HomeMy WebLinkAboutColdstream Condominiums Work Session 091812i i FINE
t%k-N-9 -,
TO W N OF VA 1, Y. 1�' i /) - W\"+
TO: Vail Town Council ��� ' Cee a- '� Meandum ?
FROM
DATE
SUBJECT
Community Development Department
September 18, 2012 Kerry-
i'if A request for a work session t he Vail Town Councto discuss a
contemplated major amendment to the Cascade Special Development District
No. 4 Subarea B, Coldstream Condominiums.
Applicant: Coldstream Condominiums Homeowners Association
Planner. Warren Campbell
SUMMARY
C'0� f
a� 5,��
The Coldstream Condominiums Homeowners Association, represented by Tom Braun,
is requesting a work session with the Vail Town Council to discuss a contemplated
major amendment to Cascade Special Development District (SDD) No. 4 Subarea B.
The contemplated SDD amendment would propose to redevelop an existing parking
structure with a tennis court located above on the south end of the property. The
redevelopment is anticipated to include a new parking structure with five (5) dwelling
units and two (2) employee housing units located above. A memorandum from the
applicant dated September 5, 2012 detailing their request is attached for reference
(Attachment A).
APPLICANT'S REQUEST
Ask any questions and offer any comments on the conceptual ideas presented by
the applicant, specifically any aspects of the project the applicant should
consider if and when they pursue a formal development application.
ROLES OF REVIEWING BOARDS
Major Amendment to a Special Development District
Planning and Environmental Commission:
The PEC shall review the proposal for and make a recommendation to the Town
Council based upon the findings made on the criteria located in Chapter 12 -9A, Special
Development District, Vail Town Code.
6 -1 -1
Town Council:
The Town Council takes into consideration the PEC's recommendation when reviewing
an application for a special development district and is responsible for final
approval /denial of an SDD. The Town Council shall review the proposal and
approve /approve with conditions /deny the application based upon the findings made on
the criteria located in Chapter 12 -9A, Special Development District, Vail Town Code.
IV. BACKGROUND
On February 28, 2011. the Planning and Environmental Commission held a work
session hearing to discuss the contemplated redevelopment of a portion of the
Coldstream Condominiums property. At this hearing the Commission provided
feedback on the design and public benefit. Attached are the memorandum to the
Commission (Attachment B) and the results of the hearing (Attachment C).
V. ACTION REQUESTED OF THE COUNCIL
L e Community Development Department cautions the Vail Town Council from
mmenting on the contemplated redevelopment's merits or compliance with the Code
d its criteria. If an application to amend the SDD proceeds forward, the Vail Town
uncil will be acting in a quasi judicial role and must maintain the integrity of the
escribed process.
e Vail Town Council does not need to take any action on this request.
CH h
VI. ATTACHMENTS
A. Applicant's request and attachments dated September 5, 2012
B. Memorandum to the Planning and Environmental Commission dated February 28,
2011
C. Planning and Environmental Commission hearing results dated February 28, 2011
Town of Vail Page 2
9/18/2012
6 -1 -2
Coldstream Condominiums
Cascade Village SDD Amendment
January 31, 2011, revised February 24, 2011, September 5, 2012
Over the past 30 years the Coldstream Condominium Owners Association has taken
many steps to continually upgrade and improve their community. Recently the
Association has been evaluating the feasibility of implementing a relatively small but
important improvement program that would involve the addition of five new residential
units, two EIfU's and a number of other on -site improvements. In order to implement
this plan an amendment to SDD No. 4- Cascade Village will be necessary.
Prior to submitting formal applications to amend SDD No. 4 the Association is interested
in a work session level discussion with both the Planning and Environmental
Commission and the Town Council. The Associations goal for these work sessions is to
gain some indication of the Town's interest and/or attitude with regard to the re-
development of Coldstream.
While it is understood that any input received from the Town during this work session
process will be preliminary and non - binding, these work sessions will still be beneficial
to the Association in deciding what future actions to take on the potential re- development
of the project. Given the current economic climate, particularly with regard to real estate
development, any land owner must be prudent with how approach any land development
project. The Town's SDD process can be exhaustive and the design work necessary to go
through the formal review process is extensive. Prior to expending the time, energy and
dollars to do so the Association would greatly appreciate preliminary feedback from the
Town on their conceptual ideas for the re- development.
A work session was held with the PEC in February of 2011. As an informal work session
no vote of the PEC was taken, however with caveats the PEC's comments were generally
supportive of the re- development concept presented by the Association. The PEC
provided specific direction with regard to a number of design aspects of the project, i.e.
how the project entry will be enhanced, addressing portions of "exposed" parking
structure walls, using landscaping and building articulation to break up the linear corridor
that would be created by the new building. This type of feedback was exactly the input
the Association was hopeful of receiving and will be very beneficial in deciding if and
how to move forward with the project.
The following provides an explanation of the proposed re- development plans and
associated benefits, background on the Coldstream Condominiums, a summary of
existing and proposed development, an evaluation of alternative review processes, a
bullet -point response to SDD review criteria and a summary of the proposed project.
Coldstream Condominiums
SDD Amendment Work Session
9/18/2012
6 -2 -1
Proposed Re-development/Benefits of Project
Major elements of the re- development plans include the construction of five new free -
market condominiums, two new employee housing units, a new parking garage and
associated site improvements. There are a number of other improvements that are being
considered as a part of this project. While at this stage plans are conceptual and subject
to change, other specific improvements under consideration include:
• Employee housing square footage that is over twice that required by the Town's
Inclusionary Housing Ordinance ( +/ -2,350 sf in two 3- Bedroom units).
• A new on -site property manager's office designed and constructed specifically for
this purpose.
• Conversion of the existing on -site manager's office back to a residential unit.
• Improvements to the project entry/arrival and auto circulation for guest access.
• Replacement of deteriorating carports with a fully enclosed parking structure
• Replacement of 15 surface parking spaces with enclosed parking.
• Replacement of the obsolete courts buildings with new residential dwellings
compatible with the Coldstream vernacular.
Background on the Coldstream Condominiums
The Coldstream Condominiums were completed in 1981 and include 45 residential
condominiums and other related improvements including on -site parking, extensive
landscaping, pool, spa, cabana, tennis court and a racquetball/squash court. Coldstream
has approximately 23 units included in the Vail Cascade short term rental program; total
revenues are approximately $1.3 million per year producing approximately $130,000 of
sales and lodging tax revenue to the Town. The on -site management office and
housekeeping facilities are very important to these short-term rental operations.
With the opening of the Cascade Club [Aria] in 1987 (with its seven tennis courts and six
racquetball/squash courts), the Coldstream tennis and racquetball/squash facilities
became obsolete as Coldstream owners are able to utilize Cascade Club facilities. Since
that time the racquetball/squash court has been adapted to property and rental
management use and the tennis court is seldom used.
In late 1990 an amendment to SDD4 was proposed and recommended by Community
Development Department [9/24/90] to approve a small increase in GRFA and clarify
other development standards. The plan included the renovation of the courts building into
property management facilities and storage as well as two employee restricted units.
Because of financing difficulties the project never implemented.
Since it's opening in the early 1980's the Coldstream Association has been very diligent
in maintaining and upgrading the project. In 1995, Coldstream owners expended $1.5
Coldstream Condominiums
SDD Amendment Work Session
9/18/2012
6 -2 -2
million to replace the roofs and make substantial site /landscape improvements. In 2002
the Association spent a considerable amount of money to bring natural gas into the
project. In 2004, the Board prepared a phased redevelopment plan for the project. The
first phase consisted of replacing all building exteriors: siding, windows, doors and
extensive landscape and site improvements at a cost of $6.2 million. These
improvements were completed in 2006. The second phase is to replace the court
facilities and carports which are deteriorating.
As evident by this proposal, Coldstream owners continue to demonstrate their
commitment to an aggressive maintenance and improvements program for their project.
Existing and Proposed Development
Coldstream is situated on an approximately 4.21 acre ( +/- 183,479 sf) parcel designated as
Area B in Special Development District 4 (SSD No. 4, Cascade Village). The property
does not have underlying zoning as it was annexed into the Town with the creation of
SDD4.
SDD No. 4 - Area B development standards include:
( *) — Or as otherwise indicated on site specific development plan.
( * *) — 50% of required parking shall be located within the main building or buildings or
hidden from view.
With the exception of GRFA and setbacks (for the substantially below grade parking
structure), the proposed addition can be constructed in accordance with all applicable
development standards outlined by SDD No. 4. The following summarizes how the
proposed amendment/addition would affect zoning/development standards:
Dwelling Units
The five proposed condominium units would increase project density to 50 units, well
below the maximum allowable of 65 units (the two EHU's, if developed as Type III units
would not count toward density).
Coldstream Condominiums
SDD Amendment Work Session
9/18/2012
6 -2 -3
Allowed
Existing
• Dwelling units
65
45
• GRFA
65,000 sf
66,898 sf
• Site Coverage
35 %, or 64,218 sf
42,689 sf
• Landscaping
50 %, or 91,740 sf( *)
88,686 sf
• Parking Spaces
As per Chapter 10( * *)
77
• Height
48 ft
48 ft
• Setbacks
20 ft
20 ft
( *) — Or as otherwise indicated on site specific development plan.
( * *) — 50% of required parking shall be located within the main building or buildings or
hidden from view.
With the exception of GRFA and setbacks (for the substantially below grade parking
structure), the proposed addition can be constructed in accordance with all applicable
development standards outlined by SDD No. 4. The following summarizes how the
proposed amendment/addition would affect zoning/development standards:
Dwelling Units
The five proposed condominium units would increase project density to 50 units, well
below the maximum allowable of 65 units (the two EHU's, if developed as Type III units
would not count toward density).
Coldstream Condominiums
SDD Amendment Work Session
9/18/2012
6 -2 -3
GRFA
Existing development slightly exceeds the maximum allowable GRFA of 65,000 sq ft.
The five condominiums would add approximately 10,000 sq ft of GRFA to the site. The
two EHU's, if developed as Type HI units would not count towards GRFA.
Site Coverage
Proposed improvements would increase site coverage from +/- 42,689 to +/- 58,681 sq ft,
or 32% of the site. The allowable site coverage is 35 %. Existing and proposed site
coverage diagrams are found at the end of this report.
Landscaping
While detailed landscape plans have not yet been done, a green roof is envisioned as a
possible solution for the parking garage. Assuming that a green roof is a part of the final
design solution the total landscaping of the entire site would actually increase from +/-
48% to +/ -50 %. Existing and proposed conceptual landscape diagrams are found at the
end of this report.
Parking
There are presently approximately 77 parking spaces at Coldstream. These spaces
include surface spaces, parking in carports and garage parking within individual units.
The parking requirement for the new addition would involve replacing any existing
parking displaced by the project and providing parking for the new development. The
proposed addition creates a requirement for 17 new spaces (10 for the five
condominiums, 4 for the two EHU's, and 3 for the management office). Proposed
improvements displace 47 existing surface and carport spaces. This means 64 new
spaces are required. The proposed parking garage is designed for 64 parking spaces and
3 new surface spaces are also proposed for a total of 67 new spaces. This would satisfy
parking requirements
Height
The SDD allows for building height of 48'. The proposed improvements will be
designed within this limitation.
Setbacks
20' setbacks are required by SDD No. 4. The residential buildings would conform to this
standard; however the parking garage would be located within a few feet of the south
property line. At the south property line the majority of the parking garage would be
below grade and at the highest point would only extend 6 -8 feet above grade.
The adjacent properties to the south, Eagle Pointe Condominiums and Park Meadows, are
zoned HDMF. As a point of comparison, if HDMF zoning were applied to Coldstream
the allowable number of units would increase to 105 and the allowable GRFA would
Coldstream Condominiums 4
SDD Amendment Work Session
9/18/2012
6 -2 -4
increase to 139,444 sq ft. This amount of GRFA is over twice that permitted by the SDD
and greatly exceeds the GRFA proposed by these improvements.
Review Process Alternatives
As outlined above, the proposed improvements could be constructed in accordance with
existing SDD development standards with the exception of GRFA and setbacks (for the
below grade portion of the garage adjacent to the south property line). There are two
alternatives for obtaining development approvals for these improvements:
Remove Coldstream from SDD No. 4/Re -zone to HDMF/Request Setback Variance
Removing Coldstream from SDD No. 4 and re- zoning to HDMF would provide more
than enough GRFA to accommodate proposed improvements. However, a setback
variance would also be necessary. While procedurally these steps are all feasible, there is
not a great deal of precedence in removing land within an existing SDD (under these
circumstances) which creates a degree of uncertainty with this process alternative. In
addition, from the town's perspective simply re- zoning Coldstream to HDMF would
leave the door open for a significant re- development of the property and not provide the
Town with the same certainty of having an approved development plan as per SDD
regulations.
Amend SDD No. 4
Two fairly straight forward amendments to existing SDD development standards would
allow for these improvements to Coldstream — increasing allowable GRFA by +/- 10,000
sq ft and modifying setback requirements to state "20' or as otherwise indicated by an
approved development plan ". A development plan depicting the location of the garage
would then be approved in conjunction with these amendments.
While both of these processes would have the same result, amending the SDD is the
preferred alternative.
SDD Review Criteria
The following criteria are used to evaluate a proposed SDD. Bullet -point responses to
how this proposal would conform to these criteria are also provided:
1. Compatibility: Design compatibility and sensitivity to the immediate environment,
neighborhood and adjacent properties relative to architectural design, scale, bulk,
building height, buffer zones, identity, character, visual integrity and orientation.
• The limited scope of proposed development is consistent with and sensitive to
existing development within the site and on surrounding properties.
Coldstream Condominiums
SDD Amendment Work Session
9/18/2012
6 -2 -5
2. Relationship: Uses, activity and density which provide a compatible, efficient and
workable relationship with surrounding uses and activity.
• Density (dwelling units) is within that permitted by the existing SDD.
• Proposed uses are consistent with existing uses on the site and with surrounding
areas.
3. Parking and Loading: Compliance with parking and loading requirements as outlined
in chapter 10 of this title.
• Parking in accordance with Chapter 10 can be provided.
4. Comprehensive Plan: Conformity with applicable elements of the Vail comprehensive
plan, town policies and urban design plans.
• The maintenance and upgrading of existing properties, particularly those with a
strong short-term rental component is encouraged by the Town's master plans.
5. Natural And/Or Geologic Hazard: Identification and mitigation of natural and/or
geologic hazards that affect the property on which the special development district is
proposed.
• N/A
6. Design Features: Site plan, building design and location and open space provisions
designed to produce a functional development responsive and sensitive to natural
features, vegetation and overall aesthetic quality of the community.
• Proposed improvements are located on land that is already developed. As such
this criterion is not applicable.
7. Traffic: A circulation system designed for both vehicles and pedestrians addressing on
and off site traffic circulation.
Revisions to the project entry will allow for improvements to existing vehicular
circulation.
8. Landscaping: Functional and aesthetic landscaping and open space in order to optimize
and preserve natural features, recreation, views and function.
• With the green roof proposed for the parking garage the project will result in a net
increase to landscape area (48% to 50 %).
9. Workable Plan: Phasing plan or subdivision plan that will maintain a workable,
functional and efficient relationship throughout the development of the special
development district.
Coldstream Condominiums
SDD Amendment Work Session
9/18/2012
6 -2 -6
• The project would be done in one phase.
Project Summary
The revenue to be derived from the five condominiums is clearly the "economic engine"
necessary to fund other improvements to Coldstream — the two employee housing units,
the development of a parking garage, a dedicated on -site management facility and other
related site improvements. Contrary to a "traditional development project ", the five
condominiums will not bring a windfall of profits to the Association but rather will allow
for the implementation of Phase II of the Association's redevelopment master plan and in
doing so further their tradition of continually maintaining and upgrading their
community.
With approximately one -half of Coldstream's units involved in a short-term rental
program, the project plays an important role in providing the Town with guest
accommodations. In addition, the lodging/sales tax revenues to the Town generated by
Coldstream are not insignificant. The improvements that can be made to the project via
this re- development plan will improve Coldstream's ability to serve the lodging market
and in doing so provide benefit's to the entire Vail community.
Coldstream Condominiums
SDD Amendment Work Session
9/18/2012
6 -2 -7
Coldstream Condominiums
SooAmendment Work Session
$1N2Zm2
6 -2 -8
\�
\ \�
� (\
(/
\��
j
2
±\
ƒ
Coldstream Condominiums
SooAmendment Work Session
$1N2Zm2
6 -2 -8
\�
\ \�
� (\
(/
Coldstream Condominiums
SDD Amendment Work Session
@!k2Zm2
6 -2 -9
\\\;F
.
�o
\
^
'\
,
» \
�\
-
. \
�}
ƒƒ
w
Coldstream Condominiums
SDD Amendment Work Session
@!k2Zm2
6 -2 -9
/
af&wZ±
k c;L-
Coldstream �\
Cnomini_s
SDD Amendment Work Session
@!x2012
6 -2 -10
10
ZY & !I?
\ / \� \� Z4
ZZ
� � ƒ \�
Q.,
...... ......
.. ..... ..... .......
...... .......
... ......
...... ......
\. : +
Coldstream Condominiums
SDD Amendment Work Session
9/18/2012
6-2-11
}/
I I
I
` »f
ay 7w22a
Coldstream Condominiums
SDD Amendment Work Session
9/18/2012
6-2-12
\ \#
12
MEMORANDUM
TO: Planning and Environmental Commission
FROM: Community Development Department
DATE: February 28, 2011
SUBJECT: A request for a recommendation to the Vail Town Council on a proposed major
amendment to Special Development District No. 4, Cascade Village, pursuant to
Article 12 -9A, Special Development District, Vail Town Code, to allow for an increase
in gross residential floor area and site coverage, and a reduction of the side setback,
located at 1476 Westhaven Drive /Lot 53, Glen Lyon Subdivision, and setting forth
details in regard thereto. (PEC110014)
Applicant: Coldstream Condominiums Homeowners Association, represented by
Tom Braun
Planner: Warren Campbell
SUMMARY
The applicant, Coldstream Homeowners Association, represented by Tom Braun, is
requesting a work session with the Planning and Environmental Commission on a proposed
major amendment to Special Development District (SDD) No. 4, Cascade Village, pursuant
to Article 12 -9A, Special Development District, Vail Town Code, to allow for an increase in
gross residential floor area and site coverage, and a reduction of the side setback, located at
1476 Westhaven Drive. The proposed amendments include five additional dwelling units
and two employee housing units located above a parking structure.
As this is a work session the applicant and Staff request that this item be tabled to March 14,
2011.
II. DESCRIPTION OF THE REQUEST
The applicant is requesting a work session with the Planning and Environmental Commission
in order to gather feedback on a proposed major amendment to SDD No. 4 for Development
Area B, Coldstream. The goal of the applicant is to gather feedback from the Planning and
Environmental Commission on the proposal in order for the homeowners association to
determine if additional investment is warranted to develop the documents for a final review of
the project. The applicant acknowledges that this is not an official review of the project with
regard to the criteria and does not perceive the feedback they receive as binding.
The applicant is proposing to construct five (5) dwelling units and two (2) deed restricted
employee housing units along the southern property line adjacent to Park Meadows and The
Eagle Point Condominiums. The proposed units would be located on a partially buried
parking structure containing 64 enclosed parking spaces with an additional three parking
spaces on the exterior of the structure. These proposed improvements would replace and
existing tennis court which the applicant has suggested are `obsolete" and replace
"deteriorating" carports.
In association with the proposed major amendment to the SDD the applicant is suggesting to
9/18/2012
6 -3 -1
provide 100% of the employee housing on -site (50% required) and furthermore would provide
"over twice" the required mitigation square footage for a total of approximately 2,350 square
feet. This would be provided in two 3- bedroom units.
Other improvements proposed by the applicant include:
• A new on -site property manager's office within the enclosed parking structure;
• Conversion of the existing manager's office back into a residential unit; and
• Improvements to the project entry/arrival and auto circulation.
In a letter dated February 9, 2011, Staff provided several comments on the documents
submitted for review. The comments included initial feedback from all Town Departments
some of which Staff acknowledged would be addressed should the project move forward with
a final review of a major amendment. Those comments which Staff believes are relevant to
a work session discussion to identify comments and concerns prior to moving forward are:
• The lack of landscaping along the north elevation of the proposed parking structure
is a concern for staff due to the height of the proposed garage and structures. The
development currently incorporates a design in which landscaping is included
around all structures.
• Staff is concerned about the ability to place significant landscaping on the roof of the
parking garage with regards to weight and soil depth.
• The required snow storage will need to be shown. Currently, wintertime conditions
can become tight within the development. Will any areas be heated?
• Possible public benefits that may be needed in the area include extension of
sidewalks and stream bank stabilization.
• Any encroachments that may be existing in the stream tract will be requested to be
removed.
• Staff has concerns about the exposed south wall of the parking structure in close
proximity to the property line eliminating the ability to buffer the improvement from
neighboring properties.
A vicinity map (Attachment A), a written document from the applicant detailing the request
(Attachment B), a set of proposed conceptual plans (Attachment C), and a letter from the
applicant with responses to concerns identified by Staff in its February 9, 2011 letter
(Attachment D) are attached for reference.
As this is a work session Staff has not prepared responses to the nine criteria which shall be
used in evaluating the merits of a major amendment to an established SDD. It will be the
burden of the applicant to demonstrate that submittal material and the proposed
development plan comply with each of the following standards, or demonstrate that one or
more of them is not applicable, or that a practical solution consistent with the public interest
has been achieved. Staff believes that feedback to the applicant should consider the
following criteria.
A. Consideration of Factors Regarding Special Development Districts:
A. Design compatibility and sensitivity to the immediate environment, neighborhood
and adjacent properties relative to architectural design, scale, bulk, building height,
buffer zones, identity, character, visual integrity and orientation.
9/18/2012
6 -3 -2
B. Uses, activity and density which provide a compatible, efficient and workable
relationship with surrounding uses and activity.
C. Compliance with parking and loading requirements as outlined in Chapter 12 -10 of
the Vail Town Code.
D. Conformity with the applicable elements of the Vail Comprehensive Plan, Town
policies and Urban Design Plan.
E. Identification and mitigation of natural and /or geologic hazards that affect the
property on which the special development district is proposed.
F. Site plan, building design and location and open space provisions designed to
produce a functional development responsive and sensitive to natural features,
vegetation and overall aesthetic quality of the community.
G. A circulation system designed for both vehicles and pedestrians addressing on and
off -site traffic circulation.
H. Functional and aesthetic landscaping and open space in order to optimize and
preserve natural features, recreation, views and functions.
I. Phasing plan or subdivision plan that will maintain a workable, functional and
efficient relationship throughout the development of the special development
district.
Staff believes the following questions will help begin a conversation based on the proposed
plans for a major amendment. Staff and the applicant acknowledge that the plans submitted
are conceptual and will need to provide additional detail if the project moves forward.
• Will the conceptual proposal have positive effects on the existing Coldstream
Condominiums and adjacent properties with regard to design, scale, bulk, building
height, buffer zones, identity, character, visual integrity and orientation?
• Will the conceptual proposal contain uses, activities, and density (including gross
residential floor area) which provide a compatible, efficient and workable relationship
with surrounding uses and activities?
• Will the conceptual proposal contain public benefits commensurate with the
suggested development standard deviations?
• Will the conceptual proposal contain functional and aesthetic landscaping and open
space in order to optimize and preserve natural features, recreation, views and
functions?
• What other feedback would the Planning and Environmental Commission like to
provide?
II1. BACKGROUND
9/18/2012
6 -3 -3
Special Development District No. 4
Special Development District (SDD) No. 4, Cascade Village, was adopted by Ordinance No.
5, Series of 1976. At minimum of seventeen subsequent amendments occurred from 1977
through the present day, inclusive of the most recent major amendment to approve the
revised development plan for Cascade Residences in 2007 and the Cornerstone project in
2008. The subject property was a Planned Unit Development under Eagle County
Jurisdiction when the property was annexed in 1975. SDD No. 4 includes the following:
Area A
Cascade Village
Area B
Coldstream Condominiums
Area C
Glen Lyon Primary/Secondary and Single Family Lots
Area D
Glen Lyon Commercial Site
The entire Cascade Village site is approximately 97.5 acres. Because the property was
annexed into the Town of Vail as a Planned Unit Development under Eagle County
jurisdiction and early Special Development Districts were not based on an underlying zoning,
there is no underlying zoning for this SDD. The uses and development standards for the
entire property are as outlined in the adopting ordinance for SDD No. 4.
Coldstream Site
The Coldstream Condominium development was completed in 1981 and included 45 dwelling
units. In 1990 approvals were granted which provided for an increase in gross residential
floor area in association with a project which did not move forward. Most recently
Coldstream completed a complete renovation to the exterior of all buildings including siding
materials, windows, and doors.
IV. ROLES OF REVIEWING BOARDS
Major Amendment to a Special Development District
Planning and Environmental Commission:
The PEC shall review the proposal for and make a recommendation to the Town Council
based upon the findings made on the criteria located in Chapter 12 -9A, Special Development
District, Vail Town Code.
Town Council:
The Town Council takes into consideration the PEC's recommendation when reviewing an
application for a special development district and is responsible for final approval /denial of an
SDD. The Town Council shall review the proposal and approve /approve with conditions /deny
the application based upon the findings made on the criteria located in Chapter 12 -9A,
Special Development District, Vail Town Code.
V. APPLICABLE PLANNING DOCUMENTS
Vail Land Use Plan (in part)
The goals articulated here reflect the desires of the citizenry as expressed through the series
of public meetings that were held throughout the project. A set of initial goals were
developed which were then substantially revised after different types of opinions were
brought out in the second meeting. The goal statements were developed to reflect a general
consensus once the public had had the opportunity to reflect on the concepts and ideas
9/18/2012
6 -3 -4
initially presented. The goal statements were then revised through the review process with
the Task Force, the Planning and Environmental Commission and Town Council and now
represent policy guidelines in the review process for new development proposals. These
goal statements should be used in conjunction with the adopted Land Use Plan map, in the
evaluation of any development proposal.
Resort Accommodations and Service:
This area includes activities aimed at accommodating the overnight and short -term visitor to
the area. Primary uses include hotels, lodges, service stations, and parking structures (with
densities up to 25 dwelling units or 50 accommodation units per buildable acre)
The goal statements which Staff believes are applicable to the proposed plan are as follows:
1. General Growth / Development
1.1 Vail should continue to grow in a controlled environment, maintaining a
balance between residential, commercial and recreational uses to serve both
the visitor and the permanent resident.
1.2 The quality of the environment including air, water and other natural
resources should be protected as the Town grows.
1.3 The quality of development should be maintained and upgraded whenever
possible.
1.12 Vail should accommodate most of the additional growth in existing developed
areas (infill areas).
1.13 Vail recognizes its stream tract as being a desirable land feature as well as
its potential for public use.
2. Skier /Tourist Concerns
2.1 The community should emphasize its role as a destination resort while
accommodating day visitors.
2.4 The community should improve summer recreational options to improve year -
round tourism.
2.5 The community should improve non -skier recreational options to improve
year -round tourism.
5. Residential
5.1 Additional residential growth should continue to occur primarily in existing,
platted areas and as appropriate in new areas where high hazards do not
exist.
5.2 Quality time share units should be accommodated to help keep occupancy
rates up.
5
9/18/2012
6 -3 -5
5.3 Affordable employee housing should be made available through private
efforts, assisted by limited incentives, provided by the Town of Vail, with
appropriate restrictions.
5.4 Residential growth should keep pace with the market place demands fora full
range of housing types.
5.5 The existing employee housing base should be preserved and upgraded.
Additional employee housing needs should be accommodated at varied
sites throughout the community.
6. Community Services
6.1 Services should keep pace with increased growth.
6.2 The Town of Vail should play a role in future development through balancing
growth with services.
6.3 Services should be adjusted to keep pace with the needs of peak periods.
Town of Vail Zoning Regulations
Special Development District (in part)
12 -9A -1: Purpose And Applicability:
A. Purpose: The purpose of the special development district is to encourage flexibility and
creativity in the development of land in order to promote its most appropriate use; to
improve the design character and quality of the new development with the town; to
facilitate the adequate and economical provision of streets and utilities; to preserve the
natural and scenic features of open space areas; and to further the overall goals of the
community as stated in the Vail comprehensive plan. An approved development plan fora
special development district, in conjunction with the property's underlying zone district,
shall establish the requirements for guiding development and uses of property included in
the special development district.
12 -9A -2: Definitions:
MAJOR AMENDMENT (PEC AND /OR COUNCIL REVIEM: Any proposal to change uses;
increase gross residential floorarea; change the number of dwelling oraccommodation units,
modify, enlarge or expand any approved special development district (other than "minor
amendments" as defined in this section), except as provided under section 12 -15 -4, 'Interior
Conversions ", or 12 -15 -5, 'Additional Gross Residential Floor Area (250 Ordinance)" of this
title.
VI. ZONING ANALYSIS
The following is a zoning analysis of the development potential of Development Area B as
contained within the SDD.
9/18/2012
6 -3 -6
Legal Description:
Land Use Designation:
Lot Size:
Development Standard
Lot Area:
Setbacks:
South:
Lot 53, Glen Lyon Subdivision
Resort Accommodations and Services
173,369 sq. ft.13.98 acres
Allowed Existing
173,369 s.f. 173,369 s.f
Per SDD 20 ft.
Proposed
no change
3 ft.
Height:
48 ft.
48 ft.
no change
Density Control:
65 d.u.s
45 d.u.s
50 d.u.s 2 e.h.u.s
GRFA:
65,000 s.f,
66,898 s.f.
76,898 s.f.
Site Coverage:
60,679 s.f.
42,689 s.f
58,681 s.f.
(35 %)
(24.6 %)
(33.8 %)
Landscaping:
86,684 s f.
76,736 s.f.
80,218 s.f.
(50 %)
(44.3 %)
(46.2 %)
Parking
2 space per d.u. 77 spaces
97 spaces
90 required
104 required*
*The proposed amendment
does not increase
the parking deficiency as required by Code.
VII. SURROUNDING LAND USES AND ZONING
Land Use
Zoning
North: Recreation
None
South: Multi- family residential
High Density Multiple - family District
East: Residential
SDD No. 4 Cascade Village
West: Recreation
No Zoning /General Use District
VIII. STAFF RECOMMENDATION
The Community Development Department recommends the Planning and Environmental
Commission tables this application to March 14, 2011.
IX. ATTACHMENTS
A. Vicinity Map
B. Applicant's written application
C. Proposed conceptual plans
D. Letter from the applicant addressing Staff's February 9, 2011 letter
9/18/2012
6 -3 -7
Coldstream Condominium.-,-,
Subject Property
e 9 /10 /LU1Ler�m..e�r tno..:u.aa,,.o bne.e.n...iww�,a�y.,n.♦a�e�r a.��..,rn.,e...,r..ra.,rair �ear.a ,
Feet.. �
0 350 500 1000
Lap MOdified`Fe bruary24,207} 38. Si!
Coldstream Condominiums
Cascade Village SDD Amendment
January 31, 2011, revised February 24, 2011
Over the past 30 years the Coldstream Condominium Owners Association has taken
many steps to continually upgrade and improve their community. Recently the
Association has been evaluating the feasibility of implementing a relatively small but
important improvement program that would involve the addition of five new residential
units, two EHU's and a number of other on -site improvements. In order to implement
this plan an amendment to SDD No. 4- Cascade Village will be necessary.
Prior to submitting formal applications to amend SDD No. 4 the Association is interested
in a work session level discussion with the Planning and Environmental Commission and
the Town Council. The goal of these work sessions is to gauge the Town's interest in this
re- development plan. While it is understood that any input received from the Town
during this work session process will be preliminary and non - binding, it will none the
less be beneficial to the Association in deciding what future actions to take on this re-
development plan.
The following provides an explanation of the proposed re- development plans and
associated benefits, background on the Coldstream Condominiums, a summary of
existing and proposed development, an evaluation of alternative review processes, a
bullet -point response to SDD review criteria and a summary of the proposed project.
Proposed Re- development/Benefits of Project
Major elements of the re- development plans include the construction of five new free -
market condominiums, two new employee housing units, a new parking garage and
associated site improvements. There are a number of other improvements that are being
considered as a part of this project. While at this stage plans are conceptual and subject
to change, other specific improvements under consideration include:
• Employee housing square footage that is over twice that required by the Town's
Inclusionary Housing Ordinance ( +/ -2,350 sf in two 3- Bedroom units).
• A new on -site property manager's office designed and constructed specifically for
this purpose.
• Conversion of the existing on -site manager's office back to a residential unit.
• Improvements to the project entry/arrival and auto circulation for guest access.
• Replacement of deteriorating carports with a fully enclosed parking structure
• Replacement of 15 surface parking spaces with enclosed parking.
• Replacement of the obsolete courts buildings with new residential dwellings
compatible with the Coldstream vernacular.
Coldstream Condominiums
SDD Amendment Work Session
9/18/2012
6 -3 -9
Background on the Coldstream Condominiums
The Coldstream Condominiums were completed in 1981 and include 45 residential
condominiums and other related improvements including on -site parking, extensive
landscaping, pool, spa, cabana, tennis court and a racquetball/squash court. Coldstream
has approximately 23 units included in the Vail Cascade short term rental program; total
revenues are approximately $1.3 million per year producing approximately $130,000 of
sales and lodging tax revenue to the Town. The on -site management office and
housekeeping facilities are very important to these short-term rental operations.
With the opening of the Cascade Club [Aria] in 1987 (with its seven tennis courts and six
racquetball/squash courts), the Coldstream tennis and racquetball/squash facilities
became obsolete as Coldstream owners are able to utilize Cascade Club facilities. Since
that time the racquetball/squash court has been adapted to property and rental
management use and the tennis court is seldom used.
In late 1990 an amendment to SDD4 was proposed and recommended by Community
Development Department [9/24/90] to approve a small increase in GRFA and clarify
other development standards. The plan included the renovation of the courts building into
property management facilities and storage as well as two employee restricted units.
Because of financing difficulties the project never implemented.
Since it's opening in the early 1980's the Coldstream Association has been very diligent
in maintaining and upgrading the project. In 1995, Coldstream owners expended $1.5
million to replace the roofs and make substantial site /landscape improvements. In 2002
the Association spent a considerable amount of money to bring natural gas into the
project. In 2004, the Board prepared a phased redevelopment plan for the project. The
first phase consisted of replacing all building exteriors: siding, windows, doors and
extensive landscape and site improvements at a cost of $6.2 million. These
improvements were completed in 2006. The second phase is to replace the court
facilities and carports which are deteriorating.
As evident by this proposal, Coldstream owners continue to demonstrate their
commitment to an aggressive maintenance and improvements program for their project.
Existing and Proposed Development
Coldstream is situated on an approximately 3.98 acre ( +/- 173,369 so parcel designated as
Area B in Special Development District 4 (SSD No. 4, Cascade Village). The property
does not have underlying zoning as it was annexed into the Town with the creation of
SDD4.
SDD No. 4 - Area B development standards include:
Coldstream Condominiums
SDD Amendment Work Session
9/18/2012
6 -3 -10
( *) — Or as otherwise indicated on site specific development plan.
( * *) — 50% of required parking shall be located within the main building or buildings or
hidden from view.
With the exception of GRFA and setbacks (for the substantially below grade parking
structure), the proposed addition can be constructed in accordance with all applicable
development standards outlined by SDD No. 4. The following summarizes how the
proposed amendment /addition would affect zoning /development standards:
Dwelling Units
The five proposed condominium units would increase project density to 50 units, well
below the maximum allowable of 65 units (the two EHU's, if developed as Type III units
would not count toward density).
GRFA
Existing development slightly exceeds the maximum allowable GRFA of 65,000 sq ft.
The five condominiums would add approximately 10,000 sq ft of GRFA to the site. The
two EHU's, if developed as Type III units would not count towards GRFA.
Site Coverage
Proposed improvements would increase site coverage from +/-42,689 to +/- 58,681 sq ft,
or 34% of the site. The allowable site coverage is 35 %. Existing and proposed site
coverage diagrams are found at the end of this report.
Landscaping
While detailed landscape plans have not yet been done, a green roof is envisioned as a
possible solution for the parking garage. Assuming that a green roof is a part of the final
design solution the total landscaping of the entire site would actually increase from +/-
44% to +/ -46 %. Existing and proposed conceptual landscape diagrams are found at the
end of this report.
Parking
There are presently approximately 77 parking spaces at Coldstream. These spaces
include surface spaces, parking in carports and garage parking within individual units.
Coldstream Condominiums
SDD Amendment Work Session
9/18/2012
6 -3 -11
Allowed
Existing
• Dwelling units
65
45
• GRFA
65,000 sf
66,898 sf
• Site Coverage
35 %, or 60,967 sf
42,689 sf
• Landscaping
50 %, or 86,684 sf( *)
88,686 sf
• Parking Spaces
As per Chapter 10( * *)
77
• Height
48 ft
48 ft
• Setbacks
20 ft
20 ft
( *) — Or as otherwise indicated on site specific development plan.
( * *) — 50% of required parking shall be located within the main building or buildings or
hidden from view.
With the exception of GRFA and setbacks (for the substantially below grade parking
structure), the proposed addition can be constructed in accordance with all applicable
development standards outlined by SDD No. 4. The following summarizes how the
proposed amendment /addition would affect zoning /development standards:
Dwelling Units
The five proposed condominium units would increase project density to 50 units, well
below the maximum allowable of 65 units (the two EHU's, if developed as Type III units
would not count toward density).
GRFA
Existing development slightly exceeds the maximum allowable GRFA of 65,000 sq ft.
The five condominiums would add approximately 10,000 sq ft of GRFA to the site. The
two EHU's, if developed as Type III units would not count towards GRFA.
Site Coverage
Proposed improvements would increase site coverage from +/-42,689 to +/- 58,681 sq ft,
or 34% of the site. The allowable site coverage is 35 %. Existing and proposed site
coverage diagrams are found at the end of this report.
Landscaping
While detailed landscape plans have not yet been done, a green roof is envisioned as a
possible solution for the parking garage. Assuming that a green roof is a part of the final
design solution the total landscaping of the entire site would actually increase from +/-
44% to +/ -46 %. Existing and proposed conceptual landscape diagrams are found at the
end of this report.
Parking
There are presently approximately 77 parking spaces at Coldstream. These spaces
include surface spaces, parking in carports and garage parking within individual units.
Coldstream Condominiums
SDD Amendment Work Session
9/18/2012
6 -3 -11
The parking requirement for the new addition would involve replacing any existing
parking displaced by the project and providing parking for the new development. The
proposed addition creates a requirement for 17 new spaces (10 for the five
condominiums, 4 for the two EHU's, and 3 for the management office). Proposed
improvements displace 47 existing surface and carport spaces. This means 64 new
spaces are required. The proposed parking garage is designed for 64 parking spaces and
3 new surface spaces are also proposed for a total of 67 new spaces. This would satisfy
parking requirements
Height
The SDD allows for building height of 48'. The proposed improvements will be
designed within this limitation.
Setbacks
20' setbacks are required by SDD No. 4. The residential buildings would conform to this
standard; however the parking garage would be located within a few feet of the south
property line. At the south property line the majority of the parking garage would be
below grade and at the highest point would only extend 6 -8 feet above grade.
The adjacent properties to the south, Eagle Pointe Condominiums and Park Meadows, are
zoned HDMF. As a point of comparison, if HDMF zoning were applied to Coldstream
the allowable number of units would increase to 105 and the allowable GRFA would
increase to 139,444 sq ft. This amount of GRFA is over twice that permitted by the SDD
and greatly exceeds the GRFA proposed by these improvements.
Review Process Alternatives
As outlined above, the proposed improvements could be constructed in accordance with
existing SDD development standards with the exception of GRFA and setbacks (for the
below grade portion of the garage adjacent to the south property line). There are two
alternatives for obtaining development approvals for these improvements:
Remove Coldstream from SDD No. 4 /Re -zone to HDMF /Request Setback Variance
Removing Coldstream from SDD No. 4 and re- zoning to HDMF would provide more
than enough GRFA to accommodate proposed improvements. However, a setback
variance would also be necessary. While procedurally these steps are all feasible, there is
not a great deal of precedence in removing land within an existing SDD (under these
circumstances) which creates a degree of uncertainty with this process alternative. In
addition, from the town's perspective simply re- zoning Coldstream to HDMF would
leave the door open for a significant re- development of the property and not provide the
Town with the same certainty of having an approved development plan as per SDD
regulations.
Coldstream Condominiums
SDD Amendment Work Session
9/18/2012
6 -3 -12
Amend SDD No. 4
Two fairly straight forward amendments to existing SDD development standards would
allow for these improvements to Coldstream — increasing allowable GRFA by + /- 10,000
sq ft and modifying setback requirements to state "20' or as otherwise indicated by an
approved development plan ". A development plan depicting the location of the garage
would then be approved in conjunction with these amendments.
While both of these processes would have the same result, amending the SDD is the
preferred alternative.
SDD Review Criteria
The following criteria are used to evaluate a proposed SDD. Bullet -point responses to
how this proposal would conform to these criteria are also provided:
1. Compatibility: Design compatibility and sensitivity to the immediate environment,
neighborhood and adjacent properties relative to architectural design, scale, bulk,
building height, buffer zones, identity, character, visual integrity and orientation.
• The limited scope of proposed development is consistent with and sensitive to
existing development within the site and on surrounding properties.
2. Relationship: Uses, activity and density which provide a compatible, efficient and
workable relationship with surrounding uses and activity.
• Density (dwelling units) is within that permitted by the existing SDD.
• Proposed uses are consistent with existing uses on the site and with surrounding
areas.
3. Parking and Loading: Compliance with parking and loading requirements as outlined
in chapter 10 of this title.
• Parking in accordance with Chapter 10 can be provided.
4. Comprehensive Plan: Conformity with applicable elements of the Vail comprehensive
plan, town policies and urban design plans.
• The maintenance and upgrading of existing properties, particularly those with a
strong short-term rental component is encouraged by the Town's master plans.
5. Natural And/Or Geologic Hazard: Identification and mitigation of natural and/or
geologic hazards that affect the property on which the special development district is
proposed.
• N/A
Coldstream Condominiums
SDD Amendment Work Session
9/18/2012
6 -3 -13
6. Design Features: Site plan, building design and location and open space provisions
designed to produce a functional development responsive and sensitive to natural
features, vegetation and overall aesthetic quality of the community.
• Proposed improvements are located on land that is already developed. As such
this criterion is not applicable.
7. Traffic: A circulation system designed for both vehicles and pedestrians addressing on
and off site traffic circulation.
• Revisions to the project entry will allow for improvements to existing vehicular
circulation.
8. Landscaping: Functional and aesthetic landscaping and open space in order to optimize
and preserve natural features, recreation, views and function.
• With the green roof proposed for the parking garage the project will result in a net
increase to landscape area (44% to 46 %).
9. Workable Plan: Phasing plan or subdivision plan that will maintain a workable,
functional and efficient relationship throughout the development of the special
development district.
• The project would be done in one phase.
Project Summary
The revenue to be derived from the five condominiums is clearly the "economic engine"
necessary to fund other improvements to Coldstream — the two employee housing units,
the development of a parking garage, a dedicated on -site management facility and other
related site improvements. Contrary to a "traditional development project ", the five
condominiums will not bring a windfall of profits to the Association but rather will allow
for the implementation of Phase II of the Association's redevelopment master plan and in
doing so further their tradition of continually maintaining and upgrading their
community.
With approximately one -half of Coldstream's units involved in a short-term rental
program, the project plays an important role in providing the Town with guest
accommodations. In addition, the lodging /sales tax revenues to the Town generated by
Coldstream are not insignificant. The improvements that can be made to the project via
this re- development plan will improve Coldstream's ability to serve the lodging market
and in doing so provide benefit's to the entire Vail community.
Coldstream Condominiums
SDD Amendment Work Session
9/18/2012
6 -3 -14
Coldstream Condominiums
SDD Amendment Work Session
9/18/2012
6-3-15
>
/
{/ /
Coldstream Condominiums
SDD Amendment Work Session
9/18/2012
6-3-15
kdd2
Coldstream Condominiums
SOD Amendment Work Session
$lk2Zm2
6 -1 -l6
3
�
/
\.
\
Coldstream Condominiums
SOD Amendment Work Session
$lk2Zm2
6 -1 -l6
Coldstream Condominiums
SDD Amendment Work Session
9/18/2012
6 -3 -17
±$%S2
Coldstream Condominiums
SDD Amendment Work Sessi m
$!»2!012
6 -J -l8
!0
\ \n®
.. .
-(\§ /2
}
{
\\
±a3
{/
`$2
(\ I
.
. _
�i 27
\ \�
� ± \
» \
\
\\
Coldstream Condominiums
SDD Amendment Work Sessi m
$!»2!012
6 -J -l8
!0
a °f&£5x
\: A
2 {/
Coldstream Condominiums
SDD Amendment Work Session
9/18/2012
6 -1 -l9
I
I:
(§
6K
\ \^
In
....
\ Kn
„
& ±
\ \^
\\
ƒ
��
& &
O
/
\
f {
�
:
Coldstream Condominiums
SDD Amendment Work Session
9/18/2012
6 -1 -l9
I
\� \IK
5
1.)
Coldstream Condominiums
SDD Amendment Work Session
z
}� \ \ \\ �
\ /��\ �
9/18/2012
6-3-20
12
tj
-!GIAIPWG -fi-I LIVIS) 'GS 10-1 IN
Nol-LiCnIv �4v3aLLG 2-10
11610 k, °
00
Z
IL
g?a`8� opna0107 'HOA Dill
UOISIAIPPnS UOR-1 —19 '`r5 10-1 N011100V §
I� �3
E• _
zb
�r
1 3:9 opn.loIo� 'Wo% , ,{ e m
g s UOISIAlpgns uofi } u019 "GS 10-1 il, I I
i I
I
I
I I I Cana -t dzd�d
I
1 I
1 I
VZVL
of 9L3'YJtl
NvIML67a3d
I
I I
I I
I �
3N11 X)Vel.'�'S sale ----
a gees opbao�o� 'llen , jil'i
pi
to -
J
� ] o
1�
d
�_
� a opv-Aolo'D '11en , Al uOISIAItxitIS UOR-1 Ua19 '�S 10-1 NOI11aOb' 8fi
z3
O
H
d
Ea
1-24 0
z
Oa
U3
to
N
Z
O
I Ea
lu
6
w3
z
O
W Ea
w
N
lu
K
` u 1U,
LAND RANNiNG & COMNIUN;iV DEVzi- 0Prt1FNT
February 17, 2011
Mr. Warren Campbell
Town of Vail
75 South Frontage Road
Vail, CO 81657
RE: Coldstream Condominiums /SDD Work Session Discussion
Dear Warren:
Thank you for your letter of February 9th, re: initial staff comments on the SDD Work
Session submittal for Coldstream. While many of these comments are most
appropriately addressed after more detailed design has been done and during the formal
development review process, we do appreciate the "heads up" on what may be discussion
points. The following is a brief reply to the points raised in your letter:
• The development will be required to be sprinklered and have monitored fire
alarms.
Response
We assume that this comment pertains to the sprinkling and monitoring of the
proposed new building. This would be addressed during the detailed design of the
building.
• Research will need to be performed to determine if a recreation fee credit was
given for the tennis court site which is proposed to be removed. Fees may be due
if the provided recreation improvement is removed.
Response
Understood. We will address this if/when the Association decides to pursue the
project.
• Eagle River Water and Sanitation District will need to be contacted to discuss
water rights available for the proposed development.
Response
Understood. Based on similar discussions I've had with the District, I suspect
that this will not be an issue as the project density is still below that originally
allocated to the SDD.
Opal Building • 225 Main Street • Suite G -002 • Edwards, Colorado • 81632
970 - 926 -7575 • 970 - 926 -7576 fax • www.braunassociates.com
9/18/2012
6 -3 -26
The lack of landscaping along the north elevation of the proposed parking
structure is a concern for staff due to the height of the proposed garage and
structures. The development currently incorporates a design in which landscaping
is included around all structures.
Response
I would offer two thoughts in response to this comment - currently the drive aisle
fronts onto a +/- 15 stall surface lot and then a +1-15 stall carport and there is
virtually no landscaping in this area,. The proposed design at this conceptual
stage includes three significant landscape pockets on the eastern end of the
structure. Arguably the proposed landscape condition in this area would be an
improvement over existing conditions.
Staff is concerned about the ability to place significant landscaping on the roof of
the parking garage with regards to weight and soil depth.
Response
The landscape treatment of the roof is best addressed during detailed design.
However, our thought is that as a "green roof' the soil depth of the roof would be
sufficient to support grasses and shrubs. We would not plan on installing trees on
the roof.
The required snow storage will need to be shown. Currently, winter time
conditions can become tight within the development. Will any areas be heated?
Response
We have not contemplated heating the drive aisle. In comparing the existing and
proposed plans the area devoted to drive aisles is essentially the same. However,
the proposed plan eliminates +1-15 surface spaces and replaces them with 3
surface spaces. As such the area where snow would need to be removed is being
reduced, hence the necessary snow storage I area would decrease. In addition, at
this conceptual level the new landscape areas at the project entry would appear to
provide an increase to snow storage areas.
Possible public benefits that may be needed in the area include extension of
sidewalks and stream bank stabilization.
Response
We believe that given the relatively modest development that is proposed the
EHU's being twice what Town regs would require, along with other
improvements to the project outlined in our submittal represent a significant
"package" of public benefits. That said, we are happy to learn more about what
you the thinking in terms of the sidewalk. The idea of stream bank stabilization
does "give me pause" from two perspectives — 1) there would not appear to be a
rational nexus between the impacts of the proposed development and the stream
bank, and 2) in my experience with stream bank stabilization the costs can be
astronomical. We look forward to discussing this aspect of the SDD with staff,
the PEC and Town Council.
9/18/2012
6 -3 -27
• Any encroachments that may exist in the stream tract will be requested to be
removed.
Response
We are not aware of any existing encroachments in the stream corridor but will
certainly confirm this in the spring.
Staff has concerns about the exposed south wall of the parking structure in close
proximity to the property line eliminating the ability to buffer the improvement
from neighboring properties.
Response
Understood. There are a few potential solutions that are best addressed if/when
the Association decides to move forward with the project. These could include 1)
"stepping" the parking garage to lower the west end and reduce the height of the
south facing wall, 2) working with our neighbors to provide a buffer by
landscaping on their property, or 3) working with the neighbors to re -grade on
their property in order to bury the exposed wall.
Details will be needed on the shoring methods anticipated in order to construct the
subterranean parking structure in close proximity to the property line.
Response
This is a good question but is one that cannot be answered until more detailed
design work is done. This information will be provided with a formal SDD
amendment request.
• The site coverage and landscaping area images included with your application
depict the inclusion of a parcel owned by the Town of Vail counting towards
landscape area. The area in question is the "tail" of land just to the south of the
development's entry adjacent to Westhaven Drive and Parkside Meadows. We do
not believe this land should be included in these calculations.
Response
You are correct. We had understood the "tail" to be owned by the Association but
it is not. Amended landscape and site coverage calcs along with a revised written
description of the project will be provided to you in the next few days.
Thank you again for your initial comments. Please do not hesitate to contact me with any
questions you may have.
Regards,
Thomas A. Braun
CC: Don MacLachlan
Sid Schultz
Andy Norris
9/18/2012
6 -3 -28
PLANNING AND ENVIRONMENTAL COMMISSION
February 28, 201
L''t 1:OOpm
TOWN COUNCIL CHAMBERS / PUBLIC WELCOME
75 S. Frontage Road -Vail, Colorado, 81657
MEMBERS PRESENT MEMBERS ABSENT
Luke Cartin None
Michael Kurz
Bill Pierce
Henry Pratt
John Rediker
Tyler Schneidman
David Viele
Site Visits:
1. Coldstream Condominiums — 1476 Westhaven Drive
2. Ellis Residence — 302 Hanson Ranch Road
3. Black Stallion Holdings Residence — 400 East Meadow Drive
60 minutes
A request for a recommendation to the Vail Town Council on a proposed major amendment to
Special Development District No. 4, Cascade Village, pursuant to Article 12 -9A, Special
Development District, Vail Town Code, to allow for an increase in gross residential floor area and
site coverage, and a reduction of the side setback, located at 1476 Westhaven Drive /Lot 53,
Glen Lyon Subdivision, and setting forth details in regard thereto. (PEC110014)
Applicant: Coldstream Homeowners Condominiums, represented by Tom Braun
Planner: Warren Campbell
ACTION: Tabled to April 11, 2011
MOTION: Kurz SECOND: Cartin VOTE: 6- 0- 1(Pratt recused)
Bill Pierce disclosed that his firm represents the HOA pn other matters, and as he will not gain
financially from this application nor felt any bias, he did shot recuse himself.
Henry Pratt recused himself because his architecture firm is representing the applicant.
Warren Campbell made a presentation per the Staff memorandum.
Tom Braun, representative of the applicant, made $ presentation on the application. He
provided a brief history of the project and reviewed the following topics: SDD amendments, site
planning, design, criteria and public benefits.
Sid Schultz, of Gwathmey, Pratt, Schultz and Lindall, made a presentation on the design of the
buildings and the site. He described the landscaping an site, which would be a green roof. The
proposal includes 5 free market units and 2 employee housing units.
Tom Braun continued his presentation to including a discussion regarding the SDD
amendments, criteria and public benefits being proposed. He provided examples of other SDD
amendments within the Town of Vail. He stated that the HOA needs an economic engine to
upkeep the entire project and ensure the future of the development.
9/18 q 121
6 -4 -1
Commissioner Kurz stated that the benefit of employee housing is significant and that the project
was in a physical location which did not lend itself to multiple public benefit options. He asked
for further detail on the entry improvements that could be made.
Tom Braun responded with details on how the entry could be redesigned to clean up asphalt and
make the property more navigable.
Commissioner Kurz added that the massing of the proposal and the "channelized" effect should
be mitigated through additional landscaping. He stated variation in fagade depth, materials, etc
would help to break up the massing of the project. He concluded that the removal of the carports
is positive.
Commissioner Pierce stated he felt that the partial exposed parking structure would be a
negative impact to the adjacent property owners. He encouraged the applicant to look into
stepping the garage to avoid the results at the Vail Mountain View Residences. He added there
needs to be something to offset the straight building lines through the proposal on the north
elevation and the ability to plant vertical landscaping between the new structures and on top of
the structure.
Commissioner Cartin asked about the process for amending a Special Development District.
Warren Campbell responded by explaining the SDD amendment process.
Commissioner Cartin stated that the landscaping along Westhaven Drive is a good example of
how the landscaping should be preserved and incorporated in to the proposal. He stated that
the roof should support large shrubs or trees to create a break between properties and mitigate
the bulk and mass.
Commissioner Cartin asked what the height is of the garage entrance.
Sid Schultz responded that the garage entry door would be nine feet tall. He added that this
would be enough head height for an SUV with a box on the roof.
Commissioner Rediker asked about the timeframe of construction.
Tom Braun responded that early 2012 would be the soonest that construction could occur, but
that no time frames had been discussed thus far.
Commissioner Rediker asked about the side setback. He inquired as to the ability for the
proposed development to shift north and narrow the drive lane and pull the structure away from
the property line.
Sid Schultz stated that the concern was that the existing parking on the north of the driveway
would be removed if the driveway was shifted. Tom Braun added that they would evaluate
additional options at a later hearing. He stated that any development is limited due to the
physical space available.
Commissioner Rediker added that he would like to see more landscaping on the south side of
the proposed development. Rediker asked Warren Campbell to clarify the thinking in the Staff
comment regarding sidewalk extension and streambank improvements.
Warren Campbell responded that these could be potential public benefits for the SDD
amendment.
Pape 2
9/18/2012
6 -4 -2
Commissioner Rediker asked if there are any encroachments into Gore Creek.
Warren Campbell responded that there are no known encroachments.
Tom Braun recapped the Commissioners' comments, including the need for more landscaping,
breaking up of building massing and public benefits.
4
Pape 3
9/18/ZO12
6 -4 -3
TOWN- OF Vkli
VAIL TOWN COUNCIL AGENDA MEMO
MEETING'1®TE: September 18, 2012
ITEM /TOPIC: Emer cy notification system (Siren/Voice)
PRESENTER(S): Jerry Joh n - Cooper Notification; Mark Miller
ACTION REQUESTED OF COUNCI Listen to presentatio nd provide feedback
and direction.
N--,
BACKGROUND: Over the course of the last f rs, there have been
discussions /questions relative to an emergency ation system in the TOV. The notification
system could prove extremely beneficial in re rds to safety and early notification in the
event of a catastrophic or life threatening ergency. M communities utilize such a system
for various emergency notifications, in ing; wildfires, sev weather, hazardous materials
spills, lost children, terrorist activitie pecial events, etc. Over ost of the system depends
on the number of towers or sites d coverage area, but is estima . at $300,000 - $500,000.
STAFF RECOMMENDAT : As an important tool for evacuation and eni ency notification
in TOV, staff is recom ding that Council approve moving forward in pursui for
proposal /quote for a mergency notification system in the TOV which could be i ded in the
5 year capital bu t as appropriate.
ATTAC
notification system
9/18/2012