatly
decrease the "observed" volume of delivery vehicles in the Village. As there are other
alternatives to distribute dclivery vehicles throughout the system such as alternative cxit points
via Willow Circle, Willow Bridgc Road, or Gore Creek Drivc, exiting all delivery vehicles via
Vail lload provides a conservativc analysis. The final decision as to where delivery vehicles will
Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc.
Voil llesorts' Front Door Redeaeloanent
Vail's Front Door
Environmental I mpact RePort
Addendum 1/I-21
t be permitM to exit the central loading and delivery facility will be left up to the Town of Vail
Peak season site generated baffic is shown in Figure 6.
Kimtey-HonawtAssociatcs,Inc. EnvironmenrlH#,"1"?:J;
VailResorts' FrontDoor Redcaelopnent Addendum l/I-21
LEGEND
O study Area Key Segrnent
WKDY(SAT) Average Daily Trafic Volurnes
lxa(xxxxl Trafrc Volumes Vehicles per Day (vpd)
(both direc-tions)
/)
a\--q
'rl
VAIL'S FRONT DOOR
PEAK SEASON SITE GENERATED TRAFFIC
NIOFTTH
l{I:; 0c7tc70o|
Vail's Front Door
Environmental Impact RePort
Addendum lA-23
FIGURE 6
h^-\
JHW 4,- J4i,
(
)
€\
V-fl Kimley*lom
\lI7 I and Associales Inc.
O 4.3 Total Background Plus Peak Season Slte Generated Traffic
Peak season site generated traffic volumes including both new automobile trips and rerouted
delivery vehicles were added to the background volumes in Figure 5 to represent estimated
haffic conditions for full project development. Total traffic volumes for the entire planned
Front Door Redevelopment proiect are illustrated in Figure 7.
Vail's Front Door
Environmental I mPact RePort
Kimtey-Horn and Associates, lttc. Addendum l/I-24
Vail Resorts' Front Door Redeuelopment
LEGEND
O Study Area Key Segrnent
-.-_
WKDY(SAT) Average Daily Traffic Votumes
lxx,)(to(sxl Tratrc Volumes Vehicles per Day (vpd)
(boh dnecfo.rs)
L5.
a\ xr4
---'l
\-_
VAIL'S FRONT DOOR
BACKGROUND PLUS SITE GENERATED
TRAFFIC VOLUMES
Vail's Front Door
Environmental Impact RePort
Addendum l/I-25
FIGURE 7
I\IOFITH
t{ls o07E67001
7l-fl Kimley-Hom
\I7 \ ano Assoqates, Inc.
5.0 TMFFIC AND CENTML LOADING FACILITY OPEMTIONS ANALYSES
Kimley-Horn's analyses of traffic operations in the site vicinity were conducted to determine
potential capacity deficiencies. The acknowledged source for determining overall capacity is
the current edition of the Highway Capacity Manual.
5.1 Roadway Segment/Arterial Level of Service Analysis
Roadway segment capacity analysis results are listed in terms of Level of Service (LOS). LOS is
a qualitative term describing operating conditions a driver will experience while traveling on a
particular street during a particular time interval. It ranges from A (very little delay) to F (long
delays and congestion). Based upon Kimley-Hom experience, LOS D or better is recommended
as the measure of acceptable level of service during the peak hours. The roadway segment
operations for background (without proposed action) and total (with proposed action) haffic
peak-hour conditions were analyzed using thc analysis methodologies found in the Highway
Capacity Manual (HCM) using the Highway Capacity Software (HCS 2000) program, Release
4.1 (calculations in Appendix C).
Vail Road Capacity Level of Service Analysis
The capacity of VaiI Road given that it carries one lane of travel in each direction is 14,900
vehicles per day. This roadway currently has a daily traffic volume of 9,030 vehicles per day
north of Meadow Drive and 1,920 vehicles per day south of Forest Road. With a projected peak
day volume ol 9,879 and 2,354 vehicles per day with development of the project north of
Meadow Drive and south of Forest Road, respectively, all conditions result in an acceptablc
level of service of C and A, respectively. Since this roadway has a large amount of reserve
capacity available, the possible highest demand, worst-case, conservative, increase in traffic
results in a very acceptable level of service.
Kinley-LIont and Associates, lnc.
Vail Re sorts' Front Door Redeuelooment
Vail's Front Door
Environmental I mpact Report
Addendum l/I-26
5.2 Dellvery Demands and Observations
As previously described in Section 3.3, the Town of Vail requested an analysis be conducted to
determine existing delivery vehicle demands for the Vail's Front Door, as well as demands
along Gore Creek Drive within the pedeshian core area of Vail Village. Therefore the fuly 3,
2002 survey data was used to determine delivery demands for the Village. These counts were
analyzed to determine the maximum number of delivery vehicles that would be expected to
occur at a given time throughout the day. Based upon the peak observations, it was determined
that nine (9) deliveries occurred during the same time period on July 3,2002, throughout the
Village. This maximum delivery load occurred between 8:47 a.m. and 9:00 a.m. At the P3&J
parking facfity, five (5) detveries were observed to occur during the same time period on July
3'd between 10:52 a.rn and L1:02 a.m. On average, a demand of five (5) deliveries was observed
at any given moment in time throughout the village. At the P3&J facility, this average was
approximately three (3) delivery vehicles. This delivery vehicle count information is included
in Appendix A.
These results were evaluated with previous delivery studies that have been conducted for the
Village. Two studies and information were evaluated and compared with the data collcctcd for
this report. Thc following paragraphs discuss the results of these previous studies.
MK Centennial (now Washington Group) conducted a detailed study of delivery activity within
the Village in 1999. This information is included in Appendix A. Results of this study
determined the peak number of delivery vehicles along Gore Creek Drive, Willow Bridge Road,
and Haruon Ranch Road was 12 deliverv vehicles.
Information was provided from the Town of Vail that indicated that L08 daily deliveries were
counted along Hanson Ranch Road and Gore Creek Drive on February 15th and 16th,2001. To
proiect the number of deliveries that would be expected at any given moment during the peak
season from these daily delivery counts, the percentage of deliveries during the peak time
period was calculatcd from thc July 3,2002 count and observation. It was observed on this date
that the highest pcrcentage
total yielded a total of 10.8
Kimley-Hom and Associates, lnc.
of delivcries occurring at a given moment compared to the daily
percent. Thcrefore, if 10.8 percent of the 108 delivery vehicles
Vail's Front Door
Environmental ImPact RePort
Addendum l/I-27
Vnil Resorts' Front Door Rerleaelownent
counted during the peak winter season all delivered at the same moment in time, 12 delivery
spaces would be required at the central loading facility. These counts and calculations are
attached in Appendix A.
Therefore, based upon in{ormation provided from previous studies, it is believed that the
,demand for deliveries is approximately 12 loading and delivery spaces during peak winter and
sununer months. Since the facility should account for the peak period, 12 delivery spaces are
recommended.
It is understood that at the request of Town of Vail staff, current plans for the Front Door
provide 14 delivery vehicle spaces. Based on the analysis above, 14 spaces exceed what is
necessary to serve the village during peak delivery times in the winter and summer. It should
also be noted that data used to conclude 12 spaces are sufficient to serve the Villagc core area
was based largely on survey information of existing deliveries during times when truck
deliveries in the Village were confined to a few hours each day. Because of these tirne
restrictions deliveries were "compressed" resulting in higher delivcry vehicle trips. Dclivery
time restrictions have skewed this data. It is expected that the central loading and dclivery
facility will be open between ten and twelve hours each day and as such will allow for
deliveries to be dispersed throughout the day. Given this, L2 spaces available throughout the
day is probably in excess of what is actually needed to serve deliveries occurring within Vail
Village.
5.3 Delivery Elevator Capacity Discussion
Kimley-Horn has reviewed the site layout for the central loading facility based on the June 20,
2003 submittal to the Town of Vail and the central loading study. A preliminary analysis has
been performed to determine the feasibility of thc site layout for transporting goods from the
loading facility to the various destinations throughout the Village. The analysis included the
following assumptions:
Vail's Front Door
Fl,nviron mental Impact Report
Addendum l/I-28 KinleyJ'Iorn and Associates, lnc.
Vail Resorts' Front Door Redeoelopntent
List of Assumptions Used to Evaluate Elevator Capacity
Parameter Value Assumed
Elevator Trip Time 55 seconds round trip
Elevator Capacity 1 Hand Truck Per Trip
Elevator Loading Conf iguration Front and Rear Entry/Exit
Elevator Door Width At least 3 feet wide
Cargo Movement Method Hand Truck Only
Typical Walk Speed with Hand Truck 230 feet per minute
Hand Truck Load Time 5 minutes
Cargo Handover Time 5 minutes
Number of Deliveries per Truck 1.5
Maximum Delivery Distance 1000 feet
Based on the above assumptions thc maxirnum trip time it would take from the moment a truck
pulls up to the dock until the driver is back behind the whcel can be estimated as shown below.
This analysis assumcs it takes one rninute to reach the elevator from the truck loading position,
the driver spcnds a minute behind the wheel logg g the delivery, and the elevator is in the
"wrong" position when the delivery person pushes the button. These are all very conservative
assumptions to demonstrate worst case scenarios.
Vail's F-ront Door
Environmental I mPact RePort
Kirnley-Horn and Associates, Inc. Addendum l/I-29
Vail Resorts' Front Door Redeuelopment
Typical Delivery Time Table
Event Estimated Time
Hand Truck Load Time 5 minutes
Travel to Elevator Queue l minute
Elevator Trip including wait time 55 seconds
Walk to Deliverv Location 1000ft/230 ftlmin = 4.4 minutes
Handover Delivery 5 minutes
Walk Back to Elevator 1000 ft/n0 ftlmin = 4.4 minutes
Elevator Trip including wait time 55 seconds
Walk Back to Delivery Truck l minute
Load Hand Truck and Log Delivery 2 minutes
Total Delivery Time 24.5 minutes
The above assumptions are meant to estimate a worst case scenario. If we assume that an
average delivery takes approximately 75o/o of the time and that each truck makes 1.5 deliveries
the average delivery vehicle dwell time per loading bay would be 27 .5 minutes. This means, on
average, a delivery vehicle can be expected to occupy one loading space for approxirnately 28
minutes. This means that each Ioading space could accommodate 2 delivery vehicles per hour.
If the central loading facility is designed with a total of 14 loading bays, the total number of
hucks that could be accommodated within the central loading facility per one hour period
would be 28.
From the delivery vehicle counts conducted on July 3, 2002 at both the P3&J facility and
Checkpoint Charlie, it was found that on average each delivery vehicle was parked for
approximately 30 minutes within the Village. Based on the 14 loading bays planned at the
central loading facility, the total number of delivery vehicles that could be accommodated
within this system would be 28.
Vail's Front Door
Environmen tal ImPact RePort
Addendum l/l-30 Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc.
Vail Resorts' Front Door Redeuelopment
Therefore, it is believed based on both future loading assumptione and the existing delivery
system within Vail Village that all deliveries can be accommodated during the peak season with
14loading bays within the central loading and delivery facility.
Kmlcy-Horn anil Associates, Inc.
Vsil Resorts' Frott Door Redmelopment
Vail's Front Door
Environmental Impact Report
Addendum 1/I-31
6.0 coNcLUsroNs
Based on the analysis presented in this report, Kimley-Horn believes the proposed Vail Resorts
Front Door Redevelopment will be successfully incorporated into the future traffic operations
without any necessary roadway modifications. The existing street system can accofiunodate site
generated traJfic. The level of service (LOS) of Vail Road north of Meadow Drive is expected to
be LOS C with or without the addition of project traffic. The LOS of Vail Road south of Forest
Road is expected to be LOS A with or without the addition of project traffic. This is a very
acceptable level of service condition. In addition, Vail Road north of Meadow Drive is expected
to be at only approximately 63 percent of capacity. South of Forest Road, Vail Road is expected
to be at only approximately 16 percent of capacity.
The 14 delivery spaces proposed with this project are expected to be morc than adequate to
serve the demand of deliveries during the peak hour of the peak holiday weekend season.
Based on this analysis, 12 delivery spaces are expected to adequately serve loading demands.
By removing delivery vehicles from Gore Creek Drive, the pedestrian environment would be
expected to improve tfuough the Village core.
It is important to recognize that this study assigned all project traffic to Vail Road to provide a
conservative analysis for this roadway. It is expected that based upon the location of the
loading facility, four alternatives are available for exiting delivery vehicles, which include
Willow Road, Willow Bridge Road, Gore Creek Drive and Vail Road. This would likely
dishibute delivery vehicle volumes to existing conditions. It is recommended that the Town of
Vail determine the best strategy for the distribution of delivery vehicle movements. In addition,
this dishibution could be continually monitored and modified in the future as necessary.
Kimley-Horn and Associates, lttc.
Vail Resorls' Front Door Redeuelonmenl
Vail's Front Door
Environmental Impact Report
Addendum l/I-32
APPENDICES
Vail's Front Door
Environmental Impact Report
Addendum l/I-33
APPENDIX A
Delivery Vehicle Counts
Vail's Front Door
Environmental Impact Report
Addendum 1/I-34
Vehlcle3 Enterlng Maln Lodge and Checkpolnt Chartle on Z3l02
Time In Er{er Locatbn Ttn6 oiJt Exlt Locailon Length (feet)Vehble Type
F@ds
BFI Gafbage
HorEy Wagon
Dary
Garbage
Delivery Truck
Fish Co.
Fbh Co.
7:08 Lodgo (iraln)
7.25 Checkpdr Charlie 7:32 Ctr€ckpolr{Chadie
7',4O Ch€€kpoar(Chanio 8:07 Ct€ckpoi Chadie 8:09 Lodge ([|.aln)
9:35 CtEckpoiotCharlie 6:10 Checkpoh Cha.lie 6:15 Lodge (Main)
8:35 CtFckpolnlcharlie
E:20 Checkpointcharlie 8:20 Checkpdnt Chadie E:43 Lodge (Main)8:58 CheckpoinfCharlie 6:45 Lodge (Main)
0:10 CheckpoiniCharlie 6:{6 Checkpoinl Chanio
9:3O Gqe Geek Frorlage 6'.17 Lodg€ (i/talo)8:53 Oreckpoin Chadie 8:47 Checkpoin Charlie
9:07 Go.e Creek Froitaqe 9:14 Lodge (Main)g:29 Ch€ckpdnt Chadie 9:12 Lodge (Main)
9:45 Ct|eckpointCharlie
9155 Checkpoint Chadi€9:55 Lodg6 (Main)9:57 Checkpoi.rtcha.lie
10:00 Ch€ckpolntCha,lie '10:09 Lodge (Main)
l0:'10 Ch€ckpoln(Cha.li€
10:50 CheckpointChadie
10155 ChockpolntChadie
1O:57 CheckpointCharlie
11;04 ClEckpohtCha.ile
I1:l I Checkpoint Cha,lie
11;1,{ Ch€ckpolntCharll€
l1:20 CheckpointCharlie
11:29 ChockpolntCtra.lio
l1:47 CheckpointCharlie 12:10 Lodge (iraln)12:17 Lodge (Main)
12122 CheckpolntChadi€
12:35 Checkpdnt Chadie 12:U CtEckpolni Chadl€
13:'19 CheckpointChadie
1,1105 CheckpolntCha.lie
14:12 CheckpointChadie 14:18 Lodge (i,laln)
1/t:42 CheckpdntCharlie
15:03 CheckpoidCharlie
l5:13 CheckpoinlCharlie
15:45 CheckpcirtCharlie
16125 Checkpoi Chadie
16:25 CheckpdntCharlie
7:i5 Lodge (iiah)
8i20 Gore
9:07 Gore
8:16 Go.6
E:26 Go.e
9:35 Lodge (Main)
10:3E Gore
9:32 Gore
8:35 Lodge (Maln)
9:12 Gore
6:47 Hansen
Er35 Willow Br*lge Road
8:50 Lodge (Main)
9:15 Gore
9110 Lodge (Main)
9;35 Willo\,v Bruge Road
9:57 Gore
8153 Lodge (Main)
9:0O Gorc
9:31 Go.e
9'.24 Lodg6 (Maln)
9:5€ Go.e
9:55 Lodge (Maln)
11:'l I Gore
9:57 Go.e
1f:27 Go(e
10:07 Lodge (Maln)
10:19 Gore
11:05 Wllo' , Brilge Road
10:47 Gore
'14:01 Gore
11r07 Go.e
'11:10 Go.e
l l:20 Wfti'i BriJge Road
1 | r20 Wllglr Brirge Road
l1:30 WUo{ Bridge Road
1l:31 Go.e
12:27 Gc'e
12:00 Wilow B.itge Road
12:15 Lodge (Main)
12:22 W ow Brilge Road
'12:32 Wnbr/ B.iJge Road
12:44 Wllor{ BriJge Road
'13:15 Willolr/ &iJg€ Road
13:21 Wllofl Brilge Road
'1,{:22 Ch6ckpoir(
14:40 W o'.v B.ilge Road
1,1:3.1 Wlol i B.ldge Roed
14:/t4 Checkxir{
15107 Wllor B.ldge Road
15:m Wlorv B.iJge Road
16:00 Wllo / B.ldoe Road
16:35 ClEckpoint
16:?,0 Checkpolnt
Service Lodge?
lro
mam enuance
no
no
m
no
main enkance Coors Truck
Coors Truck
Budr!€iser Van
Tnck
T.uck
no
ato
maln €nLarrce
tx,
n(l
trc
mam entrarrce
no
main enttance
aro
Gdd
Gold
LineMjniform
LineMJrilom
Velvet Dry Cbaners
Vdvet Dry Cleanors
9:30 Go.e Creek Frontage slopped alor€ core in front of lodge '
17:Og
IE
25
25
30
30
30
1E
30
30
25
30
30
30
30
30
't8
18
t8
18
30
30
30
30
30
30
30
t6
16
30
30
30
30
18
t8
18
30
30
30
30
30
30
1E
30
1a
18
ta
30
30
18
18
18
't8
30
t8
30
no
main entfarce
no
Elank White Van
Loaf Oovea Truck
Gorsuch LTD White T.uck
Loaf Clover Truck
Linen
Miler Lite
Italco Foods
Oesigns
Sevanm While Van
Slope Laund.y
Blank White Truck (1636022)
No.ih€ast Whlte T.uck
Oary
UPS
Lite
UPS
B€er Truck
Uphdestry
9:07 Gor6 Crook Frontag6 8lopp€d alorE Gore h Lor{ of lodge '
no
maln gnt?nce
no
lhaln entrance
no
no
main enlrance
stopped alorE Gore lo tront of lodge
no
man gn|taaEe
stopped along Gore in front ol lodge
no
no
stopped alorE Go.e in fronl of lodgo
m
no
n0
no
tto
no
mam emtaalce
main enlrance
t10
no
no
flo
|rt
no
main enbance
alo
no
no
m
no
m
Oary
Hon€y wagoo
Truck (Penske)
Rivsr Nehral Cheese
Transpoat
Al F.elght
Lineo
Dry Cl€aners
Oesigirs
White Pick-Up
Truck
Ski Rental Van
Bull Energy Drink
' Irxllcares a.rivaL/d€ps.t'r€ dudi{ pe.k pedod
Colnt Sumnarv Statistics
Average Truck Length Ovqrall 30
Av6rag6 Truck Length During Peak 30
Numbe. of 18 ft Trucks 20
Number of 25 fr Tnrcks 4
Nlmber ol 30 ft Trucks 33
Numbor ot 35 ff Trucks 0
Nlmber ol40 ft Trucks 1
lAverage Delivery Vehicle DwellTime O:29
TotalNumber of Deliveries 58
Vail's Front Door
Environmental Impact Report
Addendum l/I-35
Vehicles Entering at P3&J onTl3l02
Vehicle Type Time In Time Out Exit Location Length (ft)
Valley Honey Wagon garbage
Christy Sports
Miller Lite
Budweiser
Meadow Gold
UPS
Summit Laundry
Olive Oil (Calabria)
Jim's Formal Wear
Spartan
Dana White Truck
Green Van
Michael Shea's
Outback Builders
8:17
8:24
9:25
9:32
9:32
9:40
9:42
9:57
10:05
1O:O7
1O.'27
10:43
1O:52
11:51
11:58
12:Q0
13:23
14',25
14:49
15:12
15:17
15:31
15:53
16:51
10:54
8:32 Gore
8:24 Gore
9:31 Gore
11:22 Gore
11:32 Gore
9:54 Gore
9:54 Gore
10:05 Gore
10:37 Gore
10:07 Gore
10:40 P3&J
11:.46 Gore
11:02 Gore
12:23 Gore
13:22 Gore
12:02 Gore
13:58 Gore 'l5:03 Gore
14:56 Gore
15:31 Gore
15:42 Gore
15:42 Gore
15:53 Gore
16:56 Gore
12:38 Gore
18
35
30
30
30
30
30
1B
30
18
40
JU
18
1B
30
30
18
1B
30
1a
18
18
' indicates anival/deparlure during peak period
Count Summarv Statistics
Average Truck Length Overall
Average Truck Length During Peak
Number of '18 ft Trucks
Number of 30 ft Trucks
Number of 35 ft Trucks
Number of 40 fl Trucks
Average Dwell Time
Total Number of Deliveries
25
2n
12
1',!
1
1
0:30
25
Vail's Front Door
Environmental Impact Report
Addendum 1/I-36
J,t45 (lL UEJZ lU JUJ.f.abtD ttt r.vz/v.1
o N[.E 3A 'gZ L6'V9 FR FHU
Total Delivery Demand
6:00 am to 3:00 pm
Totals
Vehicle
Class
211sl01 a16101
Hanson Ranch
Road
Gore Creek
Drive
Both Sites Hanson Ranch
Road
Gore Creek
Drive
Both Siles
21
0
0
0
0
3
0
0
!
28
34
6
2
13
6
I
2
0
I
80
55
6
2
13
o
12
2
0
JL
't0E
23
I
0
2
0
1
0
0
2
29
19
7
0
o
4
11
2
0
8
60
42
I
0
11
4
12
2
0
10
89
Vail's Front Door
Environmental Impact Report
Addendum 1/I-37
5cp-09-02 l0:02a4 tron-T-6 t9 P.05/05 F800
Table 5 - Vail Parking Structure Rates
O earxing
ParkinginVailVi||ageiso-nlyforpermittedvehicles.Vehic|eswithoutthecorrectpermit0r
vehictes wfro Exceed the limits ot ttreir peilil*tii6".ti9r99 .. Du,rinq a three week period MK
contenniat observed the permined p*ii:"i'ltiii. ',iiti'inViirVillag6 and found the tollowing
occupancy rales Plesented in table 4'
l
I
Vail's Front Door
Environmental Impact Report
Addendum 1/I-38
Table 4'VailVillage Parking Study
Sheet2
O <=n $$'it#T,o.,,*
Project Vail Village
SubTect Peak number of delivery vehicles
Designed by enG
Checked by
e , __________.:::-.....'...,'..- _-t-__:_:_:__::::_
Checked by _ Sheet No. L of
PEAK NUMBER OF DELIVERY VEHICLES
From delivery vehicle counts obtained July 3, 2002, it was determined that 83 vehicles made
deliveries to Vail Village. The peak number of delivery vehicles present on the site at any given
time that day was g vehicles. This is 10.8% of the daily delivery vehicles.
Counts conducted during the winter at Vail Village indicate a total of 216 in and out delivery
vehicle trips, which is 108 round trip deliveries. Using the peak percentage obtained from lhe
July 3rd counts, a peak number of 12 delivery vehicles can be expected in the winter.
Based on an average dwell time of thirty minutes per delivery vehicle from observations July 3, 2002
and 12 delivery bays to accommodate the maximum number of deliveries it can be assumed that
approximately 24 deliveries will occur per hour.
(30 min per vehicle = 2 vehicles per hour => 2 vehicles per hour * 12 storage bays = 24 vehicles per hour)
This equates to approximately one delivery vehicle every 2.5 minutes.
Vail's liront Door
Environmental Impact RePort
Addendum l/I-39
Page 1
.Srp-09-02
l0:02an Fron-T-619 P,06/05 F-800
Loading and Delivery Activity fi;;';?;ffi;iliai 50 - t'o truck deliveries per day in vaitvirage- _rliF, flll']l
go"o. i"1#Viitase oriiinate trom a varietv of.sources-an9 991'I9l.t ^u-"liy,:i 9"o9:'-l
[.t or O.tiutrv truc[s, the'ir size, and tipe of goods delivered i?
bYi9l il-l
'ln np;iehbix A. There
;;;;;;y'diif;;iiyp;; or orsin6i.es Seins served.bvth." d?l'y:.ry,1Y-91: j11lti":".1
il.;ibi;iJi;riiltvpliJ a"rr"ery n"tlqms Ill:"g!, tniervieli'wit!-{1qlil.s-,llT";il1
#:lriJ,';;"
',i:';.ii#;d,n"i"rjp'iotim"tely
65"/0 oithl truck deliv6riri!,1e ynlau-e-lojll
restaurants. Table 2 ooiu*enti'establishments in the villagri and thbir coresponding
square footage.
Busues@-Sq. Ft.# seals I rooms
Blu's Restaurant 1?24 . ii. lO 1-. ':' .'; I
Bridqe Street Charlie's .-: .:900
Chri$iania Lodgq .'.!- ' .: ,::46
Glub Chelsea 24o,0 .:..130
Club. The 2000 ti..'j.75
]anons Saloon 6000 * 160
Gasmot G nns narn rnqr'l-!c.28
Gorsuch Ltd,.'10000
Lancelot lnn. lnc- ." 4000 125
LettBank Restaurant ': 3000 :'U
Looqe @ vajlfold/Bqt
ttldoe @.Vail Othec?',-r,1ar'
Lile @ VailQeta[-lj
Lodqe @ Vail;:The ':'rI 116
Los Amigix:i;iF,li.1400 112 83
Mav Palace:Restauran!3000 120
Moqrils ii!"hYij 94
Nick's #2800 59
Ore House:/3800 114
Pepi's ne$aurant !LBa!157
Fled.Lion, The 6700 232
Bussell's 2700 I tv
Sarah's Lounqe 0v
Sitrmark Lodqe, The
Sweet Basil 100
Tivoli Lodqe, The 50
Uo rtre Crex Bar & Grill 1600 70
VailVillage Ctuo 11620 116
Vand€tta's 6200 120
Skier Droyoff ActivitY
Sfi"iArii,tf and pick-up aclivity takes placealong Hanson Ranch Foad iust south of the
FC'a "Li"i Approximatety ii'-eti u.t ict"i are involied in skier drop olf actlvity during eagh
iriirv iidr (;,i & fii, 'rt'LrJ
"r" a number of other vehicles, mainly cars that use the
nans6n Rancn Ro'aa illegal access into the Village on this segment.
Vail's !'ront Door
Environmental Impact Report
Addendum l/I-40
APPENDIX B
Trip Generation Worksheets
Vail's Front Door
Environmental Impnct Report
Addendum 1/I-41
<=n lffiey*lom
sdAssodabs, lrrc.
Project Vail's Front Door Subject Trip Generation Summary for Projecl
Designed by EAG Date July 17,2003 JobNo. 067867001
Checked by SheetNo. 1 of 1
TRIP GENERATION SUMMARY
Residence Club at Vail's Front Door Trip Generation
13 units generate an additional 4 peak hour trips, 42 weekday daily, and 40 Saturday daily
(from previous calculation sheet)
Ski Club Membership Trip Generation
285 proposed ski club members with 95 parking spaces.
All 100% of parking spaces are expected to be occupied.
It can be expected that 33% of all trips arriving will occur during common peak hour per Vail Resorts Information.
Therefore, it is assummed that 95 club members would be generated on any given Saturday.
190 daily trips (one entering and one exiting per club member)
Of these 95 club members attracted, 33% would arrive during the common peak hour resulting in
32 peak hour trips (95 members per day x 0.33 arrive in peak hour)
Skier Services Building and Other Parking
A total of 31 parking spaces are expected to be provided for the new skier services building to be used by
the Lodge at Vail or by Vail Resorts employees.
All 100% of parking spaces are expected to be occupied on any given day.
62 daily trips (31 spaces x 2, (1 entering and 'l exiting))
It can be expected that 90% of all trips arriving will occur during common peak hour per Vail Resorts lnformation,
Therefore, it can be assumed that 27 trips will occur during the peak hour.
(31 spaces x 0.9 arrive in peak hour)
Total Proiect Trip Generation
Peak Hour Weekday Daily
4 peak hour trips for residential units 42 peak hour trips for residential units
32 peak hour trips for ski club members 190 peak hour trips for ski club members
Z peak hour trips for skier services building 62 peak hour trips for skier services building
63 Total Peak HourTrips 294 Total Peak HourTrips
Saturday Daily
40 peak hour trips for residential units
190 peak hour trips for ski club members
@, peak hour trips for skier services building
292 Total Peak HourTrips
Vail's Front Door
Environmental Impact Report
Addendum l/I-42
EN lft{ey+lom
gtdAssochtes, Ina
Pro1'ect Vail Village
SubT'ect Trip Generation
Designed by EAG Dafe July 15,2003 Job No. 067867.001
Checked by Date Sheel No. 1 of 1
TRIP GENERATION MANUAL TECHNIQUES
ITE Trio Generation Manual 6th Edition, Fitted Curve Equations
Land Use Code - Recreational Homes (260)
Independant Variable - Dwelling Units (X)
l= 13
T = Average Vehicle Trip Ends
Peak Hour of Adiacent Street Traffic. One Hour Between 4 and 6 p.m. (paqe 471)
Daily Weekday Direclional Dishibution: 41o/o ent. 59o/o exit.
(T) = 0.26 (X) T = 4 Average Vehicle Trip Ends (T)=0.20- (13.0) 2 entering 2 exiting
2+2=4
Weekdav. (paqe 469)
Daily Weekday
(T) = 3.16 (x)
(r) = 3.10. (13.0)
Directional Distribution: SQYo ent. 50o/o exit.
T = 42 Average Vehicle Trip Ends
21 entering 21 exiting
21 +21 =42
Saturdav. (paqe 474)
Directional Distribution: 50% ent. 50% exit.
(T) = 3.07 (X) T = 40 Average Vehicle Trip Ends
(T) = 3.07. (13.0) 20 entering 20 exiting
20+20=40
Vail's Front Door
Environmental Impact Report
Addendum l/I-43
APPENDIX C
Roadway Segment Analysis Worksheets
Vail's tr'ront Door
Environ mental Impact Report
Addendum 1/I-44
HCS2000: Two-Lane Highwfelease 4.1 c
Fax:
Two-Way Two-Lane Highway Segment Analysis
Analyst EAG Agency/Co. Kimley-Horn
Date Performed 711512003
Analysis Time Period Existing Weekday Highway Vail Drive From/To North of East Meadow Drive Jurisdiction Town of Vail
Analysis Year 2003
Description 067867001 - Vail's Front Door
Input Data
Highway class Class 1
Shoulder width 6.0 ft Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.88
Lane width 12.0 ft % Trucks and buses 2 o/o
Segment length 0.5 mi 7o Recreational vehicles 4 o/o
Terrain type Level % No-passing zones O o/o
Grade: Length mi Access points/mi 4 lmi Up/down Yo
;fFllHlll*'H"r uoon"?"t veh/h
Average Travel Speed
Grade adjustment factor, fG 1.00
PCE for trucks. ET
PCE for RVs. ER
Heavy-vehicle adjustment factor, 0.996
Two-way flow rate,(note-1 ) vp 1030 pc/h
Highest directional split proportion (note-2) 618 pc/h
Free-Flow Speed from Field Measurement:
o
Phone:
E-Mail:
1.2
1.0
Field measured speed, SFM
Observed volume, Vf
- mi/h - veh/h
Estimated Free-Flow Speed:
Base free-flow speed, BFFS 65.0 mi/h
Adj. for lane and shoulder width, fLS 0.0 mi/h
Adj. for access points, fA 1.0 mi/h
Free-flow speed, FFS 64.0 mi/h
Adjustment for no-passing zones, fnp 0.0 mi/h
Average travel speed, ATS 56.0 mi/h
Percent Time-Spent-Following
Grade adjustment factor, fG 1.00 Fn:[VT'r** il
Heavy-vehicle adjustment factor, fHV 0.998 Vail's Front Door
Two-way flow rate,(note-1) vp 1028 pc/h Environmental Impact Report
Highest directional split proportion (note-2) 617 Addendum l/I-45
Base percent time-spenffollowing, BPTSF 59.5 %
AdJ.for directional distribution and no-passlryones, fd/np 0.0
Percent time-spent-following, PTSF t 59.5 7o
Level of Service and Other Performance Measures
Lev{of service. LOS C Vf: to capacity ratio, v/c 0.32
PeaY1s-min vehicle-miles of travel, VMTI 5 128 veh-mi
Peak-hour vehlcle-mlles of travel, VMT60 452 veh-mi
Peak 15-min total travel time, TT15 2.3 veh-h
Notes:
1. lf vp >= 3200 pclh, terminate analysis{he LOS is F.
2. lf highest directional split vp >= 1700 pc/h, terminate
analysis-the LOS is F.
Vail's Front Door
Environmental Impact Report
Addendum l/I-46
HCS20fi): Two-Lane Highwalerease 4.1c
Fax:
Two-Way Two-Lane Highway Segment Analysis
Analyst EAG Agency/Co. Kimley-Horn
DatePerformed 7/1512003
Analysis Time Period Existing Saturday Highway Vail Drive From/To North of East Meadow Drive Jurisdiction Town of Vail
Analysis Year 2003
Description 067867001 - Vail's Front Door
Input Data
Highway class Class 1
Shoulder width 6.0 ft Peak-hour factor. PHF 0.88
Lane width '12.0 ft % Trucks and buses 2 o/o
Segment length 0.5 mi % Recreational vehicles 4 o/o
Tenain gpe Level % No-passing zones 0 o/o
Grade: Length mi Access points/mi 4 lmi Up/down %
IU#il";i[*'H"i uoo? veh/h
o
Phone
E-Mail
Average Travel Speed
Grade adjustment factor, fG 1.00
PCE for trucks. ET 1.2
PCE for RVs, ER 1.0
Heavy-vehicle adjustment factor, 0.996
Two-way flow rate,(note-1) vp 974 pc/h
Highest directional split proportion (note-2) 584 pc/h
Free-Flow Speed from Field Measurement:
Field measured speed, SFM - mi/h
Observed volume, Vf - veh/h
Estimated Free-Flow Speed:
Base free-flow speed, BFFS 65.0 mi/h
Adj. for lane and shoulder width, fLS 0.0 mi/h
Adj. for access points, fA 1.0 mi/h
Free-flow speed, FFS 64.0 mi/h
Adjustment for no-passing zones, fnp 0.0 miih
Average travel speed, ATS 56.4 mi/h
Percent Time-Spenf Followin g
1.00
1.1
1.0
0.998
972 pc/h
Highest directional split proportion (note-2) 583
Base percent time-spent-following, BPTSF 57.4 %
Grade adiustment factor. fG
FtH[t"J';*"
Heavy-vehicle adjustment factor, fHV
Two-way flow rate,(note-1 ) vp
Vail's Front Door
Environmental Impact Report
Addendum l/I-47
Adj.for direclional dislribution and no.passi5lones, fdlnp 0.0
Perwnttime-spent-following, PTSF U 57.4 %
Level of SeMce and Other Performanog Moasures
Level of service. LOS C
X!to?'tr?fflgi:llill/3,t,"u"r,vMr15 030 n1 veh-mi
Peak-hour vehicle-miles of iravel. VMT6O 427 veh-mi
Peak 1$.min total travel time. TT15 2.1 veh-h
Notes:
l. lf vp >= 3200 pc/h, terminate analysls-the LOS is F.
2. lf hlghest directional split vp >= 1700 pcy'h, terminate
analpls-the LOS is F.
Vail's Front Door
Environmental Impact Report
Addendum 1/I-48
HCS2000: Two-Lane Highwalelease 4.1 c
a
Phone:
E-Mail:
Fax:
Two-Way Two-Lane Highway Segment Analysis
Analyst EAG Agency/Co. Kimley-Horn
Dale Performed 711512003
Analysis Time Period Future Weekday Highway Vail Drive From/To North of East Meadow Drive Jurisdiction Town of Vail
Analysis Year 2003
Description 067867001 - Vail's Front Door
Input Data
Highway class Class 1
Shoulder width 6.0 ft Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.88
Lane width 12.0 ft % Trucks and buses 2 o/o
Segment length 0.5 mi % Recreational vehicles 4 o/o
Tenain type Level % No-passing zones 0 oA
Grade: Length mi Access points/mi 4 lmi Up/down %
Tw11ay hourly volume, V 9BB veh/h Difrnal split 60 | 40 %
Average Travel Speed
Grade adjustment factor, fG 1 .00
PCE for trucks. ET
PCE for RVs. ER
Heavy-vehicle adjustmenl factor, 0.996
Two-way flow rate,(note-1) vp 1'127 pc/h
Highest directional split proportion (note-2) 676 pc/h
Free-Flow Speed from Field Measurement:
1.2
1.0
Field measured speed, SFM
Observed volume. Vf
- mi/h - veh/h
Estimated Free-Flow Speed:
Base free-flow speed, BFFS 65.0 mi/h
Adj. for lane and shoulder width, fLS 0.0 mi/h
Adj. for access points, fA 1.0 mi/h
Free-flow speed. FFS 64.0 mi/h
Adjustment for no-passing zones, fnp 0.0 mi/h
Average travel speed, ATS 55.3 mi/h
Percenl Time-Spent-Following
Grade adiustment factor. fG 1.00 F[Il[l,"J'i** il
Heavy-vehicle adjustment factor, fHV 0.998 Vail's Front Door
Two-way flow rate,(nole-1) vp 1125 pclh Environmental Impact Report
Highest directional split proportion (note-2) 675 Addendum l/I_49 Base percent time-spent-following, BPTSF 62.8 %
Adj.for directional distribution and no-passitlg.ilones, fd/np 0.0
Percent time-spent-following, PTSF ! 62.8 Vo
Level of Service and Other Performance Measures
Level of service. LOS C
y*rmnf;lIJilli;Yittraver.VMrlS o'35
140 veh-mi
Peak-hour vehicle-miles of travel, VMT60 494 veh-mi
Peak 15-min total travel time. fi15 2.5 veh-h
Notes:
1. lf vp >= 3200 pc/h, terminate analysis-the LOS is F.
2. lf highest directional split vp >= 1700 pc/h, terminate
analysis-the LOS is F.
Vail's Front Door
Environmental Impact Report
Addendum l/I-50
o
Phone
E-Mail
HCS2O00: Two-Lane Higtrwdletease 4.1 c
EAG
Kimley-Horn
Fax:
Two-Way Two-Lane Highway Segment Analysis
Vail Drive
North of East Meadow Drive
Town of Vail
2003
Description 067867001 - Vail's Front Door
Input Data
Highway class Class 1
Shoulder width 6.0 ft Peak-hour factor. PHF 0.88
Lane width 12.0 ft % Trucks and buses 2 a/o
Segment length 0.5 mi % Recreational vehicles 4 o/o
Terrain $pe Level % No-passing zones O Yo
Grade: Length mi Access points/mi 4 lmi Up/down To
I'ff#..;lll *'H"l uoon"7"n veh/h
Average Travel Speed
Grade adjustment factor, fG
PCE for trucks, ET
PCE for RVs. ER
Analyst
Agency/Co.
Date Performed 711512003
Analysis Time Period Future Saturday
Highway
From/To
Jurisdiction
Anallais Year
1.00
1.2
1.0
Heavy-vehicle adjustment factor, 0.996
Two-way flow rate,(note-1) vp 107'l pc/h
Highest directional split proportion (note-2) 643 pc/h
Free-Flow Speed from Field Measurement:
Field measured speed, SFM - mi/h
Observed volume, Vf - veh/h
Estimated Free-Flow Speed:
Base free-flow speed, BFFS
Adj. for lane and shoulder width, fLS
Adj. for access points, fA
Free-flow speed, FFS
Adjustment for no-passing zones, fnp 0.0 mi/h
Average travel speed, ATS 55.7 mi/h
Grade adiustment factor. fG
Ft:[v"J'i.*
Heavy-vehicle adjustment factor, fHV
Two-way flow rate,(note-1 ) vp
Highest directional split proportion (note-2)
Base percent time-spentfollowing, BPTSF
Percenl Time-Spent-Following_
65.0 mi/h 0.0 mi/h
1.0 miih
64.0 mi/h
1.00
1.1
1.0
0.998
1069 pc/h
641
60.9 %
Vail's Front Door
Environmental Impact Report
Addendum l/l-51
Adj.for directional distribution and no-passiqpones, fd/np 0.0
Percent llme-spent-following, PTSF t 60.9 %
Level of Service and Other Performance Measures
Level of service. LOS C
Xtrll,'fnf;iIJilli;l'3rtraver,VMr15 o'33 1.. veh-mi
Peak-hour vehicle-miles of travel, VMT60 470 veh-mi
Peak 1$min total travel time. TT15 2.4 veh-h
Notes:
1. lf vp >= 3200 pc/h, terminate analysis{he LOS is F.
2. lf highest directional split vp >= 1700 pc/h, terminate
analysis-the LOS is F.
Vail's Front Door
Environmental Impact Report
Addendum 1/I-52
HCS2000: Two-Lane nrgnwfetease 4.1 c
o
Phone:
E-Mail:
Fax:
Two-Way Two-Lane Highway Segment Analysis
Analyst EAG Agency/Co. Kimley-Horn
Date Performed 711512003
Analysis Time Period Existing Weekday Highway Vail Drive From/To South of Forest Road Jurisdiction Town of Vail
Analysis Year 2003
Description 067867001 - Vail's Front Door
Input Data
Highway class Class 'l
Shoulder width 6.0 ft Peak-hour factor. PHF 0.88
Lane width 12.0 ft % Trucks and buses 2 %
Segment length 0.5 mi % Recreational vehicles 4 o/o
Tenain type Level 7o No-passing zones 0 %
Grade: Length mi Access points/mi 4 lmi Up/down To
Travay hourly volume, V 192 veh/h Dlonal split 60 I 40 o/o
Average Travel Speed
Grade adjustment factor, fG 1.00
PCE for trucks. ET
PCE for RVs. ER
't.7
1.0
Heavy-vehicle adjustment factor, 0.986
Two-way flow rate,(note-1) vp 221 pc/h
Highest directional split proportion (note-2) 'l33 pc/h
Free-Flow Speed from Field Measurement:
Field measured speed, SFM - mi/h
Observed volume, Vf - veh/h
Estimated Free-Flow Speed:
Base free-flow speed, BFFS 65.0 mi/h
Adj. for lane and shoulder width, fLS 0.0 mi/h
Adj. for access points, fA 1.0 mi/h
Free-flow speed, FFS 64.0 miih
Adjustment for no-passing zones, fnp 0.0 mi/h
Average havel speed, ATS 62.3 mi/h
Percent Time-Spent-Following
Grade adjustment factor, fG 1 .00 Plor kucks, ET 1.1
P\f[or RVs. ER 1.0
Heavy-vehicle adjustment factor, fHV 0.998 Vail's Front Door
Two-way flow rate,(note-1) vp 219 pc/h Environmental Impact Report
Highest directional split proportion (note-2) 1 31
Base percent time-spenffottowing, BprsF 17.s oA Addendum l/I-53
Adi.br dhectional disbibution and nepassingiizones, fd/np 1.6
Percentffme-spent-following, PTSF t 19.1 %
tovel of Servlce and Other Performance Measures
LevdofseMce.LOS A
X*#trffifiH$lill/3ru"u"r.vMrio o'07 zr veh-mi
Peak-hour vehlde+niles of travel, VMT60 96 vehfli
Peak 15-min total havel time, fi15 0.4 veh-h
Notes:
1. lf vp >= 3200 pdh, terminate analysis-the LOS is F.
2. I highest directional split vp >= 17@ pdh, terminate
analysis-the LOS ls F.
Vail's Front Door
Environmental ImPact RePort
Addendum 1/I-54
HCS2OOO. Two-Lane nrgnwaJerease 4.1c
EAG
Kimley-Horn
Fax:
Two-Way Two-Lane Highway Segment Analysis
Vail Drive
South of Forest Road
Town of Vail
Analysis Year 2003
Description 067867001 - Vail's Front Door
Input Data
Highway class Class 1
Shoulder width 6.0 ft Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.88
Lane width 12.0 ft % Trucks and buses 2 o/o
Segment length 0.5 mi % Recreational vehicles 4 Yo
Terrain type Level % No-passing zones O o/o
Grade: Length mi Access points/mi 4 lmi Up/down %
TIryay hourly volume, V 207 veh/h Dilcnd split 60 I 40 Vo
Average Travel Speed
Grade adjustment factor, fG 1.00
PCE for trucks, ET 1.7
PCE for RVs. ER 1.0
Heavy-vehicle adjustment factor, 0.980
Two-way flow rate,(note-1) vp 239 pc/h
Highest directional split proportion (note-2) 143 pc/h
Free-Flow Speed from Field Measurement:
Field measured speed, SFM - mi/h
Observed volume, Vf - veh/h
Estimated Free-Flow Soeed:
Base free-flow speed, BFFS 65.0 mi/h
Adj. for lane and shoulder width, fLS 0.0 mi/h
Adj. for access points, fA 1.0 mi/h
Free-flow speed, FFS 64.0 mi/h
Adjustment for no-passing zones, fnp 0.0 mi/h
Average travel speed, ATS 62.1 mi/h
Percent Time-Soent-Followino
Phone:
E-Mail:
Analyst
Agency/Co.
Date Performed 711512003
Analysis Time Period Existing Saturday
Highway
From/To
Jurisdiction
Grade adjustment factor, fG
Fnl[i,g'E**
Heavy-vehicle adjustment factor, fHV
Two-way flow rate,(note-1 ) vp
Highest directional split proportion (note-2)
Base percent time-spent.following, BPTSF
1.00
1.1
1.0
0.998
236 pc/h
142
'18.7 Yo
Vail's Front Door
Environmental Impact Report
Addcndum l/I-55
Adj.for directional distribution and nc.passiryones, fd/np 1.6
Percent time-spent-following, PTSF t 2O.3 Yo
Level of Service and Other Performance Measures
Levelof servlce. LOS A Ve to capacity ratio, v/b O.O7
Pedfi$min vehicle-miles of travel. VMT15 29 veh-mi
Peak-hour vehicle.miles of travel, VMT60 1M veh-mi
Peak 15-min total travel time. TT15 0.5 veh-h
Notes:
1. lf vp >= 3200 pc/h, terminate analysis{he LOS is F.
2. lf highest directional split vp >= 1700 pc/h, terminate
analysis-the LOS is F.
Vail's Front Door
Environmental lmpact Report
Addendum l/I-56
o
Phone:
E-Mail:
HCS2000: Two-Lane Xignwdlelease 4.1 c
EAG
Kimley-Horn
Fax:
Two-Way Two-Lane Highway Segment Analysis
Vail Drive
South of Forest Road
Town of Vail
Analyst
Agency/Co.
DatePerformed 711512003
Analysis Time Period Future Weekday
Highway
From/To
Jurisdiction
Analysis Year 2003
Description 067867001 - Vail's Front Door
Input Data
Highway class Class 1
Shoulder width 6.0 ft Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.88
Lane width 12.0 ft o/o Trucks and buses 2 o/o
Segment length 0.5 mi % Recreational vehicles 4 o/o
Tenain type Level % No-passing zones 0 %
Grade: Length mi Access points/mi 4 lmi Up/down To
Iil*l.",olil *'H"l'oo']f veh/h
Average Travel Speed
Grade adjustment factor, fG
PCE for kucks, ET
PCE for RVs, ER
1.00
1.7
1.0
Heavy-vehicle adjustment factor, 0.986
Two-way flow rate,(note-1) vp 271 pc/h
Highest directional split proportion (note-2) 163 pc/h
Free-Flow Speed from Field Measurement:
Field measured speed, SFM - mi/h
Observed volume. Vf - veh/h
Estimated Free-Flow Speed:
Base free-flow speed, BFFS 65.0 mi/h
Adj. for lane and shoulder width, fLS 0.0 mi/h
Adj. for access points, fA 1.0 mi/h
Free-flow speed, FFS 64.0 mi/h
Adjustment for no-passing zones, fnp 0.0 mi/h
Average travel speed, ATS 61.9 mi/h
Percent Time-Spent-Following
Grade adiustmenl factor. fG ;l}l[v"JtF' il
Heavy-vehicle adjustment factor, fHV
Two-way flow rate,(note-1 ) vp
Highest directional split proportion (note-2 )
Base percent time-spent-following, BPTSF
1.00
0.998
268 pclh
161
21 .O %
Vail's Front Door
Environmcntal IrnPact RePort
Addendum l/l-57
Mj.for directional diskibution and no-passinq-zones, fdlnp 1.6
Peicent time-spent-following, PTSF '
O 22.6 V'
Level of Service and Other Performance Measures
Level of service. LOS A
Xt*rrilHJilli;l?traver.VMr15 008 ,. veh-mi
Peak-hour vehicle-miles of travel, VttlfOO 118 veh-mi
Peak 15-min total travel time. TT15 0.5 veh-h
Notes:
1. lf vp >= 3200 pc/h, terminate analysis-the LoS is F.
2. lf highest directional split vp >= 1700 pc/h, lerminate
analpis-the LOS is F.
Vail's Front Door
Environmental Impact Report
Addendum l/I-58
HCS2000: Two-Lane f ignwfetease 4.1 c
EAG
Kimley-Horn
Fax:
Two-Way Two-Lane Highway Segment Analysis
Vail Drive
South of Forest Road
Town of Vail
Anallais Year 2003
Description 067867001 - Vail's Front Door
Input Data
Highway class Class 1
Shoulder width 6.0 ft Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.88
Lane width 12.O ft % Trucks and buses 2 o/o
Segment length 0.5 mi % Recreational vehicles 4 o/o
Terrain type Level 7o No-passing zones 0 o/o
Grade: Length mi Access points/mi 4 /mi Up/down o/o
TUAay hourly volume, V 250 veh/h
Diftond split 60 | 40 %
Average Travel Speed
1.00
1.7
'1.0
0.986
- mi/h - veh/h
65.0 mi/h 0.0 mi/h 1.0 miih
64.0 mi/h
Analyst
Agency/Co.
Date Performed 711512003
Analysis Time Period Future Saturday
Highway
From/To
Jurisdiction
Two-way flow rate,(note-1 ) vp 288 pcih
Highest directional split proportion (note-2) 173 pdh
Free-Flow Soeed from Field Measurement:
Grade adjustment factor, fG
PCE for trucks, ET
PCE for RVs. ER
Heavy-vehicle adjustment factor,
Field measured speed, SFM
Observed volume. Vf
Estimated Free-Flow Speed:
Base free-flow speed, BFFS
Adj. for lane and shoulder width, fLS
Adj. for access points, fA
Free-flow speed, FFS
Adjustment for no-passing zones, fnp 0.0 mi/h
Average travel speed, ATS 61 .8 miih
Grade adiustment factor. fG Pftr tiucks, ET
PCJor RVs. ER
Heavy-vehicle adjustment factor, fHV
Two-way flow rate,(note-1 ) vp
Highest directional split proportion (note-2)
Base percent time-spent-following, BPTSF
Percent Time-Spent-Following
1.00
't.1
1.0
0.998
285 pc/h
'171
22.2 %
Vail's Front Door
Environ mental Impact RePort
Addendum l/I-59
Adj.for directional distribution and no-passirlgjzones, fdlnp 1.6
Percent time-spent-following, PTSF t 23.8 o/o
Level of Service and Other Performance Measures
Level of service. LOS A
Xilff:.rnf;i[lllli;l'3,,,""ver. VMr15 o 0e 36 veh-mi
Peak-hour vehicle-miles of travel, VMT60 125 veh-mi
Peak 15-min total travel time. TT15 0.6 veh-h
Notes:
1. lf vp >= 3200 pc/h, terminate analysis-the LOS is F.
2. lf highest directional split vp >= 1700 pc/h, terminate
analysis-the LOS is F.
Vail's Front Door
Environmental Impact RePort
Addendum l/I-60
o \
co*" g*"jfy o
\rr^ , I
,."*{k;-,I9 r
==-_N*
'\-- r -r
#
VAIL'S F'RONT DOOR
VAIL, COI,ORADC)
Environmental Impact Repoft
Submrttal To The Torvn of Vail
Submrtted bv: Vrrr Rnsc lnrs I)r,.r'r,:,r-ctpNrENT Crtrprxv
|anuary 6,2003
o Lodge at Vail
o Vista Bahn l)ark
. Residence Club
. Ski Club
o Lots P-3 & J
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT
VAIL'S FRONT DOOR
TABLE OF'CONTENTS
Vail's Front Door: Lodge at Vail, Vista Bahn Park, Residence Club, and Ski Club
Project Summary of Vail's Front Door including
Lodge at Vail, Vista Bahn Park, Residence Club and Ski Club.
Existing Conditions
Proposed Development Plan
Report Summary
l. Hydrologic Conditions
2. Soils Conditions
3. Atmospheric Conditions
4. Geologic Conditions
5. Biotic Conditions
6. Other Environmental Conditions
7. Visual Conditions
8. Land Use Conditions
9. Circulation and Transportation Conditions
I 0. Population Characteristics
I L Altemative Development Scenarios
Vail's Front Door: P3&J
Project Summary of Vail's Front Door for P3&J.
Page2
Page 3
Page 4
Page 5
Page 6
Page 7
Page 8
Page 9
Pagel0
Page I I
Page 12
Page 13
Page 13
Page 14
Page2
Page 3
Page 4
Page 5
Page 5
Page 6
Page 7
PageT
Page 8
Page 9
Page 9
Page l0
Page I I
Existing Conditions
Proposed Development Plan
Report Summary
l. Hydrologic Conditions
2. Soils Conditions
3. Atmospheric Conditions
4. Biotic Conditions
5. Other Environmental Conditions
6. Visual Conditions
7. Land, Use Conditions
8. Circulation and Transportation Conditions
9. Population Characteristics
I 0. Alternative Development Scenarios
Vail's Front Door
Environmental Impact Report
Page I
EIR-VFD Pl&J-Dec 2002
O Appendix A:
Conceptual Drainage Report for Lodge at Vail, Vail's Front Door Development by
Alpine Engineering, lnc.
Appendix B:
Letter of Review of Conceptual Design, Vail's Front Door by Koechlein Consulting
Engineers, Inc.
Soils and Foundation Investigation, Vail's Front Door by Koechlein Consulting
Engineers, Inc.
Appendix C:
Air, Noise, and Odor Impact Assessment, Proposed Vail's Front Door and Lionshead
Development Projects in Vail, Colorado by Greystone Environmental Consultants.
Appendix D:
Engineering Geologic Hazard Study, Lodge-at-Vail Front Door Prqect by R. J. Irish
Consulting Engineering Geologist, Inc.
Appendix E:
Biology and Wetlands lmpact Assessment for Vail's Proposed Front Door and
Lionshead Development Projects in Vail, Colorado by Greystone Environmental
Consultants.
Appendix F:
Hydrologic Analysis for Vail's Front Door P3&J Parking Garage by Peak Civil
Engineering.
Appcndix G:
Temporary and Permanent Dewatering Systems and Buoyancy Force, Proposed
Parking Garage, Lots P-3 and J by Koechlein Consulting Engineers, Inc.
Soils and Foundation Investigation Proposed Parking Garage Lot P-3 and Lot J by
Koechlein Consulting Engineers, Inc.
Appendix H:
Visual Conditions for Vail's Front Door:
l. Vista Bahn Park: Existing Site Photo.
2. Lodge at Vail: Existing Site Photos.
3. Residence Club: Entry Perspective.
4. Parking & Loading: Perspective.
5. Ski Club: Ski Club and Residence Club Perspective.
6. Hotel & Spa: Spa EntryPerspective.
7. Hotel & Spa: Spa & Pool Deck Perspective.
EIR-VFD P3&J-Dec 2002 Vail's Front Door
Environmental Impact Report
Page2
8. Vista Bahn Park: Perspective.
9. lnts P3&J: Existing Site Photos.
10. IntsP3&J: "ViewCorridot''Perspective.ll. totsP3&J: GoreCreekDrivePerspective.
12. Ints P3&J: Hanson Ranch Road Perspective.
Appendix I:
Traffic Engineering Study for kdge at Vail Village by Kimley-Horn and Associates,
Inc.
Vail's FrontDoor
Environmentd Impact Report
Page 3
o
EIR-VFD P3&J-D6 2flt2
t
ox arx
d.i6'Ea-6<<9 '/o'
11 f
=w ;3
,FJ
+{
Environmental Impact Report
Vail's Front Door
Lodge at VaiWista Bahn Park/Residence Club/Ski Club
January 6,2003
This report was prepared by:
Urban Design Group, [nc.
162 I I 8th Sreet, Suite 200
Denver. Colorado 80202
(303)292-3388
Contributing Consultants:
Alpine Engineering Koechlein Consulting Engineers
P.O. Box 97 12364 West Alameda Parkwav. Suite I 15
Edwards, CO 81632 Lakewood. CO 80226
Braun Associates, Inc.
P.O. Box 2658
Edwards, CO 81632
Kimley-Horn & Associates Inc.
Tower l, Suite 500
l5l5 Arapahoe Street
Denver, CO 80202
O Greystone Environmental Consultants, Inc. M-E Engineers, Inc.
5231 South Quebec Street 3425 Austin Bluffs Parkway, Suite 201
Greenwood Village, CO 801 I I Colorado Springs, CO 8091 8
Hart Howerton R. J. Irish
30 Hotaling Place Consulting Engineering Geologist, Inc.
San Francisco, CA 941 I I 7l0l West Yale Avenue, No. 601
Denver. CO 80227
Hart Howerton
l0 East 40'n Street
New York, NY 10016
This report has been prepared pursuant to Title 12, Zoning Regulations, Chapter 12, Section l2- | 2-4: Studies and
Data Required for Environmental Impact Reports, of the Vail Town Code. The requirement for this report was
determined by Section 12-12-2: Applicability.
Vail's Front Door
Lodge/Vista Bahn Park/Residence Club/Ski Club Summary
Environmental Impact Report
vait Fronr Dmr EIR Dcrc 2002
Page I
PROJECT SUMMARI
Vail Resorts Development Company is proposing a redevelopment of land in the Town of Vail
at the base of the ski hill, in the areas adjacent to the Vista Bahn chairlift. Composed of
several different buildings and services, this area is refened to as "Vail's Front Door." On the
ski slope will be the Residence Club. These 13 fractional ownership units are comprised in 5
duplexes and I triplex, for a total of 37,000 square feet. Below the Residence Club will be a
private parking garage of 13,000 square feet. A separate Ski Club Building sits nearby, with
3,700 square feet of services at grade, and an additional 9,600 square feet of space below
grade. Adjacent to the Ski Club is the Skier Services Building, with 21,000 square feet of new
construction and 2,150 square feet of remodeled area at grade. The lower level of Skier
Services is 22,600 square feet of new construction, and 4,000 square feet of rernodeled area.
The Lodge at Vail will be expanded to add 13,000 square feet ofSpa space and 3,000 square
feet of additional guest room area. Also added to the Lodge at Vail will be below-grade
parking, a loading dock, and Forest Service access tunnel for a total of 93,400 square feet.
This will provide additional parking to the Lodge South Condominiums and Lodge at Vail, and
parking for the Ski Club. Parking below grade will be on three levels, with approximately 200
parking spaces. The loading dock will service the Lodge at Vail, the Lodge Tower, and the
Skier Services Building. The Forest Service tunnel will provide access to existing upslope
service roads. The above areas calculations are approximate. For exact numbers, refer to the
Proposed Development Plan.
The project will be built in phases, with the first construction beginning in the Spring of 20M,
and final construction concludine as the Residences are sold.
PROJECT BOUNDARIES
The property being developed is Lot l, Mill Creek Subdivision; Lot 2, Mill Creek Subdivision,
Lot l, Proposed U.S.F.S. Land Exchange; and Lot 2, Proposed U.S.F.S. Land Exchange.
EXISTING CONDITIONS
The site designated for redevelopment is South of existing buildings including the Lodge South
Condominiums, the Lodge at Vail, the Lodge at Vail International Wing, One Vail Place, Hill
Building, Bridge Street Lodge and the Vista Bahn Building. Existing buildings on the site
include the Restroom/Vending Building, the Vista Bahn Lift, Chair #l ski lift, and their
support buildings currently on Forest Service property. There is an existing Forest Service
Road crossing the site.
Currently, Lot I and Lot 2 of the Mill Creek Subdivision are in a Natural Area Preservation
Zone District and will require new zoning. The new zoning will be accomplished through the
adoption ofa new zone district.
The property is bounded to the North and East with existing buildings and developed land, and
to the West and South with unplatted United States Forest Service land. There are no live
creeks, streams, or water bodies on the project. The distance to Mill Creek from the East
Property Line varies from 180 feet to260 feet.
Vail's Front Door
LodgeAy'ista Bahn Park/Residence Club/Ski Club Summary
Environmental Impact Report
Page 2
Vail Front Door EIR Doc 2002
EXISTING CONDITIONS
1r"- ...
i trtt.- t
BTTDGE STI'EBT LoDGF,
(SPECIAL DElrttoPuENA,.,
'....|''".''.t \ .. -'..
PneserV4rroN &;
sTRrcT)
."i i'
.:, f . :::.._
,,i'ttn '
MILr CREFI{
L.or I, BLocK 1
VArL VTLLAGE
FrnsT l.rr"lNG
Vail's Front Door
Lodge,/Vista Bahn Park/Residence Club/Ski Club Summary
Environmental Impact Report
Page 3
',)\,ry '";;i
' . \i. ... t {-o,'
t,-\
'''g\ "i5,t"tr
St \E , '\1\
,tt t
vail Fmnt Door EIR Doc 2002
o"
Vail's Front Door
Lodge/Vista Bahn Park/Residence Club/Ski Club Summary
Environmental Impact Report
Page 4
Vail Front Door EIR Dec 2002
REPORT SUMMARY
l. Hydrologic Conditions:
A. Summary
The existing conditions are primarily dense urban development. The site is surrounded on
three sides by dense development and Vail Mountain on the fburth side. The majority of the
runoff form Vail Mountain is diverted in a ditch along a ski run/catwalk just above the Lodge
at Vail. This off-site runoff is captured by a series of inlet and pipes near the Vista Bahn that
carry the flow in an easterly direction to a discharge point at Mill Creek. Runoff from the
current site is carried by a series of inlets and pipes to Gore Creek. Stormwater for the
proposed development will be conveyed through and off of the site by the same series of inlets
and pipes. Flow will be directed such that it maintains historic drainage pattems as much as
possible. A detailed report was prepared by Alpine Engineering, Inc, and is included in
Appendix A.
B. Environmental Impacts
There will be an increase in impervious area as a result of the proposed development. The
greatest chance for environmental impact is during the construction phase.
C.Proposed Mitigation
To improve the water quality collected on-site, the stormwater runoff will be outfalled onto
grassy swales wherevcr possible. Where grassy swales cannot be used, a water quality vault
will be placed in the storm drain system to capture pollutants.
The existing storm drain system in place between the proposed development and Gore Creck
will be evaluated to verifu if it has the capacity to carry the flows from the development.
Detention is not expected to be provided because of the close proximity of Gore Creek and the
rninimal increase in peak flow that the proposed development will have on the peak of the
overall drainage basin.
A sediment control plan will be prepared for the project to limit the transportation of sediments
to Gore Creek and its tributaries during construction. Devices that may be used during
construction to prevent sediment-laden runoff ffom leaving the site include stabilized
construction entrances, silt fence, straw bales, stone outlet structures, sediment traps, and a
pumped sediment removal system.
Vail's Front Door
LodgeiVista Bahn Park/Residence Club/Ski Club Summary
Environmental Impact Report
Page 5
Vail Front Door EIR Dec 2002
D.Irreversible Impacts
Since the proposed development contributes a minimal increase in peak flow, it is not expected
that the new development will have any irreversible impact to the existing system. Additional
storm sewer will be added if necessarv.
2. Soils Report:
A. Summary
The natural soils on the site will support the buildings as designed. The natural sand and
gravel will support spread footings foundations and slab-on-grade construction. Existing fill
will not support construction, and will be rernoved prior to replacernent of fill or consffuction
of floors. At the time of drilling, ground water was encountered at various elevations in
exploratory borings. Because the ground water appears to be above the lowest below-grade
level, it is anticipated that ternporary and permanent dewatering will be necessary. Due to the
close proximity to existing structures and the anticipated depths of excavation, shoring will be
required in order to proceed with construction of the site. A detailed report was prepared by
Koechlein Consulting Engineers, lnc, and is included in Appendix B.
B. Environmental Impacts
The amount of water pumped out by the dewatering system will need to be monitored during
excavation to determine if the existing storm system can accommodate this additional flow. A
device will need to be used to prevent sediment laden runoff from leaving the site during
dewatering. Also, there is the potential for radon gas in the subsurface strata of the mountain
terrain. Due to the granular nature of the nafural soils and shallow ground water, it appears
that the risk for radon gas at this site is low.
C. Proposed Mitigation
Refer to Section A: Hydrologic Conditions and the report by Alpine Engineering in Appendix
A for details of devices used to remove sediment from the pumped water, prior to it entering
the storm system. To minimize any impact of radon gas, the below grade areas will be
ventilated.
D. Irreversible Impacts
As the amount of ground water pumped out of the site is unknown at this time, it is not known
if it will have any irreversible impacts on Gore Creek. However, the estimated amounts do not
appear to create any problems.
Vail's Front Door
Lodge/Vista Bahn Park/Residence Club/Ski Club Summary
Environmental Impact Report
Page 6
Vail Front Door EIR Dcc 2002
3. Atmospheric Conditions:
A. Summary
The small rise in vehicle traffic in the area may result in a slight increase in fugitive dust and
tailpipe emissions. However, the impact on the local air quality is expected to be minimal
relative to contributions from vehicle traffic on I-70, and general vehicle traffic in the Town of
Vail. Short-term impacts to air quality may occur during the construction phase of the project.
These impacts would result in temporary increases in levels of airbome particulates and
tailpipe emissions. Impacts are predicted to be small and can be successfully mitigated.
Impacts to air quality from the operation phases are expected to be insignificant. It is
anticipated that boilers and emergency generators will be associated with the project. All
combustion flue gasses would be vented through devices that meet standard practice for air
pollution control. Overall, this equipment should not sigrrificantly alter the local air quality. A
detailed report was prepared by Greystone Environmental Consultants, and is included in
Appendix C.
B. Environmental Impact
During construction, ernissions of fugitive dust will be generated from demolition, earth
moving and material handling, vehicle traffic on paved and unpaved surfaces, and tailpipe
ernissions from diesel-powered earlhmoving equipment. It is expected that these impacts will
be rninimal because the constnrction area is small, and control measures can be applied. Upon
completion of the project, the additional vehicle traffic may result in slight increases in fugitive
dust and tailpipe emissions.
C. Proposed Mitigation
During construction, dust emissions can be mitigated by wet suppression, soil compaction,
minimizing disturbance of storage piles, adding gravel to unpaved surfaces, limiting vehicle
speed, weight, and number of vehicles on the road, minimizing "track out," and street
sweepers.
D. Irreversible Impacts
Fugitive dust and tailpipe emissions will be limited to the construction period. It is expected
that impacts from fugitive dust and tailpipe emissions will be minimal because control
measures can be applied. Upon completion of the project, fugitive dust can be mitigated by
periodically cleaning paved roads. Additional impact on local air quality is expected to be
minimal relative to contributions from vehicle traffrc on I-70 and seneral vehicle traffic in the
Town of Vail.
Vail's Front Door
Lodge/Vista Bahn Park/Residence Club/Ski Club Summary
Environmental Impact Report
PageT
vail Front Door EIR D€c 2002
4.
A.
Geologic Conditions:
Summary
Geologic conditions across the project area appear to be relatively benign, although most ofthe
area is situated on a large alluvial fan that has been actively constructed by the flows of Mill
Creek for thousands of years. There is no evidence of potential geologic hazards, such as
landslides, debris flows or avalanches, which would influence the development of the project.
Some seismologists consider the local faults to be potentially active, but most consider the risk
of a strong earthquake generated by any fault within 100 miles of the project site to be low to
insignificant during the next 100 to 200 years. Earthquakes generated by the reactivation of
faults in this region should have small magnitudes. Refer to the detailed report prepared by R.
J. Irish Consulting Engineering Geologist, Inc, included in Appendix D.
B. Environmental Impact
The planned residential construction across that hillside should have no negative impacts on
existing geologic conditions and could not generate any new geologic hazards. Similarly,, the
construction activities planned for the valley floor should not significantly disturb geologic
conditions, provided the planned large and deep excavations are appropriately supported.
C. Proposed Mitigation
Geologic conditions across the project area appear to be relatively benign, although most ofthe
area is situated on a large alluvial fan that has been actively constructed by the flows of Mill
Creek for thousands ofyears.
The garage structure under the Residence Club is mostly into morainal soils, but the bottom
part of the cut, particularly on the up-hill side, could intercept the interbedded sandstones,
siltstones, and shales of the Minturn Formation. Ground water flows are likely to be
intercepted, and a dewatering system will be required. Refer to the Soils Report in Section 2.
The cuts created fbr the Residence Club are expected to be mainly in morainal soils or backfill
soils above the parking garage, and shall be laid back at about 2: I and revegetated, or if cut
near-vertically, will need to be reinforced. Only small amounts of ground water, if any, are
likely to be intercepted.
The construction activities planned for the valley floor and hillside sectors of the property
should not significantly disturb geologic conditions, provided the planned large and deep
excavations are appropriately supported, and ground water is not allowed to pond.
Vail's Front Door
Lodge/Vista Bahn Park/Residence Club/Ski Club Summary
Environmental Impact Report
Page 8
Vail Front Door EIR Dec 2002
D.Irreversible Impacts
The planned construction activities should not increase the geology-related hazard risk to this
or other properties or structures, or to public buildings, roads, streets, rights-of-way, easements,
utilities, or other facilities.
5. Biotic Conditions:
A. Summary
Wildlife species may be ternporarily displaced from the project areas because of construction
activities and increased human presence. No threatened or endangered plants or wildlife will
be impacted by this pro-fect. Refer to the detailed report prepared by Greystone Environmental
Consultants, included in Appendix E.
B. Environmental Impact
At the area of the Vista Bahn Park/Skier Services, Vail Resorts proposes to move the ski lift
upslope approximately 90 feet. The proposed action would not disturb the mixed woodland
habitats. Several species may use the mixed woodland and grassland habitat in this
Consffuction, increased human presence, and noise will likely displace wildlife species
the site during construction.
At the proposed Residence Club site, three acres of mixed woodland habitat type would be
partially rernoved. Several species may use this habitat, and will likely be displaced from the
site and may experience direct injury or mortality due to the increase activity in the area.
No vegetation or habitat exists at the Ski Club Building Site.
C. Proposed Mitigation
At the area of the Vista Bahn Park/Skier Services, the construction area would be regraded and
revegetated with grassland species, and therefore would result in no net loss of grassland
vegetation or habitat.
At the Residences site, the potential for erosion would be increased during the construction
phase ofthe project because ofvegetation removal and soil disturbance. These impacts can be
reduced by avoiding the removal of trees and shrubs whenever possible, and be revegetating
the area as soon as possible. This loss of habitat would not likely be important to wildlife
species, including big game, because of its proximity to human development and fragmented
condition that make it less favorable.
When practical, native vegctation species should be used to revegetate disturbed areas.
Revegetation should occur during mid-summer to provide the best opportunity for success. In
Vail's Front Door
Lodge/Vista Bahn Park/Residence Club/Ski Club Summary
Environmental Impact Report
Page 9
area.
from
Vail Front Door EIR Dec 2002
areas not used for construction, shrubs and understory vegetation should be retained for use as
cover by birds and small mammals. Disturbance should be limited to within the construction
work site. Fruit trees should not be planted near entrances or exits of new buildings to help
avoid interactions between humans and bears. Strict covenants on the proper storage of
household waste should be enforced, or the use of bear-proof enclosures should be required
when waste is stored outside of the buildings.
D. Irreversible Impacts
Three acres ofvegetated habitat will be permanently lost as a result ofconstruction activities.
Disturbed areas and unoccupied sites will be reclaimed to original habitat condition. Affects to
wildlife species are not expected to have long-term detrimental impacts to the population
health or status. This is because the proposed development occurs at or near existing buildings
and ski lifts.
6. OtherEnvironmentalConditions:
A. Summary
The site was reviewed for impacts due to sound and odor. There will be an increase in noise
and odors during the construction phase due to construction equipment. During the operation
phase, the noise due to the increase in traffic will be barely perceptible over the existing
ambient noise that is dominated by the vehicle noise from I-70. The activities associated with
operation ofthe Vail Front Door project are not expected to result in any signifrcant impact to
odor. A detailed report was prepared by Greystone Environmental Consultants, and is
included in Appendix C.
B. Environmental Impact
There will be no long-term impact from noise or odors for this project. The short-term impact
during construction will be from equipment. Noise generated by construction would occur
only during the dayime, and should be within the local noise limit for construction. During
the daytime, there are better conditions for odor dispersal, limiting potential impacts to odor
from construction.
C. Proposed Mitigation
Construction during the daytime will minimize the impact of noise and odors.
D. Irreversible Impacts
There will be no irreversible impacts from noise or odors.
Vail's Front Door
Lodge/Vista Bahn Park/Residence Club/Ski Club Summary
Environmental Impact Report
Page 10
Vail Front Door EIR Dec 2002
7. Visual Conditions:
A. Summary
The land covered by the Front Door Project is currently developed with ski lift facilities,
surface parking and loading, ski storage facilities, an unpaved mountain access road, treed
areas, and other ancillary uses. The visual quality ofthe site is poor due to the aging condition
of many of the uses and structures as well as the haphazard placement of uses and parking.
Photographs showing existing conditions are included in Appendix H.
The proposed land use conditions for the subject property are shown on the proposed
development plan. The proposed uses include residential dwellings in two-family and three-
family anangements, a skiers club facility, a renovation of a portion of the Lodge at Vail to
provide new private spa facilities and two new hotel rooms, a new hotel pool area, a skier
services building, retail facilities, private parking facilities, and underground parking and
loading facilities to serve the uses proposed. Additionally, public loading facilities are being
provided to serve other uses in this area ofthe village core.
The proposed development of the site will improve the overall visual aesthetics of the site.
The proposed development is subject to the Town's zoning limitations and design guidelines.
The proposed bulk and mass of structures will be similar to other existing structures developed
in the Vail Village.
The ultimate design of structures and materials utilized on proposed structures will be
reviewed and approved by the Town of Vail Design Review Board. The bulk and mass of
proposed structures will be reviewed by the Planning and Environmental Commission and
approved by the Town Council.
The Town of Vail does regulate views adjacent to the proposed development parcel and any
adopted view corridor will not be affected by the proposed redevelopment. Potential impacts
to private views on surrounding land are not a criterion that the Town uses to evaluate
development proposals, however the applicant has worked closely with the neighbors to
respond to issues related to views and visual impacts.
B. Environmental Impacts
Please refer to other sections of this report for specific development related impacts. Therc
will be impacts to a portion of an existing tree stand that will impacts the visual conditions on
the site.
C. Proposed Mitigation
Please refer to other sections of this report for specific development related impacts and any
proposed mitigation. Visual impacts have been minimized by placing all parking and loading
Vail's Front Door
Lodge/Vista Bahn Park/Residence Club/Ski Club Summary
Environmental Impact Report
Page 1l
Vail Front Door EIR Dec 2002
facilities below grade, providing low profile structures that bench into the hillside, and by
implanenting quality design techniques and materials to blend the development into the
surrounding context and environment. The proposed plans respect the Town ofVail adopted
view corridor in this area-
D. lrreversible Impacts
There are no irreversible impacts to visual conditions on this parcel. These improvements will
act to improve the overall visual interest and quality of the area.
8. Land Use Conditions:
A. Summary
The land area encompassed by the Front Door Project is currently developed with ski lift
facilities, surface parking and loading, ski storage facilities, an unpaved mountain access road,
and other ancillary uses. The property is immediately adjacent to and in the vicinity of other
large residential and lodging facilities, single and two-family homes and is located at the
primary portal to the Vail ski mountain. The Town of Vail Land Use Plan Designation of a
portion of the property is Ski Base with other portions referencing the Vail Village Master
Plan. The Vail Village Master Plan designates a portion of the property as Ski Base/Recreation
and Mixed Use.
The proposed land use conditions fbr the subject property are shown on the proposed
development plan. The proposed improvements will require the establishment of a new Ski
Base Recreation zone district and amendments to the Land use Plan and the Vail Village
Master Plan. The proposed development of this site will not result in negative impacts to land
use conditions in the area and is consistent with the development pattems established in the
area.
B. Environmental Impacts
Please refer to other sections of this report for specific development related impacts.
C.Proposed Mitigation
Please refer to other sections of this report for specific development related impacts and
mitigation.
D. Irreversible Impacts
There are no irreversible impacts to visual conditions on this parcel. The proposed land use
conditions are consistent with the context ofthe site and the neiehborhood.
Vail's Front Door
Lodge/Vista Bahn Park/Residence Club/Ski Club Summary
Environmental Impact Report
Page 12
Vail Fronl t)(xrr EIR Dcc 2002
9.
A.
Circulation and Transportation Conditions
Summary
Approximately 200 parking spaces will be provided to accommodate the various uses of the
proposed project. Loading spaces will also be provided, with the final number to be negotiated
by way of a developer agreement between Vail Resorts Development Company and the Town
of Vail. A report and trip calculations by Kimley-Horn & Associates, Inc. can be found in
Appendix L
B. Environmental Impacts
Please refer to other sections of this report for specific development related impacts.
C. Proposed Mitigation
Please refer to other sections of this report for specific development related impacts and
mitigation.
D. Irreversible Impacts
Please refer to other sections of this report for specific development related impacts.
10.Population Characteristics:
A. Summary
The land covered by the Front Door Project is currently developed with ski lift facilities,
surface parking and loading, ski storage facilities, an unpaved mountain access road, and other
ancillary uses.
The proposed land use conditions for the subject property are shown on the proposed
development plan. The proposed uses include residential dwellings in duplex and triplex
arrangements, a skier club facility, a renovation of a portion of the Lodge at Vail to provide
new private spa facilities and fwo new hotel rooms, a new hotel pool area, a skier services
building, retail facilities, private parking facilities, and underground parking and loading
facilities to serve the uses proposed. Additionally, public loading facilities are being provided
to serve this area of the village core.
The redevelopment of the hotel will result in the net addition of two room keys and therefore
will not have an impact on the population to the site. The only use that generates a population
is the 13 proposed fractional fee dwelling units. These units are likely to be used as seasonal
vacation residences; however, they have been analyzed as if they are producing a permanent
Vailts Front Door
LodgeAy'ista Bahn Park/Residence Club/Ski Club Summary
Environmental Impact Report
Page 13
Vail Front Door EIR Dec 2002
population. These dwellings will produce approximately 39 persons based on 3 persons per
dwelling.
This site, given its central location in the commercial core area of Vail, provides a suitable
location for the anticipated population given its proximity to public transportation, recreational
amenities, and commercial activities.
B. Environmental Impacts
Please refer to other sections of this report for specific development related impacts.
C. Proposed Mitigation
Please refer to other sections of this report for specific development related impacts and
mitigation.
D. Irreversible Impacts
Please refer to other sections of this report for specific development related impacts.
11. AlternativeDevelopmentScenarios
During the process ofdeveloping the desigrr, several goals were established:. Create a sense of arrival to the base of the ski mountain.. Place skier services in an easily accessable and identifiable location.. Enhance the experience for those skiers who would like the opportunity to be members
ofa ski club.. Provide a world-class spa within the existing Lodge at Vail.. Provide a pool for access from the Lodge at Vail or the Spa.. Improve the loading options by concealing it underground, while having it centrally
located.. Provide fractional ownership housing units.r Provide parking to replace that displaced by new construction, and for the proposed
construction.r Maintain Fonest Service access uto the mountain.
Potential options include the extrernes of making no changes at a minimum, to maximizing
square footage below ground and above ground for the proposed uses. The visual quality of
the site is poor due to the aging condition of many of the uses and structures as well as the
haphazard placement of uses and parking. Skier amenities offered by competing ski resorts are
not offered at this location. In time, making no improvements to this site may result in lower
skier numbers.
Vail's Front Door
Lodge/Vista Bahn Park/Residence Club/Ski Club Summary
Environmental Impact Report
vait Frcnt Dffr EtR Dec 2002
Page 14
Because of land aquired by a trade with the Forrest Senrice, the new property will require new
zoning. Due to the density of the surrounding structures, it would not be unreasonable to
design a similarly dense project. This may have resulted in one large, mid-rise structure that
would not improve the aesthetics of the area, and it is felt it would result in more of a barricade
to the mountain than its front door.
The proposed design. meets the goals listed above while minimizing the perceived size of
structures above grade. The proposed structures are small in scale, and take into consideration
their appearance as part of the view from the adjacent structures. Their exterior materials
blend with the alpine surroundings, and in the case ofthe Skier Services Building, a grass roof
is utilized to increase the perceived area around the Vista Bahn. The collection of smaller
buildings results in the creation of a front door to the ski area, defining the edge between the
town and the ski area.
Vailts Front Door
LodgeAy'ista Bahn Park/Residenee Club/Ski Club Summary
Environmental Impact Report
Page 15
Vail Front Door EIR Doc 2fi)2
o o
o
F
o
o
Environmental Impact Report
Vail's Front Door
P3&J
January 6,2003
This report was prepared by:
Urban Design Group, Inc.
162l I 8th Street. Suite 200
Denver, Colorado 80202
(303)292-3388
Contributing Consultants:
ABS Consultants, lnc.
I123 Auraria Parkway, Suite 400
Denver, CO 80204
Braun Associates, Inc.
P.O. Box 2658
Edwards, CO 81632
Greystone Environmental Consultants, Inc.
5231 South Quebec Street
Greenwood Village, CO 801I I
Koechlein Consulting Engineers
12364 West Alameda Parkway, Suite l l5
Lakewood, CO 80226
Kimley-Hom & Associates lnc.
Tower l. Suite 500
l5l5 Arapahoe Street
Denver, CO 80202
Peak Land Consultants
1000 Lion's Ridge Loop
Vail. Colorado 81657
This report has been prepared pursuant to Title 12, Zoning Regulations, Chapter I 2, Section 12-124: Studies and
Data Required for Environmental Impact Reports, of the Vail Town Code. The requirement for this report was
determined by Section I 2- I 2-2: Applicability.
Vail's Front Door
P3 & J Summary
Environmental Impact Report
Page I
Pl&J EIR Dec 2002
PROJECT SUMMARY
Vail Resorts Development Company is proposing a redevelopment of land in the Town of Vail
at the site of a current surface parking lot. Identified by the two adjacent lots that comprise the
site, the project is referred to as "P3&J". Because of the proximity to the other proposed
development projects, this area is also included in "Vail's Front Door." The development of
the property will include a threelevel below grade parking garage. The top level ofthe garage
will be landscaped, and will have surface parking. The garage will provide approximately I 14
parking spaces, including 92 whole ownership parking spaces, parking for the Christiana
lndge and internal loading spaces. The total area ofthe project is 43,410 square feet.
Construction is estimated to begin in Spring 20M, with completion at the end of 2005.
PROJECT BOUNDARIES
The property being developed is Lot P-3, Parking Zone District, and Part A oflot J, Public
Accommodati on Zone District. Part A of Lot J is in the process of being rezoned to Parking
Zone District to allow for the proposed development. Also, the property is being replatted to
relocate the city street right-of-way to the current street location, affectionately referred to as
"The Chute."
EXISTING CONDITIONS
The project is situated in the dense development of the Town of Vail, just northeast of Seibert
Circle. The property is bounded on the North side by Gore Creek Drive, on the West side by
"The Chute", and on the South side by Hanson Ranch Road. The property is bounded on the
East by the Villa Valhalla. There are no live creeks, streams, or water bodies on the property.
The distance to Mill Creek from the East Property Line varies from 140 feet to 185 feet.
Vail's Front Door
P3 & J Summary
Environmental Impact Report
Page2
P3&J EIR Dec 2002
Existing Conditions
TowNHOMES
L$r.<j ! ,r 't
I
| .r .r
!l
rt \'r1'
TRACT D-l
Vail's Front Door
P3 & J Summary
Environmental Impact Report
Page 3
\ ''.i,*,'ni:.,\
i-
LOI i vfl | ctft\
coLR i
MIII CnBBr
Counr
\
\
fiiLt c
\'jJ
.
''r'!'
I "){ \. '{r
"'l:t'"'&t
Cs.trnu
; CHnlstlaNs
FowNHoNrEs
P3&J EIR Doc 2002
PROPOSED DEVf, LO}MENT PLAN
Tfngadvant'geofthcslope€'dslingonthesite,thegalag€€ntry$rilloccuratlheloweIe|evationalongGorecrekDrive'Theacc€to6esdf
gvailablefI0mGorecre€kDrive'Ped€stri.nac.esswillbeat8n.iealongHan'onRanchRoad'andslairswillprovideacc€ssupnGorcC
obviousbuildingonthesit€willbetheAcccssPavitionhousingthe€levator,e'n€rgencyegressstair,andgam8eexh
designed with bould€NB rnd naturnl landscaping to softcn the elevation.
Gore Creek Drive
ln"
- J.{.
Garage and Loading Entry
Hanson Ranch Road
Vail's Front Door
P3 & J Summary
Environmcntal lmpact Report
Page 4
Pl&J EIR Dec 2002
REPORTSUMMARY
l. Hydrologic Conditions
A. Summary
The current drainage pattem through the site will be maintained with the proposed
development. The design for the site will be to collect runoff through curbs and gutters and
into the storm sewer system. The drainage system will be desigrred so that existing drainage
patterns will rernain and will conform to the Town of Vail water quality standards. Basin A
drains from the north to the south, into the storm sewer system, and discharges into Mill Creek.
Basin B drains from the north to the south, into the storm sewer system, and discharges into
Gore Creek. Refer to attached report prepared by Peak Land Consultants, Inc., Appendix F,
and see Sheet Cl forbasin locations.
B. Environmental Impact
Construction will ternporarily create increased runoff and sedimentation. There are no long-
term impacts, since the post development drainage pattems will not be altered from the
existing patterns.
C. Proposed Mitigation
During the construction process, silt fences, straw bales, and check dams will be used to
minimize sediment transport throughout the site. A water quality system will be designed
concurrently with the final drainage design. Parking garage and parking lot runoff will be
treated with a sand-oil separator, where particle sediment and removal of free-oils and carbons
will occur. Surface drainage from roads and the park will continue to be directed into the
Town of Vail drainage system.
D. Irreversible Impacts
There is no significant impact to the existing surface runoff volumes or quality of water
entering the Town of Vail drainage system. Therefore, there are no ineversible impacts.
,,Soils Conditions
A. Summary
The natural soils on the site will support the design of the proposed structure. Ground water
was encountered during exploratory boring, and may require temporary and permanent
dewatering. Because the proposed parking garage will be constructed with below grade levels
and due to the space constraints of the site, temporary shoring will be required to maintain the
Vail's Front Door
P3 & J Summary
Environmental lmpact Report
Page 5
P3&J EIR Dec 2002
3.
A.
stability of the excavation slopes. A detailed report was prepared by Koechlein Consulting
Engineers, Inc., and is included in Appendix G.
B. Environmental Impacts
The only environmental impacts will be temporary during construction. Soil erosion control is
addressed in Section l: Hydrologic Conditions. Temporary increase to air particulates from
both excavation and construction equipment are addressed in Section 3: Atmospheric
Conditions.
C.Proposed Mitigation
Refer to proposed mitigation in each section referenced above.
D. Irreversible lmpacts
There are no irreversible impacts based upon the excavation ofthe property.
Atmospheric Conditions
Summary
The small rise in vehicle traffic in the area may result in a slight increase in fugitive dust and
tailpipe emissions. However, the impact on the local air quality is expected to be minimal
relative to contributions from vehicle traffic on I-70, and general vehicle traffic in the Town of
Vail. Short{erm impacts to air quality may occur during the construction phase of the project.
These impacts would result in temporary increases in levels of airbome particulates and
tailpipe emissions. Impacts are predicted to be small and can be successfully mitigated.
Impacts to air quality tiom the operation phases are expected to be insignificant. A detailed
report was prepared by Greystone Environmental Consultants, and is included in Appendix C.
B. Environmental Impact
During constnrction, emissions of fugitive dust will be generated from demolition, earth
moving and material handling, vehicle traffic on paved and unpaved surfaces, and tailpipe
emissions from diesel-powered earthmoving equipment. It is expected that these impacts will
be minimal because the construction area is small, and control measures can be applied. Upon
completion of the project, the additional vehicle traffic may result in slight increases in fugitive
dust and tailpipe emissions.
C. Proposed Mitigation
During construction, dust emissions can be mitigated by wet suppression, soil compaction,
minimizing disturbance of storage piles, adding gravel to unpaved surfaces, limiting vehicle
Vailts Front Door
P3 & J Summary
Environmental lmpact Report
Page 6
P3&J EIR Dec 2002
4.
A.
A.
speed, weight, and number of vehicles on the road, minimizing "track out," and street
sweepers.
D.Irreversible Impacts
Fugitive dust and tailpipe emissions will be limited to the construction period. It is expected
that impacts from fugitive dust and tailpipe emissions will be minimal because the construction
area is small and control measures can be applied. Upon completion of the project, fugitive
dust can be mitigated by periodically cleaning paved roads. Additional impact on local air
quality is expected to be minimal relative to contributions from vehicle traffic on I-70 and
general vehicle traffic in the Town of Vail.
Biotic Conditions
Summary
No vegetation, animal habitat, or wetlands exist in the project area. The proposed construction
therefore would not have any negative affect on these conditions.
Other Environmental Conditions
Summary
The site was reviewed for impacts due to sound and odor. There will be an increase ln nolse
and odors during the construction phase due to construction equipment. During the operation
phase, the noise due to the increase in traffic will be barely perceptible over the existing
ambient noise that is dominated by the vehicle noise from I-70. As there is no trash storage or
food preparation on this site, there will be no significant impact from odor during the operation
phase of the project. A detailed report was prepared by Greystone Environmental Consultants,
and is included in Appendix C.
B. Environmental Impact
There will be no long-term impact from noise or odors for this project. The short-term impact
during construction will be from equipment. Noise generated by construction would occur
only during the daytime, and should be within the local noise limit for construction. During
the daytime, there are better conditions for odor dispersal, limiting potential impacts to odor
ffom construction.
C. Proposed Mitigation
Construction during the daytime will minimize the impact of noise and odors.
Vail's Front Door
P3 & J Summary
Environmental Impact Report
Page 7
Pl&J EIR Dec 2002
D. Irreversible Impacts
There will be no irreversible impacts from noise or odors.
6. Visual Conditions:
A. Summary
The subject property is currently improved as a paved (asphalt) surface parking area. Adjacent
to the subject parcel is a loading zone for large and small delivery vehicles. The visual quality
ofthe site is poor since the area is used as a parking lot and because the area lacks sufficient
landscape treatment. Refer to photographs showing existing conditions included in Appendix
H.
The proposed land use conditions for the subject property are shown on the Proposed
Development Plan. The proposed uses include whole ownership parking, parking for the
Christiania Lodge, a public park, and a loading and delivery facility.
The proposed development of the site will improve the overall visual aesthetics of the site as
much of the parking and loading will be placed in a subsurface parking structure. The areas
visible to the public will consist of a well-landscaped surface parking area and a public park.
The proposed development is subject to the Town's zoning limitations and design guidelines.
Perspectives and sketches of the proposed development are included in Appendix H.
The ultimate design of structures and materials utilized on proposed structures will be
reviewed and approved by the Town of Vail Desigr Review Board. The bulk and mass of
proposed structures will be reviewed and approved by the Planning and Environmental
Commission.
The Town of Vail does regulate public views adjacent to the proposed development parcel and
the adopted view corridor will not be affected by the proposed redevelopment (see plans). The
proposed development will have relatively minor impacts on views; however, private views on
surrounding land are not a criterion that the Town uses to evaluate development proposals.
The applicant has worked closely with the neighbors to respond to issues related to views and
visual impacts.
B. Environmental Impacts
Please refer to other sections of this report for specific development related impacts.
C. Proposed Mitigation
Please refer to other sections of this report for specific development related impacts and any
proposed mitigation.
Vailts Front Door
P3 & J Summary
Environmental Impact Report
Page 8
Pl&J EIR Dec 2002
D.Irreversible Impacts
There are no irreversible impacts to visual conditions on this parcel. These improvements will
act to improve the overall visual interest and quality ofthe area.
7. Land Use Conditions:
A. Summary
The subject property is currently improved as a paved (asphalt) surface parking area. Adjacent
to the subject parcel is a loading zone for large and small delivery vehicles. The property is
currently zoned Public Accommodation and Parking.
The proposed land use conditions for the subject property are shown on the Proposed
Development Plan. The proposed improvements will require a rezoning of a portion of the site
to Parking Zone District which allows for public and private parking facilities as well as public
park improvanents. The proposed development of this site will not result in negative impacts
to land use conditions in the area and is consistent with the development pattems currently
established on the property and in the area.
B. Environmental Impacts
Please refer to other sections of this report for specific development related impacts.
C. Proposed Mitigation
Please ref'er to other sections of this report for specific development related impacts and
mitigation.
D. Irreversible Impacts
The proposal will not result in irreversible impacts to land use conditions.
8. Circulation and Transportation Conditions
A. Summary
The property currently provides parking tbr Vail Resorts employees and the Christiania Lodge.
The proposed parking will provide approximately 92 whole ownership parking spaces. Based
upon the initial interest of the sold parking space program, approximately half of the spaces are
anticipated to be sold to existing homeowners in the area. Therefore, only half of the parking
spaces will result in new traffic, since the homeowners already contribute to current traffrc
Vail's Front Door
P3 & J Summary
Environmental Impact Report
Page 9
Pl&J EIR Dec 2002
trends. The other portion of spaces will result in a slight increase in traffic. Refer to the
attached report prepared by Kimley-Hom and Associates, included in Appendix I.
Truck delivery needs and expectations are still being negotiated with the Town of Vail. The
current site provides for loading along Hanson Ranch Road. The proposed project provides for
a 35-foot loading space and two van-sized loading spaces. There is also a loading zone along
Hanson Ranch Road that can accommodate up to a 55-foot truck. The property use does not
require loading spaces per Zoning Regulations, but Vail Resorts Development Company is
offering the spaces to help ease the delivery issues the Town of Vail is trying to solve.
B. Environmental Impacts
Please refer to other sections of this report for specific development related impacts.
C. Proposed Mitigation
Please refer to other sections of this report for specific development related impacts and
mitieation.
D. Irreversible Impacts
Please refer to other sections of this report for specific developmcnt related impacts.
9. Population Characteristics:
A. Summary
The subject property is currently improved as a paved (asphalt) surface parking area. Adjacent
to the subject parcel is a loading zone for large and small delivery vehicles.
The proposed development will have no impacts upon population generation in the Town of
Vail.
B. Environmental Impacts
Please refer to other sections of this report for specific development related impacts.
C. Proposed Mitigation
Please refer to other sections of this report tbr specific development related impacts and
mitisation.
Vail's Front Door
P3 & J Summary
Environmental Impact Report
Page l0
Pl&J EIR Dcc 2002
D.Irreversible Impacts
Please refer to other sections ofthis report for specific development related impacts.
10. AlternativeDevelopmentScenarios
During the process ofdeveloping the design, several goals were established:o Maintain parking for the Christiania Lodge.
Provide additional loading per request from the Town of Vail.
Construct a maximum number of whole ownership parking spaces without undue
excavation depths.
Improve the visual condition of the site.
In an effort to enhance the area, it was decided not to maximize the parking at grade, and
instead provide a small landscaped park that could be appreciated by the neighbors. The
only exposed parking is that for the Christiania, which had to be maintained in the
redevelopment of the site. These spaces are currently at grade, and placing them below
grade would make access for the Christiania residents difficult. Given the alternatives of
making no enhancements, versus maximizing the parking at grade, the developed option
that provides a combination of parking and landscaping meets all the goals of the project.
Vail's Front Door
P3 & J Summary
Environmental Impact Report
Page ll
a
a
P3&J EIR Dec 2002
o o
o
(D
x
o
o
CONCEPTUAL DRAINAGE REPORT
FOR
LODGE AT VAIL
VAIL'S FRONT DOOR DEVELOPMENT
December 2002
Prepared for: Vail Resorts Development Company
P.O. Box 959
Avon, Co 81620
Prepared by: Alpine Engineering, Inc.
P.O. Box 97
Edwards, Co 81632
(970) 926-3373
Vail's Front Door
flnviron mental Impact Report
Page A-l
TABLE OF CONTENTS
l. Vicinity Map........... .........................1
2. Project Description ..........................2
3. Existing Conditions. ......................'.2
4 Developed Conditions............... ............'-........"'2
5. Water Quality...... .........3
6. Downstream Impact......' ...--........"'3
7. Floodplain ..--......'."""'3
8. Erosion and Sediment Control .......-----..........""4
g. Soils... -..'..'....""""'-""4
10. Exhibits:
Exhibit A - On-Site Drainage MaP
Exhibit B - Water Quality Vault Details
Exhibit C - FEMA FloodPlain MaPs
Exhibit D - Sediment Control Details
I l. Preliminary Site MaP
Vail's Front Door
Environmental Impact Report
Page A-2
:fr;,t
a
g z z
E'$/
r8
""*:-a
LODGE AT VAIL
Vail's Front Door
Environmental Impact RePort
Page A-3
VICINITY MAP
2. Project Description
Vail Resorts is proposing a development at the base of Vail Mountain in Vail Village.
The development is proposed near and on the Lodge at Vail property adjacent to the
Vista Bahn ski lift. Proposed are lodge buildings, underground parking structures and
tolvnhouses. Portions of the proposal are a re-development of existing developments
and portions such as the townhomes zue on previously undeveloped parcels.
3. Bxisting Conditions
The existing conditions are primarily dense urban development. The site is
surrounded on three sides by dense development and Vail Mountain on the fourth
side. Vail Mountain is primarily grass and trees with some gravel access roads.
The majority of the runoff from Vail Mountain is diverted in a ditch along a ski
run'/catrvalk just above the Lodge at Vail. This off-site runoff is captured by a series
of inlets and pipes near the Vista Bahn that carry the flow in an easterly direction to a
discharge point in Mill Creek. Runoff from the curretlt site is canied by a series of
inlets and pipes to Gore Creek. (See On Site Drainage, Lodge at Vail, Intemational
Wing drawing - Exhibit A).
4. Developed Conditions
proposed for the development are several buildings, underground parking structures,
plaza areas and driveways. Stormwater will be conveyed through and off of the site
by a series of inlets and pipes. Flow will be directed such that it maintains historic
Vail's Front Door
Environmental Impact Report
Page A-4
Ducernber 2002 Conceptual Drainage Repon of Lodge at Vail
drainage patterns as much as possible. Additional pipes and inlets will be installed to
carry runofffrom the site.
5. Water QuatitY
There rvill be an increase in impervious area as a result ofthe proposed development.
Some of it will result in an increase in pollutants on the site. Care will be talien to
remove these pollutants to the greatest extent practicable. Stormwater runoff will be
outfalled onto grassy swales wherever possible. Where grassy swales are not able to
be used a water quality vault will be placed in the storm drain system to capture
pollutants. A detail of a possible water quality vault is provided in Exhibit B.
6. Dou'nstream Impact
There is a storm drain system in place between the proposed developnrent and the
Gore Creek. This storm drain system will be evaluated to see if it has the capacity to
carry the flows from the proposed development. Additional storm sewer will be
installed as is necessarl'. Detention is not expected to be provided because ofthe
close proximity of Gore Creek and the minimal increase in peak flow that the
proposed development will have on the peak ofthe overall drainage basin.
7. Floodplain
There is no floodplain encroaching upon the proposed development. A copy of the
FEMA floodplain panel in the area of Vail Village ntay be found in Exhibit C. Mill
Vail's Front Door
Environmental Impact Report
Page A-5
Deccnber 200-l Conceptual Drainagc Repon of Lodge at Vail
Creek has the closest floodplain to the project and is not impacted by the
O development.
8. Erosion and Sediment Control
A sediment controt plan will be prepared for the project to limit the transportation of
sediments to Gore Creek and its tributaries during construction. Devices to be used
during construction to prevent sediment laden runoff from leaving the site include
stabilized construction entrances, silt fence, straw bales, sediment traps and the
Dirtbag (pumped sediment removal system). Details.of these devices may be found
in Exhibit D.
9. Soils
Alpine Engineering, Inc. has reviewed the "Engineering Geologic Hazard Study,
Lodge-at-Vail Front Door Project, Vail, Colorado", dated October 8,2002 by R.J'
Irish Consulting Engineering Geologist, Inc. Alpine Engineering, Inc. will
incorporate recommendations by R.J. Irish in the final design of the project.
December2002 Conceptual Drainiil:'Pcnon of l.odse at Vail Environmen;iifrT"r"ii::.i
Page A-6
o o
Exhibit A
On-Site Drainage MaP
Vail's Front Door
Environmental Impact Report
page A-Z
.d
,.$i
i'it""i:.Jt
yr;
:F r\
Ffi"
fi$i
l1d1
*
F q
7
il oY it I!Iil ti Jl !t
oe
uJ (t
,'
e, )"i.
E >i
O P4Z
rr,, q5
E|fi r,1
=o
rn
rt
g
o
.c
o
o
=F z 3 o
=
_J
a!A.';J uf x't bo
Ss
N
W
N
E
-?-?
E
Vail's Front Door
Environmental Impact Report
page A_g
l ;rl 6 0-r
o o
Exhibit B
Water Quality Vault Detail
Vail's Front Door
Environmental Impact Report
Page A-9
4" Dio. Ring &
ode Rings As
4" Dio.
Req'd
Access
Around All Pipes
By Controctor
utlet Pipe
Retoining Boff I
lso View
For RETdEiie onty
rt
O $ECldcasir= i:::=:-
AfflCOR4'-' Division
lvl2 Rliryllr Prtr tltl|.to.t. CO !0125
.rrn. (:C:r r3,_11.^ / t_er^_7.:-1536
SANDOIL SAND / OIL INTERCEPTOR
STANDARD DRAWING
Vail's Front Door
Environmental Impact Report
Page A-10
FILE NAME:'ll0ECSSNDO|L-F
ISSUE DATE: APRIL, 2001
o t
Bxhibit C
FBMA Floodplain Maps
Vail's Front Door
Environmental Impact Report
page A-tl
o
lrATt0ilAt Ft000 msuRAilct pnocRAil
FTOODWAY
FLOOD BOUI{DARY AND
ttooDl{AY ilAP
TOWN OF
VAIL, C()LORAD(}
EAGLE C()UNTT
PAI{EL 2 OT 5
(SEE MAP INOEX FOR PANELS NOT PRINTEO'
C0MMUIIITY-PAl{E L llUI'IBER
080051 0002
EFFECTIYE DATE:
MAY 2, 1983
Federal Enrergency Management Agency
Vail's Front Door
Environmental ImPact RePort
Page A-12
L'MIT OF
O€TAIL€D STUOY
I
?
I
I
\t:\
Footbridge
Spraddle Qeek
IOO.YEAR FLOOD --
COMIAINED lN CUIVERTI _r',^- \-'
LIMIT OF
TAILEO STUDY
WTLLOW A RIOG€
FI OAD
TOO.YEAR FLOOD
CONTAINED IN
CULVERT
'est il ill
Creek
I
ARF AIN T
-VE F
SITE GO RE
RE€K
ROND
--._---_.-\\
VAIL MOUNTAIN
APPROX IMATE SCALT
4OO O aOO FE ET
I 'I
_l
I
LIMIT
Vail's Front Door
Environmental Impact Report
page A-t3
Y
roo.YEAR rtooo -' f
CONTAIN€D IN CULVERT ,,,2/A -....._^. ^-..:.. ^^-^,/ \a)HA,NSON RANCH ROAD
OETAILED STUOY
-/-ae9/
I
I
!-
\
CHALET \FOAo --+GORE t
_cnlgx rg I
l
I
\
\
Eicycle
B. idge
5OO YEAR
FLOOO
AINEO
N CULVERT
LIMIT OF
OETAILED
STUDY
I t-t-
Vail's Front Door
Environmental Impact Report
Page A-I4
o o
Exhibit D
Sediment Control Details
Vail's Front Door
Environmental ImPact RePort
Page A-15
STABIUZED CONSTRUCNON ENAANCE
not to rcdr
SCE
STANOARO SN,IEOL @
EXISNNC CRCUND
PROFILE
50'ulll.
MCUNIAALE 8E.RU
(oPncN^L)
-r
10'I
T to'
t.
J.
.+.
(
6.
PLAN MEW
CON STRUCNON SPECIFICAT]ONS
STONE SZE - US€ 2. CRUSTIED SCREENED ROCK.
I.ENGIH - AS REC{JIRED. zuT NOT LESS THAII 50 FEET.
lHrcx|rEss - lloT LESS THA,\ SX (6) INCHES.
woit - TEll (to) FooI ntNluuM. dur xor I Fss THAN THE ru|.t \Y|DTH AT POINTS lttlERE INGRESS
OR EGRESS OCqJRS.
NT-TEN CT.OIT . S4LL 8E PI-AC€D O\€l IHE E}INRE AREA PRIOR TO PLACTNC OF STONE RLER WLL
SURFACE Y/ATER - ALL SURFACE WAIER FLO\IING OR DI\€RTED TOWAfiO CO}ISIRUCI]ON EI]RANCES
SrrAl! EE PTPED AC8OSS IHE ENTRA.'ICE. IF PIPINC tS IUPRACICAI. A UCUNTASLE BERM YNTH 5:'I
SI.OPES *III. 8E PERMITIE.
UIIHTIXUCE - THE 0\{TRANCE sr{AII. BE UAINTAINED IN A CC$IDITION T$JICTI IIiLL PREVANT IRACXING -ON
NOV'rHC_Or SEOTUENT O}ITO PUEUC RICHTS-OF-WAY. THI5 MAY REQUIRE PERI@IC TOP ORESSING
ntrx iootnoNer- sTouE
^s
coNotTlons oeHAuo a{0 RFATR A}|DloR ctrANo9T oF A}lY uEAstlRES
US€O fO IRAp SEoIMENT. ALL S€DIMo.IT SPILLED, oRoPPED, W SHED OR IRACXEo ONTO PUSUc
RIGHT-OF-WAY UUST 8E REUO\€D IUTIEDIAIELY.
TYA5HING - YfiENs SliAI 8E CIEAI{E) TO REMO\€ S€OIMEI{T PRIOR TO SiTRANCE ONTO PUBUC
irci*-or-uv. WHEN vrAsHtNc ts REeutREo, lr SHALL 8E 00NE 0N Al.l AREA srAEluzED \nIH
STONE /|"\O }IIIICII ORAINS INTO AN APPRO\€D SEOIUENT 1RAPPING OEVCE.
PENIOOIC TNSPECNON ANO NEEDEO MAINTENANC€ SHALL 8E PRO\4OEO AFTER EACH RAIN.
ENTP A II^T
Vail's Front Doot
Environmental Impact Repor
Page A-1{
sTABtLt ZED CONSTEUCTIQN
S|LT FENCE
v
/- ttlJVE t lltxL t lJr{- [/ uAx. 6'l,tEsr{ gAcrilc)
/ rl9-'. rlN:..F
GRCruNO
35' UtN. FRIC€ POST
HECTIT OF FILTER
- 16' Ul|r-
-T r
-L 8' MtN..-f
UNOISTURBED GROTJ}IO
STA.\oAFO SrugCL
r-s-S
PO6TS: SIEEL ETHER T OR U Tl?E OR
2' HARolr€Oo,
FAtce WO\oI ttlRE, 1+ 1/2 Clr 6'
UN( HESH OPENING
FILTB CLOIH: RLIER K tllR R 100X.
STAA!}IKA N40N OR APPRO\ED
ECtrAl-
PREFASRICAIU) UNIN G€O€48'
AIVROFENCE, OR APPRO\€O
EQU^L
tto\Elr r$Rg FENC€ (14 l/2 Cr\ UIN-. IIAX'
gt uEst sPAoNG) vitrx nlrrn ct.orH o\E
t I\O\€fi }VRE FENC€ TO BE FASTE\ED SEC1JRELY TO
rancE posrs t$TH v/lRE TIES Ofi STAPlls.
NT-TTN CONT TO 8E FASIEIED S€CURELY TO - .'tKjr,€lt -stRE Fstcg nrnr rES sPAcED E\€RY 2{'
AT TOP ANO MIO SECIION.
itiEx-no-stclors oF nLTER clorrt ADJoIN E\cll
OTHER I}IF/-SI^LL 8E O\6IIPP€D BY SX INCHES
ANO FOIDEO.
n^rnre .rxE sIALL BE PERFoRITED As NEEDEo a{D
UAIEIAL R&IO\€O V,tltN '8ULC€S' 0EVELOP lN
lHE SLT FENC€,
SECNON
SILT FENCE
Vail's Front Door
Environmental Impact Report
Page A-17
EU€ED RLIER CLOTH
utH. E' INTO CfiC{JNO
srANoARo sil8oL
s80 EE
STRAW EALE OIKE
EEDDING DETAIL
1.
A}Iq.E FIRST STAXE T_OWARO
PREVIOUS.Y L^JO BALE
-*
? lr?'i8'l' il%;,]ffi3.tr 3;fi;'*
rru-st w|nr gel-E'S-
EAITS S}IALL 8E PIJCED AT THE TO€ OF A SLOPE.OR OII THE CONTOUR AID tN A ROW
"il"a.os
nc"oY ABUT'''N. THE ADJA.EIIT BALES'
E *t BALE s.a! BE atutoEol* THE solL A MlNtMuu oF (4) lN.'lEs' alo Pllc@
s€ IHE EtNorNGs ARE HoRlzcf{T l- Lco .r\un ar^vFs oR RE-BARS
B^,fs SHALL BE s€cuRELY ^til*t
tN PLA.E 8Y EIHER TYo srAKEs 0R RE-Brfis
oRtvEN THR.IJGH THE EALE
-ti'e otsr srME lN EACH BAlr stlll! BE
'Rl!€N
Tow R0 rHE pREvousLY *o'tiG ir eN mae ro FcRcE THE sAtrs r.c€rHER'
ii^*ii "'^o BE oRlv€N FLU'H rnIH THE B^tE'
rN,,EcnoN sltAtt BE o,oui'it-
^no ^"^* REPLAcBlolr sHAt! BE U^',E PR'UPIY
AS NEEDEO BY THE COTIRACTOR'
BALE' sHAtr BE REuo\€o tttin tt'E HA\€ s€R\€o THER u'EFULNESS s0 As Nor ro
ia* ot tupEDE sToRu FLow oR oRAlNAcf'
Vail's Frout Door
Environmental Impact Report
Page A-18
,$' varcAl- FAC€
STRA]ru BALE DIKE
Qro,u*, ,**
not to scole
-l f-1'MrN.
t
SIIALL
RIPRAP
t
EAR]H EMBANKMENT
PROFILE UNOISTURB@ AREA
t
FLOW D
2' STONE
(oPnoNAL)
F.2' APRON
I.AREAUNDEREMSANKMETTS-HAIIEECLEARED,CRUEBEDANDSIRIPPEDOFAT'IY\€GETAIONANDROOT
UAT. THE POOL AREA SHAI.I 8E CLEAREO.z rHE RLL MATERTAL ron ii.iexliJfri:.tisr4q-.g.e- FREE oF Roors AllD oJHER YlcooY \EGETATIoN As
$€LL As olER-szED sicilTeiliciciit,-oqc-^@-ulTERnr- on onren oBJE9l!9r'.!A8tr MAIERTAL THE
EIB^NKMENT sHArr 8E'Co-uFibn-ri'iiv-rnrqnry9 Utrx eor.ltpueNr l$lLE tT ts BoNG coI{STRUCTED'
r. ru-Cui r.Ho nu sLoPES stlALL BE 2:l oR-Fl,rrIF'
1. IHE sTOuE usED tN nr '- 'iitis-x-lu-ei qulU_niinAP .t'-8' ALoNc wlTH A r' THICKNESS oF 2'
AGGREGATE pucro on rii'ui;-ciiioE sioe oH rxi sulu RIPRAP oR oIBEDoED RLIER ctolH lN THE
RIPRAP.5. S€DIMENT SHALL BE RAlo\€D ANO TRAP EqsToryE!-TO ITS ORIONAL OlMEllgoNS Ynro{ THE SEDIMENT
xri eCcuuuurEo ro 1/2 THE oEstcll oEPTH-oF.THE TRAP'
6. rHE STRUcTURE srl^,_u'6i riisiicro rrn! E49.1 RAIN AND REPAIRS MADE As NEEED'
7. CONSTRUcnon openenorii ii-A[-bEirnnrio or:rix sucl A MA]INER THAT ERoso{ A}lD T/AIER
POLLUTION IS UI}.IIUIZED
8. THE sTRUCTURE sHAJJ- be nsMO\€O AllO lHE AREA STABIUZED WIEN THE DRAINAG€ AREA HAS BEEN
PROPERLY STABIUZEO.
14'MrN.-l
RLIER CLOIH
EXCAVATE FOR REOUTREO STORAG€
OPTION: A ONg FOOT L \€R OF 2'
PI.AC€ OF lHE RIEEDOED
STONE MAY BE PLACED ON THE UPSTREAM s|DE Of, THE RIPRAP IN
RLIER CLOTH.
Vail's Front Dool
Environmental Impact Report
Page A-19
SEDIMENT TRAP
Pumped Sediment
Rembval System
ll'lrcnn,er acrutnulaled ztalu ntu.tl ltt fttuttf tttl.l
l)rrrtcct (lrc cttvitonttrcrtt elli ctirth'
irn<l t',,rrr,rnriclllv rvith Diltll:ur'!
(:{)ll('ct s:rn(1. silt atrl lirrt.. ..\r'oicl
silting str cluts. sun'oulr(tilu l)r ol)cr-
t\: itn(l st()rn'r sc\\'('fs. .'\J tttot.t' ittt(l
trrott't rtrltlr;t..is is ;rttt t-rtt savittq orrr'
trTt lir rrtls. r'('gul.lti|,trs :ut' lr, . orttit|g
l')rc str in!('nt tlq:rrrlirt{ tlrt'
prrrtrpirrt trl' diltl rr':rirl ljirrrr lr.L's
irf()tI|r(l t,,rrslrur'lir)rI sitcs-su('lr ;rs
Iirtrrr<|;rti,rrr,, pip, lirrr' ( ()us u( li()lr.
r','llltilirrg rrrrrrri, iIllI rr':rtcr'/s,'rvt'r'
!irr|r. tlLtt itrr' ( r)u\tt ucli()tl. tttilit),
lriqlrrv:N lrrrrl sit, (L'\1'l(ll)r)lcnt
rrrc;rs. l ) ilt llrg lrllplir'.rtir>rts itrt:
ct r( ll( s:;.
llse Reconrnrerrilati ons
r\( il: Lrrvirirrrr rrr'r rtlrI nr:rntr{':rctrnt's
l)':1lr;rS rr.irt,- :r vrtt i,'t1 o1' ttottrrotttt
qt'ott'rtil,' l.rl)ri( tr)iul [il( tLrrr'<l lrV SI
( it.,r'"lrrti,rrr.,'l lr'' l;rlrrit' JrrrrPcrtics
orr tlrc 51x'r'ilit llior rs p.rgc lllilrrr tlrc
stn'rrgtlr ol l)irtlr;rg:rrr,l atl a rr:srrlt
ol' l('str.i {'()ll(luctctl lrt orr-sitc lrtlrrrr:t-
(olilr lrt tlrr' glr r1' :ltilr' [;rct,rrr: Al] tt'st
rtr'tlr,,cls:rrr' ,.\S'l .\l ()r ilrrhr\tr'\ s{iln-
tl: t lr ls.
L:rclr st:rtrilrutl l)ir'tlr:rq lrrrs it lili
sl)(.)rrt l:lrqt (' r)uglr to :tccOtntttocl;tlt'
lr .1" tli., lr,ugc 1r,.r..r.'. 5,r,,'r.
"'l.'irttlt.lrlrl t(l s('cul1' tlrr' lrost' artrl Prr'-
\( rrt tr'::Irl)L(l rr':ttct li,rttt ('iC:rl.rit|I.t
rvitlrr,lrrt Irt ing Iil,, r'ctl.
Instlll l)iltlrlg t.rrr it s[r1lc so tlr:rt
ittt r,t tti;tg t;;rlrl llorrs tlutr rrlrill
t ltr()Lr{lr l)ir t1r,11 rt'itl r,'ttt ct-t ili ir :.;
rnorr r:r'osiolr. Str lr;-, tltt rri'.'k ol'
l)irrbeg tiqhrly to tlrc rlisr.lr:rrgt'
1.r,1,. 111 il,( r,'.rii lir',llici, r,i ' crl'
liltr'.rtiorr. lllar:r tlrc lxrq- ort ;ttr
:l,lqrr'l1irlc ot lr.rr,lr.rl, 1,, ,1t,' ttt;tri-
nrizl rlrlr'r' ll,rrr 1lrr,,rr'glr tlr, :rrr'lrr,,
;rt r',r ll tlrl lr:rS.
l)irtlr;11 i. lrrll r'. lr, tr it tr,,l,'t11, r
,lrri r'l'lj, i, rrtlr lilt, r ', rlirrr, rrt or
l),r\s \\irtr'l itt il rr ,l\r'll,rlrlr' lilt(.
I l,'\\ tiii''\ r'' iil r;rri ,1, 1,, 11,11t1,1 ott
llr, riz, ,,l l)rrrl,,r,q. tlr'l\l)( l t(l
;lrronnt ,,1 :, rlill, r,' rli', Ir,rtlr',1
irrt,r ])irtlr.rg. llr, lrlr' r'l ,-ri,rrrrl.
trrr k rrt rrlltct sltl).l.rn', llrl(lr'r tllr'
lr.t1 ;rtt,l tlr, rl,':r,, ,,1 tlr, '1,,1,, r,rr
r'. lri' l. rl,' l',':' l . l r ,l' r ttt,,.t lir-
( |l||l\I.lrl(, t |)irtL.r:, tr iiI .tr r llttttrtr,
rl.rtr'li'rrr r:rtl.r rrl l-,rtt tl.rllrrrrs;rr r
Ir,itrttt,', I sc r,l r \r, ..i., l],,'..
r.rt,: or r,\l llillirrl l)irtlr.rq rritlr
.r'rlrrrr, nl r,ill ,rrrr., rill,ri (\,,1 llr'
i,.r1,,'r !.,il,r,r ii,
I r t \ .tl)S.
Vail's Front Door
Environmental Impact Report
Page A-20
Easy To Use
Jilst, Dirtbag" is casy to trauspolt
-[o the site. To install, sirnply unfold
and inselt up to 4" prrmp dischargc
the ltosc into thc ltarttl-scu'rr spottt
and sccurc rr'ith thc attaclrcd
straps. Putrrp dirty rlatcr irrto
Dirtbag. Thc bas collccts the silt as
tlrc clcan \! atcr gcntlv filtc|s out
frt,nt rll sid.:s.
(ionrpirrc Dirtllee to th(: altenlatiles
strclt rts str:r.r, l.r:tLr firt'ts rr'hiclt lle
tttott' ctnt rlrt'r'si,rnc to tl allslx)l'1, to
builcl aricl to cleln urr afterrvard. r\nd
Dirrbitg l)oses rlo thrcat to thc cnvi-
rrullllent rvhcn dislmsed pr o1;crlr:
Dirtbag Features
. I)t'signcd attd plorlrrccd liurtt a
r':rricty ol'lalrlics to urcct cngi-
ncering spccilicatiorrs lor llorv
Iatcs, strcnqlll, ancl perrncalrilitr:. St:rllilizcd to trrrxidc rr'si:t:rrrcc to
ultla-r'iolct rlt'eradatiou.
tr lects rnrrrriciJr:rl, statc, :rrrr:l
Cor'1.rs oi l',rrgirrcct s spt--cilica-
IIOltS.
.\':rilrrlrlt: irr l0's l5'. l2-'l,,'x
l5', an<l l5' r l5' sizcs. Custorn
sizcs availablc.
Typical Dirtbag" Construcliorr
BAG PLA(:[D C{
AGGREGAII OR
t-
I
I
I
I
=
I
I
I
.I
FIGH STRINGTH
|ri)U8LE STITCHTD
"J'' TYPI STAMS
DIRTBAG
st !\'il iN sP0u T
f ilinil S Ill!-llGTrl
TOP ViIV/
S Iii APP.ti! IOR
fr0t0rr.lc hOsE
lri PLACI
_-_---- \{A iap iLOy/
rqi|,r PUMP
PUM9
DiiC:r l?Ci
H 05i
0ltNrNC
Ar trrli ci Alis
LrP i0 4
OISCH ARCi
lrjil
Vail's Front Door
Environmental Impact Report
Page A-21
AGCFiGAft.0'? S IRAVI
uriDt R!- A I l,'i li T
SrDt VlEw
(9
x
o o
o
o
o
K?echrein consulting?ngin.ers, Inc.
Consulting Geotechnicil Engineers
12364 W. Alarneda Plory r Sufte ll5 o l-akewood, CO 80228-2845
I.AKEWOOD
(303) 989-1223
(303) 989-0204 FAX
AVOl.l/SILVERTHORNE
(e7o) 949-6009
(970) s49-9223 FAX
October 16,2002
Terry Winnick, V.P.
Vail Rasorts Development ComPanY
P.O. Box 959
Avor\ CO 81620-0959
Subject: Review of Concephral Design
Vail's Front Door DeveloPment
Vail, Colorado
Job No. 02-107
As requested, we have reviewed our report entitled nsoils and Foundation Invesfigation, Vail's
Front boor, Lot 2, Section 8, T.5 South, R.80 West, 6th P.M. and Area Southeast of The Iodge
at Vail Condominiums, Vail, Coloradon, dated Septenrb et 27 , 2002, Job No. 02-lO7 , the letter
prepared by Urban Design Groupfinc. dated October 2, 2002, and the Vail's Front Door
if"f"t*o irawings datedseptemb er 26, 2002 with regards to the proposed development on the
subject site. The purpose ofthis lefter is to present our understanding ofthe projest based on the
crlnent conceptual drawings as compared with our report and to provide any additional
recommendations beyond those presented in our soils and foundation report.
The size and height of the buildings within the proposed developmen! as indicated in the
conceptual plans, is generally in agreernent with the assumptions made in our aforementioned
report. Maxi** *ioro and wall loads assumed in our report would still be applicable to the
proposed structures presented in the conceptual plans. Howevu, based on the conceptual plans'
we-understand that I to 3 levels of below grade constnrction are planned for the proposed
development. In our roport, we had only anticipated that I below grade level would be
constructed. The below grade levels primarily consist ofparking areas' an access road tunnel,
locker rooms and loading docks. For I below grade level we had antioipated excavations up to
15 feet" however, based on the conceptual plans and the existing topography, we understand that
excavations up to 45 feet may be required for construction of the parking garage and forest
service access road tunnel beneath the proposed residences.
After review of our report and the conceptual plans, it is our opinion that the recommendations
presented in our report are applicable for the proposed development with some exceptions. Since
ihe proposed excavation depths wilt be greater than those indicated in our soils report, additional
recommendations and conc€ms not presented in our soits report will be necessary. The
Vail's Front Door
Environmental Impact Report
Page B-1
TcrryWinnick
Octob€r 16,2W2
JobNo.02-10?
Pagc2of4
xo E 4I Lnfil (} A LTI NG ENG INE ERS, INC
CctsaltlagAcotechaical E n gln ccrs
following paragfaphs pr€sent additional reconrmendations and concems with regards to the
proposed development as presented in the conceptual plan$ dated September 26,zWL
l. We believe that the subsurfac€ conditions, which will be encountered at the proposed
excavation depths, will generally be similar to those conditions encountercd within our
exploratory borings at their respective maximum depths. We anticipate that the
subsurface conditions will generally consist ofvery densq sandy gravel with cobbles
and boulders. However, it is possibte that isolated areas ofsandstone/siltstone bedrock
may be encountered in the deeper excavations. Very large boulders or isolated areas
of very hard sandstone/siltstone bedrock will probably be encountered during
excavation for the below grade levels'
2. As presented in our repor! heavyduty excavation equipment will be required to
complete the necessary excavations. Due to the de,pttrs of the proposed excavations,
we anticipate that very large boulders or isolated areas ofvery hard bedrock could be
encount€red within the excavations. Chiseling or blasting may be required to remove
large boulders or bedrock.
3. Due to the depth of the proposed excavations, it is our opinion that a shoring system
will be requifed for construction of the proposed development. Since, we anticipate
that ground wat€,f will be encountered during excavation for the proposed
development, we r€cornmend that the shoring systen be designed to conhol ground
water flow into the excavation. Refer to Item 4 for additional ground water conc€rns.
The shoring systerns and design criteria described in our soils repott arc applicable to
the proposed development as presented in the conceptual plans.
4. Alttrough ground water may not have been encoultered within the majority of our
exploratory borings, since excavatiolls up to 45 feet in depth may be required for
construction of the below grade areas,. we anticipate that gound water will be
encountered within excavations for the development. As presented in our report, we
believe that ground water travels through more permeable layers within the soil
resulting in isolated nsprings" or nchannelsn. Excavations planned for the proposed
development will most likely encounter isolated layers or channels of ground water
within the soil matrix. Therefore, we rogonrmend that temporary and permanent
dewatering systems be designed to control the influence of the ground water prior to,
during and after construction. Refer to Items 5,6, and 7 for additional ground water
and dewatering eoncerns.
5. BecaLse the ground water will generally flow tfuough ochannels" within the soil
matrix, the amount of ground water that may enter the excavations is extremely
difficult to determine. Based on previous proj€cts, we estimate a flow of ground water
into the excavation may be I to 3 gpm per linear foot of excavation. The flow of
ground water, presented above, represents an estimate and is subject to change based
on the subsurface conditions exposed during construction. Vail's Front Door
Environmental ImPact RePort
Page B-2
Tcrry Winnick
October 16,2W2
JobNo.02-107
Page 3 of4
KOECHLEIN CONS'JLTTNG ENGINEEP"9, INC
Conrulting Gcot.chnicsl E ngla e crs
6.Thetemporarydewateringsystemfortheproposeddevelopmentcouldconsistof
trenches within the "**nition sloped down to a positive gravity discharge or to a
sump pit where the water can be iemoved by pumping and/or deep- wells. During
construction the dewatering system should be reviewed and it may be necessary to
adjust the pumping in ordei to control the amount of ground water infiltrating into the
excavation. Because we anticipate that ground water will be travelling in "channels"
within the soil matrix, this system generally provides an effective temporary
dewatering system. This system also allows the flexibility to control varying amounts
of ground water infiltration.
7. Thc pennan€nt dewatering system may consist of a combination of underslab drains
and foundation drains sllped to a sump pit where the water can be removed by
pumping.Werecommendthatanystructurewitlrmorethanlbelowgradelevelbe
il;; wi*r an underslab drainage system. A professional engtn:el familiar with
penianent underslab drain systerns should design the underslab drain system' A
consideration of the change in ground water flow for the time of year should be made
in the desigrr of the permirent lewatering system. The pump capacity (if required) of
the permaient dewatering system can be better determined during constnrction by
tnonitoring the requirements of the tunporary dewatering system. If requested, we catr
assist in the design of the permanent dewatering system'
g. As mentioned in our report, all existing structures must be properly supported during
excavation and constnrction ofthe proposed development'
g. Based on the conceptual plans, buildings are planned that malr be supported by a
combination ofexisting fili and natural toitt. to order to reduce the risk ofdifferential
settlernent between foundation elements, we strongly reoornmend that the foundation
desiga ofthese structures take into consideration the influence offill beneath a podion
of the structure. where possible, we recornmend that no shucture be planned that is
supported by a combinaiion of natural soils and fill. Where it is not possible to
construct structures on all natural soils, we recornmend that the owner consider the use
of deep foundation systems for areas of the structure over fill. The deep foundation
systems may consist of micro-piles, drilled piers, or driven piles. The installation of
Oritt"O pi"."or driven piles wili be influenced by the presence of large boulders'
10. The conceptual plans also show buildings located on top of proposed tunnels and
other below grud" *"ur. Special considerations should be given to the foundations
for these buildings. It may be desirable to construct the foundations for these
t.ritaingr directly-on the below grade structures as opposed to compacted fill over the
below grade structures. constructing the foundations directly on the below grade
structures should have a lower risk of settlernent and foundation movement'
Foundations constructed on fill placed over the below grade area roofs will have a
greaterrisk ormovement'
nnni.on-"ntliiHfrltlr";
Page B-
o
KO ECH LE I N_CO NS U LT I N G ENG I N E E RS, I N C
Co nsa!ling G c otcch nical En gl n ce rs Terry Winnick
October 16,2002
Job No.02-10?
Page 4 of4
ll.As stated in our report, backfill adjacent to below gra{e leas should not be
consider€d for support oi new foundations. Foundations in these areas should be
designed to span^ihe distance between the below grade foundation wall and the
nahrral soils-
We recommend that a representative or representatives from our office be present during future
design meetings. our representatives can assist in the design phase ofthe proposed development
from a geotechnical viewpoint. we appreciate the opportunity to provide this service' If we can
be offu-rttrsr assistance from a geotechnical aspec! please contact our office'
KOECHLEIN CONSULTING ENGINEERS, INC.
Scott B. Myers, P.E.
Senior Engineer
Reviewed by:
4i,Iu*- #, K*'JJ';
William H. Koechlein, P.E.
Presidert
(2 copies sent)
cc: Randal Johnson, AIA - Urban Design Group/Inc'
Andrew Catford - Hart Howerton
Vail's Front Door
Environmental Impact Report
Page B-4
*-trff-ig
#,tri:ir.^i$
a
I
o
SOILS AND FOUNDATION INVESTIGATION
VAIL'S FRONT DOOR
LOT 2, SECTION 8, T.5 SOUTH, R.8O WEST, 6TH P.M.
AND
AREA SOUTHEAST OF THE LODGE AT VAIL
CONDOMINIUMS
VAIL, COLORADO
Koechlein Consulting Engineers, Inc.
Gonsulting Geotechnical Engineers
12364W. Alamsda Pkwy. Suhe a15'Lakewood, CO 8022&2845
LAKEWOOD SILVERTHORNE
!o
(30it) 98$,1223 (970) 949-6009 (970) 468€e33
(3O:]) 989{204 FA)( (970) 949-9223 FAX (970) 468'6939 FA)(
Vail's Front Door
Environmental ImPact RePort
Page B-5
ro"Oo-,uN coNsrlLTrNG BNcn Cns, INc.
CONSULTING GEOTECENICAL AAID MATERIAI.S ENGINEERS
SOiLS AND FOT'NDATION I}.IVESTIGATION
VAIL'S FRONTDOOR
LoT 2" SECTION 8, T.5 SOUTH, R.8O WEST, 6O P.M.
AND
AREA SOUTHEAST OF THE LODGE AT VAIL CONDOMINTTJMS
VAIL, COLORADO
Prepared for:
Teny Winnick, V.P.
Vail Resorts Development Company
P.O. Box 959
Avon, CO 81620-0959
Job No. 02-107
DEI|WR: 12364 ll'cst Alantedo Prk'l'T:, Suitc I 15, Lakcwoo{ CO 8l
Al'O ht6 ILI/ERTH O RA'E : 0 7 0) 919-6009
RECEIVED
OCT 3 2002
URBAN OESIGN GROUP
DEN'rER CFFIc
Se,ptember 27,2002
Vail's Front Door
Environmental ImPact RePort
Page 8-6
4;'?iilfN
Scprcmbcr27,2002 I
Job No. 02-107
TABLE OF CONTENTS
SCOPE
EXECUTIVE SI"JMMARY
PROPOSED CONSTRUCTION
SITE CONDITIONS
PREVIOUS INVESTIGATIONS
INVESTIGATION
RADON
SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS
EXCAVATIONS
SHORING
GROTIND WATER
EXISTING FACILITIES
FOLINDATIONS
FLOOR SLABS
FOUNDATION DRAINAGE
LATERAL WALL LOADS
SURFACE DRAINAGE
COMPACTED FILL
LIMITATIONS
VICINITYMAP
LOCATIONS OF EXPLORATORY BORINGS
LOGS OF EXPLORATORY BORINGS
LEGEND OF EXPLORATORY BORINGS
GRADATION TEST RESULTS
FOUNDATION EXCAVATION RECOMMENDATION
TYPICAL WALL DRAIN DETAIL
TYPICAL RETAINING WALL DRAIN DETAIL
SUMMARY OF LABORATORY TESTRESULTS
ft(,ECHLOONSULTING ENGINEERS, I N C
Consulting Gcotcchnical Enginccrs
Fig. I
Fig.2
Figs.3 thru l0
Fig. I I
Figs. 12 thru 20
Fig. 2l
Fig.22
Fig. 23
Table I
I
2
5
6
6
7
8
9
l0
t2
l3
l4
l6
18
l9
20
2l
22
Vail's Front Door
Enviroumental Impact Report
Page B-7
Septcmber2?,2002 a
Job No. 02-107
KOE CH LE O NS ULTI NG E N G I N E E RS, I NC
Co n su lti n-fi G eolcch n i co I En gi n ccrs
SCOPE
This report presents the results of a soils and foundation investigation for the
Vail's Front Door development located south and southeast of the Lodge at Vail
Condominiums in Vail, Colorado. The approximate site location is shown on the
Vicinity Map, Fig. l. The purpose of this investigation was to evaluate the subsurface
conditions at the site and to provide geotechnical recommendations for the proposed
construction.
A large portion of the proposed Vail's Front Door development, south of the
Lodge at Vail Condominiums, has been previously investigated. The reports for the
previously investigated area were used in the compilation of this report. The pur?ose of
this report is to provide descriptions of subsoil and ground water conditions encountered
in the exploratory borings, allowable soil bearing capacity, recommended foundation
systems, and recommended foundation design and construction criteria for proposed
development. This report was prepared from data developed during the field
investigation, our labomtory testing, review of our previous investigations, and our
experience with similar projects and subsurface conditions in the area.
The recommendations presented in this report are based on the proposed
development as described in the PROPOSED CONSTRUCTION section of this report.
We should be contacted to review our recommendations when the final plans for the
Vail's Front Door
Environmental lmpact RePort
Page B-8
Septcmbcr 27, 2fi)2
Job No. 02-107
KOECI I LE TDNS U LTI NG ENG I NEE NS, I N C
Consulting Gcotechnical Englnccrs
development have been completed. A summary of our findings and conclusions is
presented below.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
l. The subsurface conditions encountered in the exploratory borings varied
with location. The subsurface conditions consisted of 1.0 to 10.0 feet of
existing fill, topsoil or roadbase underlain by either a dense to very dense,
sandy gmvel with cobbles and boulders or a dense to very dense, silty sand
with sotne gravel to varying depths of 5.0 to 30'0 feet. The existing fill
was characterized by a loose to nrediutn dense, silty, sandy gravel with
some cobbles. Practical drill rig refusal on boulders was encountered in
exploratory borings TFI-8 (00-09?) thru Trl-l l (00-097), TH-13 (00-097)
thru TH-19 (00-097) and in TH-l (98-348), TH-2 (98-348), TI{-4 (98-
348), and TH-5 (98-348) in our previous investigatiotts'
2. Existing fill to varying depths of 1.0 to 10.0 feet was encountered at this
site. Tlre existing fill will need to be removed from all construction areas
prior to construction.
Cround water was encountered in Tll-3 (98-348) at a depth of 20.0 feet
and in TI{-22 (02-107) at a depth of 17.0 feet at the tirne each boring was
clrilled. Ground watef was not encountel'ed in any other borings for this
investigation or in previous investigations. Refer to the GROUND
WATER section of this repofi for additional details.
We anticipate tlrat the existing flll will be encountered at the proposetl
foundation elevations. In our opinion the existing fill will not safely
support foundations. In our opinion tlre underlying natural, sandy gravel
will support spread footing foundation systems fbr the proposed buildings
and additions. Refer to the FOUNDATIONS section of this report for
conrplete recornmendations.
We anticipate that the soils at the potential floor slab elevations will
corrsist of existing fill. In our opinion the existing fill will not safely
support slab-on-grade floors. In our opinion the underlying natural sandy
glavel or properly moisture conditioned and compacted structural fill will
3.
+.
5.
Vail's Front Door
Environmental ImPact RePort
Page B-9
Septernbcr 27,2002
Job No. 02-107
KOECH LE I ONS IJLTI NG ENG I NEE RS,, NC
Consulting Gcot.chnical Enginccrs
satisfactorily support slab-on-grade floors' Refer to the FLOOR SLABS
section of this report for complete recommendations.
Because cobbles and boulders were encountered in the exploratory
borings, we anticipate that heavy-duty excavation equipment will be
necessary to complete the required excavations'
Drainage around the structures should be designed and constnrcted to
provide for rapid removal of surface runoff and avoid concentration of
water adiacent to foundation walls.
PROPOSED CONSTRUCTION
A hand drawn preliminary site plan was provided by Vail Resorts Development
Company prior to our field investigation. The preliminary site plan presented the
locations of the existing structures and proposed structures' At the time of this
investigation, the final development plan for Vail's Front Door has not been completed.
We understand that the proposed development involves the construction of residential
structures. a skier club, additions to the Lodge at Vail Condominiums, a skier services
building, additions to buildings southeast of the Lodge at Vail, and possibly the
relocation of the Vista Bahn Lift.
The residential buildings and skier club south of the Lodge at Vail Condominiums
are located in an area previously investigated by Koechlein Consulting Engineers, Inc.
Based on the preliminary developnrent plans, the proposed plans are similar to those
plans assumed in our previous investigations. We anticipate that the buildings will be 2
to3-storiesinheightwith I belowgradelevel. Weanticipatethatexcavationsupto l5
6.
7.
Vail's Front Door
Environmental Impact Report
page B-10
September 27, 2002
Job No. 02- 107
KO ECHLE I OS U LTI NG E NG I N E E NS, I NC
Consu!ting Gcotechnlcal Engincers
feet may be required for construction of the buildings witlrin the existing hillside. If
excavations greater than l5 feet are required for construction of the proposed buildings,
we shoulcl be contacted to review our lecon'lmendations. We anticipate that the proposed
buildings will be of cast-in-place concrete and rvood frame construction rvith slab-on-
grade floors. Maximum column and wall loads for the proposed residences and ski club
building were assuured to be those normally associated with residential structures and
light commercial structures.
The area not previously investigated includes the area of the skier services
building, additions to the Lodge at Vail, additions to the buildings southeast of the Lodge
at Vail, a1{ the relocation of the Vista Bahn Lift. We anticipate tlrat the skier services
building will he up to one-story in height and will be of cast-in-place concrete and rvood
frame construction with slab-on-grade floors. We do not believe that a basement or
below grade area will be constructed for the proposed building. Wc anticipate
excavations of up to 5 feet in depth will he required for construction of the proposed
builcling in orclel to retnove the existing fill. We anticipate tlrat the proposed additions to
the Lodge at Vail and other buildings southeast of the Lodge will be one to two stodes itr
height with basements and slab-on-grade floors, Excavations for the additions lnay be up
to l2 feet in clepth. The relocated lift building will be a single-story building with slab-
on-gtade floors, but with no basement or crawlspace. Maximum column and wall loads
Vail's Front Door
Environmental Impact Report
Page B-l I
Scptembcr 27, 2002
Job No. 02-107
KOECH LEI O NS ULTI N G ENG I N EEf,.S,'NC
Consultin! Gcotc c hn i ca I Engincers
were assumed to be those normally associated with light to medium commercial
srucrures.
SITE CONDITIONS
Vail's Front Door development will be located immediately south and southeast of
the Lodge at Vail Condominiums in Vail, Colorado. Access to the site is from a gravel
road off of Vail Road. The location of the road is shown on the Locations of Exploratory
Borings, Fig. 2. The area of the proposed residences and ski club building consists of an
undeveloped slope co'tered with trees, shrubs, \'eeds and grasses. A portion of the slope
has been cleared of all trees and vegetation in this area consists of grass' The overall
slope of the existing hill is down towards the north-northeast'
The area of the proposed additions for the Lodge at Vail is immediately south ol'
the existing building and consists of a parking lot and is generally level. The portion of
the development for the building additions southeast of the Lodge at Vail, the skier
services building and the relocation of the Vista Bahn Lift consists of a developed area
southeast of the Lodge at Vail Condominiums. This area includes a portion south of the
existing Vista Bahn Lift. This area has been developed with an existing lift, single-story
buildings, multi-story buildings and landscaping. The overall slope of this area is down
towards the north-northeast. Vegetation on the site consists of grass.
Vail's Front Door
Environmental Impact Report
Page B-12
Septernber 27,2002 O
Job No. 02-107
KoEcH LE O NS U LTI NG ENG I N EEf,S,,A'c'
Consultiifi G co tcch n ica I Enginccrs
PREVIOUS INVESTIGATIONS
Two previous georechnical investigations were perforrned for the southern portion
of the proposed Vail's Front Door development. This area of the proposed development
includes the residential buildings, skier club and the additions to the Lodge at Vail. This
area has been previously investigated by Koechlein Consulting Engineers, Inc. The data
and results of these previous investigations have been reviewed and included in the
preparation of this report. The following reports were reviewed and information from
them used in compilation of this report.
L Koechlein consulting Engineers, Inc., Prelimina\' Geoteclmical
Investigation, Proposed Developmetzt, The Trade Parcel, Lot 2, section 8,
7.5 Sottth, R.80 lTesr,6th P.M., l/ail, Colorado, December 3, 1998, Job
No.98-348.
Z. Koechlein Consulting Engineers, Inc., Soi/s and Fowrdation Int'estigation,
Proposetl Btildings, Vail Lodge - T'adc Parcel, Lot 2, Seclion 8, T'5
Sottth, R.80 lltest,6t' P.A4., Vail' Colorado, July I1,2000, Job No' 00-097'
INVESTIGATION
Subsurface conditions for this investigation were perfonned at this site on
September 17,2002 by drilling four exploratory borings, TH-20 (02-107) thru TH-23
(02- 107), with a 4-inch diameter solid stem flight power auger at the locations shown on
the Locations of Exploratory Borings, Fig. 2. An engineer fiom our office was on the site
to supervise the drilling ofthe exploratory borings and visually classily and document the
subsur;ace soils and ground water conditions. Our engineer also obtained representative
Vailrs Front Door
Environmental Impact Report
Page B-13
Scptcrnbcr27,2002 O
Job No. 02-107
KOECH LEONS ULTING ENGI N EER.S,,IYc,
Consu!tinj Gcotcch n ica I Enginecrs
samples of the soils within the exploratory borings to be examined in our laboratory' A
description of the subsurface soils obsen'ed in the exploratory borings for this
investigation and from our previous investigations (Job No. 98-348 and Job No. 00-097)
is shown on the Logs of Exploratory Borings, Figs.3 thru l0; and on the Legend of
H,xploratory Borings, Fig. I 1.
Our laboratory investigation included visual classification of all samples and
testing of selected samples for natural moisture content and gradation analysis. Results
of the laboratory tests for this investigation and our previous investigations (.lob No. 98-
348 and Job No. 00-097) are presented on the Logs of Exploratory Borings, Figs. 3 thru
l0; on the Gradation Test Results, Figs. 12 thru 20; and in the Summary of Laboratory
Test Results. Table l.
RADON
In recent years, radon gas has become a concern. Radon gas is a colorless,
odorless gas rhat is produced by the decay ofminerals in soil and rock. The potential for
radon gas in the subsurface strata of mountain terrain is likely. Due to the granular nature
of the natural soils, it is our opinion that the risk for radon gas at this site is low.
However, because below grade areas may be constructed for the proposed residences and
additions to the Lodge at Vail and other buildings, we recommend that the below grade
areas be desiened with ventilation to reduce the risk ofradon gas build-up in these areas.
Vail's Front Door
Environ mental I mPact RePort
Page B-14
Scptcrnbcr 27, 2002
Job No.02-107
SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS
Subsurface conditions encountered in the exploratory borings for this
investigation [TH-20 (02-107) thru TH-23 (02-107)] were simiiar. The subsurface
conditions consisted of 4 inches of topsoil underlain by an existing fill to varying depths
of 5.0 to 6.0 feet. The existing fill was characterized by a dark brown, moist, medium
dense, silty sandy gravel. Below the existing fill, to the maximum depth explored of 20.0
feet, the subsurface conditions consisted of a natural, light brown to brown, dry to moist,
dense to very dense, silty, sandy gravel with scattered cobbles and boulders.
The subsurface conditions encountered in the exploratory borings for our previous
investigations (Job No. 98-348 and Job No. 00-097) varied with location. The strbsurface
conditions consisted of 1.0 to 10.0 feet of existing fill, topsoil or roadbase underlain by
either a dense to very dense, sandy gravel rvith cobbles and boulders or a dense to very
dense, silty sand with some gravel to varying depths of 5.0 to 30.0 feet. The existing fill
was characterized by a loose to medium dense, silty, sandy gravel \^'ith some cobbles.
Practical drill rig refusal on boulders u'as encountered in exploratory borings TH-S (00-
097) thru TH-l I (00-097), TH-13 (00-097) thru TH-I9 (00-097) and in TH-l (98-348),
TH-2 (98-348), TH-4 (98-348), and TH-5 (98-348) in our previous investigations.
Ground water was encountered in TH-3 (98-348) at a depth of 20.0 feet and in
TH-22 (02-lO7) at a depth of 17.0 feet at the time each boring was drilled. Ground water
IOECH LEI}'NS TJLTING ENG I N EERS,'IYC
Consu I ti n! Gcotcchnical Engin ccrs
Vail's Front Door
Environmental I mpact Report
Page B-15
Septernber 27, 2002
Job No. 02-107
KOECH LEI}^IS U LTI NG E N G I N E ERS, INC
Co nsu I ti n! G c olc ch n i ca I E nginccrs
was not encountered in any other borings for this investigation or in previous
investieations.
EXCAVATIONS
We anticipate that excavations of up to l5 feet may be required for construction of
the proposed residential and ski club buildings within the existing slope along the
southwest side of the subject site. If excavations greater than 15 feet are required for
construction of the proposed buildings, we should be contacted to review our
recommendations. Excavations ranging from 5 to 12 feet in depth may be required for
construction ofthe proposed additions, lift terminal and skier services building. Because
cobbles and boulders were encountered u'ithin the exploratory borings, it is our opinion
that heavy-duty excavation equipment will be necessary to complete the required
excavatlons.
Care needs to be exercised during construction so that the excavation slopes
remain stable. In our opinion, the existing, moist, sandy gravel fill, natural silty sand
with gravei, and the natural, moist, sandy gravel classify as Type B soils in accordance
with OSHA. Wet or saturated natural sandy gravel will classifo as Type C soils in
accordance with OSHA regulations. OSHA regulations should be followed in any
excavations or cuts. In order to reduce the size of the required excavations temporary
shorine mav be used. Refer to the SHORING section of this report for additional details.
Vail's Front Door
Environmental lmPact RePort
Page B-16
Scptanbcr 2?,2002
Job No. 02-107
KOECHLEONS T,J LTI NG E NG I N E E RS, I N C
Consalting G.ot.ch n ical Enginccrs
All existing fill, foundations, and soft soils beneath the proposed construction
should be removed, and if necessary, replaced with properly moisture conditioned and
compacted fill. Refer to the EXISTING FACILITIES section of this report for additional
details. All fill should be placed and compacted as recommended in the COMPACTED
FILL section ofthis report.
SHORING
In order to reduce the size of the excavations and limit the disturbance of
construction, temporary shoring may be used. A typical shoring system used for deep
excavations includes piles (either driven or socketed in pre-drilled holes) as soldier posts
with lagging. However, due to the presence of cobbles and boulders, driving or pre-
drilling holes with conventional drilling equipment may not be possible. An altemative
to driven piles or socketed piles using conventional drilling equipment as soldier posts
could be multiple minipiles in conjunction with tie-backs, which can be drilled through
tlre cobbles and boulders. Minipiles are installed by drilling and advancing a casing into
the ground to the desired depth. The hole is then filled with Slout as the casing is
removed from the hole. Where ground water is encountered, it is sometimes necessary to
leave the casing in the ground to prevent water from entering the hole. Multiple
minipiles in conjunction with tie-backs could be used as soldier posts for a soldier post
and lagging shoring system.
Vail's Front Door
Environmental Impact Report
Page B-17
l0
September 27,2002
Job No. 02- 107
An altemative shoring system that may also be considered for this site is a soil
nailed shoring system. Installation of a soil nailed shoring system will be influenced by
the presence of cobbles ald boulders ancl by the presence of adjacent existing structures
and utilities. Property boundaries nray also limit how far the shoring system can extend
beyoncl the excavation and intrude into the adjacent property. Therefore, othel methods'
such as interior bracing, lnay need to be evaluated.
The ability to cornplete the excavations within the site constraints and tlre ueed for
a shoring system including the type of system should be evaluated during the design
phase of tlre p[oject. Based on the subsurlace conditions encoulrtered during this
investigation and our previous investigation, the shoring system may be designed using
the following engineering soil chalacteristics lbl tlre natural sancly gravel: rl" = 38o, Y:
l35psf,c=0.
If soil nails are used as part of the shoring systeln, their pullout capacity will be
influenced by the existing soil conditions, urethocl of hole advancement, hole diatneter,
bondetl leugth, grout type, ancl grouting pressure. For preliminary design purposes, thc
soil nails may be clesigned using an ultimate unit resistance of 20 kpf, assuming that the
soil nails are snrall diameter and are backfilled with low-pressure grout in the natural
sandy gravel.
KDECTTLEI Nls aLrt NG E NGt NEE RS, INC.
Consu!ting G cor.ch n icol Engiuects
ll Vail's Front Door
Environmental lmPact RePort
Page B-18
Scptember 27, 2002
Job No. 02-107
re EcH LEr ONs nLTI Nc ENGI NEERS, rNc.
Consulting G eolec hn i ce I Engince rs
GROUND WATER
Ground water \^,as encountered in TH-3 (98-348) at a depth of 20.0 feet and in
TH-22 (02-107) at a depth of 17.0 feet at the time each boring was drilled. Ground water
was not encountsred in any other borings for this investigation or in previous
investigations. Since we anticipate excavations to a depth of 5 to l5 feet may be required
for construction ofthe proposed buildings and additions, it is our opinion that the risk of
ground water influencing the construction of the proposed buildings is low. However,
shallow ground water from localized springs has been encountered in various projects
along Forest Road and Beaver Dam Road during the late spring and early summer
months. Therefore, depending upon the time of construction, it is possible that ground
water may be encountered. If ground water is encountered during excavations for the
proposed buildings, special precautions may be required during construction. These
precautions may include temporary dewatering trenches, pumping from the excavation
during construction or possibly more elaborate and expensive temporary dewatering
systems.
To reduce the potential risk of ground water entering the excavation from
localized springs, we recommend that construction take place after peak runoff time,
which is typically July 15. To further reduce the risk of ground water infiltration,
construction should take place at the end of August. Starting construction at the times
outlined above will not eliminate the risk of water entering the excavation. However,
Vail's Front Door
Environmental lmpact Report
Page B-19
t2
Septcmber 27,2002
JobNo.02-107
KO ECH LEI ONS ULTI NG ENG I NE f'f,S,,/VC
Con su lti n g Geotcch n ical En gin ccrs
they tend to reduce the risk of water infiltration and if water is encounteted, the amount
of water entering the excavation is typically less than other times of the year.
Ifground water is encountered during construction ofthe proposed buildings and
additions, we should be contacted to review our foundation drain recommendations. It
may be necessary to revise our foundation drain recommendations and also provide an
underslab drain system for the buildings and additions.
EXISTING FACILITIES
We anticipate that prior to construction of this portion of the development, the
existing structures and utilities \r'ill be rsmoved. We recommend that existing
foundations, slabs-on-grade, utilities, and existing fill be completely removed and, if
necessary, replaced u,ith properly moisture conditioned and compacted fill prior to
construction of the new facilities. A representative from our office should observe the
completed demolition and removal of the existing foundations, slabs-on-grade, utilities,
and exisring fill in order to veri! that they have been completely rernoved.
Provided that the existinc fill is free of deleterious material, the existing fill may
be used as structural fill for this project. All fill for this project should be moisture
treated and compacted as recommended in the COMPACTED FILL section of this report.
A representative from our office should observe and/or test the removal of the existing
Vail's Front Door
Environmental Impact Report
Page B-20
IJ
September27,2002 O
Job No. 02-107
Ko ECHLei}Nil ULTI NG ENG I N E Ef.s, /Ivc
Consulting G cor. ch n ico I Enginccrs
foundations, slabs-on-grade, associated utilities, and existing fill, as well as the placanent
and compaction of any fill beneath the new facilities.
FOUNDATIONS
The subsurface rnaterial at the potential foundation elevation for the proposed
buildings and additions consist of either the existing fill, natural sandy gravel or silty
sand with some gravel. In our opinion, the existing fill will not safely support a spread
footing foundation system. The existing fill should be removed and repla<;ed with
properly moisture conditioned and compacted strucrural fill prior to foundation
construction. After removal and replacement of the existing fill, it is our opinion that the
proposed buildings and additions may be supported by spread footings bearing on the
natural sandy gravel, silry sand or compacted fill. We recommend that the spread footing
foundation systems be designed and constructed to m€et the follou'ing criteria:
1. Footings should be supported by the undisturbed natural sandy gravel,
silty sand or properly moisture conditioned and compacted fill, as
described below in ltems 2, I l, 12, and 13.
2. All existing fill must be removed from below proposed foundations. If
necessary, properly moisture treated and compacted structural fill may be
placed beneath the proposed foundations in order to raise the level of the
excavation after rernoval of the existing fill. If structural fill is placed
beneath the proposed foundations, an equal depth of fill must be placed
below the entire foundation. The fill beneath the proposed footings should
extend beyond the proposed footing, as shown in the Foundation
Excavation Recommendation, Fig. 21. All structural fill placed beneath
foundations must be moisture treated and cornpacted as recommended in
the COMPACTED FILL section of this reporl. Placement of the fill must
Vail's Front Door
Environmental Impact Report
Page B-21
tA l-t
Scpternber 27, 2002 O
Job No. 02-107
be observed and tested on a full time basis by a representative from
office.
We recommend wall and column footings be designed for a maximum
allowable soil bearing pressure 5,000 psf.
Spread footings constructed on the natural sandy gravel, silty sand or
properly moisture treated and compacted structural fill may experience up
to 0.5 inches of differential movement between foundation elements.
Because the soils are granular in narure, we anticipate that the majority of
the differen ti al settlernent will occur durine construction.
Construction of new foundation excavations next to existing footings may
cause undercutting ofthe soils beneath the existing footings. The loss of
support could result in settlement of the existing footings. The location of
the new foundation needs to be evaluated during design. The placement of
the new foundations should be such that they do not reduce the stability of
the existing foundations during constmction. The new foundations should
be'located such that they meet the requirements presented in Itern 6.
Excavation for foundations adjacent to existing structures should be
performed with care. The excavation should be made so that existing
foundations and floor slabs are not undermined. Excavations adjacent to
existing structures should be excavated at a I to I slope (Horizontal to
Vertical).
7. Wall footings and foundation walls should be designed to span a distance
of at least 10.0 feet in order to account for anomalies in the soil or
comnacted fill.
Foundation wall backfill should not be considered for support of load
bearing footings. Footings should be stepped and supported by
undisturbed natural sandy gravel or silty sand and should not be
constructed on foundation wall backfill. Foundation walls or grade beams
should be designed to span across an excavation backfill zone and should
not be constructed with footincs within this zone.
The base of the exterior footings should be established at a minimum
depth below the exterior ground surface, as required by the local building
Vailrs Front Door
Environmental Impact Report
PageB-22
K,ECH LloNs uLTr NG ENc rNE E ns, r Nc
Consu ltln g Gcotcchn ica I E n gin ccrs
3.
A
5.
6.
8.
9.
l5
Scptember 27, 2fi)2
Job No. 02-107
Ko E CH L E I|)NSI] LTI NG ENG IN EENS,,,VC
Consultlng Gcolcchuical Entlnacrs
code. We believe that the depth for frost protection in the local building
code in this area is 3,5 feet.
Column footings sltould have a minimum dirnension of 24 inches square
and continuous wall footings should lrave a minimum width of l6 inclres'
Footing widths may be greater to accommodate structural design loads.
We anticipate that cobbles and boulders will be encountered at the
foundation elevation. Renroval of the cobbles and boulders may result in
depressions and rouglt bottoms in the excavation. Tlre resulting
depressions can be backfilled witlt compacted backfill or lean concrete.
Refer to the COMPACTED FILL section of this rcport for backfill
requirements.
Pockets or layers ofexisting fill nray be encountered in the bottom ofthe
completed footing excavations, These materials should be removed to
expose the undisturbed, natural sandy gravel or silty sand. The
foundations should be constructed on the natuml sandy gravel, silty sand
or new cornpacted structural fill. Refer to the COMPACTED FILL
section of this report for backfill requirenrents.
13. Fill should be placetl ancl compacted as outlined in the COMPACTED
FILL section of this report. We recommend that a representative of our
office observe and test the placenrent and compaction of structulal fill
used in foundation construction. It has been our experience that without
engineering quality control, poor constluction techniques occur whiclt
result in poor foundation pet'fonnance.
14. We recomrnend that a representative of our office observe the cornllleted
founrlation excavation. Vadations from the conditions described in this
leport, which rvel'c uot indicated by our borings, can occur. The
representative can obsele the excavation to evaluate the exposed
sutrsurface conditions.
FLOOR SLABS
The subsurJ'ace soils at the floor slab elevations consistetl of existing fill. ln our
opinion the existing fill will not safely support slab-on-grade floors. l-lowever, it is out'
t0.
I t.
12.
Vail's Front Door
Environmental Impact Report
Page B-23
l6
itr'ffiiH..20 *o rrr rlo*s u LTr Nc E N c r N EEtrs, r^c
Consulting G colcch n ical Enginccrs
opinion that the undedying natural sandy gravel, silty sand or new compacted structural
fill will support slab-on-grade floors with a low risk of movement. We anticipate that
slabs-on-grade constructed on the natural soils or properly moisture treated and
compacted shtctural fill may experience up to 0.25 inch of movetnent. We recommend
the following precautions for the construction of slab-on-grade floors:
l. Slabs should be placed on the natural sandy gravel, silty sand or new
compacted fill. All existing fill or soft soils beneath slabs-on-grade should
be removed prior to placement of fill or construction of floors.
A subgrade modulus of200 pci may be used for design ofslabs-on-grade.
Slabs should be separated from exterior walls and interior bearing
members. Vertical movement of the slab should not be restricted.
Exterior slabs should be separated from the buildings. These slabs should
be reinforced to function as independent units. Movement of these slabs
should not be transmitted directly to the foundations or walls of the
structure.
Frequent control joints should be provided in all slabs to reduce problems
associated u'ith shrinkaqe.
6. If ground water is encountered during construction of the proposed
buildings or additions, we should be contacted to revierv the need for an
underslab drain system.
7. Fill beneath slabs-on-grades may consist of on-site soils free of deletenous
material or approved fill. Fill should be placed and compacted as
recommended in the COMPACTED FILL section of this report.
Placement and cornpaction of fill beneath slabs should be obset'r,ed and
tested bv a representative of our office.
2.
A
5.
Vail's Front Door
Environmental I mpact Report
Page B-24
17
September 2?,2002O
Job No. 02-107
xoECH L}O NS U LTI N C EN G I N E E RS, I NC
Consultiig Gcotcchnical Enginecrs
FOLND.ATION DRAINAGE
Surface water tends to flow through relatively permeable backfill typically found
adjacent to foundations. The water that flows through the fill collects on the surface of
relatively impermeable soils occurring at the foundation elevation. Both this surface
water and possible ground water can cause wet or moist below grade conditions after
construction.
Because below grade areas are anticipated for some of the buildings and
additions, we recommend the installation of a drain along the 6"1su' glade foundation
walls. The foundation drain will help reduce the risk of hydrostatic pressure developing
on foundation walls and of ground water infiltrating into the belou' grade areas. The
drain should consist of a 4-inch diameter perforated pipe encased in free draining gravel
and a manufactured wall drain. The drain should be sloped so that water flows to a
positive gravity outlet or to a sump where the water can be removed by pumping'
Recommended details for a typical foundation wall drain are presented in the Typical
Wall Drain Detail, Fig. 22. If ground water is encountered during excavation for the
proposed buildings and additions, we should be contacted to review our foundation drain
recommendations.
Vail's Front Door
Environmental Impact Report
Page B-25
l8
Scptcmbcr 2?,2002
Job No. 02-107
KoECil LE I.,NS U LTI NG E NG I N E E RS, I NC.
Consullittg G cotc chn ico I Enginccrs
LATERAL WALL LOADS
We anticipate that below grade walls, which will require lateral eartlt pressures for
clesignwill beconstructed. Lateral earthpressuresdependonthetypeofbackfill andthe
height ancl type of wall. Walls, rvhich are free to rotate sufticierrtly to rnobilize the
strength oftlre backfill, should be designed to resist the "active" earth pressure condition.
Walls tlrat are restmined should be designed to resist the "at rest" earth pressure
condition. The following table presents the lateral wall pressurcs that nray be used for
design.
Backfill placed belrind or adjacent to lbundation walls and retaining walls slrould
be placed and compacted as recornnrended in tlre COMPACTED FILL section of this
report. Ptacement and compaction of the fill should be observed and tested by a
reDresentative of our offi ce.
Due to the slope of tlre existiug hill in the southwest comer of the sitc, we
anticipate that retaining walls may be constructed as part of this developlnent. The types
Vail's Front Door
Environmental Impact Report
Page 8-26
Earth Plessure Condition Equivalent Fluid Pressure'
(pcf)
Active 35
At-rest 50
Passive 300
Notes:
l. Equivalent fluid pressures are for a horizontal backfill condition with no hydrostatic
plessures or live loads.
2. A coefficient of friction of 0.4 may be used at the base of retairring wall or spread
footings to resist lateral wall loads.
l9
iT'i,T:fi.ii'i002(l
xo r ca t jo Ns a LT I N G E N G I N E ERs, r/vc
Co nsultin g Gcotcc h n ica I E n gi n c crs
of walls that are possible on this site are conventional concrete retaining walls, MSE
(mechanically stabilized earth) walls, crib walls and boulder retaining walls' We
recommend that drains be constructed adjacent to the retaining walls to reduce the
possibility of developing hydrostatic pressures behind the walls. The drain may consist
of a manufactured drain system and gravel. The gravel should have a maximum size of
1.5 inches and have a maximum of 3 percent passing the No. 200 sieve. Washed concrete
aggegate will be satisfactory for the gravel drainage layer. The manufactured drain
should extend from the bottom of the retaining wall to within 2 feet of subgrade
elevation. The water can be drained by a perforated pipe with collection of the water at
the bottom of the wall leading to a positir,,e gravity outlet. A typical detail for a retaining
wall drain is presented in the Typical Retaining Wall Drain Detail, Fig. 23.
SURFACE DRAINAGE
We recommend the following precautions be observed during construction and
maintained at all times after the facilities are completed.
L Wetting or drying of the open fottndation excavations should be
minimized during construction.
2. All surface rvater should be directed away from the top and sides of the
excavations during construction.
3. The ground surface surrounding the exterior ofthe buildings and additions
should be sloped to drain away in all directions. We recommend a slope
ofat least 12 inches in the first l0 feet.
Vail's Front Door
Environmental ImPact RePort
PageB-21
20
Septcmber2?, 2OO? a
Job No. 02-107
Kr,ECHLC'ONS TJ LTI NG ENG I N EE NS, I NC
Contulling Gcolcchnical Englnccrs
4. Backfill, especially around foundation walls, must be placed and
comPacted as recommended in the COMPACTED FILL section of this
report.
5. Surface drainage should be designed by a Professional Civil Engineer.
COMPACTED FILL
Fill may consist of the natural sandy gravel, silty sand with gravel, existing on-
site sandy gravel fill free of deleterious material, or approved imported fill. Deleterious
material includes; building materials, trash, topsoil, and organics. The imported fill may
consist of non-expansive silty or clayey sands or gravels with up to l5 percent passing the
No. 200 sieve and a maximum plasticity index of 10. No gravel or cobbles larger than 6
inches should be placed in fill areas. Fill areas should be stripped of all vegetation and
loose soils, and then scarified, moisture ffeated, and compacted. Fill should be placed in
thin loose lifts; moisture treated, and compacted as shown in the following table. The
recommended compaction varies for the given use of the fill, as indicated in the following
table.
Vail's Front Door
Environmental Impact RePort
Page B-28
2l
Scptcmbcr 27, 2002 O
Job No. 02-107
K,ECH L}oNs a LTI NG E NGI NEERS, I NC,
Consu Itin g G colcch n i col E ngln cers
Use of Fill
Recommended Compaction
Percentage ofthe
Standard Proctor
Maximum Dry
Density
(ASTM D-698)
Percentage ofthe
Modified Proctor
Maximum Dry
Density
(ASTM D-r557)
Percentage ofthe
Optimum
Moisture Content
(ASTM D-698
or D- l 55?)'
Below Structure Foundations 98 95 1 to +2
Below Slabs-On-Grade 95 90 -2 to +2
Utilitv Trench Backfill 95 90 -2to +2
Backfi ll (Non-Structural)90 90 -2to +2
Notes:
l. For clay soils the moisture content should be 0 to +2 percent of the optirnum moisture content.
For granular soils the moisture content should be -2 to +2 of the optimum moisture content.
We recommend that a representatirre of our office observe and test the placement
and compaction of structural fill. Fill placed below foundations and slabs-on-grade is
considered structural. It has been our experience that without engineering quality control,
poor construction techniques can occur which result in poor foundation and slab-on-grade
performance.
LIMITATIONS
Although the exploratory borings were located to obtain a reasonably accurale
determination of foundation conditions, r'ariations in the subsurface conditions are always
possible. Any variations that exist beneath the site generally become evident during
excavation for the removal of existine sffuctures and excavation for the nevv structures. A
renresentative from our office should observe the completed excavations to confirm that
Vail's Front Door
Environmental Impact Report
Page B-29
22
Septembcr2T, 2OO|^
Job No.02-107
Scott B. Myers, P.E.
Senior Engineer
Reviewed by:
,i rt 4
lg.-LL-a-rr'* '
KoEcHO cogs uLTINc ENGINEERS, INc
Consulting Gcotechnicol Engincers
the soils are as indicated by the exploratory borings and to veriry our foundation and slab-
on-grade recommendations. The placernent and compaction of fill, as well as installation
of foundations, should also be observed and/or tested. The design criteria and subsurface
data presented in this report are vdid for 3 years from the date ofthis report.
If we can be of further assistance in discussing the contents of this report or in
analyses ofthe proposed project from a soils and foundation viewpoint" please call.
NSULTING ENGINEERS, INC.
(, x:-../'lo".'-
William H. Koechlein, P.E.
President
(4 copies sent)
Vail's Front Door
Environmental Impact Report
page B_30
;tflljEf!{ft
a/.r17i$
ibiiitrS
23
cHr-Eht coilsuLnilc EilONEERS, tNC.
Comultlng G.otochnlcal Englnccrr
I
I
roT to lcAtE
Vail's Front Door
Environmental Impact Report
Page B-31
, .. i,rr i:,'l ;irt ,:
JOB NO.02.107
VICINITY MAP
R
IJ
, !:t'":,"- . ;-
t:.:." .. .--:..."'-
'',1...' -,- 'r't''
/-.".
':..: "...-..,./n.. _ -. ,,,.., - --
ECHLEIN CONSULTING ENGINEERS, INC.
Consulting Geotechnical Engineers
I l 'rf /-,,
'.'.-...".
3l
ffi
m
w
w
g
3
;T
kfl
J
3
ffi
ffi
ffi
m
b$
LODGE AT VAIL
"..".
.11
I
l
Vail's Front Door
Environmental Impact Report FIG' 2
Page B-32
:
''
. ' _l -$.. ,-t----------i-t ,' I .
"' . '\- ",-' '- "''
"TE AREA oF . 'i . t- APRPOXIMATE AREA 05 STIER
"' : ' : .pioiosio nestoeNces tno -- seRvcds eutiiotHo : . '" '
....siitct.uB..'.''1'):'.-.:..-.
"", ., ," ...,-:ai,ii:,i.;,:,1,,,...:l_
'_
" " - : "_
,,."' -' ."'., *'i-- *-'.-' ; t . - l. , ',-
t'--....,
,.- ,t,t*i--\-:',:-t"t.'., . . ,-t-,--..:,.*r:" :l;ii,,-j
tr ii:r-.Tr{::j-.;_,*,^.,,--.,.
j
lenioxrn,tarE loclrion op >-f
RELocATED vrslAEFnN uJd ::-'; .-':' -:j' .< '..'- - '--t-_
JOB NO. 02-107
1" = 80'
LOCATIONS OF EXPLORATORY BORINGS
TH-l O
(98-348)
APP.EL.8172
TH-2
(98-348)
APP.EL. 8188
KOECHLEIN CONSULTING ENGINEERS, INC.1f Consulting Geotechnical Engineers
TH.3
(98-3481
APP.EL. 8170
o
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
l
l l
I
l
l I lo J]n t'o ,l{
--.t :lz -lrt
JM tm _l .
.l
J
l l
l
-j
J
F u,
uJ tl z
:E
o
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
32t6
WC= 11
-2OO = 19
OE
Vail's Front DooI
Environmental Impact Report
Page B-33 JOB NO. 02-107
LOGS OF EXPLORATORY BORINGS
ul uI lr
=
G
UI o
TH-4
(98-348t
APP.EL. 81
t
96
TH-5
(98-348t
APP.EL. 8248
36t12
WC=7
DD= 13O
-2OO=2a
50/8
KOEGHLEIN CONSULTING ENGINEERS, INC,
-,
ConruhlngGcotcchnlcalEnginocrs
r}l-6
(98-3481
APP.EL. 8259
24t12
WC= 11
DD=. 118
-2OO=43
16t12
WC=13
DD= 120
-2OO=43
Vail's Front Door
Environmental Impact RePort
Page B-34
JOB NO. 02-107
LOGS OF EXPLORATORY BOF
o m !
2 .tl
m n I
UJ u.l ll
=
o-
uJ o
TH.7
(oo-o97)
APP.EL. 81
o
84
TH-8
(oo-o971
APP.EI.8176
90t12
WC=5
-2OO=29
KOECHLETN CONSULTTNG ENGTNEERS, lNC.
Consuhing Geotechnical Englne.r3
i]l-9
(oo-o97)
APP.EL, 8172
10.t12
wC=5
DD= 117
-200= 11
Vailrs Front Door
Environmental Impact Report
Page B-35 JOB NO. 02-107
LOGS OF EXPLORATORY BORI|i
0 m !-{
2
.n
m m {
u,UI l!
=
o-
uJ o
rH-10 |
(oo-o97)
APP.EL. 8196
TH-l1
(00-0971
APP.EL.8188
KOECHLEIN CONSULI lNLi EN{tlNtsEKl' lNs.
^.-. ContultlngGcotcchnlcalEneinocn
=l-12 (oo-o971
APP.EL,8189
19t12
34t12
WC=10
DD= 121
-2OO=37
95t't2
40t12
50t12
WC=3
DD=117
-200 = 6
Vail's Front Door
Environmental Impact Report
Page 8-36
62t12
50/6
Wc=5
-2oO = 16
JOB NO. 02-107
LOGS OF EXPLORATORY BORII
I m !
z
'tl
m m {
IJJ
uJ lt
=
A
UJ o
rH-13 |
(oo-0971
APP.EL.8190
TH.14
(o0-o97)
APP,EL.8190
KOESHLEIN CONSULTING ENGINEERS, INC.
Conruhing Gootechnicll Engineors
Itr-15
(oo-0971
APP.EL.8197
40t12
50/5
WC=7
DD = 130
-200--23
I
F; . :::l I \,/ )[: : :::l L.\ |[:::::l x x
!....n
r-.-.1 t,!..rt
lii::::h +orrz Et:.i.ii.h2st12 [;i:::! t:::::H t....,1
.-+- r:::::l | 'T*'l
LOGS OF EXPLORATORY BORII\Vail's Front Door
Environmental Impact RePort
Page B-37 JOB NO. 02-107
0 m !{r
z
'n m m
ul
UJ tI.
=:E
c
UT o
rH-l6 0
(oo-097)
APP.EL. 8223
TH.17
(oo-o97)
APP.EL.8217
25t12
19t12
39t12
KOECHLEIN CONSULTING EN(iINEERS, INg.
-,
ConruhingGaotechnicrlEngineerr
lf|.l8
(oo-o97)
APP.EL. 8220
50/10
32t12
WC=3
-2O0 = 9
Vail's Front Door
Environmental ImPact RePort
Page B-38 JOB NO. 02-107
LOGS OF EXPLORATORY BORI
0 m 'tr
z
.tt
m m {
uJ
uJ lt
=
G
llJ o
TH.1S
(oo-o97)
APP.EL. 821
o
o
TH.20
{02-107)
APP.EL. 8191 .9
36t12
21t12
38t12 50/10
WC=7
-2OO=14
KOECHLEIN CONSULTING ENGINEERS, INC.
Conrulting Gcotcchnlcal Engincer
=t-21 to2-'to7l
APP.8L.8193.1
4A1A
WC=5
-2OO=12
42112
Vail's Front Door
Environmental ImPact RePort
Page B-39 JOB NO. 02-107
LOGS OF EXPLORATORY BORIN
o m !
I
z
1l m m
!!ut tt
=I F o-
IIJ o
J,,
to2-1071
APP.EL. 8188.0
LOGS OF EXPLORATORY BOF
KObgflLElN (;t)NsULIlNtt ENt INEEKS' lNs.
Conrulting Geotcchnicel Engineers
rH-23 0
toz-10'll
APP.EL. 8208.O
32t't2 WC-4
-2OO = 15
Vail's Front Door
Environmental ImPact RePort
Page B-40 JOB NO. 02-107
0 m T
2
'n m m {
LEGEND:
FILL, GRAVEL, Sandy, Silty, Scattered cobbles, Dry to moist,
Loose to medium dense, Brown to dark brown.
GRAVEL, Sandy. Cobbles, Boulders, Silty, Dry to
moist, Dense to very dense, Light brown to brown.
ASPHALT
SAND, Silty, Some gravel, Moist, Dense to very dense, Light
brown to reddish brown.
TOPSOIL
CAVING. Indicates depth of caving soils while drilling.
T REFUSAL. Indicates practical drill rig relusal.
- WATER. Indicates depth ol water encountered while drilling.
I SPLIT SPOON DRIVE SAMPLE. The symbol 5O/6 indicates that 50
I blo*r of a 140 pound hammer falling 30 inches were required to
drive a 2.0 inch O.D. sampler 6 inches.
n CALIFORNIA DRIVE SAMPLE. The symbol 36/12 indicates that 36
U blows of a 140 pound hammer falling 30 inches were required to
drive a 2.5 inch O.D. sampler 12 inches.
M BULK SAMPLE. Obtained from auger cuttings.
n
Notes:
1. Exploratory borings TH-1 thru TH-6 were drilled on October 26, 1998,
borings TH-7 thru TH-19 were drilled on May 3O and 31, 2OOO, and
borings TH-20 thru TH-23 were drilled on September '17, 2OO2.
2. Ground water was encountered in boring TH-3 at a depth of 2O'0 feet
and in explorarory boring TH-23 at a depth o{ 17.O feet.
3. The Boring Logs are subiect to the explanations, limitations, and
conclusions as contained in this report.
4. Laboratory Test Results:
WC - Indicates natural moisture (%l
DD - Indicates dry density (pcf)
-20O - Indicates percent passing the No. 200 sieve (o/o)
5. Approximate elevations for borings TH-1 thru TH-19 are based on the
T6pographic Map shown on the Locations of Exploratory Borings, Fig.2.
Approximate elevations for TH-20 thru TH- 23 w€re measured using a
Stanley Compu-level and are based on a known inlet elevation.
KOECHLEIN CONSULTING ENGINEERS, INC.
Consulting Geotochnical Englno€rs
Vail's Front Door
Environmental Impact RePort
Page B-41
M b.X
ffi-g
F&gl I
F #
-->
JOB NO. 02-107
LEGEND OF EXPLORATORY BOI
*tl.r,-.r N coNSULrt NG =*CQ==*,
DIAMETER OF PARTICLE IN MM
SAND and GRAVEL, Sil
Elev.rDepth l4.0 feet
Sample ot
Source TH-l (98-348) Sample No-
Sample of
source _!!!l_.1p!l!!l_ sample No.
GRAVEL 44 % SAND
SILT & CLAY 13 % LIOUO LIMIT
PLASTICITY INDEX
GRAVEL
SILT & CLAY I9
PLASTICITY INDEX
LtoutD LrtrllT %
GRADATION TEST RESIJI TS
Vail's Front Door
Environmental Impact Report
PageB-42
0
10
20
30
40
50
DIAMETER OF PARTICLE IN MM
=a
at)
z
uJ
UJ L
SAND, Gravelly, Sil
Elov./DeDth 14.0 feet
Job No.02- | 07
Sample of
SamDle of
^t"rr=rN
coNSULrl NG r*Cl.t*.
SAND, Gravelly, Silty GRAVEL
SILT, Gravelly, Sandy
43
Source TH-5 (98-348) Sample No.Elev.rDepth 9.0 feet SILT & CLAY 24 LIQUD LIMIT
PLASTICIW INDEX
GRAVEL 30 % SAND
Elev./Depth 14.0 feet SILT & CLAY 43 % LIQUID LIMIT
PLASTICITY INDEX
Sourcs TH-6 (98-348) sample No.
GRADATION TEST RESIJI TS
Vail's Front Door
Environmental I mpact Report
Page B-43
to
20
30
DTAMETER OF PARTICLE IN MM
80
70
60
50
t0
20
a0
50,
m
-t
DIAMETER OF PARTICLE IN MM
02- 107
rOcnur N coNSULrt NG erutEens
sample of
Source TH-6 (98-348) Sample No.
Sampl6 of
Source TH-7 (00-097) SamPle No.
ElevJDoDth 19.0 feet
4.0 feet
GRAVEL
SILT & CLAY 43 LIOUO LIMIT
PLASTICITY INDEX
GRAVEL % SAND
SILT & CLAY 29 % LIQUID LIMIT
PLASTICITY INDEX
%.t:
o/o
GRADATION TEST RESULTS
Vail's Front Door
Environmental ImPact RePort
Page B-44
t0
20
30
50
m
70
80
90
i00
DIAMETER OF PARTICLE IN MM
0
t0
20
30
50
70
80
90
100
z
U)a
(L
z ul ()
UJ
o-
1 01
DIAMETER OF PARTICLE IN MM
SAND, Gravelly, Sil
Elev.rDepth
Job No.02-r 07
^t"rr=r N coNSULtNG =*ol==*t
DIAMETER OF PARTICLE IN MM
Sample of
Sample of
FILL, Gravel, Sandy, Silty GRAVEL 6I % SAND
Source TH-9 (00-097) Sample No.Elev.rDepth 4.0 fest SILT & CLAY II % LIQUO LIMIT
PLASTICIW INOEX
GRAVEL ?4
Elev.rDepth 8.0 feel SILT & CLAY 37 LIQUIO LIMIT
PLASTICITY INDEX
SAND. Gravelly, Silty %
Source TH-10 (00-097) Sample No.
GRADATTON TEST RES! il rs
Vail's Front Door
Environmental Impact Report
Page B-45
0
10
20
30T
m
an()'-m
z I 50-
m
66!z m
7oo
80
90
r00
DIAMETER OF PARTICLE IN MM
Job No.02-r 07
ecHr-etN coNSULrt NG rr.rOerns
t0
m
30
=o o
L
F z
UJ o
IU
IL
DTAMETER OF PARTICLE IN MM
SAND and GRAVEL, Silt
9.0 feet
Sample of
source _!!1!_!1(![Q!]l sample No'
Sample of
Source TH-12 (00-097) SamPle No.
Elsv./DeDth
Elov./DeDth
GRAVEL % SANO
GRAVEL
stLT & ct-AY 16
PLASTICITY INOEX
LIOUD LII/IIT %
SILT & CLAY 6 % LIOUIO LIMIT
PLASTICITY INDEX
%
GRADATION TEST RESULTS
Vail's Front Door
Environmental lmpact RePort
Page 8-46
80
90
r00
DIAMETER OF PARTICLE IN MM
SAND, Gravelly, Sil
9.0 feel
Job No.0?-107
rCcHlEr N coNSULl NG rtutrgent
o
t0
m
30
ao
t0
80
s0
1m
1(,
DIAMETER OF PARTICLE IN MM
SAND, Gravelll', Sil
9.0 feet
Sample of
Source TH-15 (00-097) Sample No.
GRAVEL
Elev./Depth SILT E CLAY 23 LIOUD LIMIT
PLASTICITY INDEX
0
10
20
l0
60
70
80
e0
1m
DIAMETER OF PARTICLE IN MM
GRAVEL and SAND, Sil
Elev,rDeDth
Sample of
Source TH-16 (00-097) Sample No.14.0 feet
GRAVEL 48 % SAND 43
SILT & CLAY 9 % LIQUID LIMIT
PLASTICITY INDEX
v"
GRADATION TEST RESULTS
Vail's Front Door
Environmental Impact Report
Page B-47
Job No.02- 107
,.C.rrtN coNSULTtNG =*fi ==*,
0
to
m
3{)
40
50
DIAMETER OF PARTICLE IN MM
Sample of
Source TH-17 (00-097) SamPle No.
Sample of
Source TH-18 (00-097) Sample No.
Elev./Depth
GRAVEL
stLT & CLAY _
PLASTICITY INDEX
LIOUO LIMIT
GRAVEL % SAND
SILT & CLAY 9 % LIOUID LIMIT
PLASTICITY INOEX
%
7c
%
9.0 feet
GRADATION TEST RE.SI II T.q
Vail's Front Door
Environmental ImPact RePort
Page B-48
8.0 feet
o z
U)
(L
z
UJ
ul
70
60
50
40
70
60
90
'100
OIAMETER OF PARTICLE IN MM
Elev./Deplh
02- 107
rCEcHr-s N coNSULrt NG Er'rC\erns
GRAVEL Sample of
Source Tll-10 (02-107) Sample No.
%
%
Source TH-21 (02-107) Sample No.Elev,/Depth 4.0 feet
SILT & CLAY 14
PLASTICITY INDEX
LIOUD LIMIT
GRAVEL % SAND
SILT & CLAY 12 % LIQUID LIMIT
PLASTICITY INOEX
SAND and CMVEL, Silty %
%
Sample of
GRADATION TEST RESULTS
Vail's Front Door
Environmental ImPact RePort
Page B-49
90
'l00
! 01
DTAMETER OF PARTICLE IN MM
Elev.rD€pth 14.0 feel
0
t0
20
30
il0
50
80
70
60
90
I
ltoo
30
l0
DIAMETER OF PARTICLE IN MM
Job No.02- l 07
0
't0
m
=th o
F z
llJ
lu
30!
m
.0R
sol z m
zoo
DIAMETER OF PARTICLE IN MM
rGcHlerN coNSULr NG n'rC\rrns
GRAVEL, Sandy, Silty GRAVEL Sample of
Sample of
lo Source TH-22 (02- 107) Sample No.El6v./Depth 4.0 feet SILT & CLAY 16
PLASTICITY INDEX
LIOUD LIMIT
GRAVEL 42 %
9.0 feet SILT & CLAY 15 % LIQUID LlllllT
PLASTICITY INDEX
SAND and 6LAYEL, Silry
Source TH-23 (02-107) Sample No.Elev./Depth
GRADATION TEST RESULTS
Vail's Front Door
Environmental Impact Report
Page B-50
0
10
20
30
,t0
50
00
70
60
90
'100
DIAMETER OF PARTICLE IN MM
riiiii
z
o
F.z
IU
UJ
Job No,02-t 07
KOECHLETN COI{SULTNG E]{G|NEERS, tNC.
Consuldng Geotochnlcal Engineerr
CONCRETE FOOTING
FIRV NATURAL SOIL
EDGE OF EXCAVATION
(EXCAVATE AS PER
OSHA REGULATIONS)
FOUNDATION EXCAVATION RECOMMENDATION
Vail's Front Door
Environmental Impact Report
Page B-51
,t *'/ COMPACTED GRANULAR FILL \/ (SEE REPORT FOR \
COMPACTION RECOMMENDATIONS)
JOB NO.02-107
KOECH o LEIN CONSULTING ENGINEERS. INC.
Consulting Geotechnical Englnears
CLAYEY BACKFILL
EDGE OF EXCAVATION
(EXCAVATE AS PER
OSHA REGUTATIONS)
COMPACTED BACKFILL
MANUFACTURED
$/ALL DRAIN
BELOW GRADE WALL
WATERPROOFING
PLASTIC
MIN.
FILTER FABRIC
L-l_,,1
NOTES:
1. DRAIN SHOULD BE AT LEAST 12 INCHES BELOW TOP OF FOOTING
AT THE HIGHEST POINT AND SLOPE DOWNWARD TO A POSITIVE
GRAVITY OUTLET OR TO A SUMP WHERE WATER CAN BE REMOVED BY
PUMPING.
2. EXCAVATIONS ADJACENT TO FOOTINGS SHOULD BE CUT AT A 1 TO
1 (HORTZONTAL TO VERTICAL) OR FLATTER SLOPE FROM rHE BOTTOM
OF'THE FOOTINGS. EXCAVATIONS ADJACENT TO FOOTINGS SHOULD
NOT BE CUT VERTICALLY.
3. THE DRAIN SHOULD BE LAID ON A SLOPE RANGING BETWEEN 1/8
INCH AND 1/4 INCH DROP PER FOOT OF DRAIN.
4. GRAVEL SPECIFICATIONS: WASHED 1.5 INCH TO NO. 4 GRAVTL
WITH LESS THAN 32 PASSING THE NO. 2OO SIEVE.
5. THE BELOW GRADE CONCRETE FOUNDATION WALLS SHOULD BE
PROTECTED FROM MOTSTURE INFILTRATION BY APPLYING A SPRAYED
ON MASTIC WATERPROOFING OR AN EOUIVALENT PROTECTION METHOD.
TYPICAL WALL DRAIN DETAIL
Vail's Front Door
Environmental Impact Report
Page B-52
JOB NO.02-107
CLAYEY BACXFIII
KQECHLEIN CONSULTING ENGINEERS, INC.
O ConsultingGcotechnicalEnoineers
Vail's Front Door
Environmental Impact Report
Page B-53
COMPACTED GRANULAR
BACKFILL
EDGE OF EXCAVATION
(EXCAVATE AS PER
OSHA REGULATIONS)
TERPROOFING
6 INCH DIAMETER
PERFORATED PIPE
NOTES:
1. DRAIN SHOULD BE SLOPED DOWNWARD TO A POSITIVE GRAVITY
OUTLET OR TO A SUMP WHERE WATER CAN BE REMOVED BY
PUMPING.
2. THE DRAIN SHOULD BE LAID ON A SLOPE RANGINC BETWEEN I,/8
lNcH AND I /4 rNcH DROP PER FOOT OF DRATN.
3. GRAVET SPECIFICATIONS: WASHED 1.5 INCH TO NO. 4 GRAVEL
WITH LESS THAN 3Z PASSINC THE NO. 2OO SIEVE.
4. THE BELOW GRADE CONCRETE FOUNDATION WAL!-S SHOULD BE
PROTECTED FROM MOISTURE INFILTRATION BY APPLYING A SPRAYED
ON MASTIC WATERPROOFING OR AN EQUIVALENT PROTECTION METHOD.
TYPICAL RETAINING WALL DRAIN DETAIL
JOB. NO.02-107
()z
Ui
G,
llJ
uJ z
o z
IU o z
F
5
U'z o
z
llr J -
ul o Y
J=o>o11
a j
(g
l-a z
U)
tt)
>l
0)
ag
z
u)
o
a)
r.1
F{z
v)
.lt U)
>r
U)
z
a
t)
u)
c)
z
v)
v)
x
dt v)
>l
J J
>r
u)
>r
d)
z
a
>'
v)
J
r"l
(g
z
a
an
5
0)
F
d z
v)
>t
v)
F
z
U'
Hix.a a1 =,tz-
(-l s at r+c.l s o\c.l
t-c.l
\o tl N
a/)F
J
rrl
F t-
F ;1 X
kn><-i2
F{ t<
dr d>l--\ '^.' U)
AIAA
z r-l
€
a.a
F (..l c-ca
. Itl ?(&/-.-_\ F \o tr9:)<o z>
*t\.r-
i.l F
-.O.8 4tn.J <al
+s +sl $@ oi
E]J
@ s
@
F
@
$
@
F
a $
@
F
€s
€
F
ao v
oo
F
t-
a-
F
t'-
F
l'-
v r.
tt-
F
r.-
c.l
F
t\.
l1
U)F J
v)
F a
F
11
F ^-. <
-c',
UA
J
^
a
z,
v)
a.l
< tll
a
F.o
(\o
o z
o -)
Vailrs Front Door
Environmental ImPact RePort
Page B-54
o
z_
U't
l,u |r|z o z
IIJ
(9
z_
F
5 o z o
C)z
lll J T ()
lll o Y
J*r 6;@v
>-r
v)
l-{z
a
=
J
>l
U)
J
>|
U)
>|
AJ
z
a
v)
o
z
v)
ct)
J
z
0
>l
u)x
a
J
>l
./)
J
z
a
HR*.(rn=<-,tz-Or o\s N
v)F
-]
!-r
F iiX
{<nx '@q?<=J
Q r-.
aa>i--'1 '.2 U)
zrJ
<=&/r-,--1 F \o F9O <o z>
c.l CN ('-e'l v
l{+,
o-F,^<rO-€
<E u)-
.$o<;
.v s
t!
-.1
:c
Fr o\
F
r-
F-
l-
F--
oo
'l F
f-
ol
c.l
F
F-
c.l
a.l
F
r-
a{
c.l e.l
t-
|r..
c.l
(\
F
a F J
D a lr I
F a
F
at\*
^Yr,rv
.v rr1 -F < lrl Y FIrl
-l
r&
z
D
U)
F-
N
o 7
dt o -
Vail's Front Door
Environmental Impact Report
Page B-55
o o
o
t?
x
o
o
o o
AIR, NOISE, AND ODOR IMPACT ASSESSMENT
PROPOSED VAIL'S FRONT DOOR DEVELOPMENT
PROJECT IN VAIL, COLORADO
FOR THE
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT
Preparedfor:
Vail Resorts Development Company
137 Benchmark Road
Avon. Colorado 81620
Prepared by:
Greystone Environmental Consultants
5231 South Quebec Street
Greenwood Village, Colorado 801I I
December 2002
Vall's Front Door
Environmental Impact Report
c-1
TABLE OF CONTENTS
,a ,:-. ::, .. , ..
Air, Noise, and Odor Impact Assessment. ............................ 3
Proposed Vail's Front Door Development Project in Vail, Colorado................... ............... 3
Summary'
2.0 Analysis of Air Quality. ...................... 5
2.1 Existing Air Quality and Atmospheric Conditions... .......................... 5
2.2 Air Quality Regulations..... ................. 6
2.2.1 Colorado Air Emission Source Regulations................. ................................ 6
2.2.2 Colorado Air Quality Regulations for Demolition Activities........ ............... 6
2.2.3 Town of Vail Air Emission Source Regulations ............... ........................... 6
2.3 Potential lmpacts to Air Quality from Demolition..................... ................................ 7
2.3.1 Emissions of Fugitive Dus1................ ...........7
2.3.2 Asbestos4ontaining Material ...................... ........................7
2.3.3 Lead-Based Pain1............... ..........................- 7
2.4 Construction Phase Impacts........... ............................. 8
2.4.1 Demolition, Earth-Moving and Material Handling Activities........ .............. 8
2.4.2 Unpaved Travel Surfaces...................... ................................ 9
2.4.3 Paved Travel Surfaces.......... ........................ 9
2.4.4 Tailpipe Emissions from Diesel-Fueled Earth-Moving Equipment ............. 9
2.4.5 Summary of Impacts During Construction Phase ................ 9
2.5 Operation Phase lmpacts .................. l0
3.1 Existing Noise Background
3.2 Noise Regulations in the Town of Vail ............
3.3 Noise Impacts During Construction Phase.....
3.4 Noise Impacts from Operation Phase .............. ......... 13
3.5 Noise Mitigation from Operation Phase.............. ............................. 13
4.1 Colorado Odor Regulations.................... .................. 14
4.2Yarl Odor Regulations.................... .......................... 14
4.3 Odor Impacts during Construction Phase..... ............ 14
4.4 Operation Phase Impacts .................. 14
5.0
TABLES
Table I
Table 2
Table 3
Typical Construction Noise Levels...... ........... 12
Predicted Noise Near Construction Activities ........ ................ 12
Tvoical Automobile Noise Levels .................. 13
Vail's Front Door
Environmental Impact Report
c-2
AIR, NOISE, AND ODOR IMPACT ASSESSMENT
PROPOSED VAIL'S FRONT DOOR DEVELOPMENT PROJECT
IN VAIL, COLORADO
SUMMARY
This report describes an evaluation of impacts to air, odor, and noise for the Vail's Front Door
development project. The report was developed to describe local atmospheric conditions, including
existing air, noise and odor, applicable local and state regulations, potential construction and operation
impacts, and mitigation measures.
Short-term impacts to air quality may occur during the construction phase of the projects. These impacts
would result in temporary increases in levels of airbome particulates and tailpipe emissions. lmpacts are
predicted to be small and can be successfully mitigated. Impacts to air quality from the operation phases
are expected to be insignificant.
Short-tenn impacts to noise will occur during the construction phase of the projects. Operation of heavy
equipment will result in noise levels typical of construction. However, the anticipated noise is predicted to
be within the limits set by the Town of Vail. Noise will also occur from increased vehicle traffic
associated with the operation phase of the projects; however, impacts are not exp€cted to be signihcant
relative to existing ambient noise levels.
Odor impacts are expected to be limited to the construction phase of the projects. Temporary odors may
result from diesel exhaust and short-term construction. These odor impacts would also be related to
meteorological conditions that would affect dispersal of the exhaust.
Vail's Front Door
Environmental Impact Report
c-3
1430-Vail Resons Air EIR (Dec.26.02)
1.0 INTRODUCTION
'
This report is intended to be an element of an Environmental Impact Report developed pursuant to Title
l2 of the Vail Town Code, Zoning Regulations, Chapter 12, Environmental Impact Reports (EIR).
The elements required ofthe EIR covered by this report include:
r Local atmospheric conditions, such as airshed characteristics
o Potential air emissions
o Any potential changes in or impacts to air quality
. Other environmental conditions such as noise and odor
. Any potential changes in or impacts to noise or odor
The impacts to air, noise, and odor that are associated with the development of Vail's Front Door are
assessed in this report.
Vail's Front Door encompasses several different buildings and services, including 13 new fractional
ownership units composed of five duplexes and one triplex, a ski club building, a ski services
building, and expansion ofthe Lodge at Vail to include a spa and below-grade loading dock. The Vail
Parking Garage (P3&J) project will expand an existing surface parking lot to include a twolevel,
below-grade parking garage.
Vail's Front Door
Environmental Impact Report
c-4
1430-Vail Resons Air EIR (Dec.26.02r
2.0 ANALYSIS OF AIR QUALITY
2.1 EXISTING AIR QUALITY AND ATMOSPHERIC CONDITIONS
Air quality concerns in the Western Slope Air Quality Region of Colorado are primarily associated with
elevated ambient air concentrations of particulate matter with an aerodynamic diameter less than 10
micrometers (PMro) during the winter months. These elevated levels of PMro are related to seasonal
sources such as wood stoves and fireplaces and road sanding. They are also related to atmospheric
inversions where dense, cold air within mountain valleys becomes trapped below a warrner layer of air.
Little or no air moves during inversions and pollutants within the trapped air cannot disperse out of the
valley. Inversions typically occur during the winter and usually do not last for more than a week.
Lnversions can also occur during the early moming hours at other times of the year, but usually break up
shortly after sunrise.
When inversions are not present, wind patterns in the Vail valley would be primarily down-valley and up-
valley and would follow the predominant geographical features. Down-valley winds would typically
occur during the morning, and up-valley winds would typically occur in the aftemoon.
Controlled and uncontrolled burns that take place during seasons other than winter can also affect ambient
concentrations of PMr6, as well as other regulated air pollutants.
The state regulatory standards or thrcsholds for concentrations of PM16 in ambient air are:
o 150 micrograms per cubic meter (pglmr) for 24-hour averages, and
. 50 pg/nrr for annual averages.
The Town of Vail is in an attainment area for all criteria pollutants (Hancock 2002). Attainment means
that the area is in compliance with the federal Clean Air Act. Standards for air quality are stricter in
nonattainment areas than in attainment areas.
Monitoring data for Vail were reviewed. The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) reports that
ambient concentrations of PM16 have been monitored in Vail since 1996 at 846 Forest Road (EPA 2002a).
Over this period, monitoring has shown that EPA standards have not been exceeded and has shown a
decreasing trend in both 24-hour maximum and annual average concentrations (EPA 2002b). Records for
monitoring of other criteria pollutants - nitrogen oxides (NO,), sulfur dioxide (SO2), carbon monoxide
(CO), ozone, and lead - were not found for Eagle County.
ln addition to emissions of PMls, combustion sources such as vehicles, gas heaters, and wood stoves can
also produce emissions of other regulated pollutants such as NO,, CO, SO2, and volatile organic
compounds (VOCs). ln general. air quality issues that are associated with these pollutants are limited to
heavily populated and industrial areas where numerous emission sources can generate high ambient
concentrations.
Air quality near the proposed site would also be affected by the proximity of lnterstate-70 (I-70), which is
near the four proposed development projects in Vail. Commercial and non-commercial vehicle traffic on
I-70 may contribute both fugitive dust (PM16) and tailpipe emissions (NO,,, CO, SOz, and VOCs) to the
local ambient air.
Vail's Front Door
Environmental Impact Report
c-5
1430-Vail R(xiorts Air EIR (D€c.26.02)
o 2.0 Analysis of Air Quality
2.2 AIR QUALITY REGULATIONS
2.2.1 Colorado Air Emission Source Regulations
Some large construction projects are required to file an Air Pollution Emission Notice (APEN) for
construction sources that would generate fugitive dust (Colorado Air Quality Control Commission,
Regulation Number 3, Part A.tr). Activities that would be exempt from this rule include "disturbance of
surface areas for the purposes of land development, which do not exceed 25 contiguous acres and which
do not exceed six months in duration..." the Vail's Front Door development project is not exempt from
this rule because of the anticipated length of construction. The construction phase for each project is
anticipated to be longer than 6 months. An APEN must therefore be filed with the Colorado Department
of Public Health and Environment's Air Pollution Control Division (CDPHE). The APEN must include a
dust control plan that addresses how dust will be kept to a minimum at the construction sites. The
developer must prevent visible emission, off-property transport, and off-vehicle transport of particulate
matter for the sites' activities. haul roads. and haul tnrcks.
2.2.2 Colorado Air Quality Regulations for Demolition Activities
General impacts to air quality from demolition are regulated under Colorado Air Quality Control
Commission Regulations l, 3, 8, and 19. CDPHE enforces these regulations.
Regulation l.m.D.2.h regulates emissions of fugitive dust from demolition.
Regulation 3.tr, which covers the criteria for filing APENs, may require an APEN to be filed for
demolition that involves asbestos. Whether an APEN is required, CDPHE will require compliance for
demolition that involves asbestos under Regulation 8, Part B. Regulation 8, Part B specifies the
procedures and notifications required for asbestos abatement and removal. This rule will affect
demolition of any structure that contains asbestos.
Regulation 8, Part C regulates emissions of lead. Although this regulation does not address demolition
specifically, it is applicable to any source that has the potential for emissions of lead.
Regulation l9 regulates abatement of lead-based paint. This regulation would apply if the structures are
occupied by children or are target housing (in general, target housing means it was constructed before
1978 other than a zero-bedroom dwelling or any housing for the elderly or a person with a disability). If
the structures that are proposed for demolition do not meet these criteria, then this regulation would not be
applicable. If the structures meet these criteria, then abatement, under controlled conditions to reach
certain clearance levels for lead in soil, may be required.
2.2.3 Town of Vail Air Emission Source Regulations
Title 5, Chapter 3, Air Pollution Control, of the Vail Town Code regulates air quality in Vail. In general,
these rules regulate the use of solid fuel burning devices, gas appliances, and gas log hreplaces in
dwelling units, accommodation units, restricted dwelling units, and common areas. Devices that burn
solid fuel are required to be certified in addition to other specific requirements listed in these rules.
Vail's Front Door
Envlronmental Impact Report
c-6
l4lo-Vail Resorts Air EIR (De.26.02)
2.0 Analysis of Air Quality
2.3 POTENTIAL IMPACTS TO AIR QUALITY FROM DEMOLITION
Potential impacts to air quality from demolition will depend on the type of materials contained in the
structures and on the demolition operating procedures. Older buildings may contain asbestos and lead-
based paints. Operating procedures that would minimize the generation of fugitive dust would be
recommended during demolition.
2.3.1 Emissions of Fugitive Dust
It is recommended that the Control Measures and Operating Procedures under Regulation LItr.D.2.h be
implemented, wherever feasible and economically reasonable, to minimize generation of fugitive dust
during demolition. The measures and procedures cited in this regulation include:
. Wetting down, including pre-watering of the work surface,
r Removal ofdirt and mud deposited on improved streets and roads, and
r Wetting down, washing, or covering haulage equipment when necessary to minimize emissions
of fugitive dust during loading and transit.
2.3.2 Asbestos-Containing Material
Existing structures scheduled for demolition may have been constructed before 1979. Structures built
before 1979 have the potential to contain asbestos+ontaining materials (ACM). Because of the age of the
structures, there is potential that they were constructed using ACM.
If asbestos is found in the structures, CDPHE will require an inspection followed by abatement before
demolition can begin. Asbestos is not considered a hazardous waste and is handled as a solid waste, but
must be disposed of at landfills that accept asbestos.
After asbestos has been properly abated, it is not considered an issue for impacts to ambient air.
However, in addition to precautions before demolition, special precautions must also be taken during
demolition.
2.3.3 Lead-Based Paint
Stmctures built before 1978 have the potential to contain lead-based paint. Because of the age of the
structures, there is potential that they were constructed using lead-based paint. If the structures scheduled
for demolition contain lead-based paint, it is expected that demolition would generate insignificant
emissions of lead. Instead, the lead would predominantly remain in the refuse material, where it would be
retained on the painted surfaces or in large flakes of paint that would not disperse into the air. Abrasive
activities, such as sanding or sawing of materials coated with lead-based paint, may have the potential to
result in small amounts of emissions of lead.
In general, emissions of lead that result from demolition of structures that contain lead-based paint may
not be specifically regulated; however, this activity may still create liabilities ifprecautions are not taken.
It is recommended, if feasible, that the Control Measures and Operating Procedures under Regulation
l.lII.D.2.h be implemented-
In addition, appropriate health and safety measures must be taken during demolition to protect worker
exposure to any potential hazardous air pollutant emisstons.
l4lo-Vail Resorts Air EIR (Dec.26.02) VailrS FfOnt Door
Environmental Impact Report
c-1
2.0 Analysis of Air Quality
o 2.4 CONSTRUCTION PHASE IMPACTS
During the construction phase of Vail's Front Door, sources of air pollution will include fugitive dust
from demolition, earth-moving and material handling, vehicle traffic on paved and unpaved surfaces, and
tailpipe emissions from diesel-powered earthmoving equipment. Lnpacts from these sources will be
limited to the construction period and are not expected to affect the overall air quality of the area.
Emissions of dust will vary day to day, depending on the level of activity, the specific activity, and
meteorological conditions. Emissions will not be continuous and will have a definable beginning and end.
ln addition, these impacts can be minimized by applying control measures. It is expected that any
impacts will be minimal and should not exceed Colorado's ambient air quality standards.
2.4.1 Demolition, Earth-Moving and Material Handling Activities
Fugitive dust will be generated from demolition, rough grading, excavation, cut-and-fill operations, and
material storage and handling. These emissions can result from both the transfer of materials and from
wind erosion. Material that would typically be susceptible to wind erosion would be dry or freshly
disturbed surfaces.
Soil and foundations were investigated for the Vail's Front Door project. A summary of subsurface
conditions is presented here to characterize soil and existing fill.
The investigation of the soil and foundations for Vail's Front Door (Koechlein 2002b) characterizes the
subsurface conditions as existing fill, topsoil, or road base underlain by either a dense to very dense sandy
gravel with cobbles and boulders or a dense to very dense, silty sand with some gravel. 'l'he existing fill is
characterized as a loose to medium dense, silt, sandy gravel with some cobbles.
The investigation of the soil and foundations for the Proposed Parking Garage (Koechlein 2000)
characterizes the subsurface conditions as asphalt underlain by dry to wet, medium dense to dense, silty,
gravelly sand with cobbles, a dry to wet, loose to medium dense, gravelly sand or moist, medium dense to
very dense, sandy, bravely cobbles and boulders.
It will likely be necessary to control wind-blown dust by wet suppression for the tlpe of fine particle silt
and clay described here. The moisture may act as a natural mitigation measure for areas were subsurface
soil moisture may be present, such as described for the proposed parking garage. Both investigations
report that the potential for radon gas in the subsurface strata of mountain terrain is likely, but low.
Radon is therefore not considered a concern.
Fugitive dust from demolition, material handling, and excavations can be managed to comply with local
regulations. Emissions of fugitive dust from the type of construction described here are commonly
controlled by wet suppression, compaction of soil, and by minimizing the disturbance of storage piles.
Fugitive dust from some demolition may be difficult to control. The general strategy for demolition
should consider minimizing generation of fugitive dust.
Vail's Front Door
Environmental Impact Report
c-8
1430-Vail Resons Air EIR (Dec.26.02)
2.0 Analysis of Air Quality
2.4.2 Unpaved Travel Surfaces
Emissions of fugitive dust are also generated when a vehicle travels across an unpaved surface. The force
of the wheels on the road surface pulverizes surface materials, and particles are lifted and dropped from
the rolling wheels. Mechanical turbulence created by the vehicles is also a factor in generating fugitive
dust plumes. The quantity of emissions is a factor of both surface silt and water content and vehicle
weight. Emissions of fugitive dust from unpaved road surfaces are also caused by wind erosion.
The heavily traveled unpaved surfaces such as on-site access roads, parking lots, and laydown areas can
be watered as necessary to minimize dust generation during the construction phase. A schedule of surface
treatment such as regular watering will reduce fugitive dust by as much as 50 percent. Surface
improvements, such as paving or adding gravel or slag to an unpaved road will decrease dust emissions.
Limiting vehicle speed, weight, and the number of vehicles on the road will also control emissions from
unpaved roads. Rain and snowfall can also act as natural mitigation measures.
2.4.3 Paved Travel Surfaces
Emissions of dust from paved roads occur when vehicles travel over loose material that has been
deposited on the paved surface and then is re-entrained. Traffic passing from unpaved surfaces to paved
roadways can create both mud and dirt deposits on the paved surface (referred to as "track out"),
generating additional emissions of road dust. Again, the quantity of emissions is a factor of surface
material, silt and water content, and vehicle weight.
Control measures for paved surfaces are typically both preventative and mitigative. Preventative control
measures prevent material from being deposited onto the surface. These measures include minimizing
"track out" by periodic washing of the unpaved or paved surfaces of intersections, gravelling road
entryways, washing vehicle wheels, and covering truckloads. Mitigative measures attempt to remove
material that has been deposited on road surfaces, such as using street sweepers to periodically clean
paved surfaces or water flushing. Other control measures can include limiting vehicle speed and weight
and the number of vehicles on the road. Because of the limited scope of roads at construction sites,
mitigative measures can be used successfully.
2.4.4 T ailpipe Em issions from Diesel -Fueled Earth-Movi n g Equ i pment
Tailpipe emissions from diesel-fueled earthmoving equipment may result in a temporary increase of
concentrations of PMro and other pollutants in ambient air. Diesel exhaust from heavy equipment may
accumulate in the area during inversions and contribute a short-term local impact to air quality.
Minimizing construction activities that generate dust during inversions can mitigate local impacts to air
quality. High exhaust velocities and temperatures will augment dispersal of pollutants in tailpipe
emissions; thus, ground-level concentrations of these pollutants near the proposed development site will
be minimal.
2.4.5 Summary of lmpacts During Gonstruction Phase
ln summary, emissions of fugitive dust will be generated from demolition, earth moving and material
handling, vehicle traffic on paved and unpaved surfaces, and tailpipe emissions from diesel-powered
earthmoving equipment. Tailpipe emissions will be generated from diesel-fueled construction equipment.
Dust emissions can be mitigated by wet suppression, soil compaction, minimizing disturbance of storage
Vail's Front Door
Environmental Impact Report
c-9
1430-Vail Resorts Air EIR (Dec.26.02)
piles, adding gravel to or paving unpaved surfaces, limiting vehicle speed, weight, and the number of
vehicles on the road, minimizing "track out," street sweepers, and limiting construction during inversions.
Tailpipe emission can be mitigated by minimizing construction activities that generate dust during
inversions.
Fugitive dust and tailpipe emissions will be limited to the construction period. It is expected that impacts
from fugitive dust and tailpipe emission will be minimal because construction areas are small and control
measures can be applied.
2.5 OPERATION PHASE IMPACTS
Operation of Vail's Front Door may have a small impact on local air quality because of the anticipated
small increase in vehicular traffic, boilers, emergency generators, and cooling associated with the
projects.
A small increase in the local population is expected along with a small rise in vehicle traffic in the area.
This additional vehicle traffic may result in slight increases in fugitive dust and tailpipe emissions.
Roads will be paved to mitigate fugitive dust emissions from vehicle traffic. Paved roads can also be
cleaned periodically to reduce the accumulation of surface material that would generate fugitive dust.
Tailpipe emissions from the additional vehicles may also result in slight increases of PMle as well as of
other pollutants, but the additional impact on local air quality is expected to be minimal relative to
contributions from vehicle traffic on I-70 and general vehicle traffic in the Town of Vail.
It is anticipated that small boilers and emergency generators will be associated with the projects.
Depending on the size and operating schedules of this equipment, it may be necessary to file one or more
APENs with the State of Colorado. Boilers with a capacity of 5 million British thermal units Btu per hour
will require an APEN. Emergency generators with a horsepower (hp) rating greater than 260 or that
operate more than 250 hours per year or with a horsepower rating of more than 180 and that operate more
than 100 hours per year also require an APEN. All combustion flue gases would be vented througlr
devices that meet standard practice for air pollution control. Overall, this equipment should not
significantly alter the local air quality.
Exposed soil areas will be revegetated as construction progresses, mitigating emissions of fugitive dust
during operation.
Vail's Front Door
Environmental Impact Report
c-t0
1430-Vail Resorts Air EIR (D€c.26.02)
o
3.0 NOISE
3.1 EXISTING NOISE BACKGROUND
Noise standards and sound measurement equipment have been designed to account for the sensitivity of
human hearing to different frequencies. This varying sensitivity is accommodated by applying "A-
Weighted" corection factors. This correction de-emphasizes the very low and very high frequencies of
sound in a mann€r similar to the response of the human ear. The primary assumption is that the A-
weighted decibel (dBA) is a good correlation to a human's subjective reaction to norse.
ln general, an urban residential area at night is 40 dBA; a residential area during the day is 50 dBA; a
typical construction site is 80 dBA; a subway train at 20 feet is 90 dBA; and a jet takeoff at 200 feet is
120 dBA.
A current analysis of noise in the Vail area (Washington 2001) estimated existing and future noise levels
throughout the Vail Valley. Assuming that the primary source of noise in this area is l-70, this analysis
estimated that the maximum I -hour average noise level near the proposed locations is currently 58. I dBA
and is expected to increase to 60.2 dBA by the year 2020.
3.2 NOISE REGULATIONS IN THE TOWN OF VAIL
Title 5, Public Health and Safety, Chapter I (5-l-7, Noise Prohibited) of the Vail Town Code regulates
sources of noise. The regulated noise level for sources located on private property is established at the
boundary of the property. Sources in all residential areas, except areas zoned for high density multiple-
family (HDMF) development, are limited to a maximum of 55 decibels from 7:00 a.m. to I l:00 p.m. and
50 decibels from I l:00 p.m. to 7:00 a.m. Construction is allowed up to 90 decibcls from 7:00 a.m. to 7:00
p.m.
These rules also regulate noise liom motor vehicles. These rules apply at all times. Vehicles less than
10,000 pounds gross vehicle weight, are limited to 80 decibels at a distance of 25 feet. Vehicles greater
than 10,000 pounds are limited to 90 decibels at a distance of 25 feet. It is unlawful for any person to idle
or permit the idling of the engine of any truck or any motor vehicle for a period in excess of 20 minutes.
It is also unlawful for any person to permit any idling of an engine of any unattended truck or any motor
vehicle except for refrigeration vehicles within the Lionsheads Mixed Use l,Lionshease Mixed Use 2,
Commercial Core I or the Commercial Core 2 zone Districts of Vail.
A permit is required for a business or corporation to operate sound-amplifying equipment.
3.3 NOISE IMPACTS DURING CONSTRUCTION PHASE
Tablc I presents typical noise levels for construction equipment at a distance of 15 meters (45 feet)
(Crocker 1982). These valucs assume the equipment is operating al full power.
Vail's Front Door
Environmentat Impacr -.8-orT
l4J0-Vail Rcsofls Air EIR (Dec.26.02)
3.0 Noise
TABLE 1
TYPICAL CONSTRUCTION NOISE LEVELS
Equipment Category Noise Level at 45 ft (dBA)
Dump Truck 88
Portable Rock Drill 88
Concrete Mixer Truck 85
Pneumatic tool 85
Crader 85
Front-End Loader 84
Mobile Crane 83
Excavator 82
Backhoe 8l
Dozer '18
Generator 78
The typical noise 45 feet from a constnrction site would be 85 dBA because the construction equipment
can be spread throughout a construction site and may not be operating concurrently. This value and the
data presented above indicate that there will be a temporary increase in ambient noise that will be limited
to the construction phase of the project. The propagation of noise depends on many factors including
atmospheric conditions, ground cover, and the present of any natural or man-made barriers. As a general
nrle, noise decreases by approximately 6 dBA with every doubling of the distance from the source (Bell
1982). Therefore, noise levels at various distances from the construction site can be predicted and are
shown in Table 2.
TABLE 2
PREDICTED NOISE NEAR CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITIES
Distance from construction site
(meters)Predicted Noise Level (dBA)
l5 85',
30 79
60 IJ
t20 67
240 6l
I Appmximated t)?icalnoise level at 15 meteTs ftom a construction sitc.
Noise generated by the project would occur only during construction and the activities will be
intermittent. Noise from construction will not be generated during nighttime hours. Noise from
construction will be temporary and will briefly add to existing highway noise. Construction will be
completed in a timely manner. As long as construction takes place within the prescribed regulatory period
of 7:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m., the resulting noise should be within the local noise limit for construction.
Vail's Front Door
Environmental Impact Report
c-r2
1430-Vail Rcsorts Air EIR (Dec.26.02)
3.0 Noise
3.4 NOISE IMPACTS FROM OPERATION PHASE
The impacts to noise during the operation phase will be related predominantly to increased automobile
traffic. Table 3 (USDOT 1995) presents typical noise levels for automobiles at a distance of 15 meters
(45 fee0 at speeds ranging from 50 miles per hour (mph) to 70 mph.
TABLE 3
TYPICAL AUTOMOBILE NOISE LEVELS
Speed (mph)Noise at 45 ft (dBA)
50 62
55 64
60 65
65 66.5
70 68
The increase in the population may result in a slight rise in traffic along Town of Vail roads. Traffic noise
is a combination of traffic density and vehicle speed. The resulting increase in vehicle noise from traffic,
which would be much less dense and slower than the highway traffrc, would be barely perceptible over
the existing ambient noise that is dominated by vehicle noise from I-70 and general traffic in the Town of
Vail.
3.5 NOISE MITIGATION FROM OPERATION PHASE
The increase in noise caused by operation of the proposed development projects is predicted to be
minimal and barely perceptible over existing ambient noise. Therefore, noise mitigation is not necessary.
Vail's Front Door
Envtronmental Impact *T:rl
1430-vail Resons Air EIR (Dec.26.02)
4.0 oDoR
4.1 COLORADO ODOR REGULATIONS
Colorado Air Quality Control Regulation No. 2.A.1 regulates odors in residential and commercial areas.
This regulation states, "it is a violation if odors are detected after the odorous air has been diluted with
seven (7) or more volumes of odor free air."
4.2 VAIL ODOR REGULATIONS
The Town of Vail evaluates odor associated with construction and development under Title 12, Zoning
Regulations, Chapter 12, Environmental Lnpact Reports, of the Vail Town Code.
4.3 ODOR IMPACTS DURING CONSTRUCTION PHASE
Temporary impacts tb odor from the constmction phase may result from exhaust gases from diesel
equipment or fiom short-temr construction activities such as roofing applications. As with air pollutant
emissions from this equipment, dispersal of odors would be augmented by high exhaust velocities and
temperatures and would also be related to various meteorological factors, such as wind speed and wind
direction, that would limit or enhance dispersal of these odors. Odors can be mitigated by limiting
construction during adverse meteorological conditions.
Because construction is expected to occur during the daytime when there would be better conditions for
odor dispersal, potential impacts to odor from construction would be limited.
4.4 OPERATION PHASE IMPACTS
The activities associated with operation ofthese development projects in Vail are not expected to result in
any sigaificant impacts to odor.
Sewage from the development will be handled by the Eagle fuver Sewage and Sanitation District sewage
treatment plant, thus eliminating the potential for odors related to sewage at each location.
Vail's Front Door
Environmental Impact Report
c-t4
l4l0-Vail Resods Air EIR (Dec.26.02)
5.0 REFERENCES
Bell, Lewis H. 1982. lndustrial Noise Control, Fundamentals and Applications, Marcel Dekker, Inc., New
York, New York.
Crocker, M.J., Kessler, F.M. 1982. Noise and Noise Control, Volume II. CRC Press, Inc., Chemic Rubber
Company, Cleveland, OH.
Hancock, R.K., Air Pollution Control Division, Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment.
Personal Communication (RE: status of Town of Vail attainment for criteria pollutants] with
Susan Riggs, Greystone Environmental Consultants, October 31,2002.
Koechlein Consulting Engineers, Inc., 2000. Soils And Foundation Investigation Proposed Parking
Garage, Lot P-3 and Lot J, Job No. 00-106, Vail, Colorado, July I l.
Koechlein Consulting Engineers, Inc., 2002a. Soils And Foundation Investigation Proposed Lionshead
Redevelopment Marriott Property and West Day Lot, Job No. 02-057, Vail, Colorado, July 8.
Koechlein Consulting Engineers, Inc., 2002b. Soils And Foundation lnvestigation Vail's Front Door, Lot
2, Section 8, T.5 South, R.80 West, 6ft P.M. and Area Southeast of the Lodee at Vail
Condominiums, Job No. 02-107, Vail, Colorado, September 27.
U.S. Department of Transportation (USDOT), Federal Highway Administration, Office of Environment
and Planning, Noise and Air Quality Branch, I 995. Highway Traffic Noise Analysis and
Abatement Policy and Guidance, June.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), 2002a. AirData, Select ReportMap, Eagle County,
Colorado, http://www.epa. eov/air/data/repsco.html?co-08037-Eaele%20Co-CO, October.
EPA. 2002b. AirData, Monitor Summary Report,
http://oaspub.epa.gov/airsdata,/adaqs.summary?geo=&cnty08037&geoinfo=%o3Fcoo/o7E08037o/o
7EEagleVo2520Coo/o7ECO&year:_&fld=county&fld=stabbr&fld:regn&rpp=25, October.
EPA. 1995. Compilation of Air Pollutant Emission Factors, AP42, Fifth Edition, Volume l: Stationary
Point and Area Sources, section updates (2002) http://www.eoa.eov/ttn/chief/ap42l.
Washington Infrastructure. 2001 Noise Slrrd1,. ppgtr..4 for the Town of Vail.
1430-Vail Resons Air EIR (Doc.26-02) Vail'S FrOnt DOOr
Environmental Impact Report
c-15
o o
o
o
x
o
o
7101 Wsg Yale
Avenue No 601
Den\€r, Colorado 80227
303-986-6658
URBAN DESIGN GROUP
1621 18r'Street, Suite 200
Denver, CO 80202
Attn.: Ms. Tracy Hart,
Architect
Re: Engineering Geologic Hazard Study, Lodge-at-Vail Front Door Project, Vail'
Coforado. (Revised from report dated October 8,2002)
Job No. 573
Gentlemen:
As requested, we have conducted an engineering geologic hazards study for the
planned additions to the Lodge-at-Vail Front Door Project in the Town of Vail, Eagle
County, Colorado. The study area is in the west-central part of Section I' T. 5 S.' R. 80
W. in the "old town" area of Vail in the Gore Creek Valley. lt lies south of Gore Creek
and immediately west of the mouth of Mill Creek, a major tributary of Gore Creek. The
project area is irregularly shaped, with its northern side about 8120 feet long, its eastern
side about 770 teelwide, and its westem side about 185 feet wide. lt comprises about 6
acres.
Our objectives have been 1.) to generally outline geologic conditions pertinent to the
property, with particular reference to geologic hazards such as landslides, debris flows,
avalanches and rock falls; 2.) to evaluate the probable impact of those conditions on the
planned construction; and 3.) conversely, to assess the probable impact of the planned
construction activities on the natural geologic conditions.
During the course of our work we have researched published geologic maps
pertinent to the project area; stereoscopically studied aerial photographs of the site and
vicinity; and geologically reconnoitered the site and vicinity (on May 14,2002). Also, we
reviewed a geotechnical report prepared by Koechlein Consulting Engineers. This
report provided pertinent subsurface information on the southwestern part (valley slope
sector) of the project areat. Geologic maps, Figures 1 and 2, have been prepared to
graphically present our geologic observations and interpretations within the study area
and general vicinity.
The southwestern half of the study area lies on the foot of the southern slope of the
Gore Creek Valley. Elevations there range from about El. 8190 feet to about El. 8250
feet. The forested hillside there slopes on angles ranging from about 2:1 to 2.7:1. The
I Koechlein Consulting Engineers, 2002, Soils and foundation investigation, Vail's Front
Door:, Lot 2, Sec. 8, T. 5 S., R. 80 W., and area southeast of the Lodge-at-Vail
Condominiums, Vail Colorado: for Vail Resorts Development Co', Avon, CO.; Job
No.02-107.
R. J. lrish
Consulting Engineering
Geologist, Inc.
December 27,2002
Vail's Front Door
Environmental Impact Report
Page D-l
Consultanl to Desrgners, Contractors, Planners
northeastem half of the property lies on the floor of the Gore Creek Valley. The valley
floor originally sloped very gently northwestward, but construction activities already have
modified that slope considerably by both cutting and filling2.
Five duplex units and 1 triplex unit (the Residence Club) are to be constructed
across the western third of the hillside sector of the project area. On the neighboring
valley floor a guest rooms addition and spa are to be added to the Lodge-at-Vail, a Ski
Club Building is to be centered about 150 feet south of that addition near the center of
the projecl area, a Skier Services Building is to be constructed immediately east of the
Ski Club Building in the northeastern quadrant of the project area, and a loading services
elevator is to be built in the northeastern corner of the project area (Fig. 2.).
Additionally, subsurface parking garages are to be constructed under the central
part of the Residence Club area, under the Ski Club Building, and under the open area
between the several facilities on the valley floor. The garage structures on the valley
floor presumably will be placed in an open cut that subsequently is bacKilled over the
garage structure. The garage structure under the Residence Club area, to be about 65
feet wide by 200 feet long, is to be placed in a backfilled open cut also, then parts of 4 of
the planned Residence Club buildings are to be constructed on the backfill soils. The
remainder are to be sited on the natural soils underlying the adjacent natural slope. The
planned Residence Club garage is to be set on a level pad at E|.8190 feet. Two
elevators and 2 stairs will provide access to the residences above.
SITE GEOLOGIC CONDITIONS
Sedimentary rock strata of the Pennsylvanian age (about 289 to 320 million years
ago) Minturn Formation constitute bedrock beneath the floor and the neighboring slopes
of the Gore Creek Valley. Although ledges of rock crop out along the valley slopes, for
the most part the bedrock beneath those slopes and the valley floor is mantled by soils
derived by alluvial, glacial and slopewash processes. The bedrock strata of the Minturn
Formation incorporate interbedded sandstones and siltstones, some of which are
conglomeratic; shales; and a few thick limestone beds. These rocks typically are hard,
strong, and thin to thick bedded, and prominently jointed, but the joints tend to be
several feet apart. These strata tend to be differentially weathering-weakened to a depth
of several feet to several tens of feet. They appear to dip about 10o westward, thus
along the valley slope (rather than into, or out of the slope), and appear to strike north-
northeastward within the project area.
The bedrock strata across the hillside area on which the 5 planned duplexes and 'l
triplex are to be constructed are covered by morainal soils (Figs. 1 and 2). These soils
were deposited by one or more of the multiple glaciers that coursed down the Gore
Valley from cirques located near the crest of the Gore Range to the east during the lce
Age. This lce Age began in this part of Colorado about 2 million years ago, and ended
only about 8,000 years ago. Morainal soils typically are an heterogeneous mixture of
silts and sands with abundant gravels and cobbles, along with scattered boulders.
2 Sectors of the project area underlain by fill have not been delineated on the geologic
maps.
R. J. lrish
Consulting Engineering
Geologist, Inc.
Vail's Front Door
Environmental Impact Report
Page D-2
Some of the boulders are quite large, on the order of a Volkswagen Beetle and larger.
These morainal soils across the wedge-shaped area in the western sector of the
property where the Residence Club structures are to be constructed appear to be
generaily in excess of 20 feet thick, but borings drilled there3 were terminated before
intercepting bedrock. Typically, ground water seasonally flows within these soils,
generally in a band immediately above the buried bedrock surface. As the morainal soils
tend to be permeable, but enatically so, the flow volumes are expected to be errativ both
in volume and location.
Othenvise, the northeastern half of the project area is sited on the northwestern toe
of a large alluvial fan deposited by Mill Creek across the floor of the Gore Creek Valley
mainly since the termination of the lce Age. This fan is about 3500 feet wide along its
toe and about 2000 feet long from its apex at the mouth of the Mill Creek Valley to its toe
along the Gore Creek channel (Fig. 1). The deposition of this delta-like fan by soils-
charged floods pushed the Gore Creek channel almost over to the northern side of the
valley floor.
Typically these alluvial fan soils are tonentially bedded silts, sands and gravels that
are partly cobbley and bouldery. The deposit probably ranges to several tens of feet
thick. Ground water is expected to saturate these soils to an elevation a few feet above
the elevation of Gore Creek adjacent to the fan toe.
The fan soils are expected to be underlain by a series of glacier-related outwash
and morainal soils, and by alluvial soils deposited by both the modern and lce-Age Gore
Creek. Those soils, ranging in composition from silts, clays and sands through gravels,
cobbles and boulders, reportedly have aggraded the buried bedrock floor of the valley
more than 100 feet. This is a primary aquifer for the Town of Vail.
ASSESSMENT OF GEOLOGIC HAZARDS
Geologic conditions across the p@ect area appear to be relatively benign, although
most of the area is situated on a large alluvial fan that has been actively constructed by
the flows of Mill Creek for thousands of years. That process of fan building undoubtedly
will continue intermittently for thousands of years hence. Potential flood flows of Mill
Creek could jump the existing channel and spread out across the fan to dump their bed
load of soil and rock debris, thus pose a potential hazard to the planned development.
The risk of these events, as well as their magnitude, should be assessed by an
engineering hydrologist. The soils of the alluvial fan have been torrentially deposited,
thus may be subject to differential settlement if wetted.
Otherwise, we did not discover any geologic evidence of potential geologic hazards,
such as landslides, debris flows or avalanches, that should influence the development of
the 2 parcels. Large boulders in the morainal soils of the valley slope sector of the study
area are well lodged in those soils, and are not likely to be dislodged by natural
3 As reported by Koechlein Consulting Engineers, report dated September 27,2002, Job
No.02-107.
R. J. lrish
Consulting Engineering
Geologist, Inc.
Vail's Front Door
Environmental Impact Report
Page D-3
processes. On the other hand, some of these boulders could be dislodged by
construction/excavation activities, thus care should be exercised when working in that
area.
The garage structure under the hillside sector of the property will underlie 4 of the 6
Residence Club buildings. lt is to be placed in a backfilled open cut. The maximum
height of the 200-foot long back wall cut of the excavation would be on the order of 35
feet. This excavation is expected to be mainly in morainal soils, but the bottom part of
the cut, particularly on the up-hill side, could intercept the interbedded sandstones,
siltstones, and shales of the Minturn Formation. The expected low, westward dip of the
bedrock strata at this site should enhance the stability of those strata exposed by the cut
slope excavations. Ground water flows are likely to be intercepted, particularly during the
Spring and early Summer months. These flows are likely to range from small to
moderate. The soils should be "common excavation" material that incorporates
scattered large boulders. The bedrock, on the other hand, may be mainly rippable, but
light blasting may be needed locally to dislodge and disaggregate the thicker, stronger
sandstone beds. Ground reinforcement or support alternatives for the morainal soils
exposed across the back wall and the side walls of the excavation include soil nails or
steel l-beam soldier piles and lagging, with the soldier piles set in pre-bored holes; or the
soil-faced walls could be sloped back to about 2:1. Boulders are likely to impede the
installation of a few of the soil nails or the soldier piles. The tops of the piles could be cut
off to a depth of 3 feet or so and covered with engineered fill for aesthetic purposes. The
bedrock could be reinforced by rock bolts. The support system, of course, should be
designed by a geotechnical engineer in cooperation with an engineering geologist.
The 5 planned duplex units and the 1 triplex unit that are to be set on the hillside
sector of the development are to be placed on individual, level pads of about 1000
square feet per residence, and stepped up about 5 feet between residences. The back
walls for those pad excavations are expected to be about 5 feet to 8 feet high. The cuts
to create the pads for 4 of the structures are expected to be partly in reworked (i. e.,
backfill) morainal soils and partly in the in-place morainal soils. This may complicate the
building foundation geotechnical criteria because the natural and reworked soils are
likely to have different strengths, thus different bearing characteristics. The cuts to
create pads for the remaining 2 structures are expected to be in the natural morainal
soils outside the area of the planned garage excavation. The cut slopes for these 6
pads, consequently, should be sloped to about 2:1 and re-vegetated; or, if cut near-
vertically, they will need to be reinforced (e. g., by soil nails) or buttressed by large
boulders. Only small quantities of ground water, if any, are likely to be intercepted.
Locally the bedrock may be intercepted by cuts for the buildings adjacent to the area of
the backfilled excavation, but it is expected to be weathering-weakened to any potential
depth of excavation, thus will need to be sloped at about 1:1 , or reinforced by rock bolts
or supported. The choice of reinforcement or support should be premised on a visual
observation and assessment of the bedrock by an engineering geologist. Deep cuts and
fills for these buildings should be avoided. lf that is not possible, the cuts and fills should
be designed by a geotechnical engineer in cooperation with an engineering geologist
based on the results of appropriate geotechnical investigations of subsurface conditions.
R. J. lrish
Consulting Engineering
Geologist, lnc.
Vail's Front Door
Environmental Impact Report
Page D-4
Proper placement of engineered fill to close the garage structure excavation and on
which to found the 5 duplex buildings and the single triplex building will be critical to the
structural security of those structures. This should be assured by constant monitoring of
the placement of the fill by an experienced geotechnical engineer, who also should
provide the geotechnical criteria for the fill and fill placement.
Additional borings drilled to at least 10 feet below the planned excavation invert
elevation of the Residence club garage site should be programmed to investigate
subsurface conditions within that area and to provide soil samples for laboratory teJting
of their e-ngineering performance characteristics. The geotechnical/geologic informatioi
derived from these borings is needed to guide the detailed engineering planning and
cost estimating for, and design of the excavation and of the garage structure to be
constructed in it. That information is needed also to guide the design and placement of
a ground support system forthe excavation.
The inverts of the excavations for the planned singl+story and double-story garage
structures to be constructed on the floor of the valley are to be as much as 40 feetbelow
the, existing ground surface. We conclude that the excavations are likely to be in the
soils of the Mill Creek alluvial fan and possibly the upper part of the glacio-fluvial and
morainal soils below. The alluvial fan and glacio-fluvial soils are expected to be
torrentially bedded sands, silts, and gravels; the morainal soils are expected to be non-
bedded cobbley, silty sands and gravels with scattered boulders. consequently, the
walls of the excavation will need to be supported (unless laid back, but that is an unlikely
alternative). Commonly specified alternatives include soil nails or soldier piles. These
excavations may need to be dewatered.
Borings should be drilled to explore subsurface soil conditions within the planned
footprints of the garage structures to be sited on the valley floor to provide direct, site-
specific information on the physical nature of the soils and possibly bedrock at these
sites, and to provide soil samples for laboratory testing of their engineering performance
characteristics. The resulting geotechnical/geologic information will be critical to the
development of plans for the excavations and their support, the creation of design
criteria for the placement of the backfill, and the engineering design of the garage
structure.
The 40-mile long Gore Fault, a major mountain-bounding structure on the western
side of the Gore Range, lies about 5 miles north-northeast of the project site (at its
closest approach); the SO-mile long Mosquito Fault lies about 10 miles to the east, the
24-mile long, northwest-trending Williams Fork Mountain Fault terminates about 20 miles
northeast of the site, and the several faults of the San Luis Graben terminate (at their
northern ends) about 28 miles south of the site. Some seismologists consider these
faults to be potentially active; but most seismologists, nonetheless, consider the risk of a
strong earthquake generated by any of those faults or any other fault within 100 miles of
the project site to be low to insignificanl during the next 100 to 200 years. This is not to
say that this part of Colorado is seismically quiescent, but the earthquakes generated by
the reactivation of faults in this region should have small magnitudes. Earthquake
intensities of V to Vl, with peak accelerations of 0.059, we conclude, are unlikely to be
exceeded at this site during the life of the project.
R. J. lrish
Consulting Engineering
Geologist, Inc.
Vail's Front Door
Environmental Impact Report
Page D-5
Othenryise, the construction activities planned for the valley floor and hillside sectors
of the property should not significantly disturb geologic conditions there, provided the
planned large and deep excavations are appropriately supported, backfills are properly
engineered, and snowmelt and rain water are not allowed to pond in a manner that will
promote seepage into the soils and raise pore water pressures there, particularly on the
hillside sector of the property. These qualifications are achievable with the present state of the geotechnical/engineering geologic practice. Consequently, the planned
construction activities, in our opinion, should not increase the geology-related hazard
risk to other properties or structures, or to public buildings, roads, streets, rights-of-way,
easements, utilities or other facilities.
We have appreciated this opportunity to contribute to the planned development. lf
you have any questions, or would like to discuss any aspects of this report, please call.
Robt. Jamfs lrish. P. G.
Consulting Engineering Geologist
R. J. lrish
Consulting Engineering
Geologist, lnc.
Vail's Front Door
Environmental Impact Report
Paee D-6
Yours truly,
GEOLOGIC LEGEND
-.---.-....-.--
., -'-.---,:-::::--::. - -- - --.
=::=::#::/-i
i;
e ?:1.-;/-jFf
fffil ALLUVIAL FAN: ALLUVIAL SOILS DIPOSITED BY MILL CREEK
','- l5:f,qgt I oNTO THE FLOoR oF THE GORE cREEK VALLEy; pooRLy
/l
'- "--\f-,=;:l GLAC|AL-DEPOSIED SOILS (MORA|NE) BLANKETTNG MTNTURN '-.--.:*---l uln/rm I FoRMATtoN (BEDRocK); MoRATNE FoirMED oF HETERocENo FORMATION (BEDROCK); MORAINE FORMED OF HETEROGENOUS
MIXTURE OF SILTS, AND SANDS, WITH ABUNDANT GRAVEL AND
COBBLES, AND SCATTERED SMALL TO LARGE BOULDERS;
MINTURN FORMATION COIilPRISES INTERBEDDED SANDSTONES,
SILTSTONES, AND SHALES, AND A FEW PROMINENT Llt\iltSTONE
BEDS.
ij;::-,=i;3a ar - z.CONTACT
LOCATED
BETWEIN GEOLOGIC
APPROXIMATELY.
MATERIALS, INTERPRETED,
f\';"i
, *,{i i i t,.ri
-,;1 1;!{!;. .-=-.;;'{:}$:,$[
, . ',i:PLANNED DEVELOPMENT AREA ^' *':'--':t - :-- ---;t-'-"
"/-E;-:+
;1=1p;1-.i S ii 1:l*g=
,:'Qm/Pm:i .,'':*
0 300 600 1200 :
SCALI IN FTIT
W.'' i,!--El FILL: PLACED FoR INTERSTATE HIcHWAY l-70.
ALLUVIUM: STREA,I'/ DEPOSITED SOILS, INCLUDING SANDS,
GRAVELS, CLAYS AND SILTS. LOCALLY COBBLEY AND BOULDERY.
BIDDED/INTERBEDDED SILTS, SANDS, GRAVELS, IN PART
COBBLFY AND BOULDERY.
ALLUVTAL FAN/DIBR|S FAN COMPLEX FORMED OF SOILS
DEPOSITED BY SPRADDLE CREEK AND MIDDLE CREEK:
N/AINLY SILTS, CLAYS, SAND, IN PART GRAVELLY, COBBLT/
AND BOULDERY.
R.J - iRISH
CoNSULTING ENG.INEERINc.GEOLOGIST, INC.
GEOLOGIC MAP
LODGT AT VAIL
FRONT DOOR PROJECT
VAIL, COLORADO
DATE: 1o/8/02 Vail's Front Door
Environmental Impact Report
Page D-7 1
o
GIOLOGIC MAP
DEVILOPMENT AREAS
LODGE AT VAIL
FRONT DOOR PROJECT
VAIL, COLORADO
Vail's Front Door
Qar
QriVFm -
Environmental ImPact RePort ]
Page D-8 -
;,'*il. - -
i :... . '.,
: -;':\:-.=.-\-'i: -':l ).:
R.J. IRISH
CONSULTINC ENGINEERII'{6.'6EOLOGIST, lNC.
NOTE: SEE FIGURE 1 FOR A GEOLOGIC LEGEND.1o/8/02
o o
o
o
x
o
o
BIOLOGY AND WETLANDS IMPACT ASSESSMENT
FOR VAIL'S PROPOSED FRONT DOOR
DEVELOPMENT PROJECT IN VAIL, COLORADO
FOR THE
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT
Prepared for:
Vail Resorts Development Company
137 Benchmark Road
Avon, Colorado 8 1620
Prenared hv:
Greystone Environmental Consultants
5231 South Quebec Street
Greenwood Village, Colorado 801 I I
December 2002
Vail's Front Door
Environmental Impact Report
E-1
TABLE OF CONTENTS
3.2.1
3.2.2
)-z-)
Vail's Front Door
Environmental Impact Report
E-2
I 430-VailBiology-EIR(Dec.26.02)
Tiblc ofCor 6 s
Table I Wildlife Species with Potential to Occur in the Project Area l0
Vail's Front Door
Envlronmental Impact Report
E3
| 430-Vail-Biologr-ElR(D€c.26.02)
SUMMARY OF REPORT
This report evaluates impacts to vegetation, wetlands, and wildlife from the Vail's Front Door proj ect.
The report was developed by Greystone Environmental Consultants to describe local biological
conditions, including existing vegetation, wetlands, and wildlife; applicable local and state regulations;
potential impacts from construction and operation; and mitigation measures. It is anticipated that impacts
that occur during the constnrction phase of the projects will be minimal and should not require special
permits from the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service or the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. A site visit was
conducted on October 1.2002.
It is possible that wildlife within the project area may be affected by construction activities. The
likelihood of this occurring is low because wildlife are expected to avoid project areas as the result of
increased human presence, construction activity, and disturbance ofhabitat. These effects to wildlife are
not expected to have long-term detrimental impacts to the health or status of local populations. No
threatened or endangered plant or wildlife species will be impacted by the proposed project.
Approximately three acres of vegetated habitat will be permanently lost as a result of construction.
Disturbed areas and unoccupied sites will be reclaimed to the original habitat condition.
Vail's Front Door
Environmental Impact Report
E4
| 430-Vail-Biology-EIR(Dcc.26.02)
1.0 VEGETATION
1.1 HAB ITAT CHARACTE RIZATI O N
The area where the majority of the proposed Vail's Front Door redevelopment project will be built is
either previously disturbed and supports reclaimed vegetation species or includes existing structures or
parking lots that are void of any vegetation. This analysis addresses only the areas that support existing
vegetation.
Based on differences in structure and dominant species, two distinct vegetation types were obseryed in the
project area. These vegetation types include mixed woodland and grassland.
The mixed woodland vegetation type is dominated by lodgepole pine (Pinas contorla\ and aspen
(Populus tremuloides), with scattered individuals of Colorado blue spruce (Picea pungens). This
vegetation type is diffused throughout the lower slopes within the proj ect area. The understory is
characterized by bluegrass (Poa spp.), big bluegrass (Poa ampla), Oregon gnpe (Mahonia repens), vetch
(Vicia americana), oatgrass (Danthonia spp.), smooth brome (Bromus inermis), westem wheat grass
(Paseopyrum smithii), bastard toadflax (Comandra umbellata), and false Solomon's seal (Smilacina
stellata). Westem snowberry (Symphoricarpos oreophilus) occurs in areas where the forest canopy is
open.
The grassland vegetation tlpe within the proj ect area occurs either on or at the toe of the treeless ski
slopes. This vegetation type is characterized by both native and introduced species. The introduced
species are a result of reseeding the open, treeless areas. Grass species in these areas consist of bluegtass,
big bluegrass, mountain oatgrass, smooth brome, and western wheat. Needlc grass (Achnatherum spp.)
occurs on drier sites in the grassland habitat.
1.2 THREATENED AND ENDANGERED PLANT SPECIES
No federally listed threatened or endangered (T&E) plant species occur in Eagle County (FWS 2002).
Therefore, the projects associated with Vail's Front Door redevelopment will not affect T&E plant
species. Sensitive plant species identified by the U.S. Forest Service (FS) will not be addressed in this
analysis because no portion of the proposed project occurs on land administered by the FS (Crites 2002).
The Colorado Natural Heritage Program (CNHP) also indicates that there are no known occurrences of
T&E plant species within the project area (Menefee 2002).
1.3 VAIL'S FRONT DOOR - SITE SPECIFIC CONDITIONS AND
ANALYSIS
1.3.1 Vista Bahn Park/Skier Services
The mixed woodland and grassland habitat types were observed at the area of the Vista Bahn Park and
Skier Services area. Uphill of the existing lift loading area is mixed aspen/lodgepole pine forest.
Grassland habitat exists in the area between the forest and the lift loadins area and between the lift and
the existing shops and lodge.
Vail proposes to move the ski lift upslope 90 feet. Two acres of grassland habitat would be disturbed by
this project. The proposed action would not disturb mixed woodland habitats. The construction area,
Vail's Front Door
Environmental Impact Report
E-5
| 430-Vail-Biology-EIR(Dec.26.02)
outside of the footprint for the new ski lift, would be regraded and revegetated with grassland species.
This constnrction therefore would result in no net loss ofgrassland vegetation.
1.3.2 Ski Club
No vegetation exists in the area proposed for the Ski Club building. The proposed construction therefore
would not affect any vegetation.
1.3.3 Residence Club
The mixed woodland habitat type occurs at the proposed Residence Club site. This area supports aspen,
lodgepole pine, and several Colorado blue spruce. Three acres of the mixed woodland habitat type would
be partially or completely removed, including approximately 30 aspen and lodgepole pine trees (these
pine trees exhibit signs ofpine-beetle infestation). The potential for erosion would be increased during the
construction phase of the project because vegetation would be removed and the soil would be disturbed.
These impacts can be reduced by avoiding trees and shrubs whenever possible and by revegetating areas
as quickly as possible after construction.
1.3.4 Lodge at Vail Hotel and Spa Expansion
No vegetation exists in the area proposed for the Lodge at Vail Hotel and Spa Expansion. The proposed
construction therefore would not affect any vegetation.
1.3.5 Lots P3 and J
No vegetation exists in the area proposed for Vail Parking Garage lots P3 and J. The proposed
constmction therefore would not affect anv vecetation.
Vail's Front Door
Environmental Impact Report
E-6
I 430-Vail-Biology-ElR(Dcr.26.02)
2.0 WETLANDS
1 :.1. i- . ::-il.i :r: il',.'r;,,rii::rr' r.'r )'
2.1 SITECHARACTERIZATION
A site reconnaissance conducted on October 1,2002 indicated that none of the project sites supports
wetland habitats. This reconnaissance did not include formal wetland delineations in accordance with the
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (COE) Wetland Mitigation Guidelines (1987). Several of the proposed
projects are, however, near Gore Creek. This drainage supports isolated riverine wetland habitats. Gore
Creek is considered a Waters of the United States. As such, it is included under Section 404 of the Clean
Water Act and the jurisdiction of the COE. Dredge and fill within this creek or within the riverine
wetlands associated with this creek would require a Section 404 Permit. Guidelines for Section 404(bXl)
of the Clean Water Act 404(bXl) require that wetlands be avoided whenever possible and that impacts be
minimized through project actions.
Characteristic plant species along the drainages include groundsel (Senecio spp.), orchard gnss (Dactylis
glomeratus), mountain willow (Sa/ix monticola), and sandbar willow (Sa/rx exigua). The willow species
are wetland indicators and are closely associated with the low areas on the floodplain near surface water.
Seeps and springs that are cornmon on many ofthe slopes in the Vail area have not been observed at any
ofthe proposed project sites.
Current descriptions of the proposed projects indicate no wetlands or other Waters of the United States
would be affected.
2.2 VAIL'S FRONT DOOR SITE.SPECIFIC CONDITIONS AND
ANALYSIS
2.2.1 Vista Bahn Park/Skier Services
No wetlands were observed within or adjacent to this proj ect site; therefore, this project would not affect
wetlands.
2.2.2 Ski Glub
No wetlands were observed within or adjacent to this project site; therefore, this project would not affect
wetlands.
2.2.3 Residence Club
No wetlands were observed within or adj acent to this project site; therefore, this project would not affect
wetlands.
2.2.4 Lodge at Vail Hotel and Spa
No wetlands were observed within or adj acent to this project site; therefore, this project would not affect
wetlands.
Vail's Front Door
Environmental Impact Report
E-7
1430-Vail-Biology-ElR(Dec.26.02)
2.0-Wahds
2.2.5 Lots P3 and J
The proposod Vail Parking Garage site is n€ar Gore Creek. As proposcd, the site would not have direct
impacts on Gore Creeh however, sedimentation could iocrease, especially during the constnrction phase,
because of its proximity to the creek.
Vail's Front Iloor
Environmentd Impact Report
E8
| 430-Vril-BioloS|-ElR(Dcc.2602)
3.0 WILDLIFE
3.1 GENERALDESCRIPTION
lnformation on distribution ofand issues that involve wildlife was obtained through agency contacts and a
field reconnaissance (October l, 2002). The Colorado Division of Wildlife (CDOW), U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service (FWS), FS, and CNHP were contacted.
Species with a potential to occur in the project area and potential impacts caused by the project are listed
in Table l. This table also includes the seasons the species are likely to be present in the project area and
the type of impact ofthe proposed project on the species.
Several wildlife groups are discussed further in the following paragraphs as a result of issues raised by
CDOW and FWS. These include big game, raptors, fisheries, and threatened and endangered species.
3.2 BIG GAME
3.2.1 Mule Deer
CDOW has divided the state into data analysis units (DAU) for management of big game herds. These
DAUs are further divided into game management units (GMU). The project area occurs within mule deer
(Odocoileus hemionus) DAU D-8, also known as the State Bridge Deer DAU, which includes the Vail,
Eagle, and Yampa populations. This DAU contains GMUs 15, 35, 36, and 45. This DAU covers 1,458
square miles; of this area, 343 square miles are winter range, 140 square miles are severe winter range,
and 4l square miles are winter concentration areas. The current estimate of the mule deer population is
19,700 individuals. The provisional herd objective is to reduce the herd to 16,500 mule deer (Graham
2002).
Critical habitat is defined as an activity area that, if lost to a species, would adversely affect it. Critical
habitat includes the I-70 underpass and its migration corridor, the area south of Gore Creek and east ofthe
Eagle River as a migration staging area, and all winter range. The total area of critical habitat within this
DAU is 367 square miles. The proj ect area occurs within summer range, and no critical habitat or
migration corridors are within the project area (Andre 2002, NDIS 2002). Implementation of the project
would not directly affect any critical habitat for mule deer.
3.2.2 Elk
The project area occurs within elk (Cerws elaphus) DAU E-16, also known as the Frying Pan River Elk
DAU, which includes GMUs 44, 444,45, and 47. Estimates of critical habitat use areas were not obtained
from CDOW; however, the project area is within summer range. No critical habitats, migration corridors,
or calving areas are in the project area (Andre 2002, Graham 2002). lmplementation of the project would
not directly affect any critical habitat for elk.
3.2.3 Black Bear
Black bears (lJrsus americants) inhabit the Vail area in and around the proposed projects. Many plant
species found near the proj ect area, such as serviceberry, chokecherry, and currant, provide forage for
bears. Bears also regularly scavenge unprotected trash at residences and businesses in the Vail area
Vail's Front Door
Environmental Impact Report
E-9
1430-Vail-8iolo$/-ElR( Dec.26.02)
3.0 - Wildlifc
(Andre 2002). No critical bear habitats are within the project area (Andre 2002). Implementation of the
project would not directly affect any critical black bear habitat.
Table 1 Wildlife Species with Potential to Occur in the Project Area
Vail's Front Door
Environmental Impact Report
E-10
COMMON NAME SCIENTIFIC
NAME
SENSITIVITY TO
HABITAT LOSS
AND HUMAN
ACTIVITY
TYPE OF
IMPACT'
SEASON OF
POTENTIAL
OCCURRENCE
MAITIMALS
Black bear Ursus americanus Sensitive 2 Year round
Elk Cert:us elaphus Sensitive 2 Year round
Mule deer Odocoileus
hemionus Sensitive Year round
Snowshoe hare Lepus americanus Moderately
sensitive 2 Year round
Bobcat Lynx rufus Sensitive 2 Year round
Red fox Vulpes wlpes Moderately
sensitive 2 Year round
Mountain lion Felis concolor Sensitive 2 Year round
Coyote Canis latrans Minimally sensitive J Year round
Porcupine Erethizon
dorsatum Minimally sensitive J Year round
Marten Martes americana Sensitive t-2 Year round
Red squirrel Sciurius
hudsonicus
Moderately
sensitive J Year round
Deer mouse Peromyscus
maniculatus Minimally sensitive J Year round
Mountain
cottontail
Sylvilagus
nuttallii Minimally sensitive .]Year round
Long-tailed
weasel Mustela frenata
Moderately
sensitive 2 Year round
Red-backed vole Microtis
clethrionomys Sensitive 2 Year round
BIRDS
Bald eagle Ilaliaeetus
leucocephalus Minimally sensitive 3, no habitat in
area Winter
Golden easle Aquila chrysaetos Minimally sensitive 3, occasional use
only for hunting Year round
Pereerine lalcon Falco peregrinus Minimally sensitive 3, occasional use
only for hunting Summer
Red-tailed hawk Buteo jamaicensis
Minimally-
moderately
sensitive
2, restricted use of
area for huntine Year round
Northem qoshawk Accipiter gentilis Minimally sensitive No known
occurTence Year round
No(hern three-
toed woodpecker
Picoides
tridactvlus
Moderately
sensitive 2 Year round
I 430-vai l-Biology-EIR( Dec-26.02)
3.0 - Wildlifc
Table 1 Wildlife Species with Potentlal to Occur in the Project Area
rl Long-termdisplacement
2 Displacement from developed areas
3 Partial displacement near developed areas
3.3 RAPTORS
No raptor nests are known in the project area, and none were observed during the site reconnaissance. No
known goshawks use the project area. A known peregrine falcon nest is located more than 5 miles from
the project area, and peregrine falcons may forage within the proj ect area (Andre 2002).
Vail's Front Door
Environmental Impact Report
E-lt
COTIMON NAME SCIENTIFIC
NAME
SENS]TIVITY TO
HABITAT LOSS
AND HUMAN
ACTIVITY
TYPE OF
IMPACT.
SEASON OF
POTENTIAL
OCCURRENCE
Hairy woodpecker Picoides villosus Moderately
sensitive 2 Year round
Northem flicker Colaptes auratus Minimally sensitive J Year round
MacGillivary's
warbler Oporornis tolmiei Moderately
sensitive 2 Summer
Pygmy nuthatch Sitta pygmaea Moderately
sensitive 2 Summer
Warblinq vireo Vireo gilvus Moderately
sensitive 2 Summer
Red crossbill Loxia curvirostra Moderately
sensitive 2 Year round
Green-tailed
towhee Pipilo chlorurus Moderately
sensitive
1 Year round
Virginia's warbler Yermivora
virginiae
Moderately
sensitive 2 Year round
Cedar waxwins Bombycilla
cedrorum Minimally sensitive J Year round
Black-billed
magpie Pica pica Minimallv sensitive J Year round
Stellar's jay Cyanocitta stelleri Moderately
sensitive Year round
Gray jay Perisoreus
canadensis Minimallv sensitive J Year round
Tree swallow Tachycineta
bicolor
Moderately
sensitive 2 Summer
AMPHIBIANS
Tiser salamander Ambystoma
tigrinum Sensitive
Would be affected
only if it occurs in
disturbed wet areas
Year round
Boreal toad Bufo boreas
boreas Sensitive
Would be affected
only if it occurs in
disturbed wet areas
Year round
| 430-Vail-Biology-ElR(D€c.26.02)
3.0 - wildlifc
3.4 FISHERIES
Two streams, Gore Creek and Sandstone Creek, occur within the project area. Sandstone Creek is a
tributary to Gore Creek. CDOW has designated Gore Creek as a gold medal fishery. Colorado River
cutthroat trofi (Oncorhynchus clarki pleuriticus), rainbow trout (Oncorhynchus mykiss), brook trout
(Salvelinus fontinalis), and brown trout (Sa/mo trutta) occur in the reach of Gore Creek that flows through
the project area (Andre 2002). Spawning can occur in this reach throughout much of the year because
cutthroat trout and rainbow trout spawn in the spring and brook trout and brown trout spawn in the fall.
3.5 THREATENED AND ENDANGERED SPECIES
The FWS Federally Listed and Candidate Species and Their Staas list was examined for T&E species
that may occur in Eagle County, Colorado (FWS 2002). The list includes two endangered species, two
threatened species, and three species that are candidates for listing. The endangered species that may
occur within Eagle County are black-footed fenet (Mustelu nigripes) and Uncompahgre fritillary butterfly
(Boloria acrocnema). The two threatened species that may occur within Eagle County are bald eagle
(Haliaeetus leucocephalus) and Canada lynx (Lynx canadensis). The three candidate species that may
occur in Eagle County include Gunnison sage grouse (Centrocercus minimus), yellow-billed cuckoo
(Coccyzus americanus), and boreal load (Bufo boreas boreas).
The project area does not support suitable habitat for black-footed ferret, Uncompahgre fritillary butterfly,
Gunnison sage grouse, or yellow-billed cuckoo. Therefore, these species will not be analyzed further in
this document.
The project area does not support suitable habitat for Canada lynx. The habitat for Canada lynx in
Colorado is typically mature or old growth Englemann spruce and subalpine fir forests; a mix of
Englemann spruce, subalpine fiq and aspen is the second most common habitat used by lynx. Lynx also
require sufficient deruring habitat, which has been described as areas of dense downed trees, roots, or
dense live vegetation (Shenk 2001). The proj ect area supports small, mixed woodland with aspen,
lodgepole pine, and Colorado blue spruce (at lhe proposed Residences at Vail Village). There is a lack of
downed woody debris, the habitat is extremely fragmented, and it is in an area that experiences heavy
human use year round. Therefore, the project does not support potential habitat for Canada lynx.
Suitable lynx habitats occur near the project area, including on the ski mountain. Lynx have been
recorded near the project area using radio and satellite telemetry (Shenk 2001). CNHP also reports that
six Canada lynx occurrences have been reported between 1969 and l99l at higher elevations at the Vail
Ski Area (Menefee 2002). These occunences were not near the project area.
In Colorado, bald eagles typically nest in large, mature cottonwoods or pines. Nesting sites are typically
associated with large rivers or reservoirs in locales that experience little human disturbance. Similar sites
are also commonly used by wintering eagles, especially near roost sites. ln Colorado, foraging eagles are
typically associated with aquatic habitats that support reliable populations of fish and waterfowl. Eagles
will also forage in open, terrestrial habitats, where they prey on medium-sized mammals (prairie dogs and
jackrabbits) and scavenge roadkill or winterkill animals when these resources are available. Bald eagles
are not known to nest or roost within the project area or in the immediate vicinity (Andre 2002, Menefee
2002). Suitable aquatic foraging habitats occur in the Vail Valley, and bald eagles may be expected to use
these habitats. During the winter, bald eagles are known to occasionally occur in the Vail Valley, where
they forage along Gore Creek (Andre 2002). No potential bald eagle habitat would be disturbed by the
proposed project.
Vail's Front Door
Environmental Impact Report
E.-12
| 430-Vail-Biolog-ElR(Dec.26.02)
3.0 - Wildlife
ln Colorado, the boreal toad typically lives in damp conditions near marshes, wet meadows, streams,
beaver ponds, and lakes interspersed in subalpine forests. These habitats include lodgepole pine,
Englemaru:r spruce, subalpine fir, and aspen (Hammerson 1999). Potential habitat for the boreal toad may
exist within Gore Creek. These habitats are expected to be of marginal quality because of disturbance
caused by anglers. Boreal toads are not known to occur within the project area (Andre 2002, Menefee
2002). Occunences of the boreal toad are known at the Vail Golf Course in ponds 2 miles east of Vail
Village (Andre 2002, Menefee 2002). The proposed projects would not disturb potential habitat for the
boreal toad.
CNHP and CDOW indicate that there are no known occurrences of T&E wildlife species within the
project area (Andre 2002, Menefee 2002). Based on this information, the results of the site
reconnaissance, the large proportion of the project area that is already developed, and the lack of suitable
T&E habitat within the project area, no T&E wildlife species are expected to occur within the project
atea.
3.6 VAIL'S FRONT DOOR SITE€PECIFIC CONDITIONS AND
ANALYSIS
3.6.1 Vista Bahn Park/Skier Services
Several mammalian and avian species listed in Table I may use the mixed woodland and grassland
habitats that occur at the location of the Vista Bahn Park and Skier Services. Construction activity,
increased human presence, and noise would likely displace wildlife species from this site. The existing
park site would be reclaimed and revegetated, resulting in no net loss of habitat. These potential effects
would not jeopardize the current health or protective status of wildlife species that may occur in the
project area.
3.6.2 Ski Club
No habitat exists at this proposed site; therefore, none of the wildlife species listed in Table I are
expected to use this area. Implementation ofthe proposed project is not expected to affect wildlife species
because of the low likelihood that wildlife would occur at this site.
3.6.3 Residence Club
Several mammalian and avian species listed in Table I may use the mixed woodland habitat at this site.
Wildlife would likely be displaced from this site as a result of construction, increased human presence,
and noise. Construction rvould disturb or destroy existing mixed woodland habitat. The loss of this habitat
would not likely be important to wildlife species, including big game, because of its proximity to human
development and fragnented condition, which make it less favorable. These potential effects to wildlife
and habitats would not jeopardize the current health or protective status of wildlife species that may occur
in the proj ect area.
3.6.4 Lodge at Vail Hotel and Spa
No habitat exists at this proposed site; therefore, none of the wildlife species listed in Table I are
expected to use this area. lmplementation ofthe proposed project is not expected to affect wildlife species
because of the low likelihood that wildlife would occur at this site.
Vail's Front Door
Environmental Impact Report
E-13
I 430-Vail-Biology-ElR(Dec.26.02)
3.0 - Wildlife
3.6.5 Lots P3 and J
No habitat exists at this proposed site; therefore, none of the wildlife species listed in Table I are
expected to use this area. Irnplementation of the proposed project is not expected to affect wildlife species
because of the low likelihood that wildlife would occur at this site.
There is a potential for increased sedimentation and nrnoff during construction because Lots P3 and J are
near Gore Creek. This potential impact would be short term and could be minimized by implementing
best management practices and by reseeding the area as soon as possible after constnrction. Runoff and
sedimentation would not likely be increased in the long term because an existing parking structure is
currently on the site and the proposed project would occupy the same physical footprint.
lncreased sedimentation and runoff could affect trout spawning in Gore Creek, depending largely on the
time of year construction takes place and the duration of construction. Rainbow, brown, and brook trout
all spawn in Gore Creek. Rainbow trout spawn in the spring and brown and brook trout spawn in the fall.
Sedimentation could impair spawning by smothering spawning beds and filling interstitial spaces in the
gravel. Sedimentation could have a larger effect during the fall spawn because flows are typically lower
and sediment is not flushed out of the system as quickly as when flows are higher.
3.7 IRRETRIEVABLE COMMITMENT OF WILDLIFE RESOURGES
The irretrievable commitment of wildlife resources, which is considered for both individuals and habitats,
includes habitats that would be permanently lost to development and human intrusion on habitats. Three
acres of land wilt be permanently disturbed. The proposed development, in mixed woodland and
grassland habitat types, would alter these areas so that they would no longer be suitable wildlife habitats.
Human intrusion, including, noise, visual, and activity-related disturbances at the proposed project sites,
would likely displace wildlife from these sites to other suitable habitats.
Vail's Front Door
Environmental Impact Report
E-14
| 430-Vail-Bioloey-EIR( Dcc.26.02)
4.0 RECOMMENDED MITIGATION MEASURES
a
a
a
a
a
I
a
When practical, native plant species should be used to revegetate disturbed areas.
Revegetation should occur during mid-summer to provide the best opportunity for success.
Shnrbs and understory vegetation should be retained for use as cover by birds and small
mammals in areas that are not disturbed by for construction.
Disturbance should be limited to within the construction work site.
Silt fencing will be installed, where necessary, to control siltation of creeks that are adj acent to
construction areas.
Fruit trees should not be planted near entrances or exits of new buildings to help avoid
interactions between humans and bears.
Strict covenants on the proper storage of household waste should be enforced, or bear-proof
enclosures should be required for waste.
Disturbance to riparian areas should be avoided, especially along Gore Creek.
The realignment of the bike path at the West Day Lot site should be sloped away from Gore
Creek to reduce the amount of fine sediment that enters the creek durins construction and
maintenance.
The following mitigation measur€s are recommended to further reduce potential effects to flora, fauna,
and habitats:
Vail's Front Door
Environmental Impact Report
E-15
| 430-Vail-Biolo$/-EIR(Dec.26.02)
5.0 CUMULATIVE IMPACTS
The evaluation of cumulative impacts from the proposed proj ect on plants and wildlife considers previous
actions and developments in the Vail Valley. The most significant impacts to populations of wildlife and
plants in the Vail Valley include construction of the Vail Ski Area, construction of lnterstate 70, and
residential and commercial development.
The Vail Ski Area occurs in areas of surrmer habitat for elk and mule deer. Because the majority of
activities at the ski area occur during the winter, these species experience relatively lower impacts than
with intensive summertime activities. As the level of use during the summer months increases, the
potential types and degrees of effects to wildlife are expected to increase. Construction of I-70 caused
severe impacts to populations of mule deer and elk. The highway bisects the Vail Valley and intemrpts
the winter-summer migration route, causing loss of important winter ranges and increased collisions
between motor vehicles and animals. Residential and commercial development of the Vail Valley has also
had impacts on wildlife populations because it has resulted in an almost complete loss of habitat in the
valley floor and on many hillsides.
Considering the past impacts to wildlife in the Vail Valley that all of the proposed developments would
occur at or near existing buildings, ski lifts, lodges, and parking lots; and the small acreage of permanent
disturbance, the proposed Vail's Front Door Redevelopment project will not have important contributions
to the t)?e or magnitude of cumulative effects.
Vail's Front Door
Environmental Impact Report
E-16
I 430-Vail-BioloS/-ElR( Dec.26.02)
6.0 REFERENCES
Andre, B. 2002. Personal communication lOctober 24 telephone conversation with P. Golden, Greystone
Environmental Consultants, Greenwood Village, Colorado. RE: CDOW wildlife issues for the
Vail Environmental lrnpact Report (EIR) for the Vail's Front Door and Lionshead
redevelopments.l. Wildlife Biologist, Colorado Division of Wildlife, Vail, Colorado. 2 pages.
Crites, M. 2002. Personal communication fOctober 23 telephone conversation with P. Golden, Greystone
Environmental Consultants, Greenwood Village, Colorado. RE: Applicability of White fuver
National Forest Sensitive Species analysis in the Vail EIR for the Vail's Front Door and
Lionshead redevelopments.]. Biologist, U.S. Forest Service, White fuver National Forest,
Supervisors Ofhce, Glenwood Springs, Colorado. I page.
Graham, V . 2002. Personal communication lOctober 25 telephone conversation with P. Golden,
Greystone Environmental Consultants, Greenwood Village, Colorado. RE: Mule deer and elk
population numbers and habitat information for the Vail EIR for the Vail's Front Door and
Lionshead redevelopmentsl. Wildlife Biologist, Colorado Division of Wildlife, Grand Junction,
Colorado. I page.
Hammerson, G.A. 1999. Amphibians and Reptiles in Colorado. A Colorado Field Guide.2m edition.
University Press of Colorado and Colorado Division of Wildlife
Menefee, M. 2002. Personal communication fOctober 24 fax to P. Golden, Greystone Environmental
Consultants, Greenwood Village, Colorado. RE: Threatened and endangered or rare species and
significant natural communities in the vicinity of the project area]. Environmental Review
Coordinator, Colorado Natural Fleritage Program, Colorado State University, Ft. Collins,
Colorado. 7 pages.
Natural Diversity Information Source (NDIS). 2002. NDIS database, Eagle County, Elk and Mule Deer
Habitats [web page]. Colorado State University. Located at:
http://ndis.nrel.colostate.edu/ndis/ftp_html site/fto lead.html. Accessed October 24,2002.
Shenk. T. M. 2001. Post-Release Monitoring for Lynx Reintroduced to Colorado, Annual Progress Report
for the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, December 2001. Interim Report Preliminary Results.
Located at http://wildlife.state.co.us/I&E/Lynx./USFWS Report_0l.pdf. Accessed October 23,
2002.
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS). 2002. Federally Listed and Candidate Species and Their Status in
Colorado. County-wide species list. Effective August 22, 2002. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service,
Ecological Services, Colorado Field Office, Lakewood, Colorado.
Vail's Front Door
Environmental Impact Report
E-17
I 430-Vail-Biology-EIR( Dec.26.02)
o o
o
o
x
':l
o
o
ITYDROLOGIC ANALYSIS
FOR
VAIL'S FRONT DOOR
P3&JPARKINGGARAGE
VAIL, COLORADO
Prepared For:
Urban Desip Group, Inc.
162l Eighteenth St., Suite200
Denvetr, Colorado 80202
Prepared By:
Peak Civil Enginecring, Inc.
1000 Lion's Ridge Loop
Vail, Colorado 81657
October,2002
Vails Front Door l
pEAx r iD coxsulylrrtr, lxc. pEAX rAND suRvEytNG, rNc / pEAx crvrl ENGTNEERING. rNc . s7o47ffi644 EnvifOnmental ImpaCt RepOft sz
Page F-l
L GENERAL LOCATION AND DESCRIPTION
LOCATION
tt-" p.p*"a p3 & J parking garage is located on portions of Lot P-3 anj_3 fart
of Lot l, Block 5A, Viil Village, First Filing. The site is located south of Hanson
Ranch Road and north of Gore Creek Drive in Vail Village'
DESCRIPTION OF SITE
Tt""rt" tt .ppt".-"tely 0.6 acres in size and currently consists of a paved
asphalt parking lot. There is a small arnount ofgrass and landscaping around the
pau"d area. Hyarotogic soil information was not available for the site, therefore it
ias assumed tirat soils were of hydrologic soil type c/D. This will produce the
higlrest runoffestimate and is the most conservative approach'
The proposed development consists of a below gnde parking garage with a park
and at-grade parking on top. The attached sheets Cl and C2 show the pre- and
post-development site Plans
PUR}OSE OFTHE STT'DY
The purpose ofthis report is to analyze the existing hydrologic conditions ofthe
site and-the potential impacts that development may have. At the current time, the
site design is still in the schernatic stages anti a detailed drainage plan for the site
has not been completed. This study analyzes the schematic drainage plan for the
site, however doel not study specific drainage stnlctures. The analysis of specific
drainage structures will be completed when site desigrr is at a more detailed level'
DRAINAGE BASINS
There are two drainage basins located within the site. Basin A is located on the
western portion of the site. Runoffflows from the south to the north and leaves
the basin at the northwesten comer. Runofffrom Basin A is ultimately
discharged into Mill Creek. Basin B is located on the eastern portion of the site.
Runoff flows from the south to the north and leaves the basin at the northeasteflr
comer. Runoff from Basin B flows into an existing Town of Vail storm drain
inlet and is ultimately discharged into the Gore Creek.
Slopes throughout the site are relatively gradual, averaging approximately a 5%
gr"di*t. Thi pre-development conditions of the basins consist of approximately
i5% impervious area (asphalt) and25o/o lawns, grasses, and vegetated areas.
After development, Basin A will consist of approximately 53o/o impervious and
47o/olawns and grasses. Basin B will consist of approximatelyTTo/o impervious
area and 23% lawns and grasses.
A.
B.
lI.
Vail's Front Door
Environmental Impact Report
Page F-2
It is planned that the post development drainage patterns will not be-altered from
the existing patterns. Curb and Gutter and a storm sewer systern will be designed
to convey runoffalong the existing drainage path.
Iv. IIYDROLOGICANALYSIS
A. DEVELOPMENT OF BASIC DATA AND CONSTRAINTS
Neither the existing nor the proposed improvements to the site present any
substantial constraints in terms ofaddressing storm drainage.
B. HYDROLOGICAL CzuTERIA
Considering the relatively small watershed area that required analyzing, the
rational method was used to perform runoffcalculations. The 2, 5, 10, 25, 50, and
100-year storm frequencies wgre analyzed forboth pre-development and post-
development conditions.
Time of concentration calculations were calculated for both pre- and post-
development conditions using methods outlined in the Urban Storm Drainage
Manual for initial flow time and overland travel time. Time of concentration
paths are illustrated on sheets Cl Existing Drainage Plan and C2 Proposed
Drainage Plan.
Rainfall intensity was calculated using the Town of vail Rainfall Intensity-
Duration Curve and the calculated time of concentration. The Town of Vail
Rainfall lntensity-Duration Curve is attached in the Appendix.
Composite runoffcoefficients were calculated and applied for pre- and post-
development conditions. References used for determining the runoffcoefficients
are cited in the runoffcoefficient calculations found in the appendix.
C. RI-INOFF CALCULATION RESULTS
The following tables illustrates the pre- and post-development runoffvalues:
BASIN,A,
Frequency
(w)
Pre-Development
Runoff
(cfs)
Post-Development
Runoff
(cfs)
Change in Runoff
Due to Development
(cfs)
.|
L 0.45 0.29 -.0.16
5 0.66 0.48 -0.06
l0 0.85 0.65 -0.20
25 l.l I 0.9r -0.20
50 t.3l 1.10 -0.21
100 r.56 t.34 -0.22
Vail's Front Door
Environmental ImPact RePort
Page F-3
BASIN B
D.
The development does not significantly change the runoff from the site. Runoff
from BasirrA will slightly decrease (0.06 cfs for the S-year event) and Basin B
will slightly increase (0.10 cfs for the S-year event). There will be negligible
downstream impacts from the increase and reduction of runoffdue to the site
development. All supporting hydrologic calculations and figures have been
included in the appandix.
I{YDRAULIC CRITERIA
ft"ti-i*.ty hydraulic calculations were performed for storm sewer and curb and
gutter. Minimal slopes w€re used to insure there would be no anticipated
problems with flow conveyrmce. This was done for analytical purposes to aid in
the final drainage desigr. All calculations are shown in the appendix'
GROLINDWATER
A portion of the parking garage will be below the water table, making a
dewatering system for the parking garage necessafy. Koechlein Consulting
Enginers, Inc. has prepared a soils report for the site and has specified
gto*d*uto levels and volumes. They have also prepared aconceptual underslab
Iewatering plan for the site. Groundwater volumes will need to be accounted for
in the final desigr of the storm sewer systern.
DRAINAGE FACILITY DESIGN
A. GENERALCONCEPT
Th" "".*t dr"i"age pattem through the site will be maintained with the proposed
development. Basin A drains from the north to south and ultimately to Mill
creek. Basin B drains from the north to south and ultimately to Gore creek. The
schernatic drainage design collects runoffthrough curb and gutter and into the
storm sew€r system.
B. WATER OUALITY DESIGN AND IMPROVEMENTS
A water quality system will be desigrred concurrently with final drainage design.
Parking gzrage and parking lot runoffwill be heated with a sand-oil separator,
V.
Vail's Front Door
Environmental Impact Report
Page F-4
Frequency
(vr)
Pre.Development
Runoff
(cfsl
Post-DeveloPment
Runoff
(cfs)
Change in Runoff
Due to DeveloPment
(cfs)
2 0.32 0.38 +0.06
5 0.49 0.59 +0.10
l0 0.62 0.75 +0.13
25 0.83 0.97 +0.14
50 0.99 t.t4 +0.15
100 1.17 1.35 +0.18
c.
where particle sediment and rernoval of free-oils and carbons will occur. Surface
drainaie from roads and the park will continue to be directed into the Town of
Vail drainage systeflI.
The water quality systern will desigrred to meet Town of Vail water quality
standards.
O""tg tn" """.t"*Uon
process silt fences, straw bales, and check dams will be
used t6 minimize sediment transport throughout the site. Silt Fence shall be used
to filter sediment fiom small disturbed areas in sheet flow. Gravel check dams
and straw bales will be installed to dissipate velocities. Sediment buildup will be
periodically removed from behind straw bales and stone check dams during
construction.
CONCLUSIONS
The proposed development ofthe P 3 & J parking garage does not sigrrificantly
impact iutfu"" runoffvolumes. The drainage systern will be desigred so that
existing drainage patterns will remain and will conform to the Town of Vail water
quality standards.
Prepared By:
Peak Civil Engineering, lnc
Vail's Front Door
Environmental Impact Report
Page F-5
lltk#, .
Mark B. Tarall
Reviewed By:
Eric G. Williams, PE
Peak Civil Engineering, lnc.ffijP
R&*.-.":o$
APPENDIX
Vail's Front Door
Environmental Impact Report
Page F-6
PROJECTNAME:
P3&JPARKINGGARAGE
VAIL'S FRONT DOOR
DATE:t0-2002
SCALE: N/A
PROJECTNo.: l167
TITLE:
VICINIryMAP
FIGURENo.: Vl
Vail's Front Door
-"u"-'/\lTtr ...' i | | L_ -./.' I ('\
l, ,.//\,/, ltt !l-a
.r!r. | -' ,/ ./-"'.\/'"\)' ,/ \l '--"--""' ../' \ I ----(' i t .-'-"/ i i 9 ,./-1 i I I
-\
i it
\ \ i-' \ !\ \;-- |
\ 8.4\b- \r .--.-
S
--'l
rtrt-,El \tf, rrr- i.l nI
rllt Ftl
_.- - --'T -'
|,ralGl
.-.-V"- ---"L"-
rr@(Fl
-"- "''f-----'- "-'-
t----
..___.__-.--
-f'-..t
i "----l, -'
g
r----l
\ .-..q t , a .r-E Er tlE
y' ..,"'
I
ri;
lEt.rrlo r. nt tr..r. 6t nrE
FEAK I..AI{D COISJLTA}ITS. NC.
PEAK CfvL EII|GIEE G NC'g'o-ciq-*rr F r
',+ara'cra tEo Lr||! E)e L@? va- co ics,
Environmental ImPact RePort
Page F-?
I{YDROLOGY CALCT]LATIONS
Vail's Front Door
Environmental Impact Repofi
Page F-8
Project:
Job No.:
Date:
Calc By:
P3 &J
tt67
October 18,2002
MT
BASINA
Basin Area = 0.381 acres
- Land Uses
Pavement and Roofs = 0.292 acres
Lawns and Grasses:0.089 acres
% lmpervious = 77o/o
- Soil Type - Aszumed Hydrologic soil Group c/D (Most Conservative Analysis)
Time of Concentration - t": tL+ t,
- Idtial Flow Time- Sheet Flow, ti = 0.395(l.l-C5)L*'/s*-
Cs = From Urban Drainage Criteria Manual, Volume l, Table RO-5 = 0'60
L=60'
S = 0.042
g. : {.9{ rnin
- Overland Travel Time - Flow tbrough shallow paved/gravel swale, t1
Length = 167'
V = GS*oj
G = From Urban Drainage Criteria Manual' Volume l, Table RO-2 = l8'5
S* = 0'060
V =4.4 fus
h:167'l4.4tPs = 37.9 sec = 0.63min
t = ti * tt - 4.5 min + 0.60 min = 5.1 min
L = 5.1 min.
Vail's Front Door
Environmental Impact Report
Page F-9
Rainfall Inunsin,I
- Rainfall lntasity, I - From Town of vail Rainfall Intensity Duration curve
lz = 2.1 rn/ht
Is :2.9 in/tu
Iro = 3'5 in/lu
Izs = 4'3 in/hr
I5e = 4'9 in/hr
Iroo = 5.6 in/hr
RunoffCoefricienL C
- Tlpe C/D Soils
- 77% Roofs and AsPhalts
- Z3VoLawrc and Grasses
From Urban Drainage Cdteria Manual, Volume 1, Table RO-5
Cz = 0'56
Cs = 0'60
Cro = 0.64
Czs = 0'68
C5s = 0.70
Cles = 0.73
Runof C alculations. 0=C IA
Qz = 0.56*2.1*0.381 = 0.45 cfs
Qs =0.60*2.9+0.381 =0'66cfs
Qro : 0-64*3'5*0'381 : 0'85cfs
Qr =0.68*4.3+0.381 = l.llcfs
Qso =0.70+4'9*0'381 = 1'31cfs
Qroo = 0'73*5'6*0'381 = 1'56cfs
Vail's Front Door
Environmental Impact Report
page F-I0
BASINB
Basin Area = 0.325 acres
- Land Uses
Paveure,nt and Roofs = 0.2M acres
Lawns and Grasses = 0'081 acres
% Impernioru = 75%
- Soil Type - Assumed Hydrologic Soil Gronp c/D (Most Conservative Analysis)
Time of Concentration - t"= tt! tt
- hidal Fl"* Time- sh;;TG% ti = 0-395(l.l'c5;L0'5lS0'33
Cs = From Urban Drainage Criteria Manual, Volume l, Table RO-5 = 0'58
L = 130'
S = 0'039
f1 : J.l rnin
- Overland Travel Time - Flow over gass slope, t1
Length -- 34'
V = C"S*o'S
C*: From Urban Drainage Criteria Manual, Volume l, Table RO-2 = 15
S* = 0'20
V = 6.7 fps
tt= 34'l6.7fPs = 5.07 sec : 0.lmin
t - tr + tt=7.1min + 0.1 min = 7.2 min
t = 7.2 min.
Rainfall Intensim, I
- Rainfall Intensity, I - From Town of vail Rainfall lntensity Duration curve
Iz : 1.8 in/hr
Is = 2.6 b/tr
Iro :3.1 in/tr
Izs = 3.8 in/hr
Iso = 4.4 in/hr
Iroo:5.0 in/hr
Vail's Front Door
Environmental Impact Report
page F_il
Runof Coeflicient. C
- Tlpe C/D Soils
- 75% Roofs and AsPhalts
- 25o/o Lawns and Grasses
From Urban Drainage Criteria Manual, Volume 1, Table RG5
Cz = 0'54
Cs = 0'58
Cro = 0.62
Czs = 0'66
Cso = 0'68
Croo = 0.71
Ru n ofl C alculatio n s. O:C IA
Qz = 0.54+1.8*0.325 = 032 cfs
Qs =0.58*2'6*0'325=0'49cfs
Qro = 0-62+3'l*0'325 = 0'62cfs
Qzs = 0'67*3'8*0'325 =0'83cfs
Qso = 0-69*4'4*0'325 = 0'99cfs
Qroo = O'72+ 5'0*0'325 = 1'17cfs
Vail's Front Door
Environ mental ImPact RePort
Page F-I2
o
Project:
Job No.:
Date:
Calc By:
P3&J
tt67
October 18,2002
MT
BASIN A
Basin Area = 0.381 acres
- Land Uses
Pavernent and Roofs = 0.199 acres
Lawns and Grasses = 0.182 acres
% Impervious = 53%
- Soil Type - Hydrologic Soil Group C/D
Time of Concentration - t"=Jltfr _ ^ . _.1 ir
- Initial Flow Time- Sheet Flow, ! = 0'395(1'l-cs)L"''lS"'--
Cs:FromUrbanDrainageCriteriaMaaual,Volumel'TableRO-5:0'42
L=25'
S = 0.026
G = 4.48 min
- Overland Travel Time - Flow through shallow paved swale/conc' pan, t1
Length = 135'
V : QS*o'5
C,": From Urban Drainage Criteria Manual, Volume l, Table RO-2:20
S* = 0.065
V = 5.10 fps
tr: 1E5'/5.10fps = 36.3 sec = 0.60min
t3 = t1 * tt = 4.48 min * 0.60 6i1 = $.1 min
L = 5.1 min.
Vailrs Front Door
Environmental Impact Report
page F-13
o
Rainfall Intensitv, I
- Rainfall Irrtansity, I - From Town of Vail Rainfall Interrsity Duration Crrrve
lz :2'l rr,lbt
Is = 3.0 in/br
Iro = 3'6 in/ir
lzs = 4'4 inJbr
Iso = 5'0 in/hr
Iroo = 5.7 in/hr
Runo.ff Coefficient. C
- Type C Soils
- 53% Roofs urd AsPhalts
- 47o/oLawts and Grasses
From Urban Drainage Criteria Manual, Volume 1, Table RO-5
Cz = 0'36
Cs :0'42
Cro = 0.47
Czs = 0'54
Cso = 0.58
Croo = 0.62
Ru noff C alc ulatio n s. O:C IA
Qz :0-36*2.1*0'381 = 0'29cfs
Qs =0'42*3'0*0'381 = 0'4Ecfs
Qro :0'4?*3'6*0'381 = 0'65cfs
Qx =0.54*4'4*0'381 = 0'9lcfs
Qso =0.58*5'0*0'381 = l'l0cfs
Qroo = 0'62*5'7*0'381 : 134cfs
Vail's Front Door
Environmental Impact Report
page F_|4
Project P 3 &J
Job No.: ll67
Date: October 18,2002
CalcBy: MT
Post-Development - Runoff calculations - Rational Method
BASIN B
Basin Area = 0.325 acles
- Land Uses
Pavemeot and Roofs = 0.250 acres
Lawns and Grasses = 0.075 acres
% ImPenrious :77o/o
- Soil Type - Hydrologic Soil Group C/D
Time of Concentration - t.- tL*' tt
- Initial Flow Time - Snofil ti : 0.3 95(1. l -Cr1L0's750'3
Cs = From Urban Drainage Criteria Manual, Volume 1, Table RO-5 = 0'60
L=32'
S = 0.020
ti = 4-26 min
- ovedand Travel Time - Flow througb shallow paved swale/conc.pan, t1
LengtU = 139'
V = C',S*0'S
Q=FromUrbanDrainageCriteriaManual,Volumel,TableRO-2-20
S* = 0.02
V = 2.83 fps
tt = 130'/2.83fps = 45.9 5ss = 0.lJmin
t : tr + tr= 4.26 min + 0.77 min : J.[ rnin
L = 5.0 min.
Vail's Front Door
Environmental Impact Report
Page F-I5
Rainlall Intensitl. I
- Rainfall Inte,lrsity, I - From Town of Vail Rainfall lnt€nsity Duation curve
lz :2.1 inlhr
Is = 3.0 inlhr
Iro = 3.6 inrhr
lzs = 4.4 inlbr
Iso = 5.0 inlhr
Iroo = 5.7 in/hr
Runotf CoefficienL C
- Type C Soils
- 77% Roofs and Asphalts
-Z3%oLawns and Grasses
From Urban Drainage Criteria Manual, Volume l, Table RO-5
Cz :0'56
Cs = 0'60
C1q = 0.75
Cx =0'97
Cso = l.l4
Croo = 1.35
Ru n off C alcu btio ns. O-1 IA
Qz = 0.56*2.1 *0.325 = 0.38cfs
Qs :0.60*3.0+0.325 = 0.59cfs
Qro = 0.64*3.6*0.325 = 0.75cfs
Qzs = 0-68*4.4*0.325=0.97cfs
Qso = 0.70*5.0*0.325 = 1.14cfs
Qroo = 0'73*5.7+0-325 = 135cfs
Vail's Front Door
Environmental Impact Report
Page F-I6
Project:
Job No.:
Date:
Calc By:
P3&J
rt67
October 18,2002
MT
BASIN A
BASIN B
Frequency
(vr)
Pre-DeveloPment
Runoff
(cfs)
Post-Development
Runoff
(cfs)
Change in Runoff
Due to DeveloPment
(cfs)
2 0.45 0.29 -.0.16
5 0.66 0.48 -0.06
r0 0.85 0.65 -0.20
25 l.ll 0.91 -0.20
50 I .31 l.l0 -0.21
100 Ls6 1.34 -0.22
Frequency
(yr)
Pre'Development
RunoIf
(cfs)
Post-Development
Runoff
(cfs)
Change in Runoff
Due to DeveloPment
(cfs)
2 0.32 0.38 +0.06
)0.49 0.59 +0.10
10 0.62 0.75 +0.13
25 0.83 0.97 +0.14
50 0.99 1.14 +0.15
100 t.t7 1.35 +0.18
Vail's Front Door
Environmental Impact Report
Page F-17
o t o
INTENS lrY - nuRAi"/ON -
FRESUENCY CUBVES
n
(TIME
30' . 40
MINUTES) ,
VAIL ,CALOffA DO
. :'. .. .'
Erlhtuae*tu6a
Vail's Front Door
Environmental ImPact RePort
Page F-l8
Fe,:a'- Tov
o
DRATNAGE CRITERIA MUAL (V. 1)
06/2001
Urban Orainage and Flood Control Oistric{
RUNOFF
TABLE RO.s
Runoff Coefficients, C
Feora : rJgeA^, 9rue,,^)e*r,*orE Cene,"in M*^rul'l-
Vouuttg a. Jo^ra z-oot,
Vail's Front Door
Environmental Impact Report
Page F-I9
Percentage
lmperviousness Type C and D NRCS Hvdrologic Soil Groups
2-vl 5-yr 10-vr 2*yl 50-yr 100-yr
0lo 0.04 0.15 0.25 0.37 0.44 0.50
1Yo 0.08 0.18 0.28 0.39 0.46 0.52
10%0.11 0.21 0.30 0.41 0.47 0.53
11Vo 0.14 0.24 0.32 0.43 0.49 0.54
2lo/o 0.17 0.26 0.34 0.44 0.50 0.55
25o/o o.20 0.28 0.36 0.46 0.51 0.56
30%0.22 0.30 0.38 0.47 0.52 0.57
3SYo 0.25 0.33 0.40 0.48 0.53 0.57
40o/o 0.28 0.3s 0.42 0.50 0.54 0.58
45o/o 0.31 0.37 0.44 0.51 0.55
50Yo 0.34 0.40 0.46 0.53 0.57 0.60
5570 0.37 0.43 0.48 0.55 0.58 0.62
60Yo 0.41 0.46 0.51 0.57 0.60 0.63
65Yo 0.45 0.49 0.54 0.59 0.62 0.65
70o/o 0.49 0.53 0.57 0.62 0.6s 0.68
75To 0.54 0.58,0.62 0.66 0.68 0.71
81o/o 0.60 0.63 0.66 0.70 0.72 0.74
85Yo u.bb 0.68 0.71 0.75 0.77 n70
90%i 7'1,0.75 0.77 0.80 0.82 0.83
o60/-0.80 0.82 0.84 0.87 0.88 0.89
100o/o 0.89 0.90 u.vz 0.94 0.95 noA
Twe B NRCS Hydrologic Soils Group
o%0.02 0.08 n {E 0.25 0.30 neq
0.04 0.10 0.19 0.28 nee 0.38
1jYo 0.06 0.14 0.22 0.31 0.36 0.40
15o/o 0.08 0.17 0.25 0.33 0.38 0.42
20o/o 0.12 0.20 0.27 0.35 0.40 0.44
25Yo 0.15 0.22 0.30 0.37 0.41 0.46
30a/o 0.18 0.25 0.32 0.39 0.43 0.47
35Yo 0.20 0.27 0.34 0.41 0.44 0.48
40Yo 0.23 0.30 0.36 0.46 0.50
45o/o 0.26 0.32 0.38 0.44 0.48 0.51
50Yo 0.29 0.35 0.40 0.46 0.49 0.52
55Yo 0.33 0.38 0.43 0.48 0.51 0.54
OU-/o 0.37 0.41 0.46 0.51 0.54 0.56
65o/o 0.41 0.45 0.49 0.54 0.57 0.59
70To 0.45 0.49 0.58 0.60 0.62
75o/o 0.51 0.54 0.62 0.64 u.oo
80%0.57 0.59 U.OJ u.oo 0.68 0.70
85o/o U.bJ 0.66 0.69 0,72 U./J u./c
90%0.71 0.73 U.I J 0.78 0.80 0.81
o60/^0.79 0.81 0.83 0.85 0.87 0.88
100o/o 0.E9 0.90 u.Yz 0.94 0.95 0.96
RUNOFF DRA|U: CRITERIA MANUAL (v. 1)
I = length of overland flow (500 ft maximum for non-urban land uses, 300 ft maximum for urban
land uses)
.s = average basin sloPe (fUft)
Equation RO-3 is adequate for distances up to 500 feet. Note that, in some urban watersheds' the
overland flow time may be very small because flows quickly channelize'
2.4.2 Overland Travel Time. For catchments with overland and channelized flow, the time of
concentration needs to be considered in combination with the overland travel time, t, which is calculated
using the hydraulic properties of the swale, ditch, or channel. For preliminary work, the overland travel
time, r,, can be estimated with the help of Figure RO-1 or the following equation (Guo 1999):
V = C,S *o't (RO4)
in which:
Iz = velocity (fUsec)
C" = conveyance coefficient (ftom Table RO-2)
S- = watercourse slope (fVft)
TABLE RO-2
Conveyance Coefficient, C
Type of Land Surfggt Convevance Coefficient, C,
Heaw meadow z.J
Tillaqe/field 5
Short Dasture and lawns 7
NearlY bare qround 10
Grassed waterway 15
Paved areas and shallow paved swales 20
The time of concentration, t , is lhen the sum of the initial flow time, 4, and the travel time'
',,
as per
Equation RO-2.
2.4.3 First Desion point Time of Concentration in Urban Catchments. Using this procedure, the time
of concentration at the first design point (i.e., initial flow time, t,) in an urbanized catchment should not
exceed the time of concentration calculated using Equation RO-S'
L .^t =-+ lt,'c l8o --tRo$^l uRE|lil 9oe*r, D*r*Ake CerEeu+ M*stko-st
Vcuo.Ar= 1-,, \osE ?qtet
Vail's Front Door
Environmental Impact Report
Page F-20
K\J-O
ITYDRAT]LIC CALCT'LATION S
Vails Front Door
Environmental Impact Report
page F-21
Basin A - 12' CMP Calculations - l0(Fyear event
Manning PiPe Calculator
Given lnPut Data:
Shape ........... Circular
Solving for .......'...'......... Depth of Flow
Diameter .. 12.0000 in
Flowrate .. 1.3400 cfs
Slope ............ 0.0100 ff/ft
Manning s n ....'.........--..... 0.0200
Computed Results:
Depth........... 6.5507 in
Area ....'........ 0.7854 ft2
Wetted Area ..................... 0.4385 ft2
Wetted Perimeter 19.9525 in
PerimetEr . 37.6991 in
Velocity .. 3.0557 fPs
Hydraulic Radius 3.1649 in
Percent Full ...........'... .- - -. 54.5892 o/o
Full flow Flowrate 2-3158 cfs
Full flow velocitY 2.9486 fPs
Critical lnformatiou
Critical depth .................. 5.873 I in
Critical slope ...'..'..'.......' 0.0144 ff/ft
Critical velocity 3.5067 fts
Critical area..."....-......... 0.3821 ft2
Critical perimeter 18.5957 in
Critical hydraulic radius ....... 2.9591 in
Critical toP width I1.9973 in
Specifi c energy ...'...........'. 0.6909 ft
Minimum energy .....-.....'...... 0.7341 ft
Froude nuurber .......--....'..... 0.8 I 36
Flow condition Subsritical
Vail's Front Door
Environmental Impact Report
PageF-22