Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutVAIL VILLAGE FILING 1 BLOCK 6 LOT 8 FILE 2 PART 2 LEGAL- oe T!.oo ; p ftF fiF --= Ell UE T 0 tr fFNFF iEF Nx;E p -rF loP l3 PI *t IE:rIt tgIt o'i I nt ll I!tIIt t6 itt!'t i I it!i 'i t lfirl 'iiil !il9tl le0 !' r!trll ll ;ii'iilqiiiiqr or oo c 0r_ tc3s 0 ot !t tcf,I 0 TiTii{'iryiiififfiri 0a- LrI rl l' I s--' I r ......-il- 0-'o lEriil iii;i; iHiii th ot iHrill+) ili iriiii /l\v/ NNNffiilNHIIliilllllritili'iil Nffi 1tI r,tntr t-IHE firlr; EMlII8 Z MNffi itilii IEHHI!n r-- 'l .'lslEIti,tu<ido+^rEt:it!IlFl I ox o tr tb E to D>!0F -0 tbb.DDL'!DLL>DD>DL>ut!uI\rt l,\, tr \r Ir trlr t r,t,tr!.Jbi -- !i!t, !.:-bbtt su r, illi;l iti r|I laI& 9o t! tl rd tItt dJ 'q ei a-4O-6O lfr\ r(o| 6 ll ll rr '4 !il1! lt['lrx$!ilrFli lirltlf;l t i I i I r4litl!$bl$tt $t !tlilr!iilrltunru1 lltltltIIf !ilr!;Itlf ir!tErtlittltrllr :rFt ]i'.itFI$tiliiid|'$tiirilliifrl I !:lllillFrtr3rrlll qI| rllifi iiiiiliiiiiiilititttllltt 1 llilFlili'IrrffI!| llrl iiliiiiii I iiiii;tui;ry ili{i;iiiillifii it ff:r $flttil FraF.taiiilia.trr I tFFITE'Erirr[$ | .rr I F6 lqiitlrlrlr$lilrllliiirlr{l|liil||!I I tuiiiiriiiliri, ffi | i'i llll ilil rill filil llifiiil lilll I Htr!f qlEf r i1! 9Ieb liii iirfr EIEI rErI ;Eiu :ll ! ItF' rt,;F Fitli6!t i ilill ilt i lllli ill ililli Jlpfr iHl!;i irli[*;JPlol 9ii'r' Enl PROPOcED-r]HE ,LO\WS I, Colo.rdo c luor.uqcBuv tillr iJ ^sF El v, 3E => RRA.-zi E;U> J{ <.; o6"---.r,-' e9il<i 6>co-r,r() a) oroE<tFFJFLJ 'a ,/\P \J .-il ,.,- ^v s c" -.i- HL' l iltr E[ii rliiirittttt!!##* = =1 r!# ililffi I #i€!ed *$ fiElr 15ts I II g il $ $s $ 9;J 5{illrl,r a; if t ili lft, '\'N4 1*ffi ffi ,l 4.i I I I I I I t I I I I 3 IItllr ;ai ECilll E6 d I t I -.t I xir I-Hl : I rtJ___ - !t,t' i^ttri r v |IFF il6 ilii p' I 1 a ri IIII lrli E€ (t\-, JII r -n z, r tt , r! ' i! t-vf7)aNt 7- ____J :-r'i+'+'rt r---ritl .' lli*x)io! t: iezlEb ( lY:"* PROPOSED:THE\urlLLO\vS illiili$iiiiilErF oOT l I I I ! S ri$I i? ttit hiq i!:i B' ; - /.4 r ":\ ;il it e9 ,tE- € lt'- !io [\ lrolB\;\9\[- 1- YF ,II:' :lJ, e olo'qlP lo lo lzlm lx :ll[ 1(', ' ,j: !E 1' l I I r r-l -___-L_ I I t. l I I'r Tt; q I * d r f dI or!P-:o-(t, I I a r JB I PROPOSED :THE\wlr_f ows 7. w$ld Ro.d Vall, Crlo.ado illilli$iiiillE:E oorr I l I I/I 1p /oItlo/sixt4 t- ,'|:---' Ii . _ lqliI r--Tr-Iai JJltf,l#+ '--f 'I 'r'tr I i----------lirtli , t tJ i-t -. I , I i-1 llil\li -J--t---r---T---------- iprlitl \itrii\rii tti I L -t---*Tl I i | -'b, q iI r I lil------------r i-------l-----T---- \i ! it 8H d i f'[" i'r:eill -- -+ --l-- l,l" \i. ----r.*- -. l"ii +F-+t--l-+ | ------J L__-=.h-s=l* = 'a-.? "1 |I \ t;--l*r1 -)lr Itt Y- \sr g Io B otoe /:\VilO{l{'ldl fltlmtzl{totml(' lo- :llt _.* l.-_+t=,;-"-.1?d;+ ii'lil ,Iflfttll: \T1 l'\"al$ff; ii\ :ti , Itilti Ill ! | I!4IL]''=J ilr f'+CJjliitl =-jtsn--"'-- -{' '.i.. ii ;e '--r'-it'1t'rf tl\- r \{i-i I-\ri i'i;ittliu8 tt i I fir6 ? E/ E$i I I --+ I) Irlr/ T-f la t, I7 t-v,f?-)-a-\L- -7vo PROPOSED:TI{E\vlr T O\vS 7,1wlloe L.d V.ll, Color.do oot +t":r -i-4 +!l; :fr i t YT"l qh ' cE*{ le[ I t Jd 9li 1 t1"lq iff[E fl66'i :iF iF;t 9l-tl | ---ni. I I t*' Ill tti ilf ii YI ,i $# $fr-lfi it i, !u ;' i,' I i (tt Jm ucFo 2o (J' m zo (t, mo :l oz yr N irJ P q i 6 6 I $ (', (',t ,l,l rt\r t!-{r oz (-tt r 1 {lJl ,! 'tl P PROPOSED :fHE\urlr T.O\WS 7a Wllbw Rod Veil, Cold-ado illiiii$iiiiilE:E t o a q Jm uEr-ozo ('| mo =oz o --ln oc F U 6 omoI 9 PROPOSED :TIJEv/ILLO\WS 7a rNlbi R.dVeil.6.do ot o tf+l;l*gt-ti4*F glr 966ri a'! 6 r -=i ''t : ..t8"l ! trl ',1 5ldl ill t+tIt ,; lidE *iH Jiiq'i i,i !F;id!i.l i!qft*ft (tt J m ulEr Uz (r, mo-J t(F:mro l-l rO iz PROPOSED :THE VILLO\WS 7,4 wllh/ Ro.d Vail, Colorada t o o ttt?olfillllhi916 dH lli r;l! :iai bl 6'3 tilr : i" s. s'l 'l 'l tl PROPOSEDTHE.sy'ILLOw'S Za wlllow Ro.d Vail, Colondo ot o Qtz I i I l'llii, yl (^) b :ili tI 6 F 6 d rrl i8?fr i! Tt tItl q l PROPOSED :fHEwlr r.o\ws 7.t Wllo, Rol Vall, colot"do illii$$iiliilE:E ffi too 't I H e9 (, i) J 9*e* I I f n I I I #Etfr g I a F PROPOSED THE\wILLO\WS 74 lv|lldRdd v.il. colq.do illiriigiiliilEEE ffi o 'r I i! l) ': lr. . ..$t' 6 i .6. ==,'Wi,i;itl\\ fi a!'tl F nb o l f,r -TIrooil t)T z P I tr 5 ; t I i I I s $ -ull Ec?n Ii 5 Il I PROPOSED :THErwlr.r.QgzS 7a wlll* to.d vall, Colqado illiisigiiii$lEEi ooo o T--'7 : I I I i I I I PROPOSED :THE v/ILLO\wS 7.a Wllld/ Rdd V.ll, Colorado ot o I \ l n F4!trDOLn ,'l o I It '\ ''\\ t':\\\\ t-,\i7F26r\]- -/ \\ I I l ir I r.ii'll6t i I'c)l iD.,UIil \s,,\ l]\.-a" \:--\\ I I EI:lni sIqlti; 9r .I I I i I Ll ,,ril r.li' I r - dlil-.-r" | [[tlil\";j li5*J$#; (t' mooz U m m tlIoon at- yrw irJ 2 I I J 9 I t t E l $ Ia 6 I *E;il r t "t It P PROPOSED :THE'wrr r.o\vs 7a wllld lo.d Vail, colo.rdo illiiliiiiiiiliEi ot o -, 1 l li i I -l I 4 b' 1?t)Filfm ,tl r (,) o t v;ioittn i'lOtotzitrlj'l;1 lm,r t<,I llTl rttr' l-r, \ :llH '', .rlx l(ft I to"l-n \lJ"to\Iq\ l('|\lo\lm\ INItlm l-{ IUt> l* I PROPOSED :TI{E \wIT r o\x/s 7.r wlld lo.d Vail, Colo.ado oot \ \ I -\ I I -, -1 I I I I I It' i \q ! !.r-roE d\) o a .1ot: o J. 617 t: lmt< lrn t;tr-lo 5t$ - l l-n'ttr l>"-l Q\ PROPOSED :THE\ TLLO\WS 7a Wrlld Ro.d vall, Col€rado oot I \ \ \ \ L -lf I fr !. 4 (r' o>ofm"l ,i 0' () IT i I I tlltiI r- il il ii r ilr \il il 'l il ll ll i? 'Errm mT -nroo A t,1- z (tr 0-n J ocJ(tl Um E (n m (, !" J tt* fi 1 Y F fFi A t ti PROPOSED :THE\vILLO\vS 7a Willod lod V.il, coloado illi:li*iliiil;EE o o ;l :f- I t-----=-t Itr-__ll i ' L- itt IJ__--.)|--/ )--l I Y @ oot f ,\l I \Ll1\l 1\:\ct_ ''\\\ \\ .\\, \"'- \ \ tl&l7-)-$ L]- _/:-z - PROPOSED :THE\w4lr.r-o\ws ta Wlo, R..d vail. C.lorado oot mb(rtJ mt-m J z I+ l" Jf; IItfttfi|ltl[|i iE !E 1l !rE *== ,i Ir__.f ,i ,i i I $== irr - 0 nL_ _lr-- >rl :rtl\):il; t a i I t ! s pi iF E a Ixrl llI PROPOSED:THE\vILLO\vS Zt wlll6|r 8o.dvall,ffi liliiliiiEliltEEF i)J O o Em(,l -l mF m -l oz I lEil It .|n tllftt UF Ji IIoF r.F iE \. I (rl -a ||:ilI t 7 dI F ! 8 $ Fi Pi T It, ! rI E ; PROPOSED :THE\x/rr r-o\ws ta Wllld. t d va{. cola.do iitii iErii I E;E iilql I ffi o \ l t) 49o>lirii T JI Y \\ erro ao L is ;oE ) E; ti T-E_t.,,t;al-- r ={ I I -'l I I \ I a---L- =-/ f- rl ll.- tl-i{ L\l r--/,_ e9 PROPOSED:TI{E\wlr r,ov/s taWlldrod V.ll, Cold'.do o oat nI. _t a a l F o o * o I n > E 6 i Io $ 8 6 fl B q 6 =oi! i o 0 F g -- o $58g1nIXlno It t8,t4 sl; sP ldt9d9 F,I H} !iiorh8F It "18PlI sF :l i xr fi E I0 ! u vo t uo tlid FFa'I in ! zo P o 6 6 R i zfg flo ETp9 TP P} MF6r frra)! I d du t, 9p n an P I6 , I llt+-if -IlirliI!r- HI HIrltqt rl rl tl irur- il ii iL-;rll il ;i tl tl il ild a :l >r(.rl ,-a ! IIg ,It I r { ; $ Pi ?# I I I !I d PROPOSED :THE \wrr r o'ws 7,1 Wllld to.d vatl, Cdddo iiliiii$iiliilE:F Application for Review bY the Planning and Environmen I al Commission Department of Communily Dev('lopmenl 75 Soulh Frontage Fbad, Vail, Colorndo 81657 tel: 970.479.2139 lax:- 970.4 /1.2452 web: www.vailgov-com General lnformation: All projects requiring Planning and Environmenlal Commission review mtrst receive approval prior to submitling a building pcrmit applicalion. Please reler to the submitlal requiremenls lor the particular approml that is requesled. An application.lor Planning and Environmenlal Commission review cann,,1 l'e accepled until all required inlormalion is received by lhe Communily Development Departmenl. The proiect r' ,, also need to be reviewed by the Town Council and/or the Design Beview Board. Type ol Application and Fee: ../. Rezoning $1300 ' v Conditionrt Use Permit $660. lriajor Subdivision $1500 .. Fbodplair, ;'lodificalion $400. Minor SuMivision $050 . Minor Exterior Alteration $660. Bemplion P.lal $650 . Major Exlerlrr Aheralion $800. Mhor Amendment to an SDD $1000 ' Developm,'nt Plan $1500. New Spcial Development District $@OO . Amendmo'rt to a Devebpment Plan $25O. lvhior Amendmenl to an SDD $EOOO . Zoning Cc ': nmendment $1300. Maior Amendmenl to an SDD $1250 . Variance '$500 ho erterior modilications) Sign Varia :e $20O Description of the Request: Conditional Use Per.nit for T:/pe Irr FHII- :v 1i-- 4IoCIvc\ Localion of the Proposal:Lot:_q -8bck: 6 subdivision: 74 lllllow Road Vall Village Ist Physical Address: Parcel No.: 2lo1o82190ot (ContaclEagleCo.tu :ssorat970-328-8&10torparcel no.) Zoning: The Willows Condornlnium Assoclation, IncName(s) ol Owner(s): Malling Address:74 l{i11ow Road Vai1, CO 81657 Owner(s) Signature(s) :see aCtached l-et ter Name of Appllcant:Triumph Developrnent. LLC 8120 Woodmont . Ave . Suite 800 .,.. . , . . .- .,r p..Itlalllng Address: Bethesda MD 20814 Address: Steve@Triumphdev.com Fax Phone: -LOI-657-lL12 Ir l'age I ol 5-lI'l^J l /lH PECNo,S 301-657 -5948E-mall a For Oflice fbe Pairj: . ( fvleeling Dale: Planner: t+*+*** t ***** *** * *+ +********** **** +*+******+*** ***++*+*++++:t **+*++a*********f***********+**+ TOWNOFVAIL, COLORADO Statement ***** * * ** *** * * ** * * ******* ******** * +* ********'l'l*r.****** ***{.*** * ** * ***** *t * + * + * + * + * * * * * * * * * * * * StatemenE. Nurnber: R050001?35 Anount: $650.00 lO/L7/2OO5O3:2O PM Palzmene Method: Check AND ASSOCTATES Init: ,IS Not.atsion: 148l,/Pl,Y!,tAN Permit No: Parcel Nor Site Address: L,ocabion: This Payment:$5s0.00 PEC060075 qt)e: PEC - CondiEional Use 2101--082-1900-2 74 WILLOW RD VAIL THE WIIJLOWS CONDOS ' Total FeeE: TOTA1 AIJIJ PMES : Balance: $550.00 $5s0.00 $0.00 +++****'t i.*:t :i'it **** *+********d.**t,* r:t ** * * {. {. * 'r {r 'fi* * * * * * * * * * * *i.** * * *'}*****,t +++ + * * * * *** ******* * * +* ACCOUNT ITEM LIST: Account Code DescripE, ion Current Pmts PV 00100003 r.12500 PEC APPI.,ICATION FEES 5s0.00 Conceptual Revif Application for Design Review Department of Community Development 75 South Frontage Road, Vail, Colorado 81657 tel: 970.479.2128 fax: 97O.479'2452 web: www.vailgov.conl Description of the Request: Conceptual review of The Wlllows LocadonoftheProposal: Loh 8 Blod: e Subdivision: varl viltra*" l"t 74 Wi11ow Road Physlcal Address: 210108219001 (Contact Eagle Co. Assessor at 970-328-8640 for parcel no') General Informatlon: All prc)ects requlring design levlew must receive approval prior to submittlng a building permlt appllcatlon' Please refer to the submlttal requlrements for the pardorhi approml that is requested. An applicatlon for Design Revlew cannot be acepted until ail reluired informatton is recetveO by the Communlty Development Deparbnent' The project may also need to be reviewed by the Town Council and/or the Planning and Environmental C.ommission' besign rcvlew approval lapses unless a buildlng permlt ls lssued and constructlon commences within one year of the approval. Parcel No.: v ^ 6' boc s\o Zonlng: Willows Condominium Association, Inc. Name(s) of Owner(s): 74 Willow Road Vai1, C0 E1657Malling {ddress: Phone: owner(e) 9gnature(s):see attached letter NameofAppllcant: Triumph DEvelopnent LLC Maifrng Address: 8120 Woodnont Ave, Sulte 800 Rerhesrle , Mafyl rni 2oAl4 PhOng: 3rrl-657-11 t 2 E-mall Address: Steve@Trlurnphdev.com Fax: 301-657-5948 TYpe of Revlew and Fee: tr Slgns d Conceptrat Revtew tl Nev, ConsUudontr Addidon D Mlnor Alteraflm (muft i-hmlly/commerdal ) D Minor AlteraUon (slng lefamlly/duplex) tr Changes to Approrred Phns D Separadon Reqrrest $50 Pltlf $1.m Per square fuot of total slgn area. No Fee $650 For @nsfruc0on of a narv bullding or demo/rebulkl. isoO For tn addltlon where square fuotage ls dld b any rcsldentlal or commerclal hrlldlng (lncMes 250 addldons & lntetlor conversbns)' $250 For mlnor dnnges to bulHlngs and slte lmprotremenE, sudt as, re-roofng, paln0ng, wlndow addldons, landscaplng, fences and r€talnlng wa{s, etc. $20 For mlnor dranges to bulldlngs and slte lmprorannants, zuch as, ercof,ng, palnung, wlndov{ addltlons, landscaplng, fences and retalnlng walls, etc. $20 For rcrdslons b ptans already approvtd by Plannlng Staff or the Dedgn Re'vlew Boar<l' No Fee From: To: Date: Subject: Elisabeth, I hope your marathon went well, I would like to hear how you did. I have been able to update and modify all the plans that needed further work completed on them, they should be waiting on your desk come Wednesday morning the 25th. of October. In doing this further work I also addressed most of your comments that you stated in the lefter dated 1 0/19/2006 addressed to both Steve and Rick. Site Plan: - Dashed line was deleted indicating existing structure. There is a sheet Y that you will see, 42.1.1., that indicates existing structure, PEC previous submittal and today's design. I think this is very helpful on seeing how we relate to existing structure and it also shows how we have modified the building following the last PEC meeting. - 42.1 .0. shows interpolated topographic lines and top of ridge spot elevations on roof plan. When I show up to the meeting I will have a site plan that has been further thought out, showing some new proposed spot elevations as well. lf you truly look at the interpolated topo it apqears we have a couple spots over the 48"0" limit, this is not our inten{on, | ,/],ui want to further work with the roof and the new spots to get this entire | ,' building below that magical 48' limit. - on site plan below grade garage plan is now shown dashed. & - A3.0 is the garage plan that shows the complete exlents of that below grade plan. Foundaiion walls of this garage plan do align with first floor rl above in areas that I could make this happen. I was trying to take advantage of the space below grade BUT also wanted to make sure this was a econom ical design as well. Garage level Floor plan - sheet A3.0: .V - 20' set back line as been added to all floor olansr' - Accessibility of some parking spaces MAY be limited by owner storage units, but the plan that you have now received shows 24 spaces as being accessible. This does mean that we still meet the parking requirement of 2 spaces as you stated. We are still showing and planning on 29 parking spaces total due to owners request. - We do have tandem parking in our scheme, but we are below the 50% total as alfowed by TOV. TOV requirements for our project are 21 spaces for the unit t4-' counts above. 12 spaces are non-tandem spaces, which means only9 spaces, of the required, will be tandem spaces, this is below the 50% TOV design standard. Floor plans: - There are new sheets submitted for each floor that indicate with poche just how much sq.ft. fall within the setback. These sheets are A3.0.1 / 43.1.1 I 43.2.1 / 43.3.1 | A3.4.1. "Foster, Mike" <mfoster@ResortDesign.com> 'Elisabeth Reed' <EReed@vailgov.com > 1 0 I 25 I 20OO 1 O :44'.42 AM RE: Willows comments "P ltfn (t) Tv?71 / * .ffi-'. hrziz( ? Z6P /rr 2 2o6 L fur) _- J/55 ,pD = zlss lril re- ,Al7 UtLc: VTrz Cra O,fuE ea&ltz( E.&. A.t. O*r C m'{ 5 0n t4k (prt\ - Sheet A3.4 now shows the schematic floor plans as requested by the potential buyer. Thank you for your help in this process, Please don't hesitate to call or email if you need any further documentation. Mike Foster, Architect, Partner Resort Design Associates 1434 Soruce St. suite 1 10 Boulder, CO 80302 3034494433p 303-449-3366f www.resortdesign.com ---Original Message---- From : Elisabeth Reed [mailto:EReed@vdlgov.com] Sent: Thursday, October 19,2006 9:32 AM To: rick@pylman.com; mfoster@resortdesign.com; steve@triumphdev.com Subject: Willows comments Good morning, Gentlemen: I have attached a brief letter indicating the outstanding needs which I have. Feel free to call if any issues arise. Otherwise, l'll touch base with you upon my return to the office next Wednesday. Thanks! Elisabeth E. Reed Planner ll, Town of Vail 75 S. Frontage Road Vail, CO 81657 970.479.2454 ofc 970.479.2452tax GC: <rick@pylman.com> 'Steve Virostek'<steve@triumphdev.com>, ''Rick Pylman (rick@pylman.com)"' October 19, 2006 Mr. Rick Pylman Pylman & Associates PO Box 2338 Edwards, CO 81632 rick@ovlman.com Mr. Steve Virostek Triumph Development, LLC 8'120 Woodmont Avenue, Suite 800 Bethesda. MD 20814 steve@triumphdev.com Re: The Willows RedevelopmenVT4 Willow Road, Lot 8, Block 6, Vail Village 1$ Filing Special Development District *140 (PEC06-0061 ) O Dear Rick and Steve, Thank you for submitting an amended set of plans for review by the Town of changes made in response to the original reviewed the plans for the Planning Department and outlined outstanding items below, which must be addressed before final hearing by the Planning and Environmental Commission on November 13, 2006. Site Plan - Sheet A2.1 r' Please delete the dashed lines indicating existing structures. / Please submit a site plan showing both interpolated topographic lines (i.e. historic grade) and legible roof ridge and eave elevations so that I may calculate building height. r' Pbase indicate in some manner on the site plan the location of the proposed below grade parking structure. ,/ Please provide a plan which shows the complete foundation walls of the building. The plan I have received does not indicate the location of the foundation walls at the northwest corner of the site. When shown, this will aid in site coverage calculations. Garaoe Level Floor Plan - Sheet A3.0 { Please indicate the twenty foot setbacks on this page. ,/ Please note that the accessibility of several of the proposed parking spaces may be impeded by ski storage lockers and therefore not considered a conforming parking space by the Public Works Department. As long as the requirement for twenty one (21) fully conforming parking spaces is met, this should not be a problem, however. r' Additionally, the tandem parking spaces will be viewed as "valet parking" upon the site, with the provision that valet parking may not occupy more than 50o/o of the required parking on site. U Floor Plans - Sheets A3.1 - A3.4 ,/ Please submit numbers indicating the amount of square footage, at each level, of proposed floor area within the setbacks. / Please submit a revised Sheet A3.4 indicating the floor plan of the whole ownership unit. The plan I have received shows only the floor plans of the Fractional Fee Units. I have yet to receive comments from the Fire and Public Works Deparlments, but will route those to you as soon as they have been prepared. In order to ensure a timely review, please submit all requested.items to the Community Development Department by Monday, October 30, 2006 for the meeting on the 13"'. As for the Design Review Board hearing on the 1o, we will refer to the submittal date goals outlined on the schedule which I e-mailed to you last week. Please don't hesitate to contact me with any questions or concerns you may have. I look forward to receiving revised items from you soon. Best regards, Elisabeth Reed 970.479.2454 cc: Mike Foster mfoster@resortdesion.com Rick We require sight distance to be measured using "intersection sight distance" not "stopping sight distance". The intent is to have enough sight distance so thru vehicles do not have to stop if a car pulls out from the driveway. The Town's standard is measured 10' back from edge of pavment for a distance of 250'. lf this is unobtainable AASHTO may be referenced for distance, the 10'setback should remain the same. Please pass lhis on to Jason. Thank you. Thomas Kassmel, P.E. Town Engineer Town of Vail Public Works Department 1309 Elkhorn Dr. Vail, CO 81657 (970) 479-2235 >>> Rick Pylman <rick@pylman.com> 1011712006 '10:32 AM >>> Tom: I've attached three documents in pdf format. The lirst is a copy of a trip generation chart created by Alpine Engineering. The chart indicates a drop in PM peak hour trips due to the decrease in the number of units. The second attachment is the Stopping Sight Distance exhibit and thee third is the MSHTO Table used to calculate the required stopping sight distance. I have not included this information in the re-submiltal set of drawings I will give to the planning staff as I assume this is of specmc interesl to engineering/public works. Please feel free to contact me or Jason Cowles at Alpine (926-3373) if you have any questions. Jason is working on a design set for the streetscape improvements for your review and approval. lf we need to condition the Planning Commission approval on Public Works review and approval of a design set of streetscape plans I have no issue with that. Elisabeth, please let me know if this is information I should include in the Planning commission set. Thank you. THE WILLOWS A NEW TOWN OF VAIL SPECIAL DEVELOPMENT DISTNCT ! October 17,2006 THE WILLOWS A NEW TOWN OF VAIL SPECIAL DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT Applicmt Triumph Development, LLC in parhership with The Willows Condominium Association Inc. Architect Resort Design Associates International Civil Eneineer Alpine Engineering, Inc. Land Plannins Pylman & Associates, Inc. 1.0 1.1 1.2 2.0 2.1 TABLE OF CONTENTS Introduction Summary of Request Purpose ofReport Existing Conditions The Willows History Proposed Plan Project Description Architectural Design r': Utilities Detailed ZonrngAnalysis Employee Housing Rental Opportunities Public Benefits 1. t. 2. 3. J. 23. 27. 3.0 3.1 3.2 3.3 3.4 3.5 3.6 3.7 4.0 7.0 Attachments: J. 5. 7. 7. 8. 12. t4. l5 5.0 6.0 Special Development District Review Criteria 17. Conditional Use Permit Review Criteria 21. Town of Vail Comprehensive Plen and Master Design Key Features Town of Vail application form Letter of authorization Architectural plans and topographic site survey 1.0 INTRODUCTION 1.1 Summary of Request The Willows Condominiums is truly one of Vail's early residential buildings. Originally developed by Bob Lazier over the span of two years, from 1970 to 1971, the four story brick and stucco clad building has been well maintained but has changed very little over the past 36 years. There is very little ownership tumover in the Willows and most of the owners have been involved in the building, and in the community, for many years. Due to several factors, including the age ofthe building, the original construction methods and updated life safety code requirements, the owners are facing a significant capital investment requirement. The Willows Condominium Association has spent considerable time investigating various options and opportunities. This application represents a request for the establishment of a new Special Development Disfrict in the Town of Vail to allow the ownen and a development partner, TriumphDevelopment LLC, to pursue an opportunity to redevelop the Willows building in a manner that addresses the goals of the owners and also addresses many of the goals of the Town of Vail that are articulated in various master planning documents. The existing Willows Condominiurns building like most of the buildings in the Willow Circle neighborhood, is non- conforming to almost every development standard of the High Density Multiple Family Zone District (IIDNtr). The applicants believe thatthis application represents the type of 'flexibility and creativitlt in the development of land in order to promote its most appropriate use" that the Special Development Zone District was desigred to encourage. The owners at The Willows understand that change for the Willows building is necessary yet they also have a deep affinity for their neighborhood and feel very strongly about protecting the existing character of Willow Circle. The owners have worked very carefully with Triumph Development to create a thoughtful solution that will not impact the character of the neiglrborhood in a negative manner. The redevelopment proposal will not increase the building height and will maintain conformance with the height allowance of the HDMF Zone District In fact, the new building height will be lower than the existing building in some areas. The proposal results in a net decrease in the number ofunits on site, increases the amount of landscape area, creates a greater setback from Willow Road and maintains a similar number of actively rented beds. The redeveloped active beds will be a tremendous improvement from the existing accommodations. t.2 Purpose ofReport The purpose of this report is to provide information relative to an application for a Town of Vail Special Dwelopment District (SDD) zoning designation and for a Town of Vail Conditional Use Permit (CUP). Submittal requirements for the formal establishment of an SDD and for the review of a Conditional Use Permit are set forth in the Town of Vail development regulations. This application complies with all of the submittal requirernents as outlined in the Town of Vail SDD Application Form and CUP Application Form packets. 2.0 EXISTINGCONDITIONS 2.1 TheWillows History The Willows Condominiums are located at T4Willow Road on l.ot 8 Block 6, Vail Village l" Filing. The lot size is 0.4854 of an acre (21,14 square feet). The site is bounded on the west by 44 Willow Place, on the east by the Riva Ridge South Condominiums, on the north by Willow Road and on the south by Vail Road. The Bishop Park Special Development District is located just across Willow Road. The four story building consists of twenty-seven identical 5fti square foot one- . bedroom units and one studio unit of 445 square feet. The upper three floors each have eight of the one-bedroom units located off of a central corridor with an exit stairlocated ateach end ofthe building. The ground level consists ofthree ofthe identical 596 square foot one-bedroom units, a one-bedroom martagers apartrnent, a management office, a small hot tub and sauna room and a front desk and common lobby area. An elevator in the lobby adjacent to the west stair tower also provides access to the upper floors. The building construction technique utilized a pre-stress concrete'oT" beam system for the building floors/ceilings. This type of concrete structural system limits the ability to make any kind of significant remodel or upgrade to the existing building. The existing floor to ceiling clear height to the bottom of the concrete'oT's " is seven foot six inches. The building does not have a fire suppression sprinkler system. The concrete structural system will make the installation of a fire sprinkler system very difficult and will be both expensive and unsighfly. The seven foot six inch clearance height would most likely be further compromised. The exterior brick and stucco skin of the building has been well maintained but it no longer meets the level of quality of building materials of the immediate nei ghborhood. The rear yard ofthe lot is occupied by a two-story open air concrete parking structure that has approximately forty-trvo spaces. This thirty-six year old parking deck has significant structural issues and is a candidate for complete removal and reconstruction in the near future. The existing building is non-conforming to almost every development standard of the High Density Multiple Family Zone District (HDMF). The HDMF Zone Dshict allows a density of twenty-five units per acre. This equates to an allowable density of twelve units on the 0.483acre site. The existing building consists of twenty-eight units. The building or the parking structure encroach well into every required setback, the site coverage exceeds the 557o maximum, the minimum landscape requirement of 3OVo of the site area is not even close to confonnance and the building exceeds the allowable GRFA limitation. The only HDMF development standard that is met by the current building is the 48' building height. The Willows Condominiums has always been governed by a very interesting and unique set of condominium association documents and covenants. The twenty-eight units are each owned in fee simple. There are currently twenty- six owners, with two owners each holding title to two units. The condominium declarations restrict the owner of each unit to thirty days of summer use and thirty days of winter use. All of the other time the units are placed in an actively managed rental pool. Each unit owner is a partner in the Willows Management Company, which provides the management, marketing and rental operations. Each of the twenty-seven one-bedroom units is identical in floor plan and in d6cor. Siuce the completion of the buildingin l97l all of the units have been maintained and furnished in an identical menner. Owners have not, and are not allowed to, make any individual upgrades or to conduct remodels of their own unit. In fact, while using the property, owners often stay in tbe most desirable unit available and not necessarily in the unit to which they actually hold title. Since all of the units arc finished and furnished in an identical manner the upper floor mountainside units tend to be favored. This type of condominium declaration is fairly unique and appears to be a predecessor to the fractional fee concept. 3.0 PROPOSED PLAJ\I 3.1 ProjectDescription The Willows Condominium Association and Triumph Development have spent the better part of the past year carefully studying remdel and redevelopment opportunities that would address the needs of the building, and the various goals and objectives of the homeowners, Triumph Development, the neighbors and the Town of Vail. The relatively near term building needs include: . a complete demolition and reconstruction of the parking decks, ' installation of a fire sprinkler system to meet current building codes and Town of Vail Fire Department requirements. . a significant upgrade or complete replacement of the electrical, heating and ventilation system. ' a complete renovation of the interior of all wenty-eight units and all cofllmon spaces. . an upgradey'replacement ofthe original brick and stucco exterior building facades. The overwhelming majority of existing owners wish to retain some ownership and use of the building. However, the scope of improvements required, the capital investment required and the difficulties of working with the existing concrete structural "T" system to upgrade units and co[lmon areas cfeate an overwhelming task for a homeown€rs association to address. This coupled with the realization that after all that capital invesfrnent and construction effort, the owners would still each have a 5!)6 square foot unit with a seven foot six inch ceiling height has led to a conclusion that the best course of action for the owners is to redevelop the site to a standard appropriate to theneighborhood and the community. The fact that no individual owner has invested significant sums of money in specific remodel projects or is emotionally vested in a particular unit location lends itself well to this type of group consensus. There are probably very few if any other condominium buildings in Vail that have a similar set of circumstances. The Triumph Development, LL,C and ril/illows Condominium Association partnership proposes to completely remove and replace the existing twenty-eight unit building with a new building thatwill include nine two-bedroom fractional fee units and nine whole ownership units. The nine fractional units will be divided as l/4 shares, resulting in thirty-six available shares. Each of the existing Willows twenty seven 596 square foot, thirty-six year old one-bedroom units and the k16 square foot studio unit will be exchanged for one l/4 share fractional fee ownership of a brand new beautifully finished two-bedroom unit of approximately 1200 square feet in size. The existing Willows Condominium Association will receive title to the remaining two units (eight l/4 shares). Although these shares may eventually be sold to individual buyers the initial concept is that the Willows Condominium Association will hold tlese shares for several years and place tlem in the active rental pool. All nine of the fractional units will be subject to a similar use restriction as the existing W. illows units. The owner of each l/4 share will be allowed four weeks of summer use and fow weeks of winter use. The remaining four weeks of each l/4 sharc will be placed in the rental pool. The Willows Association will continue to operate an active rental and management prognrm. The nine whole ownership units will be marketed for sale. Five of the wbole ownenhip units have been designed to include a bedroom with lock-off capability. Each of the five lock-offs may be accessed and rented separately from theprimary unit. The redeveloped Willows building also includes an on-site Employee Housing Unit. This unit, located in a very desirable ground floor comer of the building, is designed as a 670 square foot one-bedroom unil This EHU will be subject to tbe standard Town of Vail EHU deed restriction and will be made available for sale. The new building will also include a full front desk operation, a common lobby area and a separate library room. The design includes an extensively landscaped courtyard witl a swimming pool and spa facility. This pool garden will be a tremendous amenity to the site and will be a focal point for both guests and owners. The new Willows will consist of threc and four story building forrns and will not exceed the building height dlowance of the existing HDMF Zone Dstrict. The building will actually be lower than the existing building in some areas. The redesign will also pull the building back furtherfrom the street, increasing the front setback area. Existing landscape wall improvements will be removed from the street right-of-way. The area available for landscaping treatment is significantly increased and all required parking will be located in a completely enclosed parking garage directly below the building. 3.2 Architectural Design Resort Designs Associates International is the project architect for the redeveloped Willows building. Gordon Pierce, Principal of RDAI, is the lead design architect for the project. Gordon has designed many of the most notable buildings in Vail Village and is well versed in the design style that forms the fabric of the Vail Village urban design pattern. Gordon also designed two of the adjacent buildings to the Willows, 44 Willow Place and the Bishop Park Special Development District. The architectural design of the proposed building will be a dramatic upgrade from the original Willows building in style, form and materials. The intent of the design is to establish a high level of quality and character that is sensitive to the neighborhood and pays tribute to the alpine design style of Vail Village. The three and four story building heights crea0e a simple but varied form that is very compatible with adjacent buildings. The building is designed with a strong stone base, stucco and wood materials on the main massing forms and a st€ep well articulated roofline with gable dormers and hip roof forms at the building ends. The building forms provide articulation across the fagade and the well- developed window patterns and the wood railings of the numerous balconies provide for interesting and welcoming elevations. The stone, stucco and wood siding materials, the generous roof overhangs, the wood balcony railings and the small pane, true divided light window elements are all consistent with the Vail Village Urban Design Plan and with the established characler of Vail Village. A covered porte-cochere creates a focal point for the front door and provides a weather protected entrance. This creates a significantly improved check-in and loading function and will reduce congestion caused by cars temporarily parking on Willow Road during the check-in procedure. 3.3 Utilities Water and sanitary sewer mains are located within Willow Road and should be adequde to serve the redeveloped building. Alpine Engineering, Inc. is the project engineer and will work closely with town staff and the utility service providers to ensure appropriate utility connections are desigaed and implemented. Natural gas, cable television and telephone services are all available at the site. f,.4 Detailed Znrnfury Analysis A. Proposed Uses The HDMF Zone District allows for multiple family residential units and lodges including accessory eating, drinking, recreational or retail uses not occupying more than l07o of the total GRFA. The HDMF district also allows a fairly lengthy list of Conditional Uses, including fractional fee units. The historic use of the Willows prop€rty has been residential with a unique form of covenant controlled usage. The Willows redevelopment proposal maintains the residential use of the property. There will be no commercial component to the Willows rcdevelopment proposal. The redesigned building includes a total of nineteen dwelling units. Nine of these units will be designed as two-bedroom units of approximately 1200 square feet in size. These nine units will be deeded as l/4share fractional fee units and will be operated in a very similar manner to the existing Willows Condominiums. Each of the current Willows property owners will assume ownership of one ll4 share of a unit. Each owner will be allowed four weeks of summer season and four weeks of winter season use. Any unscheduled owner time and the remaining four weeks of time allocated to each l/4 share will be required to be placed in the Willows rental program. Fractional fee use is lisled as a Conditional Use in the underlying HDMF zone district. This application has been written to include a request for Conditional Use permit to allow the fractional fee use. A specific response to the Conditional Use review criteria is included in a later section of this report. The current Town of Vail definition of a Fractional Fee Club defines a fractional fee unit as "a condominium unit, pursuant to recorded documentation as approved by the town of Vail, has no fewer than six (6) and no more than (12) owners per unit..." The planned program for the Willows will result in four owners per unit so the Conditional Use Permit may not actually be a strict legal requirement of this request. There will also be nine whole ownership condominiums and one deed restricted "Employee Housing Unit. The whole ownership use is allowed as a use by right in the HDMF Zone District. A Conditional Use Permit has been submitted for rcview of the Type III EHU request. All other aspects of the project, such as the parking gzuage, the front desk operation and the pool garden courtyard are allowed as accessory uses to the HDMF Zone Dstrict. Densitv The Town of Vail land Use Code defines densiry as the number of dwelling units allowed per lot or per acre. The HDMF Zone Dstrict allows for twenty-five units per acre. The lot size of 0.483 equates to a permitted density of twelve dwelling units. Like most of the Willow Road/Willow Circle properties, the original development of the Willows Condominium geatly exceeds this permitted density. The existing building includes a total of twenty-eigbt dwelling units. The proposed redevelopment of the Willows will reduce the overall density to eighteen units plus one deed resbicted Bnployee Housing Unit. C. Residential Floor Area The HDMF Zone Distict permits a total of 76Vo of tbe site area as Gross Residential Floor Area (GRFA). The permitted GP.FA equates to 16,069 square feet. The existing Willows building exceeds the allowable GRFA and measures at 18,607 square feet of GRFA. The re-development proposes a total of 32,?A square feet of GRFA. The Vail Village Master Plan includes the following description of the Willow Circle sub-area: "Inmost cases the levels of development tlvouglwut this sub-area greatly exceedwhat is allowed wder existing zoning (High Density Muhiple fatnily). Gross residential floor uearaios (GRFAR)rangelrom .6 to l:-l with an cwerage of I .01 . With the etception of one parcel, all of the properties within this sub-area ue, developed at, or over, their permitted leveh of development." At the time of the adoption of the Vail Village Master Plan 44 Willow Place had not yet been redeveloped. The original building onthe 44 Willow Place lot represented the low end of the GRFA range stated in the above description of the neighborhood. 44Willow Placehas now been redeveloped tothefull extentof the allowable GRFA so the neighborhood range and average has increased. The redeveloped Willows GRFA is not inconsistent with other buildings in the neighborhood. D. BuiHing Height The HDMF Zone Distict Allows for a 48' building height for a sloped roof building. The existing Willows building is approximately 48' in height and is one of the few aspects of conformance with the existing zoning. The redevelopment proposal consists of three and four story building elements and will maintain conformance with the 48' height allowance. In fact, the three story elements of the proposed building are lower than the existing building. E. Site Covera&e The HDMF Zone Distict includes a site coverage allowance of 557o of the total site area. This equates to an allowable site coverage of I I,595 square feet for the Willows property. The existing building and parking suucture have a site coverage calculation of 12,638 feet, thus exceeding the allowance. The actual building footprint of the proposed new building at grade, i. e. the perceptible site coverage of the building, measures 10,820 square feet. This perceptible site coverage of the actual building footprint equates to 507o qf'the site area and would be in conformance with the 55Vo site coverage development standard. The definition for measuring site coverage, however, includes all portions of a building, including below grade portions. The parking garage below the new Willows building extends beyond the building footprint. There are extensive areas oflandscaping and courtyard on top of the parking garage, at grade level, that will not appear as site coverage and will qualfy as landscape area. The design team believes this meets the intent, if not the definition, of the site coverage development standard. The proposed building, due to the extent of the underground parking garage, and as site coverage is formally defined, has a site coverage measurement of 14,110 square feet. E l-,andscape Area The proposed redevelopment plan includes 8,540 square feet of landscape and courtyard area and brings the site into conformance with this development standard. This represents a substantial increase in the amount of landscape arca on the site. The primary means of accomplishing this is by moving the existing at grade parking to an enclosed garage underneath the building. The HDMF Zone District requires 30Vo of a site to consist of landscape improvements such as lawn areas, flower beds, courtyards, patios, walks or water features. For the Willows site this equates to a requirement of 6343 square feet oflandscape area. The existing site has been calculated to have only 2,848 square feet of landscape area, which is well below the development standard of the zone district. l0 o eL Parking The Willows falls within the area described as the commercial core area on the official Town of Vail parking maps. Tbe parking requirements for the commercial core areas are listed in Schedule A of the Town of Vail land Use Regulations. Schedule A details a requirement of0.7 parking spaces forfractional fee units and 1.4 parking spaces per dwelling unit. 9 fractional fee units x 0.7 = 6.3 9 dwelling units x 1.4 = 12.6 I EHUx 1.4= 1.4 Total parking required = 20.3 parking spaces The proposed parking garage as designed includes 27 parkingspaces. In addition to the quantitative parking requirements, the HDMF Zone Dstrict requires thatT1Vo of all parking spaces "sftal/ be located in the main building and hidden from public view or slwll be completely hidden from public view from adjoining properties within a landscape berm". The existing Willows parking deck is clearly not in conformance with this criterion and is generally considered to be a highly visible eyesore to the neighborhood. The redevelopment proposal will resolve the existing non-conformance of the visible parking by locating all of the parking spaces in the building and hidden from public view. With the development of tlre Front Door project and the increase of traffic on this portion of Vail Road the removal of this parking deck becomes a significant benefit. E Setbacks The HDMF Zone District requires a uniform 20' setback on all sides. The existing buildings encroach into the setback to various degrees on all sides. The building encroaches up to seven feet from the property line in the front and some landscape wall improvements currently extend over the propeny line and into the road right of way. The building and/or the parking garage encroach up to sixteen feet from the west lot line, six feet from the rear lot line and four feet from the east lot line. The driveway and a related retaining wall encroach onto the adjacent 44 Willows Ptace property. t1 The building setbacks as proposed in the redevelopment plan vary greatly over the site. The proposed building increases conformance with the front setback as the building has been pulled back from Willow Road to allow for a loading and drop off/pick up area. A porte-cochere roof extends out over the pick up/drop off area to the property line to provide a sheltered entqr. Setbacks on the east" west and rear sides of the building vary considerably. This design allows for a creative articulation of the architectural forms and building mass and avoids long continuous walls and flat elevation planes along the property lines. Along the east property line, where the adjacent building encroaches to within inches of the property line the building design steps deeply back into the site, creating a significant space and separation between the buildings. In the underground parking garage the walls have been designed close to the property line in order to design efficient parking and circulation spaces. These subsurface portions of the building will be imperceptible from the exterior. 3.5 Employee Housing 1) Town of Vail existing policy The Town of Vail has traditionally required the owners of new and redeveloped projects to provide employee housing for the incremental increase in the number of employees generated by a project. The Town has never formally codified this requirement but has consistently applied a housing generation formula developed by the firm of RRC Associates, Inc. For development projects that comply with underlying zoning the policy has been to provide housing for l}Vo of the incremental incrcase in employees. For development projects that exceed underlying zoning standards the policy has been to provide housing for30%o of the incremental increase in employees. The RRC employee generation formula lists a 0.4 employee demand per residential dwelling unit. The existing Willbws project includes 28 condominium units. This equates to an existing employee generation of 1 1.2 employees. (2a x O.4 = ll.2) The proposed Willows redevelopment includes 18 condominium units. This equates to an ernployee generation of 7.2 employees. (18 x O.4 -7.2) The Wllows redevelopment proposal would result in an overall reduction of 4 employees. Housing mitigation is required for the incremental increase in employee generation. In this case there is no incremental increase and therefore, 12 consistent with past application of this housing formula, no mitigation requirement. 2) Actual conditions The Willows Condominium Association owns and operates the Willows Management Company. The Willows Management Company mirnages a total of 45 units in the Willows, Riva Ridge South and other Vail Village properties. The management company has a total of 15 full time equivalent employees. This averages to 0.33 employees per unit under management. The redevelopment of the Willows would result in a total of l0 less units under Willows management. The revised average, assuming no decrease in employees,iso.42 employees per unit. This actual conditions experience at Willows Management is remarkably consistent with the RRC employee generation figure of 0.4 employees per unit. An actual conditions calculation results in a full time employee demand of 6 to 7.5 employees generated by the proposed Willows redevelopment. 3) Willows housing/public benefit proposal Altlough the application of the traditional employee housing requirements indicates that the Willows proposal does not create a net incremental increase in employee housing the applicant recognizes that employee housing is an important issue to the town and, as a public benefit of the project, believes it appropriate to provide a reasonable measure of employee housing within the community. Without taking credit for the employee demand already generated by the existing building, the new Willows building wciuld generate 7.2 employees under the existing town employee generation formula. This7.2 employee generation number is also very consistent with tle actual employee levels experienced by the Willows Management Company. Utilizing the town's housing demand methodology '7 .2 employees, divided by the 1.3 jobs per employee figure equates to a demand for 5.5 employee beds- The Willows redevelopment proposal will commit to providing 1007o of this employee housing demand. The current proposal includes one 67O square foot one bedroom apartrnent on site and the applicant will commit to providing five additional beds off site. These off-site beds will be provided via a buy down prcgram or through a direct payment-in-lieu to the Town of Vail or the Vail Housing Authorify. This housing commiEnent of one on-site one-bedroom unit and five off-site beds addresses IOOVo ofthe actual employee housing demand of the proposed Willows building. t3 3.6 Rental Opportunitie A primary goal of the Vail Village Master Plan is to maintain and to encourage an active bed base in the Vail Village area. The Willows owne6 intend to continue to operate the existing homeowner owned management company and to establish a use and rental program for the fractional units that is very similar to the current Willows use pattem. The twenty-eight fractional shares that are exchanged for the current Willows units will be subject to a condominium association covenant that will allow each owner four weeks of summer use and four weeks of winter use. All other weeks and all weeks not actually utilized by the owners will be placed in tle active rental pool. The eight additional fractional shares will be owned by the Willows Condominium Association. Although these shares may eventually be sold, subject to the same use covenants as described above, the intent of the association is to hold these units in the active rental pool for at least a few years. In addition, five of the wholly owned units have been designed to include a lock-off studio unit. This results in eighteen brand new high quality beds that will be fully utilized for short term occupancy and the potential for five more rental beds within the lock off units. This is a total of five beds less than currently available in the existing Willows building. And these new beds will be a significant improvement over the existing Willows beds. The existing one-bedroom units are 596 square feet in size with 7'6" floor to ceiling heights. The size and configuration of these units is not consistent with the marketplace and no longer meets the expectations of many of the guests looking for Vail Village based accommodations. 3.7 Pnblic Beneffts As an integral part of thc Town of Vail SDD review and approval process there has been a standard of public benefit that must be met. In general the appropriate level of public benefit to be provided by a poject has been directly relative to the level of variation requested from the standards ofthe underlying zone dishict. As has been stated above, the existing Willows Condominiums, as well as most of the other properties of the Willow Circle neighborhood, exceed most of the development standards of the existing zone district including the density and the GRFA. A redevelopment of the Willows Condominiums that would meet the strict and literal standards of the HDMF Zone Dstrict, including density and GRFA would include 12 or less units and 16,069 square feet of GRFA. In order to meet these standards the redevelopment would most likely consist of 4 to 6 large townhome units of 250O to 4000 square feet in size. This type of redevelopment scenario, while meeting the standards of the underlying zone I 14 district, would result in a very exclusive, low density project that would likely have the following consequences: . The loss of Vail Village based short-term rental inventory. ' The probability of an exclusive yet seldom used bed base.. The loss of the existing, long term Willows owners from the community.. No on-site Employee Housing Unit or provision of other housing.. No inclusion of public benefits. This type of redevelopment, while meeting the zoning code, would go against many of the principles, goals and objectives expressed in Town of Vail master plan documents. In the case of the Willows Road neighborhood the underlying HDMF Zone Dstrict is not necessarily fully harmonious with the goals and objectives of the Vail Village Master Plan. The Willows Condominium Association and the principals of Triumph Development believe that the SDD process allows for a redevelopment of the Willows property in a manner that can more successfully address many of the overall goals of the community than a redevelopment under the parameters of the existing zone district would allow. The proposed Willows redevelopment plan is able to address many of the Town of Vail master plan document objectives and also provide a public benefit in a fair relation to the deviation from the underlying zoning. Specifically the redevelopment proposal represented by this request for SDD Zone Dstrict designation will: Allow the existing Willows owners, many of whom have owoed there for many years, to maintain property ownership and to remain a vital part of the Vail community. Provide employee housing for IOOVo of the employee housing demand of the proposed building, without deducting any credits for the existing level of development. Provide a 670 square foot one-bedroom on-site Employee Housing Unit. This is an extremely rare opportunity to create a new Vail Village based EHU. An upgraded pedestrian/automobile streetscape along the entire length of Willow Road. Willow Road currently erists as a one-way street with a twenty-trvo foot wide asphalt section and no curb, gutter or sidewalk. This section of Willow Road will be reconstructed to a design that includes a twelve-foot wide asphalt automobile travel lane and an eight-foot wide stone paver pedestrian walkway. This streetscape design will match that of other recent Vail Village streetscape improvements. The pedestrian walkway will connect to the sidewalk along Vail Road on the west end and to the streetscape improvements currently under construction as part of the Front l5 Door improvements on the east end. This streetscape improvement will provide a significant public benefit to all pdestrian traffic that flows through Willow Road from the west. This streetscape will provide an enhanced pedestrian altemative to Meadow Drive and will allow direct pedestrian access to Vail Village from Beaver Dam Road, th€ First Bank area and Meadow Drive properties such as Villa Cortina. This improvement rcpresents a significant contribution to the goal of pedestrian connectivity from Vail Village towards the west. . The redevelopment of the Willows will result in a very desirable, high quality fractional ownership and rental program that will meet a key Town of Vail goal of providing and maintaining active beds in the Vail Village core area. These beautiful new two bedroom units will provide a much superior rental product over the existing one bedroom units. The larger unit size will open the Willows to a family friendly market that the property has not been able to serve over the years. The ownenhip and rcntal requirement covenant structure will ensure that these beds remain actively occupied. All of these public benefits can be accomplished with a building design that increases conformance of many of the underlying zone district standards and maintains the charm, character and integrity of the Willow Circle neighborhood. The applicant believes this level of public benefit is appropriate to the level of variation requested from the underlying zone district. l6 I 4.0 SPECIAL DEYELOPMENT DISTRICT REVTf,W CRITERIA Title 12, Chapter 9 of the Town of Vail Municipal Code provides for tle establishment of Special Development Districts in the Town of Vail. According to Section l2-9A-1, the purpose of a Special DevelopmentDistict is, "To encourageflexibility and creativity in the development of land, in order to promote its most appropriate use: to imprwe the designcharacter and quality of the new developnent within the Town; tofacililate the adequate and economical provision of streets and utilities; to preserve lhe natural and scenicfeatures ofopen space areas: and to further the overall goals of the community as stated in the Vail Comprehensive Plan. An approved development planfor a Special Development District, in conjunction with the property's underlying zone district, shall establish the requirements for guiding development and uses ofproperty included in the Special Development District." The Vail Municipal Code provides nine design criteria which shall be used as the princrpal criteria in evaluating the merits of the proposed Special Development District. It shall 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. The applicant has addressed each ofthe nine SDD review criteria below: A. Design compatibility and sensitivity to the immediate environmenf neighborhood and adjacent properties relative to architectural design' scale, bulk, building height" buffer zoneg identity, character, visual integrity and orientation. Aoolicant response: The proposed Willows redevelopment plan creates a high level of compliance with this criteria. In fact, the applicants believe that the quality of the architectural design, the proposed building materials, the elimination of surface parking and the sensitivity of the design to the neighborhood result in a significant improvement over the existing conditions. 17 The alpine style of Vail Village architecture and the quality of building materials have evolved and improved a great deal since the l97O construction of the Willows. The monolithic fagade and the brick and stucco exterior are uot up to par with the surrounding neighborhood or with recent Vail Village improvements. The design team has put a great effort into ensuring the proposed design is compatible and sensitive to tlte immediate neighborhood. An overriding goal of the design tearn has been !o achieve the program goals of the building without increasing the building height. We believe that the character, identity and visual character of the proposal are in complete harmony with the objectives of this SDD criteria. B. Uses' activity and density which provide a compatible, eflicient and workable rehtionship with surrounding uses and activity. Applicant response: The existing neighborhood is singularly residential in use, with a mix of highly active rental programs and quiet exclusive second homes. The proposed program strives to strike a compatible balance with this mix of neighborhood activity levels while simultaneously meeting the goals of the existing Willows owners, the goals of the development partner and the overall goals of the Town of Vail. We believe the proposed density and use structur€ is the optimal progam to balance these goals and objectives and provide an appropriate balance to the level of residential activity of the immediate neighborhood. C. Compliance with parking and loading requirements as outlined in Title 12, Chapter lO of the Town of Vail Municipal Code. Aoplicant response: The proposed Willows redevelopment meets or exceeds all requirements of the parking regulations. The new building presents an improved loading and drop off/pick up area that will reduce congestion on Willow Road. The existing parking deck is in dire need of replacement and does not meet the screening and visibility requirements of the zone district. All of the required parking for the proposed building will be located in a fully enclosed parking garage below the building. D. Conformity with the applicable elemetrts of theVail Comprehensive t8 I Plan, Town policies and Urban Design Plan. Applicant response: The proposed redevelopment of the Willows is in compliance with all relevant Town of Vail master plan documents, goals and policies. A separate chapter of this application details the many specffic areas of compliance. E. Identificstion and mitigation of natural and/or geologic hazards that alfect the property on which tbe special dwelopment district is proposed. Applicant response: There are no known natural and/or geologic hazards, including the Gore Creek floodplain, that affect the property. F. Site plan, building design and location and open space provisions designed to produce a functionrl dwelopment responsive and sensitive to netural features, vegetation and overall aesthetic quelity ofthe community. Applicant response: The proposed site plan and building design have been carefully designed to respond to adjacent properties and to the overall aesthetic quality of the community. The front fagade of the building had been pulled back from the street to allow for a more functional loading and drop off area and to enhance the pedestrian streetscape experience. The pool garden has been sited to create an op€n light and air rcgion in an area where the adjacent building encroaches to within inches of the property line. This courtyard design will minimize sun/shade noise and visual impacts to the adjacent Riva Ridge South building. G. A circulation system designed for both vehicles and pedestrians addressing on and off-site traflic circulation. I 19 Anolicant response: The on site vehicular circulation system is designed to allow for simple and convenient access to a single level of underground parking. An off street loading/pick up area with a covered porte-cochere will eliminate existing congestion on Willows Road. H. Functionel and esthetic landsceping and open space in order to optimize and preserve natural features, recreation, views and functions. Applicant response: The site plan includes a functional and esthetic landscape design that is appropriate to the site. This landscape plan is only designed to a conceptual level at this point in the review process. A fully detailed landscape plan will be prepared for review by the Design Review Board. L Phasing plan or subdivision plan thet will maintain a workable, functional and ellicient rcIetionship tbroughout the dwelopnent of the special developm ent d istrict. Apolicant response: All construction will take place in a single phase. The applicant will work with both the Town of Vail and the neighborhood to develop an appropriate construction management plan. t 20 5.0 CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT REVIEW CRITERIA The proposal to redevelop the existing Willows property includes a request for two separate Conditional Use Permits. One is to allow a fractional fee ownership structure for nine of the proposed units and the second is to allow an on-site Type III Employee Housing Unit. The uses are described in detail in the above project narrative. The Plannilg and Environmental Commission uses the following criteria in the evaluation of a Conditional Use Permit request. The applicant response to each criteria is included. A. The effect of the use on light and air, distribution of population' hansportation facilities, utilities, schools, parks and recreation facilitieg and other public facilities needs. Applicant Response: The use of a.portion of the site as fractional fee ownership will have no discernable effect upon the above referenced facilities and issues beyond what the permitted uses would generate. There will be no impact upon schools and the usage of transportation, utility, park and recreation facilities will be very similar to that of a lodge or actively managed rental property that is allowed as a use by right. The proposed 670 square foot EHU will have no discernable negative effect upon the facilities listed in the criteria. ,Bec- Fflhptapnfraffic with particular reference to congestion, automotive and 'eder:tp'ffnafiiarcefet5r and convenience, traffic flow and control, access' --: - -lnaneuverlrtility, and rernoval of snow ftom the street and parking areas. ABplicant Resgonse: The fractional fee ownership pattern of nine of the proposed dwelling units will result in a usage pattern of the Willows site that is very similar to the existing use pattem. We do not believe there will be an effect upon congestion, safety, traffic flow, access or mmnihgbilltp flbwrr dte design, irrespective of the ownership pattern, will irryWiedfitilldumRendcryestion, access to the Willows site and maneuverability of i'ehicles onthe 3lte. There will be no impact on snow operations due to the ownership pattem. The inclusion of one 670 square foot Type III EHU in the building should not have a measurable impact upon congestion, safety, traffic flow or snow rernoval. 2l C. Effectupon the character of the area in which the proposed use is to be located, including the scale and bulk of the proposed use in relation to surrounding uses. Applicant Response: The architecture of the proposed redevelopment of the Willows is a significant upgrade from the existing building in style, form and materials. The architecture is very compatible with tbe character of the area and with the established vernacular of Vail Village and the surrounding residential environs. The ownership format does not have an effect upon the architectural design of the building. The usage pattern of the proposed building will remain very similar to the cunent use of the current building. The inclusion of a Type III EHU does not negatively impact the character of the area or ttre bulk and scale of the proposed building. The redevelopment proposal is in full compliance with the height allowance of the IIDMF Zone Dstrict and the bulk and mass of the building is in character with the sunounding uses. The Willows owners, Triumph Development and the design team have made protecting the character of the neighborhood a high priority of the proposed redevel opment plan. 22 6.0 TOWN OF VAIL COMPREIMNSIVE PLAN AND MASTER PLANMNG DOCTJMENTS The design team and the applicant have carefully analyzed the Town's master planning documents in order to address and incorporate as many of the relevant goals and policies as possible into the proposed redevelopment plan. The list below is a summary of the goals and policies of various planning documents that are consistent with the proposed Willows redevelopment plan. Items listed in italics are particularly relevant to the proposed plan. A. Yail Land Use Plan l. GeneralGrowth/Development 1.1 Vail should continue to grow in a controlled environmenl maintaining a balance between residential, commercial and recreational uses to serve both the iisitor and the permanent resident. L3 The qaality of development should be nwintained and upgraded whenever possible. 1.4 The origirnl theme of the oldVillage core should be carried into new development in tlw Villnge Core through contirwed implementation of the Urban Design Guide Plan. I.I2 Vail should accommodale most of the additional growth in existing develnped areas (infiIl areas ). 4. Village Core/Lionshead 4.2 Increased density in the core areas is acceptable so long as thc existing character of each area is preserved through implementation oJ the Urban Design Guide Plan and the Vail Village Master Phn. 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 hclp leep occupancy rates up. 23 Affordable employee housing should be accommodated through private efforts, assisted by limited incentives, and provided by the Town of Vail, with appropriate restrictions. Residential growth should keep pace with the market place demands for a full range ofhousing types. The existing employee houstng base should be preserved and upgraded. Additional employee housing needs should be accommodated at varied sites throughout the conmuniry. B. Vail Vilage Urbsn Design Guide Plan The Vail Village Master Plan includes a map that details the area subject to the Vail Village Urban Design Guide Plan. The Willows Road -Willow Circle neighborhood does not technically fall within the guide plan area of influence. The design team has, however, incorporated many ofthe relevant architectural design elements ofthe plan into the building design. In particular, the roof compositions and overhangs, the building malerials, the style and placement of windows and the balcony railing treatments are all in complete compliance with the Vail Village Urban Design Guide Plan. e.- Vail Villaee Master Plan The Vail Village Master Plan does cover the general area from (and including) Ford Park to Vail Road. This does include thb Willow Road - Willow Circle neighborhood. The following is a list of goals and objectives that support the Willows redevelopment plan. Goal I - Encourage high quality redevelopment while preserving unique architectural scale of the Village in order to sustain its sense of community and identity. Objective L2 - Encourage the upgrading and redevelopment of residential and cornmercial faci lities. Objective 1.3 - Enhance new development and redevelopment through public improvements done by private developers working in cooperation with the town. Goa72 - To foster a strong tourist industry and promote year-round economic health and viability for the Village and for the community as a whole. Objective 23 - Increase the number of residential units available for short term overnight accommodations. 5.3 5-4 .!\ 24 Objective 2.5 - Errcourage the continued upgrading, renovation and taintenance of existing lodging and commercial facilities to better serve the needs oJour guests. GoaI 3 - To recognize as a top priority the enhancement of the walking experience throughout the Village. Objective 3.1 - Physically improve the existing pedestrian ways by landscaping and othcr improvements. Goal 4-To preserve existing open space areas and expand greenspace opportunities. There arp no objectives of this goal that are relevant to the Willows redevelopment proposal. Goal 5 - Increase and improve the capacity, efficiency, and aesthedcs of the hansportation and circulation system throughout the Village. Objective 5.1 - Meet parking demands with public and private parking facilities. Goal 6 - To ensure the continued improvement of the vital operational elements of the Village. Objective 6.1 - Provide service and delivery facilities for existing and new developmenl 2. Land Use Plan The VWIP designates the Willow Circle neighborhood as Medium/High Density Residential. The proposed plan is in conforrrance with this designation. 3, OpenSoacePlan The VVMP designated areas to be protected as open space. The Willows redevelopment is in complete conformance with this portion of the Vail Village Master Plan. 4. Parking and Circulation Pl,an The Willows redevelopment proposal is in conformance with all aspects of this element of the Vail Village Master Plan. 25 BuildinS HeifhtPhn The building height plan dasiglates the Willow Circle neighbortood as appropriatc for three and four story buildings. The proposed Willows building includes both thr€e md four story elements and is in completc conformance with this plan. 26 7.O Kev Features In summary, the following are key elements and features of the proposed Willows redevelopment plan: . The existing Willows building is in need of significant capital investment. The two level exterior parking deck is in extremely poor condition and will require a complete demolition and reconsfiuction. The main building structure was built with pre-cast concrete "T" beams. This form of construction makes any type of sipificant upgrade or renovation, including installation of fire sprinkler systems, extremely difficult. . The floor to ceiling clear height in the existing units is 7'6". . The existing ownerc, through careful and thorough analysis conducted by their condominium association, have determined that an attempt to upgrade the existing building does not make economic sense. . The proposed plan allows existing Willows owners to maintain ownership in the property and maintain the exact usage pattern they are accustomed to. The proposed plan maintains an active rental management program with a similar number of beds. The existing Willows has twenty-seven l-bedroom units and one studio unit. The proposed redevelopment plan proposes nine 2-bedroom fractional fee units and includes opportunities to rentfive additional lock offunits for a total of twenty-three actively rented beds. The redevelopment proposal includes a commitment to provide deed restricted affordable housing in an amount equivalent to lffiVo of the employee generation demand of the building. The proposed plan places all parking underneath the building. All parking will be completely screened from public view in accordance with the zone district standards. . The proposed plan rneets the allowable height limit for the HDMF Zone District. . The proposed plan incorporates public benefits that are appropriate to the level of deviation requested from standard of the underlying HDMF Zone district. The Willows owners, the principals of Triumph Development and the members of the design team believe that this proposal is in keeping with the spirit and intent of the Special Development District and maintains the character and integrity of the Mllow Circle neighborhood. 27 sriliiiiitiliitli ,,k#Kl .i ii:iE* {{;!riilii a 6!IY ;r. 9E3J t1 trl Il lll t'\z ir ri ;! \ lt \ ") iil ;l$ilft I I I 1 I lo I zloltrl UItulol \91zl olJI dl uI;trt.'o,ls tc{, ttiltfit'$ nl \51zl olJI-lol uItht.'ol3 \_/ L (a ilt lli i! lL..rlr U 1 o o I ! I lo I I 6l FI UI!llol yl olJI-l tl ulr'tl..ol!A\y llrrl t'dilfil I I I 6l FIull||tol otzl olJI5lol ul! ol3 $, t ++f+ tl] |ll ut o o I sIEtiiiiiriiii I|l rfrt I I _t 6l FI UI|ltlol vl olJI llol -t." utt- ol!/\tv tl ti$f I I o o I glit liiiiiilii til ol FI 6l 6l'l.lol oi{l 5ltrl()l url(')l vl 6lJI-lol ;l(Jl <tl rlrl dI -JlJt.5tl-l' +1, tr o o I grEliiiiliiititlt tilItlt!l til 'Ba glt. dl>l 1l url {tgti $l; \-/ L-- l { i o o I o o I Io ffi til g:!lliiiiiliii oP.Ftoo'[. P.q Ei /r tl S/|NO-I-II,S,gHI c3sodoud ItI u r81ldtr I I itit; e'! cn ri:\ \6 '|l\'s ror'<liP ,t6 liri itt,i ri-ir,t \l | lQ Ir ;r i . a6| !dI i!I 15 'j! tl:ittl'llril tiI'tili 'Ba flr''\ g|l \r :l\ lrllril\rl\"ol', \ 61,\ \, slir \A '\\J \I \\ I I4 II _) f- \ \ fttt!l til lr;!:,p,q lii ,--1113n . "m . H, '.t,,:'['u tuJ o o 3 oo mr r:illii:il tiiilii oFqqJ'I!A Fo| /6It l\,lsril.o-rTrrilgHI olsodoxd J t l* I I 5 g i$f itit; n cA 4-1Yt <l[' rlI:,, gl r" '. Jlr\11'\gl \rJl \ 0tn\ \Ilir \O r_tt!l Hlt!l UJ ,il i l.--'- r?\q 'g,a !o IBia:+ i i I ITirii lrid t: i ; l II I \ \ I I I l I I I I I I l l- I I) I f- \ \ o o t o Itlllii::illiitil rlr: ql lrll>llxlJl al1-l(lr 6tiltlS ': I 1a \ -/ ) ,,/li--r-- , !il tt II L:J \ t \ \n-- ----T-- ir-l'li\:I 'i\* \ -.i:ff 1--r I I--I ..- ,- _)IF o o , oO E:illiiiiiiiiitii otrrt€ 1r!^Fi tull|na tzsrtroT-rrrfi,gHI olsodoad i t 3 rb(tuJluL :ililiil; s tl t--r- t-Jtil tilt!l ui I I lo ior!. i6 t7 I I i \leir il 'd,tra ta I I I ! I I I I l I1) f- \ \ ___l _T'-----T *-.,----.-""-*;-" o o t THE WILLOWS 74 Willow Road Vail, CO Project #:23270 November 07,2006 41.1 - cover sheet A2.l - site plan A2.1.0 - ht. calculation sheet A2.l.l - existing vs. proposed no change A2.2 - site sections A2.3 - site sections A2.4 - site sections A2.5 - site sections A3.0 - garage floor plan Add sheet to index revised porte cochere and drive design, show paving Revised snow storage and site walls Additional landscaping along west property line lower ridge elevations so below 48'-0" limit az,r ;,eJ/.,>;. @'*, zva2 /-2a2/tt 8...' ^*p A3.0.1 - garage floor plan-sq.ft. no changes A3.1 - first floor plan 43.1.1 - first floorplan-sq.ft. A3.2 - second floor plan 43.2.1 - second floor plan-sq.ft. no changes A3.3 - third floor plan no changes A3.3.1 - third floor plan-sq.ft. no changes A3.4 - fourth floor plan no changes 43.4.1 - fourth floor plan-sq.ft. no changes porte cochere and ramp design, paving, traffic light no changes no changes no change lower ridge elevation no change no change notes about storage being "common area" lower ridge elevations lower ridge elevations lower ridge elevation new sheet A4.1 - roofplan A5.1 - elevations 45.2 - elevations A5.1.1 - enlarged elevation .:/ - ., .a, .r .4,"" ;'i.r,. d d4a*c .; )/ t-// F,fz. ffi;zao LL/E6|zgSE 29.59 97894 98L94o PVLMAI.I 8 ASSOCIATES PAGE EL TO: FAX#: DATE: ROM: Eisabcth Rced 419-?452 Nov. ?, 2(tr6 Rickfulman PRO.IECT: IrYilloweArtortrrcPort Nurrbcr dPrga Incbdl4 Covetr Shcntr !' { ENCLOSED: Mark Stclle rePort COMMDNTS: Here's a copy of the report tle arborist wrote' Notvcry delinitivc' Thanks Rick a rc Box 2338 ' Elrvtds, Colorado 81632 ' Phoncl 9F70'92Gfl155 ' Far: 9$92660G1 PVLI''|AN &PAGE A2ASS]CIATESo98184oLLlg612aEE 29259 @5 ,ilaiL Cotonto 8165E October 23, 2005 lvtr. RickPYlman Pylman & Associates POB 2338 Edwards, CO 81632 Re: \trrillows Tree Invcmtory DearMr. PYlman' otrTuesday,octobcrl0,2006,ImetwjthyouandStewVirostecktodiscussteehealth and prospcctivu p*.*"tio" activities for a pmposed redwelopmemt of the Willows' This report will summuize oru discussions, pmviile a tree inventory, and provida guidance for fiee proservation activities' g*. For easc ofrefcrencg on tagged all ttffi;i;;p;6; rpu"in"r tho dare, ree nunrber, tnuk diameter, md Garage foundation (East wall) I recommend kccPing the. In order to mitigatc impacts to tho roots #1ffi #ifiifrffiffi1]rht ;il Jrtgmp"ot to a large nat of cononwood dripline radirx. Sce Attachment A' Tree Preservation Guidelines .. - - 1,-, Attachmcut B contains " rJ oi*u preserrration g'idelinas' Crcating a limit of disturbance (IOD) at the dripline is only. a E-cltg,alizcd rule' The actual recommended ;d;F;"it# miaa-oioutsido or'the-*iplinc, and is bcst determined througb exploratory Excavation tt.t p"i"-SZ)' YJ "'F"ry observation ofthe large surfece root ,"i;ir;iFaii tit if,* a LO6 at the dripline of this tree mav not be sufficicnrt i"jt*ia. dequatebee preservation' ' ' , il;tfr"t o<te,nd along the east edge of this wdl Tree spraying Ireoommendthatall"savc'spces,aspens'andcottonwoodswithintheWillowsil;t ff ;ffi it"-taiittrv "iiaoemt Jo the ncighboring Prop€rtv towards the cast be spraved in summer zo6i. fti"f.Uowing insecUaraptnia spray sohedule applies: -- -5;fi; Needle scale and spidcr mite sprav in late June Aspcos & coitonwoods; Aphid and mitc sprayin late May ffiFnnA\ D # LL/661268a 2at59 9749498144 Cc:Mr. Stevo Virosteck Attachmorrt A, Willows TYcc Inventory Attachment B, Tree PresErvation Guidelines Aftacbmcrnt C, Willows Tree MaP Futrue consfiuction will likely exaperbate the current population of insccts/arachnids' Thereforen it is a good neffiip"ruv t" spray adjaccnt trees on neighboring properties' Howwer, trce spraying "i-44 Wiffo""pUcd witt not bc necessary' since I havc been ;;;il td;il;;ilit p*Pertv for syveral ]'esrs' I alreadv have this propertv on a regd;r inspection and nee epraying rcgime' Conclusion il#;;;ur revicw of this rcport, the next step in tha hee preservation process is to mcct with thc orcavation/concreie oontractors to stake out thc prefcrre_d LoD. once the prefenedLoDhasbecnstakcd,otploratoryexcavationoanproceed.Theresultantsize and quantity of "ut *oe -;iiffi ;. dctermine whcth.'r a given trec should rcceive Ece p*Jt'"tioit beatmcnt or is recommended for rerroval' If you have any questions about this rcport, plcase give me a call' SincerelY, PVLMAN & ASSOCIATES PAGE A3 {4."ww Mark Stelle, Registered Consulting Arbotist I O o bata6t6aL6 O 69iAZ 9AAZtgq/tl 9'g cl E () I I I I il tlrlu ll il+ llE il= rl: sl'i iti D l.: rlirll Hli El l.r =1,9t. E I'Ell 8l 9d6tl ol>l.IllrlOI6lml I I I I I I ,l tl)l fl rl rl ;ljl ,l 1l ,!li ill !li nt.tlqt.ol El' 81. 0r l: trlol>l6l 'l9loltrl I I I I I I slnst (Jll,lrult tll irlt Elr('t'ol it; olit'.0t' 8l tsl EI te lEtc;lc t+ lu t$ l> l2 H l! ll .l',I I !l i 3l i illi t)l FIc ' il'6ltrt: El' ol 8d EI €t I I I I I rl,I il il tl,l ,l fltlifr {ttl '.!rl :l ili ! 1.' ilt'ultrl DI 8l it;qlol EI; Elt)lhu EI IE lI la li It lr sli Bl:loll Fli sl Hl'ulEl il, ol5l EI EI ed EIol el I I I I I ,l il il il tl )l,l i{ :l il ?ltl DIit ili t{i i'l sl. dt.olEll EI, $'>l6l el EI I I I I I l+ lr ili st:gl.fl'(rlol 9lr :t' gl ql FI 9l<l ts lctcla latat IElrIt tt ,ltll r tt :ol irl i il!rlJDl-iilo il,1 ol eli qloltrll E l'ctolol 9dFIol>l cra I Flcl!)Itrl I I I I I I I il ;l il rl ll,l ztlt 4i1t'il+ 'liil"!lr ild ollul' !d ,)l al' 3l El' $1,qll!.1oll>tr!l EI El It IE lc la ti li rl 0ilt ll E :l (,1l ;tirll ililrll !t ll.l it.JI !rl, 6tl El, :l'9l EIol(Jl eJ EI 9l<l I I I rlitc l4 ta!llr 'l6,1 , llE ilT ;11>lJ ill)l (nl-!lit t|Pli ull Eli9tl Slr. ;lol E t'qlol $te'l ol>lrsltl El llItlillll.ci I ilE I itE lile I ilE IitE I1l.g I)l ra I ilE I ql.E Iild Ixts I/..1 q I lilE I El? ,l fl€E gt$€ f;IT E I I I I I ul, dt( sl I {)ll Elr El' El. 5l EIol fl<l I IC lf t=t! l' .liDt I ili el; Itt:Dt I l'{ Iol, gl Ell9l' EI; Hol>l<l rlll il tl alal,l 1l .rl!l 3l DI al =lstltrl EI al El dl oltrl EI ld Itaa Itd It-o I o l'6 lfil.a l(:te t: IE IT lF lt tE t:ls I'ilE tll(! trta t.lle l1l€ ltle llto I'tle lrlo Il,E IHt'lvt I lE l: |,ff | ls rl -IE HI9lu it EIFII pJ a -El FIZ EItl6.ol4lFc zl I I iltl it )l 'lil ll 'Itl fl rtl ;1hlsl .l't iti 3li ol'r hl RIUI:(al EI5t, dlftrlolol: $:dl tlrcl vlql ol lEll* It€ltE Ile. I tE Il€l 13 | tEt lslit€ I:lt I 3l€ el 3lt El 3lE .El EIE ,al 212 "El tlx,El EIE E flBc<l< F F€E^&- \o C.l c{=:lslt-lR C-l ae li- lat it.lFlblao (\nl"€ |a= EBE atl ora = ra !n t(vr rr) =rn rac\rnF ({oN o<t c{ (n(\t rnN rnc{r.l+lal(\I rr)t\(l Ega \o rn oo a c- o 0 c- b 6 o o\ Io 1') F-\o a\o o\o l.I \o rn trlq q ral \0 l \o o F- L ra \o rat 6 0 U CA !,() E a ETIA d,o f, E o CI aov) r)o q .A c) ff 0)t =F(A ()()2b(t) rto 7aa o rrl OJo eect) o 'Jea Eh qta at E Bvt 0) C) aoin d)q .A 0) B 6at C)clt 9.(n E5 au) a) C)I ArA HH*fr- t<(\l (n t \o c-*l o\FI fi *\n .\a c-€o\N N 11N o s3lvrcossv I NVl4tAdva 35vd F <€ EER. E g.& €F€ f;E' = PAGE A5n/A6/2aAE 20:59 .-..rF#!.F-..- FfLMA{ & ASSOCIATESo978949S164o €> sF t $il ag==€o a i.,DoL-t-Sr9eFeto Le* ! :,n4- ilE i"I \ 1 \ nS I.___i: d}--ry_ Fi i'+ I I l "*[ o,t tr4F \ \ \ \ Ir$ * \ \ \ I I I I It I i. I I II I I I I Itll I It I Iti\ Ii' I I I I Ie! -r I BiI E t ,I I I ttI + 6, 01 v I I Ot t*L$o -*-)^ @"t LF, S t! eq\,#I !|- r--- LLl6612gg6 29i53 3769434L44 Attachment B Tree Preservation Guidelines Project:Willows By: Mark Stelle' Registered Consulting Arborist October 23,2006 ROOT ZONE PROTECTION protection of the critical *", """t it essential to insure long-tcrm health and suwival of the trec. Soil compacti;;;;fii "' a-'"gtttg as root cutting and root romoval' To protect the critical root ,;;; ftd;"avatioriand compaction' a feo"e should be Erecrcd bcfore the onsct of any topsoil removal fiom th9 .site' ittu *itt provide a much nee'ded physical barricr or""gb"[iiii" "r*tt*tion and landscape constnrction prooess' This physical banicr protccts Jgainsi"a.r*r impacts such asotcavatiorL he,nching' Irlfri"",' U"mi,, an. attffits to t"o'pot"tity store building matenials' Fencing: An improperly installed tree protection fcnce is as good as no fence at dL Specifications "r" oiolto*ri Tt " f-"" shouldbe installcd ar the dripline of all save #-, i--.^rr^,r r,;rh ..T'r ,.,nsts on 4' centets, The fcnce should rcilnain, undishrrbcd throughout gcneml constrrction and initial landscape constmction. Fencing Altemative: Should the fencc reqrrirc temPorary disassornbly for tcmporary ac:es:' a consulting arboristshould be "*t "taio "ppro.," altemJtive tmk/rcot protection. Tho tunk can them be protectcl-Jspecifi"iin tit" "Tnmk Protection" segmcnt of this report' Mulching: If not alroady mulched, ell save-trces should be mulched before initid site excavation' Tlre mulch laycrut o"ril" z; i" 4'thick and cover tlre entire critical root zone (from the tnrnk to Uc aripiinel. '1ft" *"toi"t can be wood chips, bark, or sfiaw' Benefits axc as follows:e Reduce waporation of ground moisture' r Reduce eroding effects of supplenrcntal water' r Moderrate soil tanPerature. r Mitigate soil comPaction. o Recycle tace amounts of nutriecrts (only a bencfit of organic mulch)' Construction Material Storage & Dumping: Tho crirical *ot ,onu iii*-"'fnin ariifinb should be void of storcd materials' In "dditi*, storagp ("uci temporary) of any hroiloil containers, or other che'mical oontarninants *th* t-0 i; if tn a;pf io" of any signifi cant save-trec should be s6ictly prohibited. Oncaspilled liquiafu contaminate the rcot zonc' rerncdial leaching p'ooouo*, becomo ortrcmcly exphsive and chemical uptake by the root system often results in irrcvcrsible bec docline' PYLMAN & ASSOCIATES PAGE E6 Pago Bl ofB4 LLlg6126aE 2A,,59 974949s PYLMAN & Attachment B Lg4o ASSOCIATESo PAGE g7 Tree Preseruation Guidelines Proiecfi Willows Bv: Mark Stelle, Registered Consulting Arborist October 23,2OOo TRUNK & BRANCH PROTECTION - All hec tn'rks that are Jjr;i; runawayboulders or scraping from maohinery should be encircred wior sfiaw bar;:d;;Jr#td be positioned vcrtioatly around the artirc trunk perimctcr -d tigh;i; l;rii *itt, t'Mine. unii no circumstances should wire/sting emsir€te the ** uirr",tit"rli# ;;.;;.*. 5m* iul"t will also protect env ocposed root collarst. Wherepossiblcallhanchcsadjacenttooonstantmaolrineryhaffioshouldbeidentificd by the general .oot "",or7"*calating contractorand pruned or tied out of hamls way by an arborist. The tcc irr*t"ri io*flner se""ra trces on this project thatreed professional pnrning to ,rrow rot uuncls access ena minimizi unwanted branch tcaring' EXCAVATION Whcnrernovingto,psoil,tothec'rtentpossiblenallexcavationadjacenttothelootzone should be cut radiaty awJy-i"t mi ti""f. The operator's machine strould always be facing the tnrnk whcrr tfrc ifrovA severs the root. ihis procedure minirnizes darnagc to the residual mot s]'storn' Exploratory Excavation: This is a pro".a*, ioi aot"*lniog the actufl location' size' and volume of roots beforc the "*o*".iipo"t* Jffit topsoil ailjace'rrt to thc anpline of a significant savc-hoe. rrris pnocuo'uo must be monitored by a consulting atborist. Root pruning: Priortomachincgxcavationcuts,apre.o{cavationhand.dugtrerrchwillrerloal critical ,rt "y.ot '*fri"i "* U" ."i.- tV hand to minimize damage to the residual root system. Onsite monitoring and mot pruningby a,conntlting arborist is suggested ;; thil;;i;i A"t tir"" ; *it c,rt pmainJ"xporfo ig thl sun for an.extended pcriod, the cut should be covEred with a porous proicctive banier such as landscape fabric' burlap, orPlYwood. Tree & StumP Removal: Troes scheduled foi remo"A that located adjacent to the dripline ofsavc-trecs should gglbetopplotlbyanoxcavator.Rarber,rerrroval-trceslocatedadjacenttossvc-trees should be teueo uy an'cxpelirn"ca arborist, and the stumps should be sawn flush to thc ground or freatJwiti a stump Efind€(, t""oiog *t" stump's root wad2 and adjacent savc-fiee roots undisilrbcd' rRoot collar (rcot flarc ot root crown) - A poiat el hce bacc where ttc roob and tnr6k mergc' ' ioo, tJ -ile mrss of soil and lawc stuctural rcots imncdi$ely below the mrnk' Pagc 82 ofB4 LLlg'l2AA6 26259 97494 Attachment B Tree Preservation Guidelines Project:Willons Bv: Mark stell+ idgille13d Consultins Arborist Excess Soil Storage: Excesssoilghouldnqtbestorcd(w€mterrloralilv)yithinthcdriplineofanysavc.il. Th" ;;c offects of this sxcess soil are as follonts: r compaction irJee;r;bly ltiges tr,e crirical root zone by inhibiting cridoal gas oth"ngt and watcr Percolation'. compaction on*-tiit, ienefici"t soil miorobes that are associated with mot health. d-- i-. .Theclcanupproccssofremovingexcesssoilbymachinesoftenintoducesfirrtlrer physical damage to surfaco roots' Iftemporaryplacemc'ntoffillsoilwithinthedriplincofateebecomcsabsolutely uo"uoiOuUtlitterc aie two prudent protective measures' .-- Sooir"t" the ttrnk with vcrtically placc straw balcs' r covsrr *ur" *uJir,rio" thr d.iifi" *ith tandscape fabric prior to sdding fiu din' Aeration SYstem:^-'I?;"#;;;ril adding extra soil wer tho roor zone becomes an unavoidable option' an adequate ""rat oriliJii";ffi ;t"t be tlesignedand +tdlP.TF the guidance of a cotsultlng otti*t. On"e an aeration systeir and tnrnk P,roiection has been installe4 tfre orcavatoi*oV totn-*"e witir the addition of fill dirt' SoilRetention: Arrytimeaproposedo(cavationcutandthcassociatedover.cutwouldviolate|he Glinq rtcit stro*a! suctr as soil nailing should be considered. Water Stress Mitigatlon: Atreconaconsmrctionsitccanbecomewatcr-strcssedfromeweralinfluonces.o Ptrysical mot damrage or destnrction' -- -^2i ^-, Ir Increased oporoi-r.* the drying effects of sun upon soil aod foliage. , . Reduced *rid;d;i*.*a *it r, due to the wicking cffccts of an exposed hillside excavation cut rSoilcorrrpactioncanadverselyaffecttheavailabilityofrainwater. Supplemental Watedng: supplcnrentat waJig of all oiti"f savc-trees during this constuction prcject should be schedulcd. hior to initial cxcavation, a supplemmtal watq sorxce should bc sccurcd. If hydraniwater is not immcdiately available on the site prior to constttction, a water kuck should be schedulcd' 9S104o PVLMA..I & ASSSCIATES PAGE A8 Pagc 83 ofB4 L!lg6/2A66 29259 9709498164 PYLMAN & Attachment B ASSOCIATESo PAGE 69 Tree Preseruatlon Guidelines ProjecL Willows ^ -L --: Bv: Mark Stelle, ndgistereO Consulting ArboristY'' '----.- october 23'2ooo *"Hff ::ilK*il*ffi :g**r,'""H"|ff :il:T}"ffi "'#"?Tf,ltTsize, slope, exposure' and weather pattefi-ts o.r monitored by ,n" ".r#ii, "il"ii "l irr" titn" orinitial excavation. SUBCONTRACTOR BIDDING SPECTFICATIONS Th e rolcs of a consulting ;;;"'* ;;T-3-nlt*tJ it"p"ot't save-tsce candidates' provide guidarrce, 4 t9 t"ttit"r (dependanip.o-n lftt pto'itit budget)' constnrction impacts. The crcatlon "i;;ffi;;'t"; guiatut'"t is an inrportant ste? in a free uresenationpro*.. *i[#* tt" oiipr; *ryhirca to savl tre€s ar€ the conffactors t*it"ut""itd" who are onsite every day' Inadditiontodeootingonallfirtrrresiteplhnsthephysicalg.l,i:Il|.letrEeprotection fence, the bidding ptorp** r"iall suboonnactot't, pttti"tt"tty orcavators' should clearly reference the -"iiliilirr; *" ;*toti*;;J. Thit is aLsolutely esscntial since thc positioning of the f*""it*tt tiJ"'" ot-*r'iotty allowable' the apcess for bapifitline, soafrldinss;' *i g**"r *o*ing "pao" b"*TjTt"T:* andthc' tree dripline. SoU"ontr.ptolio,*i*ALr,""O ttrat tire tee protection fenco must rcman unattercd througho"t u! J"*tt""t"" and landscape construction proccis' PagcB4 ofB4 From: To: Date: Subject: Rick Pytman <rick@pylman.com> Elisabeth Reed <EReed@vailgov.com> 10/10/2006 6:04:33 PM Re: Revised Willows neighboring properties Thanks Elisabeth. Will you see if you can find a copy of the lock- off rental incentives that were built into the Arrabelle docs so we can match those. I want to make sure we have that issue covered. Thanks, Rick On Oct 10, 2006, at 4:31 PM, Elisabeth Reed wrote: > Hello Steve, Rick, and Mike: > | have attached a revised compendium of the development statistics for > properties sunounding the Willows Condos, this time including the > existing Willows property. > As for the schedule, here's a summary of what we've talked about in > the > last few days: > 1. Friday, Oct. 13th - all final drawings, EHU proposal, etc. > submitted to Town, as proposed by developer; > 2. Thursday, Oct. 1gth - latest day I could comfortably receive and > process all referenced items; > 3. Monday, Oct. 23rd - latest day to submit application and > appropriate items for conceptual DRB review on Wednesday, Nov. 1st; > 4. Monday, Nov. 6th - day that Staff memorandum can be expected to be > completed for review by you and others; > 5. Wednesday, Nov. 8th - latest day that Staff memorandum must be > completed for Planning Commission hearing; > 6. Monday, Nov. 13lh - final PEC hearing. > Let me know if I have missed, under or overestimated anything, etc. > Otherwise, full speed ahead. Thanks for your continued patience, > time, > and efforts! > Best, > Elisabeth > Elisabeth E. Reed > Planner ll, Town of Vail > 75 S. Frontage Road > Vail, CO 81657 > 970.479.2454 olc > 970.479.2452tax > <The Willows Redevelopment Comparison Properties.doc> September 28,2006 Mr. Rick Pylman Pylman & Associates PO Box 2338 Edwards, CO 81632 rick@ovlman.com Mr. Steve Virostek Triumph Development, LLC 8120 Woodmont Avenue. Suite 800 Bethesda, MD 20814 steve@trium phdev.com Re: The Willows RedevelopmenUT4 Willow Road, Lot 8, Block 6, Vail Village 1d Filing Special Development District #40 (PEC06-0061 ) Conditional Use Permit (PEC06-0062) Thank you for attending Monday's work session with the Planning and Environmental Commission to make the initial presentation of the Willows redevelopment proposal. I have summarized the Commission's comments below for our review as progress continues. Comments regarding deviations and public benefits: V l. n Commission asked that more thought be paid to the provision of public benefils to offset the requested deviations. Options for additional public benefits include the provision of additional Employee Housing Units, placement of public art within the Village, and other like items. / 2. Several of the Commission members suggested that more Employee Housing Units be provided, but in another location. This would include the Unit proposed within the building itself. However, other members disagreed with that suggestion, stating that the vitality of the Village was better preserved through onsite Employee Housing Units. . The Commission strongly urged further consideration of the setback deviations being requested. Egress issues become more of a problem with less of a setback as do safety separation, snow storage, review and constructability of future development proposals, and other issues. One member felt that such encroachments of the building would be better allowed below grade only. Others felt that some height deviations may be considered if the setbacks were to be improved simultaneously. Comments regarding architecture/site design: 4. The Commission requested renderings of all facades to be provided for study by the next meeting. ,t/ , /r/\ One member of the Commission encouraged the natural transition of grades across property lines in order to make property lines as indecipherable as possible. Better integration of the exit staircases into the building's design was mentioned by several members. Some concern was expressed regarding the possible eventual widening of Vail Road. I have spoken with the Public Works Department about this issue. There should be an understanding by the applicant, Staff, and the Commission that no assurance of continued existence can be provided regarding any/all improvements (landscaping, etc.) proposed beyond the property line. Additionally, building areas located near to the right-of-way may eventually be compromised should the road ever reach its full capacity. There was strong support of maintaining some architectural continuity with the rest of the neighborhood. One member asked that all trees to be removed be tagged prior to the next meeting. Comments regarding the general proposal: 10. The Commission was quite interested that incentives continue to be proposed to rent the seven (7) additional lock offs and that the number of hot beds be maintained, if not increased, within the core of the Village. 11. One member of the Commission commented that the proposed provision of a front desk should be portrayed as more of a benefit than was currently being portrayed. '12. Many of the Commission members requested that Staff analyze the build-out potential of all the sunounding properties on Willow Circle to better decipher the effect which currenUproposed deviations may have on the neighborhood. I will let you know what information I find in this regard. Finally, please note that Staff is awaiting the following items as part of thefinal submittal: 13. Please provide a massing model, either digitally or otherwise, prior to final review by the Commission. 14. Please provide elevation drawings which reflect the approximate height and massing of surrounding buildings. Please don't hesitate to contact me with any questions or concerns you may have. ln order for me to review the.next set of plans in a thorough manner so that another work session or final review may occur on October 23', please have all revised items submitted for review by Friday, October 6, 2006. lf this deadline is not feasible, let's work towards an October 27th submittal deadline for the November 13th meeting. I look fonrvard to continuing work with you. Thank you for your continued patience in what is not always simple design review process. Best regards, Elisabeth Reed 970.479.2454 8. 9. <steve@trium phdev.com> "Elisabeth Reed" <ereed@vailgov.com>, "Rick Pylman" <rick@pylman.com>, "Michael Foster" <mfoster@ResortDesign.com> From: To: Date: Subject: 0912612006 6:17:'ll AM Re: Willows recao Elisabeth Thanks for the your help yesterday. Our team met for a couple of hours after the meeting and we are working to see if we can find a way to increase the east, west and south setback. I am assuming any little bit will helo. We are also working on the public benefit presetation for our next meeting. I plan on attending the EHU worksession on the 1Oth and hope to have some idea's prepared for then. I am flying back to Maryland this morning and will check in with you later. Thanks, Steve ---Original Message---- From: "Elisabeth Reed" <EReed@vailgov.com> Date: Mon, 25 Sep 2006 16:56:07 To:<rick@pylman.com>, <mfoster@resortdesign.com>, <steve@triumphdev.com> Subject: Willows recap Hello Gentlemen: Thanks for the time and energy you took today to prepare the property, present to the Commission, etc. Please plan to hear from me in the next couple days with a more formal summary of the meeting and the next steps to be taken, though I am certain you know what they are already. I hope to speak with the Public Works Department on Wednesday to flesh out some of the right-of-way and similar issues. Until then, thanks for your patience. Best Regards, Elisabeth Elisabeth Reed presented the project according to the memorandum. Rick Pylman, the applicant's representative presented the project further. He outlined the background of the existing Willow Condominium building. He commented that no substantial changes or remodels/upgrades had occurred within the building since its construction. Rick outlined that the proposal was to keep the existing height regulation in mind with the new development. The applicant viewed the SDD process as most relevant to the preferred type of development. The applicant felt that the Master Plan goals were much better served through the SDD process than through the variance process. Steve Virostek, the applicant with Triumph Development, presented the project further. He outlined his background with Vail. He explained that the existing owners were very passionate about Vail. 3 million dollars worth of renovation would be required for the building to be livable. That would still provide 36 year old units with low ceiling heights. He explained that four of the unit owners will be selling their units after the construction process. His goal was to preserve the oasis of Willow Park, solve the needs of the owners to stay on VailAffillow road, and keep the height of the buihing lower than it exists today. He commented that his goal was to finish construction by the time the Chalets were complete. Bill Jewitt asked what incentives would be olanned to rent the 7 lock offs. Steve commented htat condo dues would be reduced if the lock offs were rented. Bill Jewitt asked about the pedestrian walkway and paver treatments. Rick responded that Tom asked for the same streetscape application that was applied/constructed in the Village. So, the applicant is proposing to reduce the asphalt and add 8 feet of cobblestone. No heat was being proposed, but no reasoning was behind that lack of heat. Bill thought that it would be reasonable to consider some heat in that area. He asked for plans of the streetscape. Bill also asked about public benefits. He thought that for so much extra GRFA, public benefits were lacking. He asked that the onsite EHU be moved off site. He felt that the 600 square feet, if turned into something salable, could be better sold onsite as a regular unit. He commented that 1.2 million could be saved by putting the unit off site. He proposed that 25 employee beds be bought elsewhere in the Town. At $50K bed, 25 beds is 1.25 million. He thought that this would be a good opportunity to deed restrict some larger units within the Town and for the applicant to be a leader within the affordable housing charge. Steve asked if this was a pay-in-lieu program. Bill commented that it was a pay down program. Steve commented that if he could plant a "flag" in Vail, he would. lf there was an innovative way to contribute to this problem, he was willing to study it and see what could be done. Bill commented that his last wish was for more colored drawings to be provided for study by the Commission. He wished to better be able to articulate the facades. Mike Foster presented the changes that were being considered in response to the view corridors that need attention from neighboring 44 Willow Road. He stated that work on the floor plans had been continuing for a year. He commented that the number of proposed parking spaces may be lessened as plans continued to evolve. The fourth floor is the floor that would continue to experience some change as consideration was paid to the neighboring units. He promised all elevations to be rendered by the final hearing. o Steve detailed the conversations with neighboring owners. Many concerns needed to be considered between the property owners, the Town, and the residents. The doughnut shape that would result from complying with existing setbacks would not necessarily be the best solution. A forty foot opening would respond to the closest corner of the RRS building. Seventy five feet (75') would exisl between the property line and the side of the proposed building by the courtyard. He commented that RRS had expressed some concerns about the constructability of the parking garage. He commented that the existing garage wall was closer than the proposed and NO TIEBACKS WOULD BE NEEDED. The third floor of one of the units at 44 Willow Road would likely be affected. lt was found that the proposal would, indeed, have a dramatic effect on the view for the unit. The fourth floor would likely change, he commented, and a flatter roof would be applied in that area. The applicant commented that he had touched base with all the neighbors and those conversations were continuing. John Alfond, a year round Vail resident, stated that his family bought the unit mentioned at 44 Willow Road. He stated that he was currently dealing, as a contractor, with a neighbor with concerns about views. He commented that the developer had been quite receptive to the needs of himself and his parents regarding view protection. He realized that views could also be affected by the Chalet project as well. Art Ablanalp, the representative of the Riva Ridge South Condo Association, commented that the Association felt that this was a positive redevelopment proposal. The main concern regarded the proximity of the proposed building, particularly at the southwest corner. He wanted assurance from an engineer that lateral support would not be needed in that comer. He also expressed some concern about the trees along that property line. The demolition of the property was also a concern for the RRS owners and the mitigation thereof. Views were also a concern, though the property owners were impressed with the developers efforts in this area. The owners would like to make sure that proximity of the proposed building would not be an issue if the RRS building were ever to be redeveloped as well. Jim Lamont, Vail Village Homeowners Association, commented that he had met several times with the applicant and at least once with RRS constituents. He asked that surroudnign properties be analyzed in terms of existing GRFA, nonconformities, etc. He felt that the major issue of this proposal was setbacks. Maintainable space between buildings must continue. lf both properties redeveloped, what would be fair for both sides? Access and setbacks may eventually be an issue. His main concern was to see what the neighborhood would be like if all developments asked for the same setback deviations. He commented that the developer was quite conscientious, however. He expressed some concern about Vail Road and possible future expansion there. Snow management must be addressed by the Commissionffown sooner rather than later. Might snow drop on others' properties? He suggested that anything around the entryway should be heated. He felt that the park across the street was an ideal place for public art. Regarding affordable housing, he asked if the current proposal would fall under the future EHU requirement, to be adopted soon. He suggested that the EHU be included on site as it was nice to have neighbors as a resident within the Town. A town without residents would not be a nice place to be. o Russ commented that Employee housing was being discussed now by the Town. In the past, developers were held to the requirements that were in place at time of submittal. The hopeful result would be some guidance for the Boards to base generation rates upon. Bill Jewitt commented that Staff might consider using the PEC's recommendation to Council at the right time. Russ agreed that Council was still very interested. Jim Lamont commented that not placing employee housing units directly in the Village was nol an option. The standard must be that housing is placed in the Village. He felt that the Council would, indeed, take an aggressive stance regarding housing. Since no other public comment was offered, the Commission proceeded to comment. Bill Pierce commented that when a view is across someone else's property, there is a problem. However, when that view lies across a setback line, it may be different. Steve commented that the view is equally impaired even if the setback is honored. Are the zoning standards reasonable regarding GRFA/FAR and density?? He also commented that conformance with adjacent grades was important to ensure that property lines "disappear''. He also asked what the impacts would be if Riva Ridge was developed to the same setback standards being asked today. He commented that energy use for heating the streeUwalk here would be a waste since it was a limited use area. He asked if the redevelopment traffic exited here or not. Jim Lamont commented that traffic mainly exited on Vail Road. Perhaps truck traffic should be considered when thinking of the width of the right-of-way. Bill mentioned concern about the stainarays and their exit patterns. He asked for a more creative use of EHU dollars, i.e. larger bang for buck in different location. Also, what if Vail Road widens? What are the impacts on the new development then? Anne Gunion commented that many things had been stated. Her main concern was regarding setbacks. There could be many different conflicts there. The "old tree" problem is the way she related to this issue. There was a reason for setbacks and this seemed to push a little far. lf egress issues became more of a problem with redevelopment, there were some big issues regarding windows, doors, separation, etc. Burden should not be placed on the neighbor. That sort of encroachment may be better allowed below grade only. Exactly what uses would be placed within the 20' line???? Also, how are view affected by observing the setbacks? lf Vail Road expanded, would there be enough space between the building and the rightof-way? The drive to the garage is along the property line as well. How will the swale work? Draft an easement for that, perhaps? The articulation looks good. However, the flying staircases don't work as well. Integrate the staircases better. She felt that employee housing should be a mix of everything to suite tastes and needs. Chas Bernhart agreed with his fellow Commissioners. Chas commented that this was his favorite neighborhood. He also expressed interest in the surrounding neighbors and their development standards. Put as much underground as possible without hurting the neighboring structures. He requested keeping things in keeping with the neighborhood, rather than strictly complying with the code. He was going to be concerned with public benefit the most. The development looks nice and may fit in with the neighborhood, though he would like to see the analysis. Dick Cleveland commented that the setbacks must be complied with more thoroughly. Fire maintenance, proximity to Vail Road, snow plow issues, views (which setbacks were put in place to maintain), were all issues that were worsened by setback deviations. He felt that impacts to other neighbors were not an issue for the Commission. This should be solidified before design review. He would not be supportive of heat in the road or the sidewalk. He too, felt that the public benefits were insufficient. As for increasing hot beds, he wasn't sure that was going to happen with this proposal. He commended the attempt to allow current owners to stay. Rollie Kjesbo was most concerned with setbacks, density, and site coverage. More public benefits might be required to make these aspects salable. When bulk and mass is doubled, views will be affected. A front desk should be touted as a benefit more than it is now. As for employee housing, he felt that was something the Housing Authority should deal with. As for height, he wasn't married to the 48' requirement. Doug Cahill commented that the deviations must be directly tied to public benefits. The underlying setbacks are an issue. He stated that the goals of the master plan must be better tied to the setback deviation requests. What is too close in terms of code (fire, access, etc.)? He also requested info on the neighborhoods to make sure that this was in compliance. He wanted to know what employee generation would be if this was a new development. He asked that the trees be marked if they were to be removed. The fractional fee units would need to be explained in terms of the ownership and hot bed strategies, etc. What would the program be and how would the Town be assured that the warm beds were not being depleted. He was interested in as much Employee housing as possible. Russ asked that it be known that the policy was being revised as we speak. Anne commented that some setback encroachment might be okay, but should be very well thought out, particularly in relation to surrounding properties. He commented that the setback encroachments were already thought out in regard to neighbors. He asked if the Commission wanted what was best for the neighbors or what was best for the code. Dick Cleveland recognized that the project was advancing. What was presented today was not in the direction of better setbacks, he said. Bill commented that more height might be added to the north side of the building if setbacks were improved. Rollie Kjesbo commented that he worried about the precedent set for future developments. Doug Cahill asked that the model reflect the proposed building plus the surrounding neighbors building corners. He finished by commenting that the grading between property lines would be an issue. o+ I0t4N0r yAILt Applicatlon for Review bY the General Informatlonr All protscts l€gulrlng Plannlng and Envhonmontal Cornmlsahn revldttt nnst recoh/o approval prlor to Eubmnhg a buildtn! pormlt appttoatton. Fbaee rsftf to the submlttal flsquiremenls (br lh€ pafilcuhr appmval thal lc mquosbd. nn agiifiatfon Oi ittanntng and Envlionmontat Commlsaton rddew cannot b€ soc€ptsd until all roquhod informatlon is reiiivea by tho Comm|;nny Devclopm€nt Oapartment. Th6 proiac,t may abo n6d to bo re\rlottt€d by the Town Planning and Environmental Commission Mlnor Ei(tedof Afioratlon lihlor Exiedor AltFrafl on Dovelopmenl Plan . Arngndmfft b I Dov€loPmont Pl6n Zonlng Codo Amendmenl Va.lance Sion Varlanco Doprrtmont of Cofiimunlty D€\rsbpmont 75 So;th Fmnlage Roed, veil, Colo€do E1857 ral: 970.470.2130 lax: 91o.4792452 wob: www.vallgov'oom Counoll and/or thg D6dgn Ft€view Board. Type of Appllcallon and Feel R.-oning $1300 Major subdlvlgion S,|600 Mlnor Subdlvtelon $850B€mpuonPht S650 Mlnor Amsndmonl to an SDD $1000 Novu spadal Doralopmant Obtrld $6000 Malor Amendmant to an SCto $6000 MajorAmendmenttoanSDD $1250 (no oxtot1p,r tr'E,dlfrc€,lione ) DeeCrlptlon Ofthe RequOCt' Pleasrl see actached naFrFclve descr{pit6rl Locatlon of tho Propo.al: Lot: 8 - Block: 6 SuMlvlelon: Val.l,-Vr r,,1 qgc J ''' Phyahat Addrec3 74 l{lllow Parcel No": 210i08219001 . , (ContaatEagleCo.Asoeseorqt9T0-328"8B40forparcol no.) $650 $400 $660 $800 $1S00 s250 $1300 $500 $2C0 TJ (t| o orooo ,LT Zonlng: qpMT , , , _ ., Name(r) of6wnerlcl:The Wll1ows Condourlnlum Assoelatlon Inc. MalllngAddnerel ., .73 Wlllou Roa4 vat1. c0 R1657 . - Phono: Ownor(e) Slgneture(s):see attached letter Name of Applloantr Trlumph Devel nt, LLC Malllng Addrcerl 8120 Woodmont Avenue Sulte 800 Bethes ,tm 20814 p6snq. 301-657-!$&9 E.mall Addrees: sreveGErl"umphdev-com Fax 301-6s7-5948 _-.]--------_._ Condltional use P€mlt- loo i cn"*nn., 199/- Page I of7"0rV0l/04 (4loq- 038 ?ol i**{'tlt*flt**f********f*l*******t*******lftit***d'l***l'***********+*****ttt**'t't**'}i'+**++**t*** TOWNOFVAIL, COI,,oRADO Statement Staternent Nr:mber: R060001321 AmounE: S550.00 08/28/200603:58 PM Payment Method: Check ASSOCIATES Init: iIS Notation: 1441/PLYr,/Blil & Permit, No: Parcel No: Site Addrees: Lrocation: This Pa)ment: P8C050062 TlDe: PEC - Conditional Use ztot- o82 -1900 - 2 74 WIIJLOI{ RD VAIL THE WIIJIJOWS CONDOS s6s0.00 Degcriotion PEC APPIJICATION FEES ACCOI.JNT ITEM LIST: AccounE Code PV 00100003112500 Total Fees: Tota1 AIJL PmtS : Balatrce l 9650.00 95s0.00 $0.00 Current Pmts 650.00 rft Application for Review bY the Planning and Environmental Commission Departmont of Cornmunlty Dewktpment 75 $outh Fnontage Road, Vail, Cohrado 81657 tsl: 970.479.2139 hx: 070.479.2452 nob: www.vallgov.com G'eneral lnformatlon: All projecb rcquirhg Plannlng and Envlronmonial Oommbalon rovierv mlst recolv€ approral prior to gubmlttlng a OutUh! pcrmtt appllcatlon. pUase rsg lo thg rubmlttal r€qulremont|s for the partlcuhr appiot al that i8 requosbd' nn apdiiiatton toi ittanntng and Envlronmontal Commlselon reylew c€nnot b€ aco€pted until all requlred information ia reiiiwO by the Communlty D€vstopmant Department. Th6 pmjcct may aho neod to bo re\,lewed by tho Town Councll and/or lhe Deoign R€\rlow Board. Type of Appllcallon and Fee: . Rezoning. lnlalor Subdlvblon. Mlnor Subdlvblon. Ercmption Plal. Mlnor Amendmont to an SDO. htanrepdalDanlogmnDhtlid. Major Arnerdment lo 6n SDD. lnajor Amendm€nt to sn SDD (no axte fio r modif bation I ) $1300 $1500 s050 $E5o $1000$m $8000 $1250 Mlnof Exlerior Aiteratton Malor Exterior Alteratlon Dov€lopmont Plan AmsrdrEnt to a Devglopment Plan Zonlng Cod6 Amendmanl Varhmg SYon Varianc.o $650 $8oo $1500 $250 $ 1300 $500 $200 d G\ooC a Doscflptlon Ofthe ReqUeSl. Pleasrr see attached na.rratlve descrlFtJnn Locatlon ot tho Prop$al:Lot:-g-8bck:-9-Sr.rbAMebn: Vall-V'l1 l"g" I"r Phyrlcal Addreec:74 Wl1low Road Malling AddresE: Parcel No"; .Zf Of OSZ1gO_O( , -, (ContactEagloCo.Asa€€soratS70€28-S640forparctl no.) Zonlnd: IIDMI'q!.',-.....- Name(s) of Owner(all The Wlllows Condonlnlum Assoclatlonr. Iqc' Owner(s) Slgnature(e):see atEached Ie t ter Namo of Appllcantl Tr iumph Devel r, LLC Malllng Addrcor:8120 Woodmont Avenue Sulte 800 Bethesda,MD 20814 Phone: :4:!lZ:!!-14 E-m.ll Addre$:steve@trlumDhdev. com Fax 301-657-5948 7/r Wl I1ar.r Ra-ad Vq{1- alft 81457 Phone: )o Page I of7.0tV01/04 RtR.Jot-. 63 rf*t*++********++++i******';,r+++++****************tf+fr***r*r****|l'r'i'r!*r*i**.r*i.:t++++t+***+***+ TOWN OF VAIL, COLORADO Statement * *'i't'f *****t***'t****** *t***t*lrt********** * *********t* * * * +t**+* ******+,t** l.***'f ********i******* Statement Number: R050001320 Amount: $5,000.00 08/28/2OO5O3:56 PM Pa)ment Method: Check Init: iIS Notatsion: 1922ITRTUMPH DEVEI,OPMENT, I.,IJC Permit No: P8C050051 TYpe: PEC - New SDD Parcel No: 2101-082-1900-2 Site Address: 74 WILLOW RD VAIIr Location: THE WILLOWS CONDOS Total Fees: $5, 000.00 Thie Payment.: $6,000.00 Total AlIr Pmts: $6,000.00Balance: S0.00 ACCOI,JNT ITEM LIST: Accormt Code DescriDtion PV OO1OOOO31125OO PEC APPI,ICATION FEES Current Pmta 5,000.00 )o September 15,2006 A. THE WILLOWS 74 Willow Road Vail. CO L Garage Floor: 2. First Floor: 3. . Second Floor: 4. Third Floor: 5. Fourth Floor: c.Allowable Deductions: 14,073 sq. ft. 12,607 sq. ft. 11,734 sq. ft. 11,734 sq. ft. 5,993 sq. ft. Total GRFA:56,141 sq. ft. walls and the exterior face of 5/8th inch sheathing on exterior walls) NlowableGRFA: Lot size: 21,144 sq. ft. Existing building GRFA: 18,fi)7 sq. ft. High Density Multiple-Family district allows 76 sq. ft. GMA/100 sq. ft. buildable site area With 20 ft. setback 8,665 sq. ft. With 5 ft.3 in. setback 13,908 sq. ft. Achnl GRFA for condominium:B. Garage First Second Third Fourth Parking 14.073 sq. ft. Employee Unit 555-sq. ft Exterior Decks/Patios 1,755 sq. ft.748 sq. ft.748 sq. ft.397 sq. ft. Exterior Stairs 250 sq. ft.292sq.ft.292sq.ft..102 sq. ft. Common Areas/Lobbv 2,459 sq. ft.1,334 sq. ft.1,334 sq. ft.805 sq. ft. Total 14,073 sq. ft.5,019 sq. ft.2,374 sq. ft.2.374 sq.ft.1,304 sq. ft. Total GRFA I)eductions:-25,144 sq. ft. D.Revised GRFA: Actual GRFA - Deductions 56,141 sq. ft. -25.144 so. ft. = Revised GRFA:30,997 sq. ft. Gross Square Footage: (Measured to the center of corridor walls and the outside face of structure of exterior walls) First Floor: Second Floor: Unit#101 (F.F. #l): 1,283 sq. ft. unit #102 (F.F. #2): 1,275 sq. ft. Unit#103 (F.F. #3): 1,316 sq. ft. Unit #104 (W.O. #5): 1,386 sq. ft. Unit #105 (Employee): 542 sq. ft. Unit #106 (w.o. *t6): 2,211 sq. ft. First Floor Total: 8,013 sq. ft. unit #201 (F.F, #4): 1,307 sq. ft. Uilt#202 (F.F. #5): 1,230 sq. ft. Unit #203 (W.O. #1): 1,812 sq. ft. Uilt#2M (W.O. #3): 2,649 sq.ft. Unit #205 (W.O. #7): 2,211 sq. ft. Second Floor Total: 9,209 sq. ft. Unit#301 (F.F, *f6): 1,307 sq. ft. Unit#302 (F.F. #7): 1,230 sq. ft. unit #303 (w.o. #2): 1,812 sq, ft. unit #304 (w.o. #4): 2,&9 sq.ft. unit #305 (w.o. #8): 2,211 sq. ft. Third Floor Total: 9,209 sq. ft. unit #401 (F.F. #8): 1,307 sq. ft. Unit#402 (F.F. #9): 1,230 sq. ft. Unit#403 (W.O. #9): 2,080 sq. ft. Fourth Floor Total: 4,617 Third Floor: Fourth Floor: Gross Total:31,048 sq. ft. Net Square Footage: (Measured to the inside face of unit envelope wal\ First Floor: ^ (F' Unit#101 (F.F. #1): I,198 sq, ft. t4.Dv unit#102 (F.F. #2): 1,194 sq. ft. P l' unit#103 (F.F. #3): 1,232sq,ft, Unit#l(X (W.O, #5): l,JJ-{sq. ft. ,A00 Unit#105 (Enp)pvd.a89q,ft. " 12Unit#106(w.o.#6):ff8sq.ft.',, 0 First Floor Total: 7,493 sq. ft. l/" Second Floor: unit #201 (F.F. #4): 1,221 sq.ft. Unit{202 (F.F. #5): 1,153 sq. ft. Unit #203 (W.O. #l): 1,71I sq. ft. U^tt#204 (W.O. #3):2,513 sq. ft. unit #205 (w.o. #7): 2,068 sq. ft. Second Floor Total: 8,666 sq. ft. Third Floor: Unit#301 (F.F. #6): 1,221sq.ft.. Unit#302 (F.F. #7): I,153 sq. ft. unit#303 (w,o. #2): l,7ll sq. ft. Unit#304 (W.O. +f4):2,513 sq. ft. Unit#305 (W.O. #8): 2,068 sq. ft. Third Floor Total: 8,666 sq, ft. Fourth Floor: unit #401 (F.F. #8): 1,221 sq. ft. Unit #402 (F.F. #9): I,153 sq. ft. Unit #403 (W.O. #9): 1,943 sq. ft. Fourth Floor Total: 4.317 Net Total: 29,142q.ft. .rruil 74 Willow Road Vail, CO Projeot#:23270 September 19,?106 Site Coverage: Total Site: Existing Building: Proposed Building above grade: Proposed Building underground: B.Parking: 21,144 sq. fr. 12,209 sq.ft.or $%-*'t 11,890 sq. ftraf 56% ,)A,AB sq./[t. or 67% -z'V----,' l. 2. 3. 4. 1. 2. 3. 4. Total Parking Spaces: 30 Total F.F. Units: 9 Total W.O. Units: 9 Total Employee Units: I c.Landscape: l. 2. 3. Existing Driveway: Proposed Driveway: 2,403 sq. ft. 1,871 sq. ft. 1007o of the remaining site is to be landscaped. 74 Willow Road Vail, CO Project#:23270 September 20, 2fi)6 GRFA: Amount of GRFA encroaching upon the 20 ft. setback: Garage Floor: 2,906 sq. ft. First Floor: 1,857 sq. ft. Second Ftoor: 2,165 sq. ft. ThirdFloor: 2,165 sq. ft. Fourth Floor: 6(12 sq. ft. Total of First through Fourth:6,789 sq. ft. o Willows emplovee housins/public benefit 1) Town of Vail existine policy The Town of Vail has required the owners of new and redeveloped projects to provide employee housing for the incrsmental increase in the number of employees generated by a project. The Town has never formally codified this requirernent but has traditionally applied a housing generation formula developed by the firm of RRC Associates. Inc. For development projects that comply with underlying zoning the policy has been to provide housing for 15%o of the incremental increase in anployees. For development projects that exceed underlying zoningstandards the policy has been to provide housing for 30%o of the incremental increase in employees. The RRC employee generation formula lists a 0.4 employee demand per residential dwelling unit. The existing Willows project includes 28 condominium units. This equates to an existing ernployee generation of ll.2 employees. (28 x 0.4 - 11 .2) ,v'". \r-u /\ \...- \rI The proposed Willows redevelopment includes l8 condominium units. This equates to an anployee generation of 7.2 ernployees. (18 x 0.4: 7.2) -t.,"\t" The Willows proposal would result in an overall reduction of 4 employees. Housing mitigation is required for the incremental increase in employee generation. In this case there is no incremental increase and therefore no mitigation requirement. 2) Actual conditions The Willows Condominium Association owns and operates the Willows Management Company. The Willows Management Company manages a total of 45 units in the Willows, Riva Ridge South and other Vail Village properties. The management company has a total of l5 full time equivalent onployees. This averages to 0.33 employees per unit under management. The redevelopment of the Willows would result in a total of 10 less units under Willows management. The revised average, assuming no decrease in employees, is 0.42 ernployees per unit. This actual condifions experience at Willows Managernent is fairly consistent with the RRC figure of 0.4 unployees per unit. This actual conditions results in a full time employee demand of 6 to 7.5 anployees generated by the proposed Willows redevelopment. Willows public benefit oroposal . Although the application of the traditional employee housing requirements indicates that the Willows proposal does not create a net incremental increase in anployee housing the applicant recognizes that ernployee housing is an important issue to the town and, as a public benefit of*re projecL believes it appropriate to provide a reasonable measure of onployee housing within the community. Without taking credit for the employee demand already generated by the existing building the new Willows building would generateT.2 enployees under the existing town onployee generation formula. This 7.2 employee generation nrunber is also very consistent with the actual employee levels experienced by the Willows Management Company. Utilizing the town's housing demand methodology 7.2 employees, divided by the 1.3 jobs per employee figure equates to a demand for 5.5 employeebeds. The Willows redevelopment proposal will commit to providing 100% of this employee housing demand. The current proposal includes one 600 square foot one bedroom apartment on site and the applicant will commit to providing five additional beds off site. These off-site beds will be provided via a buy down progtam or through a direct payment-in-lieu to the Town of Vail. This housing commitment of six beds addresses 100% ofthe actual employee housing demand ofthe proposed Willows buildins. 'O-Geoncttic Design of Hi ys arut Slru'ts I o ttt ao U) o! v) ! X u2 oo c 'rn oo o (o o $ro P8 .n .lYtg,rUE E-6(u()6S ororf,ooroo|.cJrootr)oo@-rooroo(oA,toNst(')(\lFFNNd)cDt*rO(OFTCO F. (')O)f- (\.1 rO@Oq ()$ (D|r)t',d; - rddcid c.t<ri d$ r..ric;Nru)Or{c)rONOr(()tArr-()e * - Ol c) (' st tt ul @ l'.. O Ct, q'q c a q q a q a? u? u? o? o? d? r* 6 O tD l,- (o tf O O lO ro (3 CD'qtN f., (o co r- rf, o r$ or rt o tr- (r) rrr-r-AlNg)r?ttr.()(D tu?dtF?qqaog.u?qaqqLo c.) r c) @ F. (o d) N o o F- to sr.o F- (', F N -t (o co o N C' ro F. o|)FC\JC!NO,AI (\J |f)orDo|r)oto0loo|r)0ror-Aln (',(',tf \l tOtO(o@t* t- r lf'{ lr t\t ,t tr IrfIr!t- IO l![ lo,.EIr! Io) totolo I-la i r.f) lci t6 lo Irgl()€ o E gs E69-'-.2 9rcirE xa(!0 cofr ..? z6 U'oo o .s3l) @; (! o I),(D,o (n: P8 XE6€ E€(U()6E € "6 (D ornoroLorooorooolnc\l(Y)14(O@()(Y)(O6NlI,O FF?-F(\N(\.l u? (\l c\| u?qolgu?c! d?qAlOF(oa?Ctqo)rDVtr)aOt*FCD-? (oaOOn |f)OrrfOrFrF(SrgtC! (o aD !+ f,- (9 c\, sf o) F o c\t @\tOcO@F(o(9N{CtlO(!)rrN<tlr)FO)FCr)(Oc') o?qqoq\\qqqLrlla(t o t- !+ r- @ rr) (\J o, (o ct (>F(! C\l (t.t'+lo{t'(oFoo' oooooooooooo(V C? st () (O F @ O) O - $J (.) t al Telephone: Ut 97o.476.osoo 970.476.6500 Telecopier: 970.476.4765 E-mail: Art.Abplanalp @earthlink.net Law Office of Arthur A. Abplanalp, Jr. L.L.C. Post Office Box 2800 Vail, Colorado 8165&2800 09 November 2006 Physical Address: Suite 301 Vail 21 Building 472 East Lionshead Circle Vail, Colorado 81657 Planning and Environmental Commission of the Town of Vail 75 South Frontage Road West Vail CO Re: Willows Condominium Redevelopment Members of the Commission: This office represents Riva Ridge South Condominium Association in connection with an application for the demolition and redevelopment of the Willows Condominium, which is adjacent to Riva Ridge South. The application for the redevelopment of the Willows Condominium is scheduled for final consideration by the PEC on the l3th of November, and this letter is being directed to the PEC in connection with that hearing. As was noted in the letter sent to the Town in urro"iutiorr-*ith the work session consideration of the Willows proposal in September, it should first be emphasized that Riva Ridge South supports the redevelopment of the Willows Condominium. The current Willows redevelopment plan appears to be attractive and to have been developed in a manner consistent with the concems of the neighboring property owners. Consistent with the position of Riva Ridge South during the work session, this letter is being provided to the Town in part to confirm the conditional and qualified support of the proposed Willows project. The second purpose of this letter is to confirm that there remain several concems with the project which, though not yet resolved, appear to be on track toward resolution in a manner which should permit the proposal to advance to the Town Council for consideration on the question ofthe creation ofa Special Development District consistent with and based upon the plans delivered and representations made to Riva Ridge South. Critical to this qualified support is the assumption that, if granted, the set-backs from Riva Ridge South and the courtyard established west of Riva Ridge South will be integral elements of the Willows redevelopment plan. The concerns which have been expressed by the Riva Ridge South Condominium Association were reviewed in my letter to the Town of the 14th of September but should be reiterated and up-dated in connection with the forthcoming formal hearing. The foremost concem of the Association is the proximity of the proposed Willows project to Riva Ridge South. This concern is associated (a) with the possible effect of construction and (b) with the interrelationship, with reference to set-backs, between the two structures. The developer of the Willows project has provided a preliminary report from an engineer indicating that the construction techniques to be employed in the project will not affect the Riva Ridge South structure. The building configuration has been changed somewhat to increase the separation of the two structures at their closest point. Although additional information related to the construction technique analysis may be necessary, that report and the change in the location of the proposed Willows structure have given the Association some assruance regarding its principal concerns. A second central concern remains the preservation of existing large trees which are located in whole or in part on fuva Ridge property. The Willows developer has provided a preliminaryreport regarding the probability and techniques required to preserve those trees, to the extent possible. Again, the developer seems to be on track to satisff the concems of the Association with respect to this matter, although additional information is to be provided. Riva Ridge South is also concemed regarding the immediate effect of demolition of the current Willows structures and construction of the new Willows project. The Willows developer has indicated that the company is willing to enter into an agreement to establish a construction program mitigating those impacts and dealing with other concems, and the Association is willing to work toward creating such an agreement in the near future. While conditioned upon and qualified by the understanding that there will be progress and resolution regarding the concems of Riva Ridge South as the Willows project progresses, Riva Ridge South Condominium Association is able, at this time, to indicate that it supports the Willows redevelopment project as it is presently configured and upon the condition that the issues with which it is concemed will be resolvedprlor to final approval of the proposed SDD. If the PEC and the Town of Vail proceed with formal consideration of the Willows redevelopment project, that decision must be premised upon the understanding that the commitment of Riva Ridge South to support the project before the Town Council will be affected by the anticipated progress toward resolution of identified issues. Riva Ridge South has no reason to believe that resolution ofthose issues cannot be achieved. If you have any questions regarding the foregoing, you may contact me. On behalf of the Riva Ridge Condominium Association, I thank you for your consideration of the Association's concems relatine to this matter. Arthur A. Abp xc: Riva Ridse South Condominium Association THIS ITEM MAY AFFECTYOUR PROPERW PUBLIC NOTICE NOTICE lS HEREBY GIVEN that the Planning and Environmental Commission of the Town of Vail will hold a public hearing in accordance with section 12-3-6, Vail Town Code, on September 25, 2006, at 1:00 pm in the Town of Vail Municipal Building, in consideration ot A request for a recommendation to the Vail Town Council of a proposal to establish '-V,l' Special Development District No. 40, pursuant to Article 12-9(A), Special Development f$ry- Districts, Vail Town Code, to allow for the redevelopment of the Willows Condominiums,'.t4l6u- located at 74 Willow Road/Lot 8 Block 6, Vail Village Filing 1st Filing, and setting forth nl'V details in regard thereto. (PEC06-0061) Applicant: The Willows Condominium Association, Inc., represented by Triumph Development, LLCPlanner: Elisabeth Reed ! A request for final review of a conditional use permit pursuant to Section 12-6H-3, -H Conditional Uses, allow for the construction of timeshare estate units, fractional tg.g un'E 4[q'-{ and timeshare license units, located at 74 Willow Road/Lot 8 Block 6, Vail Village Filing 1"' V Filing, and setting forth details in regard thereto. (PEC06-0062) Applicant: The Willows Condominium Association, Inc., represented by Triumph Development, LLCPlanner: Elisabeth Reed A request for a final review of an exemption plat, pursuant to Chapter 13-12, Exemption Plat Review Procedures, Vail Town Code, for a modification to a shared property boundary between Lots 3 and 4, Block 5, Bighom Fifth Addition, located at 4916 and 4920 Juniper Lane, and setting forth details in regard thereto. (PEC06-0063) Applicant Slick Asset Management Trust, represented by William and Sally Slick, Co- TrusteesPlanner: Matt Gennett A request for a recommendation to the Vail Town Council of an amendment to the Lionshead Redevelopment Master Plan, pursuant to Section 2.8' Adoption and Amendment of the Master Plan, Lionshead Redevelopment Master Plan, to amend the Lionshead Study Area Boundaries and Chapter 5, Detailed Plan Recommendations, to include the study'West Lionshead' area, generally located at 646, 862, 890, 923, 934, 953, 1000, and 1031 South Frontage Road WesVLot 54 and Tract K of Glen Lyon Subdivision, Tracts C and D, Vail Village Filing 2, and several upplatted parcels (a more complete legal description is available at the Community Development Department), and setting forth details in regard thereto. (PEC06-0008) Applicant Vail Resorts De-velopment Company, Town of Vail, and Glen Lyon Office Building Gege(al PartnershipPlanner: Wanen C/mpbell The applications and information about the proposals are available for public inspection during ofiice hours at the Town of Vail Community Development Department, 75 South Frontage Road. The public is invited to attend project orientation and the site visits that precede the public hearing in the Town of Vail Community Development Department. Please call 970-479-2138 for additional information. Sign language interpretation is arrailable upon request, with 24-hour notification. Please call 970-479-2356, Telephone for the Hearing lmpaired, for information. Published September 8, 2006, in the Vail Daily. 'i. r 'J.l ,. 'l'' li tI ...',.I , {i, . '.j.,1.1-Irt');'1 -'i t' j .r"f .,! THIS ITEM MAY AFFECT YOUR PROPERW PUBLIC NOTICE NOTICE lS HEREBY GIVEN that the Planning and Environmental Commission of the Town of Vail will hold a public hearing in accordance with section 12-3-6, Vail Town Code, on September 25,2006, at 1:00 pm in the Town of Vail Municipal Building, in consideration of: A request for a recommendation to the Vail Town Council of a proposal to establish '.V, Special Development District No. 40, pursuant to Article 12-9(A), Special Development r$lY -Districts, Vail Town Code, to allow for the redevelopment of the Willows Condominiums, '.tglOv located at 74 Willow Road/Lot I Block 6, Vail Vili;g; Filing 1't Filing, and setting forth tf\ details in regard thereto. (PEC06-0061) Applicant The Willows Condominium Association, Inc., represented by Triumph Development, LLC :T::,, .,=;::T:l:"lr " ""noitionar use permit pursuant to section 12-6H-3, -R Conditional Uses, allow for the construction of timeshare estate units, fractional fee units Al!.' 4and timeshare license units, located at 74 Willow Road/Lot 8 Block 6, Vail Village Filing 1" ' V Filing, and setting forth details in regard thereto. (PEC06-0062) Applicant The Willows Condominium As'sociation, Inc., represented by Triumph Development, LLCPlanner: Elisabeth Reed A request for a final review of an exemplion plat, pursuant to Chapter 13-12, Exemption Plat ReMew Procedures, Vail Town Code, for a modification to a shared property boundary between Lots 3 and 4, Block 5, Bighom Fifth Addition, located at 4916 and 4920 Juniper Lane, and setting forth details in regard thereto. (PEC06-0063) Applicant Slick Asset Management Trust, represented by William and Sally Slick, Co- TrusteesPlanner: Maft Gennett A request for a recommendation to the Vail Town Council of an amendment to the Lionshead Redevelopment Master Plan, pursuant to Section 2.8, Adoption and Amendment of the Master Plan, Lionshead Redevelopment Master Plan, to amend the Lionshead Study Area Boundaries and Chapter 5, Detailed Plan Recommendations, to include the study "West Lionshead" area, generally located at 646, 862, 890, 923, 934, 953, 1000, and 1031 South Frontage Road WesULot 54 and Tract K of Glen Lyon Subdivision, Tracts C and D, Vail Village Filing 2, and several upplatted parcels (a more complete legal description is available at the Community Development Department), and setting forth details in regard thereto. (PEC06-0008) Applicant Vail Resorts Development Company, Town of Vail, and Glen Lyon Office Building Gege{al PartnershipPlanner: Wanen Calmpbell The applications and information about the proposals are available for public inspection during office hours at the Town of Vail Community Development Department, 75 South Frontage Road. The public is invited to attend project orientation and the site visits that precede the public hearing in the Town of Vail Community Development Department. Please call 970-479-2138 for additional information. Sign language interpretation is available upon request, with 2&hour notification. Please call 970-479-2356, Telephone forthe Hearing lmpaired, for information. Published September 8, 2006, in the Vail Daily. it.. h ,.ilf ': ? t Willows SDD application Adjacent owners mailing list 100 Vail Road / William J. Dore C/O Dore Family Office PO Box 67 Sulphur LA 70664 10 Forest Road , Ronald J. Byrne l0 Forest Road Vail CO 81657 44 Willow Place . Patricia L. McMunn Unit I l74l Galleon Drive Naples FL 34109 ,/ Helen Miller Kurtz Unit? 6 Eaton Road Scarsdale NY 10583 / Alford, Theodore Bruce & Barbara Lawrence One Chestnut Weston MA Unit 3 02193 / Bishop Park Bishop Park Condominium Association C/O Phillips & Associates, Inc. PO Box 1403 Vail CO 81657 y' Edelweiss Edelweiss HOA 103 Willow Place Vail CO 81657 ,,/ Riva Ridge South Riva Ridge South Condominium Association C/O Willows Management 74 Willow Road Vail CO 81657 t/ Witlow RoadPublic Park Town Of Vail 75 S. Frontage Road Vail CO 81657 o Name and Address: Legal Description: Zoning: Land Use Plan Designation' Current Land Use: Development Site Size: Total Site Standards Density, GRFA (max): Site Coverage (max): Building Setbacks: Height: Name and Address: Legal Description: Zoning: Land Use Plan Designation: Current Land Use: Develooment Site Size: Total Site Standards Density, GRFA (max): Site Coverage (max): Building Setbacks: Height: Name and Address: Legal Description: Zoning: Land Use Plan Designation: Current Land Use: Development Site Size: Total Site Standards Density, GRFA (max): Site Coverage (max): Building Setbacks: Height: Name and Address: Legal Description: Zoning: Land Use Plan Designation: Current Land Use: Development Site Size: Total Site Standards Density, GRFA (max): Site Coverage (max): Building Setbacks: Height: Name and Address: Legal Description: Zoning: Land Use Plan Designation: Bishop Park, 43 and fXl Willow Place Lots 1 and 2, Block 6, Vail Village 1" Filing High Density Multiple FamilY Village Master Plan High Density Multi-Family 30,848 squafe feet (0.71 acres) Allowed/Required Existinq 18,493 sq.ft. 21'482 sq. ft. 16,966 sq. ft. (55%) 10,766 sq. ft. (34.9%) 20ft. 5' 48' 55' Riverhouse Condominiums, 83 Willow Place Lot 3, Block 6, Vail Village '1" Filing High Density Multiple FamilY Village Master Plan High Density Multi-FamilY 16,523 square feet (0.38 acres) Allowed/Required Existino 9,767 sq.ft.16,190 sq.ft. 9,087 sq. ft. (55%) 7,148 sq. ft. (43%) 20 ft. 48' .2' NA 1', 43.5' Edelweiss, 103 Willow Place Lot 4, Block 6, Vail Village l"tFiling High Density Multiple FamilY Village Master Plan High Density Multi-FamilY 15,825 square feet (0.36 acres) Allowed/Required Existino 9,487 sq.ft.20,970 sq. ft. 8,703 sq. ft. (55%) 6,963 sq. ft(44o/o) 20 ft.48' NA Summer's Lodge, 123 Willow Place Lot 5, Block 6, Vail Village 1" Filing High Density Multiple FamilY Village Master Plan High Density Multi-FamilY 14,063 square feet (0.32 acres) Allowed/Reouired Existinq 8,€8 sq.ft.11,202 sq.ft. 7,031 sq. ft. (50%) 7,420 sq. ft. (s3%) Difference > 14% < 20o/o > 15' >7', Difference > 60% <12o/o > 19.8' NA Difference > 55"/o < 'l1o/o >20' NA Difference > 32"/o > 3o/o' > 19' <4.5' 20 ft. 48' 'facts in file regarding site coverage were conflicting Riva Ridge North, 133 Willow Place Lot 6, Block 6, Vail Village 1{ Filing High Density Multiple Family Village Master Plan Current Land Use: Development Site Size: Total Site Standards Density, GRFA (max): Site Coverage (max): Building Setbacks: Height: Name and Address: Legal Description: Zoning: Land Use Plan Designation: Cunent Land Use: Development Site Size: Total Site Standards Density, GRFA (max): Site Coverage (max): Building Setbacks: Height: High Density Multi-Family 11,935 square feet (0..274 acres) Allowed/Required Existinq o Riva Ridge South, 114 Willow Road Lot 7, Block 6, Vail Village 1" Filing High Density Multiple Family Village Master Plan High Density Multi-Family 15,333 square feet (0.352 acres) 7,161 sq.ft. ? sq. ft. (557o) 20ft. 48', Allowed/Required 9,199 sq.ft. NA 20' 48' 13,126 sq. ft. ?s9.ft 1', 45' Existinq 19,824 sq. ft. NA 1', 45' 7,531 sq.ft. 4,678 sq. ft. (37olo) 10' 44' Difference > 54o/o > 19' <3' Difference ) 54o/o NA >1g', <3' Difference < 1o/o < 18o/o >10' <4', Land Use Plan Designation: Current Land Use: Development Site Size: Total Site Standards Density, GRFA (max): Site Coverage (max): Building Setbacks: Height: High Density Multiple Fam Village Master Plan High Density MultFfamily 12,630 square feet (0.29 acres) Allowed/Reouired Existinq 7,579 sq.ft. 6,947 sq. ft. (ss%) 20 ft. 48', ' -r r. : -j i. -.y:-;ri1",,,.,L.r,r. rRiva Ridgi souin 9,1 gg 8,258 J , r zb -- ^- -'f,,vb5 #ti.") ffiw 19,824 I o , zJb 10,625 7 ,g7g e The de ree to which relief fron the strict or Iitqral inte ta tion vi ci ni qo regulatid-lE necess€l to a chi eve of spec of trea-tEEi-E among si teC n theectives ot-Tnis.-ti tre rl] thdt rant The staff has glo_ :il- "nI; ?:":;i'.1:.';: ::?y?:ted requesrs ror addirjonaljJ;i; "T i :" ;,. ",.. [ ;i -" I" . i' n"":' ;".i: n. ill,l li; . r n con s i;;;;; c ri te'i " -;.;: ::l_il:?'in!i!'i:;";;r;::.:iji,i.r!!'.."T;J::to justify the varia""" -;;;;"sted and that tr":o:lip i., ;;;:;oe a grant of speciur pii"i;."; he ',r".-iur". -;;; Thi s regues t rspeciur 'piiirittses an interestilg guestion wi th .."n."a ,o ;: :"j : :; ;j j:. " * "-i^?; :i: ;;;;,3j;;" il: - ;x;* .o.d_i " "-.-."- i n. I o .'. n-u', . I =i =:i:l:=_ # : ji;i "li jt;ii i :; i:, : ".lil". : ;fi"'; "*: ; : oay not jnvol,r"Ttltnce'-- rn rig-ht of thisr an" *tth through approva I i. '-, a grant of speciar pririi"i"-.' 'r';""";:?:."r:1., jfflvariance to L. ;,tnttred f or this .equestr .'na in order f or the ,r monr-i r,'e"s ""=i l'? l t"a, the appr t :::]: ;;i;";"" mi:s t ue sa ti sri ed. ii i : : :' i i i ; ; i.'":1"1.^T-: i' ; I " i: .:,Ji :i i I i n :; :li;l . i : : " "."# T j i i;".1 *,;"i i :, """i"""'";; : : : "' i:: flil 1' rf i:i,*;* ": :: : x ;li :.1'_::; i,ri r " i i :, ff i. ; i : : i i :: I 5'=, i i';,:' i " i; i ; ; : : " " r; i : : ; : " r: I iii;,:::: ; iiii[,i"" uv - ir,"'. ;;? i:- !r, i" ;;'"""""1 .'i ;:;lii ;; i j:; ::^.:_ "r. u gi.,r" 'v -easements tha. -11*: til" iiy "I""il." the buirdablet r e e s t rra t -c ou i ; J"" t"," "::. I" ";,."""??3t : ; j: #_J": :: : j. #";: ffJ : ft is felt bV thecou, d b" :;i ":';'",'' J"1 :':inii".ijl":;:;,$;;' :;i" ol.:le appr i can t ) ''irqsurrnnr lurrur-ruunRffNd Atf-suBrlrsstoNs lu I HE !rrY dql 1pU1 ?t- ffi,*u-;u';urni*tt*r*tffiln#f*lii^,ijiltf ;:,1 . ' ,Zoning check anTo J ., ni I i:ttl:f r L;::. Riverhouse CondominiumsLot 3, Block 6 { Vait Village First Filing High. Density Multiple family District Lot size: 16,046 square feet = 0.36g acre 18.20.060 Setbacks: 20' required by.current zoning for all setbacks.Existing buiriiing setback is 3'6" on Northeast cornerand 2, on Southeait corner.Proposal is for the enclosure of the existing hot tubdeck. .|8.20.080 Height: Not applicable to proposal. 18.20.090 Density Control Maximum of 60 square feet ofteet of buildable site area. ALLOWABLE GRFA _ 60% (16,046) =EXISTING GRFA PROP0SED ADDIII0NAL GRFA =- 18.20.110 Coverage: |!Lq!4BLE = ss% (16,046) : EXISTING C0VERAGE =PR0P0SED ADDITI0NAL COVERAGE = GRFA for each 100 square 9,628 square feet 15,915 square feet 97 square feet 8,825 square feet 7,113 square feet 35 square feet r.rcsr9r creaErvrEy and trexibility in certain areas that wouid-not bepermissibte ,n:"r t|sht HDMF ioning. --- "')'""' Eelow is a table detiiring a comparison of the proposed sDD to HDMFzoning al Iowances. Densjty Site Coveraqe Parki ng d- Bldg Heisht A- setbacks f enrn + GFA (Gross Floor PROPOSED SDD l_? d. u. , i ncl udi ng one manager's uni t ('15 un'its/acre) .|0,766 sq fr (34.9%) 29 spaces covered 4 surface (2.75/unit) Varies tel!: maximum as set by development p tan vary. to 5' maximum as set, by site plan -4J8LLqgl Area ) 26,699 (.86) HDMF l7 d.r. (25 units/acre) 55% 25 spaces total requ i red. l 19 must be covered I ..t l't / / i48i - 4//tt/;/14 h ,rrtf l-Zat/ /a/;n///f,./i total covered 3e: 18,493 (.60) -26, Sgtl:q7 ) A.Zoning Consjderatjon Issues 1. Setbacks -:-- l sktr ft"^I'd'f, c'5 tssL&s a'/' : vary greatly. propos on Town been reviewed The Communjty Development staff has one area of concernregarding the setbacks proposed. Unjt 2 has a secona itorycantilevered element_that extends to a point very close io'the property 1ine. This buj lding should be shified tocreate a greater setback distance at that po.i nt. */ ant rl?n I /,4 nt pl an 1 fhe-minimum-setback nnnprffi / surrace-parking spaces are located partially / right-of-way. The setbacks and parking haviI and approved by the operational departments. n,f,1e kd I a.u.roPment Plan for SDD 15' 1A]!houg!_lgLl di ns hei ght ranges up to 55 fe west to eas-n OT EN]S teqr r and DutK above the eristinq Toning characteristic of the surroundings a! n and mass wi S.reover,as note n ob-i ecti vester Plan,ncrease In ows a evelopment more i n-ThTs area. GRFA. The^proposed SDD exceeds the a'l lowable GRFA of HDMF zoningb]+?999=sguare,feet. Because of the design nature of thiiposal , staff felt a grossl-loon area studv would give a'ld compar'lson with the bulk and mass__all owed through HDI4FZbning. 6rn ;Jor the proposed SDD, the GFA was catculated by add.inq GRFA iSp*l^ll:l:_]-I],ld the manaser's unit, a1t storiseI - mechanical , airlock, recreation aras, common hailways andstaircases with the exception of the underground partjnglevel . oU* $"&BE' YY;<tL+Jc*U A,0,r:-=tCl'"aLl^.,t I For the HDMF comparison, the ca]culation included allowableQe'c.ei'FrDp-. @lfA:.:t:lSs..t,recnanicit and airtock credits for't7 units ComtrcJ *W9x1'' and the 20% allowable common area. \-,\ Ttr. vail village Master pran shows existing properties GFA\ ll the range of .8 to 2.0 in the tllillow C.i rcle area. The\ pran has tentative'ly identified a .g - .9 range as ailt owabre\ for redevelopment projects in thjs area.''-- -:" t - rl F (|^ fq-xe5 +vf cba€ ,3 3-;1,'. *.a5< ,: g*,lor {." rlDqP all'r'^*.',.'-os e Department of community Development recommends approval of this {t\ o | \jh- proposal. Staff believes that this proposal meets tire intent of the sDDzone district. The proposa! g":ically follows the under'lying iomF - --- district and provides beneficial flexibity in certain "r"ir. tJe feelthe project meets the cri teria set forth in both the sDD zone district i:l,tl:^dl1lt-,Ylil-Yl]tlse.Master ptan and_is-compat.ibte with ""iitingarea. i,le do feel that previously discusieddesign considerations and fee for the walkway should'ue aaaresseathrough the approval process and would also -request the ioii owinqcondi ti on be pl aced upon thi s project. aCdvr+CJ-€d - " I The applicant agrees to pay a fee to be subsequently agreedupon for the constructjon of a pedestrian walkway "jon6 eor" t i {ec qf foe, .- .\\*.u.J ou-A g.r-A,k,n 1 Creekllu< t^cU.\ 6or,1^ co n 5,.lcrn.-t o,.-5 dL.L up0n proj ect . L"""e- b-y& pPt. 2111 V *ut.STAFF RECOMMENDATION development plan fon SDD 15. -8- \* rP^ ^ {-4- f-E r._ _-rJeP vq+()1 ^ta^!1!sod Staff discussed with the applicant various a'l ternatives for zoning the property to a'l low for this project. Staff recommended the SDD solution, as it appearsto be the most effective way to handle the project. Requirements for HDMF zoning wou1d serve as a development guide. A SDD would also eliminate several variances that would be necessary under stri.ct HDMF zoning. Variances would be needed for additional commercial square footage, offjce other than hotel offices, setbacks, and parking if HDMF zoning is used. The primary reason for establishing an SDD is to allow for more commercial square footage than would be allowed under strict HDMF zoning. HDMF zoning a'llows for only ten percent of the total GRFA of the main structure or structuresto be used for accessory eating, drinking, recreationa'l , or retail establishments. In this case, the allowed commercial under HDMF zon'ing is 844 s.f. The proposed commercial includes 6,075 s.f. of retail, restaurant, and perhaps office space. A parking exception for the commercial parking would still be required with an SDD. Below is a comparison between the allowed HDMF zoning and the proposed SDD zoning. Zoning Comparison HDMF PROPOSED SDD D I FFERENCE Dens i ty GRFA 8 d. u. (25 units/acre) 8438 s.f. (60% x total s'ite area) 6 d.u. 8775 s.f. GRFA +.add common area over allowed = .l.l,202 s.f. 4800 s.f. 7,420 s.f. -2 d.u. under , r allowed + .2764 s lf . over al l'owed +3956 s.f. over al I owed -313 s.f. under allowed Conunercial/ 844 Retai I (]0% of s.f. a1 'lowed GRFA) Si te Coverage 7 ,734 s.f . (50% x tota'l site area ) Parki ng 75% of parking must be enclosed or covered Lodge 12 required Commercial approx. 20-22 spaces Landscaping 4,2.|9 s.f (30% x Total Site Area) Lodge parking all on sitel0 spaces underground 3 in rear setback (west sideof property--one of which is a loading space) Cormercial spaces: owner proposes to pay into CCI parking fund Unable to make comparisonat conceptual level +2427 s.f. over allowed Loading Hei ght Setbacks Loadinq zone exists al ong trli 1 1ow Bri dge Road to the east of the site. oia owed GRFA) ft flat roofft sloped roof 20 ft front, rear, sides Loading zone will be ma'i ntained- I surface parking space on west side of building is proposed for hotel I oadi nglde1 i veri es fl at roof sloped roof Assuming l,lillow Bridge Road is thefront of the site, the front setbackis proposed to be 0 to 2 ft, rear and side setbacks 20 ft 45 48 45 ft 48 ft (A model will be presented at the joint meeting.) The Special Development District allows more flexibility within the developmentproposal while maintaining_in most respects the integrity of the underlying HDMFzoning. staff has jdentifjed 5pqe of the issues related-to zoning and iesignthat wi I I need to be resol ved.-Th'ey i ncl ude: l. The setback in front of Checkpoint Charlie should not be a 0, setback.Instead an .|8" to 24" setback should be created. If the buitaing ii"pulledback, the project's footings will not extend into it0V property. 2. The area between the east property line and pavement will need some siteimprovements.. Paving material and permanent or temporary p'l anters weresuggested. Who provides and maintains these improvements needs to be resolved. Office space other than for the lodge should be minimized. The amountof office spaces, if any, needs to be determ.ined. The willow Bridge Road side of the property should be designated as thefront of the project to enable surface parking on the t^/illow place (west)side.of the property. This designation'would-resolve the concern oi travingparking in the front setback. Parking for the retajl space would have to be purchased from the Town. The_developer bel'ieves that a precedent has been set by the Sonnenalp thatwould allow for this type of parking arrangement. A dec'ision should be made to determine if a parking except'ion is an appropriate solution. 3. A +, (aco! .|' o <f tl @ F{+1\(\t co (f, t\ F{ ororo r..)ost' rol Ol.+ co lc.,(\.t ltft ol(o L.cr lF\ F{l@ cq l(n F\ lcl lF- F I(Y)* - * l-r o|o ro tolo..l. (\t ctloitr) 0 0)loro € F\loOr sf l|l)ul lf' I stor F.0., ro _O(o = ,d J(o! OlOO.(v (\.t .+ .(o tl+o.lt 'o (IJ +Jo+, v, JJo Io-€c-0,(f, LlolCE! (F rts 'li Tt(J JF! I IanC(,O(uttl rn.95oov1 E =o -d,<r** ..ioltr) '-OC\Ior@. F- r.t) N\-, G' roJrrjv F\ OlF (t)irt Isr.rf Ol Ol (oo| tr R=l g 3 R \ - ll o co o !.1 o !\.] rr, ro c') or o"Hl N F F F- c! r- crl crt c! c\i dj u: o o o o -l F)or6.,'trl e \?q;qq:33 :33 x:Rs Al b eBssNHcsK Nss dddgEI lr) Ot+@c\tC\t O F\ Lr!(O F\ o|) F\ (7) F\ l'\ F tc| r.ct t., r.(-)#or co .o o .ti ,.- o i S e - r- 9? C? .,i o, - .oEEI s.qqqqqq$"q8" EqE Ri Hf;H cD sf C! C., C\l F _ ,_ F C! ,_ F_ C\l CD C! r_ (Y) t! d . e g > a c.r t') --r or cD r :t !. o co rf) co (o<<l o F\ co @ to e to 6 irt -$ q! g > o ro ui eEel : o. a a q ": -i;- "i * e ,o o' 6 6 6.i co =61 sf .+ o) \o .+ Sr F- o, o, 6..i oi j j d ": .6 ;d F\ __: - --ii Rr r-, '-=: -{soal !.Jl r+ @ r- N =l Rr I - c<llr.llq --i=l O= - - (O cd- 61l N (Otoor*--lrlcr,-3- 3 5::trRdiri e eqad*;o*E :-j'co6iisqqq€ 3s3 SKhRbst + t., o <r- N - u: ro \ .o oi ol ^? "i ^i d "ic\, =- * * R_F r c, = = _ o.r co_ _ rrj [.dl * 6a1 * c5l -.- il = :t 1., "- I co <t co o S .- -<l c{ Ft o) c'' .' - g a p l .r, 6 g - crr r,o "c, - Fru-r | ('o - sl (O (O tr) r+ C\t c.l c.l Cb 6 s S !r) t_\ (\, (l.) r'dl n(o @ cq(Jl tr)<l c! o.Jco-- -.,[*+Fbjs 3 +2.62 z- _,=3- = zia=H 9E i U - tn L/, = ,-. j H E - iA e = = * = 3 E = 5 =4= = F g;'= u,:=-=- <st'=<-JJJ5=3==s, !{ i f = = = = F F = 3 3 = = g = E g *r 3 =l 'i -l F\ tr- |e. e.l <r.HI R =l J -t cl *:o orF\F\+ Fl CD lr)rolr) t? !' l? ,..i - "{ o N o,r F)rygN(o(\coaq*" {d-qE sRP '- co u? ,ri d .;' c,.i J J ci roOlc! N C\I FI o o al 9." t I I --I I I I I I F I I .€ ut .o I 1..t\+@ .:t Ft l\ 6.r|.lu- F{F<r r\aF.rC{c':'alC.l .+ |Jl ia cO Cr- |-a EE' tr Fo'tr't@6-cF-Pi izr d |ti co o@|.lvatt€ -@CE| Fl Cr lr-J r\ c{c.ro@ <rcora\+r'r<o('{<i <FO-O'€a{'OJl\{J CEr cF O F. lt- Fi O cD lcr C\r <r O C{ rtiFa ED rrt t\l c{ g -l* 6l - - N c{ al va o .4| (!r! !? l.i trt o" F @ ft F + li, @ !'t < <- a.lF (-.l if Et- l.? ti a..olr?O-|-tlO-Fl s-tra a: EIlrlr\a @cEt€F@ cdo--@ o,. rr cEl (\dd i6d>.al-l+l'o.od,o rt F\ r= l.a (.l l-t l/) rtl o!-lrcF<c\toa{rtf lrl l-\ - aE a..l O tlf "O F\ ciadric{ Fa e.l d r.t @.Or!.F |.2, "6(<l r: € <- ..| an-40P)F\ar\<_a aft t\ t/r d| : flcdFO-o-.o-O-'< *..oc'c,cF.d-r.?t?it-cqFta{I- !o .J <tl 6Oi\O-n4c'-ra-CO({-<t if cF -o Ft a a\ rr'ttat c..t < .o l\ o. r\ <\tdFo < Fl r.,r <. o- rar cots d5 r--r r{ '€ Fzr lr? tJ_r i6(\r O 1.'.€ F-cq < r cta l,l a'q d Fil <, rl. 6 t2 l,.t co -<rl*.a =r\ '3_O lrt o..o ..o o.. -o f-J c.r co G---.ot-\@(a)c{ AOOO-m_tr-)tt:r<t <F ll-:, F., tf, F_ _O rA ,5 F) oF' al' C.l (! F\ '€ .ar o- o- a{ P) ({ F1 (F a,J -rrc{P?rdl/l:l <. <. 1' tj-t lrl !- .o CF<d-l-C{6.{lo. F -t o- <1. c\r o. F\ < r' !-t l\ ltl CY:d-.ar.a CO,€'CtsF\<>a!€. tr":, F- F 6-aW(D t-\ or. Cr, ol- o- -*-.oa6o.=ri.,'F.'|cie{F4r..dd -t i5 |"\ @c! !'t < -F-COEr-4d-iaco <- rti or tr- ar,t -O<rO.OiFc.Irttt r\ - r -l- t.\ F\ a.l <t- Ga o tftlttrd-t\<tat.,r-@ttt!OO- !<t-|j'tto<'F\-!'1 a{ d (\a a\a F-J d c.{ c{ 15.Cg (J .=. |'r) .5 z, CF (t- e-o . L|'l \G, lJl ct LD t!- o o o o E IJJ o (= LJI ecd o (D -e,a.O l^ja- =, E < i:zl!= tll lr-l ct - IJJ =.:t <E= <E :- .J .J = :E - -<Eo o F- tlt <E J.J <E & - -Qlrx"'ffig Aitg-fuPsit" coverase: Density: Dwelling Units: GRFA: Common Area: Building Setbacks: Deck Setbacks: Parking: Height: Landscaping: Floor Area for EHU's: 7 7,579 sq. ft. 35% of ailowed GRFA or 2,652 sq. ft. 20 ft. on all sides 15 ft. for deck 5 ft. above grade 11 spaces 757o enclosed or 9 spaces 48 feet 3,789 sq, ft, or 30% 60/o ol2,652 sq. ft. or 1,591.2 sq. ft. ... rcrli'^ 3 + 1.5 DU's = 4.5 7,531 sq. ft. free matket 361.0 sq. ft. mechanical 1.213.0 sq. ft. EHU's 1,574.0 sq. ft. 10 ft. north 20 ft. south 10 ft. east 5 ft. north 10 ft. east 9 garage spaces 6 unenclosed surface = 15 spaces 44 feet 4,725 sq. ft. minimum or 37.5/o 1,213 sq. ft. Upon review of section 1l;gg:^t1" community Deveropment Department recommendsapprovar of the conditionar use permit oaseo',,-pon tn" fotowing factors: III. CRITER'A AND FINDINGS A.Consideration of Factors: 1. fi"JTi"ff.r,O and impact of rhe use on devetopment ob,ectives of staff believes that the oroposed request is consisrent with the deveropmentobjectiVes of the Town. .Tl-"_I;*l;"Err#r"irp,oyee housing units to be9,,:?::.:1]Tgushout,n:::ITrllv,. rneToar. and poricies onhe Land Userran support employee housing, as shown in tfre goats listed below: ->"F-*- 1 0 7,579 sq. tl 7 35% ol allowed GRFA ot 2,652 sq. tl' 20 leel on all sidas '15 lsst for decK 5' above grads 11 spaces; . 757o enclosed or 9 sPaces 48' 3,789 sq. n. or 3V/o E VAI l;l?lil . r'""T*":;n'ql''.') *'1.' 3+ 3TYPelll EHU=6 36.1 sq. tl. 10' notlh 20'soulh 10'easl 5' norlh 10' easl I garage sPaces 5 al grade ' 15 sPaces 44 leel ,p Buildinesetbacks: flLDtcu Selbacks: Parking: Height: LandscaPln9: il1. I' nodn 20' south 11'-6" easl wesl" 4 nonn 2 surlace below 48' 8,889 sq. ft. ot 7O1" ,4 ] d( rhis site is specificarrv addressed il lt.YllY::?:.:,,H?l?J lJll;.lt?fi"t3'i#il'3:::jJ|tT I.Tt':'i:?;''"T'::1'J'ffi i',ry.g"*:::*':,:,iH""r?iH:the Master Plan s 9oatsrarru vrJlew.tvs ""-'. lncepts for this site. il;lfy th" goals' ind objectives and sub-area cr 4lwwt 4,725 sq. fr. minimurnl * or 37 .sao Landscapins does not includ€€t-:tifi,:""":T#,'JI":?J;cks come toselher in a poinl oreatins a lriansular shaped lol' There is no west selback becaus' Willow Circle Sub Atea#2 "lnmostcases,thelevelsofdevelopmentthroughoutthissub-areagreatlyexceed what is a*owed unoer exisinilo".*ig trrign #Jty M;il r"r'rvl. 6ross residentiat ftoor area ratios (GRFAi,.-";iS"";il':aio"r.g, *iin In "u"t"g" ot t 'ot ' with the exception or one parcer' :iififfii;i;F'l.Ht;uol"i"u aie developed at' or over' their permitted levets o, o?u-"rop*"nt. As .r"n, t'n""i"lJtitG oevetopment potential left ,1 ) ,4,-',/ /o--" f z2'-1t-r o ]* * o]'i ru '!! frf il' 'I t,l I . d-t", *..-*-'-----f-lFt \i ultmr lrfrlllttr*, hIr In|i..;!lr-:lr. h ;y.''-.' --- . .,:.'1r{$t : ." '\irli'l-::,:i.;..-1-.-- .l- 4", l' fr oo o o tutff 'd{ ,t'\ ', t N:r\x 4,. !'!! rV ilj m ": {.l, 'R\ttt:,t \, o ; Il.i. . r' It' o oo 4l i ! I t d t J Sil N rl i I I .-\. d ------- I 1| Telephone:r- 970_476.0300-.- gzo.4z6.6soo Telecopier: 970.476.4765 E-mail: Art.Abplanaip @earthlink.net Law Office of Arthur A. Abplanalp, Jr. L.L.C. Post Office Box 2800 Vail, Colorado 81658-2800 14 September 2006 Attachment: C Physical Address: Suite 301 Vail 21 Building 472 East Lionshead Crrcle Vail, Colorado 81657 Planning and Environmental Commission of the Town of Vail 75 South Frontage Road West Vail CO Re: Willows Condominium Redevelopment Members of the Commission: This office represents Riva fudge South Condominium Association in connection with an appiication for the demolition and redevelopment of the Willows Condominium, u,hich is adjacent to Riva Ridge South. The application for the redevelopment of the Willows Condominium is scheduled for a work session with the PEC on the 25th of September, and this letter is being directed to the PEC in connection with that work Session. It should first be emphasized that Riva Ridge South supports the redevelopment of the Willows Condominium. On its face, the current Willoq,s redevelopment plan appears to be attractive. Although there is at least one violation of the common property line by a proposed roof line, that arrangement may be acceptable to Riva Ridge South, recognizing that a similar condition may exist r.",ith reference to,the roof of Riva Ridge South. There are, hou'ever, several considerations which compel Riva Ridge South to point out that the application is not ready for formal consideration by the Torvn of Vail, although the work session revie'*,which is scheduled is a logical and necessary hrst step toward redevelopment of the Willows project. First, the application filed with the Town of Vail does not indicate whether or not the current proposal can proceed without the use of the lot to the east, which is the Riva Ridge South Condominium property. By overlaying the Garage Level Floor Plan (which doesn't establish the location of the property lien or Rrva Ridge South) on the First Level Floor Plan (which does establish the location ofthe property line and Riva Ridge South) (see attached), it appears that the garage/foundation wall will be only approximately thirteen feet from Riva Ridge South (without consideration of the actual area of excavation, although Mr. Pyleman has indicated that the Willows actually is to be moved eighteen inches to the west). Excavation and construction in such close proximity to Riva fudge South may affect the structural stability of its building. Information regarding the nature and effect of this proximity, which has a direct relationship to the question of u,hether the Willorvs project can proceed u'ithout the use of Riva Ridge South land, should be provided and available to the Town before formal consideration of theappricationbvthePEC' 6 v fu'e'*"ha/a t u/z'/"'- trs p'7 "*7/L:.,-'-,t J / A/,Ltu4!E"fu,,, '/ q ////r/t?d/tutuu pzs 't1/futfrb",c"t to{ Recent discussions between the Willows developer and Riva Ridge South indicated that it may be impossible to construct the east wall of the proposed parking garagelfoundation wall without the use of soil nails or similar devices which would extend across the property line onto Riva Ridge South property. If this is the case, the use of soil nails or other construction technique may affect the structural integrity of the improvements on the property. Although representatives ofRiva Ridge South have discussed the project and hope to cooperate with the Willou's developers, at this point in time no information regarding construction techniques have been provided. To the best ofthe knowledge ofthe representatives ofRiva Ridge South, plans have not been developed by the Willows developers which identify the requirement for construction of that garagelfoundation wall or the nature, scope, or impact of such construction on Riva Ridge South property. The developer should be required to confirm the type of construction technique which will be employed so close to an existing building. The questions of whether Riva Ridge South property must be used or penetrated in association with the Willows project and whether Riva Ridge South can or will permit the use of its property in association with the Willows project must be resolved prior to formal consideration of the Willows application. Otherwise, the Town may find that it's staff time and effort will have been devoted to a project which cannot proceed because the project is premised on an assumption (use of fuva Ridge South property) which cannot be realized. Riva Ridge South has several other concerns which should be considered early in the consideration of the Willows proiect. One central concem is the preservation of existing large trees which are located in whole or in part on Riva Ridge property. One of these trees appears to be within ten feet of the proposed Willou's garage wall (again without consideration of the actual area of excavation). These trees may be killed by adjacent excavation and consffuction activity' fuva Ridge South is also concerned regarding the demolition of the current Willows structures. While it is, perhaps, to early to expect definite answers to this concem, it is a concern '*'hich will arise during the planning process. Another issue relates to the possible redevelopment of the Riva Ridge South project. Riva Ridge South must obtain assurance, to the extent possible, that the development of the Willows project will not affect or limit the redevelopment of its own property. Further, the effect of the Willows redevelopment project should not affect the enjoyment of the Riva Ridge South property by its owners. Although a commitment has been made to provide visual depictions of the appearance of the Willows project from the Riva Ridge South condominiums. that has not yet occurred. While the fundamental and preliminary questions of (a) whether Riva Ridge South property must be used in association with the Willows development property and (b) whether the Willows redevelopment plan may affect the structural integrity of the Riva Ridge South property should be determined before formal consideration of the Willows project occurs, each of these concerns noted above should be dealt with and resolved during the early review ofthe project proposal. For each of the reasons noted above, fuva Ridge South Condominium Association cannot, at this time, provide any assurance whatsoever that the Willows redevelopment project will be able to use Riva Ridge South property or that support can be given to what generally appears to be an attractive project. ln order to determine whether the Willows project can proceed without the use of Riva Ridge South property, the effect of the proposed construction in close proximity to that property must be determined and evaluated, and a decision should be made regarding the terms upon which Riva Ridge South property may be used, if such use is necessary, before the Willows application receives formal consideration. If the PEC and the Town of Vail proceed with formal consideration of the Willows redevelopment project, that decision must be premised upon the understanding that no agreement may ever be reached permitting the use of Riva Ridge property in the redevelopment of the Willows. Approval of a proj ect premised on an enoneous assumption would be an unfortunate and expensive experience for all concemed, and the Riva Ridge South Condominium Association hopes that, to the extent possible, these issues will be resolved before action is taken by the Town on the pending application. Ifyou have any questions regarding the foregoing, you may contact me. On behalf of the Riva fudge Condominium Association, I thank you for your consideration of the Association's concerns relating to this matter. Enclosure xc: Riva Ridge South Condominium Association Town of Vail Departrnent of Community Development Attention: Georse Ruther and Elizabeth Reed t zc / [-- J.,n g \5_ J q B ,"J t..L-' 6ry luro I z- tJ-o 12-13-3 the following'findings before approving the managerilent plan: )- a. That the management plan is in accordance with the inlent and pur- poses of this chapter and chapter 6, article I ol this title. b. That the management plan effec- tively provides lor the provision of employee housing as defined in sec- lion 12-2-2 of this title. c. That the management plan effec- lively provides lor adequate notice to prospective owners of the require- menls of the management plan and the occupancy requirements for a typeVl employee housing unit. (Ord. 1e(2001) $ 4: Ord. 6(2000) S 1) rt Town of YaiI March 2005 at:o o rq (fJ C\Ir st FI rooool ed F i til-{z z lA rc F1 an t-l'z o .f (o 6t $ CTJr (\lr oo =>s5EoE + EFE.695 tl- -lEf5:il = E<>'E 6 = (t o o oL C' -gtcto-c=;F Ei€€ sgF !g$EiEeg ieEEssE€aire #..Ir 38 p €;E€<J ulE=E,g-EIEE9F4, $e .8 5 E;3 fiB.Ee eEE* IEtEb.g EE fig;eEg€Es 7i -^r;tr Eaa€ o-E '=5 06=ONE>\olD =C# F^ uf; E #E € EEE EgTEEE 3: Iul o tr o ).)u) .N .a t e)r AJ- * o)r ot .o c< co (,ls $EEE;g f EE? ,E 5€>'x 6 o o-. !D .d--:i E AE --= o Id.=eio,:Yo o. b'E-+.9 o 1 -E* o do! 6=i;s€ (D- HHH6>'=(rE tt. oo EEsfEEaisg*Ert;a =#EH =;sSE$He*f.e€ ^E6t-€ - 9rO a(!(!o: €EEg<_5 {c E.x< =*:/n .3.Q o|Ir=:9!.E iE.E e P? = r-tr666 r.E+o o; EE a;6'tE ;;IE$EfiP*+;= o- c== Y FC.:d:.r, o=9 : *.J ;rcE'x >oLJdl= 9pE.:o,x NE>\ocl gi=Bg*eEeg, :l'r UJ (D t b. F: o oo .9i =Fg€ 2e s EEi>'i;i a= g€{* fs scs' FffgE*EffiE= { o- @ -o. .9E5a: te= sgF gF6bu{ - Et o ^a6dlox o gtt x Esfl€<j { 9-Ef =G€0 :'FcEtEl* aE AE6g 5go.c dr! AEE =6S TEEtr;e> :(Jd' o=9pb: E r'r- (!!t- c' 't >\Os 6.E6*EcxcF:O6 =.O* Ea(L 33 ,B s i;::g . sr8.E EgE BsE EBsEE FB E EEE g €$g'Eaf,u$:sss EtFE$ f tu =oqF rif (t) ol F 9 (r) F $t F .|r)o,o ol e au o (l lr, .N c v (f) (\l >E ot I o colo .h ab4^ cv =sl '; Y r.'r \-t; \ =ls =\J S.!r6ot €; .o, g^(!F.=Q -(\tED\v.=|r) OIJ d' tn !o>F^ EO cN E(')(l)F o a-\-ov 67- = a,O7t!.E /.\(/'s aO ES'ov<r-u- |f -:ox.\J t .c (fJ C\I ) '6 c o)o Eo eEFa-tr>; =6Xd.i6 >,9 .=is5Eo-o *cx!fxs 8EE c E €Esa E;gfFEF < rt.a E a.o.:: fifi? =vd-E E;E E<>'E;i h'-69>:;E "q I6:e6Eb 6o o- 6= ^E6'x6ld -'E t|-l)i9P9i; .:g-d610f; iBsF B w!!'= o q O E.S E: FA; EA6 E (f,c o! H'# o ori=6cE=.!= F;s€ -4 f 'F .6 ori= a cE=.[=iie€;f:EE;Ea $gE ,c ='FIFa: >6 ;FA 6.E E do o=ct_E(D(/'Gq)'-^(! U9=.: ::ho F (D:- (J e*--=C; - F7;qg= E 6 6HiBEE'Bts4p'i 6E P# E'-B E o66boi E e; f6XIriEv c<-5 {c ^- 31 '=.iE;eP9i:; *ts*t;lEfig g !: E'E.e E.9 > E 9.E;: F<E(!bEa66 x< ooP >.FEo "e!n Ot::XgYaF.E E AAEXA ,n7 - o= == >qEg# F CEU P} =pYFE6: (D= Y O EEEg€Eg >.8 bE .d)g,E\JF >; *P- ta 5Eril39*o-zrc: F O.: al 5;€ E g, fi E**I B g:E;EgEEEE Oooz!. -,' -^ J .=arotA- c'^- >r Oudl= o =lJNE>,olD isi*gg .E rt! (I, EE @ acO0) 'lf l/, lJl o F o Emplovee Housing Requirements As indicated in a number of the goals and objectives of the Town's Master Plans, providing affordable housing for employees is a critical issue which should be addressed through the planning process for SDD proposals. In reviewing the proposal for employee housing needs, staff relied on the Town of Vail Employee Housing Report. This report has been used by the staff in the past to evaluate employee housing needs. The guidelines contained within the report were used most recently in the review of the Austria Haus, Marriott, Four Seasons, Manor Vail Lodge, and SDD No. 6 - Vail Village Inn development proposals. The Employee Housing Report was prepared for the Town by the consulting firm Rosall, Remmen and Cares. The report provides the recommended ranges of employee housing units needed based on the type of use and the amount of floor area dedicated to each use. Utilizing the guidelines prescribed in the Employee Housing Report, staff analyzed the incremental increase of employees (square footage per use) that results from the redevelopment. The figures identified in the report are based on surveys of the commercial-use employment needs of the Town of Vail and other mountain resort communities. As of the drafting of the report, Telluride, Aspen and Whistler, B.C. had "employment generation" ordinances requiring developers to provide affordable housing for a percentage of the new employees resulting from commercial development. "NeW' employees are defined as the incremental increase in employment needs resulting from commercial redevelopment. Each of the communities assesses a different percentage of affordable housing a developer must provide for the new employees. For example, Telluride requires developers to provide housing 'for 40o/o (0.40) of the new employees, Aspen requires that 60% (0.60) of the new employees are provided housing, and Whistler requires that 100% (1.00) of the new employees be provided housing by the developer. In comparison, Vail has conservatively determined that developers shall provide housing for 15ok (0.15) or 30% (0.30) of the new employees resulting from commercial development. When a project is proposed to exceed the density allowed by the underlying zone district, the 30% (0.30) figure is used in the calculation. lf a project is proposed at, or below, the density allowed by the underlying zone district, the 15% (0.15) figure is used. The Crossroads special development district does exceed the density permitted by the underlying zone district in both number of dwellino units and GRFA so the 307o ratio was used. Proposed Project Emplovee Generation Calculations - Middle of Ranqe 41 1. t- a) Multi-Family (Dwelling Units) 69 new units proposed @ (O.4/unit) b) Retail and Service Commercial 45,804 sq. ft. @ (5.0/1000 sq. ft.) = 27.6 employees = 229.0 employees c)Bar/RestauranUArcade/Theater/Bowl ing 13,000 sq.ft.@ (5.0/'1000 sq. ft.)65.0 employees -t 4i6 'UUI 321.6 employees = 8.8 employees 110.58 employees 100.0 employees 67.75 employees 6.88 employees 9.36 employees Existing Grossroads Project Emplovee Generation Calculations - Middle of Ranqe a) Multi-Familiy (Dwelling Units) 4 e do [0' rt '1'2 5,b ,.,G:',)f ?,22 units existing @ (0.4/unit) Retail and Servjce-.lQommercial ,1 1 6 sq. @(s. o/io-00=6. ft . ) O-ffise: Professio f20,000M.0/1000i. ft.) employees emplovees employees 303.37 employees 321.6 new - 303.37 exisitinq 18.23 net new x.30 5.47 required # beds According to the calculations above, the applicant must establish 6 new deed- restricted employee beds ("pillows"). The applicants are proposing to provide the required deed-restricted employee housing beds off-site through the purchase of units throughout Town or through a pay-inJieu program, if established by the Town prior to requesting a Temporary Certificate of Occupancy (TCO). The applicant will deed restrict the units under the appropriate deed restrictions depending upon which zone district the property is located within the community under the appropriate review process. In the previous meeting, the Commission asked for greater detail on how a "bed" will be defined in regards to the deed restricting of units. For example if the applicant purchased a structure containing three bedrooms this could potentially count as six employee 'beds". As expressed by the Commission a unit as described previously may likely be rented by a family and would still count as six employee beds. Staff recommends that the developer submit to staff, prior to issuance of a TCO or Certificate of Occupancy, the location of the units proposed to be deed restricted along with the appropriate review application which is applicable or remit payment in funds commensurate with any adopted pay-in-lieu program. Please see the applicant's employee housing unit provision proposal on page 16 of the Crossroads Redevelopment: Aoolications for Special Development District. Text Amendments. and Conditional Use Permit document dated December 12,2005, which is attached for reference (Attachment C). Staff believes that the proposal does comply with this portion of the criterion. September 13,2006 Mr. Rick Pylman Pylman & Associates PO Box 2338 Edwards, CO 81632 rick@ovlman.com Mr. Steve Virostek Triumph Development, LLC 8120 Woodmont Avenue, Suite 800 Bethesda, MD 20814 steve@triumohdev.com Re: The Willona RedevelopmenUT4 Willow Road, Lot 8, Block 6, Vail Village ld Filing Special Development District #40 (PEC064061) Conditional Use Permit (PEC0C0062) 4. b. 6. Please g;ovide a parking levglfloor plan which incldes the prgperMines.t.^G;t; 6 dw ati. Cu,|'i&li*) on c/.'\:t'?]o Additionally, I received tfie attached set of comments fr0d the Public Works Q.eparlment yesterday. None ot these comments will need to be addressed prior to the worksession on the 25th, however. Also, I spoke with O Dear Rick and Steve, I am writing to inform you of some additional needs that Staff has identified for submittal before the Planning and Environmental Commission (PEC) worksession on the 25th of September. 1. Please identify the proposed loading bay location on the site plan and/or applicable floor plan. One loading bay will be required pursuant to the section of the Vail Town Code which states that "One loading berth for uses up to 100,000 square feet gross residential floor area" will be required for "Multiple-family dwellings with over 20,000 sguare feet gross residential floor area' (Section 12-'lo-13, Vail Town Codel. tta ,*e d6kr.rLu Pfease provide a set of plans (preferably 11" x 17'for review by PEC members) designating areas and amount of square footage located within all setbacks, both total numbers and "per floof numbers. Please provide a Sun/Shade analysis, This may be produced digitally or othenvise. Though Staff understands that the height of the building is not proposed to change for the worse, the amount of bulk and mass proposed within the twenty foot (20') setbacks will be greater than exists today. Please provide a rough massing model, again either digitally or otherwise, for the reason specified above. Please provide elevation drawings that reflect the approximate height and massing of surrounding buildings. oo the Fire Department lhis moming, which only specified that an egress plan will need to be submitted prior to more extensive review by that Department. Finatly, ptease ptan to stake ttp proposed buildirp (as much as possible considering tlyt tocation of the existing building) aN prcpefty comers prtor to the 12 noon on Monday, September 2g' . Please don't hesitate to contact me with any questions or concerns you may have. I look foruvard to continuing work with you. Best regards, Elisabeth Reed 970.479.2454 enclosure Bepartment of Public Works &Transportation 1309 Elkhorn Drive Vail, CO 81657 970-479-2158 Fax: 970-479-2166 www.vailgov.com MEMO To: From: Re: Date: Elisabeth Reed Tom Kassmel, Town Engineer Willows Redevelopment PEC Review 09/tzt06 The Town of Vail Public Works Deparfrnent has received the Planning and Environmental Commission submittal plan set dated 8128106 for the Willows Redevelopment. Based on our review the following comments will be required to be resolved prior to approval. Comments 4 1f yt(O The Porte Cochere area does not meet curent town standards. TOV standards requires a minimum * entrance angle of 70 degrees for 30'. However due to its location on a oney'fay^street-ari\he traffic1' flows in and out of the Porte Cochere area PW can support this variance. VEd t'|bw't2 2. Show driveway slopes on Porte Cochere. 3. The first 30' ofthe driveway entance shall not exceed 4Yo Please show slope. 4. All driveways greater than 9% must be heated. All heat within ROW must be on a separate zone and sl$f? no heat shall be in the required concrete pan. Show sight distance triangle on Landgcape/Site plan. Provide an 8' concrete pan at drive qltrances. A 4' pan with a l" invert may be used if it has a-dequate drainage "upu"ity. Mryt $ Show top and bottom of all walls. u /8. All retaining walls must be a minimum of 2' offadjacent property lines. 9. Minimum two way drive access into parking garage is 22'. 10. Minimumtwoway garcgedooraccesswidthis20'. ' , P,fCll. Showsnowstorageonsite. il#-J I 4 12. The minimum width of the porte cochere is 12' for one-way access. ,-f fr" .hgl1'', @ The developo shall provide a traffic impact study showingany change to PM pealrdooit ipr. . Y'-'. q3. The developerhas proposed to reconstuct Willow Rd to provide an 8' paver walk and a 12' travel lF ' lane with curb and gutier, similar to Hansen Ranch Rd. and East Gore Clegk Drive. Preliminary design plans should be provided prior 1p approval. This improvenent is {consistent qith the intenl r. of tuture Streetscape improverifidd-Xft[5ited uy ruttic works. f Vro\i**oartfo;(f' Fiaay 0 - -t? ff:f'"X1ff*Hri*i^lllffff fflHlHH?,"r conditions orApprovar. lsee attalhed ) ffi'x U- LPawo -4m*. n/trftar ffinZryke o Town of Vail Public Works General Conditions of Apnroval l. Please add the Town of Vail General Notes to constuction plans. (Notes can be e-mailed upon request) 2. Please add Utility Sigrrature block and have all utilities sigrr acknowledging acceptance of utility design. 3. All construction staging issues shall be resolved prior to construction including staging, phasing, access, schedules, haffic control, emef,gency access, etc... 4. A Rowrutility permit shall be obtained and approved by the Town of Vail prior to commencing any construction within public Right of Way. 5. A Town of Vail Revocable ROW permit shall be recorded for all private property improvements located within public ways. 6. Prior to approval of a Building permit all necessary pennanent and tempomry easements are recorded with Eagle County. 7. Prior to approval of a Building permit a shoring and excavation plan shall be submitted including; excavation phasing, engineered shoring plans with plan, profile and cross sections. Cross Sections and plans shall include all existing conflicts (i.e. utilities). 8. Any excavation shoring methods used that encroach upon adjacent public or private property shall have approval by the appropriate owner and have a recorded easement prior to construction. 9. A CDPHE Permit and all applicable ACOE permits (i.e. Dewatering) shall be submitted prior to construction. 10. Provide full civil construction drawings meeting Town of Vail standards prior to building permit submittal. wt.^he +ry ^-' September 5, 2006 Mr. Rick Pylman Pylman &Associates PO Box 2338 Edwards, CO 81632 rick@ovlman.com Mr. Steve Virostek Triumph Development, LLC 8120 Woodmont Avenue, Suite 800 Bethesda. MD 20814 steve@triumphdev.com Re: The Willows RedevelopmenUT4 Willow Road, Lot 8, Block 6, Vail Village ls Filing Special Development District #40 (PEC06-0061 ) Gonditional Use Permit (PEC06O062) O DearSirs, Thank you for submitting an application for the creation of a new Special Development District (SDD) and a proposal requesting a Conditional Use Permit for the construction of fractional fee units at the referenced address. I have conducted the initial review of the project for the Planning Department and outlined outstanding items below, which must be addressed before final hearing by the Planning and Environmental Commission and/or the Design Review Board. Landscape Plan r' Pbase list the caliper size/height of all proposed landscaping.{ Please plan to provide the Town of Vail with a revocable rightof-way permit for all landscaping and other improvements that will be placed oulside the property lines and within the Town's right-of-way. This is a relatively simple form and fee that can be completed and paid for just prior to building permit release.r' Pbase specffy the materiality of the proposed pool area, walkwalrs, site walls, etc. as the cover sheet did not adequately address each material change. Site Plan r' Phase delete the dashed lines indicating existing structures as they complicate the drawings somewhat.,/ Please submit a sile plan which indicates interpolated topographic lines (i.e. historic grade). These grades could be approximately drawn using a topographic map of the condition of the sile prior to the construction of the exisling Willows Condominiums. The interpolated grades should then be shown underneath the proposed building height so that Staff may make accurate height calculations from the site plan.{ Please be aware that the roof overhang at the northeast corner of the site currently overhangs the property line. o Gradlno Level Floor Plan r' Please submit a revised parking level sheet which indicates the propefi lines. Architectural Floor Plans r' Please explain the intent behind partially enclosed common staircases on some levels and fully enclosed staircases in other locations. Other r' Finally, please submit all plans in an 8 Yz " x 11" format. I will then distribute copies to the Planning and Environmental Commission al the September 25th worksession, which begins around 2 p.m. As you are aware, as the plans for this project mature, additional items may be requested. In the meantime, please submit all possible requested items to the Community Development Department by Monday, September 18'2006 to ensure that we are adequately prepared for the meeting on the 25n. Please don't hesitate to contact me with any questions or concerns you may have. I look forward to working with you as this project progresses. Best regards, Elisabeth Reed 970.479.2454 From: Chris GunionTo: Elisabeth ReedDate: 08/30/2006 1:46:05 PMSubject: Willows redevelopment Just to follow up with the DRT comments on the fire separation distance to property line for the east and west sides of the building, maybe remind the architect they are required to comply with IBC table 602 for exterior wall fire ratings and are limited on opening such as windows per IBC table 704.8 even if they get approval for a lesser setback per the zoning or SDD. Thanks. Chris f t. , I ptW@rvt,u{'j . $t'/\' )l Re: August 28,2W6 Ms. Elisabeth Reed Town Of Vail Department of Community Development 75 S. Frontage Road Vail. CO 81657 The Willows Condominiums Dear Elisabeth, Under cover of this letter please find the required application materials and documentation for an application for establishment of a Special Development District and for approval of a Conditional Use Permit. Specifically, attached is the foltowing: o Q copies ofan application narrativee l, sets ofarchitectural plans and a stamped survey. a completed application form and fees in the amount of $6000.0O for the SDD application and $650.00 for the CUP application. a letter of authorization from the Willows Condominium Association. a copy ofthe title report. selfaddressed stamped envelopes and a conesponding list ofadjacent property owners Please call if there is any additional information you need to accept this application as complete for a work session hearing. We understand that additional information, such as the sun/shade analysis and a massing model will be submitted prior to formal hearings. On behalf of Steve Virostek of Triumph Development, LLC and the 26 owners at The Willows Copy: Steve Virostek, Triumph Development, LLC Tim Hargreaves, The Willows Condominiums Gordon Pierce, Resort Design Associates Intemational)t L' Wce: 13? Main Street, Suite C-107W E.lu'ards, Colora,,b 816)2 Mail PO. Box 2J18, Edrvards, Colt:rado 81632 Phone: (970) 926-6065 Frrt: (970) 976-6a64 Emnil: rick@pylman com m Land Title Guarantee Company CUSTOMER DISTRIBUIION Date: 08-28-2006 Property Address: Our Order Number: V50015978 74 WILLOW ROAD / WILLOWS CONDOMINIUM BUILDING VAIL, CO 81657 PYLMAN & ASSOCIATES PO BOX 2338 (137 MAIN ST., STE. C107W) EDWARDS, CO 81632 Ath: RICKPYLMAN Phone: 9?0-926-6065 Fax: n0-926-6M4 EMail: rick@pylman.com Linked Commitment Delivery If you have any inquiies or rquire further assistance, please contact one of the numbers below: For Title Assistance: Vail Title Dept. Roger Avila IO8 S FRONTACE RD W #203 FO BOX 357 VAIL, CO 81657 Phone:970-476-2251 Fax:. 970-4764732 EMail: ravila@ltgc.com Chicago Tide Insurance Company ALTA COMMITMENT Schedule A Our Order No. V50015978 Cust. Ref.: Property Address: 74 WILLOW ROAD / WILLOWS CONDOMINII,IM BI]ILDING VAIL. CO 81657 1. Effective Date: August I 1, 2fi)6 at 5:00 P.M 2. Policy to be Issued, and Proposed Insured: Information Binder hoposed Insured: TI{E WILLOWS CONDOMINIIJM ASSOCTATION, INC., A COLORADO NON-PROFIT CORPORATION 3. The estate or interest in the land described or referred to in this Comnitment and covered herein is: A FEE SIMPLE 4. Title to the estate or interest covered herein is at the effective date hereof vested in: TI{E WILLOWS CONDOMINIUM ASSOCIATION. INC.. A COLORADO NON-PROFIT CORPORATION 5. The land referred to in this Commitment is described as follows: THE WILLOWS, ACCORDINC TO THE MAP TI{EREOF FILED FOR RECORD IN MAP CASE 2, DRAWER W AND AS DEFINED IN TTIE AMENDED AND RESTATED CONDOMINII,JM DECLARATION FOR THE WLLOWS RECORDED SEPTEMBER 11, I979IN BOOK 290 AT PAGE 907, COTINTY OF EAGLE, STATE OF COLORADO. ALTA COMMITMENT ScheduleB-Sectionl (Requirements) Our Order No. V50015978 The following are the requirements to be complied with: Item (a) Payment to or for the account of the grantors or mortgagors of the full consideration for the estate or interest to be insured. Item (b) Proper instrument(s) creating the estate or interest to be insured must be executed and duly filed for record, to-wlt: Item (c) Payment of all taxes, charges or assessments levied and assessed against the subject premises which are due and payable. Item (d) Additional requirements, if any disclosed below: This product is for informational purposes only and does not constitute any form of title guarantee nor insurance. The liability of the company shall not exceed the charge paid by the applicant for this product, nor shall the company be held liable to any party other than the applicant for this product. THIS COMMITMENT IS FOR INFORMATION ONLY, AND NO POUCY WILL BE ISSTJED PI.JRSUANT }IERETO. ALTA COMMITMENT ScheduleB-Section2 @xceptions) Our Order No. V50015978 The policy or policies to be issued will contain exceptions to the following unless the same are disposed of to the satisfaction of the Company: l. Rights or claims of parties in possession not shown by the public records. 2. Easements, or claims of easements, not shown by the public records. 3. Discrepancies, conflicts in boundary lines, shortage in area, encroachments, and any facts which a correct survey and inspection of the premises would disclose and which are not shown by the public records. 4. Any lien, or right to a lien, for services, labor or material theretofore or hereafter furnished, imposed by law and not shown by the public records. 5. Defects, liens, encumbrances, adverse claims or other maners, if any, created, frrst appearing in the public records or attaching subsequent to the effective date hereof but prior to the date the proposed insured acquires of record for value the estate or interest or mortgage thereon covered by this Comrnitment. 6. Taxes or special assessments which are not shown as existing liens by the public records.o the Treasurer's office. 7. Liens for unpaid water and sewer charges, if any.. . In addition, the owner's policy will be subject to the mortgage, if any, noted in Section I of Schedule B hereof. 9. RIGHT OF PROPRIETOR OF A VEIN OR LODE TO EXTRACT AND REMOVE HIS ORE THEREFROM SHOI,JLD THE SAME BE FOI,JND TO PENETRATE OR INTERSECT THE PREMISES AS RESERVED IN UMTED STATES PATENT RECORDED JULY 12, 1899, IN BOOK 48 AT PAGE 475. 10. RIGHT OF WAY FOR DITCHES OR CANAIJ CONSTRUCTED BY TI{E AUTTIORITY OF T}IE T]NITED STATES AS RESERVED IN TINTIED STATES PATENT RECORDED JULY 12, 1899, IN BOOK 48 AT PAGE 475. 11. RESTRICTIVE COVENANTS WHICH DO NOT CONTAIN A FORFEITI,JRE OR REVERTER CLAUSE, BI.IT OMITTING ANY COVENANTS OR RESTRICTIONS, IF AI{Y, BASED UPON RACE, COLOR, RELIGION, SE)C SD(UAL ORIENTATION, FAMILIAL STATUS, MARITAL STATUS, DISABILITY, IIANDICAP, NATIONAL ORIGIN, ANCESTRY, OR SOIIRCE OF INCOME, AS SET FORTH IN APPLICABLE STATE OR FEDERAL LAWS, D(CEPT TO TIIE H(TENT THAT SAID COVENANT OR RESTRICTION IS PERMITTED BY APPLICABLE LAW AS CONTAINED IN INSTRUMENT RECORDED AUGUST IO, 1962,IN BOOK I74 AT PAGE 179. 12. THOSE PROVISIONS, COVENANTS AND CONDMONS, EASEMENTS AND RESTRICTIONS, WHICH ARE A BI,JRDEN TO THE CONDOMINIUM I,JNIT DESCRIBED IN SCHEDI,JLE A. BUT OMITTING A}IY COVENANTS OR RESTRICTIONS, IF ANY, BASED UPON RACE, COLOR, RELIGION, SEX, SEXUAL ORIENTATION, FAMILIAL STATUS, MARI'TAL STATUS, ALTA COMMITMENT ScheduleB-Section2 @xceptions) Our Order No. V50015978 The policy or policies to be issued will contain exceptions to the following unless the same are disposed of to the satisfaction of the Company: DISABILITY, HANDICAP, NATIONAL ORIGIN, ANCESTRY, OR SOURCE OFINCOME, AS SET FORTH IN APPLICABLE STATE OR FEDERAL LAWS. EXCEPT TO THE EXTENT THAT SAID COVENANT OR RESTRICTION IS PERMTTTED BY APPLICABLELAWAS CONTAINED IN INSTRUMENT RECORDED SEPTEMBER II, I979,IN BOOK 290 AT PAGE 907. 13. EASEMENTS, CONDMONS, COVENANTS, RESTRICTIONS. RESERVATIONS AND NOTES ON TI{E RECORDED CONDOMINII]M MAP OF THE WILLOWS. 14. TERMS, CONDITIONS AND PROVISIONS OF CABLE TELEYISION EASEMENT AND MAINTENANCE AGREEMENT RECORDED SEPTEMBER 13, 1994 IN BOOK 649 AT PAGE 837. 15. TERMS, CONDITIONS AND PROVISIONS OF GRANT OF EASEMENT RECORDED APRIL 14, 2006 AT RECEPTTON NO. 200609611. 16. AI.IY AND ALL ENCLIMBRANCES WHICH HAVE BEEN CREA'IED BY THE INDIVIDUAL CONDOMINII.JM I'NTT OWNERS. LAND TITLE GUARANTEE COMPANY and MERIDIAN LAND TITLE. LLC DISCLOSURE STATEMENTS Note: Pursuant to CRS 10-11-122, notice is hereby given that: A) The subject real property may be located in a special taxing district. B) A Certificate of Taxes Due listing each taxing jurisdiction may be obtained from the County Treasurer' s authorized agent. C) The information regarding special districts and the boundaries of such districts may be obtained from the Board of County Commissioners, the County Clerk and Recorder, or the County Assessor. Note: Effective September l,1997, CRS 30-10406 requires that all documents received for recording or filing in the clerk and recorder's office shall contain a top margin of at least one inch and a left, right and bottom margin of at least one half of an inch. The clerk and recorder may refuse to record or file any document that does not conform, except that, the requirement for the top margin shall not apply to documents using forms on which space is provided for recording or filing information at the top margin of the document. Note: Colorado Division of Insurance Regulations 3-5- 1, Paragraph C of Article VII requires that "Every title entity shall be responsible for all matters which appear of record prior to the time of recording whenever the title entity conducts the closing and is responsible for recording or filing of legal documents resulting from the transaction which was closed". Provided ttrat Land Title Guarantee Company conducts the closing of the insured transaction and is responsiblc for recording the legal documents from the transaction, exception number 5 will not appear on the Owner's Title Policy and the Lenders Policy when issued. Note: Affirmative mechanic's lien protection for the Owner may be available (typically by deletion of Exception no. 4 of Schedule B, Section 2 of the Commitment from the Owner's Policy to be issued) upon compliance with the following conditions: A) The land described in Schedule A of this commitment must be a single family residence which includes a condominium or townhouse unit. B) No labor or materials have been furnished by mechanics or rnaterial-men for purposes of construction on the land described in Schedule A of this Commitment within the past 6 months. C) The Company must receive an appropriate affidavit indemnifying the Company against un-filed mechanic's and material-men's liens. D) The Company must receive payment of the appropriate premium. E) If there has been construction, improvements or major repairs undertaken on the property to be purchased within six months prior to the Date of the Commitment, the requirements to obtain coverage for unrecorded liens will include: disclosure of certain construction information; financial information as to the seller, the builder and or the contractor; payment of the appropriate premium frrlly executed Indemnity Agreements satisfactory to the company, and, any additional requirements as may be necessary after an examination of the aforesaid infornration by the Company. No coverage will be given under any circumstances for labor or material for which the insured has contracted for or agreed to pay. Note: Pursuant to CRS lGl l-123, notice is hereby given: This notice applies to owner's policy comrnitments containing a mineral severance instrument exception, or exceptions, in Schedule B, Section 2. A) That there is recorded evidence that a mineral estat€ has been severed, leased, or otherwise conveyed from the surface estate and that there is a substantial likelihood that a third paay holds some or all interest in oil, gas, other minerals, or geothermal encrgy in the property; and B) That such mineral estate rnay include the right to enter and use the property without the surface owner's permission. Nothing herein contained will be deemed to obligate the company to provide any of the coverages referred to herein unless the above conditions are fullv satisfied- Form DISCIOSURE 09/0L/02 JOINT NOTICE OF PRIVACY POLICY Fidelity National Financial Group of Compenies / Chicago Title Insurance Company Security Union Title Insurance Company arrd Land Title Gumantee Company and Meridian Land Title, LLC July 1, 2001 We recognize and respect the privacv exDectations of todav's consumers and the reouirements of aoplicable federal and state pritacy laws. W-e believe that rirakiie vou aware of liow we use vour non-pubfic oersonal inf6imation ("Personal'Information-"), and to whom it is disclosed,'wil[ form the basis for a r6lationshii of trult between us and the-public that we serve. This Privacy Statement provides that explanation. We reserve ttr6 right to change this Privacy' Statement from time to tinie consistent'with applicable privacy laws. In the course of our business, we may collect Personal Information about you from the following sources: * lrom applications or other forms we receive from you or your authorized representative;* Erom ybur transactions with, or from the services Seing p6rformed by, us, our affiliates, or others;* rrom our lnrcmet web sltes:* Fro.m the public records maintained by govemmental entities that we either obtain directly from those entities, oi from our affiliates or otheisi and* From consumer or other reponing ageni:ies. Our Policies Regarding the Protection of the Confidentiality and Security of Your Personal Information We maintain physical, electronic and procedural safeauards !o Drotect vour Personal Information from unauthorized access or intrusfon. We limit access t6 the Personal liformation only t6 those employees who need such access i4 connection with providing products or services to you or for other lEgitimate busines's purposes. Our Policies and Practices Regarding the Sharing of Your Personal Information We may slare your Personal lnformation with our affiliatcs, such as insurqnce companies, agents, and other real estate settlement service providers. We also may disclose your Personal Informatiori: * to agents, brokers or representatives to provide you with services you have requested;* to tliird-party contractois or-service proliders who provide servicd,s or perforni mark6ting or other function's on our behalf: and* to others with whom wd enter into joint marketing agreements for products or services that we believe you may find of interest. In addition, we will disclose vour Personal Information when vou direct or eive us Dermission. when we are reouired by law to do so, or when we suspect fraudulent or criminal aciivities. We alSo mav disclose v6ur Personal Liformation when otherwise peniritted bv applicable Drivacv laws such as. for exainple. wheir disclosure is needed to enforce our rights arising out of any agre'e'ment, trlnsaction or relationship with ybu. One of the important responsibilities of some of our affrliated companies is to record documents in the public domain. Such-documents' may contain your Personal Information. ' Right to Access Your Personal Information and Ability to Correct Errors Or Request Changes Or Deletion Certain states aford you dre right to access your Personal lnformation and, under certain circumstances, to find out to whom vour Persorial lnform-ation has been disclosed. Also- certain state6 afford vou the risht to reouest correctioti, amendme^nt or deletion of your Penonal lnformation. We rcserve the right, wherE perminbd by law, to charge a reasonable fee to cover the costs incurred in responding to such requests. - All,requests submitted to the Fidelity National Financial Group of CompanieVChicago Title Insurance Company shall bb in writing, and delivered to'the following address: Privacv Comoliance Officer Fidelit'v Nati6nal Financial- Inc. 4050 Calle Red. Suite 220- Santa Barbara, CA 931 10 Multiple Products or Services If we prov_ide yog wjth more than one financial product or service, you may receive more than one privacy notice from us. We airologize for any inconvenience this may cause you. Fo]]n PRw.mL.CHI rc( August 16,2006 Mr. George Ruther Town of Vail Community Development Department 75 South Frontage Road Vail, CO 81657 Re: WillowsCondominiums Dear Mr. Ruther: The purpose of this letter is to provide authorization for Triumph Development LLC to represent The Willows Condominium Homeowners Association with regard to Town of Vail review of the attached application for a new Special Development District. By the signature below such authorization is granted. Sincerely, President Willows Condominium Association \TILLOV/S (:()NDOMINIUMS 74 \Uillow Road, Vail, Colorado 81657 . 888-WILLO\(/S (945-5697\, 970416-2233' 97A476-5714 {ax email: sales@u'illou'scondos.com' wuv.willowscondos.com '6Csr RIVA RIDGE SOUTH ISSTIES TO BE RESOLVED WITH TRII.JMPH DEVELOPMENT' S PROPOSED WILLOWS REDEVELOPMENT PLAN : 1v1emo To: Mr. George G. Ruther, Chief of Planning, Town of Vail From: Ivan M. Popkin, President of Riva Ridge South Condominiums s Date: August 11,2006 l. How will the requested variances from the Town's setback, impact the Riva Ridge South building? We have contracted for a new survey and pinning. We would expect that Triumph will need to do the same. We would then want to match up our building with the new Willow's proposed development to see exactly the relationship of their final building plan on our Westerly side. This is critical to all Westerly RRS owners facing the Willow redevelopment. This may entail views from each apartnent. What future effect will these variances have on any development that Riva Ridge South may entertain for their own building? 2. How will both the demolition and construction phases of the Willows project affect the structural integdty of Riva Ridge South? 3. How will both the demolition and construction phases of the Willows project affect the viability and health ofthe existing trees and shrubs on any ofthe present green space between the two buildings of Riva Ridge South? The above arre some of the initial issues that confront the constituency of Riva Ridge South at this time. & )o I will be in Vail through Labor day. You can reach me for any reason at 476-2231-ext.670. I may also be reached by email at whalei@aol.com After Labor day I can be reached at: GP Development Corp. The Pavilion, Suite 700-40, 261 Old York Rd. Jenkintown, PA 19046 or by phone at 215-886-1136. Email is the same. Thank you for your interest and time. {