HomeMy WebLinkAboutVAIL VILLAGE FILING 1 BLOCK 5D LOT M O VAIL PLAZA HOTEL 2001 MAJOR AMENDMENT ORDINANCE NO 21 SERIES OF 2001 PEC 08 13 2001 TOWN COUNCIL 08 21 2001 TOWN COUNCIL 09 04 2001 PART 1 LEGALa
This file contains the information
on the
Vail Plaza Hotel Major Amendment
Ordinance No.21, Series of 2001
PEC August 13, 2001
Town Council August 21,2001
Town Council September 41 2001
-o
-Questions? Cail the planning Staff at 479-2139
APPUCATION FOR PTANNING AND ENVIRONMENTAL
COMMISSION APPROVAL
Employee Housing Unit ffype: )
Major or E Minor E:<terior Alteration
(VailVillage)
Major or Minor Exterior Alteration (Lionshead)
Variance
Zoning Code Amendment
Atnendment to an Approved Development plan
GENEML INFORMATION
This application is-for any prqject reguiring approval by the Planning and Environmental cornmbsion. For specificinformation, see the submittalrequirenrcnt fui the parthular approial that is requesteo. The application ci,n notqe accspted until all required information b submitted. rne pioject may atso nieo to be reviewed by the TownCouncil andlorthe Design Ra4ew Board.
A. TYPEOFAPPUCATION:tl Bed and Breakfasttr Conditional Use permit
tr Major or E Minor SubdivbionO Rezoningtr Sign Variancetr Special Devebpment DistrictE( Major or tr Minor Amendncnt to SDD
B. DESCRIffiON OF THE REOUEST: Halor Ane
tr
tr
tr
tr
tr
tr
Oc.
D.
E.
F.
LOCATION OF PROPOSAL: LOT;- BLOCK:- FILING;see Attached Title Policy
PHYSICAT ADDRESS:
PARCEL #' 210108203003 . (conbct Eagle co. Assessors ffice at 970-328-8640 for parcet #)
2g1r1Jp6. Public Accomodation/SDD #6
NAMEOFOWNER(S1: Daymer Corporation' N.V.
DESCRIffiONOFTHEREQUEST: Halor Anendment to Special Districr #6-
re-enactment of oiart "t
G.
H.
MAIU1{G ADDRESS: 100 East
Vail, CO 816
owNER(S) Srct{ATURE(
NAMEOF APPUCANT:
MAILINGADDRESS: lOO
Vai1, CO 816 PHONE: 970-476-5622
FEE: fu subnitful rcquiranentr for appopriaE fe
PT.EASE SUBMIT THIS APPUCATTON, ALL SUBMTTTAL REQUTREMENTS
AND THE FEE TO THE DEPARTMEI{TOF COMMUNITY DEftLOPMENT,
75 SOUTH FROI{TAGE ROAD, VAII, COLORADO 81657.
Questions? Call the Planning Staff at 479-ZL3g
SPECIAL DEVELOPMENT DTSTRICT (SDD)
SUBMITTAT REQUIREMENTS
This application is for any project that is applying for a new SDD, or making an amendment to an
odsting SDD.
I. DEFINMONS
Itfaior Amendment'Any proposal to change uses; increase gross residential floor area;
change the number of dwelling or accommodation units; modif,, enlarge or o<pand any
apprwed Special Dwelopment Districts.
Itlinor Amendment - Modifications to building plans, site or landscape plans that do not
alter the basic intent and character of the apprwed special dwelopment district, and are
consistent with the design criteria for special development clistricts. Minor amendments
may include, but not be limited to, variations of not more than five feet to approved
setbacks andlor building fooprints; changes to landscape or site plans that do not
actuersely impact pedestrian or vehicular circulation throughout the Special Development
Districq or changes to gross floor area (o<cluding residential uses), of not more than firre
percent (5olo) of the approved sguare footage of retail, orffice, common areas and other
non-residential fl oor area.
PRE-APPUCATION CONFERENCE
A pre-application conference with a planning staff member is strongly encouraged. No
application can be accepted unless it is complete. It is the applican(s responsibility to
make an appoinUnent with the staff to determine additional submittal reguirements.
SUBMITTAL REOUIREMENTS
tr FEE: $1,500.00 - Establishment of a sDD
$1,000.00 - Major Amendment$ 200.00 - Minor Amendment
The fee must be patd at the time of submitbt.
tr Stamped, addressed envelopes and a list of the names and mailing addresses of
all property owners adjacent to the subject property, including properties behind
and across streets. The applicant is responsible for correct names and mailing
addresses. This information is availabte from the Eagle County Assessol's office.
tr A massing model depicting the proposed dwelopment in relationship to
development on adjacent parcels.
II.
IIL
Four (4) copies of tfie followinS
tr A survey stam@ by a licensed surveyor indicaUng o<isting conditions of the
property to be included in the special development district, to include in location of
improvements, existing contour lines, natural features, existing vegetailon, water
courses, and perimeter property lines of the parcel.
A vicinity plan showing the proposed improvements in relation to all adjacent
properties at a scale not smaller than 1"=50'.
A proposed site plan, at a scale not smaller than 1" = 20', showing the
approximate locations and dimensions of all buildings and structures, uses tterein,
and all principal site development features, such as landscaped areas, walkways,
service enFies, driveways, and off-street parking and loading areas with proposed
contours after grading and site developmeng
A preliminary landscape plan, at a scale not smaller than 1" = 20', showing
existing landscaped features to be retained or removed, and showing proposed
landscaping and landscaped site dwelopment features, such as o$door
recreational facilities, bike paths and trails, pedestrian plazas and walkways, water
features and other elements.
An open space and recreational plan sufficient to meet the demands generated by
the dorelopment without undo burden on available or proposed public facilities;
Preliminary building elevations, sections and floor plans, at a scale not smailer
than oneeighth equals one foot, in sufficient tletail to determine floor area, gross
residential floor area, interior circulation, locaUons of uses within buildings, and
general scale and appearance of the proposed dwelopment.
A complete set of plans depicting existing condiuons of the parcel (site plan, floor
plans, elevations), if applicable.
A complete zoning analysis of existing and proposed development to include a
square footage breakdown of all proposed uses, parking provided, and proposed
densities.
A written statement describing the nature of the project to include information on
proposed uses, densities, nature of the development proposed, contemplated
ownership pattems and phasing plans, and a statement ouuining how and where
the proposed development deviates from the development standards prescribel in
the propefi's underlying zone disfrict.
Photo overlays and/or other accephable techniques for demonstraUng a visual
analysis of the proposed development in relationship to o<isting conditions.
An Environmental hpact Report shall be submitted to the Mministrator in
accordance with Chapter 18.56 hereof unless waived by Section 18.56,030,
o(empt pCIects,
tr
tr
tr
tr
fI
D
n
tr
D
The undersigned hereby certifies that on tfts Z6lhav ot 4uLl
2001, in conjunction with tho application of DaymerlG.po*tion]ffi.IJ-u -ui*
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
amendment to Special Development District #6, I deposited in the United States mail,
postage prepaid copies of notice of hearing before the Town's Planning and
Environmental Commission addressed as stated in Exhibit A. attached hereo and
incorporated herein by this reference.
Gateway condominium Ass'n vail village Inn Plaza condo. village Inn plaza condo Ass,n
cr'o Keith D. Stoltz Ass,n I & II phase trI and phase IV
Stoltz Management of cio Sally Hanlon, pres. c/o Joseph Staufer
Delaware, Inc. Vail Village Travel 100 East Meadow Drive
3828 Kennett Pike, Suite 212 100 E. Meadow Drive Vail. CO 91657
Wilmington, DE 19807-2331 Vail, CO 81657
Colorado Dept. of Transportation Alpine Standard FirstBank
c/o Jim Nail c/o JeffMoellenrine 17 Vail Road
606 So. 9th Street 28 South Frontage Rd. West Vail, CO g165?
Grand Junction, CO 81501 Vail, CO 81657
Sonnenalp Hotel Holiday House Condominiums Steve Safford
82 E. Meadow Drive Bruce Cillie, Manager president
Vail, CO 81657 9 Vail Road Crossroads West Condo. Ass'n
Vail, CO 81657 143 E. Meadow Drive
Vail, CO 81657
FirstBank of Vail Gateway Condominium Ass'n Gateway Condominium Ass'n
c/o First Bank Holding Co. c/o Wes Jensen c/o Keith D. Stoltz
P.O. Box 150097 Stoltz Management of Stolz Management of
Lakewood, CO 80215 Delaware, Inc. Delaware, Inc.
PMB 233-19000 725 Conshohocken Stare Road
Avon, CO 81620 Bala Cynwyd, PA 19004
Holiday House Condominiums Steve Safford
c/o Gwen Scappello, Pres. Manager
9 Vail Road Crossroads East Condo. Ass'n
Vail, CO 81657 143 E. Meadow Drive
Vail, CO 81657
Ton Saa]-feld
Tall-slann Condouinium Association
62 E.ast l{eados Drive
Vail, Golorado 81657
EXHIBIT A
THIS ITEM MAY AFFECT YOUR PROPERTY
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 of the Municipal Code of the
Town of Vail on August 13, 2001, at 2:00 P.M. in the Town of Vail Municipal Building. In
consideration of:
A staff report on an approval of a minor amendment to SDD #5, Vail Run, to allow for the
remodel of an egress staircase, located at 1000 Lionsridge Loop/Lot C-11, Lions Ridge Filing 1.
Applicant: Vail Run Resort Communig Association, Inc.Planner: Brent Wilson
A request for a variance from Section 12-6D-5 ("Lot Area and Site Dimensions"), Vail Town
Code, and a final review of a minor subdivision located at 3834 and 3838 Bridge Road/ Lots 11
& 12, Bighom Subdivision 2no Addition.
Applicant: Gary Weiss, represenled by Steve Riden, Architect
Planner: Ann Kjerulf
A request for a variance from Section 12-6D-5 ("Lot Area and Site Dimensions"), Vail Town
Code, and a final review of a minor subdivision located at 3816 and 3826 Lupine Drive and 3828
Bridge Road/ Lots 8, 9, & 10, Bighom Subdivision 2no Addition.
Applicant Jeff Dahl and June Frazier, represented by Steve Riden, Architect
Planner: Ann Kjerulf
A request for a variance from Title 14 (Development Slandards) Town Code, to allow for
improvements to an existing residential private drive, located at 1450 Buffehr Creek Road/Lot 2,
Cliffside Subdivision.
Applicant: Mike YoungPlanner: Brent Wilson
A request for a final review and recommendation to the Vail Town Council of proposed text
amendments to the Vail Town Code, Chapter 12-61, Housing Zone District, and Chapter 12-2,
Definitions, to allow for additional uses and to amend definitions in regard thereto.
Applicant: Town of VailPlanner: Allison Ochs
A request for the final review of a major amendment to Special Development District #6, Vail
Village Inn, io allow for the redevelopment of an existing hotel, located at 100 East Meadow
- z Drive, Lots M and o, Block 5-D, Vail Village 1" Filing.K.{Tpplicant: Daymer Corporation, represented by Jay Petersont Planner: George Ruther
A request for a final review and a recommendation to the Vail Town Council on the Town of
Vail's proposed Meadow Drive streetscape improvement project, located at EasUWest Meadow
Drive, Vail Village.
Applicant:
Planner:
Town of Vail
George Rulher
,Et'
o Gateway Condominium Ass'n Vail Village Inn Plaza Condo. Village Inn Plaza Condo Ass'n
do Keith D. Stoltz Ass'n I & tr phase Itr and phase tV
Stoltz Management of c/o Sally Hanlon, Pres. c/o Joseph Staufer
Delaware, Inc. Vail Village Travel 100 East Meadow Drive
3828 Kennett Pike, Suite 212 100 E. Meadow Drive Vail. CO 81652
Wilmington, DE 19807-2331 Vail, CO 81657
Colorado Dept. of Transportation Alpin€ Standard FirstSank
c/o Jim Nail c/o Jeff Moellentine l7 Vail Road
606 So. 9th Street 28 South Frontage Rd. West Vail, CO 81657
Grand Junction, CO 81501 Vail, CO 81657
Sonnenalp Hotel Holiday House Condominiums Steve Safford
82 E. Meadow Drive Bruce Gillie, Manager President
Vail, CO 81657 9 Vail Road Crossroads West Condo. Ass'n
Vail, CO 81657 143 E. Meadow Drive
Vail, CO 81657
FintBank of Vail Gateway Condominium Ass'n Gateway Condominium Ass'n
c/o First Bank Holding Co. c,/o Wes Jensen c./o Keith D. Stoltz
P.O. Box 150097 Stoltz Management of Stoltz Management of
Lakewood, CO 80215 Delaware, Inc. Delaware, Inc.
PMB 233-19fiD 725 Conshohocken State Road
Avon, CO 81620 Bala Cynwyd, PA 19004
Holiday House Condominiums Steve Safford
c/o Cwen Scappello, Pres. Manager
9 Vail Road Crossroads Fgst Condo. Ass'n
Vail, CO 81657 143 E. Meadow Drive
Vail. CO 81657
EXHIBIT A
;,1f
THIS ITEM MAY AFFECT YOUR PROPERTY
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 of the Municipal Code of the
Town of Vail on August 13, 2001, at 2:00 P.M. in the Town of Vail Municipal Building. In
consideration of:
A staff report on en approval of a minor amendment to SDD #5, Vail Run, to allow for the
remodel of an egress staircase, located at 1000 Lionsridge Loop/Lot G1 1 , Lions Ridge Filing 1 .
Applicant Vail Run Resort Communiiy Association, Inc.Planner: Brent Wilson
A request for a variance from Section 12-6D-5 ("Lot Area and Site Dimensions"), Vail Town
Code, and a final review of a.minor subdivision located at 3E34 and 3838 Bridge Road/ Lots 1 1
& 12, Bighom Subdivision 2n" Addition.
Applicant Gary Weiss, represented by Steve Riden, Architect
Planner: Ann Kjerulf
A request for a variance from Section 12-6D-5 ("Lot Area and Site Dimensions"), Vail Town
Code, and a final review of a minor subdivision located at 3816 and 3826 Lupine Drive and 3828
Bridge Road/ Lots 8, 9, & 10, Bighorn Subdivision 2nd Addition.
Applicant: Jeff Dahl and June Frazier, represented by Steve Riden, Architect
Planner: Ann Kjerulf
A request for a variance from Title 14 (Development Standards) Town Code, to allow for
improvements to an existing residential private drive, located at 1450 Buffehr Creek Road/Lot 2,
Cliffside Subdivision.
Applicant: Mike Young
Planner: Brent Wilson
A request for a final review and recommendation to the Vail Town Council of proposed text
amendments to the Vail Town Code, Chapter 12-61, Housing Zone Distriqt, and Chapter 12-2,
Definitions. to allow for additional uses and lo amend definitions in regard thereto.
Applicant: Town of VailPlanner: Allison Ochs
A request for the final review of a major amendment to Special Development Distric't #6, Vail
Village lnn, to allow for the redevelopment of an existing hotel, located at 100 East Meaclow
- z Drive, Lots M and O, Block $D, VailVillage 1o Filing.u-
^ffpplicant: Daymer Corporation, represented by Jay PetersonI Planner: George Ruther
A requesi for a linal review and a recommendation to the Vail Town Council on the Town of .(,tl
Vail'i proposed Meadow Drive streetscape improvement project, located at EasUWest Meadog,^ Wu-
Drive, Vaif Viflage. ,. at1 *'Itt^i . -l ^ ,
Applicant: rown orVait A'Pry 1fllol,
Planner: George Rulher K115J.?ffi-SdrJr
T\wN0FvALw
ty
A request for a final review and recommendation to the Vail Town Council of proposed text
amendmenls to the Vail Town Code. Chapters 12-7H & l, Lionshead Mixed Use 1 & Lionshead
Mixed Use 2, to amend the regulations regarding commercial ski storage and to amend Chapter
12-2, Definitions, and setling forth details in regards lhereto.
Applicant: Town of Vail
Planner: Allison Ochs
A request for a recommendation to the Town Council for the adoplion of two view corridors
within Lionshead, as identified within the Lionshead Redevelopment Master Plan. View Conidor
1 is located approximately at lhe main pedestrian exit looking southwest towards the Gondola lift
line. View Coriidor 2 is located approximately from the pedestrian plaza at the east end of the
Liflhouse Lodge looking south up the Gondola lift line. A more specific legal description of the
two view conidors is on file at the Community Development Department.
Applicant: Town of Vail
Planner: Allison Ochs
A request for a final review of the proposed parking management plan for the Vail Gateway,
located at 12 Vail Road / portions bt tbts o and N,
-Btocx sb, vail Village 1"t Filing.
Applicant: Mountain Owners, L.P., represented by Braun Associates
Planner: Allison Ochs
The applications and informalion about the proposals are available for public inspection. during regular
office hours in the project planne/s office, located at the Town of Vail Community Development
Department, 75 Soutfi 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 479-2138 for information.
Sign language interpretation available upon request with 24-hour notification. Please call 479-
2356, Telephone for the Hearing lmpaired, for information.
Community Development Department
Published July 27,2001 in the Vail Trail.
THIS ITEM MAY AFFECT YOUR PROPERTY
PUBLIC NOTICE
NOTICE lS HEREBY GIVEN that the Planning and Environmenlal Commission of the Town of
Vail will hold a public hearing in accordance with Section 12-3-6 of the Municipal Code of the
Town of Vail on August 13, 2001, at 2:00 P.M. in the Town of Vail Municipal Building. In
consideration of:
A staff report on an approval of a minor amendmeni to SDD #5, Vail Run, to allow for the
remodel of an egress staircase, located at 1000 Lionsridge Loop/Lot C-11, Lions Ridge Filing 1.
Applicant: Vail Run Resorl Community Association, Inc.Plannec Brent Wilson
A requesl for a variance from Section 12-6D5 ("Lot Area and Site Dimensions"), Vail Town
Code, and a final review of a minor subdivision located at 3834 and 3838 Bridge Road/ Lots 11
& 12, Bighom Subdivision 2nd Addition.
Applicant:
Plannen
Gary Weiss, represented by Steve Riden, Architect
Ann Kjerulf
A request for a variance from Section 12-6D5 ("Lot Area and Site Dimensions"), Vail Town
Code, and a final review of a minor subdivision located at 3816 and 3826 Lupine Drive and 3828
Bridge Road/ Lots 8, 9, & 10, Bighorn Subdivision 2nd Addition.
Applicant: Jeff Dahl and June Frazier, represented by Steve Riden, Architect
Planner: Ann Kjerulf
A request for a variance from Title 14 (Development Standards) Town Code, to allow for
improvements to an existing residential private drive, located at 1450 Buffehr Creek Road/Lot 2,
Cliffside Subdivision.
Applicant Mike YoungPlannen Brent Wilson
A request for a final review and recommendation lo the Vail Town Council of proposed text
amendments to the Vail Town Code, Chapler 12-61, Housing Zone District, and Chapter 12-2,
Definitions, lo allow for additional uses and to amend definitions in regard thereto.
Applicant: Town of VailPlannen Allison Ochs
A request for the final review of a major amendment to Special Development District #6, Vail
Village Inn, to allow for the redevelopment of an existing hotel, located at 100 East Meadow
- I Drive, Lots M and O, Block 5-D, Vail Village 1"' Filing..|}--ar
.mpplicant: Daymer Corporation, represenled by Jay PetersonI Piinn"r: ee-orge Ruther
A reouest for a final review and a recommendation to the Vail Town Council on the Town of
Vail's proposed Meadow Drive streetscape improvement project, located at EasUWest Meadow
Drive, Vail Village.
Applicant: Town of Vail
Planner: George Ruther
--,/
.' .:1-',..,.... /
rli
D ept tment S C ommuity D atel op ment
75 Sowh Frontage Road
YaiI, Colorado 81657
toll 3aa1fe1d
Tallgnann Gonilonl-niuo Associatior
52 East ileadov llrive
Vail, Colorado 81657
tt rccrctao t*r*
/
WAMEDi Used trompollne ond frome.
Neods fo be in qood (usoble) condi
tion. coll Mike ot 627,9304.
BUSINESS BROKERS
BT'\,ING OR SELLINC?
PLEASE CALL ED MALLETT
(B70l926-7990
BOX 1427 - EDWARDS, CO 81632
2000 Dodoe Duronqo XLT. Greol con-
dition, 50K CD pfover A/C. Power
Packoqe.Coll 47ffi349
1999 Ford Raueer XLT SDort
4.0 L 5 Speed, 4-WD, Green wifh ton
inlerior, CO.32K mlles, Exlended
Wononry
Coll476-5556.
A FOUND OR LOST PET? Coll The Lost
Pet lnicrmotion Center 24 hours oer
doy, 7 doys per week Toll tree: l€77-
38G9704.
Public Notice
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN thal oursuant
to the COLORADO LIQUOF COOE lN i9S5, as
anenclod July 1, 1997, the Vail Valley Tourism
and Corwenlion Bureau, ligdng the bllowing olft-
cers: Frank Johnson, Presi@nt. 5165 M€in Gors
Dn_ve Vail, Colofado 81657 and Joe Blair, Sp€-
clal Events Manag€r, 4041 Blghorn Road #A1O,
Vail. Colorado 816i7. filed witli the Local Llcens-
ing Adhority lor th6 Tovrn ol Vall on July 9, 2001
an applica on for a Special Events Permit tor e
Malt, Vhous and Spiituous Liquor, al lhs loca-
tion o{ Vail Villag€, Vail, Colorado on Salurdry,
S6pt6mbor 8, 2001 and Sunday, Septdmb€r 9,
2001 faom 8:00 a.m. to 9:0O p.m. each day-
Maillng addrese of th€ apdbarn is 100 Easl
Meado O ve. Vail. Cololado 81657.
A puuic heling on this application will be
helj betore tlE Locai Llc€n6ing Authority b{ the
Town ot Vall in lho Councll Chambers ol Ihe Vail
Municipal Buildrng.75 Soulh Frontag€ Foad,
Vail, Colorado, on Wednosday, Arrgusl 8, 2001,
10:00 a.m. Potitions, remon5lranc€s, notions,
anil olher inslruments mav bo liled with tho Au-
thority by submltting sami lo the Town Clert in
person or by mall.
Mailing addresa ol lhe Local Licenging Au.
thorily is 75 South Frontag€ Ro8d, Vail, Colorado
81657.
Any hter€sted party mry app6ar at said pu$
hc hearing to b€ heard lor or againsl lhe gra ing
TOWN OF VAIL
LOCAL LICENSING AIJTHORITY
Lorelei Donaldson
Town Cterk and
Secretary to lhe Aulhority
Publlshed in ThE Vaii Trarl
on July 27, 2001
Public Notice
NOTICE lS HEREBY GIVEN that pursoant
to trle COIORADO LIQUoR CODE lN 193s. as
amendecl July 1, 1997, tre Va,l Alpine Ga'den
Foundalion, lsllrg the following ofllcsrs: Ry
Soulhard, Presrdent and Ewnl Monagpr, 22 cot
lonwood Road Avon. Colorado 81620, lil€d wrth
th€ Local Liconsno Authorltv lor the Town ot Vail
on July 5, 2001,-an apph;atim l't a Spooal
Ev€nts Permlt/Malt, Vlnous and Spirituous Liq-
uor, at ihs locatidr ol Lower B6nch ot Ford Park,
Vail, Colofado on Saturday, Sopl€mber 8,2001,
from 12:o0 p,m. to 9:o0 p.m.
Marlind addres6 ol ihe aDDlbanr rs 183 Goro
cr6€k DriG. vail. colorado ei657.
A public h€aring oo this application will b€
h€ld b€fore the Local Li,censino Aulhoritv lot the
Town of Vail in the Council Chimbe.s o{ r|e Vall
Munlcipal Eurlding, 75 South Frontage Boad.
vall, Colorado, on Wednesday, Augusl 8.2001,
10:00 a.m. Pelltlons, aenonslranc€a, molions,
ard other irtsliumenls may b€ filgd with lhe Au-
thority by sobmitling ssme to lhe Todn Clsrk in
percon or by mail.
Mailino address ot the Local Lia,€nsino Au-
thority b 75 Sodh Frontag€ Road, vall. Col6rado
81657.
Any Inleresl€d part lhay appear al said pub.
lic hearing lo be heard for or agarnsl lh€ granling
TOWN OF VAIL
LOCAL LICENSING AUTHORITY
Lorelei Donald5on
To,vn Clork and
secr€trry to tl6 Authodly
Publi8t|ed in The Vall Trail
on Julv 27. 20Oi
Public Notice
A oublic hganno on this apDllcElron will b€
h€H bribre lhe Locil Licensino Au|horitv lor h€
Town ot vall in tF Council Chimb€rs of ft6 v€il
lvlunlclpal Bulldlhg,- Soulh Frontag€ Fload,
vail, Colorado, on Wednosday, Augud a, 2001,
10:00 a.m, P6titon9, aemonslranc€q molions,
and olher lnatrum€fils mav bo tiled with th€ A(}
rs.3'g:&Hil""ffi;-;
8't657.
Any inlerested party may appoar at said pub-
lic hearing to ba head fcr or agalnst the grantlng
of ssid lioengo.
TOWN OF VAIL
LOCAL LICENSING AIITHORITY
Lor€ldi Donaldson
Torrn Clerk and
S€cretary to lhe Adhority
Pudished in The Vaii?alt
on July 27,2001
Public Notice
NOTICE lS HEREBY GIVEN lhat the Design
Revi€w Boad of ths Town of Vail will hold a Dub-
lic hearing on August 1, 2001 at 3:00 p.n. in lhe
To,vn of Vail Municipal Buildino.
The applications and inicrmation atout the
proposals ar6 avarlable br public inspection dur
ino reoular olfic€ hours in the ordscl planne/s ol-fi& l;at€d et the Torvn of Vail Cornmunitv D€-
volcpment D€partmont, 75 Soulh Frontage hoad
The public is invit€d lo attsnd projecl odenlation
and the site visits lhat pr€ced€ the public hearing
in the Torn ol Vail Communitv Dovelopmenl D€.
parthenl. Plqaso call 47$21_38 for Inlormalion.
Sion lanouaoe lhteroretalion available uoofl re-
qulsl wifh z-+hour ;otlication. Pl€ase call 47$
2356, T€lephone br t\e H€aring lmpaired, lor il}
ftsrmatlon.
TOWN OF VAIL
DEPAFTMENT OF
COMMUNITY OEVELOPMENT
Published ln The Vail Trail
on July 27, 2001
Public Notice
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN IhAI $O PIAN-
nino and Environri€r{al Commission ot Iho Tdmof wll hob a D[bllc hgarino in acco(bnc€
with S€cdon 12-36 of lh€ Municioal Cado ol th€
To,v,r ot Vail on Auongt 13. 2m1. ai 2i00 p.m. in
dl€ To{n ol Veil M'fup.| &ilding. In co(rairora-
tion of:
A sirlt ropoal od an EFrolrel d a minor
rmodment lo SDD*s. \h|l Run. lo allcrv tor ih€
rffrodol of an oorsss stlircase localod al lo00
Lid|6dlg6 LooFrIot C-11, Llor|3 Ridg€ Filing-.
Appllcant Vall Run Fegorl Community Agse
da{on, Inc.
Plenn€r: BrE lvibo.l
A r€qu6t b( a Erianoe lrom Sadon 12d>
5 Clot A€a €rd Slt Dirno.dord), vail To/n
Coda, rnd e fnal Erd€vr ol a minq auffivi8iixl
loc.bd d 3834 dd 3A$ B.ibp Rodl-ol8 lt{d 12, Biohom $ndh,hbc 2rd ldddofi.
ApDlkE r: Gary $Hrs, rerr! nLd by S16t/oRir4 Archrel
Ph'l||.r Ar|.| Ki0n
A r.q|..t b r strE tqn Ssdd| l26D
5 CLot Arr! rt|d Silg Dln n h.t1, l/.ll Tottt
Code, and a linal revie\r ot a minor subdivFion
locat€d at sal 6 and 3828 Luoin€ Driw and 3828
Bridge Roadl-ots 8, I and 10, Bighorn Subdivi-
sion, 2nd Addilion.
Applicant Jefi Dahl and Jun€ Frazier repre-
sented by Steve Riden, Architect
Planner: Ann Kj€mll
A reouesl for a vadanc€ ffom Title |4 lD6vel-
opment Standards) Tor,/n Cod6, to allos/ tor im-
o,ov€ments to an existino resd€ntr€l Drlvate dri!€
iocated al t450 Butfehrtrook Foad/Lot 2, Clitt-
side Subdivision.
Applicant: Mike \6ung
Planner: Brent wilson
A request icr a linal review and rccommen-
dation to the Vail Town Council of proposod texl
amendments to th6 vailTown Cod6, Chapter 12-
6i. Housino Zone Dislr'cl. and ChaDter 1-2. DolF
nrircns. 1o -allow icr addrtional uses and lo amond
d€linitdns in regafd lhereto.
ADolicant Town ol Vail
Planner; Allisoo fuis
A r€quest tor lhe fnal rsvi€w of a major
amondrnent to Sp€cial Developmo District *6,
Vatl Village Inn, to allow for lhe fed€veloprnent of
an exEtino holei localed at 100 Easl Meadow
Driw, Lota M and O, Bloch tD, Vall Village lst
Filind.-Applicsnt Daym€r Corporation r6pre6ent€d
bv Jav Psterson' Plann€r: ceo.ge Rulher
A reau€dt for a final rcMew and a t€commsn-
dalion to tho Vail Town Council on lhs Town ol
Vails propoGed Mgaclo Ddve streelscap€ im-
provement projecl locsted at EastMesi Moadow
Ddw, Vail Vlllag6.
Appljcant Tolvn c, Vail
Planne.: George Ru!|er
A r€ouest br a final re\riew and rBcorntlron'
dation lo ihe Vail Town Councll of propo€€d toxr
amendmenlg to th€ VailTown Cod€, Chaptgr 12-
7H & I, Lionsh€ad MbGd Us€ 1 and Liorch€ad
Mlx€d Use 2, to amend rhe regulaibns regarding
colhmercial ski stoEge and to am€nd Chapt€r l.
2, D€finilions, and sdltinq iorlh details in fogards
ther6to.
Applicanl: To n of Vail
Planner Allison Ochs
A reou€61 br a recomneodalion lo lhe Town
Council lor the adootlon ol lwo view contdors
will$n Uonshead, as idenlified within th€ Lions-
h€ad Fed6/6lopmeni Masler Plan. View Corridor
1 i6 locsted apporimsiely al lhe main psdsslrion
6xil lookino southwest toward6 th€ Gondola In
line. view tomdor 2 is locat€d appoximel€ly
from lh6 gedesrian pl€za at the easl €rd of th€
Ljftlmus€ Lodg6 looting souh up th6 Gondola liff
lin€. A rnor6 sp€cfic l€gal de6criplion of the two
vi€w corri(brs ls on fil€ at the Commt nity D€v€l-
opment Departmont.
Applicant Torrn o{ Vail
Planngr: Allltoi Ochs
A requegt k|. a final revie{, ol fie propos€d
pafting manag€mont plan lor tho vail GatEway
locared al 12 Vall Road,/Dorlions ot Lols O and N,
Bbck 5D. vail Vdlaoo l st Filhq.
Applicent Mointain Owners, LP ropresgnt'
ed b{, Braun Assoclale6
Plaitrler: Allison Och6
Tho applicalions aad inlo.matoi abod th€
proposals are av€ilable br public in9ection duF
ino reoular ofnc€ hours In the oroiecl Dlann€/s ol-
fic; l&stod at rhe Tos,n ol Vail Communily D€-
v€lopment D€parlm€nt, 75 South Fronlaga Boad.
Th€ puHic ls lrvited lo ationd prciect od€detion
ar$ tE sha vldls fial p|Ec€de fio pu$r,' healing
in the lown ol Varl Communiry D€velopm€nt D€-
oanmenl Pleas€ .all 479-2138 b. information.
Slon lanouao€ int€rDretation avalleble upon re-
ouia wifr zi+our notitication. Ploaso car 479.
2356, Tdephone br ihe Fl€aring lmpahed. ior in-
formalion.
TO/VN OF VAIL
DEPAFTMENT OF
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
Publish€d ln The vail Tlail
on July 27,2001
Public Notice
NOTICE lS HEREBY GIVEN lhal pursuanl
ro the COLOF(ADo LIOUOR CODE lN 1sos. as
am€nded July 1, 1997, th€ Vail Valley ToLrrism
ard convonli Bursau, listinq the followng offi-
cers: Frank Johnson. Presldent 5165 Mdn Goro
Drive, Vail, Colorado 81657 and Joe Blalr, Spe-
cial Evants Manag€r. 4041 Bigholn Road +410,
Vail Colorsdo 81657. lil€d with lhe Local Llcen6-
ing Authority for th6 T(rwn ot Vail on July 9. 2001.
an applicatlon iir a Special Ewnts Fermit for a
Malt, Vinous and Spirituous Liquor, al tho loca-
tion ol Lionshead Village. Vail, Colorado on
Thursdav. SeDlember 6. 20Ol lrom 9:00 a.m.lo
10:00 p.m, and Fdday, Sept€mbr 7, 2001 trom
9:00 a.rn. to 10:00 o.m- €ach dav
Maiting addreas of rhe apdlicanr is 100 East
l\readow Ddve, Vail, Colorado 81657.
A public hgaing ori this application will be
h€ld before the Local Urens|ng Authority tcr the
]own of Varl in lhe Council Ch3rnb6ls of tte Vail
Municlpal Buildrng, 75 South Frontage Road,
Vail. Colorado. on Wednesday. Augusl 8.2OO1.
10:00 a.m. Pelitions. r€monstranc€s, molions,
and olh€r insrum€nls may b€ lil8d wlth lhg Au'
thority by submitting samo to the Town Clerk in
Detson or Dv ma .
Mailino addrese ol lhe Local Licensinq Au-
lhonty is 75 So.nh Frontao€ Road, vail. Col6rado
81657.
Any interesled parly may appear at said pub-
lic heaing to b€ h6ard fo, or againsl the grafiing
of 6aid licens6-
TOWN OF VAIL
LOCAL LICENSING AUTHORIry
Lorelei Domldson
Town Clelk and
Socrotaryto the Alihority
Publlshod in Th€ Vail Trail
on Julv 27. 2001
Public Notice
ADVERTISEI'EI{T FOR EIDS
Fo.d P!a* Padealdan
Brldge RapLcern€nt
vall. Coldado
S€aled bids will b9 reoiv€d by the Town of
Vail (Otvnqr) at the Publlc works Admlnlstralion
Buildino. 1300 Elkhom Ddve. Vail. Colorado
81657 -untll 10:00 ..m., lerl iinro, Frid.y, Arlguat 17, 20Ol tor the Ford Park Pedestrian
B dg€ B€placemem Projecl, at which lime all
Bi& will b9 publidy opened and read aloud.
Th6 constftrclion wo* nclud€6: Tho t€moval
of the existng bruge and conslrucling n€w abd-
m6nls wilh a llmbff bri(b€ Also includsd in lho
wotl( i5 orovidno a stmeieoeer to the new aour'
menl aid wing_wells, insta4ing a new m€chani-
cally stebilized eanh $,all, trsil gradin+and plac-
ing n€w concrgie sid6walk in the r6-grad€d laall
locallong and aDDloaclE6.
All Bid6 shiril be ln acco.darce with lh6 Con-
tlact Docum€nts with Tochnical Specifcalions,
$,hich mey b obtarmd on ondry, Jury qr,
2()01 lrom the Town ol Vail. Puuic Works Acknan-
istration Building, l3og Elkhom Driw, Vail, Colo-
rado 81 657. (970) 479-21 5a
A mandalory probid m*ting will be held on
Monday, Argoat 6, A)01 d 11:00 a.m. al th€
Public Works Administratlon Euilding at 1309 Elk-
horn Drive. Vall. Coloredo.
Wo* al lh€ 6ite is lo commence wilhln len
day6 atl€r the dat€ of th€ Nolic€ lo Proc€ed. Ap-
proximal€ stanlng date rs S€Dtembsr 17, 2001 or
as woalher and sile co.ditions permil. Sub$an-
tlal Complotion shall be by Novembor t6, 2001.
Bid secrlritv in tho amounl ol 57o ot ihe lolal Bid
must acclirDary each Bkl.
No Bid hai bo withdrawo $/ hin a period of
lhl.ry (30) daya alier th€ oato esrablished lbf
op€nlng Bifu.
The Own4 ros€rv€s tho rlgl l,o rqocl Eny
and all Bits, lo waive inhfmalilles, and to r€jecl
noncontoming, nonbspongv€ oa conditionalBds
Crrn*;*
By. Tom Kassriol, PE
Ptoj€cl Enginoer
(970) 479-2169
Publict|€d in Tne Vdl Trail
on July 27 and Auguit 3, 2001
Public r.lt"
I{OTICE OF SALE
OF AAA DONED GOOI'S
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN thal a sale wiH
be held Dursuar{ to Tltle 38 21 5-101 cRs 1973,
a9 amend€d, on or after August 15, 20Ol al
10:00 a.m. at 41458 High$/ay 6E24, Eegl€-Vail.
Colorgdo. The prop€rty to b€ so|d ls located in
th€ lollowlng unils:
unit 0275
J. Scott Pogg€npohl, PO Box 1498, vall,
ColorEdo 81658 - Fan. box€a labl€. chak and
poslets
fhe propeny will be gold to lhe higfEst bi+
d6r br cagh and musl be remov€d within 3 days
ol lhe dale of tho sale. All ilems must b€ remo\€d
and the unil broom swept. s6d6d bids. Any un-
reasonablo bids can b€ rofused. Paymsni must
D€ CaSn.
VAIL SELF STOFAGE
By: oonna Cupples
R€sid€nl Manag€r
Publlshod in Th6 Val Trail
on July20 and 27, 2001
..::-i
-- --..:l ..
1993 CHRYSLER ICI/VN & CoUNTRY:
AWD. minl-von. New enoine, leolher
seats, oir S790O. Coll NonC-y or Je(v ot
476{r 89.
I989 HONDAACCORD LXi
Coll 32&7245 (doy6) or
92627s8 (nights)
1989 JEEP CHEROKEE: 119,000 miles. olr
condilionlng, one owner, troler hiich,
blke rock greot condlllon. 53900. Coll
Longmonl, (303) 48$5986,
!
-fi
--.
ALCOHOI,ICS ANOIIIYMOUS: For a listing of meeting places and
times. olease call 476{572.
ef lr'pnocmu: Family and friends of alcoholics are wel
! For information and meeting times please call 949-8002.
CANGER SIJPPORT GROUP: For inforrnation call 845-9941,
479-0894 or 926-3210
GAY & LESBIAI\I CIOIJP EVENT UPDAIE; For information
page 845-1783 or e-mail skiglov@ahoo.com or mail Box 4654;
Vail, Colorado 81658.
NARCOTICS ANONYITOUS: Meets on Mondays at 8 p.m. at the
Gracious Savious Lutheran Church in Edwards.
OVEREAfERS ANONYIIOUS: Meets every Wednesday from 6:30
to 7:30 p.m. at the Avon Public Library. Call 926-04&t.
THE BUDDIES PROGRA.III: Adult mentoring youth ages 6 to 17
in Eagle County. Be a friend, be a mentor, be a BUDDY! To
volunteer or refer a child, please call 949-7097.
PARENTS OF MULTIPLE SUPPORA For information, contact
Melanie at 32&4400 or Liz at 524-1357.
P-FLAC (Parents, Family and Frlcnds of l*sbians and Gays): A
confidential support group which meets the third Wednesday
of each month at 7 p.m. Call (970) 262-0609.
24-HOUR CRISIS LINE: Their mission is to help end family
violence. If you need io talk, need emergency shelter services,
please call the 24-hout phone line at 949-7086.
WINGS: Programs and services for adult survivors of childhood
sexual abuse. For more information or volunteer opportunities,
contact the Wings offce at (303) 238-8660 or (800) 373-8671.
THE CIIILD CARE RESOURCE AND REFERRAJ,: Having
problems finding quality child care, issues or interested in
becoming a licensed provider? A program of the Resource
Center of Eagle County. Call (877) 963-6779.
SNOI^tBOArut OUTREACH SOCIETY: This group is looking for
volunteers to help out with a youth development program. If
interested, please call 845-7040 or visit their web site,
www.sosoutreach,org
FIBROIIIYALGIA SUPPORT GROUP: Meets on the second
Monday of each month at 7 p,rn For more information, call
47S.5r05.
THE RED RIBBON PROJECft The HIV/AIDS organization for
Eagle County. They are also collecting winter coats, hats and
gloves for the homeless. Call 827-5900 or e-mail them at
red-ribbon3roject@ahoo,com
SINGLE PARENTS SUPFORT CROUR Meets every second and
fourth Wednesday of each month at Peppers R€staurant in
Edwards. Stryport and education and free childcare during
group provided,
Wont lo see o movie, go ouf on fhe
lown, or enioy o dinnel ol one of
lhe volley's gleol lesfoulonts?
Check it out in our SCENE MAGAZINEI
Locoted every weBk inskJe The Voil Troil
PICK UP YOUR FREE COPY TODAY!
Squsre, Vail, Colorado.4.lsoptemb€r 12, 13, 14,H'il';T*.tlH:'J"#
V6il, Colorado I1658.
..S THE vAn. TnAn- / Ju-v 27 - Ar:cusr 2.2oor
TO:
MEMORANDUM
Planning and Environmental Gommission
Department of Gommunity Development
August 13,2001
A request for a final review and recommendation of a major amendment,
to allow for the proposed redevelopmenl of the Vail Village Inn, Phase lV,
within Special Development Dislrict No. 6, and a conditional use permit,
to allow for the operation of a fractional fee club in the Public
Accommodation Zone District, located at 100 East Meadow Drive/Lots M,
N, & O, Block 5-D, Vail Village First Filing.
Applicant: Waldir Prado, Daymer CorporationPlanner: George Ruther
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
I- INTRODUCTION
The applicant, Waldir Prado, d.b.a. Daymer Corporation, represented by Jay Peterson,
is proposing to redevelop the Vail Village Inn, located at 100 East Meadow Drive. This
new applicant has been submitted in response to an alleged error in the publicalion for a
previous meeting. The proposal that has been submitted is identical to the previous
proposal that the Town of Vail Planning & Environmental Commission, Design Review
Board and Vail Town Council reviewed and approved in 1999/2000. The approved
development plan is illustrated pursuant to the documenls and plans adopled on May 2,
2000, upon second reading of Ordinance No. 4, Series of 2000.
The applicant has submitted an application to the Town of Vail Community Development
Department for review and consideration of a major amendment to Special Development
District No. 6, Vail Village Inn. The major amendment application proposes changes to
the existing approved development plan and is intended 10 facilitate the redevelopmenl
ol the existing Vail Village Inn, Phase lV Condominiums and allow for the construction ol
the Vail Plaza Hotel. The current proposal amends Phase lV of the Vail Village lnn
Plaza only. No amendments are proposed to Phases l-lll or V of the Vail Village lnn.
A summary of the proposal is described in detail in the memorandum lrom the Town of
Vail Gommunity Development Department to the Planning & Environmenlal Commission
daled February 28, 2000 and the Town of Vail public records.
The applicant has identified what he believes to be public benefits that will continue to be
realized by the Town as a result of the Vail Plaza Hotel redevelopment. The public
benefits associated with the hotel proposal are:
o
a
a
An increase in the annual occupancy rate through the redevelopment of an older,
exisling hotel.
The creation of approximately 10,500 square feel of new conference and meeting
room facilities.
The implementation of the revised Town of Vail Streetscape Master Plan
improvements along Vail Road, the South Frontage Road and a portion of East
Meadow Drive.
The re-investmenl and redevelopment of resort property in the Town ol Vail.
The implementation of the development goals, objectives and policies adopted by
the Town for the Vail Village Inn property.
A significant increase in the Town's supply of short-term, overnight accommodation
lo serve our guesls and visitors.
The conslruclion of a world-class "anchor" hotel providing a high-level of guest
services and amenities.
A potentially sizeable annual contribution to the Town's declining sales tax revenue.
II. DESCRIPTION OF THE REQUEST
Major Amendment Request
The applicant, Daymer Corporation, represented by Jay Peterson, has submitted a
request for a final review and recommendation of a proposed a major amendment,
pursuant to Chapter 9 ol the Town of Vail Zoning Regulation, to Special Development
District No. 6, Vail Village Inn. The purpose of the major amendment is to amend the
approved development plan to allow for the construction of the Vail Plaza Hotel in Phase
lV of the District.
The applicanl is proposing signilicant improvemenls to Phase lV of the Vail Village Inn
Special Development District. The existing hotel and restaurant are proposed to be
demolished to allow for the new construction of the Vail Plaza Hotel. The hotel is
intended to be a mixed-use development including residential, commercial and
recreational uses. The applicant is proposing lo construcl 99 new accommodation unils
(hotel rooms) ranging in size from approximately 350 sq. ft. to 370 sq. ft. per unit, 50
part-time fraclional fee club units, 18 employee housing units (38 beds) and 1 free-
market condominium. The fractional fee club unils are considered part-time, since
during the summer months the hotel will retain ownership of the units to rent as short-
term accommodation units, and then during the winter months (approximately 24 weeks)
the units will be sold as fractional fee club units. The Vail Plaza Hotel also includes two
restaurants, 4,047 square feet of accessory retail located within the hotel and along the
pf aza, a 1 5,338 square foot conference facility, a 24,799 square foot f ull-service spa and
health club facility and approximately 249 new underground parking spaces.
The approximate total gross square footage of the new hotel is 379,857 square feet.
The following is an approximate square footage breakdown of the various uses within
the hotel:
* 62,816 sq. ft. - fractional fee club units* 5,499 sq. ft. - condominium
* 35,818 sq. ft. - accommodalion units.1. 6,332 sq. ft. - employee housing units* 8,375 sq. ft. - reslauranUretail{. 15,1 30 sq. fl. - conlerence/meeting rooms* 24,817 sq. fl. -spa/health club* 22'1 ,070 sq. ft. - common area (mechanical, maid closets, stairs/hallways, parking,
office,lobby, etc.)
379,857 sq. ft. gross building square footage
A complete set of reduced plans has been provided.
III. STAFF RECOMMENDATION
The Community Development Department is recommending approval of the applicant's
request for a major amendment to Special Development District #6 to allow for
redevelopment of Phase lV of the Vail Village Inn. Staff's recommendalion for approval
is based upon the review of the criteria outlined in Section V of the memorandum dated
February 28, 2000. The staff believes that the proposal is in general compliance with the
nine design criteria as identified in the memorandum.
Again, in reviewing the proposal, staff identified a number of pros and cons that we
believe are associated with the hotel proposal. The list includes, but is not limited to, the
following:
PROS
. The presence of economic redevelopment in Vail.o An increase to the Town's supply of hotel beds and an increased level of quality.. The implementation of the Town's development goals, objectives, and policies.o The creation of new, deed restricted employee housing to offset the housing impacts
associated with lhe hotel.. The elimination of an unsightly surface parking lot.. The completion of the final phase of the Vail Village Inn Special Development
District.. The construction of new conference and meeting room facilities within the Town.. The construction of public improvements funded with private dollars.. The potential increases in sales tax revenue.r An increased amounl ol public open space.r An improved and updated loading/delivery facility which is relocated from Vail Road.. The provision of 18 on-site employee housing units.
CONS
. Increased vehicular traffic on Vail Hoad.r Deviations from the underlying zoning development standards are required.o The bulk and mass of the new hotel is significantly greater than the sizes of buildings
presently on the development site.. There are increased impacts of shading on public areas.
. The conference and meeting room facilities are potentially under-sized.r Additionalviews of Vail Mountain from public areas will be negatively impacted.. Only a portion of the dilapidated plaza paver surface is being replaced and improved.. Increased loading/delivery truck traffic on Town streets.. There is only a marginal net increase of lrue accommodation units over what exists
today.. An eighteen to twenty-four month conslruction process (noise, construction traffic,
etc).
Should the Planning & Environmental Commission choose to recommend approval of
the requested major amendment to the Vail Town Council, staff would recommend that
the Commission make the lollowing finding: ,,, l6rst_tc-il
"That the proposed major amendmbnt to Special Development District #6, Vail
Village lnn, complies with the ni4e design criteria outlined in Sedion 12-94-8 of
the Town of Vail Municipal Codp. The applicant, as required, has demonstrated
to the satisfaction of the&nndssiatthat any adverse effects of the requested
deviations from the development standards of the underlying zoning are
outuleighed by the public benefits provided or has demonstrated that one or more
of the development standards is not applicable, or that a practical solution
consistent with the public interest has been achieved. Further, the Commission
finds that the requested conditional use permit to allow for the operation of a
fractional fee club complies with the applicable criteria and is consistent with the
development goals and objectives of the Town, Lastly, public notice of this public
hearing has been sent to adjacent property owners and published in a local
newspaper of record in accordance with Section 12-3-6C of the Town Code.'
Should the Planning & Environmental Commission choose to recommend approval of
the requested major amendment, staff would recommend that the approval carry with it
lhe following conditions:
1. That the Developer submits detailed civil engineering drawings of the required off-
site improvements (street lights, drainage, curb and gutter, sidewalks, grading, road
improvements, etc.) as identilied on the off-site improvements plan to the Town of
Vail Public Works Department for review and approval, prior lo application for a
building permit.
2. That the Developer submits a detailed final landscape plan and final architectural
elevations for review and approval of the Town ol Vail Design Review Board, prior to
application for a building permit.
3. The sdd approval time requiremenls and limitations of Section 12-94-12 shall apply
to this major amendment and, in addition, the phasing of the construction of the hotel
shall not be permitted.
4. That the Developer submits the following plans to lhe Department of Community
Development, for review and approval, as a parl of the building permit application for
the hotel:a. An Erosion Control and Sedimentation Plan:b. A Construction Staging and Phasing Plan;
c. A Stormwater Management Plan;d. A Site Dewatering Plan;ande. A Tratfic Control Plan.
5. That the Developer receives a conditional use permit to allow for the construction of
Type lll Employee Housing Units in Phase lV of the District, in accordance wilh
Chapter '12-16, prior to the issuance of a building permit, to provide housing on-site.
6. That the Developer submits a complete set of plans to the Colorado Depanment of
Transportation for review and approval of a revised access permit, prior to
application for a building permit.
7. Thal lhe Developer meets with the Town staff to prepare a memorandum of
understanding outlining the responsibilities and requirements ol the required off-site
improvements, prior to second reading of an ordinance approving lhe major
amendment.
8. That the Developer submits a complete set of plans responding to the design
concerns expressed by Greg Hall, Director of Public Works & Transportation, in his
memorandum to George Ruther, dated 12l13/99. The drawings shall be submitled,
reviewed and approved by the Town Engineer, prior to final Design Review Board
approval.
9. That the Developer records public pedestrian easements belween the hotel and the
Phase lll Condominiums, between the hotel and the Phase V Building, and along the
Vail Road frontage. The easements shall be prepared by the Developer and
submitted for review and approval of the Town Attorney. The easements shall be
recorded with the Eagle County Clerk & Recorder's Office prior to the issuance of a
Temporary Certificate of Occupancy.
10. That the Developer records a deed-restriction, which the Town is a party to, on the
Phase lV property prohibiting the public use of the spa facility in the hotel. Said
restriction may be revoked if the Developer is able to demonstrale to the satisfaction
of the Town thal adequate provisions for vehicle parking have been made to
accommodate the public use of the spa. The reslriction shall be recorded prior to the
issuance of a building permit.
11. That the Developer submits a final exterior building malerials lisl, a typical wall' sections, architectural details and a complete color rendering for review and approval
of the Design Review Board, prior to making an application for a building permil.
12. That the Developer submits a comprehensive sign program proposal for the Vail
Plaza Hotel for review and approval of lhe Design Review Board, prior to the
issuance of a Temporary Certificate of Occupancy.
13. That the Developer submits a roof-lop mechanical equipment plan {or review and
approval of the Design Review Board prior to the issuance of a building permit. All
roof-top mechanical equipment shall be incorporated into the overall design of the
hotel and enclosed and screened from public view.
14. That the Developer posts a bond with the Town of Vail to provide financial security
forthe 125% of the tolal cost of the required off-site public improvements. The bond
shall be in place wilh the Town prior to the issuance of a building permil.
15. That the Developer installs bollards or similar safety devices at the intersection of the
delivery access driveway and the sidewalk along the South Frontage Road to
prevent conflicls between pedestrians and vehicles, prior to the issuance of a
Temporary Certilicate of Occupancy.
16. That the Developer sludies and redesigns the entrance on the north side of the hotel
across from the entrance to the Gateway Building to create a more inviting entrance
or a design that redirects pedestrians to another entrance. The final design shall be
reviewed and approved by the Design Review Board prior to the issuance of a
building permit.
17. That the Developer coordinales elforts with lhe owners of the Galeway Building lo
creale a below ground access for loading and delivery to the Gateway from lhe Vail
Plaza Hotel to resolve poiential loading and delivery concerns at the Gateway. lf a
coordinated effort can be reached the Developer shall submit revised plans to the
Town of Vail Community Development Departmenl for review and approval, prior to
lhe issuance of a building permit.
18. That the Developer revises the proposed floor plans lor the Vail Plaza Holel to
provide freight elevator access to the lowest level of the parking structure. The
revised plans shall be submitted to the Town of Vail Community Development
Department for review and approval prior to the issuance of a building permit.
[9.]Thal the Developer redesigns the proposed elevator tower to create an architecturalt fealure atop the lower and revises the proposed building elevalions and roof plan
prior to final review of the proposal by the Design Review Board. The Board shall
review and approve the revised design.
20. That the Developer, in cooperation with the Town of Vail Public Works Department
design and construct a left-turn lane on Vail Road and reconfigure lhe landscape
island in lhe South Frontage Road median to eliminate left-turns from the
loading/delivery. The construction shall be completed prior to the issuance of a
Temporary Certif icate of Occupancy.
21. That the Developer provides a centralized loadingidelivery facilily for the use of all
owners and lenants within Special Development District No. 6. Access or use of the
facility shall not be unduly restricted for Special Development Dislrict No. 6. The
loading/delivery lacilily, including docks, berths, freight elevalors, service corridors,
etc., may be made available for public and/or private loading/delivery programs,
sanctioned by the Town of Vail, to mitigate loading/delivery impacts upon the Vail
Village loadingidelivery system. The use of the facility shall only be permitted upon a
finding by the Town of Vail and the Developer lhat excess capacity exists. The
Developer will be compensated by the Town of Vail ancl/or others for lhe common
use of the facility. The final determinalion of the use of lhe facility shall be mutually
agreed upon by the Developer and the Town of Vail.
22. Thal the Developer submits a written letter of approval from adjacent properties
whose property is being encroached upon by certain improvements resulting from
the construction of the hotsl, prior to the issuance of a building permit.
t-
VAIL PLAZAHOTEL
2OOO REVISED MAJOR: AMENDMENT
PROPOSAL
O Town of Vaii
Planning & Environmental Commission
February 28. 2000
o
Oomv OFVAIL
Department of Community Development
75 South Frontage Road
Vail, Colorado 81657
970-479-2 r 38
FAX 970-479-2452
o
Vail Plaza Hotel
Executive Summary
la2a00)
The Town of Vail Community Development Department ?nd the Public Works Depaftment, with the aid of
various otttside consuftanfs, have completed the review of the proposal for the redevelopment of the Vail
Plaza Hotel. Upon completion of your review, the Town staff is recommencling approval of the proposed
Wject. The staffs recommendation for apryval canies with it 22 conditions. The details of the *affs
recommendation and the recommended conditions can be found in Secfibn lll of this memorandum.
tn evaluating the proposa!, the Town staff relied upon the regutationg policies and guidetines oltttinect in
the vaious land-planning related documents adopted by the Town of Vail. Throughod the course ot the
development review process staff remained primarily focused on the technical aspects of the proposal.
The mafters of design and polhy were left up to the Town's Boards. A detailed naffative of the *affs
findings based upon the established review criteria is outlined in Secfion VII of this memorandum.
A complete breakdown and technical analysis of the proposal has been prepared. ln the Vail Plaza Hotel
Zonina Analvsis (revised A28/00) and the Vail Plaza Hotel Prooosal Comparison (revised T2il00), slaff
provides analysis and comparison of the various development slandards prescribed by the Zoning
Regulations and compares the figures of the 2000 goposal fo those of the 1999 apgoval and the 1998
proposal v,thich had been rejected by Town Council nearly one year agp. Also included in the analysis
documents are a Vail Plaza Hotel View Analysis, Vail P(aza Hotel Sun/Shade Analysis and a Vail Plaza
Hotel Paffing Analysis (revised 2n8/00). The purpose of these documents is to provide a comparison of
existing conditions .relative to proposed conditions should the hotel be constructed. Accompanying this
information is a/so a revised Vail Plaza Hotel Traffrc lmpact Report. The oiginal repoft had been
yepared for the 1998 Wposal. Slnce its original formulation, the report has been revised and
supplemented in response to changing canditions and requests of staff ancl others. Tre basic ftndings of
the report conclude that while the redeveloped hotel will have impacts of cwrent trafftc patterns, the
prcjected impac'ts can be successfu/Iy mitigated. Complete copies of fhese six reprts and other relevant
information have been provided ss exhibls and are found in the back of this memorandum.
Lastly, a hief overview of the development history of the Vail Viilage lnn Special Development District
has been Wpared. This overview is intended to provide a basic understanding of the proposed changes
that have occuned within the Distrid since its original adoption in 1976. me development history of the
Vail Village lnn is outlined in Secfion lV of this memorandum.
{g *rn""ro r^"*
VAIL PLAZA HOTEL
Staff Memorandum
enst0ol
TABLE OF CONTENTS
DESCBIPTION OF THE REOUESTS
Major Amendment to Speclal Development Dlstrlct
Conditional Use Permlt
il.STAFF RECOMMENDATION
Pros/Cons
Conditlons of Approval.,...
BACKGROUND 7A
A.
B.
A.
B.
lv.
v,
vl.
vlt.
PUBLIC ACCOMMODATION ZONE DISTRICT 8
0ZONING ANALYSIS
SPECIAL DEVELOPMENN DISTRICT MAJOR AMENDMENT PROCESS 10-11
ts.
D€slgn compatlbillty and senshlvity to the lmmediate environment, nelghborhood and adlacentproperties relallve to archltectural areslgn, scsle, bulk, bullding height, buffer zones, ldenfity,
bharacter, vlsual intsgrlty and orientati6n .......-.-.:....-....:.......11-13
Uses, actlvlty and densitywhlch provlde a compatible, efflclent and workable relationshlp wlth
surrounding uses and act|vhy....,,.....,...............:.....,....
Emolovee Houslno Reoulrement ...........1 4-15
Emplovee Houslnir Generatlon Analvsis 15-17
Compliance wlth parklng and loadlng requlrements as outlined in Ghapter 18.52. of the Town of Vall
't 3-14
D.Conformity whh the appllcable elements of the Vail Gomprehenslve Plan, Town pollcles and Urtan
Vall Land Use Plan
Vall Villaoe Deslqn Conslderatlons .............23.24
Urban Desiqn Conslderations. .....................24.30
Archltsct Landscspe Consldetatlons
Hentilication and miligatlon ol natural and/or Eeologic hazards that atfoct the property on which the
special development ilistrlct ls proposed........f-.......:-................. .............:.............,..,.,..,..40
Sile plan, bullding design and location and open space provisions deslgned to produce a functional
development responslve and senshlve to natural features, vegetatlon and ovsrell aesthetlc quality ol
A. clrcu.latlon system deslgned for both vehlcles and pedestrlans addresslng on and off-sh€ tralflc
Functlonal and sesthetlc landscaoino and
features, recreation, views and fuhctions..
open space In order to optimlze and praBerve natural
.................41 -42
Phaslng plan or subdlvlslon plan that wlll malntaln 6 workable, tunctlonal and stflclent lelatlonshlp
lhroughout lhs developm€nt of the sp€cial development d|strict..........,.,.... ..................42
GRITERfA AND F|ND|NGS FOR A CONDmOilAL USE pERilr............. ...-.--_.-4245
F.
41
I vu'
ATTACHMENT AA - L
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
MEMORANDUM
Planning and Environmenial Gommission
Department of Community Developmenl
February 28,2000
A request for a final review and recommendation of a major amendment, to allow
for the proposed redevelopment of the Vail Village Inn, Phase lV, within Special
Development District No. 6, and a conditional use permii, to allow for the
operation of a fraslional fee club in the Public Accommodation Zone Distrist,
located ai 100 East Meadow Drive/Lots M, N, & O, Block 5-D, Vail Mllage First
Filing.
Applicant: Waldir Prado, Daymer CorporationPlanner: George Ruther
,o
I. INTRODUCTION
The applicanl, Waldir Prado, d.b.a. Daymer Corporation, represented by Jay Peterson, is
proposing to redevelop the Vail Village lnn, located at 100 East Meadow Drive. The applicant
has submitted two applications to the Town of Vail Community Development Department for
review and consideration:
MaJ or A m e n d ment Reguesf
1) A request for a major amendment to Special Development District #6, Vail Village lnn.
The major amendment application proposes changes to the existing approved
development plan and is intended to facilitate the redevelopment of the existing Vail
Village Inn, Phase lV Condominiums and allow for the construction of the Vail Plaza
Hotel. The current proposal amends Phase lV of the Vail Village lnn Plaza only. No
amendmenls are proposed to Phases l-lll or V of the Vail Village Inn.
Conditional Use Permit Reguesf
2) A request for a conditional use permit, pursuanl to Chapter 16 of the Town of Vail Zoning
Regulations, to allow for the operation of a fractional fee club within the proposed Vail
Plaza Hotel. The fractional fee club will be comprised of 50 fractional fee club units
operated and managed by the owner of the Vail Plaza Hotel.
The applicant has identified what he believes to be public benefits which will be reaiized by the
Town as a result of the Vail Plaza Hotel redevelopment. The public benefits associated with the
hotel proposal are:
o. An increase in the annual occupancy rate through the redevelopment of an older, existing
hotel.r The creation of approximately 10,500 square feet of new conference and meeting room
faciliiies.o The implementation of the recommended Town of Vail Streetscape Master Plan
improvements along Vail Road, the South Fronlage Road and a portion of East Meadow
Drive.r The re-investmenl and redevelopment of resort property in the Town of Vail.r The implementation of the development goals, objectives and policies adopted by the Town
for the Vail Village Inn property.
o A significant increase in the Town's supply of short-term, overnight accommodation to serve
our guests and visitors.r The construclion of a world-class "anchor" hotel providing a high-level of guest services and
amenities.r A potenlially sizeable annual contribulion to the Town's declining sales tax nevenue.
II. DESCRIPTION OF THE REQUESTS
Maj or A mend ment Req u est
The applicant, Daymer Corporation, represented by Jay Peterson, has submilted two
development review applications to the Town of Vail Community Development. The first
application is a request for a final review and recommendation of a proposed a major
amendment, pursuanl to Chapter 9 of the Town of Vail Zoning Regulation, to Special
Development District No. 6, Vail Village Inn. The second request is for a conditional use permit
to allow for the operation of a fractional fee club. The purpose of the major amendment is to
amend the approved development plan to allow for the construction of the Vail Plaza Hotel in
Phase lV of the District.
The applicanl is proposing significant improvements to Phase lV of the Vail Village lnn Special
Development District. The existing hotel and reslaurant are proposed to be demolished to allow
for the new construction of the Vail Plaza Hotel. The hotel is intended to be a mixed-use
development including residential, commercial and recreational uses. The applicant is proposing
to construct 99 new accommodation units (hotel rooms) ranging in size from approximately 350
sq. ft. to 370 sq. ft. per unit, 50 part-iime fractional fee club units, 18 employee housing uniis (38
beds) and 1 free-markei condominium. The fractional fee club units are considered part-time,
since during the summer months the hotel will retain ownership of the units to rent as short-lerm
accommodaiion units, and then during the winter months (approximately 24.weeks) the units will
be sold as fractional fee club units. The Vail Plaza Hotel also includes two restaurants, 4,047
square feel of accessory retail located within the hotel and along the plaza, a 15,338 square foot
conference facility, a 24,799 square foot full-service spa and health club facility and
approximately 249 new underground parking spaces.
The approximate total gross square footage of the new hotel is 379,857 square feet. The
following is an approximate square footege breakdown of the various uses within the hotel:
* 62,816 sq. ft. - fractional fee club units+ 5,499 sq. ft. - condominium
.:. 35,818 sq. ft. - accommodation units+ 6,332 sq. ft. - employee housing units* 8,375 sq. ft. - restauranl/relailn 15, 130 sq. ft. - conference/meeting rooms* 24,817 sq. ft. - spa/heallh club* 221,07O sq. ft. - common area (mechanical, maid closets, stairs/hallways, parking, office,
lobby, etc.)
379,857 sq. ft. gross building square fooiage
Conditional Use Permit Regues{
The second application submitted for review is for a conditional use permit to allow for the
operation of a fractional fee club in the Public Accommodation zone district. The granting of a
conditional use permit by the Town of Vail would allow the applicani lo operate 50 fractional fee
club units within the Vail Plaza Hotel. The applicant is proposing that the club units be sold on
an interval basis. The club unils would be sold for 24 weeks during the winter months with the
remaining 28 weeks owned by the hotel for use as short-lerm accommodations units. lt is
believed by the applicant that this sales structure will maximize the occupanry of the units and
optimize the availability of the units for markeling the conference facility of ihe hotel during the
summer months and shoulder seasons. To further improve occupancy potential of the fractional
fee club, the 50 club unils have been designed to include up to two "lock-off'spaces per unit.
This design creates a loial of 108 "keys" and 216 "pillows" for the fractional fee club component
of the hotel (1 key = 1 room).
A complete set of reduced plans has been atlached for reference (Exhibit AA).
III. STAFF REGOMMENDATION
The Community Development Department is recommending approval of the applicant's request
for a major amendment to Special Development District #6 and a conditional use permit, to allow
for redevelopment of Phase lV of the Vail Village lnn. Staffs recommendalion for approval is
based upon the review of the criteria outlined in Sections V & Vl of this memorandum. The staff
believes that the proposal is in general compliance with the nine design criteria and the criteria
for a conditional use permit, as identified in this memorandum.
In reviewing the proposal, staff identified a number of pros and cons thal we believe are
associated with the hotel proposal. The list includes, but is not limited to, the following:
PROS
a
a
a
o
The presence of economic redevelopment in Vail.
An increase to the Town's supply of hotel beds and an increased level of quality.
The implementation of the Town's development goals, objectives, and policies.
The creation of new, deed restricted employee housing to offset the housing impacts
associaled with the hotel.
The elimination of an unsightly surface parking lot.
The completion of the final phase of the Vail Village Inn Special Development District.
The consiruction of new conference and meeting room facilities within the Town.
J
a
a
a
t The construction of public improvements funded with private dollars.. The potential increases in sales tax revenue.r An increased amount of public open space.r An improved and updated loading/delivery facility which is relocated from Vail Road.. The provision of 18 on-site employee housing units.
coNs
r lncreased vehicular traffic on Vail Road.. Devialions from the underlying zoning developmenl standards are required.. The bulk and mass of the new hotel is significantly greater than the sizes of buildings
presently on the development site.r There are increased impacts of shading on public areas.. The conference and meeting room facilities are potentially under-sized.. Addilional views of Vail Mountain from public areas will be negatively impacted.. Only a portion of the dilapidated plaza paver surface is being replaced and improved.r Increased loading/delivery truck traffic on Town streets.. There is only a marginal nel increase of lrue accommodation units over what exisls today.. An eighteen to twenty-four month construction process (noise, construction traffic, etc).
Should the Planning & Environmental Commission choose to recommend approval of the
requested major amendment to the Vail Town Council, staff would recommend that the
Commission make lhe following finding:
"That the proposed major amendment to Special Development Asfict#6, Vail Village
Inn, complies with the nine design citeria outlined in Section 12-9A-8 of the Town of Vail
Municipal Code. The applicant, as rcquired, has demonstnted to the satisfaction of the
Commission that any adve,rse e,Tecfs of the rcquested deviations frcm the development
standatds of the undelying zoning arc outweighed by the public benefits provided or has
demonstnted that one or more of the development standards is not applicable, or that a
pnctical solution consisfenf with the public interest has been achieved. Fufther, the
Commission finds that the requested conditional use permit to allow for the operation of a
fnctional fee club complies with the applicable citeria and is consistent with the
development goals and objectives of the Town. Lastly, public notice of this public heaing
has been sent to adjacent property owners and published in a local newspaper of rccord
in accordance with Section 12-3-6C of the Town Code."
Should the Planning & Environmental Commission choose to recommend approval of the
requested major amendment, staff would recommend that the approval cany with it the following
conditions:
1. That the Developer submits detailed civil engineering drawings of the required off-site
improvements (sireet lights, drainage, curb and gutter, sidewalks, grading, road
improvements, etc.) as identified on the off-site improvements plan lo lhe Town of Vail Public
Works Departmenl for review and approval, prior to application for a building permit.
2. That the Developer submits a delailed final landscape plan and final architectural elevations
for review and approval of the Town of Vail Design Review Board, prior to application for a
building permit.
a
3.
4.
The sdd approval lime requirements and limitations of Section 12-9A-12 shall apply to
Ordinance No. 1, Series of 2000. In addition, the phasing of the construction of the hotel
shall nol be permitted.
Thal the Developer submits the following plans to the Department of Community
Development, for review and approval, as a part of lhe building permit application for the
holel:
An Erosion Control and Sedimentation Plan;
A Construction Staging and Phasing Plan;
A Stormwater Managemenl Plan;
A Site Dewatering Plan; and
A Traffic Control Plan.
That the Developer receives a condilional use permit lo allow for the construction of Type lll
Employee Housing Units in Phase lV of the District, in accordance with Chapter 12-16, prior
to the issuance of a building permit, to provide housing on-site.
That the Developer submits a complete set of plans to the Colorado Department of
Transportation for review and approval of a revised access permit, prior to application for a
building permii.
7. That the Developer meets with the Town staff to prepare e memorandum of understanding
outlining the responsibilities and requirements of the required off-sile improvements, prior to
second reading of an ordinance approving the major amendment.
8. That the Developer submits a complete set of plans responding to the design concems
expressed by Greg Hall, Director of Public Works & Transportation, in his memorandum {o
George Ruther, dated 12l13/99. The drawings shall be submitted, reviewed and approved by
the Town Engineer, prior to final Design Review Board approval.
9. That the Developer records public pedestrian easements between the hotel and the Phase lll
Condominiums, between the hotel and the Phase V Building, and along the Vail Road
fronlage. The easemenls shall be prepared by the Developer and submitted for review and
approval of the Town Atiorney. The easements shall be recorded with the Eagle County
Clerk & Recordeis Office prior to the issuance of a Temporary Certificate of Occupanry.
10. Thet the Developer record a deed-restriction, which the Town is a party lo, on the Phase lV
property prohibiting the public use of the spa facility in the hotel. Said restriction may be
revoked if the Developer is able to demonstrate to the satisfaction of the Town that adequate
provisions for vehicle parking have been made to accommodate the public use of lhe spa.
The restriction shall be recorded prior to the issuance of a building permit.
11. That the Developer submits a final exterior building malerials list, a typical wall sections,
architectural details and a complete color rendering for review and approval of the Design
Review Board, prior to making an application for a building permit.
12. That the Developer submits a comprehensive sign program proposal for the Vail Plaza Hotel
for review and approval of the Design Review Board, prior to the issuance of a Temporary
5
a.
b.
d.
e.
t
6.
Certificate of Occupanry.
13. That the Developer submils a roof-top mechanical equipment plan for review and approval of
the Design Review Board prior to lhe issuance of a building permit. All roof-top mechanical
equipment shall be incorporated into lhe overall design of the hoiel and enclosed and
screened from public view.
14. That the Developer posts a bond with the Town of Vail to provide financial security for the
125o/o of the total cost of the required off-site public improvemenis. The bond shall be in
place with the Town prior to the issuance of a building permit.
15. That the Developer installs bollards or similar safety devices at the intersection of the delivery
access driveway and the sidewalk along the South Fronlage Road to prevenl conflicts
between pedestrians and vehicles, prior to the issuance of a Temporary Cerlificate of
Orcupancy.
16. That the Developer studies and redesigns the entrance on the north side ofthe hotel across
from the entrance to the Gateway Building to create a more inviting entrance or a design that
redirects pedestrians to another entrance. The final design shall be reviewed and approved
by the Design Review Board prior to the issuance of a building permil.
17. That the Developer coordinate efforts with the owners of the Gateway Building to create a
below ground access for loading and delivery to the Gateway from the Vail Plaza Hotel to
resolve potential loading and delivery concems at the Gateway. lf a coordinated effort can be
reached the Developer shall submit revised plans to lhe Town of Vail Community
Development Department for review and approval, prior to lhe issuance of a building permit.
18. That the Developer revises the proposed floor plans for the Vail Plaza Hotel to provide freight
elevator access to the lowest level of the parking structure. The revised plans shall be
submitted to lhe Town of Vail Community Development Department for review and approval
prior to lhe issuance of a building permit.
19. That the Developer redesigns the proposed elevalor tower 10 create an architectural feature
atop ihe tower and revises the proposed building elevations and roof plan prior to final review
of the proposal by the Design Review Board. The Board shall review and approve the
revised design.
20. That the Developer, in cooperation with the Town of Vail Public Works Department design
and construct a left-tum lane on Vail Road and reconfigure lhe landscape island in the South
Frontage Road median to eliminate left{ums from lhe loading/delivery. The construction
shall be completed prior to the issuance of a Temporary Certificate of Occupancy.
21, That the Developer provides a centralized loading/delivery facility for the use of all owners
and tenants within Special Development District No. 6. Access or use of the facility shall not
be unduly restricted for Special Development District No. 6. The loading/delivery facility,
including docks, berths, freight elevators, service coridors, etc., may be made available for
public and/or private loading/delivery progmms, sanctioned by the Town of Vail, to mitigate
loading/delivery impacts upon the Vail Village loading/delivery system. The use of the facility
shall only be permitted upon a finding by the Town of Vail and the Developer that excess
capacity exists. The Developer will be compensated by the Town of Vail and/or others for the
o common use of lhe facility. The final delerminaiion of the use of the facility shall be mutually
agreed upon by the Developer and the Town of Vail.
22.Thal the Developer submits a wrilten letter of approval from adjaceni properties wtose
prgperty is being encroached upon by certain improvements resulting from the construction of
the hotel, prior to the issuance of a building permit.
IV. BACKGROUND
The development review process for the Vail Plaza Hotel has been a lengthy, labor intensive
process thal has included numerous meetings wilh the various Town boards, Town siaff, and
interested members of the community. The review process began over two years ago when the
aPplicant submitted the original redevelopment proposal application to the Community
Development. Following a nine month review process including a final review and
recommendation of approval from the Planning & Environmental Commission and the Design
Review Board, the Vail Town Council informed the applicant that a favorable vote could not be
made on the application and directed the applicant to revise the proposal. The primary concems
of the Council were building height, compliance with the Town's planning documents, off-site
traffic impacts, loading and delivery capabilities and vehicular site access. In response to the
Council's concems the proposal has been revised and resubmitted to the Community
Development Department.
The revised proposal has been reviewed and evaluated by the Planning & Environmental
Commission, the Design Review Board and the Town staff. The Commission has held five
meetings while ihe Board has held five conceptual reviews of the revised plans. Additionally, the
applicant held an open house to present the plans to interested members of the community. All
the submitted plans, models and related materials have been available for review at the Office of
Community Development and on various web sites.
The following is a summary of the existing phases and development with the Vail Village Inn
Special Developmenl District:
Phase I - This phase consists of the buildings located at the southeast corner of the
District. Phase I includes one residenlial dwelling unit approximately 3,927 square feet in
size and nine commercial/retail spaces.
Phase ll - This phase consists of three residential dwelling units lotaling approximately
3,492 square feel in size and three commercial/retail spaces. Phase ll is generally
located in the center of the District.
Phase lll - This Phase consists of twenty-nine residential dwelling units totaling
approximately 44,830 square feet in size end six commercial/retail spaces. Phase lll is
located at the northeast comer of the District.
Phase lV - This is the original and oldest Phase in the Districi. This Phase consists of
one residential dwelling unit approximately 5,000 square feet.in size and seventy-two
accommodation units comprising approximately 16,585 square feet of floor area. Phase
lV is generally located in the northwest comer of the District.
Phase V - This Phase consists of eleven residential dwelling units and threeo
accommodation units totaling approximately 9,972 square feel of floor area and four
commercial/retail spaces. Phase V is located in the southwest comer of the District al
the intersection of Vail Road and East Meadow Drive.
A map illustrating the location of the various Phases has been attached for reference (Exhibit A).
The following is a brief summary of the amendments to Special Development Distrist No. 6 since
the original adoption:
o In 1976, the Vail Town Council passed Ordinance No. 7, Series 1976, establishing Special
Development Districts No. 6, Vail Village Inn, to ensure the unified and coordinated
development of a critical site to the Town of Vail, as a whole, and in a manner suitable for the
area in which it is situated.
o In 1 985, the Vail Town Council passed Ordinance No. 1 , Series 1985, providing certain
amendments to the approved development plan for Special Development Distrist No. 6. The
amendmenls included a requirement for a minimum of 175 accommodation units and 72,400
square feet of GRFA devoted entirely to accommodation units in Phase lV.
o In 1987, the Vail Town Council passed Ordinance No.14, Series 1987, which amended and
modified Section I relaiing to the allowed density of the development plan for Special
Development Districl No. 6. This amendment broke Phase lV into two distinct phases; Phase
lV and Phase V. This amendment established the maximum allowable GRFA for the entire
District at approximately 120,000 square feet. Further, the amendment reduced the minimum
accommodation unit requirement to 148 units and 67,367 square feet of GRFA.
o In 1989, lhe Vail Town Council passed Ordinance No. 24, Series of 1989, amending the
density controls of the District. This amendment increased the allowable GRFA to 124,527
square feet and allowed Unit #30 to be created in a commercial space. The amendment
mainlained the previous approval requiring a minimum 148 accommodation unils and 67,367
square feet of GRFA devoted to units in Phases lV and V.
o In 1 991 , the Vail Town Council passed Ordinance No. 9, Series 1991 , providing for certain
amendments to the approved development plan for Special Development District No. 6,
which relates specifically to Phase lV.
a ln 1992, the Vail Town Council passed Ordinance No. 2, Series 1992, allowing for
modificalions and amendments to various sections of Special Developmenl District No. 6
which relaled directly to Phase lV, and which made certain changes to the approved
development plan for Special Development Distriel No. 6 as they relale to Phase lV.
When originally considering deviations from the underlying zoning in 1976, the Town Council
found thai such devialions were acceptable, as lhe community was to realize a substantial
increase in the hotel bed base. An increase in short-term accommodations has been a long-
standing objective of our resort community.
V. "PUBLIC AGCOMMODATION ZONE DISTRICT'
According to the Official Town of Vail Zoning Map, the applicanl's property is zoned Public
Accommodation. Pursuant 10 the Town of Vail Municipal Code, the Public Accommodalion Zone
district is intended,
" to provide sites for lodges and residential accommodations for visitors, together
with such. public and semi-public facilities and limited professional offices, medical
facilities, private recreation, and related visitor oriented uses as may appropriately
be located in the same district. The Public Accommodation District is intended to
ensune adequate light, air, open space, and other amenities commensurate with
lodge uses, and to maintain the desirable resort qualities of the District by
establishing appropriate site development standards. Additional nonresidential uses
are permitted as conditional uses which enhance the nature of Vail as a winter and
summer recreation and vacation communi$r, and where permitted are intended to
function compatibly with the high density lodging character of the District."
The Public Accommodalion Zone District is intended to provide sites for lodging units with
densities not to exceed 25 dwelling units per acre. The Public Accommodation Zone Distric-t,
prior to January 21, 1997, did not permit interval ownership. On January 21, 1997,the Town
Council adopted regulations allowing interval ownership subject to the issuance of a conditional
use permit. Previously, interval ownership was only allowed as a conditional use in the High
Density Multi-family Zone Dislricl.
On October 5, 1999, the Vail Town Council approved Ordinance No. 23, Series of 1999,
amending the development standards prescribed in the Public Accommodation Zone District.
The amendments included an increase in allowable GRFA up to 150%, an increase in sile
coverage, the elimination of AU's and FFU'S in the calculation of density, revised setback
requirements, and other various aspects in the development of properties zoned Public
Accommodation. The allowable building height, landscape area and limitation on commercial
square footage remained unchanged.
VI. ZONING ANALYS]S
The development standards for a Special Development District shall be proposed by ihe
applicant. Developmenl standards including lot area, site dimensions, setbacks, height, density
control, site coverage, landscaping and parking and loading shall be delermined by the Town
Council as part of the approved development plan, with consideration of the recommendations of
the Planning and Environmental Commission. Before the Town Council approves development
standards that deviate from the underlying zone district, it shall be determined thal such
deviations provide benefits to lhe Town that outweigh the effects of such deviations. This
determination is to be made based upon the evaluation of the proposed Special Development
Districl's compliance wilh the Review Crileria outlined in the following section of this
memorandum.
The Community Development Department staff has prepared a zoning analysis for the proposed
Vail Plaza Hotel. The Vail Plaza Hotel Zoning Analysis compares the development standards
outlined by the underlying zoning of Public Accommodation (revised 10/99), to ihe existing
development, the applicant's proposed 1998 major amendment (which was not approved), the
approved 1999 major amendment and the 2000 revised proposal. lt is important to note that the
comparison is based on the entire area of the Special Development Disirict.
A copy of lhe Vail Plaza Hotel Zonino Analvsis has been attached for reference (Exhibit B).
For comparative purposes, the Community Development Department has also completed an
analysis comparing the 1998 proposal and the 1999 approval to the 2000 proposal. The purpose
of the analysis is to provide a direct comparison of the 1998 proposal and the 1 999 approval to
the applicant's revised 2000 proposal.
A copy of the Vail Plaza Hotel Proposal Comparison has been attached for reference (Exhibit C).
VII. THE SPECIAL DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT MAJOR AMENDMENT PROCESS
Chapter 12-9 of the Town Code provides for the amendment of existing Special Development
Districts in the Town of Vail. According to Section 12-9A-1, the purpose of a Special
Development District is,
"To encourage flexibility and creativity in the development of land, in order
to promote its rnost appropriate use; to improve the design sharacter and
quality of the new development within the Town; to facilitate the adequate
and economical provision of streets and utilities; to preserve the natural and
scenic features of open space areas; and to further the overall goals of the
community as stated in the Vail Comprehensive Plan. An approved
development plan for a Special Development District, in conjunction with the
properties underlying zone district, shall establish the requirements for
guiding development and uses of property included in the Special
Development District."
According to Section 12-gA-2, a major amendment to a Special Development District is defined
AS,
"Any proposal to change uses; increase gross residential floor area; change the
number of dwelling or accommodation units; modify, enlarge or expand any
approved special development district (other than "minor amendments" as defined
in this Section), except as provided under Sections 12-15-,4, "lnterior Conversions",
or 12-156, "Gross Residential FloorArea (250 Ordinance)" of this Title."
The Town Code provides a framework for the amendment of a Special Development District.
According to the Town Code, prior to siie preparation, building construction, or other
improvements lo land within a Special Development District, there shall be an approved
development plan for the Special Development Dislrict. The approved development plan
establishes requirements regulating development, uses and activity within the Special
Development District.
Upon final review of a proposed major amendment of an existing Special Development District, a
report from the Planning and Environmental Commission stating its findings and
recommendations and a staff report shall be fonrarded to the Town Council, in accordance with
the provisions listed in Section 12-16-6 of the Town Code. The Town Council's consideration of
{he Special Development District shall be in accordance with the provisions of the Town Gode
and approved by two readings of an ordinance.
An approved development plan is the principal document in guiding the development, uses, and
aclivities of the Special Developmenl District. The developmenl plan shall conlain all relevant
L0
material and information necessary to establish the parameters with which the Special
Developmenl District shall adhere. The development plan may consist of, but not be limited to:
the approved site plan; floor plans, building sections, and elevations: vicinity plan; parking plan;
preliminary open space/landscape plan; densities; and permitted, conditional, and accessory
uses.
The determination of permitted, conditional and accessory uses shall be made by the Planning
and Environmental Commission and Town Council as part of the formal review of the proposed
development plan. Unless further restricted through the review of the proposed Special
Development District, permitted, conditional and accessory uses shall be limited to those
permitted, conditional and accessory uses in the property's underlying zone district.
The Town Code provides nine design criteria, which shall be used as the principal criteria in
evaluating the merils of the proposed major amendmenl to a Special Development District. lt
shall be the burden of the applicant lo demonslrate that submittal material and the proposed
development plan comply with each of the following standards, or demonstrale 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 submitted a report outlining a review of the criteria (Exhibit D). The
nine SDD review criteria are listed below:
NOTE: Siaff's analysis is based in part on an analysis by Jeff Winston, an independent design
consultanl.
Design compatibility and sensitivity to the immediate environment, neighborhood
and adjacent properties relative to architectural design, scale, bulk, building height,
buffer zones, identity, character, visual integrity and orientation.
Slaff believes the applicant has designed a structure which relales well lo the site and the
surrounding neighborhood. The mass of the Vail Plaza Hoiel is significantly greater than
that of the existing buildings on the site. However, staff believes the increased mass is
appropriate for the site and lakes into consideration lhe massing of the buildings on the
adjoining properties and in the immediate vicinity. The applicant has modified the
building mass by redesigning verious roof elements, articulating the building fagade along
the South Frontage Road, reconfiguring the tower elements and by lowering the roof eave
lines. The lowered roof eave lines maich more closely to the eave lines of the adjoining
buildings lo the east, west and south, thus insuring a smooth transition of building mass
between properties. To further address building mass the tallest portions of the building
have been located near the center of lhe development site. This design reconfiguration
reduces the perceived height of the hotel in the immediate area.
The applicant has revised the building footprint in response to the Town Council's request
to maintain lhe lwenty-foot setback along Vail Road. The revised footprint does not
maintain the full twenty-foot setback as requesled. The proposed plan shows that the
building encroaches a maximum of four feet into the Vail Road setback. The
encroachment is on the southwest corner of the building. The total square footage of
building area in the setback is approximately 56 square while the total amount of GRFA in
the setback is roughly 36 square feei. Staff believes lhat the intent of the Town Council's
direction has been mel since there is now adequate space for the required landscape
and sidewalk improvements.
The Vail Plaza Hotel exterior building materials are a mixture of stone, stucco and wood.
The roof material is proposed to be a terra cotta colored concrele tile with copper
flashing. The applicant has proposed to incorporate irrigated flower boxes and copper
chimney caps into the design of the hotel to serve as attractive accenl elemenls. A
grayish-brown granite stone will be used around the base of the building. The use of non-
1-1
reflective glazed windows all around the building reduces the potential of unwanted glare.
The applicant has proposed that the exterior slucco color be an off-white or cream color
to blend in with the exteriors of the buildings on the adjoining properties. Staff believes
that the combination of building materials proposed has been well incorporated into the
design of the Vail Plaza Hotel. The Town of Vail Design Review Board will have the
opporlunity to review lhe building exterior prior to final approval of the hotel.
The height of the Vail Plaza Hotel exceeds the allowable building height of the Public
Accommodation zone district by approximately 29 feei. The building height standards of
the underllng zone district indicate that the maximum height for buildings with sloping
roofs shall be 48 feet. The applicant is requesting that the maximum building height for
the Vail Plaza Hotel be approximately 77 feet. This figure does not include the proposed
architectural feature or landmark element atop the elevator lower. The height of the
elevator lower is approximately 99 feet. The building height is based on an interpolated
topography of the Vail Village Inn property, and not the original topography of the site
(pre-development). Original topography of the site is not available, as the site was
originally developed prior to zoning (and before the requirement that a topographic survey
be submitted prior to development). Staff believes, based upon the topography in the
vicinity of the development site, that the interpolated topography is a reasonable and
appropriate method lo delermine building height.
According to the Vail Village Masler Plan Conceptual Building Height Plan and the
Building Height Profile Plan (Exhibit E), the development site of Phase lV of the Vail
Village Inn is in an area with conceptual building heights of 3-4 slories, with a building
story being approximately nine feel, excluding the roof. The applicant is proposing io
construct a five-slory hotel, excluding roof. The Building Height Plan element of the Vail
Village Master Plan, states in part,
"Generally speaking, it is the goal of this plan to maintain the concentration
of low-scale buildings in the core area while positioning larger buildings
along the northern periphery (along the Frontage Road), as depicted in the
Building Height Profile Plan. The Building Height Plan also strives, in some
areas, to preserve major views from public rights-of-way.
The building heights expressed on the lllustrative Ptan are intended to
provide general guidelines. Additional study should be made during specific
review processes relative to a building's height impact on the streetscape
and the relationship to surrounding structut€s."
In response to the general guidelines provided in the Vail Village Master Plan relative to
building height, staff has requested that the applicant prepare a view analysis from eight
different locations from the public rights-of-way. This Vail Plaza Hotel Mew Analvsis
provides a "before & after'' depiction of the proposed building (Exhibit F). The view
analysis and on-site inspections have indicated that the view from public rights-of-way will
not be negatively impacted. In addition, a @was
prepared to illustrate the building's height impact on lhe sunounding streetscape (Exhibit
G). The sun/shade analysis compares the height impact of the existing siructures to the
height impact of the proposed struclures. The result of the comparison shows that
substantially more of the streelscape along the South Frontage Road easl of the
roundaboul will be shaded. The increase in shading results from the increase in building
height, the increased encroachment into ihe front setback and the additional building
mass proposed. To offset the impacts of the increase in shading during the winter
months, lhe applicant has proposed to improve the pedestrian slreetscape along the
South Frontage Road by installing heated sidewalks and drive aisles and has redesigned
o
T2
o
the roof form of the hotel to minimize the shading impact on adjacent properties. To help
mitigate the building's mass, the applicant has proposed lo construct exterior decks and
balconies, along with providing horizontal stepping of the building, along the South
Frontage Road.
To respect the relationship of the hotel to sunounding structures on adjoining properties,
and at the request of the Planning & Environmental Commission, the applicant has
removed 2 lo 2 % slories from the original proposed (1998) building, increased the
vertical stepping of the building and increased the width of the Vail Road setback.
Because of lhe inereased vertical stepping of the building and the minimum twenty-foot
setback above grade, staff believes that the proposed hotel is respectful of existing
development and uses on adjacent properties. The net effect of these changes results in
the maximum heighl of the building being located in the center portions of the site away
from the adjoining property lines and slruclures.
Staff believes thai the applicant has designed a building which relates well to the site and
the surrounding neighborhood. Further, staff believes that the proposed building
complies with the general guidelines and basic intent of the Conceptual Building Height
Plan and the Building Height Profile contained in the Vail Village Master Plan.
Much has been said regarding the potenlial "loss" of the "established view corridoi' from
the inlersection of lhe South Frontage Road and Vail Road, as a result of the construction
of the Vail Plaza Hotel. No adopted view conidor exists in this area. Staff and the
Town's Urban Design Consultant believe that ihe true loss of the view and the real
negative impacts occuned when the Vail Gateway Plaza was constructed. Through the
conslruction of the five-story tall Vail Gateway Plaza, the view from the iniersection was
substantially lost. While the existence of lhe view conidor was recognized during the
development review process of the Gateway Plaza Building and attempts were made to
respect the view, the efforts fell short of protecting the view. This, coupled with the fast
that the interseclion configuralion and traffic flow pattems of the South Frontage Road
have changed since the original adoption of the master plan, is justification for additional
encroachments upon the view. Furthermore, staff and Jeff Winston believe additional
development and building height behind the Vail Gateway Plaza will have minimal
impacts on the remaining view. While the Vail Village Master Plan discusses the
importance of maintaining views from public rights-of-way, it did not establish a view
corridor in the vicinity of the proposed development site, nor did intend to protect views
from private property. The Town of Vail has five established view corridors and is
proposing five additional view corridors in Lionshead, to be protected by ordinance.
These protected view corridors are generally localed in Vail Village and Lionshead.
Uses, activity and density which provide a compatible, efficient and workable
relationship with surrounding uses and activity.
The Vail Plaza Hotel is located within the mixed-use development area of the Vail Village
Inn Special Development District. The uses, activities and densilies for the Vail Plaza
Hotel development site are prescribed by ihe underlying zoning for Special Developmenl
District No. 6. According to the Official Town of Vail Zoning Map, the underlying zoning
for Special Development District No. 6 is Public Accommodation. The Public
Accommodalion Zone District encourages ihe development of lodges (accommodation
units) and accessory eating and drinking establishments at a density of twenty-five
dwelling units per acre. The surrounding uses and zoning designation include Public
Accommodation to the south and wesl (Sonnenalp Holiday Haus & Chateau ai Vail),
Commercial Service Center to the east (Crossroads) and Commercial Core I/SDD #21
(Gateway) to the north. The same development standards that apply 1o the Vail Plaza
B.
13
Hotel developmenl site apply to the Sonnenalp, Holiday Haus and Chateau at Vail. properties. The Commercial Service Cenler zoning applicable to the Crossroads property
is intended primarily for commercial development together with a limited amount of
multiple-family and lodging types of residential use. The Commercial Core I underlying
zoning of the Gateway Special Development Distrist is intended to provide sites for a
mixture of commercial and residenlial development.
The Vail Plaza Hotel is proposed to be a mixed-use type of development. The mixture of
uses includes commercial, lodging, recrealional and residential. Staff believes the
proposed mixture of uses and its proximity to both Vail Village and Lionshead is, consistent with the intended purpose of the underlying zoning of Public Accommodation
and in keeping with the inient of Vail Land Use Plan. Further, staff believes that the
proposed uses within the Vail Plaza Hotel will compliment those existing uses end
aclivities on sunounding and adjacent properties. The proposed density of the hotel and
the presence of the conference facilities will improve and enhance the viability and
success of the existing restaurant and retail businesses in the immediate area.
Additionally, through the redesign of the redevelopment proposal, staff believes that the
applicant has improved the integration of the hotel with the adjacent properties.
Examples of improved integration include a pedestrian conneclion and sidewalk adjacent
to the Gateway Building, an intemal service corridor providing loading/delivery access
from the centralized loading and delivery facility to the entire District, lowering of roof
eaves to relate io the existing conditions of the neighboring properties, and more
appropriately sized pedestrian walkways throughout the plaza areas to ensure congestion
free flow.
Emplovee Housino 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 Special Development District 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 conlained within the report were used most recently in
the review of the Austria Haus and Marriott 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, the staff
analyzed lhe incremental increase of employees (square footage per use), that results
from the redevelopment. A copy of the Suoqested Emplovment Cateoories and Ranoes
for Vail Expressed as Emplovees per 1000 Square Feel has been attached for reference.
The figures identified in the Housing Report are based on surveys of commercial-use
employment needs of the Town of Vail and other mountain resort communities. For
comparison purposes, Telluride, Aspen and Whistler B.C. all have "employment
generalion" ordinances requiring developers to provide affordable housing for a
percentage of the "nevr/' employees resulting from commercial development. "NeW'
employees are defined as the incremenlal increase in employment needs resulting from
commercial redevelopment. Each of the communities assesses a differenl percentage of
affordable housing a developer must provide for the "nev/' employees. For example,
Telluride requires developers to provide housing lor 4O% (0.40) of the "neu/' employees,
Aspen requires that 60% (0.60) of the "ned' employees are provided housing and
Whistler requires that 100% (1 .00) of the "nera/' employees be provided housing by the
o
1A
o
developer. In comparison, Vail has conservatively delermined that developers shall
provide housing for 15% (0.15) or 30% (0.30) of the "nera/' employees resulting from
commercial development. when a project is proposed lo exceed the density allowed by
the underlying zone district, the 30% (0.30) figure is used in the calculation. lf a project is
proposed al, or below, the density allowed by the underlying zone district, the 15% (0.15)
figure is used. The Vail Plaza Hotel special developmenl district major amendment
proposal does not exceed lhe density permitted by the underlying zone district. However,
the 3070 figure was used.
The applicant is proposing to provide employee housing for a percentage of the ,,nera/'
employees resulling from ihe hotel construction. Based upon an analysis completed by
the applicant and provided to the community Development Department, the new hotel is
expected to generate 125 "nevV" employees. The "new'employees are in addition to the
74 employees already working full-time or part{ime at ihe Vail Village Inn. The applicant
is proposing to provide deed-restricted employee housing for 30o/o (32) of the "neW'
employees. Due to lhe unavailability of private vacanl land resources within the Town
limits, the applicant anticipates that all or a portion of the deed-restricted housing will be
provided in an out-of-town or down-valley location. In order to maximize the benefit of the
housing to the Town of Vail, the applicant has suggested that the housing will be
available only to Vail Plaza Hotel employees. lt is further anticipated that some form of
transportation will be provided to the employees from the oul-of{own or down-valley
location lo the hotel. The Planning & Environmental Commission has briefly discussed
lhe employee housing alternatives with the applicant and expressed that, based upon the
information provided to date, the proposal seems reasonable and appropriate. A copy of
the 'Vail Villaqe Inn Staffino Roste/' has been attached for reference (Exhibit H).
EMPLOYEE HOUSING GENERATION ANALYSIS
The staff analysis below indicates the top, the middle and the bottom of the ranges
recommended by the Town of Vail Employee Housing Report, as well as a staff
recommended figure which was used in determining the employee housing needs of the
Vail Plaza Hotel. The staff analysis does not take into account full-time versus part-time
employee needs. A summary of the Employee Housing Generation Analysis is as
follows:
Bottom of Range Galculations:
Retail/Service Commercial = 4,047 sq. fl. @(5/1000 sq. ft.) =20.2 employees
Health Club
RestauranVLounge
Conference Center
Lodging
Multi Family (Club Units)
=24,799 sq. ft. @(1/1000 sq. ft.) =24.8 employees
= 5,775 sq. ft. @(5/1000 sq. ft.) = 28.8 employees
=10,368 sq. ft. @(1/1000 sq. ft.) =10.4 employees
a)
b)
c)
d)
e)
0
=99 units @(.2s/unit)
=50 units @(.4/unit)
= 24.8 employees
=20.0 employees
Total Employees =128.2 employees
(-74 existing employees) = 54.2 employees
15
a)
b)
c)
d)
e)
0
a)
b)
(X 0.30 multiplier)=16.3 "neW'employees
Middle of Range Calculations:
Retaif/Service Commercial = 4,047 sq. ft. @(6.5/1000 sq. ft.) =26.3 employees
Health Club =24,799 sq. ft. @(1.2511000 sq. ft.) =31.0 employees
Restaurant/Lounge = 5,775sq. ft. @(6.5/1000 sq. ft.) =37.5 employees
Conference Center =10,368 sq. ft. @(1/1000 sq. ft.) =10.4 employees
Lodging = 99 units @(.75lunit) =74.3 employees
Multi Family (Club Units) =50 units @(.4/unit)=20.0 employees
Total Employees
(-74 existing employees)
(X 0.30 multiplier)
=198.7 employees
=124.7 employees
= 37.4 "new" employees
.Top of Range Calculations:
Retail/Service Commercial
Health Club
=4,047 sq. ft. @(8/1000 sq. ft.) =32.4 employees
=24,799 sq. ft. @(1.5/1000 sq. ft.) =38.0 employees
= 5,775 sq. ft. @(8/1000 sq. ft.) = 46.2 emploJees
=10,368 sq. ft. @(1/1000 sq. ft.) =10.4 employees
=99 units @(1.25luni{)=123.8 employees
=20.0 employees
c) RestauranVLounge
d) Conference Center
e) Lodging
f) Multi Family (Club Units) =50 unils @(.4/unit)
Total Employees =270.0 employees
(-74 existing employees) =196 employees
(X 0.30 multiplier)= 58.8 "new" employees
Staff Recommended Ranqe Calculations:
The staff believes that the Vail Plaza redevelopmenl will create a need for 125 additional
employees. Of the 125 additional employees, al least 38 employees (30%) will need to be
provided deed-restricied housing by the developers of the Vail Plaza Hotel. The staff
recommended range is based on:
1. the type of retail and commercial use proposed in the commercial space
wilhin the Vail Plaza Hotel:
the size of the Vail Plaza Hotel lodging component;
the level of services and amenities proposed by the developers for the guesls of
the Vail Plaza Hotel: and
2.
J.
lo
4. the result of research completed by Town of Vail staff of similar holel operations in
the Vail Valley.
a) Retail/Service Commercial =4,047 sq. ft. @(5/1000 sQ. ft.) = 20.2 employees
(bottom of range)b) Health Club =24,799 sq. ft. @(1.5/1000 sq. ft.) =37.2 emptoyees
(top of range)c) RestauranULounge =5,775 sq. ft. @(6.5/1000 sq. ft.) =37.5 employees
(middle of range)d) Conference Cenler =10,368 sq. ft. @(1/1000 sq. ft.) =10.4 employees
(range does not vary)e) Lodging = 99 units @(.7slunit) = 74.3 employees
(middle of range)f) Multi Family (Club Units) = 50 units @(.4/unit) =19.2 employees
(range does not vary)
Total = 198.8 employees
(-74 existing employees) = 124.8 employees
(X 0.30 multiplier) = 38 "new" employees
'Lodgin0 has a pa{iculady lEE. v.rirtlon ol rnploFrs pcr |!om, dcplndlng upon hcbrs luch a! lLc of facllity and Ll/.l ol s.Mcofsuppon
seMces and am€niue6 paovided.
Depending upon the size of the employee housing unit provided, it is possible to
have up to two employees per bedroom. For example, a two-bedroom unit in the
size range of 450 - 900 square feet, is possible of accommodating three to four
employees. These figures are consistent with the requirements for the Type lll
employee housing units outlined in the Municipal Code.
Overall, staff believes that the density and uses proposed by the applicant for the Vail
Plaza Hotel do not conflicl with the compatibility, eflicienry or workability of the
sunounding uses and activities on adjacent properties. In fact, staff feels that the
proposed Vail Plaza Hotel redevelopment will substantially enhance the existing uses
and activities in the community.
C. Compliance with parking and loading requirements as outtined in Chapter 12-10 of
the Vail Town Code.
The Vail Plaza Hotel proposal has been reviewed for compliance with the parking and
loading requirements prescribed in Chapter 12-10 of the Vail Town Code. Pursuant to
the prescribed regulations, 378 parking spaces are required for all of Special
Development District No. 6. The applicant is proposing to provide a total of 368 parking
sPaces. The difference between what is required by Code and whai the applicant is
proposing is 10 parking spaces. To accountforthe difference, lhe applicanl is requesting
a deviation from the prescribed parking requirement pursuanl to the provisions of Chapter
12-9.
A copy of the Vail Plaza Hotel Parkino Analvsis prepared by staff and the applicant has
been altached for reference (Exhibit l).
The Vail Plaza Hotel has proposed a cenlralized loading facility for the hotel and
surrounding uses within the special development district. Pursuant to the prescribed
loading regulations, five loading berths are required to be provided. To insure compliance
t'7
D.
with the epplicable regulation the applicant is proposing to provide five loading berths
within an enclosed facility. Vehicular access to the facility is taken from the South
Frontage Road. The design of lhe access creates forward-in and fonrard-out traffic flow
and provides adequate maneuvering and turning space within the lot lines of the
development site. The flow of traffic on the South Frontage Road will not be impeded by
the maneuvering of delivery vehicles. Furthermore, pursuanl to the prescribed
regulations, the loading facility will not be located in the required setback, nor will it block
access to the parking spaces within the Phase lll Condominium Building. Lastly, the five
loading berths more than adequalely meet the size requirements (12' x24'x 14') outlined
in the regulations.
Upon review of the proposed parking and loading/delivery plan for the Vail Plaza Hotel,
the staff finds that the proposal meets the intent of the Town's parking requirements and
exceeds the loading and delivery requirements. Staff recognizes this as a benefit. We
believe thal given the proposed and existing uses within the district, the proximity of the
development site to the Vail Transportation Center, the immediaie availability of public
transportation and recent trends in destinalion resort lravel, the 368 proposed parking
spaces will adequately provide for the needs of District. Additionally, in a recent parking
study undertaken by the Town of Vail, lhe consultant working with the Town
recommended a significant reduction in the required number of parking spaces for
fractional fee club units. The reduction has been recommended as the use of the club
unit is more similar to the use of an accommodation unit. The maximum parking space
requirement for an accommodation units is one space, regardless of size.
Staff has been informed of a potential parking space violation within the District. The
apparent violation stems from a real estate transastion that transfened a Phase V
condominium unil separate from the required parking spaces, thus creating a situation
where a residenlial property does noi have the required number of parking spaces. Staff
believes this issue could be addressed and resolved if an appropriate number of parking
spaces were provided in the newly created parking slruclure.
Conformity with the applicable elements of the Vail Comprehensive Plan, Town
policies and Urban Design Plan.
Vail Land Use Plan
The Vail Land Use Plan map and the goal statements are intended to serve as the
primary focus for the review of development proposals, along with Town ordinances and
regulations. Any project should be reviewed with the conlexl of the intent of the overall
Plan Document. The Land Use Plan is intended to provide a general framework to guide
decision making but is not intended to be regulatory in nature.
The goals contained in the Vail Land Use Plan are to be used as the Town's policy
guidelines during the review process for a major amendment to an existing special
development district. According to the Vail Land Use Plan, the proposed hotel
redevelopment site is located within the Vail Village Area.
According to the prescribed key goals of the Vail Land Use Plan for the Vail Village Area,
in part,
Commercial growth should be concentnted primarily in existing commerciat areas to
accommodate both local and visitor needs, and
18
O New hotels should continue to be tocated pimarity in the Village and Lionshead areas,
and
lncrcased density for commercial, rcsidential and lodging uses ln the Corc areas would
be acccptable so long as the existing charccter of each area is being preserved.
Siaff has reviewed the Vail Land Use Plan and believes the following policies are relevant
to the review of this proposal:
1. GeneralGrowthlDevelopment
1 .1 Vail should continue to grow in a controlled environment, maintaining a
balance between residential, commercial and recreational uses to serve
both the visitor and the permanent resident.
1.2 The quality of the environment including air, water, and other natural
resources should be protected as the Town grows.
1.3 The quality of development should be maintained and upgrade whenever
possible.
1.4 The original theme of the old Village Core should be canied into new
developmenl in the Village Core through continued implementation of the
Urban Design Guide Plan.
1.12 Vail should accommodate most of the additional growth in existing
developed areas (infill).
3. Commercial
3.1 The hotel bed base should be preserved and used more efficiently.
3.2 The Village and Lionshead are the best location for hotels to serve the
future needs of the destination skier.
3.3 Hotels are important to the continued success of the Town of Vail,
therefore conversion to condominiums should be discouraged.
3.4 Commercial growth should be concentrated in existing commercial areas
to accommodate both local and visilor needs.
4. Mllaqe Core/Lionshead
4.1 Future commercial development should continue to occur primarily in
existing commercial areas. Fulure commercial developmenl in ihe Core
areas needs to be carefully conirolled to facilitate access and delivery.
4.2 Increased density in the Core areas is accepiable so long as the existing
characler of each area is preserved through the implementation of the
Urban Design Guide Plan and the Vail Village Master Plan.
o
19
5.Residential
5.1 Quality timeshare units should be accommodated to help keep occupancy
rales up.
5.2 Affordable employee housing should be made available through private
efforts, assisted by limited incentives, provided by the Town of Vail, with
appropriate restrictions.
The Vail Land Use Plan projects a need for additional lodging units in the Town of Vail.
While the statistical information used to project need is most likely ouldated, staff
believes lhere coniinues to be a need for additional lodging units in the Town of Vail. The
Plan projected a need for a total of 395 additional lodging units by the year 2000. The
Staff believes the proposed major amendment of Special Development District No. 6
meets the inlent, goals, and policies of the Vail Land Use Plan as outlined above.
Vail Villaqe Master Plan
According to the Vail Village Master Plan, the Plan is inlended to serve as a guide lo the
staff, review boards and the Town Council in analyzing fulure proposals for development
in Vail Village and in legislating effective ordinances to deal with the such development.
The most significant elements of the Master Plan are the goals, objectives, policies and
action sleps. They are the working tools of the Master Plan. They establish the broad
framework and vision, but also layout the specific policies and aclion steps ihat will be
used to implement ihe Plan.
As noied on page 35 of the Master Plan,
" ft is impoftant to note that the liketihood of proJect apprcval witl be greatest for
those proposals that can fully comply with the Vail Village Maater Plan."
Staff believes lhis statement re-emphasizes that the Masler Plan is a general document
providing advisory guidelines to aid the Town in analyzing development proposals and
lhai 100% compliance is not required in orderfora projectto be approved.
The staff has identified the following goals, objectives and policies as being relevant to
this proposal:
Goal #1 Encourage high quality redevelopment while preserving the unique
architectural scale of the Village in order to sustain its sense of
community and identity.
1.1 Obiective:lmplement a consistenl Development Review Process lo
reinforce the character of the Village.
1 .1 .1 Policv: Development and improvement projects approved in
the Village shall be consistent with the goals,
objectives, policies and design consideralions as
outlined in the Vail Village Master Plan and Urban
Design Guide Plan.
2Q
1.2 Obiective:Encourage the upgrading and redevelopment of resideniial
and commercial facilities.
1.2.1 Policy: Addilional developmenl may be allowed as
identilied by the action plan as is consistent with the
Vail Village Master Plan and Urban Design Guide
Plan.
1.3 Obiective: Enhance new developmeni and redevelopment through
public improvemenis done by private developers working in
cooperaiion with the Town.
1.3.1 Policv: Public improvements shall be developed with the
participation of the private sector working with the
Town.
Goal #2 To foster a strong tourist industry and promote year-round economic
health and viability for the Mllage and for the community as a whole,
2.1 Obiective:Recognize the variety of land uses found in the 10 sub-
areas throughout the Village and allow for development that
is compatible with these established land use pattems.
Increase the number of residential units available for short-
term, ovemight accommodations.
2.3 Obiective:
2.3.1 Policv The development of short-term accommodation
units is strongly encouraged. Residential units that
are developed above existing density levels are
required to be designed or managed in a manner
that makes them available for short-lerm ovemight
rental.
2.4 Obiective: Encourage the development of a variety of new commercial
activities where compalible with existing land uses.
2.5 Obiective: Encourage the continued upgrading, renovafion and
maintenance of existing lodging and commercial facilities to
better serve the needs of our guesls.
2.5.1 Polior Recreation amenities, common areas, meeting
facilities and other amenilies shall be preserved and
enhanced as a parl of any redevelopment of lodging
properties.
2.6 Obiective: Encourage the development of affordable housing units
through the efforts ofthe private sector.
2.6.1 Policv: Employee housing units may be required as part of
any new or redeveloped project requesting density
over that allowed by existing zoning.
2L
Goal#3
Goal #4
Goal#5
To recognize as a top priority the enhancement of the walking
experience throughout the Village.
3.1 Obiective: Physically improve the existing pedeslrian ways by
landscaping and other improvements.
3.1.1 Poliw: Private development projects shall incorporate
streetscape improvements (such as paver
treatments, landscaping, lighting and seating
areas), along adjacent pedeslrian ways.
3.1.3 Policy: Flowers, trees, waler features and other
landscaping shall be encouraged throughoul the
Town in locations adjacenl to, or visible from, public
areas.
3.2 Obieclive: Minimize the amount of vehicular traffic in the Village to the
greatest extent possible.
3.2.1 Policv: Vehicular traffic will be eliminated or reduced to
absolutely minimal necessary levels in the
pedeslrianized areas of the Village.
3.4 Obiective:Develop additional sidewalks, pedestrian-only walkways
and accessible green space areas, including pocket parks
and stream access.
3.4.2 Policv; Private development projects shall be required to
incorporate new sidewalks along streets adjacenl to
the project as designated in the Vail Village Master
Plan and/or Recreation Trails Master Plan.
To preserve existing open space areas and expand green space
opportunities.
4.1 Obiective: lmprove existing open space areas and create new plazas
with green space and pockel parks. Recognize the
different roles of each type of open space in forming the
overall fabric of the Village.
4.1.4 Policv: Open space improvements, including the addiiion of
accessible green space as described or graphically
shown in the Vail Village Master Plan and/or Urban
Design Guide Plan, will be required in conjunction
with private infill or redevelopment projecls.
Increase and improve the capacity, efficiency and aesthetics of the
transportation and circulation system throughout the Village.
Meet parking demands with public and privale parking
facilities.
5.1 Obiective:
5.1.1 Policv: For new development that is located outside of the
Commercial Core 1 Zone District, on-site parking
shall be provided (rather than paying into the
parking fund) to meet any additional parking
demand as required by the Zoning Code.
5.1.5 Policv: Redevelopment projects shall be strongly
encouraged to provide underground or visually
concealed parking.
Goal #6 To insure the continued improvement of the vital operational elements
of the Village.
6.1 Obiective:Provide service and delivery facilities for existing and new
development.
Vail Mllaqe Master Plan Buildino Heioht Plan
Generally speaking, it is the goal of the Building Height Plan to mainiain the concentration
of low-scale buildings in the Core area, while positioning larger buildings along the
northern periphery. According to the Conceptual Building Height Plan contained within
the Vail Mllage Master Plan, the Vail Plaza Hotel is located wilhin an area proposed to
have building heights with a maximum range of three to four slories. A building story is
defined as 9' of height, not including the roof. The applicant is proposing five slories,
excluding the roof, with a 10'6" floor to floor height.
Vail Villao€ Masler Plan Action Plan
The Action Plan graphically expresses a summary of possible development which would
be consistent wilh the elements of the Vail Village Master Plan. lt is not an all-inclusive
list, nor is it intended to restrict proposals that are not identified on the Action Plan. lt is
intended to provide suggestions and to act as a guide for implementing the Master Plan.
The Vail Plaza Ho{el is located in sub-area #1 of the Action Plan. Sub-area #1 is the
mixed use activity center for Vail Village. lt is distinguished from the Mllage core by
the larger scale buildings. The area is further distinguished by the mixture of
residential/lodging and commerclal activity. According to the Plan, a significant
increase in the Village's overnight bed base will occur within the area.
According to the Astion Plan, the Vail Plaza Hotel property is located within the mixed-use
sub-area concept area #1-1. This concept area is:
an area intended for the completion of lhe final phase of the Vail Village Inn as
established by the development plan Special Development District #6.
Commercial development al ground level to frame the interior plaza with
greenspace. The mass of buildings shall "stepup" from the existing pedestrian
scale along East Meadow Drive to 4-5 stories along the South Frontage Road.
The design of the development must be sensitive to mainlaining a view to Vail
Mountain from the 4-way stop (aka roundabout).
Vail Villaqe Desiqn Considerations
The Town of Vail adopted the Vail Village Design Consideraiions in 1980. The Design
Considerations were revised in 1993. The Design Considerations are considered an
23
integral part of the Vail Village Urban Design Plan. The Design Considerations are
intended to:
r guide growth and change in ways that will enhance and preserve the essential
qualities of the Village; and
. serve as design guidelines instead of rigid rules of development; and
. help influence the form and design of buildings.
The Vail Village Design Considerations are divided into two categories (urban design
considerations and architectural/landscape considerations):
1. URBAN DESIGN CONSIDEMTIONS
These considerations relate to general, large-scale land use planning issues, as well as form
considerations which affect more than one property or even whole areas. These considerations
are primarily the purview of the Planning and Environmental Commission.
A. PEDESTRIANIZATION
A major objective for Vail Village is to encourage pedestrian circulation through an
interconnected network of safe, pleasanl pedestrian ways. Many of the improvemenls
recognized in the Urban Design Guide Plans, and accompanying Design Considerations,
are to reinforce and expand the quality of pedestrian walkways throughout the Village.
Since vehicular traffic cannot be removed from certain s{reets (bus routes, delivery
access), a totally car-free pedestrian system is not achievable throughout the entire
Village. Therefore, several levels of pedestrianization have been identified. The level of
pedestrianization mosl appropriate for the proposed Vail Plaza Holel redevelopment is
separated use and joint vehicle/pedestrian use of the roadway.
. SfaffResponse;
The applicant has met with the Town staff to discass pedestian imprcvements. The staff
has concluded that the improvements recommended for the South Frontage Road, Vail
Road and East Meadow Dive in the 1991 Town of Val Sfreefsca pe Master Plan should
be implemented. Itis includes constructing a heated bick paver sidewalk with
landscape planters along Vail Road; a heated decontive paver sidewalk frcm the westem
propefty line of Phase lV to the eastem property line of Phase lll with the remeinder of
the sidewalk continuing to Village Center Road unheated; landscaping in the median and
along the South Frcntage Road adjacent fo Pfases lll & IV; a new sidewalk in the Town
ight-of-way at the northwest comer of the eateway Building prcpefty; and slreefscape
improvements on public property along East Meadow Dive from the westem comer of
the Base Mountain Sports retail space to the intersection of at Vail Road. The final
mateials used in the construction of the improvements shall be rcviewed and apprcved
by the Design Review Board.
B. VEHICLE PENETRATION
To minimize congestion to the exlent possible, all non-resident traffic should be routed
along the Frontage Road to Vail Village/Lionshead Parking Structures.
24
In conjunction with pedestrianization objectives, major emphasis is focused upon
reducing aulo penetration into the center of the Village. Vail Road and Vail Valley Drive
will continue lo serve as major roules for service and resident access to the Village.
Road constrictions, traffic circles, signage, and other measures are indicated in the Guide
Plans to visually and physically discourage all but essential vehicle penetration upon the
Frontage Road. Altemative access points and privale parking relocation, where feasible,
should be considered to further reduce traffic conflicts in the Village.
r SfarTResponse;
The redevelopment of the Vail Plaza Hotel will increase vehiculartnffic in the Main Vait
Roundabout and on vail Road. Accoding to the "conclusion and Recommendations"
contained in the Tnffic tmpacl Analysis -Vail Ptaza Hotel Redevelopment, prcpared by
Felsberg, Holt & Ullevig:
o The total prcjected tnps consrsf of subtracting the existing 1042 tips from the
prcposed 3082 site genented trips.
. Two roadway imprcvements will be necessary at the main access onto the
Frcntage Road. The first includes modification to the center median to
ptovide a stonge area for vehicles tuminQ left out of the site. This will allow
for a two-step left tum wrfi /ess delay. The second is an exclusive ight tum
lane into the site for eastbound traffic. This exclusive right tum lane will
remove turning tnffic frcm the through tnffre lanes thereby improving sabty
characteistics.
. The rcundabout will not be adversely affected by the proposed site tnffrc.
Ihe site tnffic will consist of approximately one percent of the total tnffrc in
the rcundabout in the year2015.
o The auxiliary lane east of the site for right tuming vehicles needs fo be
extended wesf fo the second acc€ss. This lane will be used for delivery trueks
backing into the sife. Ihr.s lane and the delivery diveway in which it will serue
should be designed to allow backing activity without impacting the eastbound
through tnffic. Physical sepantion should be considered between the
through lane end the auxiliary lane where backing would be taking place.
A complete copy of the rcpoft has been aftached for rcference (Exhibit J).
Staff agrees with the traffic enginee/s assessment of the potential traffic impacts. There
will be an increase in traffic on Vail Road. There will not be an increase in traffic on lhe
pedestrian portion of East Meadow Drive. The applicant will be required to implement the
mitigation measures recommended by the Traffic Engineer should the major amendment
be approved. Staff feels the applicant has addressed traffic issues to the extent possible.
C. STREETSCAPE FMMEWORK
To improve the quality of ihe walking experience and give continuig to the pedestrian
ways, as a continuous system, two general lypes of improvements adjacent to the
walkways are considered:
25
1. Open space and landscaping, berms, grass, flowers and tree planting as a
sofl, colorful framework linkage along pedestrian routes; and plazas and
park greenspaces as open nodes and focal points along lhose routes.
2. Infill commercial storefronts, expansion of existing buildings, or new infill
development to create new commercial activity generators to give
slreetlife and visual interest, as attractions at key locations along
pedestrian routes.
It is not intended lo enclose all Village streets with buildings as in the oore areas. Nor is it
desirable to leave pedestrian streels in the open in a somewhat undefined condition
evident in many other areas of Vail. Rather, it is desired to have a variety of open and
enclosed spaces, both buill and landscaped, which create a strong framework for
pedestrian walks, as well as visual interesl and activig.
r SfaffResponse:
The Vail Plaza Hotel redevelopment improves ffe sfieefscape fnmework through the
creation of the new hotel and the resufting enhanced visual interest along Vail Road.
Through the construction of both the intemal and extemal wall<ways, staff believes the
proposed rcdevelopment creates the critical commercial connection between Vail
Gateway Plaza and East Meadow Dive and provides new street life where very liftle
cunently exists.
D. STREET ENCLOSURE
While building facade heights should not be uniform from building to building, they should
provide a "comfortable" enclosure for the street.
Pedestrian streets are outdoor rooms, whose walls are formed by the buildings. The
shape and feel of these "rooms" are created by the variety of heights and massing (3-
dimensional variations), which give much of the visual interest and pedestrian scale
unique to Vail. Very general rules about the perception of exterior spaces have been
developed by designers, based on the characleristics of human vision. They suggest
that:
"an extemal enclosure is most comfortable when its walls are approximately 1/2
as high as the width of the space enclosed; if the ratio falls to 1/4 or less, the
space seems unenclosed; and if the heighl is grealer than the width it comes to
resemble a canyon".
ln actual application, facades are seldom uniform in height on both sides of the street, nor
is this desired. Thus, some latitude is appropriate in the application of this 112 lo 1 ratio.
Using the average facade height on both sides will generally still be a guide to lhe
comfortableness of the enclosure being created.
In some instances, the "canyon" effect is acceplable and even desirable. For example,
as a short connecting linkage between larger spaces, to give variety to the walking
experience. For sun/shade reasons ii is often advantageous to orienl any longer
segments in a north/south direclion. Long canyon streets in an easUwest direction should
generally be discouraged.
When exceptions to the general height criteria occur, special consideration should be
given to create a well-defined ground floor pedeslrian emphasis to overcome the
26
O "canyon"effect.
Canopies, awnings, arcades and building extensions can all create a pedesirian focus
and divert attention from the upper building heights and "canyon" effect.
r SfaffResponse:
Vail Road and the sldewa/ks on either side, adjacent to the Vail Plaza Hotel, avenges
approximatety 70 feet in width. The Vail Ptaza Hotel (eavetine) along Vail Road is
approximately 44 feet in height. Given that the Nine Vail Road Condominiums arc not
constructed parallel with Vail Road and the proposed landscaping at the ground level of
the proposed building, staff believes the Vail Plaza Hotel crcates a "comfortable"
enclosure of the street and does not crcate an undesinble "canyon" effect. However,
sfaffdoes believe therc is an opportunity to rcduce the epparcnt height of the eaveline
along Vail Road. Staff would suggesf that the applicant be required to continue to study
and then prcsent seyera/ sfieefscape altematives for the streetscape at the front
entnnce of the hotel to the Design Review Board for review and fina! approva!. Special
aftention should be given to crcate a design that is not only functional and meets the
technical design requircments, but is also aesthetically pleasing and attnctive in naturc.
E" STREET EDGE
Buildings in the Village core should form a strong but inegular edge 1o the streel.
Unlike many American towns, lhere are no standard setback requirements for buildings in
Vail Village. Consistent with the desire for intimate pedestrian scale, placement of
portions of a building at or near the property line is allowed and encouraged 1o give strong
definition to ihe pedestrian streets.
This is not to imply continuous building frontage along the property line. A strong street
edge is important for continuity, but perfectly aligned facades over too long a distance
tend to be monolonous. With only a few exceptions in the Village, slightly inegular
facade lines, building jogs, and landscaped areas, give the life to the street and visual
interesl for pedestrian travel.
Where buildings jog to create activity pockets, other elements can be used to continue
the street edge: low planler walls, tree planting, raised sidewalks, texture changes in
ground surface, arcades, raised decks.
Plazas, patios, and green areas are important focal points for gatherlng, resting, orienting
and should be distributed throughout the Village with due consideration lo spacing, sun
access, opportunities for views and pedestrian activity.
. SfaffResporse.'
The Vail Plaza Hotel has sfreet frontage along Vail Road and the South Frcntage Road.
The remainder of the building has building fronts intemal to the development. The edge
of the buitding has been designed at the street level to be vaied and inegular thrcugh the
use of rccessed enties, arched arcades and hoizontaWertical sfeps in the building foot
pint. Staff believes that at the street level the design of the building conforms with the
intent of the sfreel edge design considention.
F. BUILDING HEIGHT
O
zl
Vail Village is perceived as a mix of two and ihree story facades, alihough there are also
four and five story buildings. The mix of building heights gives variety to the street, which
is desirable. The height criteria are intended to encourage height in massing variety and
to discourage uniform building heights along the street.
. StaffResponse;
As discussed previously, the Vail Plaza Hotel e,rceeds the altowable building height
prescibed forthe Public Accommodation Zone District. However, sfaffdoes not feel that
the prcposed height of the Vail Plaza Hotel is excessive, given the location of the building
at the northem periphery of the Village corc and the height of the buildings on the
adjoinlng prcperties (Gateway, Nine Vail Road Condominiums, and the Phase lll and V
Buildings).
The applicant has submitted a sca/e model of the Vail Plaza Hotel in its Vitlage context
and this model will be available for use by the Planning & Envircnmental Commission,
&sign Review Board and the Town Council duing the final review process.
G. VIEWS AND FOCAL POINTS
Vail's mountain/valley setting is a fundamenlal part of its identity. Views of the
mountains, ski slopes, creeks and other naiural features are reminders 1o our visitors of
the mountain environment and, by repeated visibility, are orientation reference poinls.
Certain building fealures also provide important orientation references and visual focal
points. The most significant view corridors in the Village have been adopted as part of
Chapter 12-22 of the Town of Vail Municipal Code. The view corridors adopted should
nol be considered exhausted. When evalualing a development proposal, priority should
be given to an analysis of the impacted project on public views. Views that should be
preserved originate from either major pedestrian areas or pub'lic spaces, and include
views of the ski mountain, the Gore Range, the Clock Tower, the Rucksack Tower and
olher important man-made and natural elemenls that contribute lo the sense of place
associaled with Vail. These views, which have been adopted by ordinance, were chosen
due to their significance, not only from an aesthetic standpoint, but also as orientation
reference points for pedestrians. Development in Vail Village shall not encroach into any
adopted view conidor, unless approved under Chapter 12-22. Adopled corridors are
listed in Chapter 12-22 of the Town of Vail Municipal Code. Whether affecling adopted
view conidors or not, the impact of proposed development on views from public ways and
public spaces must be identified and considered where appropriate.
. !!!gr?8gs@!g
Although not directly impacting one of the frve adopted view conidors, as listed in Chapter
12-22 of the Town of Vail Municipal Code, the height of the building will have impacts on
the view frcm vaious locations near the roundabout. Public views of Vail Mountain will
be partially impacted frcm fhese areas. Again, a view analysis has been completed
depicting "beforc and after" conditions. Ovenll, given the building's location, the recent
changes to the intersection resulting from the construction of the roundabout and the
development paftem on adjacent prcperfies, sfaffEels that the Vail Plaza Hotel complies
with the intent of the Vail Village Uftan Design Considentions.
H. SERVICE AND DELIVERY
zd
Any building expansion should preserve lhe functions of existing service alleys. The few
service alleys that exist in the village are extremely imporiant to minimizing vehicle
congestion on pedestrian ways. The use of, and vehicular access to, lhose alleys should
not be eliminated except where funstional altematives are not provided.
In all new and remodeled construction, delivery which avoids or reduces impacts on
pedesirian ways should be explored; and adopted whenever practical, for immediate or
future use. Rear access, basement and below ground delivery conidors reduce
congestion. Weather protection increases delivery efficiency substantially.
Below grade delivery conidors are found in a few buildings in Vail Village (SitzmarUGore
Creek Plaza, Village Center, Vail Village Inn). Consideration should be given to extending
these corridors, where feasible, and the creation of new ones. As buildings are
consiructed or remodeled, the opportunity may exist to develop segments of a future
system.
r Sfat7 Response;
Through the course of sfaff's rcview of the Vail Ptaza Hotel redevelopment proposal,
several loading and delivery options werc explorcd.
The appticant had oiginally proposed to provide far fewer befths than what the cunent
design proposes. However, the applicant has amended the plans to provide a total of five
berths on the propefi. These five berths wilt be able to be utilized by the entire Vail
Village lnn Plaza and are connected yia a sen'es of elevators and below gnde seruice
arcas. The seruice areas arc located away frcm areas of major pedestrian activity. The
main sevice area is adjacent to the South Frontage Road in an enclosed facility. The
centnlized approach to this facility is unprecedented in Vail. Staff would rccommend that
the applicant continue to explore opportunities to improve the truck trcffic and passenger
car tnffic intertace in the access way within the enclosed facility.
I. SUN / SHADE
Due to Vail's alpine climate, sun is an important comfort faclor, especially in winter, fall
and spring. Shade areas have ambienl lemperalures substantially below lhose of
adjacent direc-t sunlight areas. On all but the warmesi of summer days, shade can easily
lower temperatures below comfortable levels, and thereby, negatively impact use of those
areas.
All new or expanded buildings should not substantially increase the spring and fall
shadow line (March 21 - September 23) on adjacent properties or the public right-of-way.
In all building conslruction, shade shall be considered in massing and overall height
consideration. Notwithstanding, sun/shade consideralions are not intended to restriot
building height allowances, but rather to influence the massing of buildings. Limited
height exceptions may be granted to meel this criteria.
. Sfat7Response:
29
Although the proposed height of the building willdiminish the amount of sun light rcaching
the ground in certain areas, and likewise increase shading along the South Frontage
Road (north side of the project), the prcvision of heated public wallouays effectively
mitigates this considention, thus providing ice-frce and snow-frce sidewalks. Oventl,
staff believes the proposal complies with the above-descibed considerctions.
2. ARCHITECTUREILANDSCAPE CONSIDERATIONS
ROOFS
Where visible, roofs are often one of the most dominant architectural elements in any built
environmenl. ln the Village, roof form, color and texture are visibly dominant, and generally
consistent, which tends to unify the building diversity to a great degree.
The current expression, and objective, for roofs in the Village is to form a consistently unifying
backdrop for the architecture and pedestrian streetscape, and to avoid roofs which tend to stand
out individually or distract visually from the overall character.
Roof Forms
Roofs wilhin the Village are typically gable in form and of moderate-lo-low pitch. Shed roofs are
frequently used for small additions to larger buildings. Free-standing shed roofs, butterfly roofs
and flat roofs, can be found in the Village, but they are generally considered to be out of
character and inappropriate. Hip roofs likewise, are rare and generally inconsistent with the
character of the Core Area. Towers are exceptions, in both form and pitch, io the general
crileria, but do have an established local vemacular-style which should be respecled.
r SfaffResponse
The roof form of the Vait Plaza Hotel is a mixture of gables;, banel vaults and clipped hips. While
a hip roof is genenlly considered inconsisfenf with the chancter of the Village, the applicant
believes this roof fonn and the incorpontion of dormers helps to reduce fhe mass of the building
and blends well with the rcof forms of the sunounding buildings
Pitch
Roof slopes in the Village typically range from 3112 to 6/12, with slightly steeper pitches in limited
applications. Again, for visual consisiency this general 3112-4112 range should be preserved.
r SfaffResponse
The pitch of the proposed Vail Plaza Hotel roof is 7/12 and is genenlly in compliance with this
guideline.
Overhanqs
Generous roof overhangs are also an established architectural feature in the Village - a
traditional expression of shelter in alpine environments. Roof overhangs typically range from 3 to
6 feet on all edges. Specific design consideration should be given to protection of pedestrian
30
o
ways adjacent to buildings. Snow slides and runoff hazards can be reduced by roof orientetion,
gutters, arcades, elc.
Overhang details are treated with varying degrees of ornamenlation. Structural elements such
as roof beams are expressed beneath the overhangs, simply ordecoratively carved. The roof
fascia is thick and wide, giving a substantial edge to the roof.
. SfaffResponse
The overhangs on the Vail Plaza Hotet vary, depending on location, and are genenlty four feet in
depth. The overhangs arc supported by timber bncing which adds chancter and visual interest
to the ovenll appeannce of the building. Staff believes that the prcposal complies with the
a bove -de sc i bed cite ri a.
Compositions
The intricate roofscape of the Village as a whole is the result of many individual simple roof
configurations. For any single building a varied, but simple composition of roof planes is
preferred to either a single or a complex arrangement of many roofs. As individual roofs become
more complex, the roof attracts visual attention away from the streetscape and the total
roofscape tends toward "busyness" rather than a backdrop composition.
r SfaffResponse
The roof form on the Vail Plaza Hotet woutd be considered a simple composition of roof planes.
Sfaffbe/ieves the roof composition proposed by the applicant is conslsfenf with the intent of this
a rch itect u n I c o n si de nti o n.
Stepped Roofs
As buildings are slepped to reflect existing grade changes, resulting roof steps should be made
where the heighl change will be visually significant. Variations which are too sublle appear to be
more stylistic than functional, and out of character with the more straight-foMard roof design
typical in the Village.
r StaffResponse
The Vail Plaza Hotel site is rclatively flat (by Vail's standards). While the building does not need
to step to follow the topognphy, vertical and hoizontal steps and dormers have been
incorponted into the rcof design. The vertical and hoizontal steps and dormerc provide a
reduction in the ovenll mass of lhe building and adds to the architectunl and visual interest of
the building. Sfaffbe/ieves that the stepped roob of the Vail Plaza Hotel comply with the intent
of the above-descibed citeria.
Malerials
Wood shakes, wood shingles, and built-up tar and gravel are almost exclusively used as roof
materials in the Village. For visual consistency, any other materials should have lhe appearance
of the above.
. Sfar7Response
31
Most recently, wood shakes and wood shrngles are being discounged for use as a rcofing
mateial due to ftre safety concems. At the recommendation of the Town of Vail Fire
Department, the staff has been encounging developers fo use gnvel, asphalt, tile, metal and
other morc firc-rcsistant roofing materials on new buildings.
The applicant is proposing fo use a blend of greenish concrcte tiles on the roof of the hotel. The
tiles will be similar in appeannce fo fDose used on the recent redevelopment of the Austria
Haus. The staff believes f/ris ls an apprcpriate rcof mateial to use on this project.
Construction
Common roof problems and design considerations in lhis climale include:
- snowslides onto pedestrian walks - roof dams and water infiltration
gutters freezing - heavy snow loads
Careful attention to these functional details is recommended, as well as familiarity with the local
building code, proven construction details, and Town ordinances.
For built-up roofs, pitches ol 4112 or steeper do not hold gravel well. For shingle roofs, pitches of
4112 or shallower oflen result in ice dams and backflow leakage under the shingles.
Cold-roof construciion is strongly preferred, unless warm-roof benefits for a specific application
can be demonstraled. Cold-roofs are double-roofs which insulate end prevent snow melt from
intemal building heat. By retaining snow on the roof, many of lhe problems listed can be
reduced. Periodic snow removal will be required and should be anticipated in the design.
Roof gutters lend to ice-in completely and become ineffective in the Vail climate, especially in
shaded north-side locations. Heating the interior circumference with heat{ape elements or other
devices is generally necessary lo assure adequate run-off control in colder months.
. SfaffResponse;
The applicant is proposing a cold-toof construction atop the Vail Plaza Hotel. Through the review
of a building permit, staff will ensurc the roof construction complies with the standads prescibed
the Vail's climatic conditions.
FACADES
Materials
Stucco, brick, wood (and glass) are the primary building materials found in the Village. While noi
wishing to restrict design freedom, existing conditions show that within this small range of
materials much variation and individualily are possible while preserving a basic harmony. Too
many diverse malerials weaken the continuity and repetition which unifies the streelscape.
Of the above malerials, stucco is the most consistently used material. Most of the buildings in
the Village exhibit some stucco, and there are virtually no areas where stucco is entirely absent.
It is intended to preserve the dominance of slucco by its use in portions, at least, of all new
facades, and by assuring that other materials are nol used to the exclusion of stucco in any sub-
area within the Village.
32
O ' sfatf ResPonse
The erteior materials proposed by the applicant arc a cpmbination of stone, stucoo and wood.
No one mateial is proposed to dominate the exteior of the hotel. Sfaffbe/ieves the applicant
has complied with this particular architeetunl considention. The final approval of the exterior
mateials and their application willbe addressed by the Design Review Boad at a lafter date.
Color
There is greater latitude in the use of color in the Village, but still a discemible consistency within
a general range of colors.
For wood surfaces, trim or siding, darker color tones are prefened - browns, grays, blue-grays,
dark olive, slate-greens, etc. Stucco colors are generally light - white, beige, pale-gold, or other
light pastels. Other light colors could be appropriaie, as considered on a case-by-case basis.
Brighi colors (red, orange, blues, maroon, etc.) should be avoided for major wall planes, but can
be used effectively (with restraint) for decorative trim, wall graphics, and other acceni elements.
Generally, to avoid both "busy-ness", and weak visual interest, ihe variety of major wall colors
should not exceed four, nor be less than two.
A color/malerial change between the ground floor and upper floors is a common and effective.
reinforcement of the pedesirian scale of ihe street.
O ' sfaffResPonse
The appticant has proposed an exterior building color that is compatible with the color of the
existing huildings in the vicinity of the hotel. Staff would like to point out that the applicant is
rcquircd to obtain Design Review Boatd apprcval piorto construclion and that any conems of
the Commission on this topic will be brcught to the aftention of the Board.
Transparency
Pedestrian scale is created in many ways, but a major factor is the openness, altractiveness, and
generally public character of the ground floor facade of adjacent buildings. Transparent store
fronts are "people altracters", opaque or solid walls are more private, and imply'do not
approach."
On pedestrian-oriented streets such as in the Village, ground floor commercial facades are
proportionalely more transparenl than upper floors. Upper floors are typically more residential,
private and thus less open.
As a measure oftransparency, the most characleristic and successful ground floorfacades
range from 55% to 707o of the total length of the commercial facade. Upper floors are often the
converse, 3Oo/o-45o/o transparent.
Examples of transparency (lineal feet of glass to lineal feet of facade) on ground level.
- Covered Bridge Building 58o/o- Pepi's Sports 71o/o- Gasthof Gramshammer 48o/o
JJ
- The Lodge- Golden Peak House- Casino Building- Gorsuch Building
66%
620/o
300h
51Vo
. SfaffResponse
Tnnsparcncy of the Vail Plaza Hotel is really only an issue a/ong the retail space frcnting on the
plaza arca. A measure of tnnsparency of the Vail Plaza Hotel (easUsouth courtyard elevations)
indicates that 58Yo of the ground floor facade is trcnsparent. Sfaff Delieyes that the ground level
is tnnsparcnt enough to provide the street appannce encourcged by the design
considerations.
Windows
ln addition to lhe general degree of transparency, window details are an importanl source of
pedestrian scale-giving elemenls. The size and shape of windows are often a response to the
function of the adjacent street. For close-up, casual, pedestrian viewing windows are typically
sized to human dimensions and characleristics of human vision. (Large glass-wall store-fronls
suggesl uninterrupted viewing, as from a moving car. The sense of intimale pedestrian scale is
diminished). Ground floor display windows are typically raised slightly 18 inches V and do not
extend much over 8 feet above the walkway level. Ground floors, wtrich are noticeably above or
below grade, are exceplions.
The articulation of the window itself is still another element in giving pedestrian scale (human-
related dimensions). Glass areas are usually subdivided to express individual window elemenls -
and are further subdivided by mullions into small panes - which is responsible for much of the
old-wodd charm of the Village. Similar[, windows ere most often clustered in banks, juxtaposed
with plain wall surfaces to give a pleasing rhythm. Horizontal repetition of single window
elements, especially over long distances, should be avoided.
Large single pane windows occur in the Village, and provide some conlrast, as long as they are
generally consistent in form with other windows. Long continuous glass is out of character. Bay,
bow and box windows ere common window details, which further variety and massing lo facades
- and are encouraged.
Refleclive glass, plaslic panes, and aluminum or other metal frames are not consistent in the
Village and should be avoided. Metal-clad or plastic-clad wood frames, having the appearance
of painted wood have been used successfully and are acceptable.
r SfaffRe5ponse
The Vail Plaza Hotel proposal ls in compliance with the above4escribed design considention.
Staff believes the use of domers with windows, bay windows and windows with mullions adds to
the architectural charm and visual integrity of the hotel. Staff recommends that the use
of mullions in the windows at the grcund level become a condition of final Design Review
apprcval.
Doors
Like windows, doors are importani to character and scale-giving architectural elements. They
should also be somewhat transparent (on retail commercial facades) and consistent in detailing
with windows and other facade elements.
54
o
Doors with glass contribute to overall facade transparency. Due to the visibility of people and
merchandise inside, windowed doors are somewhat more effective in drawing people inside to
retail commercial facades. Although greai varialions exist, 25-3}o/o V lransparenry is felt to be a
minimum transParency objective. Private residenoes, lodges, restaurants, and other non-retail
establishmenls have different visibility and character needs, and doors should be designed
accordingly. sidelight windows are also e means of introducing door-transparency as a
complement or substitute for door windows.
Articulaied doors have the decorative quality desired for Vail. Flush doors, light aluminum
frames, plastic applique elements all are considered inappropriate. As an expression of entry,
and sheltered welcome, protecled enlry-ways are encouraged. Doorways may be recessed,
extended, or covered.
r SfaffResoonse
Sfaffbe/ieves the applicant's proposal complies with the above-described citeria.
Trim
Prominent wood trim is also a uni_fuing feature in the Mllage. Particularly at ground floor levels,
doors and windows have strong, contrasting framing elements, which tie the various elements
together in one composition. Windows and doors are treated as strong visual features. Glass-
wall detailing for either is typically avoided.
r SfaffResoonse:
Sfaffbe/ieves the applicant's proposal complies with the above-descibed citeia.
DECKS AND PATIOS
Dining decks and patios, when properly designed and sited, bring people to lhe streets,
opportunities to look and be looked at, and generally conlribute to the liveliness of a busy street
making a richer pedestrian experience than if those streets were empty.
A review of successful decks/patios in Vail reveals several common characteristics:
- direct sunlight from 11:00 - 3:00 increases use by many days/year and protects from
wind.
- elevated lo give views into the pedestrian walk (and not the reverse).
- physical separalion from pedestrian walk.
- overhang gives pedestrian scale/shelter,
Decks and patios should be sited and designed with due consideration to:
- sun
- wind
- views
- pedesirian activity
r StaffResoonse;
The majoity of the decks and patios on the Vail Plaza Hotel arc located on the south side of the
building, facing Vail Mountain and the plaza. Wth the exception of the two outdoor dining decks
ontheplaza, fhesedecks andpatiosarcfortheuseofthe guesfs ofthehotel andnotthe
35
genenl public. Sfaffbe/ieves that the proposal complies with this design considention.
BALGONIES
Balconies occur on almost all buildings in the Village which have at least a second level facade
wall. As strong repelitive fealures they:
- give scale to buildings.
- give life lo the street (when used).
- add variety to building forms.
- provide shelter to pathways below.
. Sfaff.Eq5pgnge
Again, the majonry of the balconies on the Vail Plaza Hotel arc located on the south side of the
building facing Vait Mountain and away from the l-70 tnffic noise. Staff belreyes that the
proposal complies with this design considention.
Color
Balconies contrast in color (dark) with the building, typically matching the trim colors.
. SlaffEespo2se
Like the exteior color of the building, the Design Review Board will be rcviewing this aspect of
the proposal.
Size
Balconies extend far enough from the building to cast a prominent shadow pattem. Balconies in
Vail are functional as will as decorative. As such, they should be of useable size and located to
encourage use. Balconies less than six feet deep are seldom used, nor are those always in
shade, not oriented to views or street life.
r SfaffResponse
Staff believes this citeria has been met.
Mass
Balconies are commonly massive, yet semi-transparent, distinctive from the building, yet allowing
the building to be somewhat visible behind. Solid balconies are found occasionally, and tend to
be too dominant obscuring the building architecture. Light balconies lack the visual impact which
ties the Village together.
. ggf.Eesponse
The balconies on the Vail Plaza Hotel are prcposed to be semi-tnnsparcnt in appeannce.
Maierials
Wood balconies are by far the mosl common. Vertical structural members are the most
dominant visually, often decoratively sculpted. Decorative wrought iron balconies are also
consistent visually where the vertical members are close enough to create semi-lransparency,
JO
O Pioe rails. and olasiic. canvas or olass oanets shoutd 5s sveided
r SfaffResponse
The mateial fo be used in the construction of the balconies on the hotel is wood. with veftical
struclunl rnembers. A detail of the rciling will be reviewed by the DRB.
ACCENT ELEMENTS
The life, and festive quality of the Village is given by judicious use of acc€nt elemenis which give
color, movement and contrast to the Mllage.
Colorful accent elements consislent with existing character are encouraged, such as:
Awnings and canopies - canvas, bright color or stripes of two colors.
Flags, banners - hanging from buildings, poles, and even across streets for special
occastons.
Umbrellas - over tables on outdoor patios.
Annual color flowers - in beds or in planters.
Accent lighting- buildings, plazas, windows, trees (even Christmas lights all winter).
Painted wall graphics - coats of arms, symbols, accent compositions, etc.
Fountains - sculptural, with both winter and summer characler.
r SfaffRasponse:
O Accent lighting on the building, annual flowerc in containers and in the planting beds, potted trces
deconted with Christmas /rgfifs and inigated flower boxes are prcposed to provide colortul
accent elements on the Vail Plaza Hotel. Staffwould suggest that the applicant prcvide an
additional accent symbol (clock, crcst, etc.) on the main elevator tower. The tower is visible from
a distance as illustnted in the view analysis and would serye as an imporlant focal point to
guesfs and visitors.
LANDSCAPE ELEMENTS
Landscape considerations include, but go beyond, the placement of appropriate plant materials.
- planl materials
_ paving
- retaining walls
- street furniture (benches, kiosks, trash, etc.)
- lighting
- signage
Plant Materials
Opportunities for planting are not extensive in the Village, which places a premium on the plant
selection and design of the sites that do exist. Framework planting of trees and shrubs should
include both deciduous and evergreen species for year round continuity and interest.
- Naiive plants are somewhat limited in variety, bul are clearly best able to withstand the harsh
- winler climate, and lo tie the Village visually with its mountain setting.
Trees Shrubs
3'l
Narrow-leaf cottonwood Willow
Balsam poplar Dogwood
Aspen Serviceberry
Lodgepole pine Alpine cunant
Colorado spruce Chokecherry
Subalpine fir Mugho pine
Potentilla
Buffaloberry
. &f8espszs
A conceptual landscape plan has been submitted by the applicant. The plan has been
developed with some assisfance of Town slaff srnce a majoity of the landscape improvements
are proposed on Town property. The proposed landscape desrgn fakes into considention
factors such as the location of the plantings (sun/shade), maintenance, climate, etc. Staff would
suggest that the final landscape plan be reviewed by the Design Review Board along with the
fi n al st reetsca pe i mp rcve me nts.
Pavino
The freeze/thaw cycle at this altitude virtually eliminates common site-cast concrete as a paving
surface (concrete spall). High-strength concrete mey work in selecled conditions. Asphalt, brick
(on concrele or on sand), and concrete block appear to be best suited to the aree.
In general, paving treatments should be Qoordinated with that of the adjacent public right-of-way.
The Town uses the following materials for all new construction:
- asphalt: general use pedeslrian streets
- brick on concrete: feature areas (plazas, intersections, fountains, etc.)
. SfaffResponse
The paving material used in the public areas around the Vail Plaza Hotel has yet to be
determined and finalized. Again, the staff would suggesf that the final paving trcatment be
determined with the assisfance of the Design Review Board.
Retaininq Walls
Retaining walls, to raise planting areas, often protects the landscape from pedestrians and
snowplows, and should provide seating opportunities:
Two $pes of material are already well established in the Village and should be utilized for
continuity:
- split-face moss rock veneer - Village Core pedestrian streels (lypical).
- rounded cobble hidden moftar - in open space areas if above type not already
established nearby.
r Sfar7 Response
Landscape retaining walls are prcposed on the north, west and soufh sldes of the building. The
rctaining walls arc needed to provide proper gnding and dninage around the building. The
surtace mateial of the new landscape retaining will match the stone on the exteior of the
building.
38
Liohtino
Light siandards should be coordinated with those used by the Town in the public right-of-way.
. SfalTResponse
As part of the streetscape improvements along Vail Road, East Meadow Dive and the South
Frcntage Road, the applicant will be installing new Village light frxturcs. The number and
locations of the new lights was determined thtough consultation with Town staff.
Sisnaqe
Refer to Town of Vail Signage Ordinance
r SfaffResponse:
Given the staging of the application, signage has not yet been considered by the staff or the
applicant. The staff has requested that the applieant preparc a comprchensive sign prcgnm for
the Vail Plaza Hotel for rcview at a futurc date. The eomprchensive sign progrcm will be
rcviewed by the DRB.
SERVICE
Trash handling is extremely sensitive in a pedestrian environment. Trash collection is primarily
made in off-peak hours. lt is the building owners responsibility to assure that existing trash
storage problems are conected and future ones avoided.
Trash, especially from food service establishments, must be carefully considered; including the
following:
- quantities generated
- pick-up frequency/access
- conlainer sizes
- enclosure location/design
- visual odor impacts
Gartage collection boxes or dumpsters musl be readily accessible for collection at all times yet
fully screened from public view - pedestrians, as well as upper level windows in the vicinity.
Materials
Exterior materials for garbage enclosures should be consistenl with that of adjacent buildings.
Construction
Durability of the struciure and operability of doors in all weather are prime concems. Metal
frames and posts behind the prefened exterior materials should be considered io withstand the
inevitable abuse these structures suffer.
r SlaffResponse.'
The applicant is proposing to incorpond a t, rsh dumpster and recycting bin into the design of
the main loading/delivery area. The dumpster and bin will be completely enclosed and
accessrb/e from inside the building. Access to the dumpster and bins will not impede the
opention of the loading/delivery functions. The driveway and inteior building height is desrgned
to accommodafe fnsh trucks. Staff believes the applicant's proposal complies with the above-
descibed criteia.
E. ldentification and mitigation of natural and/or geologic hazards that affect the
property on which the special development district is proposed.
According to the Official Town of Vail Hazard maps the Vail Plaza Hotel development sile
is not located in any geologically sensitive areas or the 10O-year floodplain.
F. Site plan, building design and location and open space provisions designed to
produce a functional development responsive and sensitive to natural features,
vegetataon and overall aesthetic qualaty of the community.
The site plan, building design and localion and open space provisions of the proposal
have been reviewed at lengih by the staff, the Town of Vail Design Review Board and
Jeff Winston, of Winston & Associates, the Town's Urban Design Consultant. This
review is lhe culmination of numerous meetings between the staff and applicant's design
ieam, five conceptual reviews by the Design Review Board and three meetings with Mr.
Winston. The staff's review has focused primarily on the technical aspects of the
proposal (vehicular access, driveway grades, required distances between structures,
sidewalk widths, building orientation, developmenl slandards, etc.) while the Board and
Mr. Winston focused on reviewing the proposal for compliance with the design guidelines
and other applicable elements of the Town's planning documents.
Upon review of the proposal, the Town of Vail Design Review has voted 3-0 to forward a
preliminary recommendation of approval, with conditions, to the Vail Town Council. In
reviewing the proposal the Board was most concemed with the aesthetic qualities of the
hotel and less concemed with the development's responsiveness and sensitivity to
nalural fealures and vegetation. The lack of concern with the latter criteria is to due to
the absence of any existing natural features or vegetation on the development. A
condition of the Board's approval was a request for a detailed landscape plan to insure
adequate provisions are made for vegetation on the development site. The plans shall be
reviewed and approved by the Board as part of their final review process. A copy of the
Board's preliminary recommendation to the Town Council has been attached for
reference (Exhibit K).
Similar to the Design Review Board, Jeff Winston, the Town's Urban Design Consultant,
has also recommended approval of the hotel proposal. As stated previously, the
consultant's review focused primarily upon compliance with the design guidelines and the
urban design considerations outlined in the Vail Village Master Plan. The findings of the
consultant are that with the exception of opportunities to lower the eave lines of the hotel,
the proposal generally complies with the master plan.
The staff reviewed the technical aspects of the proposal for compliance with the
prescribed regulations. Upon review of lhe proposal, staff finds that the applicant will
need lo be provided relief for the proposed deviations from the building height, setback
and multi-use parking credit formula if this proposal is to be approved. As discussed
previously, staff believes that the request for additional building height is reasonable and
appropriate given the existing circumstances and the ability io provide employee housing
units on-site. We also believe that relief should be provided from the parking
requirements of the regulations. Staff feels that relief is justified given size of the hotel,
the mixture of uses within the hotel and within the District as a whole, and recent trends
40
G.
in resort travel. staff is no longer concerned with regard to the proposed Vail Road
setback. We believe lhat some encroachment of building improvements into the fronl
setback is appropriale given the context of the built environment of the area, the hotel
design along the street fagade, and the provision of open plaza space on the interior of
the development. While the applicant speaks of average setbacks, staff is more focused
on the minimum distances the face of the hotel and the back of the curb along Vail Road.
The minimum distance proposed is now 22 feet from the multi-story face of the hotel to
lhe back of the curb. Within this area the applicant can provide an eight-foot wide paver
sidewalk, landscaping, wilh room for snow storage. Staff would recommend that the
applicant noi be required to increase the proposed Vail Road setback.
A circulation system designed for both vehicles and pedestrians addressing on and
ofi-site traffic circulation.
The on-site/off-site vehicular and pedestrian circulation system design has been
discussed in great detail. Mueh of ihe discussion with the Board and Commission
centered on providing adequate pedestrian and vehicular access to, from and within the
development site. In response io the concems, the applicant has redesigned many areas
of the plan. The pedestrian areas include the pedestrian connection through the hotel to
the Gateway Building, the alleyway spaces between the hotel and Phases lll & V, the
plaza arca south of the hotel, and the pedestrian link from the hotel enirances to the new
bus stop on East Meadow Drive. The vehicular areas included providing adequale
lurning and maneuvering area at the porte cochere, the entrance only and exit only
driveway locations on Vail Road and the entering and exiting design of the loading/
delivery facility.
Pursuant to the submittal requiremenis for the major amendment request, the applicant
was required to submit a Traffic Report. A Traffic Report has been prepared by the lraffic
consulting firm of Felsburg, Holt & Ullevig. The purpose of the report is to evaluate lhe
impacts of the hotel development and the proposed traffic pattern circulalion on the
Town's street syslem. This report has been used by staff to analyze traffic impacts of this
project. In summary the transportation engineers find that the proposed vehicular
circulalion system is reasonable and appropriate. lt is believed that through minor
mitigation measures such as signage and an enter only/exit only design the traffic
impacts and safety concerns of the Town can be resolved.
A copy of the Traffic Report and a memorandum from Greg Hall lo George Ruther, dated
December 9, 1999 have been attached for reference (Exhib.it L).
Overall, staff believes that with several minor changes and revisions to the plans, the
proposal meets the criteria of providing adequate on-site and off-site vehicular and
pedestrian circulation systems.
Func'tional and aesthetic landscaping and open space in order to optimize and
prreserve natural features, recreation, views and functions.
Staff believes that the landscape improvements proposed will be beneficial to the quality
of the landscaping in both the public and private spaces in the vicinity of the hotel.
Through the implementation of the Town of Vail Streetscape Master Plan, a porlion of
East Meadow Drive will be enhanced aesthetically. The improvements will include new
heated brick paver walkways, the completion of the bus stop, updated streetscape
lighting, and wider pedestrian walkways and stairs,
The landscape elemenls ofthe proposal have been reviewed on a conceptual basis by
H.
4l
the Town of Vail Design Review Board. Upon review of lhe proposal the Board has
voiced a favorable response to the applicant. A final landscape plan shall be reviewed
and approved by the Design Review Board prior to the issuance of a building permit. The
design of the plaza area south of the hotel is consislentthe previous direction end inteni
of the overall development of the District. The creation of the plaze, with the associaied
pool area, landscaping, outdoor caf6, pedestrian walkways and retail store fronts
complies with the guidelines of the Open Space Plan, an element of the Vail Village
Master Plan. Pursuanl 10 the Open Space Plan, the area south of the hotel and interior to
the development is intended io be a public plaza with greenspace opportunities. Staff
believes that based upon the sun/shade analysis prepared by the applicant, the plaza
area will receive adequate amounts of sun light throughout the year. The access to sun
light will insure a pleasant, useable plaza area in the Town.
The proposed pool and hot tub deck area is intended to address the recreational needs of
the District. The use of these recreational amenities will be made available to ihe owners
of property within the District. The new pool will replace the existing pool on the Phase lV
development site and will insure consistency with the general direction of the Open space
Plan.
Overall, staff believes that the proposal complies with this criteria.
Phasing plan or subdivision plan that will maintain a workable, functional and
efficient relationship throughout the development of the special development
district.
The need for the phasing of the hotel redevelopment is not anticipated at this time. A
conslruction staging plan will be required at the time of building permit issuance. The
plan will be reviewed to maximize the workable and functional relationship between the
redevelopment of the hotel and the existing uses, structures and lraffic systems in the
vicinity of the development site. The goal of the plan will be maximize the efficiency of
lhe construction process and to minimize the negative impacts inherenl io major
construction projects.
VIII, CRITERIA AND FINDINGS FORA GONDITIONAL USE PERMIT
Upon review of Section 18.60, the Community Development Deparlment recommends appnoval
of the requesl for a conditional use permit to allow for the operation of a 50 unit fractional fee
club within the Vail Plaza Hotel based upon the following factors:
A. Consideralion of Factors:
Before acting on a conditional use permit application, the Planning and Environmental
Commission (PEC) shall consider the factors wiih respect to the proposed use:
1. Relationship and impact of the use on development objectives of the
Town.
In January of 1997, the Vail Town Council adopted Ordinance No. 22,
Series of 1996. In part, this ordinance amended the Public
Accommodation Zone District allowing fractional fee clubs as a conditional
use and set forth criteria for the Commission to consider when evaluating
such a requesi. Since that time the Austria Haus Club redevelopment
project has been completed and the Gore Creek Glub has been approved
by ihe Town. The Austria Haus contains 28 fractional fee club unils and
2.
3.
the Gore Creek Club has been approved to construct 66 units.
The applicant is requesling the issuance of a conditional use permit to
allow for the operation of a fractional fee club within the Vail Plaza Hotel.
The proposed club would be comprised of 50 two and three bedroom club
units. These units would range in size from 920 square to 2,282 square
feet. The average club unit size is approximately 1,335 square feet in
size. Each of the units has been designed in such a manner as to provide
multiple "keys" io for lock-off units. The total number of "keys" in the club
is 108. Accotding to the applicant, the ownership of the club units will be
divided into a maximum ol 1l12th intervals for the 24 winter weeks during
the ski season, while the remaining 28 shoulder season and summer
weeks would be owned by the hotel. This ownership program allows for
the most attractive weeks of the year to be sold as club units with the
proceeds helping to finance the redevelopment project. The remaining
inlerest in the clubs is then used by the hotel to support the conference
facility during the summer monihs. According to the applicant this
program will create the best possible occupancy of the hotel and maximize
the viability of ihe conference facilig.
Through the adoption of Ordinance No. 22, Series of 1996, the Town
further recognized the need for lodging altematives for our guests and
visitors. In passing the ordinance the Town Council found that quality
fractional fee clubs are an appropriate means of increasing occupansy
rales, maintaining and enhancing short-ierm rental availability and
diversifying the resort lodging market product within the Town of Vail.
Equally as important, the Council believed that fraciional fee clubs were
simply another of many forms of public accommodations. lt has been a
long held belief that in order for the Town to remain competitive and on the
leading edge of resort development, that allemative lodging opportunities
must be created and creative financing vehicles for hoiel redevelopmenl
must be implemented.
Staff believes that the conditional use permit for a fractional fee club within
the Vail Plaza Hotel will be beneficial to the Town and will have a positive
impact on the development objectives of the Community.
The effect of the use on light and air, distribution of population,
transportation facilities, util ities, schools, pa rks a nd recreation
facilities, and other public facilities needs.
Staff believes that this review criteria has been satisfied as previously
discussed in Section lV of this memorandum.
Effect upon trafiic with particular refercnce to congestion, automotive
and pedestrian safety and convenience, trafiic flow and control,
access, maneuverability, and removal of snow from the street and
parking areas.
Siaff believes ihat this review criteria has been satisfied as previously
discussed in Section lV of ihis memorandum.
Effect upon the character of the arca in which the proposed use is to
be located, including the scale and bulk of the proposed use in
4.
43
5.
relation to surrounding uses.
Staff believes ihat this review criteria has been satisfied as previously
discussed in Section lV of this memorandum.
Prior to the approval of a conditional use permit for a time-share
estate, fractional fee, fractional fee club, ortime-share license
proposal, the following shall be considered:
a. lf the proposal for a fractional fee club is a redevelopment of
an existing facility, the fractional fee club shall maintain an
eguivalency of accommodation units as presently existing.
Equivalency shall be maintained either by an equal number of
units or by square footage. lf the proposal is a new
development, it shall provide at least as much accommodation
unit GRFA as fractional fee club unit GRFA.
The Vail Plaza Hotel proposal is a redevelopment of an existing hotel. The
proposed hotel shall be required lo maintain an equivalency of the
presently existing number of accommodaiion units. The applicant is
proposing to meet the equivalency requirement by replacing an equal
number of accommodation units. According to information on file in the
Community Development Department 78 accommodation units exist in
Phase lV of the Vail Village Inn. The applicant is proposing to replace the
existing units with 99 new hotel rooms totaling approximately 35,818
square feet.
b. Lock-off units and lock-off unit square footage shall not be
included in the calculation when determining the equivalency
of existing accommodation units or equivalency of existing
square footage.
Even though lock-offs cannot be counted towards meeting the equivalency
requirement, nor are they needed in this case, the applicant has
maintained 62 lock-off units in the Vail Plaza Hotel. The staff and
applicant feel that these units will be rented as short{erm
accommodations when nol in use by the club members, and thus enhance
the overall hotel bed base in Town.
c. The ability of the propoged project to create and maintain a
high level of occupancy.
The fractional fee club component of the Vail Plaza Hotel proposal is
intended to provide additional hotel and "hotel-type" accommodation units
in the Town of Vail. The applicant is proposing to incorporale 50 member-
owned club units (fractional fee club units wilh 62 lock-off units), with 99
new accommodation (hotel) rooms. Although not included in the
equivalency requirement, the fractional fee club units have been designed
to accommodate lock-off units. Staff believes thal lock-off units provide an
additional community benefit of added 'pillows". lf a fractional fee club
unit owner purchases an interesl in a multiple bedroom unii, and does nol
desire to utilize all the bedrooms, they can then have the opportunity of
returning the unused bedrooms (ock-off units) to a rental pfogram.
44
Staff feels that by providing lock-off units, and managing the availability of
the lock-off units in a rental program when not in use, a fractional fee club
project can significantly increase the availability of accommodaiion units in
the Town of Vail.
Through our research on the fractional fee issue back in 1996, staff ihen
identified some potential positive impacis of fractional fee units in the
Town of Vail:
A) Activity during the "shoulder seasons" tends to increase due to an
increase in year-round occupancy;
B) The atlraction of revenue-generating tourists;
C) The efficient utilization of resources. This is the "warm beds" concept;
D) More pride of ownership and community buy-in with fractional fee club
units than with accommodation units;
E) Increased levels of occupancy; and
F) Increased resort exposure due to the extensive number of interval
owners.
d. Employee housing may be required as part of any new or
redevelopment fractional fee club project requesting density
over that allowed by zoning. The number of employee housing
units will be consistent with employee impacts that are
expected as a result ofthe project.
The staff included the fractional fee club units into the calculation of the
employee generation resulting from the proposed major amendment of the
Special Development District. Based strictly on the number of club units,
the development will generate a need tor 125 "nera/' employees. When the
multiplier of 0.30 is factored in, the fractional fee club generales 38 of the
"neu/' employees, which the developer must provide deed-restricted
housing for.
e. The applicant shall submit to the Town a list of all owners of
existing units within the project or building; in written
statements from 100% of the owners of existing units
indicating their approval, without condition, of the proposed
fractional fee club. No written approva! shall be valid if it is
signed by the owner more than 60 days prior to the date of
filing the application for a conditional use.
The applicant, Waldir Prado, d.b.a. Daymer Corporation, and legally
represented by Jay Peterson, is the sole owner of the property. No other
written approval is required.
Vail PlazaHotel
Major SDD Amendment
Attachments
February 28r 2000o
rf
Attachmert AA
el-/^'I twlq)-lr(r-
lF :l: Ji Fl* 5- l_. ; q)
t{
=
qJ
i'
(n
rrl()\ti
H CF
ri i-:
N;T
Fd U-E
-=9A,Jg5l- ?> z
zy. i
,,,= : i .B;
d i ! :3.
:;i!;ii
ur: :r;E
r.,ti i
N
's-{.-rtt\.>
_.-.4;l -:1'3:::::':'',:
- i*- -r- -
i il
-., *
i- qF
=.
-(CJ+r
i?rlli:=
d i-N::FT U:' vr .E
-l=?A i:,l*>i
l-r-t1
f
. ,1- t.:
jl'..i; I
::
,} '*
q)
FFiir "3
L\l = -;FT:?1-)Z
- =itn -34w,F-
.q
tr
et;
ll
i
t.
il
l'
li
ii
t:
ij
li
lti
!..q
€)*-)
I"|'I:I
t4
N
-
-n,
-t<.rd
F
t'
i;r5r
.:5v+
;F=
s*E$il
ci!;6:.E:
= ir;:iA-
'= .-a
=+aif!
1.. .-
.'1 r- ^\ i)v \-" LrtY'
/^v
o{r)
Hfrt
dEE
Ni;
--Pr.g i.giss
,tt
tiig
N
w
I
:
I
I
I
-
.:r
=E'q)Ea0r.iu-
rl=
=l x
1 LJ); .-.)].:IUI+It-=*-.Ii
i! i
1ji./i I
i
1
,,. '/.;1
=6>.a
p-*#
G
@
€
@
@
a
tEt<ffiE! EI46 3">
=ql,t: 6
!!
'o
,o
,(l)
+++*5itif;fti:
FFFttlrri
+
Efe
e
r
I
+b
.hcou6
c,
tIJ
@
"=
==EO
/^v
€)Po
T=
-:l
G
c
nl
oE
E
f
tJ)
OJ
LU
(!
t-u
=x6Eq
H9F
a_>e
''o
.E
t!
_9tlJ
o
LU
z
frjgllii
=
IilrxE{li
++++&f,ief{$EEE*'1r 1! T! {rrFrr
Lt
"F
ttt N|
I
=r
ii
.!
@Eo
UoV,
oo
.EE
=eo
ir
ft
F
*
ft
r
+++
ftfifirrriil
s
E'll
r
i
-9RH6i:d3"i
ut
>e
€)PoT+
G
N
_aL
G
EY>!!o>
=vv,
c
(!(d
ott!-:
*rY
=\J
IJ.J
i(!
E=
EE
=
c
(! L.>oq)>._-.ur=
40EU(Jz
ltlttlELLEkbililil
I
F
$
r;tii
tr FliiN=ii:
tt
$$
t
ti{t
?
.C
s+
ttttttL
*$$*$$f
$$
+
f
r
I
+*
t
I
ttt
$*$
v,
o
PG
o
tlJ i
EOI
bo*EaE
EA
/^,\v
IE
(lJ
t,(!
IJ.J
3P6E{
NgF:'= 5n->e
@Po
I
-
66
,a(!
trj
v)
(!
IJ.J
|a
o)
a!
|rJ
E
z
Er!!i
N?ll!
N
$$+t
I L I.LJ"E.E$
I
t
T
I
I
I
3
ii
;16
tatr
.9
Uo@
EO
@
.=p
=EO
/^\v
@PoTe-
6
(!tE
OE
lJr i
Er)
LLT
o{EE(Er->(Eo>
uJ=
f \,,
q\
6dtRNnr6:9
o_te
I
$
t t t t ttbEEEFF$$$$$$
.9-
i(d
E;
E8
=
EY>(!aD>_lt-ur=
EU
z
s itii
F !ii!
N
+.F
'1r
r
e.
_G3LTgf;
"Gi 'r
/^,v
@
o
-I
:x6FiNN?6:g
o_>8
6
;<t-i*,/
|!{)\l_
1-
..?
-?
gclli
=
Iiir
s* ? ili
-F€a\\It\ltl/-t'\ t I
nmi,snv#fii}K
:rkroN4
€)(u
F3a,
tnN9
J cJ'Fo..
r: t!?
S-E.H<,. g
o
oJ
/^,\v
@Po
=G
N6
L
6
t,t. (- '
(
\)(\)
(
)(
)
(
\l
(
\\
t
\,.1f-.(
=x
i: r!!;o>
-.:r! -|i>LE
filii
M Sldl
=
[ilr
N?II;
N
r li l? ll! li l3 ll: I J l3 llr li le ll:j
:
!
I
I
I
?
I:
J
I
1
{
.l
T
{
;
q
l
:
:
;
:
1
I
:
:l:l;:t:t:il;t:t!
I
/.\\.
l. / \
t:_t \\
t l: lr llI I i li ll : I j lI ll: lt l,' ll :
t li l! lflli lF ll: ll l: lli l: It llI li li llr li l:
r l!t! !l! I j l: ll: l! li lli lt l: ll: l: l:
o
Fe,gI+
eF1
=5.fio
(u
J
/^v
)
(
)
,.)
5
(r
I
L__-.r
l.^lz'\n| .' \-t tt
t'.
(
){
)\j
(
FIt1tlilllll!l---{ i
L__t-
I
I
i: .{
oFut'
>'i
@Po-r
c=5
6
N
_e
IALJ-
6d
1--l
r StiiMSldt
-=
[ ill
- ^ ErFNZIIE
N
f-ialtlallltltl
I
I
I
I
,t!lllllt,It
i
i
i
:
ti
:
:
I
rl:|,fl :l :l: ll-l:,f, = i,l,
I
j
I
t
!
Ii
i
!
i
:
:;
*
x
^
tl
v'
t,z
/l rir-l!t.lr
l__iliH
L_it:r
t---=U
('
I
-];l
"l.ii-l^)
I
I
I
I
-_,1
\.or,) -l+e
'tl
iF'E ru
d3E
ae
O
arl
=F
€,
oJ
/^\v
(
\)
(
t
ctq
N9r
o_>e
@Po
I
rg
I
)
r;tii
=
FIii
ruEiIE
N
T
T
I
\i
:ll :ltll :1"'l:ll ililrll rlrlx
I
t;
-:
_=
rf
_=
:
:
;
;
I
I
t
I
I
a.I
I
i
:_
:-
:_
x
ol
coN
o
oJ
/^v
aPo
J=
G
N6
tu
o-,
rs
i--*r{-@--
\lJf
vfi i j--
--rl'--l_------- __ -
-'-
/ 1
-"-==
g ilil
* liir
N
rr - 7l., '7
/It-, ((, )
,lN'r-.. 5
r
l
@^1
oE=n3,_\=tnf_:YOF1>n.{qIs
/^'\v
(
(
!
ll l6l l,
wi$
-J IR
i
I
I
I
I
CER
NgE
o_te
@eo
I
"E
ffiT-t
Frt .-13-tu! |
trl----lIri
Ir-::R| &&q| -m-I ttt---,\<
W fiiili
/.\^^'.a-|
-o o o vooooooo
.r .r rJ,r r. ^v r!, r!,r! \,, v soooo o o
O ooooo g o
"Y"oOiO
Io^oOL'
s,jii iis-;lltllh /.\ dl
rR
:F.9O: J'
6Et
-J64ttlJ
//L\v
iil'
I
ri
@.t-.JoT
-....E9rgF{Ni3HUtrV -. 5
n_>e
o-6
t
t
€"A
ffi
.--'--.2?
--'--.-
v'
r=fii
Nffiii
7 ffi#*W "w,.
-q-\otrii:3fiOFa
AEi
@PoT
ruERNri:id:i
o_te
"E
--'-----..'-
frclli
=
!ill
ruEllE
N
7 ffi#
uW -'w,.,
wwa--
oO
F9-trHg-ti6! E ::>Et(9_s-
/^v
a
-t__Jo=tr
a::
GN
_aL
6g
I
pts
#
2-.--.-
w%s
.fiilliffik
f',
o
o
L
=oE=tLE::XTgE;65;
-JE
//^'v
@
O
I
:xGFFNi?6:g
-=.:5n_>e
6#
G
.--
--
-.-
r;ti3
M3ldl
=
Iiirxilli
N
o
ltd+Fb
@=i>.:jjo*gJ;
€)J-Jo
=x6EFNF:c:.9
a_>d
o E:l
G
---
'--
=?
frclli
=
!iir
sl i lli
Nh
.x,@+=
:il3gt+
tu9*J.9 3
/^v
@PoT
---€EruF!Nt3id:F
-';5o_>e
G
-=-.-'-?
.-------../
fr';l'li
sEld3
=!illn< ? ili
N
t---IGA
6Eef,
HiiXQar_(zeEE ''l
/L'\v
@Po
=L6
N
-GL
6
--J'
.Ellli
E
_tr
o=
Se@:Eq
(u TEHT sEio *Eo;
ep{ FiEz
==eo
/v
Io
I
=x6EqNt3
=ur.r\) _. 5
a_>f
G
a.
Iri l'j
i;tl
IK
@li'o I
-)
fr,;l'll
=
$ilr
ru?i!i
N
IL\
F'tv?
ffis
r ',1
r{
=_@
a_
PE-€ 9ebo xEb'6 d5Hf =*t{J-'dft..'r= o
bO E F.Hg .EE-g>
=E
/^v
I
/,
t
a
K
$
HI:@
o
ll
:x6E{Nii6:g!:- =5o_>e
G
ab^ l/
l!i'o-_,1
re
5
w
ffi
fra'ili
=
!iilru?ili
N
W e/,r, i
p 'fl{ i --\-!f
',-- 4 --i- r[))1:.--b-- ) + -f )_-44-/,' {
'.Y
I
E
rh
e
=th
l\
3E,:gE
+o-
SENtn
H
:
t,t .
g;_
fEE;i
6t;i:
f;s6-
_5:P
ER<F
o)I
J4o(t,
o
E
(t)
*riEb1,qxvlr
sE
;r
o
c
=l\tc
b8llEEogR
@Po
I
6d
N6
tu
::
G
c
:E=^
a\
gE*o-dfio>e11 6l
:
At,
bE€o-
iix
E'
xo
.c
(r
t.Ll
(!l!
gr.)
.E
o-.n
oU
r3
v1
o
=l\
3
FEEd
TE
N=
c
=
.{C
b8-ctttrA
dFl
o(J
tt6v)
AI
5eE'i
JIP
N=
.E
P:
!:
EE
fiiili
Attachment A
=-z=.F
,'^A-
.:'::,:J'i-l
': r.:t.i,.;i.1.1
itl: ; j".: i,r;
\.:i'e'i
ri:ii.Ei!1",",".iih-ii
:i,q!"rt,.,e
15::-i'.:.;;i,r1;:
;r'!i;.- ii;i:
r:i'j':i-ll'.1.1....,1ii
.. -.\.._-tr:1:., ., .,.. ....-.-' .- ,,.-t.- 71:-. ..,i : : .. -r,1..,, , .
-'.:-r: ;i;'-rt t;.ili:..:4r.r:., /;'r: .: ''. ::: :,.1r':.,'..'- . -'
U
IJ
q
o(s
P
+J
h=Eiirr E g= .o:E:l tg . fin soEl *S c ^ n*8 v'Afl 6+ F 6 $i',i ;
EHgEgi$.i"FfFFEsH
Sao.^i
= c9 6= R* s( " EI ;'gEl :* ; ag$* :
EEI r_'-i"FeEFEe
lEr siF ' $.r,"$i
Fg$ E $
Fqr R *6 € 6E Fj Ps : r
:
6:
. G.E roal )4 c (D.
-:E F E 6YEE d ': "r:t hdg j tE bil -- :-rc E ;Y ff_H 6 sffF p p^ e= gg # e.EflREfifig; ,E; AEI 3
fFl E$dEi $ $$s#E tE€ $
clcta
E(\
!too
ot
GI .E
"91 itl ccil mEdfe-l
EFI .* E; 'n 6 o
,9gl E b = s i ! *"
e<t q * ",iii --- (i 6 5l*iel qH fiSF 3 i ?e ;$€51 o: €tr: *o 05E6-{El 3. e ;5; ; * r? ;Rf5tl : c s3 Ei FIRR E E .E* P;
o
Eg
- it, b.9F E E;
E=, $ F-E#g
tHI g$ gg;*
F
Eo
$
;>a;s
f1Y<
3*
(.1 N
CD (\I
&1 tr
O!
Uo
F$
FOo|.'
d
.N
E
o
Attachment C
Vail Plaza Hotel
Proposal Comparison
(revised 2128100)
The following table compares the 1998 Vail Plaza Hotel proposal and the recent 1999 Vail Plaza Hotel approval to
tlte revised 2000 proposal.
Development 1998 sDD Major '1999 SDD Major Revised 2000 SDD Major
. Standard/ Amendment Proposal Amendment Aooroval Amendment Proposal
LotArea: 150,282 sq. ft. 150,282 sq. ft. 152,282 sq. ft.
GRFA: 133o/o or 200,460 sq. ft. 117Vo ot 175,666 sq. ft. 121% or 181,719 sq. ft.
(129,156 sq. ft. proposed) (104,362 sq. ft. proposed) ( 1 10,415 sq. ft. proposed)
Dwelling
units per acre: 0.29 du/acre 0.29 du/acre 12.7 dulacre
(276 au) (98 au)
(1s tru) (44fiu)
(1 du) (1 du)
Site coverage: 62026 or 92,637 sq. ft. 62% or 92,637 sq. ft. 61% or 92,036 sq. ft.
Setbacks:front 1? 6' 16'sides: 5', 0', 8' & 6' 5', 0', 2', & 5' 5', 2', & 0'
I Heisht: lu.ru, ,,oo'nn l" ,"o,nn lr.ru,.,oo,nn87.5'(arch.proj.) 73.75'(arch. proj.) 99.75'(arch. proj.)
Parking: 394 parking spaces 288 parking spaces 291 parking spaces
(249 new parking spaces)
(42 existing @ Phase lll)
Loading: six berths fve berths five berths
Commercial
sq. footage: 23o/o or 47,226 sq. ft. 26% or 46,124 sq. ft. 25% of GRFA or 45,228 sq. ft.
Gross Building Area: approx. 395,862 sq. ft. approx. 295,557 sq. ft.
Conference/ MeetingFacility: approx. 21,009 sq. ft. approx. 15,338 sq. ft.
Spa Area: approx. 27,802 sq. ft. apprcx.22,827 sq.ft.
o
F:\evaryone\pec\memos\10\wipc1
.l
Attachment I)
i c Li D I l'j!_ L I I i" i r .,r
Ali l) A:)srl(-t,{i'ii5. ti.,,
Tuesciay, October 19, l9g9
IvIr. George Ruther
Senior Special Projects Planner
Town of Vail
Department of Communitv Development
75 South Frontage Road
Vail, Coiorado 81657
Re:Vail Plaza Hotel
Ceorge:
Thrs is a wrinen description of off-site impacts and their propos€d mitigation as requested by your letter
dated l0/13/99.
L.
Pedestrian Impacts -Vail Road. We will be providing streetscape improvements in accordance
'lvith the streetscape master plan for the eastem side of Vail Road fiom the comer of East Meadorv
Drive to the northern mosl property line of our site. These improvements tnclude new "Village"
light fixnres and standards, curb and gutter, and a six-foot wide bnck paver sidewalk to match the
color, pattem, and size of the existing sidewalk at East Nleadow Drive., Additional landscape
improvements and final sidewalk configuration will be provided in accordance with design review
zoning regulations.
Pedestrian Impacts - East .'lteadow Drive. The Vail Plaza Hotel is proposing to provide
streetscape lmprovements in accordance with the sheetscape master plan for the northem side of
East lVleadow Drive liom the comer of Vail Road to the westemmost of the Vail Village hm PhaselA strucfure to mitigate pedestrian impacts in this area. The proposed improvements inciude
replacement of the existing cube fr,rtures with new "Village" light frxtures and standards and a six-
foot wide bnck paver sidewalk to match the color, pattem, and size of the existing sidewalk at the
corner of East lvleadow Drive and Vail Road. Additronal landscape improvements and finai
sidewalk configuration will be provided ir accordance with design revi€rv zoning regulations.
Pedestrian Irnpacts - South Frontage Roari. The Vail Plaza Hotel 'is proposing to provide
streelscape improvements in cccordance rvith the master plan for the southern sitl.e of the South
Frontage Road from the corner of Vail Road to the westemmost curb of the Vail Village Inn Phase
V ddveway to mitigate pedestrian impacts in this area. The proposed improvements include nerv
"Village" light fixtures and standards. curb and gufter, and a six-foot i.vide brick paver siCewalk io
match the color. paftem. and size of the existrng stder,valk at alrng the South Frontage Roatl.
Additiona.l landscape improvements and linal sidervalk conligurarion will be provided in
accordance wrth design review and other applicable zoning reguiatrons as weil as Colorado
Department of Transportatron.
Pedestrian Impacts - South Frontage Ro:rd. The Vail Plaza Hotel is proposirrg to pror-ide
str€etscape improvements in aocordance lvith the master pian for the southem side of the South
Frontage Road from the eastemmost curb of the Vail Village lnn Phase V dnveway to the
$'estemmost comer of East fvleado'"v Dnve (Crossroads) to mingate peclestrian irnpacts in this area.
The proposed improvements include lvhrte concrete standard curb and gutter. and a sixlbot rvide,
four-inch thick reinforced. white concrere sidervalk. These inrprovements specifically exclude
utiiity reiocation. engineered structures tbr retaining earth or support of the sidewalk, handraiis,
.t{r,h1li:i Ii.'i.lIjFt.J\iii.]ii,Jr-t"liil!kl{.)l{5.i_,\f,iiiSi_\}.,i:,,!\iit_l-lt.ltf.il rir::lr
B.
D.
Vaii Piaza Hotel
961070.00
Zehren and Associates, Inc.
t0it9/99
guardrails. or walls meant to provide fbr the safet_v of pedcstrians on the srdewalk. and/or drainage
systems meant to control surface water runoff. It is assumed that the items specificallv excluded
tvill ha ^.^.';,1-,J k. :--.^-r ---i-L !L- -,------r -, 'rylrr uq pruvruEu uy another entrty to be coordinated with the proposed sidewalk. Additionally it is
assumed that all improvements along the South Frontage Road wiil be at the discretion of the
Colorado Department of Transportation.E. Public Transportation Impacts - East ivleadow Dnve. The Vaii Plaza Hotel is proposirrg to
provide public aansportation infrastrucfure improvements in accordance with thi steetscape
master plan for a new bus stop adjacent to the westernmost portion of the Vail Village Inn Phase
lA structure to mitigate rmpacts in this area. The prooosed improvements relocation of fixed bus
signage and tixtures, and a bus stop similar in size, materials and character to t}e existing bus stop
located on the south side of the roadway. Additional landscape improvements and final
conliguratron wiil be provided in accordance with design revielv and oiher applicable zoning
regulalions.
It is our understanding that the e,risting surface.water runoff from the existing structures and the proposed
stnrctures on the site is wouid be in the same quantities and would drain to the same locations as currently
exist. Additionaily, we would assume no increase in surface water on our site would occur liom the design
of proposed drainage stuctures on the South Frontage Road. Therefoie would assume that no major
drainage infrastructure improvements would be necessary to accemmodate the proposed skuctures.
Please do not hesitate to contact me with any questions or concems.
Sincerely,
Tim Losa
Project Manager
Zehren and Associates, Inc.
o
*i----
l--
,\ i'i f)
h.j
lf.i t
Lill*lE
,:,-\-rJr t/1 ij .
Tuesday, October 19, 1999
Mr. George Rr"rther
Senior Special Projects Planner
Town of Vail
Department of Communily Development
75 South Frontage Road
Vail, Colorado 81657
Re:Varl Plaza Hotel
ueorge:
This a final written statement as requested by your letter dated l0/13lgg to address design criteria A
tluough I as outlined in section 18.40.080 of the town code. It is our understanding that these nine (9)
criteria are to be used in evaluating the merits of the Vail Plaza Hotel, the final phase of the Vail Village
Inri Special Development Dish:ict.
A. Design Compatibility. We believe that the hotel is designed in such a way tlut is both compatible and
sensitive to the environment, neighborhood, and adjacent propefties.
Setbacks are consistent with the underlyng Zoning in that they maintain an average of twenty feet
(20') from most adjacent,properhes to the primary building walls. Additionally, the sfuchrre maintains
setbacks consistent wrth adjacent properties along both the Frontage Road and Vail Road.
ivlass and bulk are sensitive to adjacent struchlres in that the hotel is designed to step up in height
and bulk from both the sheet and adjacent smaller strucfures in order to maintain a comfortable
pedesbian scale while maintaining consistent heights witir adjacent stuchres roof lines and ridges.
Additionally, we have purposefully hipped most of the roof forms at or along public streets and plazas
to provide a consistent bulk plane at steet level. The stepping and broken ridge lines, along with
variations in materials and wall planes act to break clown the overall mass and bulk of the project and
relate the hotel to the sr.rrounding neighborhood.'fhe archrtectural design is neant to be both compatible with both thd Gateway building and the
remainder of the special deveiopment district while providing some identiry* to the hotel as both a
recognizable and viable comrnercial sftuchrre within the contmunilv.
B. Uses, Densitv, and Activitv. The Vail Plaza Hotel is the last phase of rhe Vail Village lnn Special
Development Distnct and as such rvas al.,r'ays meant to be the anchor or most densely deveioped
portion of the dishict. As a fllil service hotel. 'rhrch includes conference. spa. restaurant, and
commercial activities, the hotel nreaut to acr as a "magnet" that drarvs people tlrouuh the other
snaller, sornmercial basecj structures in the special development distnct, (including the Gatervay
building). Additronally. ti're hotel is legally required to provide loading and delivery sewiees,
autornobile access, and piuking for the renainder of the special developrnerrt district.
C. Parking and Loading, We believe our parking and loading lacilities are in compl.iance with the
requirements of chapter I 8.52.
We are ploviding six (6), 12' x 25'r 14' undergrotnd loadrng berths. The marimum retluired is
frve (5) 12' x25'benhs in accordance with 18.52.i50. We believe our parking ibcilities meet iequired
number oi spaces requued by zoning chapter I g.52.
,^,1i,.-illli:{. i iri.r-l:nPl-.\i.l}:ii..ii "ri.ll il!._,}i:.l.nF _}l(_.\i,,:,\l((.-lrll-tj{_lt._:R[:
Vari Plaza Hotel
961070.00
Zeluen and Associares. Inc-
10t19t99
D. Confolmit-v rvith lllaster Plan. \Ve believe our development substantially complies with the goats
expressed in ihe various plans contained within the adopted Vail Village lvlaster Plan.
Ihe Latttl Use Plan indicates orr site as Medium/High Densiry Residential and as such
recommends a iodging onentation rvith a limited amount of accessory retail.
We are proposing to provide an increased amount of "urban open space" or public plaza and
buffenng greenspace in the areas rrdicared as such in The Open Space plan.
We believe that our'project conplies with the recomnrendarions in The Parking and Circulation
PIan. W e are proposing an internal connection to the Vaii Gateway shared pedestrian/auto area as
indicated. an improved pedestrian connection to East Meadow Drive including new bus facilities as
indicated, and a secondary external pedestrian connecfion to Vail Road between phase five and our
project. Additionally we would be providing sidewalk improvements from the new bus stop on East
Nleadolv Drive to the Gatervay on Vail Road" and BikelPedestrian sidewalk improvements from the
Vaii Gateway to the Vail Transportation Center on the Frontage Road.
We believe that our design substantially complies with Building Height Plan in that the plan
indicates buildings of five stories both to the east and west of our site along the frontage road and north
and south of our site on Vail Road. Our design maintains this four to five story relationship with our
neighbors. We feei as though the three to four story designation is inconsistenr with current conditions
and are not applicable as they reiate to our site. It is our understanding that these heights indicated in
the plan were based on preservi-ng vidws to Vail Mountain from the four way stop at the Intersection of
Vail Road and the Frontage Road prior to development of the Vail Gateway and the Roundabouts.
Because these views no longer exist with the development of the Vail Gateway as acknowledged in the
plan, and because stopping to view the n:ountain is actually discouraged by the movement of traffic in
the roundabout, we l'eel that these standards may no longer apply.
The Action P/an indicates our site as an area for potential residential/lodging infill rn accordance
with previous town approvals with which our proposed project is consistent.
The Vttil Yillage &&-Areas l-l oI the Vail Yillage Master P/an indicates our site as the final
phase of SDD #6. In dorng so, it identifies a series of goals, which we believe we comply with.
Itern 1.2 encoumges "the upgrading and redevelopment of residential and commercial faciiities."
Iten 2.3 "strongly encourages the development short tenn accornmodation units" and recognizes that
rvhen untts are "developed above the existing densiry levels, they shouid be managed in such a rvay
that a1lows for short terrn overnight rental".
Itent 2'4 encourages the deveiopment of new commercial infill compatibie lvith existing land uses.
Itent 2.6 encourages the development of atTordable housing units and may be required as part of any
redevelopment project requesrinu a densiry over.levels allowed by exisnng zoning.
[tent 3 2 recoglizes the "vill to "reduce vehicuiar tra{fic in the village to the greatest extent possrble".
Ilern 4.1 encourages the implovement of existing open space to creare ner,v plazas with greenspace.
Item 5.1 recognizes the need and desire to provide fbr parking deman<is on site and with rmderground
and visually conceaied parking.
Item 6.1 recognizes tire need ro provicie serv'ice and delivery faciiiries for existiug and nei.v
deve lopment.
E Natural Hazards' We believe there are no nanral hazards that may affect development of this site
F. Site and Building Design. We believe rve har.e addressed this issue by compliance wirh the Vaii
Viilage lvlaster Plan.
a
o Vail Plaza Hotei
96 1070.00
Tim l:osa
Project Manager., Zehren and Associates. Inc.
Zeluen and Associates, Inc.
t0/19/99
G' Pedestrian/Vehicular Circulation. We believe we have addressed this issue by comoliance with the
Varl Village Master Plan. Additionally, raffic shrdies indicate that vehicular circuiation pattems are
constdered safe and have relativeiy little impact on existing vehicular circuiatron systerns.
H. Functional and Aestletic Landscaping. We believe we have adciressed this issue by compliance
with the Vaii Village Master Plan. Additionaliy, we believe we have substantially improved on the
amount and qualily of publicly accessible plazas, greenspaces, and pedestrian circulation systems.
I. Phasing PIan. Tire development Mll be constructed in one phase with completion anticipated for late
fall of 2001.
Please do not hesitate to contact me with any questions or concems regarding the intbrmahon presented.
Additionaliy, if you need any additional informafion, please do not hesitate to contact me.
Sincerely,
AttachireDt E
t\
i
JZ5Jl-r.r L
fiZ-o^r
n<=udi
!
".* "', i::i'!' i
o
g= is 3?
EiEiI EE E
s lFri E! ;3E:E* tp ?'E.i is ^<: Y
A*eE E:r s
; i!;: EiE E:68
9rF(t
z
x)i
tl
rl
Li
..11
!ii
itlrll i{i' ti
,4,.O
'O
UZ*1x+=H- lJ-
=FF
4:%>;5
zoFolua
tuEoo
UJ
CI
JJ
"
=aa
=(5z6J
m
=A:'!
d3s
BF;
>q>4viu
o
oE
ITJ(5
FzoE
LL
=oGll.
zo
st
utJg
o
tr,oeEEo
O
=ut
5
S^
n%,
va
Yv.
+,
\,w
,,&o
(o
ATTACHUENT F
02
anh
6t
'o)
€\€\g\
fr)
a
a0
-€)+iAY
lTl
--abYN
-r.Y
-lA,
-t.E
-.bY
;l;iii'
Nli
N
u1
rt2
>-l
F0)
€\€\q\
N
G{
L()
q)
oz
-tq)+]
-lvHH
rlbYNtr,bY|rlA,
-la;
-.bY
,o
;ii!ii
NitoNI
(\
rt2
u)
tr
F.)
:*glt
NlE
€\o\o\
m
t)
a0
-O{-lr-lYIit i
-bY
N
-bYFl|A,FI
f-(.-
-.bY
o
a,r;f
-;t
TII
cl
u)
u2h
Fi)
g\
+'\o\
f.l|F|
L
Q)
-l
{l)
z
-to.l.a,tv
Ftl
GN
c{
-A.
-
.Fl
.G
zei
,,,i :9 !t
"fl i! lBr
;q E!lil
': EBlg
NiE
o
o
(fI
v)
lt2
G,
F€)
€\€\o\
(t)
ah
b!
I';lll'
-€)''F)
-lItH
--lbYNc{t-1AFl
.-
.cg
,o
o
tn
v1
ra)>l
Bt)
,o
o\€\€\
t\la{L.)
q)
z
-6)'ir)AvHf{
aabYN-,bUFIAt-l
'rl.d
G
:lslil
wlEoN
T
Q
vh
cl
t(u
-c)*)
FaFi€\
SsiGEFt5
Frryrt{.T
.G
IiiI$'
N:io
v
1'
tn>.
;.-.u
a
-c)rF)AO\
dEsl*l t''t
cBsEuWE
-.EFrg
r l.€
:H=
o
ru!i'*l EE $lrui E-o
|,n
q
.Ah
Bq)
z!=
r;:Hil
:;l$iii
': Ei:I
ru?E
a
-c)+]AFla
-€\s;
- {-.bv c,
-i!/l, a0
-=
-{.-
-lbU
7
nn|
in
u)
th
F
4)
€\:€\o\
FlFILo
c)
z
z9F*i ii i5"
": rii:l19;?EBi;:i5lur: :E Eg
r.,r.1 E
-l()+)a,vhtIt I
AbUN
-lbU|rlA,
trl.-'-,
t\.
a
g\
a\€\
(r)
u,
bo
\c
o)
ln
Fq)
F
o
-t€)*JoI*i
GN
cg
-lA,
Fl.-
-t. l.Y
a
Ig;i*'o
\o
a
uth
*q)
.a
€\€\€\
clt\
tro
q)
z
-l€J+)cHfl
GNclFirl.FI
FI.-
G
rIiili'
r..ri I
t\.
u1
u1h
B(9
€\€\o\
(fl
4t
h0
-l€)+JAv,F
--bY
N
-bYFlA,FI
-rFl
-.bY
z! E-
l;iiiii
': Ei Ei
N?E
t-
o
0
F(D
ia
o\€\o\
c{N
tro
q)
z
-tq)+rAYHf{
eqN
-bY
-A.
-l.-
Gl
zeE
:;igtii
'3 E* Ei
rrt? E
€
v1
vl
6l
Fc)
trilli'
r-O*)A€\.- o\Ftl€\lrl.l -c$Nrw€tir Errg
-.O.-z
.cg
o
6
q2
u,h
Bq)
-q)
'F)o^
Fl''! or"
-c\!laNFiGH
-.EFrS
'-l {.I
CE
o
zeF
t$!illr
'3!;ltN:E
N
€\
u)
0h
ql
Fqt
g\g\g\
tn
nh
h0
=
-c)tl-)AL'
Ftl
-eg
N
GI
-lF.'{
-.Fl
.G
liillt'o
€\
PA
ut
6l
t|l,
o
13\g\€\i
t\iNLa)!
€)
oz
-()
{rlAUH
-tc{N
cg
-Fr
frl.I.cl
(o
IiiI$'rull(o
ATTACH}IENT G
,2P?=-
CqQG
;a '
H 3.rEMQ)a?t
-*2
a*
t\(\
q)
z
-()+)
F,'i
t
Nd
-tA,
-.-
-
z9:.: I i; 33
!u," !: ::
-! i: iii*{ r i i r,l.-x ; E :;i-r_; i a ; jl:
4 -' ;:ur: ?i;E
N::
ffii
,.,0)
"=63(J=
atQa'o 'o 6l
E?Ya==
a*
o
(\i
t\t
z
,,,i:! ir. 3 i i:.*i;i:i;
rH !? ii;
L!; !: ::
Nii
-q)+l
tnf-l
Ft
Nrt
f<A,
F-<.-n
qq)?=trJ.i a! 3e
asA-t
(! {.) ,-E ?T(n=,
-r2rnL
tlN
z
z9=
= : ! !tu-
=
i ic
-s :: ire*l : i iti-ro 5: r; l:
J =- taur: ; = ;aNii
-q).P
tr'!FI
-Nd
-|t,
-l.-
I
aQ)'3.!
s
-
=N:?FlXe-a?i
=iza*
GIt.l
z
i
=:iizu.l r. : i:'g
rrl " j l!:-i i a 5rir9 :: ;li
;:-6:ttt.( !i:J
Ni _E
-C)€
!Ft{
a
N
-
Ai+{
t-l.-;t
.9srE!?=d
'?5 0
C! (JFra? 'f8s
# HE
=FH.Do.A
:iiiir
N?9
-q)+rAr O\,Y o\lF o\
HFTcSNhcsiTF
-;f- .O.rl Z,1,
,o
.29r3=-f E 6i
e,=
Er!cE o€AQF
;TA
:ftiit,
Eq)+)AO\.- o\FFI O\l*l !-r
roiby (\Nr6q;iFF;
-.O.-1 Za-
-
,O
iO
ilv
TIIB!'TSTAR BANK BLDG.
l(f, ITOUTIIIRONTAGE ROAI' II'ESI, SUITE 2II4
VAIL COLORAI'O 815'7
III.EIIIONE (970) tl76-lxltl
FACSIMILE (970) 476{n9!l
Blrunv & PsrERsoN
A PRoI'BssIoNAL Conronmox
Arronusrs Ar l-nw
LINCOIN CENTER
1650 LINCOLN STREET, SUIII3175
DENVE& COI.ORAI'O E(n64
TELEPHONE (303) tO7.1660
FACSIMTLE (m) &17-q'97
MEMORADIDT]M
Attachment E
P,O. BOX {49
{29 EDWARDS ACCESS ROAD, SUTTE AX}
EDWANDS, COIPRAI'O 81632
TBI,EPHONE (970) 926.9255
FACgIMILE (9?0) 945-9298
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
RE:
George Ruther
Jay K. Peterson
october 19,1999
Vail Plaza Hotel
Dear George:
The purpose of this memo is twofold. First, to set forth our employee housing proposal
and, second, to explain the fractional fee concept.
L E4plovee Housine. Attached to this memorandum is our Vail Plaza Hotel
staffing requirements set forth by departments. The chart I believe is self-explanatory. As you
can see, rather that full-time versus part-time, we have used work hours per year which I believe
is a more accurate way to calculate staffing requirements. We have calculated our existing
staffrng requirements the same way, in order to arrive at a net increase in employees for the new
hotel. This net increase is 105 employees.
Our proposal is to provide housing for 30% of these employees. Ideally, from our
standpoin! we would like to provide all housing within the Town of Vail. However, because of
limited opportunities within the Tovm, we would request the option to provide the housing
outside the Town limits, if necessary. The numbers would be the same whether inside or outside
the Town.
2. Fractional Fee. The Vail Plaza Hotel will contain forty-seven dwelling units
which will be operated and managed by the owner of the Vail Plaza Hotel, The hotel would sell
a mar<imum of twenty-eight prime winter and/or summer weeks with the hotel managing and
operating those weeks for the owners. The remaining twenty-four weeks would remain with theo
ownenhip of the hotel and would be managed and operated the same as the hoJel. There would
I be an obligation that the weeks remaining ,inOo A" ownership of the hotel be available only as a
"short-term rental," the same as any hotel room. The number of owners would be limited to a
minimum of six and a maximum of twelve, pusuant to zoning requirements.
Ifyou have any questions, please call.
Jay K. Peterson
Attachment
o
o
VPH STAFF (permanent and seasonaUpart-time)Page 1
Number of pan fime n"r"s =(avg hs.per peak
VPH STAFF (permanent and seasonal/part-time)Page 2
note l: includes "day off' coverage were applicable.
note 2: Maid service is based on occupied rooms/maid. Minor occasional fluctuations in
demand (less than 100% occupancy) will be covered with overtime of the permanent staff.
note 3: Occasional la will be serviced by the Conference waiter staff and the two shifts
reslaurant and kitchen staff in over time.
nob 4: Same cover more than 1 of the 14 treatment rooms for some treatments.
seasonal work hourgyear divided bv the reoular one full
note 6: it is a typical hoursi/peak day of a part time
note 7: it is the total part time "names" on the Davroll.on the
Totals
time at same ratio as VPH -
Hotel & Glub YEAR
in for lunch or dinner
note E: Hotel & Club are staffed as a unified
note 9: population for the specified number of unils,
l0: all hotel restaurants off the main pedestrian trafflc (Ludwis, The Villager, etc.) rarely (if ever) achieve a
walk in demand.This
note I l: all lhese uses are stafied based on real demand and not based on sq.ft., or seats or any other parameter.
note 12: lt is established in the business that the restaurant at the hotel never captures more than I lunch
It is part of ouests program to dine out in
other restaurants. Vail is plenty of those.
serves/waiter/shifl/dav indicales that this staff can servenote 131 The low ralio of
more than 2 times this demand.
o
o
o
o
MAXIMUM HOLIDAYS AND PEAKWEEK ENDS
1999 jdays/
holidays wanter :holidays
days/peak
wk.end
days
total
Veterans .l1-Nov 3
EHtr'trThenksgiving 2$Nov 3
2-Dec
, $Dec
,'1&Dec
Christnas 7NewYear F 7
SJan
LutherK 13-Jan 3
20-Jan
Linc,Val,Pre 3
Ash 3
3
3
3
St.Pafick 3
P4'l 3
Good Fri 3
',.r7-APr
winter lotal I 35 12 47
Independence 3
3
3
3
3ffi3
3 15 18
| 21-Apr
28-Apr
Mothe/s 5-May 3
Armed Forc 12-May
1$May
Memorial 2&May 3
GrandParen :: 9Jun
Father's 1 3
3
12 3
19-Aug'3
,26-Aug
2-Sep
9-Sep,
Yom Kipur r16-Sep.3
23€epl
3O-Sep;
Columbus 7-Oct 3
14-Oct
21-Od.
Halloween 28-Oct 3
4-Nov
16 I 27
year total 56 36 92
.l
jr
o
Vail Plaza Hotel
Parking Analysis
(revised 2l28l00l
Table l: A Comparison of the Parking Requirements tor Phase IV
Table 2: Existing Parking Requirements for Phasx l, il, ilt, & V
Table 3: Total Parktng Requirementlor all Phases of SDD #6
* Employee parking is factored into existing requirements
he\reryonev€cvnernos\oo\Wtpark
Attachment I
,o
o
Use
Dwelling Unit
Fraclional Fee Club
5,499 sq.lt.
62,816 sq. ft.
Units 35,818 sq. ft.
4,799 sq. ft.
3,576 sq. ft.
13,846 sq. ft.
Factor
>2,000 sq. ft.
Town
Vail Plaza Hotel
500<2,000 sq. tt./>2,000 sq. ft.
Town
Vail Plaza Hotel
2.5
2.5
98
98
Employee Housing Units *
Restaurant
Betail
Conlerence/Meeting Rooms
0.4 spaceJunit + 0.'l spaces/l00 sq. ft.
Town 75.4
Vail Plaza Hotel 75.4
Town 0
Vail Plaza Hotel 0
1 space/8 seats Town 40
1 space/170.2 sq. ft. Vail Plaza Hotel 28.2
1 space/300 sq. ft.
Town 11.92
Vail Plaza Hotel 1'1.92
l space/16seats Town 42.W
Vail Plaza Hotel 42.87
no.7
2s8.9
Town of Vail Requirement
Vail Plaza Hotel
SDD Parking Deficit per Ordinance
Previously applied multi-use credit 2.5%
uirement Jor Phases 1,2,3 & 5
a+b-
Tanrn of Vail Rquirement
Vail Plaza Hotel
spaces to remain) x mulliple use credit =
(270.7 + 191.7 - 42) x 0.9 =
258.9 + 191 .7 - 42) x 0.9 =
378.4
367.7o
Attacbiert J
(l
prepared by:
Felsburg Holt & UlleviE
Greenwood Corporate plaza
7951 E. Maplewood Avenue, Suite 2OO
Englewood, CO 80111
303t721-1440
Engineer: Holly A, Hefner
Project Engineer: Chris J. Fasching, p.E.
FHU Reference No. 98-174
September, .1 998
TABLE OF CONTENTS
paqe
t. TNTRODUCTTON .....iA. Land Use,-Site and Study area Boundaries . .... iB, ExistingConditions .........1
II. PROJECTEDTRAFFICCONDITIONS .........7A. Trip Generation and Design Hourly Volumes . . . . 7B. TripDistribution... .........gC. year2015 projectedTfafficVolumes .........8
III. YEAR 2015 TRAFFIC OPERATIONS 12,
12
t1
A. Background Traffic .., . .
IV. CONCLUSIONSANDRECOMMENDATIONS ........14
APPENDIX A - TRAFFIC COUNTS
APPENDIX B - EXISTING CONDITIONS LOS
APPENDIX C - YEAR 2015 BACKGBOUND CONDITIONS LOS
APPENDIX D , YEAR 2015 TOTAL CONDITIONS LOS
!r, totat I ratttc
'o LIST OF FIGURES
Vicinity Map , ..,
SitePlan....... .....;
.Estimated Existing Winter Conditions
Trip Distribution . .
,,.Year2O15 Background,TrafficCondhions :......
Year 2015 Total Traffic Conditions . . . . . ;
Existing Trip Generation Estimates
Proposed Trip Generation Estimates
fo
II
L INTRODUCTION
Land Use, Site and Study area Boundaies
Zehren and Associates, lnc. is proposing the Vail Plaza Hotel development to be located on the
southeast corner of Vail Road and the South Frontage Road in Vail, Colorado. This
deveiopment will be replacing three existing buildings with one building. The site location is
shown in Figure 1 ' The existing three buildings consist of a total of 41,643 square feet. The
proposed cj;'relopment will consist of a total of approximately 15O,OOO square feet of various
uses incli.rding accommodation units, a restaurant, a lounge, a spa, and retail space.
The proposed development will have one main.access onto the South Frontage Road. The
main access will serve as the entrance to the four ievel parking garage. A second access east
of the main access, will be used for most deliveries. The site plan is shown in Figure 2. The
impacts of the project traffic at the site access points and the roundabout south of l-70 are
presented in this report.
The purpose of this repon is to address the projected traffic impacts associated with the Vail
Plaza Hotel development proposal, and to identify any roadway or traffic control improvements
required as a result of these impacts.
B. Existing Conditions
The existing conditions in the vicinity of the project site are illustrated in-Figure 3. Currently
there are two accesses to Vail Plaza Hotel site. The main access is on the South Frontage
Road and the second access is on Vail Road, The South Frontage Road runs east/west
through Vail with a posted speed limit of 25 MPH adjacent to the site. Vail Road runs
north/south from the roundabout intersection with the Frontage Road providing access to
several hotels. Vaii Road is primariiy used for local access south of Vail Plaza Hotel.
The roundabout is located approximately 1 15 feet west of the main entrance to Vail. plaza
Hotel. Most of the site traffic currently uses the roundabout as does traffic oriented to/from
t-70.
Since Vail is a ski resort, winter traffic volumes have typically been higher than summervolumes. Traffic counts were collected during the week of August 17, 1gg8, and thesecounts were used to estimate winter numbers based on 'l 990 data collected during the winter
and summer. The estimated existing winter traffic volumes for the study area are shown in
Figure 3 (the raw count data are shown in Appendix A). As indicated, the South Frontage
Road east of the roundabout carries approximately 3OoO vehicles during the winter pM peak
hour. The volumes at the two accesses were calculated by estimating rrip generation for the
existing buildings.
o'
a
I
E
!9z
o-o$5>9;lL .=-.;
>
(fdo4fF>4'rBlu?l.r
fivJ
K<G.
I
I
otco(g
;;- tr,
@
u-
t-It
a,z o4
-lnJ
.- \J --:
' .. i: ":. -'\
K<;'N-
(fJ(n=_- - r.t9.o)-.=
9t= r
Ll.-\-os)oab3
c
=>
c
-u)x
Ll,J
r
(\l
r-6
--29
ttt
@t\
IY
l
II
ut
o
E.'=
@.
IIJ
J lr
+-695\ogs
530*
I
\ca
Fl
\ \n.\i;
tl:l
rl
\
122s1
ie
'.s,
U)
ll
d).=EZ:o7,4
-o
i=o?.i: (|)
FJ
oo-r 'r
J .iz('!u0'o
z
I.IJ
trJ)
U)
.!
(u
Ill
X xl
A/,
oz
o
1o
odc4eriul X --.r:ivJ=-."\N.
The total peak hour traffic volumes were used as the basis for subsequent LOS (levels of
service) computations, the results of which are summarized in Figure 3 (worksheets are shown
in Appendix C) as is the intersection lane geometrics. Level of service is a quaiitative measure
which describes traffic operations. A letter designation ranging from A to F. is used as the
measure. A LOS A is indicative of excellent t:'affic operations with very little delay and no
congestion, while a Los F represents extreme delay and signiiicant congestion.
As shown in Figure 4 the left turn onto the South Frontage Road from the main site access
currently operates at a LOS F during the PM peak hour. The left turn into the site from the
South Frontage Road currently operates at a LOS C during the PM peak hour. All other
movements operate at a LOS B or better during the pM peak hour.
The minor movements to/from the second access along Vail Road currently operate at a LOS
B or better during the PM peak hour. The roundabout currently operates at an overall LOS A.
o
9cps
J-r
.o
!-F
-l
,r lr' ': .z\o\o\€\.i\:,\I\vo^ \-?rt\
a\
tf
t\
oT
JA
]nt
Fi31G.K<;
il.
A.
PROJECTED TRAFFIC CONDITIONS
Trip Generation and Design Hourly Volumes
Trip generation equations, as documented in Trio Generation. Institute of Transportation
Engineers (lTE). Sixth Edition, 1 997 were used to estimate the vehicle-trips generated by the
existing and proposed deveio!ment. lt was assumed that 5O percent of the traffic to/from therestaurant, lounge. and specialty retail comes from outside while the other S0 percent isinternal {as such, the trip generation associated with these uses was reduced SO percent).
Table 1 summarizes the trip generation results with existing conditions.
Table 1
Existing Trip Generation Estimates
o
J.
As shown in Table 1, the sire currentry generates approximateiy 1Oso trips per day. The AMand PM peak hour trip generation is estimated to be approximately 75 and 9o trips,
res pectively.
Table 2 summarizes the trip generation results for the proposed deveiopmenr.
As shown, the proposed development is estimated to generate approximately'31oo trips perday' The AM and PM peak hour trip generation is estimated to be approximately 175 and 260trips respectively. App:'oximately three times as many trips are projected for the proposeddevelopment as compared to the existing uses on the site.
Lano' use .'PM Peak Hour
-.;''.SlZe i In ln Total
Condo/
Townhouse
ZJU 22 Rooms 10 12 64 64 128
Hotel 3'r o 36 Flooms ,tz 'to IT zJ:t 478
Restaurant n 1.0O0's 1 1 ,7 43 43 oo
Drinking.*oJo I 1,O00'sq^ Er
o n J 't IJ IJ 26
Market 852 1 ,000's 17 16 ?l 162 tol 324
Totals 20 JI fo 6n 40 qn 521 521 1042
' Daily Drinking Total from 1 5 o/o of pM Rates
o
Table 2
Proposed Trip Generation Estimates
B. Trip Distribution
The trip distribution estimates used in this analysis are shown in Figure 4. These percentages
are based upon the existing traffic data previously presented (Figure 3). As shown,
approximately 70 percent of the total site traffic is expected to be oriented to and from the
west through the roundabout. Site generated traffic was assigned to the adjacent roadway
network per these distribution patterns and are shown in Fioure S.
C. Year 2075 Projected Traffic Volumes
Background Traffic
Analysis of traf f ic impacts f or a year 2O 1 5 scenario requires projecting background trafficvolum'es. The projected background traffic was a result of exponentially increasing the
volumes by two percent per year. Year 2O 1 5 backgr:ound traffic volumes and operational
conditions are shown in Figure 6.
Total Traffic
The total year 201 5 traffic volumes are shown in Figure 7. These volumes were determined
by first removing existing site traffic then adding the site generated traffic to the year 201E
background traffic volumes. As shown, the Frontage Road is projected to carry approximately
46oO vehicles during the PM peak hour in 20 1 5. Trips attributable to the proposed Vail plaza
Hotel would comprise approximately 6 percent of the total.
Land Use AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Weekday
Building
Type ,'ln ln Out Total Out I otat
Condo/
Townhouse
230 to Rooms 2 I 47 94
Hotel 310 zto Rooms 95 OU t 3c o:,lod I I JO 227 2
Restaurant l,OOO's 1 4 22 12 34 201 201 402
Drinking *1,000's ',4 7 )1 o:,69
Specialty
Retail
Center
Q1^1,000's c o 11 14 '14 z6 6/174
Totals 104 t5 176 144 1 541 1541 3081
Daily Qrinking Totat from I5% of pM Rares
o
E
t|)
U)
()
(6
F
o-=a
K<!
o
.9
e<
83r
I
t
oz
u.l
an
trl
J
O.5 O&fF>
=Ja-i ,^ !
:ivJ- i:'r "1N.
6
i,
(o.
(p€
E-o
o
F
o.f
I([
(D
TL
=
(l) to U)q)?-c:oo)r-n \!{
::- L 7.tfI r.r< =-a; b-c)
\JF
Lt-
a'
=
L-FI\
.}<
\1,
O
I
,,9.
(,
AI\
\\p\ro
(o
i-szs
-C-1o-
o9ld) .::E>
=o=a5=oi
=g6i
oo
JI6(6(Do
tl
ooJ
(t
o
Xx
ozut
lltJo:l:UI; J
=vJ:: '.- -\
K<;N.
a
oz
f- tO (D.n tr- ciar
*. C\j =IJ(gc.oo
\r.
E
(6r_,F
ttt
.ts
r-ro+(\{
tlrlYt-
f-- 35i- 83
iroo(DO
f\F
\geo
i
,onw
FlI)
GI
F.
@
6d^
r / av-\
ra(D6.(JE-J€J
ovt>:()_
;EOFJ
oo.l-.lr.
!rE
^o .'o Q
CL
==9o- o- s)
tl
I xlzul
ulJ
J:o
ad'c'
(D
o
i>F
ii.
o,, o4lF->
4;J;\JJi:' 'T' '-'lN.
H
ilt.
A.
YEAR 2015 TRAFFIC OPERATIONS
Background Traffic
The peak hour traffic volumes shown in Figure 6 were used as the basis for subsequent levelsof service computations, and the results are aiso summarized in Figure 6 (worksheets are
shown in Appendix C). The roundabout will operate at an overall LOS D. However, the only
movements that are iower than LOS B would be the south approach and right lane east
approach. These movements are projected to operate at LOS C and F respectively. The LOS
F from the east movement is a result of the high amount of volume turning to the north toward
l-70 and the North Frontaqe Road.
B. Total Traffic
The total peak hour traffic volumes shown in Figure 7 were used as the basis for subsequent
levels of service cbmputations, and the results are also summarized in Figure 7 (worksheets
are shown in Appendix D), All movements on the roundabout will operate at the same LOS
as the background traffic showed previously with the exception of the south approach which
will operate at a LOS D. The left turning movement into the site (at the main entrance) will
operate at a LOS E and the left turning movement out of the site will operate at a LOS F.
Site generated traffic consists of approximately 1.2 percent of the total traffic entering the
roundabout. Of the right lane east approach the contribution from site generated traffic is
approximately 2 percent, No improvements wer€ used on the roundabout for this analyses.
The main access onto the South Frontage Road included two roadway improvements in the
analyses:
' Provide a "storage" area in the dxisting median for site outbound left turning vehicles
to safely pass eastbound traffic. A raised island already exists in the median from the
roundaboutto the site access providing separation between eastbound and westboundtraffic. Minor modifications would need to be made to the island to provide for a
storage area. With this "saf e harbor, " left turning vehicles could cross eastbound' traffic in one maneuver and wait in the storage area prior to merging into westbound' traffic. With the addition of the storage area the left turn movemenrs out of the site' wouid still rerhain at a LOS F. however, the delay time for this movement is improved
significantly (more than 25%).
needed to remove right turns f rom thru traff ic lanes. This is of importance here
because vehicles coming out of the roundabout do not have sufficient reaction time in
the 1 15 foot distance to slow or stop for a right turning vehicle.
io
o
12
Limiting movements to right iniright out or three-quarter movement was considered for the
site's main access. This would require that vehicles exiting the site desiring to use the Vail
Road intersection with l-70 (which is most of the sitetraffic) make a U-turn somewhere along
the South Frontage Road. However, there is not a safe place for vehicles to make a U-turn
within a reasonable distance. Therefore, it is recommencjed to improve the main access so as
to accommodate full movement as safely as possible which includes a center "harbor" area
and a right turn deceleration lane.
The second access onto the site from the South Frontage Road will be used for deliveries. Due
to space limitations on site. trucks will need to back up onto the site from the Frontage Road.
This should be done from a separate lane along the south side of the road, The existing right
turn lane east oi the site should be extended west to the site's deiivery access. The design
of the lane and driveway should accommodate backing trucks to allow no interference with
eastbound though tra{fic. Physical or barrier sepai'ation should be incorporated into the design.
T,
o
ot5
o IV. CONCLUSIONSANDRECOMMENDATIONS
The following highiight the
analvsis:
significant findings and recommendations as a result of this traffic
trips consist of subtracting the existing 1e42 trips from the
nanorrtad trinc!rvr rv, s Lss rlPdi
The total projected
proposed 3082 site
Two roadway improvements will be necessary at the main access onto the Frontage
Road. The first includes modification to the center median to provide a srorage area
for vehicles turning left out of the site. This will allow for a two-steD left turn with lessdelay. The second is an exclusive right turn lane into the site for eastbound traffic.
This exclusive right turn lane will remove turning traffic from the though traffic ianes
thereby improving safety characteristics.
The roundabout will
traffic will consist of
in year 2015.
not be adversely affected by the proposed site traffic. The site
approximately one percent of the total traffic in the roundabout
ro
The auxiliary lane east of the site for right turning vehicles needs to be extended westto the second access. This lane will be used for delivery trucks backing into the site.
This lane and the delivery driveway in which it will serve should be designed to allow
backing activity without impacting the eastbound through traffic. Physical separation
should be considered between the through lane and the auxiliary lane where backing
would be taking place.
1A
Aug-LA-98 09: 25A LSC#Denwer
Posr.it' Fdx Note 7672
3O3 333 1]07 P. Ot
U 1**0*6 '18 "* lt :cto
Oo t
"1 sa '['{\q"\sr: t-ts
o€tt Cllalge
Tc€orqre I
!aa'r, [calru*vc
To
C{T.rt
fFar
Ct'inEr!
Chs,, fnr..roi"1
ir-l u kLF&'r| f
. i o. d Pa$s
F?fi|
Cclty
Lclm
Far t
O{nd
0bp.sil.n:[**
PA6Ei 1
FILET VAIL
0ATE: 8/17/98
c0ut{TE[ ilEAsURtS, lNC.
0irectiol:0ir I
/' \..
silr/code r 3 )
rs(Strcct: ilAlr{ vAtt t0uH0-A80uT -/t-rlr.r,t5-
:
IIIIE TOIAL ITOO}I ITOOIi
SEGIII CLfSSITIEO SLIP BDTET
VAILII |,AILII VAIISofi off 0H
VAIIS EFROII ETROI{ TFRON
oFF oti otF (llt
Lrl t,lFR0t{
0tl
t:00 Pl ?51' r,tt 00(
l:30 l00t
l1:{5 970
urR l0lil 3928.
?:00 Pi 928
2: 15 81.9
2:30 915
2:15 959
HR l0rAt 3651
19 89 1s9 7140 72 !29 65
17 r02 13{ 6S40 t6 149 89
176 319 571 293
t4 62
18 62
15 68
l( 59
5t 26t
5{7
i5 60
l8 61
{6 230
18 t03 !33
?1 161 ! (1
38 93 156{1 tE 157
t63 311 599
rft tqt
1{5 l5l
lt9 I t6
139 120
520 542
71
8{
ln:
61
70
t(
t03
lt
346
177 (7
6t tl
t?1 (1
106 68
{13 267
103 68
10{ 66
92 7E
9{ 68
39t 280
72 151 lu42 t10 tt65E 119 ll086 ls2 u3
25E 565 t80
oAY I0IiL ts79
PERCEilT of IOTAL
517
{,5
t9t107
l.t
115 u70
9.8 ls.4
597 1085 1022
E,4 7.9 t1.3 13.5 11.0
P-02t
cn#:
f r-n
303 333 I to7
H
I
-.1o
H
I
-lo
333 PAGE..W2t1t7RLIG 18 '98 11:A5
,''o
'
Aug- 1A-98 Q9=25A Lsc#Denver
*
I
,
o
*
t
F*{
/*it Oo+-l (--
. .\Jf('1 '
tl,
.€ba
lR) so
ctg
-'
{
:DIs
c.1
HCS: Unsignaf ized i:'!ie.!.sec-Lions Release 2 . lg ACC2 .I{CC paqe i
' C3n-"er i'or Mic!'ocoitlpu:grs in ?::ansportacicn
_ Univers:rv o:- Fic: iia
O;;=;;rrr=, -r,-
rz5rr"-20s3
Ph: (904) 392-037E
Sireets: (N-S) Vai j. Road (E_W) Access 2
M2 i nr CF ra-r l'1.i +oa- r ^-
LengEh of Time Analyzed.. . 15 (rnifl)
AnaLysr ...... tL\;{
Date ci AnalysLs .. - e/25/98
other Information. .ireak Hour Exiscing
Two-way Siop-cor;rclLeC InEersecticn
l\t^ F:- hl^^! ,n,-r
,--- ---: ----
VI<U
n
C^rr- hh^!,F;Eas cbound Wescbound
LTR
No. Lanes
-qt-.ln /Yi a l ..1
vo lume s
!,nr
rlrrzls
MC's (?)
SU'/RV's (t)
cv's (?)
PCE ' s
0 >1 0
tt
!4 530
U
L. L0
000 0 >0 <0
I .i- t
n
i.lo L.10
il
AdjustmenE FacEors
Vehi, c l e
MAnc' ra'ar
Crit i ca I
Gap (cg)
FoIlow-up
- T.pfi Trtrn M:'i,.\r. D^ri-.qJ vr -r!qs
Righc. Turn Mincr Road
.a!.-^,,^'- .F- - 5a : ^rrr! t.rugt t;dLilc Mr:rcr Rcad
Left Turn Minor Road
'6.0c
b - tu
t 1n
z.o9
5.5U
J.{U
o
tiCS : Unslgnaliz3d l:rt,srsec--ions R.e Leas 3 2. Lg !.aat Hnn Pag= 2
Wcrkshes-,- fcr TilS: Iii::sect i.cn
ql-5n 1 ;T jrnm Minn- <-r5.:-Lb
Conili.ci ing Flows :
O.ri 6n. i -a l I..rna:- i rrr.
Movameni Ca-oacrC-*,,
D:'^l'1 .'1i n,)-r,a-F*-5 SCaae:
732
:6v
Siep 2: LT i=om Major S:ieec Nts
Conflict,:ng Flows: (vphi
?ocential CapaciEy: (pcph)
MowemenE Capacitlt: (pcph)
Prob. of Queue-Fr3e SEate:
TH SaEu:ac ion Flon RaEe : (^ocphpl )
RT SaEurat ion Fl,oh, RaE,e : (pcphpl )
Major LT Shared Lane Prob.
nf nrlar)A-;1.-a CF=Fa -
n qa
l tnrl
n q"
Strep 4: iT f:om Mino: SrreeE
Conf liccing Flows: (w5lh)
Da*an:- i : - rr:n=ai rrr. th^-1,r1' \v e_! 'r /
Mri^r i.T Mih^r 'TlI
Iirpecance Factcr:
ACjusfed Impedance FacEor:
CapaciEy Adjustmenc Factor
dr'e Fl''r trn-'aA'i h^ M^r'. ,_ . enenis
Movemenf Capaci -Ly: (pc-ph)
Il.U b
t at tJ
n a"
v.J I
1nn
F ICW
lt.ra
M^\rsmani a h.-.ih \\rvv!-"/
Intersection Performance Summary
A..g. 95+
Move Shared Tocal eueueCap Cap Delay Length L(pcph) (pcpn) (s:c/ven) (veh)
Atrproach
(sec,l.refr)
vt5 t(
StsL
!.J
r6u >
f,6y >
507
17 767
inc:rsecticn De La:/
0.0
0.0 A
O 1 carlrrah
?1
4.8 n1
HCS: UnslgnaLizec InEersec:lcns Releas e Z-..g ACCZ.HCC Fag: 1
Cencer For Microcomouters Ln TranscorEa:ion
- Un:vers i.tv or- Fior:ia
O ;;.;;i.ri., -r=
325ii-20s3gir: (9041 3g2-o3iE
. SEr=ets: (N-S) Mai;l Access (E-W) Scuth FronEase Road.Ma'ior Sl--F.j- ni rec:ion. . . . SW
. t.onrt!-h l.r-- Ti h5 l-A:.alyzeC. . . 1-: (min)
Analyst ..... iiAli
.. Dare oi -Analysi-s ... 8/2s/98
OF-h3r Inicrmalicn. .peak }iour Existing' fwo-hrav SCop-ccnt:ciled In:er.sec;_j-or:.
i2c|:h.r!r'r^
!I}(
vz<u
r-r
rzu:t z>
n
Wes cbound
,JIIT
Nort hbounC
JJII(
No. Lanes. SEop/Yiel.d
Vo lumes
MC's (?)
su/RV's (?)
cv's (e)' PCE' s
f-]U
I\T
IU J. /6:
0
1.10
1nl
208
0
000
1 ln 1 ln
o
Vehicl e
Maneuve!'
Aci j us cment Faccors
r.'.i F i ..a I
GaP (cg)
Fo 11ow- up
. LefE Turn Major Road
RighE Turn Minor Road
Through Traffic Minor Roaci
Lefi Turn Minor R.oad
b .5u
) 1n
3 .30
J.{U
!iCS: Uns:Enalizei Inrerseclicns R.l_3ase 2.1E ACC2.HC0 9ag3 2
wcrksaeea :or TIISC In:e:sec: iol
qf a. I - tT f r/'!rn Mi:r^!- Qr-'.s-r-
Conf licr.ing Fl-ows: (vph) 647
Pot.encial Capacity: (pcph) 65f- Movemenr- CapaciEy: (pcph) 651
Prob. oi Queue-Free Siate: 0.99
Siep 2: LT !-rom Major Screet
NB S8
v\rE' lr5
Conflicring Flows: (wph) 1294
Palran!- i:l aanar.i rrr. 1F-hh\r \ Pv!,r" 345
MovemanE Capacity: (pcph) 3a-6. Prob. or- Queue-Free Scate: 0.97
- SEep 4: LT from Minor Street NB sB
Conf l icr-ing Flows: (vph)
o.\Farlri rl at!^.3/.i?.r'. ln^^h\' \ t/syrl/
M:-i.rr T.'l' Mi n^r Tt{
' 'l-mrrpai 2ri r-F Ft/-r-^7 -
A.ii usF ed =mneriangg Fac:or:
Capaciry AdjusEment Faccor
due t'o Impeding Movements
Movemeni Capacicy: (gcph)
3r'lr
10
u.> I
0.91
0 .97
10
f ntersecEion Fe:formance Summary
Avg- 95?.Flow Move Shared Total eueue ApproachRaEe Cap Cap Delay Lengch LOS Delay,
o'
. Mowemeni (pctrh) (pcph) (pcph) (sec/veh) (veh) (sec,/veh)
Nts L 23 10 * 2.4 F
NB R 9 551 5.5 o.o B
wB t 12 345 10.8 0.0 c 0.1
Incersectj.on Delay = E.g sec/veh
' The calculated value was grealer chan 999.9.
>)!.2
ARRB Tla.rrsl)olt Research LtC -.SIDRA 5.11
Felsbr:rg Holt & Ullewj.g13 Reg'istered UserTi-e and Date o:- Analysis 9:12 AM, Aug
^lil Plaza Hotel
J.sting Conciitions
in+-eisecti.on No . :
S:DRA US Highway Capacr.ty Hanua]. (1994) version- Roundabout-{
Ri]N INAORMAT ION
No. 1234
25,)_998
* ROUND
' ' tsasi-c ParaDeEe.=s:
r-ntersection qT)e : RouDdaboui
D:iving on the right-hand side of the road
SIDRA US Eighwa.y Capacity Manual. (1994) VeEsion. Input data specit-ied in US units
Defau].t Values FiJ-e No. 11
Peak fl-ow period (for perfornance): 30 ninutesUnj-t t"ime (for voh:mes) :120 u-inutes (To-_aL Flow period)'' DeJ.ay definitron: Overall- delav -
Delay fo:::mu,.a : .t"ffs":;:"i:i?il:i"""'
. Leve]. of Service based on:'Delay ( IICFI)
-_:::::_i::l:::::: Back of sueu€r, esrh-percenrire
---_----.---
tai1 P1aza lloteL
Existing Conditions
: jrsectio'*li.*o',r.
Eab].e S.3 - INIERSECTION PARALIETERS
* ROUND *
i ROUND A
Degree of saturation (highest)
Practj. ca.l Spare Capacity . (lowest)
Total vehicLe f].ow (veh/h)
Tota]- veh.j-cl-e ca.I)acity, all lanes (veh/h)
Average irrtersect'ion de]-ay (s)
Largest' average Eoveo.ent delay (s)
Largest -back of queue / 95* (ft)
Pelformance Index
Total fuel (galh)
Tot'a1 cost (S)
Inte-section Leve]. of Serwice
Worst movelrent l,ewel of Sersice
0.555
3134
9503
A1
148.58
102. O
LZ' I -ZY
A
r/ar-l Plaza Hotelqxisting Conditions
:ntersection No. :
Roundabout
la.ble S.5 - T TTERSECTION PER!.OR}4ANCE
.{};Total Awer. Prop,
DeJ-ay Detay Queued(veh-h/h) ( sec)
Eff. Pe:f. Aver.
Stop Inciex Speed
Rate (nph)
!'IOrr
tveh/h)
? (" A .1 0.578 0.51 148.58 14 . 5
Mow Mov Arv Total Lane Deg. Ave!. Eff. 95t perf.
-No- fyp F1ow Cap. Util Satn DeJ-ay Stop Back of Index(weh (weh Rate eueue/:n') /h) (t) x (sec) (veh)
{est: West ^Ap;lroacht2 L 355 1016 100 0.349 2.9 0.52 2.L 15.9311 T 304 1280 58 0.237 3.4 0.52 !.2 14.2L13 R 7 4 3l_2 58 A .237 3.5 0.55 L.2 3 .34
South : Sour.Jr Aporoach
32 L 81 251 . 100 0.323 6.2 0.69 t.7 {.1031 T 203 629 100 0.323 5.1 0.68 L.7 9.?833 R 1-02 316 100 0.323 5. 9 0. ?0 !.-7 4.81
East: East A;lcrcach
22 L 107 383 43 0.219 4.9 0.66 !.4 5.18. 21 T 254 908 43 0.280 4.5 0.59 1.4 11 .9723 R 634 956 100 0.555r. 6.3 o.98 5.5 31.49
'Torth: North Approach' 42L 374 1c34 100 0.362 1.5 o.:9 1.8 L-t.r1
47 .! 91 283 89 0 .322 2 - O 0..10 1.5 4. 0443 R 2t6 573 89 0.321 2.0 0.3? 1.s 9.33
Northwest: North West .Approach
82 r, 1{5 525 100 0.234 3.5 0.57 1.1 7.I781 r 12L 518 1OO 0.234 4.0 0.57 1.1 s.73., 83 R 72 308 100 0.234 4.I 0.62 1.1 3.32
. 7ai1 Pl-aza Hotel
Exi sting' Ccndi-ions' iatersection No. :
Roundabouc
Eable S.10 - MOVEMENT CAPACI TY AbtD PER.FORMANCE SIIMMARy
* l"4aximr:m degree of saturation
l/ail P]-aza ilotel
xis tj-ng ConCitions
-..texsect:.on No - :
Roundabout
lable S.15 - CAPACTTY AND LE\rEL OF SERVICE (HA{ STYI,E)
Mov Mov Total_ Total Deg. Awer , fOSNo. fy1: Flow Cap. of Delay(veh (veh Satn
/hl /h) (v / cl (sec)
dest: Wes', \:prcach
)_2 L 355 1015 0.349 2.9 A11 r 304 1280 0.237 3.4 A13 R 74 3]-2 0.23.7 3.5 A
, 733 2608 0.349 3.2 A
iouth: Soutl: J.;p=oacl:
12 L 8i 251, 0.323 6.2 A31 r 20-? 62s 0.323 5.- A
i ROUND *
* ROUND *
o
. l-t tt(102 316 0-323 5.9 A
__________________:::__ 1i:' 0'323 6'o A
ra.st: East Approa;---------
22 L :01 383 0.279 4.9 ACl 232 ;:: 3:?33. l:i i
995 2257 0. 655 5.7 A
"Nori:h: Nor-,h Approach
42 L 374 1034 0.35: 1.6 A' 41 T 91 283 0.322 2.O A
. 43 R 2L6 673 0.32:- 2.0 A
681 1990 0.362 1.8 A
' Nortbwest: NorEh West Approach
746 62s 0.234 3.5 Ar21 518 0.234 4.0 A72 .308 0.234 4. 1 A
82L
lI 1 rtr
83R
339 1451 0 .234 3.8 A
- AJ.L WHICIAS: 3134 9503 0. 656 4. 1 A
. IMTERSECTION: 3134 9503 0.656 4.! A
,Level of, Service caLcuLations are based onaverage overa11 deJ-ay ( HCXrl criteria),
independent of the eur:ent delay definition used.!'or the criteria, refe! to ttre [Leve]- of Service', topic ilr
|l *" SIDRA.Output Guide or the Odtput section of ttre on-Iine help.
- V Maxinr:m v/c ratio, or critical green peri.ods
--- End of SIDRA Output ---
\
o
APPENDIX C
YEAR 2015 BACKGROUND CONDITTONS LOS o-,
J'r
ARIE Tra.E.sport Research l.td - s.r-lJr(A 5 . tl
FeJ'sburg HoL t. & UJ.tewig
13 Registered User No. 1234
Ti.Ee and Date of Analysis 9:10 AM, Aug 25,1999
4ai1 Plaza HoteL BAC:{ *
; I".-^ r'-^-i.i +.t ^- -
---=fFge=secEJ-on fro. :
SiDR;I, US Highway Capaci t1r V,anua]. (1994) Version
. Round^a.bout
RIJN TNFOR}ATTON
.. I Basic Para.meters:
Inte:.section \rpe: Roundabout
.' Driwing oa the right-hand side of the road
SIDRA US Highway Capacity Manuat (1994) Versi_on
Input data specified in US uni ts
Defau]-t Values Fi].e No. LI
- , Fealc fJ-ow period (for ferformance ) : 3O minutesUait time (for vo}-:.o.es ) :120 m_inutes (Tota.I FIow period). Delay definition: Owerall delay,
Geouet"rj. c delay incJ.uded
Delay f oro.u]-a: Highway Capacity !(anua]-Level of Serviee based on: Delay (HC!{}
- -:::::-i::lil-1::. -::::-::-T:::: - ::=:::::::T-- ---
/ail- PLaza Hotel * BACK *
!'utu:e Conditions
T"""*o'*fl''o*o,,.
.Iable S.3 - INIERSECTION PARAMETERS
Degree of saturation (highest) = 1-181
. Practical Spare Capacity (lowest) -29 tTotal vehj-c]-e f].ow (weh/h) = 4391' Total wehicl.e capacity, all lanes (weh/h) = 7313
Averagie intersection delay (s) 45.1
La.rgest average Eove!,ent delay (s) = 193.L
Largest back of queue, 95t (f-,) = 263A
Performance lndex = 366.4I
Total fuel (galh) = Lj7.7
Total cost (5) = 2267.3'7
- fntersection Lewel of Service = D
Worst aovement Leve]. of Service = F
9ai1 Plaza Hotef
Fucu=e Cond,i tions
!!.riersecLion No. :
Roundabout
rabLe S.5 - INTERSECTION PERI'ORI4ANCE
* BACK *
|'a Total Aver. prop. Efr . perf . Aver.
-:!l!r Delay Delay Queued Stop Index Speed(veh/h) (veh-h,/h) (sec)Rate (nph)
4391 55.04 45.1 0.754 3. 02 365.41 11 .5
{ai} P}aza Hotel
Futu:e Conditions- .ntersect-ion No . :
Rounda.bout
* BACK T
:a-bJ-e S.10 - !'OI'EMENT CA.PACITY AlqD PERTORMANCE SUHMA!'Y
Mov Mov Arv To--a1 l.ame Deg. Aver. Eff. 95t perf.
- lNo . TLp FJ-ow Cap . Ut:,.L Sar.n Delay Stop Back of Inciex(veh (-teh Rate Queue' / r-: /:n') (E) x (see) (weh)
Iesi: West AlT)roach
!2 L .1,97 822 100 0.50s 7.51.04 5.0 25.A1, ii T 426 1016 69 0.419 5.7 0.80 2.7 2L.4513 R 104 248 59 0.419 5.8 0.82 2.1 5.06
'south: South Approach
_ 32 L 114 13?. 100 0.832 31.4 1.96 10.4 8.5831 T 2A4 341 100 0.833 30.1 2.01 11.5 20.A2
_ 33 R 143 r72 100 0.831 29.0 2.05 11.5 rO.27
',ast: Eas". Ai)F:'::.h
22L .'-. 307 4! 0.489 9.4 0.96 3.3 1.91' 21- r 35b 729 41 0.488 9.0 O.9Z 3.3 19.5023 R 888 752 1OO 1.181* 183.110.95 L05.2 775.s4
iorth: North Approaeh
42 L 524 916 100 0.512 3.3 0.64 3.9 25,8541 T L28 25I 89 0.510 3.5 0.61 3.1 6.0543 R 303 594 89 0.510 3.5 0.64 3.1 13.90
NorthWest: North, West Ap1>roach
82 L 204 443 100 0.460 8.0 o.9o 2.9 10.9981 r 159 357 100 0.460 8.9 o.9o 2.g 8.85' 83 R 101 2L9 1oO 0.461 9.3 0.93 2-A 5.18
a)
d'
Max:.mum degree of saturation
rtail l]aza Hotel
'uture Concii-tions
.,:ntersection No. :
RoundaSou-_
'talle €.15 - CAPACI TY AllD LErIE! oF SERVICE (HCM ST)ftE)
Mov Mov Total_ Totsa1 Deg. Aver. LOSNo. Ty1r FIow Cap. of DeJ.ay(weh (veh Sain
/h) /.\l (v/ cl (sec)
Wes:: West Approach
} BACK *
L2L
Li. T
._15ti
491 822 0 . 60s '7 .6 B426 1015 0.419 6.7 B104 248 0.419 6. I B
to2'7 2096 0. 605 7 .2 B
Sou:h: iouth Approach
32 L 114 r37 0.832 31.4 c31 T . 2A4 341 0.833 30.1 c
143 L12 0.831 29. O c
541 650 0. 833 30.1 c
- fast: East App=oach
22 L 150 307 0.489 9.4 B'f}; 3i: 1?2 l:13i. ,.3:l ;
1394 1788 1.181 119.9 r
- r{o=--h : No=i:h Acproach
42 L 524 916 0.572 3.3 A- 41 T tzg 25]- 0.510 3.5 A
43 R 303 594 0.510 3.5 A
955 1761 0 .572 3.4 A
r{olthwes t: No=-.h West A:rctoach
82L
81 T
204 443 0.460 8.0 B159 367 0.450 8.9 B10L .2L9 0. 4 51 9 .3 a
474 1029 0.451 8.5 s
-AI,L VEHICLES: 4391 7313 1.181 45.1 D
- INIERSECTIoN: 4391 7313 1.18L 45.1 D
I,eve]- of Service calcuLati_ons are based on
av€r:.age overaL)- deJ-ay (!IG4 crite.ria.) ,independent of the cuIrent delay defini-tion used.
For the criteria, -efef to the ',!eve-1, of Service,, topic intbe SIDRA Output Guiie or the Output section of the 6rr-lass |rarn
Maximr-rm v/c ratio , or eriLicaL g'reen perj.od,s
--- End of SfDRA Output ---
o
A.PPENDIX D
YEAR 2015 TOTAL CONDITIONS LOS
o
:iCS: Unsignalized .l-ni e:'s ect ions Re1=ase 2.19 AaC.HCO paEe t
. Cente. Foi Mic:occmput3rs In T:anspc::ecicn
Universi:v ci 5i::ida
O;:i":li..i::'," r2sii-20E3
Dl.. f qn4 ) ?g?-n?".c
Streers: (N-S) M.a j n Acc?ss (E-i{) Soutil Froni,age Rcad
Mair'r* qt--.ar n.i ro^r i nn ;'r^r
L3ng:Eh o:- Time "N1=:yzed... 15 (min)
-q.!lcr.!vsL ..., l:.ql.l
uare o! Anarysrs ... g/25/99
Other Informalion. . Peak Hour yea;. AOis
Two-way Sto!-. - coni ro 1i ed Interseccion
(^r
' Fhh^! rF.l
!lt(
I EasEbound
'I l!1K.l------------
No.Lanesl02<0
St.oplYield I u
!t^t..--- |. volumes | 1790 t 00'pHFlq<q<
llrzi a I n
MC's (?)
|
SU'IRV's (?) |cv's (?)
|PCE's I
l\tes tbound llarr hFrnlnJ
LTR
1?n
I 1n
101
CJ J:
000
'| 1^ 1 .rn
o
Adjustrnent. Factors
venJ- c _L e
. Maneuver
C:1t ical
Gap ( tg)
Fo l Low -up
Ti.me (if)
Left 'Turn Major RoaC 5.50
RighE Turn Minor Road 5.S0
Through Traiflc Minor RoaC
Lefc Turn Minor Road
2.10
z . ov
3.30
.O
!{CS: ilnslgnalized fnt=rseccions Rel-:as= 2.ig ACCB.:{CC paE3 1
===========
Ce!i--e: FO: M:C:'--.Flltr'-rrc -- --,nc!'r,'l--:- r ^n
i1:. i.rrs-c i -1r ^i ;l.r-i ..r
=i2 weir Ha-i
Ph: (901) 392-0318
SE;ee:s: (N-S) Main Accass (f -W) South Froniaqe Rcad
M^-:.1r <F-.-- n.i raF- i ^n Elt.t
:,e::gc:: o: Tine Anaiyzed... 15 (m:n)
.r.rlcrys L ..... l:-r-ll_:
;1r1- 5 .\-- Ana jr,,cila,J*yr_s .... A/Z)/'t6
Ot.her' ;nformarion. _ -peak !{our year 2015
Twc-w3y St.oo- coni:o1ied In;+rsecc ion
F':cthnrrnd
LTR
000
N
Wes Ebcund
lJIl(
Nort hbound
TTR
Sou chbcund
'L T R
1\1^ T.:nta
qi.\'1 /vi ,r 1.l
Vo lumes
:'r! -i
Grade
Mir c f 2)
' SUI/'RV's (?)
t^\/re t2)
030
N
257 0
.95
0
000 nnl
OJ
.,:
t .10
o
F.d j us tment Factors
vehi_ 3l e
- Ma:1euv3r Gap ( rg)
FoIlow- up
Tim- lr-il
. - af - 'r!'t"h MIi^' D^:^
RighC Tu:it Minor Road
Through Traffic Minor Road
Le f E T'r::r Mi nor RoaC
5.50
f -:u
c.lu
?.00
2.10
J.JU
3.40
HCS: Unsignalized Incerseccions ReL:ase 2;1g -\:aq. iiCC pag3 1
'' Ceai=r Fcr Microccm_oiJcers In ?ranspor:ation
rtnir:5-ci Fr, ^.- tri ^ri Arv.r-!r-r-eJ
'O::i":=i,l:i'." 325,1-2063'Ph: (904) 392-0378
. - Scree-,-s : (N-S ) Main Access (!-w) Sou-"L FronEage Roai.
Ma'ior S:=eet Direc:ion. ... ew
i.an, ---h ^"- Ti rna Ana l1r7ad 1 < /6i n I._r{_j _gu. . . -r ir.r_r:i,
rurarvJL . . .. t:Li:^- Daie of Anaiysis .... Ei25/95' Olher In:ormaEion ..peak Hour year 2015
. Two-vray Stop-ccntrolled Intersect icn
Eas:bound Wes tbound
LTR
Northbound I Souchbound
FI?L r R lr, T Rt-----1 0 1lo 0 0
I
65 Jf, |
^-l'-- |0l
I
I
I
1. r0 r..101
No. Lanes
cr- ^- /vi a1A
Vo lume s
Grade
MC's (?)
su/Rv's (?)
CV's (?)
' PCE' s
021
N
L790 t-00
0
1n
N
44
.95
1 ?n
o
Menar r1ra'.
Cri. tical
Gap (t9)
F^ l I ^d-ri^
Tima fFf\
. L€fi Turn Major Road
Righr Tu=n Minor Roaj
Through Tral-iic Minor Road
Left Turn Minor R.oaC
f, .lu
1nn
2.i0
2 .60
J.JU
3.40
o
rjaC. :-ne i dy:'al i ?aA T-!:5rc5z-i- i,rrle aa l5:r= ? 1.r ?ase 2
workshsei ior 1'I.IS C In:3:s 3.-, i.cn
SE=p i: F.l i:om Miro: Scree:
Ccn:-lic:ing Flows : (vp!l)
Pocenrial Capa:i:1r: (pcph)
M.'rrra.n5nF f'r.r:-i err- f nr,-rh lugyq9^.I.\PL.v!r/
9ror . o: Queue-Free S;aEe:
942
.tbi
Strep 2: LT lrom I'1a j cr Siree*.5E
Coni l:c--ing Flows : (v:rh)
D.\Fa.r- i:' r.rn:^i rr.'- /nr-nh\r rPv-v--/
Movem3nE Capacicy: (pcph)
Dr,'rl'1 ^: f'}rarr5-i:-a- qFtr-6.u - b:
qi.n 4 . T,'F frnm Mi nAt' qi1.5.r -lj
Cor:f 1ic:ing FLows : (vph)
Drit-arlr'i: l f'.anr^i t-rr. lnF-\h\vg!/99|L].r^vEyrr/
M.a i .rr T,T M i rt.rr TTJ
ti^^;.--. tr:,-.f-^r .
l.lirrq-6d Trn-rori:nr.s Fr^r ^i.
CapacrEy Adjustment Factor
aue tc ic,.,_oecii-ng Movemencs
Movem-nt Capacity: (pcph)
].Y.'U
u. bf
v. of,
u. of,
Movemen:
F 10w
In:ersec-.icn Performance Summarv
Avg- 95?
Move Sharecj Toial eueueCap Cap Delay LengEh LOS
/^^-!.i t^^^v\ t ^^^ /--^r
Approach
ha l rrr
( s eclveh)
NBL
N8R
W3L :I
40
Inie=section DeLay
o.{ i848 -2
8.5
>JJ . Z
37.0
o
'o
!iCS; UnsigaaLjzed -l-nte:s=:rions Rel=ase 2.1g -{CC.-{CO pag= 2
Wcri.:si-_=:: ic: l.vis C ina=asecc ior
St.ep i: RT i:cm Minor S::ee:5ia
Conil !.ccing iicws: (rph) 991
Pctenc j.al Capacriy: (pcphj 43^-- l4ovemen; Cape,citv: (pcph) 81P:ob. of Qu=ue-lr=e Scai€: 0.9:-
Step 2: LT i:om Major Sir=ec
Conf lrcE.ing FLows : (rphi
P.\:El'!r- i a l f'=n:^: rr,. lnar; lr r y!-v--;
MovernenE Capac!. ty: (pcpi:)
Prcb. of Queue-Free sE aEe :
\>6>
0 .55
.. SEep 4: LT t-rom Minor Street NB SB
CnF 5l i r'f i ncr F'l nw< . I rmh Ivv..-.r99-.rYlltJ.I/
Datrclri i: l C.an:..r rr,. /^--hl' \t/vPr''
Me i o* T,T M i n-; ?ti
TmnadtnFA F r-- ^i .
adjuscea Impedanc3 Facao::' CapaciEy Adj ustrnent laci'or
due E.o Impedi:rg Mov:men.us
OY:::i:i: ::i::_:1- l:::ll
Intersection Performance Summarv
Avg. 952Fl-ow Move Shareci Total eueue Approach
RaEe Cap Cap Delay Lengch LCS Delay. Movemeilc (ocph) (pcph) (pcph) (seclveh) (veh) (sec/veh)
---.'.-
NB !,. g6 1 a 11.9 F
NB R 4i 431 g.2 o-2 B
wB L 51 !47
Intersecricn Delay = 993.3 sec/veh
* The calcularad value t^ras greacea than 999.9.
4<9R
1
0 .55
u.bf,
1
io
./ai]. P1aza llotel
Future Concl-itions
:ntersection No^:
RouIlCabout
]A5}E S.1O - MOVE}{ENT CAPAC:TY Ar{D PERFORT44NCE SU},OARY
Mow Mow AEv Total. Lane Deg. Aver. Eff . 95* pe=f.''No. f:fp Fr.c, Cap. Utit Satn Delay Stop Back of Iniex(ve: (veh Rate eueue/hJ /]n') (*) x (sec) (weh)
Ies;: West' Approach
L2 L 496 805 100 0- 515 8.1 1.08 6.3 27 .o811 T 438 1003 1! 0.437 7.1 0.83 2.9 22.26
iou;h: South ADproach
32 \ 114 t_30. 100 0.a77 38.4 2.25 !2-4 9.4331 r 283 322 100 a.879 36.9 2.31 14.0 22.5933 R 148 168 100 0.881 35.6 2.37 14.0 11 .59
East: East Approach
22 L 153 305 42 0.500 9.5 o-98 3.4 8.1627 T 366 13t 42 0.501 9.1 0.94 3-4 19.0823 R 908 '753 100 1- ro5* 205.411. 95 115. 6 rg4.20
lorth: Nolth Approach
42 L 539 906 100 0.s95 3.5 0.58 4.3 26.794t ! L2A 246 88 0.520 3.7 0.63 3.2 5.0843 R 304 584 88 0.521 3.? 0.55 3.2 L4.02
Notthwest: North West Approach' 82 L 204 422 1oo o - 483 8. 6 0.94 3.2 11.1281 T L14 360 100 0-483 9.s 0.94 3.2 9.24- 83 R 104 2r5 1oo 0.484 9.9 0.9? 3.0 5.40
Maxr&.r:-u degree of saturatj.on
Vail. Plaza Hotel
'uture Conditions
-ntersectl-on No.:
Rounda.bout
fable S. 15 - CAPACI TY AliD rEvEr oF SERVICE (HCs,{. STyfE)
Mcw Mov Total Total. Deg. Ave:. LOS.No. TyI: Flow Cap. of Delay(veh (veh Sarn
/'n', /'^) (v / c) (sec)
Wesl: West Apploachr,
12 L 496 806 o. 515 8.1 B11 ! 438 1003 0.437 7.L B13 R :.04 238 0.437 7.2 B
1038 2047 0. 51s 7 .5 . B
sou'-h : South -\pproach,
32 L 114 I3O 0.817 38.4 D31 r 283 322 0.879 35.9 D
* liJT *
* EIJT T
Jr
o
.2.1,g, ACCB.Hao
w3rksheec r-or TWSC laaerse::ion
---------;-
Page 2
Step i: R? f:om Minor Six--et NB SB
Conflicting Flows:
Potential Capaclcy:
Mcv€menE Cap acity:
Prcb. of Queue-Free
(pcphI
(pcph)
qF-f a.
>uz
483
483
n qn
IncersecEion Performance Sumnary
? ! a..'
Frra
Movelnent (pcph)
Avg.
ShareC Tot.al
Cag Delay
(pcph) (sec,/veh)
95?
Queue
Length LOS
(weh) .
Airr r/.r A /. l r
De lay
( s ec lveh)
!r ...,:.'
(pcph)
- ,s3 R 96 4e3 t -5
Interseciion De1ay
u.tt rt
.3 sec,/veh0
,::: : .:
ARRB l:atrs5le:t F.esearc}. Ltd - SITRA 5.11
Felsbulgr Holt & Ullevig
13 Regislered Use! No. 1234
Tile anC Da-!e of Ana].ysis 9:11 AM, Aug 26,1998
Vail- 9laza Hc --e1
Future Condii,rons
[nLe:seciiorr No. :
SIDRA US Highway C>Facity Manual (1994) ve=sion- Rou:r.dabor:t
RUN INFORMAT ION
* Fl'T *
t tsasi.c Farametels :
Inte:section TIT)e: Roundabout
Driving on tJ.e right-hand side of the road
SIDRA US tlj-ghway Capacity ManuaL (1994) Ve:sion
Ln1:ut data s1recified in US units
Det-ault Values File No. il' Peak f,low pe=i-od (for perfo:mamce) : 30 minutes
Unit ti-ne (for volumes ) :120 r.inutes (Total F].ow pe:iod)
Delay definitior-r: Overa1J- delay,
_ GeoE'etr.ic de].ay inc]-uded
Delay f o:u.ula: Highl.ay Capacity Manua]-
. I.eve). of Servj.ce based on: DeJ.ay (HG4)
Queue ciefinition: Back of queue, 95th percentile
Vail PLaza liote].
Future Condi-tions
I:rtersection No. :
Rounda.bout
ra.bLe S.3 - INTERSECTION PARAMETERS
* EUIT *
*FUT*
Degree of satuj.ation (highest)
P=acticaf Spare Capacity (lowest)
TocaL vehicle f].ow (veh/h)
Total wehi-cle catr:acity, al1 lanes (veh/h)
Ave=age r.ntersection de].ay (s)
Laxgest alrerage moveoent deJ.ay (s)
La:gest back of gueue, 95t (:t)
Pe=i-omance Index
Tota1 fuel (g'a,/h)
Tat-: l aacr- 1(l
Intersection Level of Service
Wo:s-. moveDeIl: Leve} of Ser"vice
-5U
{t{85
t Ld9
50. 9
205.4
z> Lo
5:rz.lo
l-Et.) - -5
z)t>.zz
F
Vail PLaza HoteJ.
Suture Condi'ions
:n:ersecticn No. :
Rounda-bout
lable S. 6 - INTERSECTION PERFORI,IANCE
lotal Toia]. -Aver .
Flow Delay Delay
(veh/h) (veh-h/h) (sec)
Queued Qf^^
Rate
Perf- Aver.
Index Speed
(nph)
.t!ab-'50. 9 o .772 11 1
148 168 0.88t 35. 5 D
545
'..r, :. r :, ...r ''33 R
' iast.: East Atrrproa.ch
22 L '153.CT ;3:
?n(
/5J
0.500 9.5 B0.501 9.1 ts
1.206* 205.4 F
L.t z I 1790 !.206 134.1
',{orth,: Nortb APproach
42 L 519 905
41 T r2A 246
43 R 304 584
0 .520
U.JZL
3.7
).1
>t!1-f a<0.595 3.6
]{or-JrWest:
82L
81 T
.83R
North West Approach
204 422
774 350
104 .2L5
8.5 B
v.J l,
9.9 '8 ,"
0.483
0. 483
0.484
. 4A2 991 0.484 9.2
- AtrL \EHICLEa: 4463 7189 1.206 SO.9 D
IIInTERSECII9N:, 4453 . 1!89 r.2OG
----:------
. Leve]- of Service calculations are based on
aweragie t o 'rlral'l deJ.ay luOr criteria)'; ' :: ' ,'' ,'i r"--;, ' '
independent of the current de].ay. definiti'ort. useilj.., . l
?FELSBURG
HOLT &
ULLEVIG
in$ricetitrg Padt n ctosgorrzldaa Joir.sicnt
Nsvember 16, 19ttt
Mr. Tlm Losa
Zerrren ano Associslec, inc,
P,O. Box r976
Avon, Colorzdc 81620
.
HE: Accasr lrsucc - Proporcd Vail Plaza Hord
FHU FeftrcncE ttlo_ 99.,t9gt
DerTlm: i
fWe have ptapat|d this'lstrr in rreporrse to yrrur lrttrr dated Novembar 4, 1993 ltgsrdlng
i"ccess i*sucr et rhe proForcd Varl Pbza Hotel. 1fi6 f6v6 ly'lpsled each commern es follorrr:
Caonpm 1: Tha grssiltif1y of tnlfn tuking up to ttn maltffiout fiom tha slat anV on
Vail Road wlthout e deilE td httAn bne-
A roral sucldng distarce sf 31O fed woutd ba rvrilablc Elong Vail Road betlrrsen tfie
Roundabout and the proposad Wrrfhern Hotal Gntry- Thil *acting lFltance urodd
accsmmodate a qseu€ lcngth sf abour 15 vehidee, On averaEe. k le forrcafiGl that ebout
I vehicle per minutc wlll t.lm lett intD tho site- and about 13 vahideo Per Inirlutt will cominuc
sornh rlong vril Road- iUndor an edrema condition, if dl 14 of rll.ae vshicler werE tP stoP
et rhc rntry irrtersecrion, thcn a queur lcn6h of rboc 28O {lrt woulcl bo gcnrrated- Ssch a
qucue lerrgrth would not axcaed the cvallable rccklrr€ dlrrsnco. However, drh reprue$ts c
worst Gase scenario. Queuo lengths srs qpcctEd tD be significendy lrus tlran 289 feet sincs
rnor? dlan I vehlcle per minute are elprcrad b be {blt tE urm hft into thc site-
By evaluating rhr avaifbtc 'gap" timo for left-tuming vehicles along Vall Road, h was
estimated tfrat about 4 $hlcleg per minute, of I vohiclo rvrry 15 seconde, could turn latt lnto
the irre. In a 1S$on{ lnterval, about,4 vehbtsls lon avaraga} err fcrtcastGd to held roudl
along Vail Road. tf il n at thesa vCdclcs yysrc ti stop attirc cntry irrtrrsrstion, then a quege
lengrh ol abour 80 fact would bc genararcd. Such a qucua wq.rld not evan block the propcsed
erit drivoway of dro Hottt she.
l05.zr-r4{0
tuJCt.ru!8lZ
lhrllhlcq*oo
luuY, 10. i!sJ 3;l+r[/,i! jlcn .llllu anJu\,lA luu, l l t ij
F ron: lC?0
o
/
ffi,ffi3e4
Engarcd,@SUl
,,v1. lut liJJ .J.lJlll /., !;.r]l!t! .tA!r n!rvvl.'1
November 16, 195S
Mr- Tirn Losa
Page 2
The bensfrtr and
idenrified ae
rruckst csn
dte rold-
Anasrt Z Ttc *fcry ndlwnsfs a'socrlrd with the hotd .tg|it laated aight feat swilt
of the Vatl GnanyeEnessot'Vall Road'
Insigatlonswh€retwoacccligdriyervrysaraitorclysFtc€d'kieimperativrlrornesafety
standpoint that gOoO slgmlGarcG is rvailablo rt botr accsss't' Sdcrty at ruc*r irrtersccliong
can aho ba improvcd W mrnitizfttg tl'F numbor of conflaing urrrrr' This cen bo dono bV
restrlcting Ingrass and/or *rurtu'iing-o"t-ffirc' In dre creo of dre proposcd Hstel' it ie
racomrnended thsr the ;L;b. |irt
"d
ro ourbound mo'rilltntlt onlv (i.e- an uit onlvl' As
noted in our seFtgrnber zifJsJffi;-r.fort, trehibirlng inbourd left-rrns crltrb acc€rs wilt
"nrnino. """tfapping
laft'arm sonlllgts ttong Vil Bord-
TherE or., while this spaang i: not an idoel csndition' thc Fov'teion ct good-sigfc d]3*":
tlre resrisdon or moreT rtrits"t"*ooltA -fyt' thc lorecartedlow YotumG st ditlng t'aftrc' and
# ;;;;;t bw spocd .*iion"'"nt stro'id suow for ln acccatablo condrtion'
I
Coaluzrnt 3: The safery an&or risk assshted wtth /rrehotd lotditg sd dcliwy enW uly
aa;l s * i'&;bc i optw A etd il's proximity b tr:c pun&b*tt ott /'c
Sort Fmnaga f,oad,
From:10?0
ol rhe progosed dedgn of tro frontagc roacl accsss hlYo bcon
veway ls da:lgned 6uch tttst dolivcry vucks tinclrdirrg semFttailct
intu the unloadrng/docl aree of du she wilhorn imeacting rrgilfc onThe
{
frro propo*i errtry lenoprovidos epfugaagfordccderrting tdght'ilmingl vehicle='
#;;-r;Sirg o" rir*iiiiJJ t""'.fo oor[rionr ftom trrfflc o*iring d1g ruundabout'
Also, a voflc-le or truck i"i.*ap -ttqi*ti" t"tt'ao erua {whilr r delivery vcttlclc ir
manarvcringwlthintlresira|anottttf{icstgngfteFrontagrBoadwil|sti|lnotbe
impacted-
, Wrong-wqy movem€nts csuld be made up rhe inbound accs$ lrne' However' rhis can
i" tfig#C bv posting lDo ltot Erxer' and/or'wrong Wry" eigns'
As roted hv t+ Town's Enginear' entcring vrhldcs could reor-cnd a tnrck rnalring
backing ,nirlcuyers "n-.t-'-io*"vcr. tris can be mitis$Ed by portcd 'Yrdd' rigns
ai:hebaa€otlheonrn/t"*'lti=wiit*crtanincornlrgdrivcrofpotantielcgntligt'
Fron;1C70
N0. ll10 r, t/3,rrr[.t Al{]J A))uLiA
II
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
l. icru
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
i
I
I
l\
il,Fr| ll IIll k=l I tl
ll h-di il tl
ll +-Sl il llill tFrl r | | | I
lll LLrr rl lfll -r rl llil i tl llIt t I I I If,fi i\ rl lllll\ r\ tl I L-
ltl -r\\ I _'l\,
I[\\ I | \ttt '.t \ \ll'\\_ l{ \-it-:- | r\_ \il l, \\r^T \ftt I t t- lFt \tl t\ll I ' Drfff rl I --J tlll /'il ./ 6 llr Ill / t\ ,- ^Fl I,.s!_J x- rl :tr I, a, Il-i*It/ta | ,/ I\-/ z' I, )---- /
I
\
\t
ll"I j9-
ilffii
flUfll
IIir
t,l,'1
,,Jt'',
1t'l
L
A
rt,{l
bz
3
II
1
ffi[
<
E+3
EiF
IIt/t
o
Eq
I€5tsi
* TETH- PFE.6 H
N0v. 10. luYY
I
Z E H R E N
AND ASSOCIATES, INC.
Thursday, November 04, 1999
Mr. Lawrence Lang
Transportation Engineer II
Felsburg, Holt and llllevig
Greanwood Corporate Plaza
7951 E. Maplewood Avenue, Suite 200
Englcwood, Colorado 801I I
Re: Vail Plaza Hotel
Date Heceive
fl0V 9, lggg
o
Mr. Lang:
I had recently reviewed your rEport dated Septemb er 27, 1999 with the town enginecr. In reviewing the
report and the associated access points, the engineer wouid like us to address a few additional items.
Specifically, the town engineer would like us to address:
I' The possibility of raffic baclcng up to the roundabout from the south entry on Vail Road without a
dedicatcd left turn lane.
2. The safety and/or risks associaled wittr the hotel exit located eight fee! (eighteen feet from the
centerline of the gateway drive), south of the vail Gateway access on vail Road.3' The safety and/or risks associated with the hotel loading and delivery entry only access as indicated in
Option A and it's proximify to the roundabout on the South Frontage RoaJ. It L our -terrriorr'tt "t sil
semi-trailers, and 45' passenger coaches use the drive (enry) lane for backrng prior to d.eparting
through the east exit. Our t-eehng is that passenger coaches only Aequent the h-otll during the .bif
season" or low Faffic periods due to the fact that the hotel operates as a fractional fee condominiumhalf the year and does not have the remaining occupancy to be able to cater to large groups.
Additionally' other than the initral equipment -i n-t"ir-is move-in period, we foresee no semi-treiler u-affic although it has been determined that we n""d to provide for such vehicles, It is ourobjective to have all other vehicles including 35' straight-body trucks and 50' articulated fteerdeiivery) be able to hrm right out of the structure with minimai maneuvers. It is the town engineer's' concem that vehicle entering the drive will rear-end vehicles using the drive lane for a backing
movement.
4' Tbe safety and/or risks associated with the hotel loading and delivery exit only access as indicated rnOption A and it's proximity to the roundabout on the South Frontage Road. Specificalll the townengineu would like some cornment on the feasibiiity and safety of both autos and the larger service
type vehicles tumtng left on the frontage road. We have pretirninarily indicated medians forlrotection
of the center tuming lane in this option.
Additionally, the town engrneer had asked us to explore additional options for a combination in/out 90-
degree access. Enclosed is Option B explonng that option. Please just generally discuss any positive or
negative impacts associated with this scheme including safety concerns asiociatei rvith its ptoii*ity to th.roundaboul
ARCHITECTT- RE.ptANNINC.tNTERIORS. tANDSC.ApE ARCHTTECTURE
PO. Box 1975 . Avon. Colorado 8i62O. E7O)g4g-0257. FAX {920) 949-.l0BO
o
il0v. 1b. l"ucY b:l5lll /tx.l(!,Ji AfllJ A5)uilA N0. I I lb t, 4/1
From:i0?9
November 16. 1999
Mr. Tim LPsa
Pege 3
tf you.have any quedisns E$rding our findingr or if you need sdddiorul Ns8ictanca, pl9a56
call.
Sincerely
FASSUNG HOLT & UTLEYIG
Overull,hshouldbenotedthatthavdumgsfr:lficrrneringanderirlngthesiteisverylow
.r,a ar,i"* related rafflc ir .rgsted to be infraqrcrrt. Ourlng pcrk p$iodc. only 1 vrhicls
errery 3 minUteS (on gvefagrl i6 foracas&d to alm.imo th! 8lts, and abont 1 Vehicb evcry 5
ii.u*= is cxgactcd 3o exit thc sita' on evonea Al5o, h i5 anticipdedthd taffic will srn'r
rhe site et low sFeeds, given thar tfie asc€sr is locatcd in dosa pnrximlry to g roundabsut
wnete cxiring sPeedr are low.
Camrcnt * Tha sgllatY andlor risks rsrrlctttd vdd' the lrrltd ledfng aN ddttvt qil catf
aeEnrqt as In&d an OPfun A md fl's pnxinWb lha nut&out on fl'c
soufiFroatlgefud.s'rxilic,llY,tteownqgiwwottuftcgnn
cpmnunt onipr*prtryrrraxfuryof bodt ,x//tosrndh2 hrgcf gg1tfu ve
vdt/cns fitmhg tcttut ilafmmqcmat'
ln ragards to the fGseibllity o{ u|cls t|mitlg lefi orrlo th6 frofitlgo rEd, it apDGlr! from rhe
lUming tGmplaua ft$ y,ou prOvidcd drat d'lil dlol'dd .6t bo s PrOblqrr' Frorn en opcrationel
;;;;;"i*. ['"r.. a.rr#iod grsrrh. outbound Ht-tuming raftic wiil ugrricncg long dclavn
ff.rJ of u.*ice Of -€' ccndltions) dunrE pcrk Periods. HowerCr' t$l dosr'nC n€cs5janf
i-pp .f,"a t"-ing or;t of tho tita wllt ue unsa6, but only thus drivrrs may tranc ro wait lor long
pertads before an *.g."b|" gap in tralfic ig avaihbla foruming' ssftliy b€cgmos En bsus
ti;;; bccomes,impgticnt-and rurn8 onto the lrontage rcad whql a gap in traffic i! not
sfticient-
I
In regards tc fio opiion,ol provifmi a g6Hlgrec sccut along lhe tronE gs nad, we bcf,cve
th'1 thb atso rrpresrnr! s viabie oprlon from rn oFr-tional standDoiff provfrtrd rhat tte ontrv
"nJ
oi grades mecr Town crheria- Howarer, it tFP€fl! thet a 5*dqd semi-trellor could nct
,"n"u"i on-gitg without meting e hacking manouvet onto or dff of thr frontage road' Such
a manauver would craatc a very haardour aihntion'
Vail Plaza Hotel
961070.00
Zehren and Assocrates. lnc.
tlt04/99o
rl
The design intent of both oPtions is to schematically meet the development standaxds and tgming radii of
the tlpes and numbers of vehicles dictated by the torrn cngineer and planning staff. It is our ina{tion t}rat
we have the approved design fully angincered for confirmatiqr of the ideas presented prior to perrtiting ;i
the project by the to,rn or CDOT.
Please do not hesitate to contact me or the town cngineer, Greg HaH, with any questions or concerns. Wewould hope to have confrrnation of these issues by Friday, November 12, lggi ii it is at all possible-
Sinccrely,
Tirn Losa
Project Manager
Zehren and Associates, Inc.
Cc: George Ruther, Senior planner, Town of Vail
Greg Hall, Town Engineer, Town ofVail
Enclosures
,o
l',U
v
/'
I
|''
1!.
J}
i' -q
I
I
I
I
I
I
\
iiilr
-.lF
:v
TbSIl.2 siil t .rEetEis5.f
I'\
4
J
,l
I
l
I
i
I
I
il
rlI
t/
I
I
.t
\\
mT--r]
fn:_lI
l,l
I
!
I
Hi€, .ni,'
Ei3Ililisgi i
q
/i
I
I
I
!
\
I
,o
I
I
i
I
I
I
I
I
j
I
i
-.i.
\
', ,,
,,,,
r.F {
*ieliil,
I
I
I
I
t,,
'l/'
I
tl
t!
ll
ll
ll
llli
'lji
li
IJ
!/l
ll/ta
t1
t:,tr/
\iI lriil
\ii
il
I
I
I
t,| ,'i'
l,f
.!
'!
F$-rfiliI,,.1""ii
\
l
I
I
'.1
- -l-'t-i'
Il
l*fi
lr1
frl
F$ ra$r'
o
I
!
I
I
I
!
Ilril/i
/ 1!il
r i,1 i ,t'/ /.;/ .t ,i
,/L
/;
l
I
I
i
I
I
I
.!
I
j
I
I
I
I
l
j
\
';ili
*
.llEo#rE
sEi€iEF".?EE-p{ts
l
I
\
\i
Accounting
ttiil
--l'l
-
fl(5- -
-{sl-
,Ei-i-
Attachent K
Department of Comnunity D evelopment
75 South Frontage Raad
Vail, Colorado 81657
970-479-2 r 38
FAX 970-479-2452
MEMORANDUM
To: Town ofVail Deslgn Reviiw Board
From: ConnnuoityDevelopment Departrneut
Datb: Decernber l, 1999
Re: Vail Plaza Hotel - Preliminary Re commendation to the Vail Town Council
In 'aniicipation of appearing before tbe Vail Torvn Council for first reading of an amending ordinance to allow for
the redevelopment of Phase IV of the Vail Viliage Inn Special Development District, the applicant has requested a
preliminary recommendation from the Design Review Board.
PuxsuaDt ro the Town Code, in pan, "no person shall building construction or demolition wirhin the corporate limits
of the Town urless desip approvai has been granted in accordance with Title 12, Chapter I I of the Town Code."
Siould the Desip Revierv Board choose to make a preiirninary recommendation of approval to the Vail Town
Councji on the reclevelopment proposal for the Vail Plaza Horil, staff would zuggpst tlat the following finding and
cmditions be made pan of the recomrnendation:
Upon the preliminary review and consideration of the redevelopne proposal for fie Vail Plaza Hotel, tbe Board
finds that the Vail Plaza Hotel will be compatible witb eristing sructures, the hotel's surroundings and with Vaii's
envirorrnent. The Board fi:rther finds that the proposal is in compliancs witb the applicable provisions of the
Design Guidelines prescribed in Title 12, Chapter 1l of the Town Code and the Vail Viilage Master Plan & Urban
Design Considerations. Therefore, the Board recommehds apprwal of thc redevelopment propoial for the Vail
Plaza Hotel. The Board's recornmendation of approval cirries with it the iollowing conditions:
l. That the applicant suhnits a fi:ral landscape pla, fnal off-site i rprovernents plan, and outdoor lighting
pian in accordance with tle provisions prescribed in the Zoning Regulations for revi€w and approvat of the
Desigu Review Board2. That the applicant submits a final exterior bujlding materials list and color rendering for review and
approval of the Design Revierv Board.
That the applicant submits a cornprebelsive sign pogram proposal for the vail plaza Hotei.
That the applicant submits a rcof-top mechanicai plan prior !o the issuance of a buikling permit. All roof-
top mechanical equipment shall be enclosed and screened frorn public view.
,A
!
3.
A
no
{gun"t*'^'*
o
Attacflment L
Memorandum
To: Geor.-qe Ruther, Senior Special Projects Planner
From: Greg Hail, Director oiPubiic Works and Transportatron
Datc: December 9, I 999
Subject: Vail P,laza Hotei - Review of the November 23, 1999 plans
I have completetl my review of the Vail Plaza Hotel and have the fbllowing comments and concems. Some
of these are ru.ly c omments, which shou.id be corrected as the pnoject progresses through the deveiopment
process, and others are concems or conditrons, which shail be taken care of at the aDDroDriale times in the
proc ess.
Requircd Plan Correctirrns
O The scale stated on the site illustrative plan is inconect^ oleasc label corectlv.D Sheerlevel ivlinus Two, ihe elevationtf the ramp from above proceeding to the 6 % gade ar the
lowest level is not 145' as indicated.tr hovide the siope (9io) of the parking area in the lowest valet arec and rhe location where the grades
change from 128' to I30'.o Please shor.v all access points and doorwavs ro elel,ators and hallways. Specificailv, access to the
elevators in the Lcvei Vlinus Two, this may cause valet spaces to be eliminated. Access io the small
elevator lobbv from thc loading berth, and access liorn the loading berth to the freigbt elevators. The
exact location of the garage door into the Phase III parking suucture. Sho$' the staging area in front of
the freigit elevator iurd how this may impact access to Pbase III and the safery ofthose using the
elevator. Show the location of the trash pickrro.
tr The eastside curb a.lienment of Vaii Road is shown per the survey. Holvever, there apoears to be one
shot out of line, this causes a jog right at the hotel entry, r,vhich doesn't exist. Thc curb moves one foot
at this location.a The widths of Vail Road, the South Frontage Road and East Meadow Drive along wilh the exact
locations of the curbs of the rouadabout and mcd.ian islands and opposite side ofthe streer will nced to
be shown accurately p'rior to first rearting t€fore tbe Town Council.
Issues for Discussion
There has been signiiicant discussion rvirh regards to whether a leftlurn lane is requircd on Vaii Road. The
hotel iocation as it is presently designed rvould not nave to move if the desire for a lert-tum is there. A
pedesuian easurent l!'ould be required to push the rvalk east to make room for the additionai 12' lane.
Virtually all of the landscaping on the east siCe of the road would be lost. A space of3' to 11' wirje as you
go north would exist on the south building md the space wouid be 8' to 15' along the north building.
Thc need for a left+um lane lvas specifically revierved and evaluated by the traffic consult.ing lirm of
Felsburg, Holt & Ullevig. [r the Trafftc Repon prepared b-v the ccns:lting engineer, the engineer has'
srated that based upon Earfic projecrions, vehicles "backing up" into the roundabout traffic wouid not
cxlcur,
A review of the ror,rndabout design rvith regards to Vaj.l Road tral'fic determined that at current volumes,
there is a fiow oi 321 vehicles in the Ai\I peek hour with a capaciry to take 1501 vehicles and a manimum
o queue of I vehicie, in the Plvl peak flow was 484 veiricies with a capacity to take i423 vehicies and a
maxrmurn queue of 2 veh.icies.
The roundabout desigrr allows for a 509/o increase in peak flows with the AlvI havine a peak hour flow of
481 vehicies rviur capacity of t i72 vehicles with a maximun quer-re of 2 vehicles. f'n" pVf peak flow
would be 735 vehicles witb a capacity of 1055 vehicles anci a ftL\imum queue of 7 vehicles. This queue
do€s Dot iinpact fie cntrv into this site.
The Vail Plaza Hotel Traffrc Repon sates the cunent norrhbound ra-11ic volume of Vail Road is 695
vehioles. Ihe added trips to Vail Roi-rd will be approximately 57 trips in and 40 trips out, during the peak
PM period. 'fhey also analyzed that the nips rvere tuming in against 900 vehicles verses tle 735 trips. As
estimated in the fi:ture rounriabout calcularions.
The second rssue is that the loatiine bay requirements for the sire were to accommorlare the rurning l
maneuvers oi a 30' singie axle 'uuck, a 45' over the road coach and a 50-foot semi tractor trailer on-site,
and to additionaliy to ailow a 65' semi Eactor failer to maneuver without irnperling rhe flow of traffic on
rhe South l-rontage Road. The applicant has provided an access and maneuverability plan, which rllustrates
that the rnaneuvering of ihe vehicles takes place partially ofl'-site, in the right-oi'-lvay. However, oo
backingmotions occur across any sidewalks and the traffic flow on the South Frontage Road is not
tmpeded. Extendiog lbe propos;d South Frontage Road median througb this access point could solve rhe
question of the left tLrn oul for the frontage road access. It would be desirable to at least provide a left turn
pockel east bound somewhcre in the frontage road to allow U-tums ofpasseng$ caru at a point that is
determinec appropriate. This is rnost likely at Village Center Chule. The landscape mcdran wouid need to
be extended the entlre iengh to ensure this takes place where determined.
Thjs entire access plan on th€ llonlage road will i'equire a Colorado Department of Transponation revised
access permit. The tansportation engineers ar CDOT have the authority to decide how the access firnclions.
Reguired Improvements rnd Conditions
B The required improvements for this development are a 6' heated paver wallovay hom the east property
Iine of the SDD to the Gateway Building. In addition any revisions to the curb will require new curb
and gutter and modifications or additions to the storm sewer system. Tbc extension of Viilage-style
street iights is also requireC. Any necessary modifications to utilities, landscaping irrigarion systems
and required retajning rvails shail be the responsibility of the developer. The walkway will be
deiineated in pavels acrbss the drivcways behind the cross Diuts.D Frontase ltoad l;mdscape medians to inclr.rde c'.rb and gutter, concrete unit paver apnons, any nxsonry
rock walls, plant mater.ial, bedding mix to Tov specifications, and irrigation system and water
connections ind sleeves.tr Improvements to Vail Road include a heated.R' paver lvalkway from the Gateway Building property to
East Ivleadow Drive. All additional irnprovements to allow for this to rake place iu similariy as stated
above for ihe fronrage road are also the responsibilitv of the developer.n ln addition, adding c'.rb, guner and a 5' concrcts ',valk fi'om the east property line of the SSD to and
aroLrnd the curb renrn of Village Cenrer Chure on the South Fronuge Road. Any modifications to the
drainage system to accomplish this work are considered the requirement of the curb. Work such as
retaining walls and utility moCficarions are the responsibilit_v of the Town of Vail.o Details of the improvemeDts from Vail Road to the rvest edge of the Phase I building (Base Mountain
Sports) along \,vith the improvements of tire bus stop along East Nleadow Drive are as follows a heaied
paver walkrvay a[tached to the streel and bus stop along with zrll modifications ro drainage, utilides,
reraining r;enil5, drainage sysrems, inigation. Iandscape modifications stre--t lishting and aly adjacent
properry improveme.nts impac ted.D The orange street lights existing aiong ihe entire lengrh of Eas Meadow Dr'ive sball be sh:nged to the
Village -sryie srreet lighr fixrue. This installation shall be completed by the developer.tr A flna1 grading and drainage plan be prepared anci all drainage systems carryiag runoff from publ.ic
right oirvays require drainage easemefis. The tinai gading plan will have all grades to the renth of a
lbot.
o
(o A final landscape plan ,"howing sight distances, snow storage areas, and all existing vegetarion
impacted.
The entire build.ing rviil require a gunering system , heat tape and piping to the slorn sewer.
That snow shedding is addressed for the entire building.
The pedestrian walks along Vail Road and the other pedestrian mews are established as public
pedestrian easements.
Complete civil-engineered plans are reviewetl, and approved by tbe Town Engineer prior to submining
pians for thc building permit.
All one-way cross or.er lanes shall be l8' in width apd all two-way cross over lanes shall be 24' in
width. This affects approximately four compact and seven valet spaces.
The two-way drive aisle at the porte-cochere is only 20' in width between the columns. The valet
spaces draurn ate only 16' in length. if full-size valet spaces are established as required, the drive lane
width is fi.r.r*ier reduced down to l?'. To resolve the conflict the parkiug spaces need |o be removed.
The slopes of the heated and enclosed drive aisle ramps are allowed to be a maximum grade of 16%.
An engineered-stamped designof the drive aisie is required prior to final DRB approval.
The three Phase V parking spaces south of the hotel are not pracdcal. To enter the frst to requires the
driver to use the hotel porte+ochere as a roundabout. The one angled parking space, when drawn to
the proper dimensions (9'x 19') reduces the drive aisle to the structure by 1'. This conflict could be
resolved by moving the parking space closer to rhe Phase v building. However, the proposed 4 foot
wide walk in this rnew is then reduced to tfuee feet in width when adiusted. The reduced width is too
narow ne.(t ro tbe building. The parking space desip musr be revis;d.
The curb retwns into and out of the site will need to be revised to allow proper turning and
maneuvering.
The sor.rth retum onto the site shall have a iS'radius.
The north return out of the site shali have an 8' radius.
The Soulh Fronlage Road exit shall be widened to accommodate the 65' semi tractor traiier. This
requires an adjustment to both sides of the drive aisle and to tbe landscape island-
The brick paver sidewalk along Vail Road shall be 8' in width.
a
O
0
n
tr
oro
o
/o
PLANNING AND ENVIRONMENTAL COMMISSION
PUBLIC MEETING SCHEDULE
Monday, February 28, 2000
MEETING RESULTS
Proiect orientation / PEc LUNCH - communitv Development Department 12:00 p.m.
MEMBERS PRESENT
Galen Aasland
Diane Golden
Tom Weber
Chas Bernhardt
Doug Cahill
Site Visits :1:30 p.m.
1. West Vail Lodge - 221 1 N. Frontage Rd.
George
NOTE: lf the PEC hearing extends until 6:00 p.m., the board will break for dinn€r from 6:00 - 6:30 p.m.
Public Hearinq - Town Councll Chambers 2:00 p.m.
1. A requesl for a conditional use permit, to allow lor the conversion of existing hotel rooms
into employee housing units, located at2211N. Frontage Rd. (West Vait Loige)iLot 1,
Vail das Schone #3.
Applicant: Reaut ComorationPlanner Brent Wilsbn
MOTION: Chas Bernhardt SECOND: Diane Gotden VOTE: 5-0
TABLED UNTIL MARCTI13, 2OOO
2. A request for a final reyiqw 9f a major amendment, to allow for the proposed
redevelopment.of the Vail Village lrin, Phase lV, within Special Oev'eloiment District No.
Q' and a conditional use permit, to allow for the operatiori of a fractionil fee club in thePublic Accommodation Zone District, located at i00 East Meadow Drive/Lots M, rrr, a.O,Block 5-D, Vail Viilage First Fiting.
Applicant: Daymer Corporation, represented by Jay petersonPlanner: George Ruther
MorloN: Tom weber SECoND: Doug cahiil VorE:4-1 ( chas Bernhardt
opposed)
APPROVED - MAJOR AMENDMENT RECOMMENDATION TO TOWN COUNCIL
O+eopr
MEMBERS ABSENT
John Schofield
Brian Doyon
Driver:
KQffo
o
-u\
4ilUhAN'Doug Cahiil SECOND: Tom Weber VOTE: S-0
.lqrq} ?#iou=o-coNDrtoNAL usE pERMrr wrrH 21 coNDrroNS:
\ ' 1. Th"t the Developer submits detailed civil engineering drawings of the required off-site
improvements (street lights, drainage, curb and gutter, sidewalks, grading, road
improvements, etc.) as identified on the off-site improvements plan to the Town ot Vail
Public Works Department for review and approval, prior to application for a building
permit.
2. That the Developer submits a detailed final landscape plan and linal architectural
elevations for review and approval of the Town of Vail Design Review Board, prior to
application for a building permit.
3. lhe sdd approval time requirements and limitations of Section '12-gA-12shall apply to
Ordinance No. 1, Series of 2000. In addition, the phasing ol the construction of fh6 hotel
shall not be permitted.
4. Thal the Developer submits the following plans to the Department ot Community
Development, lor review and approval, as a part of the building permit application for the
hotel:
a.
h
c.
d.
E.
An Erosion Control and Sedimentation Plan;
A Construction Staging and Phasing Plan;
A Stormwater Management Plan;
A Site Dewatering Plan; and
A Traffic Control Plan.
Jl'l3t th9 Developer receives a conditional use permit to allow for the construction of Type
lll Employee Housing Units in Phase lV of the District, in accordance with Chapter 12-i'6,
prior to the issuance of a building permit, to provide housing on-site.
That the Developer submits a complete set of plans to the colorado Department of . :
Transportation for review and approval of a revised access permit, prioi to application for
a building permit.
That the Developer meets with the Town statf to prepare a memorandum of
understanding outlining the responsibilities and reguirements of the required off-site
improvements, prior to second reading of an ordinance approving the major amendment.
That the Developer submits a complete set of plans responding to the design concems
expressed by Greg Hall, Director of Public works & Transportation, in his memorandum
to George Ruther, dated 12l13/99. The drawings shall be submitted, reviewed and
approved by the Town Engineer, prior to final Design Review Board approval.
That the Developer records public pedestrian easements between the hotel and the
Phase lll condominiums, between the hotel and the phase V Building, and along the vail
Road frontage. The easements shall be prepared by the Developer and submitt-ed for
review and approval of the Town Attorney. The easements shall be recorded with the
Eagle County Clerk & Recorder's Office prior to the issuance ol a Temporary Certificate
ol Occupancy.
.-.
v
7.
8.
9.
10. That the Developer record a deed-restriction, which the Town is a party to, on the Phase
!V propgrty prohibiting the public use of the spa facility in the hotel. Said restriction may
be revoked if the Developer is able to demonstrate to the satisfaction of the Town that
-
adequate provisions for vehicle parking have been made to accommodate the public use
of the spa. The restriction shall be recorded prior to the issuance of a building permit.
o
o 1 1. That the Developer submits a final ex'terior building materials list, a typical wall sec1ons,
architectural details and a complete color rendering for review anO a-pproval of the Design
Review Board, prior to making an application for abuilding permit.
12. That the Developer submits a comprehensive sign program proposal for the Vail plaza
Hotel for review and approval of the Design Review Board, frioi to the issuance of a
Temporary Certif icate of Occupancy.
13. That the Developer submits a roof-top mechanical equipment plan for review and
approval of the Design Fleview Board prior to the issuance of a building permit. All roof-
top mechanical equipmenl shall be incorporated into the overall design of the hotel and
enclosed and screened from public view.
14' Thq! the Developer posts a bond with the Town ol Vail to provide financial security for the125/" ol the total cost of the required off-site public improvements. The bond snatt be inplace with the Town prior to the issuance of a building'permit.
15. That the Developer installs bollards or similar salety devices at the intersection of the
delivery access driveway and the sidewalk along th'e South Frontage Road to prevent
conflicts between pedestrians and vehicles, prior to the issuance ol a Temporlry
Certificate of Occupancy.
16. That the Developer studies and redesigns the entrance on the north side of the hotel
across from the entrance to the Gateway Building to create a more inviting entrance or a
design that redirects pedestrians to another entrance. The final design shall be reviewed
and approved by the Design Review Board prior to the issuance of a OuilOing permit.
17. That the Developer coordinate efforts with the owners of the Gateway Building to create a
below ground access for loading and delivery to the Gateway from th-e Vail Plaza Hotel to
resolve potential loading and delivery concems at the Gateway. lf a coordinated effort
can be reached the Developer shall submit revised plans to the Town of Vail Community
Development Department for review and approval, prior to the issuance of a building
permrt.
18. That the Developer revises the proposed floor plans for the Vail Plaza Hotel to provide
freight elevator access to the lowest level of the parking structure. The revised plans shall
be submitted to the Town of Vail Community Development Department for review and
approval prior to the issuance of a building permit.
'l 9. That the Develeper redesign+the Brepesed elevater tewer te ereale a$ arehiteetural
ijhe€€er+shdt-r€vievAnC
apBr€v€+hsevis€Cd€sign,
20, That the Developer, in cooperation with the Town of Vail public works Department
design and construct a left-turn lane on Vail Road and recon{igure the landscape island in
the South Frontage Road median to eliminate left-turns from the loading/delivery. The
construction shall be completed prior to the issuance of a Temporary Certificate of
Occupancy.
21. That the Developer provides a centralized loading/delivery facility for the use of all owners
and.tenants within Special Development District No. 6. Access or use of the facility shall
not be unduly restricted for Special Development District No. 6. The loading/delivery
facility, including docks, berths, freight elevators, service corridors, etc., may be maie
available for public and/or private loading/delivery programs, sanctioned by ihe Town of
o
it.
Vail, to mitigate loading/delivery impacts upon the Vail Village loading/delivery system.
The use of the facility shall only be permitted upon a finding by the Town of Vail and the
Developer that excess capacity exists. The Developer will be compensated by the Town
of Vail and/or others for the common use of the facility. The final determination of the use
of the facility shall be mutually agreed upon by the Developer and the Town of Vail.
22.That the Developer submits a written letter of approval from adjacent properties whose
property is being encroached upon by certain improvements resulting from the
construction of the hotel, prior to the issuance of a building permit.
A request for variances from Section 12-6C-6, Section 1 2-6D-6, and Section 12-14..6,
Town of Vail Code, to allow lor an elitended entry, trash enclosure and deck expansion,
located at 706 W. Forest Road/Lot 9, Block 1, Vail Village 6'n Filing.
Applicant: cliff lltig, represented by Beth LevinePlanner: Allison Ochs
TABLED UNTIL MARCH 13,2OOO
A request for.a minor subdivision, to allow for an amendment to a previously platted
luifding env.elope and a revised lot access, located al14s2 Lionsridge Loof i tot +,
Ridge at Vail.
Applicant: Mike YoungPlanner: George Buther
TABLED UNTIL MARCH 13,2OOO
A request for final review of a proposed major amendment to special Development
Piqtrict #4 (cascade Village), tocated at 't 000 s. Frontage Road west (Gten Lyon office
Building)iLot 54, Block K, Gten Lyon Subdivision.
fpPlicant: Dundee Realty, represented by Segerberg Mayhew ArchitectsPlanner: George Ruthejr
TABLED UNTIL MAHCH 13, 2OOO
A request for a variance from sections 12-6H-6 and 12-14-6, Town ol Vail Code, to allow
for the additio_n of gro_ss residenlial floor area and balconies within required setback5,
located at 303 Gore creek Drive Vail rownhouse #2-clLot 2, Block s, vait vittage tn
Filino.
Applicant:
Planner:
Vicki Pearson, represented by Ron Diehl, Architect
Ann Kierulf
TABLED UNTIL MARCH 13, 2OOO
A request for a conditional use permit, to allow for the construction of an addition to the
existing raw water intake structure and pump station, located on Black Gore DriveiLot 8,
Heather of Vail.
Applicant: Eagle River Water and Sanitation DistrictPlanner: Brent Wilson
WITHDRAWN
Information Update
4.
7.
L
t
, 9. Approvalof February 14, 2000 mlnutes.
{O
The appllcations and information about the proposals are available for public Inspection durino
regular office hours in the project planners otfice located at the Town bt vait Community
Development Department, 75 South Frontage Road. Please catt47$2138 for informatidn.
lien tanguage int€rpr€talbn available upon r€quest with 24 hour notifDatbn. pleaB€ call 479-2356, Tebphone for heHeering lmpaired, lor informatbn.
Community Davelopm€nt Department
o
ro
Vail Plaza Hotel
961070.00
Level 6
Gross Square Footage
Dwellitrs Unit
Dw€lling Unit (upper level)
Club Units
Unit Number
Club Unit 44 (Upper Level)
Club Unit 45 (Jpper i,evel)
Club tlnit 46 (Upper lrvel)
Club Unit 47 (Upper L*vel)
Club unit 49 (Upper kvel)
Club Unit 50 rupp€r [,€vel)
Sub-Totrl Club
Conidor (public)
Core (elevator)
Maid
Corc (stair)
Mechanical (rooftoo)
SutsTotel Area
Dwelling Unit Net
Club Unit Net
Other Net
Total Net
NcVGross Differetrce
Level 6 Zehren and Associates, Inc.
ant00
o
o
7,923.00
Area
2,053.00
AI9C
814.00
814.00
814.00
648.00
814.00
814.00
4,718.00
0.00
150.00
0.00
0.00
222.00
372.00
2,053.00
4,7t8.00
3'12.ffi
?,143.00
7E0.00
Deck Area
0.00
Deck Area
141.00
147.00
147.00
l0E-00
147.00
147.00
843.00
900/"
Bedrooms
1.00
Bedrooms
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
6.00
Studio
0.00
Studio
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
Pillows
2.00
Pillows
2.00
2.00
2.00
2.00
2.00
2.00
12.00
Kcvs
0.00
Kevs
r.00
1.00
1.00
r.00
1.00
r.00
6.00
Page I
Vail Plaza Hotel
961070.00
Dwellins Unit
Dwelling Unit (lower level)
Club Units
Unit Number
Club Unit 35 (Upper L:vel)
Club Unit 36 (Upper Lrvel)
Club Unit37 (Upper L,evel)
Club Unit 38 (Upper Level)
Club Unit 40 (Upper kvel)
Club Unit,f4 (Lower L:vel)
Club Unit 45 (Lower l"evel)
Club Unit 46 (tower l-evel)
Club Unit 47 (Low€r Level)
Club Unit 48 (Rat)
Club Unit 49 (loum trvel)
Club Uait 50 C..ower kvel)
Sub-Total Club
Other Areas
Corridcn (public)
CoI€ (elevaaor, rnech. shall)
Maid
Core (stair)
Sub-Total Other Arces
Dw€lling Linit Net
Club Unit Net
Other Net
Totd Net
N€UGross Dlff€rence
Level 5 Zehren and Associates, Inc.
an/00
/ O #squor"rootrge 16,146.00
Area
3,446.00
Area
814.00
814.00
814.00
814.00
857.00
912.00
n9.00
486.00
513.00
858.00
992.00
955.00
9,80E.00
Aret
r,617.00
l5 t.00
0.00
9.00
r,76E.00
3,446.00
9,808.00
1.768.00
15,022.00
r,t24.00
Deck Area
340.00
Deck Area
!47.00
147.00
147.00
147.00
147.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
?35.00
Bedrooms
3.00
Bedrooms
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
2.00
2.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
2_N
2.00
16.00
Kevs
4.00
Keys
1.00
r.00
1.00
t.00
1.00
2.U)
2.00
l.00
1.00
2.00
2.W
2.00
17.00
Studio Pillows
1.00 8.00
Studio Pillows
0.00 2.00
0.00 2.00
0.00 2.u)
0.00 2.00
0.00 2.00
0.00 4.00
0.00 4.00
0.00 2.00
0.00 2.00
1.00 4.00
0.00 4.00
0.00
1.00
4.00
34.00
93Vo
Pzge 2
Vail Plaza Hotel
961070.00
Leyel 4
Gross Squrre Footrgc
Club Units
Unit Number
Club Unit 21 (Upper Level)
Club Unit 22 (Upper Level)
Club Unit 23 (Upp€r Lrvel)
Club Unit 28 (Jpper Level)
Club t nit 29 (Upper LevcD
Club Unit 34 (Flat)
Club Unit 35 (tower kvel)
Club Unit 36 (I-ower Lrvel)
Club Unit 3? (l-ower l-evel)
Club Unir 38 (Lower Level)
Club Unit 39 (Rat)
Club Unit 40 (Lower bvel)
Chb Unit 4l (Flat)
Club Unit 42 (Flat)
Club Unit 43 6lar)
Sub-Totd Club
Accomodation Units
Unit Type A
Other Areas
Conidor (public)
Core (elevator)
Maid
Cor€ (stair)
Sub.Total Other Ar€rs
Club Unit Net
Accorrnodation N€t
Other Net
Totrl Net
NeUGrosJ Difterence
Level 4
Bedrooms
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
l00
l00
1.00
2.00
2.00
2.00
1.00
2.00
2.00
2.00
2.00
22.00
Studio
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
1.00
0.00
1.00
0.00
0.00
2.00
Pillows
2.00
2.00
2.00
2.00
2.00
2.00
2.00
4.00
4.00
4.00
4.00
4.00
6.00
4.00
4.00
48.00
Zehren and Associates, Inc.
aB/00
26,445.OD
Area Deck AreN
790.00 14't.00
790.00 1.47.00
790.00 147.00
790.00 147.00
790.00 147.00
798.00 147.00
513.00 0.00
l,034.00 0.00
1,034.00 0.00
1,034.00 0.00
990.00 195.00
980_00 93.00
1,693.00 t47.00
| ,226.00 93 .00
| .226.W 93 .00
r4,418.0O 1,503.00
Kevs
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
r.00
1.00
1.00
2-00
2.00
2.00
2.00
2.00
3.00
2.00
2.00
24.W
Kevs Totrl Arer
17.00 5343.00o
Ave. Aree
373.12
Area
3,0t7.00
r50.00
512.00
27t.00
3,950.00
14,478.00
6,343.00
3.950.00
24;t7r.0o
1,674.00 94Vo
Page 3
Vail Plaza Hotel
961070.00
Level 3
Gross Squrre F'ootag€
Club Units
Unit Tvoe
Club Unit l8 (Flat)
Club Unit 19 (Flat)
Club Unit 20 (FlaQ
Club Unit 2l (l-ower kvel)
Club Unit 22 (I-ower kvel)
Club Unit 23 (Lower Level)
Club Unit 24 (nat)
Club Unit 25 (Flat)
Club Unit 26 @ag
Club unit 27 (Flat)
Club Unit 28 (.ower Level)
Club Unit 29 (Lnwer kvel)
Club Unit 30 @aQ
Club Unit 3l (Ra0
Club Unit 32 (Flat)
Club Unit 33 Glat)
Sub'Totrl Club Utrits
Accomodrtion Units
Unit Type A
Other Areas
Maid
Corridor (public)
Corc (clevator)
Corc (stair)
Sub-Totrl Othcr Arees
Totrls
Club Net
Accormodation Net
Other Net
Totd Net
NeUGrost Difference
Level 3 Zehren and Associates, Inc.
2/23/00
,o 32,480.00
Area Deck Aree
782.00 93.00
1,092.00 164.00
864,00 164.00
562.00 0.00
1,088.00 0.00
994.00 0.00
1,021.00 93_00
1,073.00 273_00
975.00 98.00
958.00 93.00
979.00 94.00
979.00 94.00
969.00 t37.00
920.00 64.00
1,242.00 93.00
t.226.0Q 93.00
75,724.00 15$.00
Ave, Area
361.04
498.00
4,303.00
150.00
338.00
12E9.00
15,724.00
9,387.00
s.289.00
30,400.00
2,080.00
Studio Plllows
0.00 2.00
1.00 4.00
0.00 2.00
0.00 2.00
0.00 4.00
0.00 4.00
0.00 2.00
1.00 4.00
1.00 4.00
1.00 4.00
0.00 4.00
0.00 4.00
l.00 4.00
l00 4.00
0,00 4.00
0.00 4.00
6.00 56.00
Kevs
1.00
2.00
L00
| .00
2.00
2.00
1.00
2.00
2.N
2.00
2.00
2.00
2.00
2.00
2.00
2.00
28.00
Bedrooms
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
2.00
2.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
i.oo
2.00
2.00
l 00
1.00
2.00
2.00
22.O0
,o Kevs Total Aree
26.00 9,387.00
940/.
Page 4
o
{
Level 2
Gross Square Footrge
Club Units
Unlt Type
Club Unit 6 (Flat)
Club Unit 7 @aQ
Club Unit 8 (Flat)
Club Unit 9 @at)
Club Unit l0 (Flat)
Club unit 1l (Flat)
Club Unit 12 (Ilat)
Club Unit 13 (Rat)
Club Ljnit 14 (Flat)
Club unit 15 @aQ
club Llnir 16 (Flat)
Club ljnit 17 (FliO
SubTotal Club Units
Accomodation Units
Unit Tlpe A
Other Arces.o [illu-""*",
. Cor€ (elewtor)
Corc Gtair)
Rmftop Deck
Sub.Totel Other Areer
Totalg
Club Net
Accsmodation Net
Oth€r N€t
Totd Net
NetfGrosr Dlllerencc
u,972.00
Aree Deck Area
907.00 93.00
1,235.00 93.00
1163.00 93.00
946.00 98.00
976.00 98.00
958.00 81.00
958.00 99.00
9s8.00 99.00
970.00 146.00
920.00 199.00
1,455.00 20.00
t rl3.00 20.00
12,?59.00 r,r39.00
Kws
1.00
2.00
2.00
2.00
2.W
2.00
2.00
2.00
2.00
2.00
3.00
2.00
24.00
Kcvs Total Area
36,00 l3.0B.m
94Uo
Bedrooms
1.00
2.00
2.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
L00
1.00
1.00
2,N
2.00
16.00
Studio
0.00
0.00
0.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
0.00
E.00
Pillows
2.00
4.00
4.00
4.00
4.00
4.00
4.00
4.00
4.00
4.00
6.00
4.00
48.00
Ave. Arce
36t.7 5
386.00
4,370.00
150.00
325.00
r.790.00
7,02r.00
r2,759.N
13,023.00
7.021.m
32,E03.00
2,169.00
rl
Vail Plaza Hotel Level 1.5 Zehren md Associal€s,Inc.9610?0.00 uittoo
,- I,cycl 1.5
{ , Groas S$rrrc Footag€ 26Js0.0o
Cluh Unirs
' Unit TVoe Area Deck Area Kevr Bedrooms Studio plllows
Club unit I @aQ 90E.00 112.00 1.00 LoO 0.00 2.00
Club Unit 2 (Flat) rJ35.00 n2.00 2.00 z.w 0.00 4.00
Clirb thit 3 (FlaD 1,263.00 95.00 2.00 Z.OO 0.00 4.00
Cl$ Unit 4 @a$ 948.00 112.00 2.00 1.00 1.00 4.00
'club unit 5 fiat) ns.N e5.oo 2.@ L00 1.00 4@
Sub.Totd Clob Unt6 5329Ir0 526.00 9.00 7.00 2,00 18.00
A{tmdrtiotr UrlE Avc. Aree Kcvs Totrl Arcr plllows
Unit T,,pc A 3fi.25 . 20.00 2,065.m 40.00
Emlovcr Eourlne Ave. Aree Kqrc Totsl Arcr pillows
thit l)FE A 351.?8 9.00 3,166.00 17.00
Otb3tr Arers
,l
Ctrrirfor (lrublic) 4,317.W
ConE(elEvstor) 150.00
Cors (steir) 324.00
Rmfrm Dcct 4.114.00
&rb-Totrl othcr Arcrr 9Jll.00
Tdk
Club Net 5J29.00
Accu nodatidtNct 7065.00
Enptoy€e Ho$ing Net 3,166.00
Other Net 9.3 1 1 .00
Totrl Net 24,t7t.OO
ieUGros! Dlficrcnce 1,509.00 91oi
Page 6
--.
I
Vail Plaza Hotel
961070.00
Level 1
Gross Square Footage
Emoloyee Housins
UnitTpeA
Retall
Retail Tlnee
Retteurant
Main Restaurant (Buffet)
Sp€cialty Restaurant
S[b-'Totd Reltrurant
Lounae
Lounge
Exterior Circulation
Auto Ramp (North)
Pedestrian Entrv (South)
Sub-.Total Ert Circ.
Other Arcas
Corridor fuublic)
Conidor (employce)
Conidor (service)
Kitcher/Servicc
Truck Docl/Auto Circ-
Restrooms
Maid
Core (elevator)
Core (stair)
Sub'Total Other Arees
Totds
Ernployee Housing Net
Retsil Net
Restaurant Net
Lnungr Net
Exterisr Circ. Net
Other Net
Tolrl Net Area
Net/Gross Dilferencc
Level I
Totel Area Pillows
3,166.00 17.00
Zehrar and Associates, Inc.
2t23/00
39,t70.00
Ave. Area
351.78
Arer
564.00
AEc
2,155.00
1.503.00
3,658.00
Area
1,141.00
2,532.00
4.685.00
7,217.0O
35E0.00
I,619.00
709.00
6,868.00
7,233.00
600.00
29.00
254.W
397.00
21389.00
3,166.00
564.00
3,658.00
i,l4l.00
7 217.00
21.389.00
37,135.00
2,835.00
Kcvs
9.00
Occ. Factor Occunants
18.00 119.72
25.00 60.t2
179.84
Occ. Fsctor Occuprnts
25.00 4s.il
Page 7
Vail Plaza Hotel
961070.00
I Levelo
i C*ro Squrrc Footrge 42,216.00
1,473.00
1.539.00
3,012.00
Area
2,426.00
1,969.00
1,134.00
1.887.00
4,990.00
3,019.00
2447.00
1J92.00
1.686.00
E,544.00
1,263.00
3.634.00
4,t97.00
930.00
5,676.00
1,984.00
935.00
816.00
r0"341.00
1,307.00
275.00
568.00
3.801.00
5,951.00
5,00
3,012,00
2,426.00
4,990.00
8,544.00
Occ. Fact,
30.00
Levei 0
Occup.
80.87
Zehren and Associates, Inc.
a23to0
Reteil
Retail One
Relail Two
Sub.'Totrl Retail
Lobbv
I-obby
Adminlstration
Front Desk
Office./Salas
Accountinq
Total Admlnistration
Soa - Men'VWorkout
Men's l,ockers/Facilities
Treatmenl
Deck
E (€rciscy'Workout
Sub..Total Spa
Service Areas
Service Cotridor
Scrvice -Receive/Storage
SubTotrl Servic€
Exterior Circulation
Covered Rarp (North)
Covered Auto Entry (West)
Pedestrian Access (West)
Auto Rarp (South)
Pedestrian Access (East)
Sub-Totel ErL Circ
Other Areas
Mechanical
Core (eleYator)
Core (Stair)
Cmrido(Public)
Total Other Arers
Parkinp Provided
Valet Spaces
Totals
Retail Net
lobby Nct
Adminisbation Net
Spa Net
Page 8
Vail Plaza Hotel
961070.00
Zehren and Associates, lnc.
2/23/00
O serviceNet
o
4,897.00
Exterior Circulation Net 10,341.00
Other Net 5.951.00
Total Net 40,161.00
NeUGross Difference 2,055.00 9So/"
Level 0
Page 9
Vail Plaza Hotel
9610?0.00
: LevdMtnucone
1 Cres S$|rrc Foobge 57,696.00
Level -l Zehren and Associates, Inc., u2yw
Area
Wsmn'r l-ockcosffacilities 3,116.50
. Tr€eftnent 2,853.00
D€ck Arca 6,26.00
Exercise/Wctout I ,246.00
Pgot Area 2.774,W
SubfodSpr 16255.5t1
l-otrl€rence Aree Occ, X'actor Occuptnts
Bdtoorn 6,923.W 15.00 461.53
hc-convnre 2.358.00 ZJo 336.96
Srb-Totd Confcrcnce 9.241.00
Scrvi* 4,689.00
O'Ser Arces
Mcchmicsl 0.00
Conidu(Public) 2328.00
Cd! (cl€vetor) 275.00
Cffq (stai) s42.0o
Public R€3trooflis 856.()0
SlbTo.d +m1.00
$pc
PrrHtr! hovlded Soaces Area Arcr./Sorce
Vrh$pa€€s 0.00
Pcking Spoccs (Futl Size) 45.00
Hiry Spaccs (Corrpact) 7.00
Hint Soscor (Accessible) 2.OO
gubTttrl Prrhng 54.00 20,931.00 388
Tot*@
OirrArE{sNcr 4,001.00
SpoNut 16J55.50
Cdf€r€occN€t 9r8i.00
56rr/iccNet 4,689.00
Psting {d Rary Net 20.93 l.m
Tohl Nrt 5115751
NcUGrmr DilTcnencc 253E5(l 96Uo
I
Pagc l0
Vail Plaza Hotel
961070.00
Level Mlnus Two
Grusr Squere Footage
Conference
Breakout
he-conven€
Sub.Totel Conference
Servlce
Other Areas
Mcchanical
Conitlor@ublic)
Corc (elevator)
Cor€ (stair)
Public Restroom.s
Sub'Totrl
Perklne Provided
Velet Spaces
Parking Spaces (Full Size)
Prking Spaces (Conpact)
Parkng Soaces (Accessible)
Srb.Totel PerHng
O ffi**r*
Conference Net
S€rvice Net
Parkine and Ramp Net
Toid Nct
NcVGross Difference
Level -2
Occ. Factor OccuDtnts
15.00 224.27
7.00 355.00
Agg Arer,/Sorce
20,928.tX1
720h
Zehren and Associates, Inc.
2/23/00
49fsE.00
Aree
3,364.00
2.485.00
5rE49.00
8,,183.00
0.00
220.N
152_00
285.00
0.00
657.00
Soercs
0.00
45.00
7.00
2.00
54.00
Aree
65?.00
5,849.00
8,483.00
20.928.00
35,91?.00
r3,941.00
388
Page I I
a r.crvcr ltluur Tnree
i - Grurr Sqrrre Footrgc 45,771.00
Othcr Areas
Mooheical 0.00
Ccrido (public) 221.00
C6r(el€valor) t52.00
tur (Btsil\ 2E5.00
Sub-fotal (Xler Arcrs 65840
Arct SprcB Arcr Ancr$otce
Valstspsc€s 30.00
Prling Spacca (Fu[ Size) 96.m
Ps*ing Spsc€s (CoqacD I I .m
Mim Spaces (Accceible\ 4O0
SrbTotdPrrErg 141.00 4393000 311.56
Totrk
Oth€r Net 658.00
Pdtinq and Rfip Nct 43.930.00
TotdNst 44.588.00
Nc GhossDlllcrFncc I,183.00 97V.
if
o
Vail Plaza Hotel
9610?0.00
Dwellinp Units
Dwelling Unit I
Club Units
Club Unit I 0lat)
Club Unit 2 (Flat)
Club Unit 3 (Flat)
Club Unit 4 (Flat)
Club Unit 5 (Flat)
Club tJnit 6 (Flat)
Club t.lnit ? (Flat)
Club Unit 8 (Flat)
Club Unit 9 (Flat)
Club Unit l0 (Flat)
Club Unit l1 @at)
Club Unit 12 (Rat)
Club Unit 13 (Flat)
Club Unit 14 @at)
Club Unit l5 (Flat)
Club unit 16 (Flat)
CtuU tlttit lA 6r"9
Club Unit 19 (Flat)
club unit 20 (Flat)
Club Unit 2l CIwo l*vel)
Club Unit 22 (Tnr: Level)
Club Llnir 23 Clwo IrveD
Oub Unit 24 (Fla$
Club LJnit 25 @at)
Club lJnit 26 (Flag
. Club Unit 27 (Flat)
Club Unit 27 (Two level)
Club lJnit 29 (Two Irvel)
Club Unit 30 @a$
Club Unit 3l (Flat)
Club Unit 32 (Flat)
Club Unit 33 (Rat)
Club unit 34 (Flat)
Club Unit 35 (Two kvel)
Club Unit 36 (Two level)
Club thit 37 (Tno lrvel)
Club Unit 38 (Two kvel)
Club Unit 39 (Flat)
Club thit 40 Cfwo Lflel)
Club Unit 4l (Flat)
Club Unit 42 (RaD
Club Unit 43 (FIat)
Club lJnit 43 (Two kvel)
Club Unit 45 (Two l-evel)
Club Unit 46 (Two Level)
Club Unit 47 (Iwo I-evel)
Club l.Jnit 48 (Flat)
Club IJnil 49 (Two l*vel)
Club Unit 50 fTwo l-evel)
Totel Club Prrking
Parking Summary Zehren and Associates, lnc.
2/23100,l
{o
Total Area
5,499,00
Total Area
908.00
1235.00
I,263.00
948,00
97s.00
907.00
l,235.00
1r63.00
946.00
976.00
958.00
958.00
958.00
970.00
920.00
1,455.00
782.00
1,092.00
864.00
1,352.00
1,8?8.00
I,784.00
1,021.00
1,073.00
m5.00
958.00
1,769.00
1,769.00
969.00
920.00
1,242-00
1,226.W
798.00
t,327.00
1,848.00
I,848.00
1,848.00
990.00
1,837.00
r,693.00
L 226.00
| 226.00
|,726.0Q
I,793.00
1,300.00
1,161.00
858,00
814.00
814.00
62,816.00
Park. Factor
>2000
.Sactor
500<2000
500<2000
500<2000
500<2000
500<2000
500<2000
500<2000
500<2000
500<2000
500<2000
500<2000
5@<2000
5004000
500<2000
500<2000
500<2000
500<2000
500<2000
500<2000
500<2000
500<2000
500€000
500<2000
500<2000
500<2000
500<2000
500<2000
500<2000
500<2000
500<2000
500<2000
500<2000
500<2000
500<2000
500<2000
'500<2000
500<2000
500<2000
500<2000
500<2000
500<2000
500<2000
500<2000
500<2000
500<2000
5004000
500<2000
500<2000
500<2000
Park. Reo'd
2.50
Sraces
2.0Q
2.00
2.00
2.00
2.00
2.00
2.N
2.00
2.00
2.00
2.00
2.OO
2.O0
2.00
2.00
2.00
2.00
2.00
2.0Q
2.00
2.00
2.W
2.00
2.00
2.00
2.00
2.00
2.O0
2.00
2.00
2.00
2.00
2.00
2.00
2.00
2.00
2.00
2.00
2.00
2.00
2.00
2.00
2.00
2.00
2.00
2.00
2.00
2.00
2.00
98.00
o
Page 13
,o
Vail Plaza Hotel
961070.00
Accommodation Units
Total Acc. Unih
R$trurant
Total Restaurant
Lounee
Total Lounge
Retail
Total Retail
Conference
Ballroom
Breakout
Total Reouired Spaces
Total Dwelling Unit
Total Club
Total Accommodaiion
Total Restaurant
Total Inunge
Total Relail
ConferrnceOffi
Mixed Use Reduction (10%)
Totel Prrking Required
Total Parking Provided
PerHng Difference
Parkins Provlded
Existing SDD spaces to remain*
Lrvel Zem Pdking
I-evel Minus One Parking
Level Minus Two Parking
I-wel Minus Three Parkins
Total Parking Provided
Pcrcenlrge
+ SDD Perkius Reouired (ohases1.2.3.5)
Existing SDD Spaces
SDD Parkine Deficit
Sub-Totel (Current Re{uirement)
Previouly Applied Redumion- (2.5%)
, J currenttv o€dicared rhase q spaces
Total SDD Prrking Requircd (phases 1,2.315)
Parking Summary
Factor
0.7 6
Factor
l:8 seats
tr'actor
1:8 seats
Factor Soaces
1:16 seats** 28.85
l:16 seatl** 14.02
Zehren and Associates, Inc.
423/00
Snaccs
75.42
Soaccs
22.48
Soaces
5.71
SDoc€s
Lt.92
Area
35,818.00
@
3,658.00
Area
l,141.00
Aroa
3,576.00
@
6,923.00
6,923.00
2.50
98.00
75.42
22.48
5.7 |
11.92
4.86
149.68
408.56
-40.86
367.10
366.00
-r.70
Full Size
1t2
0
45
45
90
298
8lo/o
112
75
ta7
191.68
149.68
KeYg
99.00
Scrt Frct
20.34
S€at Fact.
25.00
Factor
l:300 sq. ft.
Seat Frct.
15.00
15.00
Cornpact
0
0
7
7
;
70/r
Formuh
.5+.1/100s.f.
Seats
179.84
Seats,r*
Seats
461.s3
Valet
0
5
0
0
30
?<
tovo
Accessible
0
0
2
;
2o/a
Total
l12
5
54
54
141
366
100%
Page 14
Vail Plaza Hotel
961070.00
Parking Summary
rrassume 50% intemavpublic transportatiorvpedestrian haffic - breakout use by balhoom occupants
Zehren and Associates, Inc.
2123/00
o
Page 15
o Uloer Area
2,053.00
Uoper Arca
908,00
I,235.00
I,263.00
948.00
975.00
907.00
1,235.00
I,263.00
946.00
976.00
958.00
958.00
958.00
970.00
920.00
1,455.00
l,2I3,00
782.00
1,092.00
864.00
790.00
790.00
790.00
1,021.00
1,073.00
975.00
958.00
790.00
790.00
969.00
920.00
t,242.00
1,226.00
798.00
8t4.00
814.00
814.00
814.00
990.00
E57.00
1,693.00
1,226.00
t,226.00
814.00
814.00
814.00
648.00
858.00
814.00
Deck Area
340.00
Deck Arca
I 12.00
112.00
95.00
112.00
95.00
93-00
93.00
93.00
98.00
98.00
81.00
99.00
99.00
146.00
199.00
20.00
20.00
93.00
164.00
164.00
t4'1.OO
147.00
147.00
93.00
273-00
98.00
93.00
24t.00
24r.O0
137.00
64.00
93.00
93.00
14',1.00
147.00
147.00
r4'1.00
147.00
195.00
240.00
147.00
93.00
93.00
147.00
147.00
147.00
108.00
0.00
147,00
Keys
4.00
Kevs
1.00
2.00
2.00
2.00
2.00
1.00
2.00
2.00
2.00
2.00
2.00
2.00
2.00
2.00
2.00
3.00
2.00
L00
2.O0
1.00
2.00
3.00
3.00
1.00
2.00
2.00
2.00
3.00
3.00
2.00
2.00
2.00
2.00
L00
2.00
3.00
3.00
3.00
2.00
3.00
3.00
2.O0
2.00
3.00
3.00
2.00
2.00
2.00
3.00
Vail Plaza Hotel
961070.00
Dwellins Units
Divelling Unit I
Club Units
Club Unit 1 (Flat)
Club Unit 2 (Rat)
Club Unit 3 (Flat)
Club Unit 4 (Flat)
Club Unit 5 (Flat)
Club Unit 6 (Flat)
Club Unit 7 (Flat)
Club Unit 8 (Flat)
Club.Unit 9 (Flat)
Club Unit l0 (Flal)
Club Unit 1l (Flat)
Club Unit 12 (Flat)
Club Unit l3 @at)
Club Unit l4 (Flat)
Club Unit 15 (Flat)
Club Unit 16 (Flat)
Club Unit 17 (Flat)
Club Unit 18 (Flat)
Club Unit 19 (Flat)
Club Unit 20 (Flat)
Club Unit 2l (Two Level)
Club Unit 22 (Two lrvel)
Club Unit 23 (Two Lewl)
Club Unit 24 (Flat)
Club Unir 25 (Flat)
Club Unit 26 (Flat)
Club Unit 27 (Flat)
Club Unit 27 (Two Level)
Club Unit 29 (Two kvel)
Club Unit 30 (Ftat)
Club Unit 31 (Rat)
Club Unit 32 (Flat)
Club Unit 33 (Flag
Club Unit 34 (Flat)
Club Unit 35 (Two l-evel)
Club Unit 36 ('fwo t-ev€l)
Club Unit 37 (Two Level)
Club Unit 3E (Two trvel)
Club Unit 39 (FlaD
Club Unit 40 (Two Level)
Club Unit 4l (Flat)
Club Unit 42 (Flat)
Club Unit 43 (Flat)
Club Unit 43 (Two Level)
Club Unit 45 (Two l-evel)
Club Unit 46 (Two Levet)
Club Unit 47 (Two Level)
Club Unit 48 (Flat)
Club Unit 49 (Two l€vel)
Program Summary Zehren and Associates, Inc.
u23/00
Bedrooms Sludios Pillows
4.00 10.00
Bedrooms Studios Pillows
1.00 0.00 2.00
2.00 0.00 4.00
2.00 0.00 4.00
i.00 1.00 4.00
i.00 1.00 4.00
1.00 0.00 2.00
2.00 0.00 4.00
2.00 0.00 4.00
1.00 L00 4.00
1.00 1.00 4,00
1.00 l.o0 4.00
1.00 t.00 4.00
1.00 1.00 4.00
1.00 I.00 4_00
1.00 1.00 4.00
2.00 1.00 6.00
2.OO 0.00 4.00
1.00 0.00 2.00
1.00 1.00 4.00
1.00 0.00 2.00
2.00 0.00 4.00
3.00 0.00 6.00
3.00 0.00 6.00
1.00 0.00 2.00
1.00 t.00 4.00
1.00 L00 4.00
1.00 L00 4.00
3.00 0.00 6.00
3,00 0.00 6.00
1.00 1.00 4.00
1.00 1.00 4.00
2.00 0.00 4.00
2.00 0.00 4.00
1.00 0.00 2.00
2.00 0.00 4,00
3.00 0.00 6.00
3.00 0.00 6.00
3.00 0.00 6.00
1.00 L00 4.00
3.00 0.00 6.00
2.00 1.00 6.00
2.00 0.00 4.00
2.0Q 0.00 4.00
3.00 0,00 6.00
3.00 0.00 6.00
2.00 0.00 4.00
2.00 0.00 4.00
l 00 1.00 4.00
3.00 0.00 6.00
Lower Area Total Area
3,446.00 5,499.00
Lower Area Total Area
0.00 908.00
0.00 1,235.00
0.00 I,263,00
0.00 948,00
0.00 975.00
0.00 907.00
0.00 1135.00
0.00 1,263.00
0.00 946.00
0.00 976.00
0.00 958.00
0.00 958.00
0_00 958.00
. 0.00 9?0.00
0.00 920.00
0.00 1355.00
0.00 1,213.00
0.00 '182.00
0.00 1,092.00
0.00 864.00
562.00 1,352.00
1,088.00 1,878.00
994.00 1,784.00
0.00 I,021.00
0,00 1,073.00
0.00 975.00
0.00 958.00
979.00 1,769.00
979.00 1,769.00
0.00 969.00
0_00 920.00
0.00 |,242.00
0,00 1,226.w
0.00 798.00
513.00 |,327.00
1,034.00 1,848.00
l,034.00 l,848.00
1,034.00 1,848.00
0.00 990.00
980.00 l,837.00
0.00 r,693.00
0.00 1,226.00
0.00 |,226.00
9i2.00 1,726.00
9'79.00 1,793.00
486_00 1,300.00
513.00 l,16l.00
0,00 858.00
992.00 1,806.00
Page l6
Vail Plaza Hotel
961070,00
Rgidetrtial Totrls
Restrurant
Main R€staurant
Sp€cialw Restaurant
Tolrl Restaunnt
Lounse
I-oung€ 1,141.00 25.00 4s.64
Conference Facilites Seatlns Area Occ. Factor Selrs
Breakout 3J64 15 224
Ba[mom 6,923 15 462
Pre-convene 2.358 Z 33't
Totsl Conventior 12,645
Program Summary
t04,r33.00 6,639.00 211.00 192.00 19.00 424,00
S€atlng Area Occ. Frctor Sests
2,155.00 18.00 1\9:12
1.503.00 25.00 6Q.12
3,658.00 2034 779.84
Zehren and Associates, Inc.
2/23/00
(la
Soe
Level Zero 8,544.00
kvel Minus One 16.255.50O --'.'
Retail
Retail One 1473
Retail Two 1539
RetailTbree 564.00
Totel Retail 3.576.00
Club Unit 50 (Two IrveD 814.00 955.00 1.769.00 147.00 1,00 3.00 0.00 6.00
s0 Total club uDits 48,782.00 14,034,00 d2,816.00 6,299.00 108.00 89.00 19.00 2t6.00
Accommodrtion Units Room Area Rooms Totsl Arcr Deck Arer Keys Bedroorns Stldios plllows
Totsl Acc- unlts 361.80 99.00 35,81s.00 0.00 99,00 99.00 0,00 19E.00
Admlnstrstion 4990.00
,o
Page 17
?=t€€eagttgtE rs= e = =-FP:"=E ePEB e
ilg*:aAt*ni*ne=aia=*=€=:sEE*aei*[ is3F=spB=i$ nxU
:l eEE o a - oSlsnt = e Ec et E ixjl FR$ .., o ,.io o, i FH
ol .i Y -cOldol b- f 3
8l : E*
dl F xiqi+
8t = i..
5l 1 Ex
^o-E Bl : n*F ga 9s: -,9 6t
E sea...i-.':3 3g
8 qq
AYY
=ovJ.'r 3g
-t 8 8 r
Ele" $. Rrll S : oi
-t 8 88
EIH F 8.,lt S 3 i
E e^
= :E\orle
E es
-O-
=
Fc{
g:5
$-X
-l 8 P 9
El! 5 s
'll : .'i qi
=t E
HEit s
g'
a
9F\6trlO
UE
OE
vn(l!
El'{
nt<l
6tI
.t
i gl 5 ax
8 p=
F:YY;os; '/) a'l'rir.l
I ra,l ar -;l : qEEi='TlE $gE
i J
vid'"i
age;sf, EnE :r 3 [x
5e 56 5ci frG €1H €-.-: €"
cn.4=!o
EIR6l c^,JS
-o:<o=
R qE gel
- al a oo\.i$oi
E Eea AE €scEl e3i sg lnnpo\nl--!.\o (.r 6 (rto\i66\O
erR
at {.] $.
o\
c^
3l g c{<jl vl = o\
^^^Ooooo
-: .i '.i A6r v) ca gl
.!.t-.\t6
I
TIE
C]l E>t i\cil ;
or i -: \o6l i F Ci6l "t Qa
EE rJol .t- (r1 c..
eBt8888 seE eiir.RiF,fl f gs E.'r(\€al-Flct
F 493x FSR
..i od
\o .r
-ro'l <l
-61 t
EIF
.rl Qrt Y
qs
-E eEP $ ? '3 e aq s E
ti F€HE *uis€g?e.ari€c'*,€egegr€€-aEaAi Zl
s Fg ag ig ! g g E x E ; i ; i E E f.g € ;Fi ; $ E E 3 ssf E 5 E g; g E EE
IU
. ctLF9lNO:t 4r!o *t - -id Fl $ -s!
.5 $ a t i,t -r Lt E t =in id p.t oo(J>c,\
Page I
. . .PART]AL TRANSCRIPT
.r\F
PLANNING AND ENVIRONMENTAL COMMISSION
' regarding
VAIL PI-,AZA HOTEL
PEC2t28t00
Page 2
1 (Other unrel-ated matters were heard which
2 are not herej-n transcribed. )
3 MR- AASLAND: Okay, we're back on the
4 record. And item number 2 on the agenda is the
5 rarnracl- f or a f inal- review of a mainr amendment for\r! cr rlr(rJ \J -L crr
6 the WI f or SDD and we're al-so reviewinq a conditional
7 use permit..
8 Most of us sat through a fair number of
9 meetings on this project. And so f think we,re afl at
10 a certain l-evel- fairly familiar with ic. What we,re
11 going Eo ask is first we're going to ask ceorge to do
L2 a sLaff presentation primarily dealing with the
13 changes, just kind of an overview of the project just
L4 for the record. And then we,l_l_ ask the applicant to
15 gi-ve a presentation. Any public comment. after that,
16 and t.hen we'l-1 ask for Lhe commissioners.
17 And, ceorge, I think if you could briefly
18 explain at the beginning, f believe what. we,re being
19 asked to do is basically a completely new approval to
20 reconsider. And iusL make sure that is how the
21 applicant is proposing that this be done, be put on
22 the record, if you cou1d please. And so, George, give
23 us your presentation.
24 I4R. RUTHER: Sure. We had an opportunity at.
25 a premeeting to briefly go through the Vail plaza
PEC2t28t00
o
o
o
. pace 3
1 Hote1 2000 revised major amendment proposal memorandum
2 that has been provided by staff to the planning and
3 environmental commission. I'm not going to go through
4 this thick document word for word. Everyone has had a
5 chance, I bel-ieve, to read throuqh this document. The
6 criteria for consideration has been addressed in this
7 document and been considered.
8 I did notice, and it has been brought to my
9 attention there are some errors in t.he memorandum.
1-0 I'd like to cl-ear those errors up- And as I go
1L through this, I will do that.
12 I4R. AASLAND: George, and just one other
3 thing. One other item that we were given was, f
14 bel-ieve, attachment D was missing a page- And before
15 the meeting, you handed that out to us" And if anyone
L5 in the nrrblic or fhc ennlicant wOuld like a eon.r.r ofq \- \-.,v)' \J r-
L7 that, t.hat will be available through George.
18 MR. RUTHER: Thank you. Again the request
19 is a request for a final review of a major amendment
20 request, special development district number 6, phase
2L IV of the Vail Village Inn special_ development
22 district. In the case of the major amendment, the
23 planning commission is being asked for a
24 recommendation of approval or denial Lo the Vail Lown
25 council for their review and consideralion.
PEC2t28/00
Page 4
l- In the case of the condiEional- use permit,
2 the role of the planning and environmental commission
3 is a role of a decision-making body, and your decision
4 on the conditional use permit would be final. So
5 there is a slight distinction between the two tlpes of
6 requests that you're seeing here today.
1 There have been several changes to the
8 proposal as a result of the appJ-icant providing the 38
9 employee beds on site as reqluesLed by the Vail- town
10 council - Those changes most noLably are in overalf
11 increase of approximately Lhree and a half feet of
1,2 additional building height to add 18 employee dwelling
13 units on the property, tlpe III employee housing.
1,4 units. Arr encroachment of four feet into the Vai]
15 Road setback, and I have boards here that we can go
16 Ehrough to iIlustrate some of these changes. From the
I7 2O-foot setback approved by the town council to a
18 16-foot Vai1 Road setback proposed by the applicant.
a9 A total of 36 square feet of building fl-oor area,
20 interior floor area for the buildincl will be
2L encroaching into the southwest corner of the property.
22 And, again, I'l-f point that out as we go Ehrough.
23 The overall square foot,ages, and some of the
24 square fooLage breakdowns on the numbers of units and
).\ qatltarF f oof arre i n f ha hrri I di nn h.aq l.roan rdirrcl- ad
^rgsrr s \-rJ t |r L-=\-r
PEC2t28t00
Page 5
1
_-L
z
5
(
1
t'
o
1n
1:l
,1 /.1
_LZ
I4
15
I6
I7
l_(1
T9
20
2I
22
23
24
25
slightly. Those adjustments were made as a result of
providing the employee housing units on site and then
meeting code requirements for providing ingress and
egress and exit.ing requirements in and out of the
building- So there are slight deviations in the
numbers that you had seen previously.
I don't think anything deviates more than 5
percent. And, in fact, in most cases there,s been a
red"uction in sguare footage. For example, fractional-
fee units. The fractional fee unit overall square
footage for the building, while there has been a neL
increase of two additional fractional fee units on the
property, there's been a decrease of approximately 700
square feet of fractional fee uniL square fooLage.
And, again, the same holds true for the rest
of the square footage in the building. And again :
that's a result of having to manipulate the floor
plans to accommodate the employee housingt on site.
The applicant is proposing, with this
amendment, is proposing 99 accommodation units on
ci '|_a ^na Fraa market dwelling unit, 50 fractional fee
cl-ub unit, and then the 18 employee housing units, and
then accessory retail, commercial, conference, spa,
meeting room types of facilit.ies on the property_
Again, a distinction from what was looked at
PEC2/28/00
I
)
3
A
6
6
1
tJ
9
:l_ c
:11
I2
13
I4
15
I6
I7
18
L9
20
2L
22
23
)A
25
page 6
by the council in January a month or so ago, there's
been a slight. decrease in the tota1 number of keys
associated wit.h the property. That's been a result of
again reconfiguring the numbers of rooms. That
reduction is a reduction of approximately two keys
two or three keys. I t.hink we went from 2l-4 down to
2l-1 total keys within the building. Within Lhe
fractional fee club component of the hotel itsef,f,
there's 10R kcyg for 50 fractional fee club units.
. On page 3 of the staff memorandum, staff is
reconmending approval of the applicant's request'for
the major amendment and for a conditional use permit
to al low for the redevelopment of the phase IV site of
the Vail Village special development districL.
On page 4 of the memorandum, should the
planning and environmental commission choose to
recommend approval of the reqr-:.ested amendments to the
town council, we would -- we, staff, woul-d encourage
that t.he commission make a finding similar to that,
finding in the middle of page 4.
Beginning in the bottom of page 4,
nzrrrl- in".i nr' ..'-' +-^ ^^^^ ? ^-^ .2 COnditiOnS Of apprOVal .!- L' r r L- r r r r,r r r r v l.rrr Lv IJq.\Jg I a,Le zz ewtLl)L LJ_(JI.l.5 !rI
Those 22 condiLions of approval are essential-Iy those
same conditions of approval approved by the town
councif when they saw t.he project again a month or so
PEC2/28/00
Page 7
| 1 ago. Notably there has been a removal of two
2 conditions -
3 One condition that all of the employee
4 housing units either be on site or half the units be
5 on site or provided within Ehe town of Vail. Since
5 the current proposal shows the employee housing units
7 on siLe, if approved, that condiLion would no longer
8 be applicable so that was removed.
9 Secondly, the condition placed on the
l-0 approval by the town council .that the applicant
l-l- maintain a 2O-foot setback along Vail Road, that has
t2 been removed- ff it,s your desire to see that placed
3 back in, that could be put back in.
t4 And then al1 other 22 conditions of approval
l-5 . that were forward.ed. by the planning comrnission to the
16. town council are in this ordinance with the exception .
L7 of the one condition that the council Look out that
18 the planning commission was recommending, and. that was
19 the elimination of t.he elevator tower- If you recall,
20 iE was your desire -- this commission's desire to see
2L that the elevator t.ower be eliminated.
22 The tor,rrn council wanEed to see the elevat.or
23 Eower detailed and expanded upon and made an integral
24 element of the building. So that condition is not in
25 here. If it's your desire to have that condition put
wc2t28t00
Page 8
1 back in, we can make that motion as welI.
2 On page 15 of your memorandum, the middle
3 paragraph, there's a typographical error. The
4 applicant is proposing restricted housing noE for 32
5 employees, but instead 38.
6 MR. AASLAND: Which page was that on again?
7 MR. RUTHER: Page 15. That changes
8 everything. f woul-d like to point out some additional
9 information that has been added to the memorandum and
10 some additional review thaE went into this
11 application.
12 On page 18, under letter D, conformity with
13 applicabl-e elements of the Vail comprehensive plan,
1"4 town policies and urban design guide plan, the Vail
l-5 : land use p1an. f 'm not going to read that to you :
16 ' verbat.im other than to poin-t out that sorne additional_
I7 review and some additional criteria from that plan was
18 pulled and put into this ordinance -- or, excuse me,
L9 this memorandum.
20 Specifically, according to the prescribed
2I key goals of the Vail- Land use plan for the Vai]
22 Village area to which this development is a parL.
23 commercial growth should be concentrated primarily in
24 existing commercj-al areas to accommodate bot.h l-ocal
25 and visitor needs. And new hotets shoul_d continue to
o
PEC2t28t00
I
2
3
4
5
6
I
9
1U
1- l_
L2
i_3
L4
15
L6
L7
l_8
IY
Page 9
be located primarily in the Village and Lions Head
areas and increased density for commercial ,
residential and lodging uses in the core areas would
be accessible so long as existing character of each
area is being preserrred. Again, that was additionat
information added.
Page 20 under the Vail Village master p1an,
staff has gone through and highlighted the intent and
the purpose of the Vail Village master p1an, whaE its
intended role is in the planning process. And then
gone through and identified the goals, objectives and
policies taken from that plan that we believe are
relevanE to this application. And those are listed on
pages 22 -- 20 through 24.
Continui-ng on with the nine crit.eria on page
40 of this memorandum, the criteria talks about .the
site p1an, building design and l-ocation of the p1an.
If you recall, staff had a concern all through the
development review process of what we're calling the
1-999 proposal that the proposed. setback along Vail
Road did not comply with the intent of seEbacks.
We believe, however, that this application
with a four-foot encroachment into the 20-fooc
setback, of which 36 sqr-rare feet of building area is
located in the setback, that the intent of the setback
20
.tazr
22
z5
24
25
PEC2/28t00
Pagc 10
1 in the right-of-way adjacent to Vail Road is now beingr
2 met in that there is ample opportunj-ties. for the
3 required landscaping, snow storage, utilities,
4 pedestrian easements and access, light and air and
5 separation between buildings is all being provided
6 for. And that. is no longer a concern to sLaff.
7 If you reca1l, the previous proposal was for
8 a nine-foot seEback. We've gained an additional- seven
9 square feet of lineal distance between the edge of the
10 street and the corner of the building. There
l-1 excuse me -- a substanLia] increase in the amounE of
L2 landscape/ snow storage and pedestrian areas now in
13 front of Lhe building that did not exist prior to this
L4 proposal .
15 ., . On page 42 is the criLeria and findings for ;
16 a conditional use permit. Again, I won't go through
L7 that, all of this criteria word for word. It is
18 listed in the memorandum, and the memorandum is part
19 of Lhe record for this proposal. The applicant is
20 proposing 50 fractional fee club units on the
2L property. That is a total increase of two new
22 fractional- fee unit.s on the property. However, there
23 is a net reduction again of 700 square feet of
24 fractional- fee club area that is a resul-t of the
25 al-locating and redesigning some of the square footage
PEC2/28t00
-L
z
3
4
5
6
l
6
9
t_0
Page I I
on the property.
The operati-on and average size range of t.he
units remains substantially the same. The operation
will be that the 24 winLer weeks are sol-d on
one-twelfth interval-s, and that 28 weeks of ownership
is returned to the hotel for summer seasen uses to
compliment the conference facifity on site.
In your att.achment.s, in going through the
attachments, I believe Tim wil-l be able to answer and
talk to your questions relaEive to the si-te plan and
the building elevations being proposed and the net
impacts of the additional- three to Lhree and a half
feet of overall building height added by the proposal.
So I won't go into Ehat here.
There's also a revised sunshade study -- or
sun sLudy that's being done. The intent of that sun
study is to depict the impact of the proposed building
height providing light and air to adjacenL structures
and properties in public areas. So that's in there
for consideration. And, again, there's a copy here we
can speak to if you have specific questions-
On Lhe Vail Plaza Hotel zoning analysis,
under the approved l-999 SDD major amendment., there
should be a correction to the front setback. Instead
of nine feet, it should be 20 feet. What I was
11
L2
1_3
L4
l-5
T6
L7
18
L9
20
2l
zz
23
24
25
PEC2/28t00
Page 12
1 comparing was what the applicant was proposing with
2 the '99 proposal. If you recall, the councj-l approved
3 20 feeE, so that should be changed to 20 feet.
4 MR. AASLAND: George, which page is that on?
5 MR. RUTHER: There is not a page number.
6 It's attachment B, the Vail- Plaza Hotel zoning
7 analysis. It's the first chart after the sunshade
8 analysis and landscape plans.
9 MR. AASLAND: So which one is that again,
10 George, please?
1-1 l{R. RUTHER: Under the 1999 approval, the
L2 front setback should be changed t.o 20 feet. The
1-3 council approved a 2O-foot setback. The number f
L4 have --
15 i , MR. AASLTAND: It,,says nine?
16 MR. RUTHER: It says nine, correct. That
tl was the proposal . The council approved 20, however.
18 And then on the next page, at.t.achment C,
L9 Vail Plaza Hotel proposal comparison, the same
20 correction needs to be made.
2a MR. AASLAND: Where iL says six?
22 MR. RUTHER: Correct. It was in f1ux.
23 MR. AASLAND: Would it help if we just saw
24 i t rrnsi do down, George?gv Yvr.,
25 MR. RUTHER: That way has probably been the
PEC2t28t00
way I've been looking at this for a while now,
qr\
I believe that is al-l of the changes that I
have noted. Additionally, I,d like to point out and.
enter into the record as part of the review of this
projecE, pursuant to chapter 12-3-6c of the town code,
we have sent notice to the adjacent property owners of
this meeting and of this public hearing today- Notice
was sent again to each of the adjacent property
owners.
There was some concern from the owners in
the Vail Gateway PLaza Building that they had not
received notice of previous meetings. So notj-ce was
sent to multiple addresses at Stoltz Brothers
Management who is identified as the property.owner for
that project.
Additionally, a courtesy letter was sent out
Eo al-l- of the adjacent property owners on February
14th. That list of owners was downloaded from the
Eagle County assessor's information for al_l_ adjacenL
property owners adjacenE to the Vail plaza Hotel . I
do want to point out that one letter was recei rrod 1rw
our office returned, and that letter was sent co
Jeffrey and ,foyce Diskin in Montville, Colorad.o, and
we received that returned to us. However, notice
Page 13
t_
3
4
5
6
.7
8
9
IU
1t-
L2
1_3
L4
15
16
L7
18
IY
20
2L
zz
24
25
PEC2t28/00
Page 14
1 again was sent pursuant Lo our currenE town of Vail
2 regnrlations,
3 Notice was published in the paper, and it
4 was published in the Vail Daily on Friday, .Tanuary --
5 or, excuse me, February 11th of 2000. So we had
6 notice as of that.
/ MR. AASLAND: George, in regard to these
8 letters, it's like there,s no assurance in a future
9 project. that the town would notify absol-utely every
l-0 person as we've done with -- what you,ve done, what
7L the applicant or the town, however it,s been done, has
12 notified all the people as regui-red and then the
13 additional letters are just a courtesy that we,ve d.one
L4 for this project; is that true?
15^ MR. RUTHER: Correct. The additional
L6 lett.ers thaE were sent out were sent out as a
I7 courtesy. And it st.ates that in the letter that was
18 sent.
19 MR. AASLAND: BuE this is not a change in
20 town policy. There's no assurance in t.he future that
2I additional let.ters will be sent out?
22 MR. RUTHER: Correct, All right. With
23 that --
24 (Inaudible discussion)
25 MR. AASLAND: George, and Diane had a
wc2t28t00
1-
2
3
4
5
6
7
I
9
l_0
1- 1_
L2
1_3
1,4
15
Page 15
guestion. Did you have a question?
MR. RUTHER: What was your question?
MS. GOLDEN: No, I,m fine. I don,t have a
question -
MR- AASLAND: Okay, and before the applj_cant
makes a presentation, Tom wants to disclose something.
MR. WEBER: Yeah, I'd like to disclose for
the record that I contacted Jay about providing
off-site housing a couple months ago. I d.o nor
believe that this affects my vote. But if anybody
wishes to object, f will abstain from the vote.
MR. PETERSON: I cerEainly don't object. I
don't think he would be influenced by our conversation
on his vote one way or the other.
MR. AASLAND: ilay, do you want to just --
MR. PETERSON: It had to do with employee
housing located of f the site, but in the torarn of Vail.
And al-so the conversation happened after the tornrn
council had already voted and approved our project.
MR. AASLAND: And just for the record, f,ve
disclosed it before, buE .Tay is, in fact, my attorney.
But I always pay him unfortunately. And if anyone has
a problem with me voting in this, please disclose it.
Okay.
Jay, did you want to starL a presentation?
16
L7
1-8
L9
zv
2L
22
z5
24
25
PEC2/28/00
l-
z
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
-LU
l_1
I2
1?
I4
t_5
IO
L7
I6
L9
zv
2L
22
t?
24
z5
Page 16
George, have you finished?
. MR. RUTHER: I just wanted to go through and
show the setback that's being proposed. Did you want
to come up and take a look at it.
MR. PETERSON: The red line is where we were
in the approval -- in their last approval. this line
here is the 2O-foot. setback line. This is our
encroachment into the 20-foot setback. And the bl-ue
represenLs the area that we could occupy up to our
setback thaL we are not.
The red, the outline is our old approved --
the old approval from the board. When we goL Lo
council-, then our approval was based on the 2O-foot
setback l-ine- We did that the day of the council
meeting. We went out to the site and said: Okay, we
can hold it back, we will- come back with a plan
showing it.
Since then, we have analyzed this to death.
And we have with the building, we lost about l-4 feet
out of our lobby already, and we've had to
reconfigure, as George explained, a significant amount
of hoteL rooms and fractional fee. We are asking for
this amount of encroachment, 35 square feel, inLo the
setback, and we are giving up this amount outsid.e of
the setback that we could build in.
PECA28t00
1
z
J
4
5
t'
9
l_0
11
I2
13
1A
15
IO
I7
t_B
L9
zv
Page 17
And if we did this, what would happen is
we'd have Lo -- we had a pl-an rotating Lhis building.
And service lines became al-l- skewed, and it didn,t
make any sense to do it that way. I mean the building
was strange. And so we fel-t that this area here --
and you say, well-, why didn,t you just take out that
little encroachment, is that it really does squeeze
our parking area dovn: beIow, our portecochere, and
also we start to lose the big rooms.
BuL mostl-y it has to do with that. ground
Ievel, that we have taken out so much out of the lobby
now. And to push it back further, and the way the
pillars have to sit for structure in going in with a1l
of this -- because remember all- of this is our
entrance area -- it became very, very difficul_t-
And we felt thaE this area in exchange for
Lhis was more than sufficient- And we felt it realIy
made sense, and it rea11y was the intent and meets the
intent of st.aying out of the 20-foot setback
considering we could fill in this area which would
have a far greaLer impact on Vail Road, certainly on
the Gateway and cert.ainly across the street., Ehan
this -
MR. WEBER: To clarify, how many l_evels does
f hc ? 6 qcnrara f ool- harrnan nn ?e rrs[/}/vrr vrr.
2L
zz
23
Z4
25
PEC2/28/00
L
2
J
4
5
6
7
B
9
l_0
l-1
L.L
J-J
1A
1_5
..1_ b
1'7
l-d
L9
20
2L
zz
ZJ
24
25
Page 18
I4R. LOSA: Three 1eve1s .
( Inaudible discussion)
MR. AASLAND: I think what we would ask at
this time is that the appticant make a presentation,
you can save that and make that once we start to do
the public comment, please.
( Tnaudible discussion)
PEC MEMBER: Yes, please, and if you,d just
keep -- I mean if you need some paper to write down
what you want, w€'d be happy Eo provide that.
MR. PETERSON: So we felt that that was a
va1id tradeoff. And the way the entire building
works, we felt it was certainly something that was
worth pursuing. At first I said no, to take it out,
because it. would be easier to take out that whole
area. But there's repercussions on the whole building
on that side. And rotating the building was not a
pleasant redo as far as the roof angles and how the
(inaudible) did not line up on the buildinq if you try
to rotate it.
PEC MEMBER: Can you identify yourself.
MR. LOSA: I'm Tim Losa for the applicant.
MALE: Okay.
MR. LOSA: The ground floor plan here says
stair, and Ehis comes up from a parking, a required
o
PECA28/00
1
2
3
5
6
7
6
9
t_0
.l.I
L2
13
1A
15
J-O
1.1)-I
Id
I9
')i
2L
23
z4
Page 19
egress. And then based on the town,s Lechnical review
and their standard would be a minimum width access.
So this corner just represents essentially
{ i n.arrdi l-r'l a t
\ !rfe$s4v4v / I
MR. RUTHER: Can you talk to the employee
housing units, where they,re l-ocated and how you
provided them with only --
MR. PETERSON: One thing in which you,re
reviewing today is that we,re asking you to pass on
the entire project again. If it were to be turned
down by the town council, Ehe project doesn,t go away.
We just simply go back Lo our o1d approval . And so we
end up with basically no employee housing- We do have
to, however, if they were to hold us to this, we would
have to honor that 2O-foot. setback. That would be the
only thing Lhat would chanqe in our previous approval .
We fel-t that by coming back in and adding a
(end of tape 1) -- to compromise the project
internalfy as far as (inaudible) are concerned and
mainly hallways, baLhrooms and things like this where
all your mechanical runs go, that we want to make sure
Lhat. we can have a first cl-ass building and to try to
save a foot and a half or so and compromise all_ that
on such a large scale building, it just doesn't make
much sense.
PEC2/28t00
I
a
3
5
6
7
Y
10
11
L2
LJ
1,4
15
L6
I7
18
tv
20
a12t J-
22
23
24
Pagc 20
And the whol-e proposal is based on is it
worth having 38 beds on site for three and a half feet
maximum on the project? And the answer to us was yes,
we feel that that.'s a good proposal and somethinq that
the town should (inaudibl_e).
MR. LOSA: We have fooked at it in terms of
providing employee housing. Previously on Level one
we had truck }oading bays, and that determined the
height of rooms invol-ved. We had 14 feet plus another
three feet for structure, 14 feet for the trucks- By
adding three and a half feet, we can start Lo util-ize
the area (inaudible) because the fl-oors match up- We
have additional area office, lobby. So what we did
was we fitled over the top of the service areas with
employee housing at three and a half feet and then
over the office areas in here, and left the lobby as
two-story space and two-story space over the
portecochere.
MR. PETERSON: So it was noncritical areas
that we were able to draw from basically two stories
down to one story and pick up internally that. cubic
square footage and put it in the (inaudible) .
MS. GOLDEN: So the employee housing doesn't
open up overlookingr the lobby?
MR. LOSA: We have the corridors that onen
PEC2t28/00
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
t_0
Page 2L
up, and we have to maintain our egress. We have a
stair that exits in this corner, and then we have our
second exit in this corner. Then we have these
bridges that. kind of go across
MR. WEBER: Is this glass or anything?
MR. RUTHER: f think the answer to your
question, fou don't. -- f don't beli-eve you look from
inside the unit down int.o the lobbv.
MR. LOSA: No.
( Inaudible d.iscussion)
MR. LOSA: We do have a couple of units that
look into the atrium space over in this area. We have
hotel rooms that stack like that. So this is -- it,s
an enclosed area. You see sunshine. It,s kind of
l-ike an Embassy Suites comparison. .:
MR. PETERSON: And they're. nice rooms. I
mean everybody has windows and everything else. It,s
basically a hote1 room. And we had room for it and we
made it into employee housing so it,s not a buried
unit underground or anything like that.
MS. GOI-,DEN: But it's separated from the
guests?
MR. PETERSON: It's separated from the
gruests. You know, it's a -- you know, because they,re
on their own level . But we ful1y intend to have any
11_
LZ
13
L4
J_3
L6
L7
l-B
1_9
ZU
2L
zz
z5
24
25
PEC2t28t00
1
4
5
6
1
8
9
10
t_ l-
L2
13
L4
1_5
T6
IT
18
1,9
20
2I
)1
z5
.A
25
employees who will be on sit.e, and they will be living
on site, we do not envision them -- trying to keep
them separate from giuesLs or anything when they,re off
dut.y. We feel it's more of a positive than any kind
of negative, to be honest with you. We feel guest.s in
this tlpe of hotel will like the inreraction with
employees. It's someLhing f think has been lacking in
the Vil1age.
MS. GOLDEN: So Vou are not worried about
noise?
MR. PETERSON: Yeah, we can certainly
control- that.. We have absolut.e control over that. If
it's too loud, we simply te11 them to turn it down.
If Ehey don't do it, they don't live there anymore.
And so we don't really view that as a problem. And I
think the employees will underst.and that, you know,
they are in a hotel- and so t.hey're going to have to be
cognizant of that.
I think we'11 probably have more problems
with guests. I think that t1pically happens. And if
they get rowdy, they're on vacation- The employees
that are working all t.he time, they're not necessarily
partying in their rooms, so
MR. RUTHER: Do you have the building height
profiles that show Lhe difference of the incremental
PEC2t28t0o
pzge 23
1 increase in building (inaudible) ?
2 MR. LOSA: These are the buildinq height
3 diagrams. The red line represents what has been
4 approved. And then the new building line shows what
5 we're proposing. And in terms of Llre model, you,d be
6 looking at a quarter-inch of heiqht, three-sixteenths
7 inch in height difference.
I MR. AASLAND: (fnaudible), does that show
9 the 20-foot setback on the existing building, or is
1-0 that what the presentation is (inaudible)?
1-1- MR. LOSA: The north elevation here, this is
12 the frontage road elevation.
3 MR. AASLAND: Okav.
L4 MR. LOSA: This west elevation is Vail Road.
15 (fnaudible discussion)
L6 MR. I-,OSA: The red dashed line shows the
L7 buildi-ng back. The red l-ine is the old one.
L8 MR. AASLAND: But that,s not whaL was
L9 approved by council?
20 MR. PETERSON: By this board, actually iL is
2l basically this. This is what you approved.
22 MR. zu\SITAIgD: But the town council did not
23 approve that?
24 MR. LOSA: No, we pulled it back to the 20
25 feet, and thaE's what this rcnrespnrs The north
PEC2t28t00
Page 24
l- elevation complies with the 20 feet-
2 MR. AASLAND: Oh, there's another -- there's
3 a second --
4 l4R. LOSA: The souLh elevation which is this
5 corner that we're asking for three feet, which is
6 essentially to right there.
7 AASLAND: Okay, so that line would
8 approximat.ely be where the town council did before?
9 MR. PETERSON: ThaE's right. We'd have to
10 go back and have that -:- that. would be the only
1-1 difference that we'd have to get approval for in
L2 reliance on our old approval . We,d have to come back
l-3 and say can we encroach basically 36 square feeE.
14 MR. LOSA: And again what we were looking at
15 doing is minimizing the kind of visual aspects or i .
L6 impact of that setback.' Design review had given us
7l initial preliminary approval on it. The indicaLion
18 was that most people liked the elevations. It was noL
L9 a substantial redesign to that elevation.
20 MR. CAHILL: Going back r.o the building
21, height, why did you need to increase it?
22 MR. LOSA: Our whole building height was
23 based on truck loading delivery previously. We had 14
24 feet clear for t.he trucks, another three feet. for
25 structure and mechanical. That save us 17 foot first
PEC2t28t00
o
o
o
1
z
3
4
5
6
I
9
Page25
floor. By adding three feet to Lhat or three and a
half feet, we can put in two floors, one at ten feet
and one aE ten feet six. And that allows us to put
employee housing over the nonservice areas.
delivery
volume.
and. then
MR. WEBER: What was being nonutil_ized.
MR. LOSA: Yes. (fnaudible) So our loading
is at level 165 which is down here in this
This is dedicated to loading and delivery,
we snuck in employee housingi over the top.
MR. WEBER: You're not loading .and delivery1_0
tl-
t2
underneath the employee housing, are you?
MR- PETERSON: No, that,s service.
MR. WEBER: That's not where that
increment.a] increase came from?
open.
MR. LOSA: No. This L-shaped portion is
MR. WEBER: Oh, I see. ft's where the floor
above the employee housing was defined as what you
needed for ceiling height.
I,IR. LOSA: And then we utilized the same
floor space because our floors have to match up with
Ehe elevators, we utilized the same floor space above
the office areas, check-in desks, accounting,
receiving, in these areas. So our lobby is still
two-story space, and then employee housing
L4
L5
l-o
L7
l-8
L9
zu
2I
22
23
z+
25
PECU2A00
I
J
5
7
d
9
1-0
11
t2
1?
I4
15 .
J_O
L7
l_ tt
19
21,
22
z5
24
25
(inaudible).
you
to
MR. BERNHARDT: So in the upper areas,
reduce your floor height from ten six Eo nine
help squeeze that down?
MR. PETERSON: No, we can't go down to nine
because it's not physically possible to get the
structure in- Vfhat we are analyzing right now --
that's why I talked about the maximum of three and a
half feet -- is sgueezing a little bit per fl-oor. And
the Austria House got caught in that bind because they
maximized at 48 feet so Ehey squeezed the building.
If you walk into Lhat building and go down the hal_l,
it's seven foot (inaudible).
MR- BERNHARDT: That,s too short.
MR. PETERSON: And so we are rel-uctant -',- .:.
what we're trying to do is take out inches; And
that's what we're going Eo be studying over the next
two weeks if we get the go-ahead is thaL we feel we
can squeeze it some to squeeze out -- to drop down Lo
ten feet is difficult, but we do have to knock it down
by a foot and a half or so. And so we,re still
analyzing that-
What we don't want Lo do is really
compromise the building to save a foot. Nobody is
going to perceive that in t.he overall_ size of the
Page26
did
foot
PECU28t00
o
o
o
p^ge 27
1 building, and yet they will perceive that potentially
2 inside our hotel. And that,s what we,re trying to
3 stay away from. And we feeL we can squeeze some.
4 MR. BERNIIARDT: So did you say Sonnenalp
5 maintained their 48-foot height?
6 MR. PETERSON: The Austria House is 48 feet.
7 Yeah, it would have been much -- they were up around I
I think 52 or so, and then squeezing down. And it shows
9 in the building. It shows in their parking structure,
10 and it shows in their lobby. That,s too bad. you
11- know, f think t.he building would have been far better
L2 inside and certainly (inaudible) . To me that,s a
1-3 shame to do that.
L4 MR. BERNHARDT: But 48 feet, and you say
15 seven foot ceilings, and on a five foot story if you
16 had a foot per room, Lhen you,d get 15 feet, but
L7 currenLly you're at 77.
18 l4R. PETERSON: But we have five floors, we
l-9 have five stories above grade.
20 MR. BERNHARDT: Riqht.
21- MR. PETERSON: But you have to remember ours
22 is a totally different proposa1 than the -- the
23 Austria House was -- 100 percent of their project was
24 at basically 48 feet. Our project, when the original
25 SDD was approved back in L9'1 6, there were tradeoffs
PEC2t28t00
Page 28
1
3
A
5
b
'7
8
9
10
11
1-2
l-3
1-4
15
I6
I]
18
I9
20
.t -1ZI
))
24
25
for East Meadow Drive. Rigrht along East Meadow Drive,
that could have been 48 feet. Those buildinos are Lwo
stories tall.
And so what the SDD 6 did was move low
heights along Meadow Drive except for architecLural
features, and with the taller part up in the frontage
road. But you can't stay 48 feet here and be down at
30 some feet down there. That doesn't work.
And so that. was the whole purpose -- that's
the whol-e purpose of the SDD. Not just this SDD buL
any SDD, i-s t.o get the flexibiliEy to provide
incentives to a developer Eo do certain things where
the town is getting something in reLurn, especially
along pedestrian ways, and then giving something back
in areas that really can stand the height.
And so the who]e idea of this SDD was a flow
of low Lo high. And when you look at even the master
p1an, there's been a lot of discussion, everybody
keeps talking about the master plan being three
stories up here or four sLories, that's simply not
true. IL talks about this area here -- this is right
out of the action plan that this is four to five
stories along the frontage road and then it. drops down
along Meadow Drive down there.
And you'l-f not.ice thaE Lhe master plan also
PEC2t28/00
Page 29
1 aE GaLeway is that this is totally nonconforming
2 according to the master plan. And when the original
3 SDD was done, Gateway wasn,t there. We had a gas
4 station there, and that was zoned commerciaL service.
5 And that had a maximum height of -- he had a sloped
6 roof of 38 feet. And 33 feet it was a flat roof or a
7 mansard roof-
8 And so when they went up, al-l- of a sudden
9 the rules realIy changed- And the new master plan
10 reflects that. The original plan for that area along
l-L this was one to one and a hal f stories. One story
12 here and possibly two back here. And then when they
1-3 came in, that rea11y changed. And, of course, the
L4 Roundabout changed everything. We've been through
L5 this in the last go-around, but that has changed
L6 everything. Because the four-way stop is in the
L7 middle of the isl-and. fn fact, it,s on the south part
l-8 of the island.
19 MR. CAHII-,L: ( Inaudible)
20 MR. PETERSON: No, it's really hard because
2I there's so many (inaudible) . This is Lo show you
22 what's more than 48 feet and what's under 28 feet.
23 It's about as close as we can get. f mean there,s so
24 many roof angles and things like that. But, once
25 again, w€'ve been through this on our previous
PECA28t00
t-
2
3
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
L2
13
I4
15.
I6
11
1B
I9
20
2L
22
24
25
page 30
approvals, but we feel that adding, you know, a
maximum of three and a half feet to Lhis area Ehrough
here is well- worth getting 38 beds on site.
MR. AASLAND: (Inaudible)
MR. PETERSON: Yeah, this one is a l-ittle
bit in conflicL with what Ehis talks about because of
this area here. This building on the master plan will
not be there. This is originally -- in the original
1976 approval , there was noLhing in this area. That
was going to be open space- And then Joel built on
this space, and there were some tradeoffs that were
made. Built on this space, fil-led it in.
MR. AASLAND: Was that on SDD?
MR. PETERSON: This is from the SDD.
That's space 5 of the SDD. And so in the master plan,
this is non -- basically a nonconforming aspect.
The GaLeway is a nonconf ormi-ng aspect. I
mean Ehey say when the master plan was done, the
building had not been approved -- had not been buil-t
yeL. fL was approved but not built.. They said if it
doesn't get built, then you need to refook at that
building.
MR. LOSA: (Inaudibl-e) It's too tall-. And
that was based on this being one to two stories, three
to four sLories and stepping up to four to five. You
PV.C2/28/00
o
Page 3 I
t_
2
3
4
5
6
8
9
10
11
LZ
13
L4
t_5
16
I7
l_u
LY
zu
2L
22
z5
z4
25
know, as you step this way and this way-
MR. PETERSON: Then that makes some sense
then. And that's actual-ly what the ptan showed from I
believe the 1984 (inaudible). And so this steps up
this way and everything -- and went up actually this
way. And in effect actually what has happened now is
that it's st.epping up, which makes more sense, I think
the master plan shows that, is it steps up from Meadow
Drive up to the frontage road which does make sense.
You go from pedestrian to vehicular roads-
But t.his realfy set the tone for this area.
Plus the four-way stop was there when the master plan
was done. And that reaLly did change everything in
that area. You don't stop there. Nobody 1ooks to the
east anymore; you're always looking to the wesL when
you're going into Lhe Roundabout.. And so your eyes
are al-ways just. flowing around with the traffic- It,s
a totally different area.
And so we feel -- I think everybody, even
ffi€, and the Gateway people that -- I think it was
brought up that they said welf, everybody relied on
that old approval when they brougrht (inaudible) in
town. Well, you know, there's that. And I think
(inaudible) Lalked to ,-Tohn Dunn about it, and there is
thaL view (inaudible).
PEC2/28t00
Page 72
1 And that. adds a couple different components
2 as far as he was concerned, and Lhat was that the
3 Gateway, Leo Palmer at the time, the developer of the
4 project, said that each purchaser would be ful1y
5 informed in writing of the approved development. rights
6 belonging to the WI , number one. In addition to
7 that, that prior to any sa1e, he,11 obtain a signed
8 waiver of any interest, claim or what the purchaser
9 may have in an unobstrucLed view from the Gatewal/
10 projecC across the \,rVf property.
11 lt's not according to any approved plan or
72 anything el-se. That was paragraph one that they know
13 there's a plan in effect, but in addition Lo that you
14 don'L have any right to complain about a view going
1-5 across my property. And.what Joe was concerned about
16 at that time is that he had changed a couple of
17 different times up to Lhat point. Up to that point iL
18 had been (inaudible) involved with three
t9 modificat.ions. And since then we,ve had now another
20 one, another two.
2L And so he was concerned abouL Lhere was no
22 residential on t.hat site, that that was a heawlr
23 service district.. And so I don,L -- he didn,t want
24 people complaining that hey, we,re going to have
25 residential- units here, and now these peopl_e are
PEC2/28/00
1
z
3
4
5
6
7
.J
page 33
complaining that I've got a big projecE back here and
they don't want it anymore. Well, he was concerned
about that. And people l-ook at that record against
al-l- of the Gateway project and all of their title work
shows that documenE..
And so they've had notice that t.hey
certainly coul-d have come over and they should have
seen that hey, this project has been modifi_ed several
different times. It was modified in -- first one was
'76. It was changed after that. It was changed in
'84. There was a couple different approval_s after
that that never got built. And then Joe did the last
one I think tn L992 for that l_ast 1itt1e (inaudibte).
And so we think t.hey've had plenty of
notice. And once again this has nothing t.o do with
the t.own or this board, but in trying Lo say what,s
fair and what's fair to people, they had some notice
that this was going to be a hotel back there and this
was not a residential site. I think they did. I
don't know how t.hey did not. for the record. And so we
have d.one -- we have been more than fair to them, and
we have done certain things that, you know, trying to
be a compatible neighbor. But this is a hotel site,
and this was al-ways to be where the height was -
f mean phase III and phase IV, and even
l_0
11
I2
IJ
1A
l-f
111
18
L9
tn
2I
)t
ZJ
24
PEC2t28/00
1
2
3
4
5
6
1
B
9
10
1"L
t2
1?
I4
1_5
L6
T7
I|J
19
20
11
22
ZJ
1A
25
Page 34
phase V was really tall. But this area was always
where the height was. And even if you look at the
1984 approval, we are within a few feet of t.he height
here and here. There's an area behind here that, was
absolutely flat because that was Ehe corridor through
Ehere that everybody was concerned about before the
GaLeway was built. But once the Gateway was built,
it's gone. ThaE view was gone. And that's what we
show with our site analysis here from various parts is
what does our building look like behind the Gateway
building.
MR. LOSA: This is the view from the
four-way stop. And the encroachment into that
supposedly for --
MR. PETERSON: ,This is the middle of the
highway.
MR. AASLAND: ,Jay, can you speak to this
while you're here about the height of this from that
previous approval , what year was that?
MR. LOSA: This building here -- this
represents the -- this is the gras staLion.
(Inaudible) And this was a flat roof, and that
preserved the view from the four-way stop which was
here up to Gold Peak-
MR. AASLAND:So how long --
PECU28t00
pase 35
1 1.4R. I-,OSA: With this proposal with the
2 employee housing. we're about four and a half feet.
3 taIler.
4 MR. PETERSON: you can see this ridqe in
5 comparison to these three.
6 I4R. AASLAND: Do you have an el_evation that
7 shows these two?
8 MR. LOSA: We have one with the previous
9 p1an. A-nd we're three and a hal f feet t.aller.
10 (Inaudible discussion)
1l- MR. LOSA: This is the floor plan that the
L2 set pJ-ans overlay, and this is the previous approval .
l-3 MR. AASLAND: AcEually, I guess what I,d be
14 interested in is comparing.
15 MR. PETERSON: I think this green is --
16 (Inaudible discussion)
L1 MR. LOSA: So we're actually fairly close
1-8 even though Gateway has a significant impact on
L9 these --
20 MR. AASLAND: But the center portion did not
2L go across?
22 MR. PETERSON: That,s right, the center
23 court did not- And, once again, whether that could
24 have been built like that or not, and no encroachments
25 in there, who knows. But it did make sense at that
wc2t28t00
Page 36
1 time because that was a significant flat roof-
2 MR. LOSA: This elevation, is Ehis elevation
3 here from GaLeway as superimposed?
4 I{R. AASI-,AND: Oh, that.'s the Gateway, it, s
5 not this.
6 MR. RUTHER: No, it's not the gas station.
'7 IL's the Gateway.
8 MR- LOSA: The Gateway's in front here. See
9 the flat roof in here, the ridge in here, and then it
10 steps down.
11- MR. CAHfLL: So actually that ridge line is
1,2 identical- to this ridge line?
13 MR. LOSA: We're asking to go up three and a
14 hal-f feet from this point.
15 MR. PETERSON: . This is our plan that,s
16 approved. And so if the new plan is not approved,
L7 this is what we would gro back to.
l-8 l4R. LOSA: This is along Vail Road. This is
L9 the flat roof in here, Lhe talt portion, and then this
20 is that ridgeline.
2I MR- AASLAND: So this and this, and this one
22 will compare with that elevat.ion?
23 MR. LOSA: Yes, this elevation and this
24 elevation.
25 yIR. AASLAND: Okay, and this -- basically
o
PEC2t28t00
o
1_
2
5
4
5
5
Page37
because this side is dropping across here. And that,s
why this is lower across there?
MR- PETERSON: So the question is simply is
this worth t.he three and hal-f feet. And we would give
you (inaudible) that we wouLd study that. And, once
again, by the time we got Lo council you would
hopefully be (inaudible). It could be two. It,s not
going to -- it's going to go up a little bit. It,s
not going up, it will only go down, maximum three and
a half. f wou1d guess we would end up around two and
a half.
MR. LOSA: This plan was in place when the
master p1an. This plan was approved and in place, and
the master plan does acknowledge that t.his was an
7
8
9
10
l_ l-
1,2
L3
t4
15
rb
L7
18
L9
zv
21
22
approved plan.
23
z+
25
MR. AASLAND: (Inaudible)
MR. LOSA: This is 1988.
( Inaudible discussion)
MR. AASLAND: The approval was in '84 or
,88?
MR. PETERSON: '84.
MR. LOSA: This was in place when the master
plan -- and the master plan does acknowledqe that this
was the direction that they want.ed to go with this
PECA2A00
l_
3
5
6
7
8
9
10
LI
I2
13
I4
t_5
l_o
I7
td
L9
1n
2I
22
23
24
page 38
site. If you look here, this was their loading and
delivery area, and it was one, two, three, four, five,
six and a half story building.
MR. PETERSON: Everybody kind of remembers
that building as -- you know, they remember what they
want to about that building. And also you can see
here, there's a l-ot of negatives to it too. This is
where it --
( Inaudible discussion)
MR. PETERSON: You can see that the loading
came in here. This is for service. And so trucks
would back up from Vail Road, come into here, of
course block all parking. And this was t.he entryway
into the parking garage to here and then it came out
here. But this was the extent of their sloping. And
everybody had to back up from Vail Road.
So we have put all that up here, taken the
trucks off of Vail Road and simply put our lobby down
there. Here's how the original plan goes. But t.he
building was not significantly smaller than --
MR. WEBER: It looks l'ilra i-horz'ro nll4Ching
ro pnase r1r.
MR. RUTHER: Yes,
III.
Lhey attached into phase
were all under oneMR. LOSA: So they
wcu28t00
page 39
1 ownership at that point?
2 MR. RUTHER: Right. When you go int.o phase
3 III today, there's Lhat entrance for structured.
4 parking- It actually circles around in there,
5 circulated in there, and then came back out into this
6 building for parking and then exiting.
7 MR. PETERSON: A11 of their parking flowed
8 through phase III into their parking structure.
9 MR- WEBER: Right, which is why thaE
l-0 entrance is on that side right now.
l-l- MR. PETERSON: Exactly correct. And so
L2 we've (inaudible). We,re keeping our parking separate
13 for the hoEel.
L4 MR. AASLAND: Jay, do you have any other
1-5 items Ehat, you'd like to present?
L6 MR. PETERSON: No, I think that's -- I,d be
1-7 happy to answer any qluestions.
18 (Inaudible discussion)
1-9 MR. AASLAND: Okay, if you could identify
20 yourselves for the microphone so that v/e can keep a
2t record, please.
22 MS. SCALPELLA: My name is Gwen Sca1pe11a.
23 T'm a part-time resident and f 'm al-so president of the
24 homeowners associati-on over there. And I believe I
25 spoke to this body back in December, having received
wc2t28t00
1
2
4
5
6
7
B
J
1_0
11
I2
IJ
I4
15
./.IO
L7
1_8
I9
20
a1
22
23
24
25
Page 40
notice of the final meeting of the PEC by accident.
It's the only notice we've ever received. So although
we've taken some shots for being late in the game, I
apologize, but we have gotten no notice of any of
r-1^; ^LrLJ--.
You asked about how high the
half foot encroachment into the -- four
encroachment into the setback was. And
-- the answer you got was three stories
to take issue with that, quite frankly.
three and a
foot
you were told
. And I'd like
When you start. counting at zero and your
numbers go from zero, one, one and a haff, two, lfou
get at least four. On the south wing of this
building, zero, if I read Lhe plans correctly, and I
may be wrongf , level zero is lobby, level one I think
is rooms, then Lhey've got another one and a half and
a level- two. And I believe the first group setback on
this south wing of the building on Vail Road is the
next leve1 up. So that tel-ls me that we've got four
full facade l-evels, if I'm counLing correctl-y, that
are int.o the 20-foot setback Lhat the council has
approved.
On the north side or on the north winq, if
you wil1, on Vail Road, if we count the same way, I
believe before you get your first roofline set.back,
PF.C2t28/00
1_
2
3
4
5
6
tJ
9
IU
l_ 1-
L2
L4
Page 41
you have level- zero, one, one and a half, two and
three. Then you have two more levels which are set
back which gives you seven stories in the north wing
on Vail Road, six stories in the south wing- But
those that are not set back are not -- zeto, one, one
and a half, two, four stories and five sLories, f
believe, on the two sites-
We have to count the levels, and you have to
start with zero. And that makes it trouble when we
start counting zero.
MR- AASLAND: Do you have additional things
that you'd like to talk about, or do you want -- would
you like them to address that with you, or how would
you like to do that?
' ,MS . SCALPELLA: I'd like a response. If I , m
counting correct.ly, I think Mr- peterson,s entitled to
tel-l- me that I'm countj-ng incorrectly. f studied
these plans and t.ried very hard to count. And if I,m
counting t.hem wrong, I think it's only fair that he
rebut.
MR. AASLAND: Okay. .Tay or Tim, could you
please help us with that, please.
MR. I-,OSA: We've got -- this is the west
elevation from Vail Road. We've got -- f believe
George is counting here. We've got one story which is
11
. r6
L9
4U
..\ 1ZL
z,d
z+
25
PEC2t28t00
Page 42
1 our lobby, two stories, the balcony, three stories if
2 we counL windows. Three stories and then --
3 MR. AASIJAND: (Inaudible)
4 I4R. LOSA: Excuse me?
5 MR. AASLAND: You have additional
6 (inaudible) .
7 l4R. RUTHER: Yes, which -- the Vail Village
I master plan talks to that, however. The Vail Village
9 masEer plans talks to the sLories of the building
10 (inaudible). So it says three stories plus a roof,
l-1 four stories plus a roof, five stories plus a roof.
1,2 It doesn't imply that to get to that service story you
l-3 have a ftat roof
L4 MS- SCAI-,PELLA: But the first story is a
15 double story too, so you really have to count that as
L6 two.
L1 MR. AASLAND: How high is the first story?
1-8 MR. LOSA: TL's 20 feet floor to floor, and
l-9 that's where we have put Ehe employee housing.
20 MR. BERNHARDT: And the master plan does
2L call for a storv equal to nine feet-
'2'2 YIR. "OrO, Yes, which is technrcarry noc.
23 feasible.
24 l{R. PETERSON: It never was possible.
25 MR. AASLAND: George, can you answer, we
PEC2t28t00
1_
2
3
4
5
8
9
1_0
l_1
72
3
T4
1-5
l_o
1'7
1_8
19
20
2t
22
z5
24
25
Page 43
dealt with this a few years ago on the Lions Head
master p1an. And when we did that, we talked about a
trigher floor to floor on the first story. Is that
applicable to the Vail Village or how -- could you
just stress that maybe?
l4R. RUTHER: In the Lions Head redevelopment
master plan, we identified because of changing trends
and construction and hotel properties, I beLieve the
fl-oor to floor is ten six or ]ess feet. floor to floor-
MR. AASLAND: That's the minimum or maximum?
MR. RUTHER: Wel1, Lhat's maximum. That's
how you come up with an 82-foot overall building
height.
MR. AASLAND: Was part of Ehat. process that
we tal-ked ,about a higher floor to.floor on the f irst
l-evel ?
MR. RUTHER: It wasn't --
MR- AASLAND: Yeah, we did.
MR. RUTHER: I'm not aware of it. If you
did, you did, but I'm not aware of that.
MR. AASLANDi Is that applicable aE al-I to
this?
MR. RUTHER: That applies to Lions Head.
MR. AASLAND: Okay. So that wouldn't be
applicable to this then?
PEC2t28t00
L
.)
3
4
5
A
7
8
9
1_0
11
L2
l_J
L4
1_5
I6
L7
l_ tt
)-v
zu
2L
22
ZJ
24
25
Page 44
l4R. RUTHER: No.
MR. LOSA: Retail, restaurant, hotel lobby,
it's not salable unless you've got at least a ten foot
ceiling. And thaL's an absolute minimum.
MR. PETERSON: When you look in hotel-
lobbies, they may be 14 feet, 15 feet, Lt-' s certainly
something that you see all the time- And that's what
the Lions Head master plan has been updated. The Vail
Village master plan has not be updat.ed for those
things. But you will- not see major hotels built with
a ceiling (inaudible).
MR. AASLAND: So can you just address this
one more time with the stories. So can you talk what
you feel are your stories, and could you maybe say how
you feel about that?
MR. PETERSON: I woul-d. say what she's
saying- What we've qot is we were thinking -- that
first story is 20 feet floor to floor, so you have a.
fair amount of structure. There's probably, what, an
18-foot ceiling or l-7-foot ceiling.
I.{R. LOSA: Seventeen foot.
MR. PETERSON: Seventeen-foot ceiling. end
if you take out the structure, we've divided that into
two fLoors. We've taken ceiling footage in the office
areas, not in the lobby area, and we've just -- and
o
PECA2A00
1
z
3
4
5
6
9
l_0
l-1
t2
Page 45
we've made tliat into an additional floor- We needed a
little bit more height because of the strucLure to get
two floors out of what this space was, 20 foot floor
to floor.
But. once again, we're both right. I mean
she's not incorrect when she says now in certain areas
on this, if you count floors or count windows, we,d
have an additional floor in this office area. In the
front it does not read that way. You know, because
the lobby is what you see in the front.
MS. SCALPEIJLA: (Inaudible) And you,ve gtot
one, two, three, four level-s above that roof setback
area. We counted. zero, that's five. The first floor
leveL has always been counted as -- you know, it,s
alwalrs been two- So it depends on how you want to
count. If you count the equivalent master plan
building floor to floor height levels. your int.rusion
into the setback is four stories.
MS. GOLDENT So that's your objection is
that this (inaudible). ff iE wasn't in the setback
o.l- Eo. - -
MS. SCALPELLA: What I was trying to do is I
was trying to make a poinL of clarification. I took
issue with what -- it sounds like a little bit of a de
minimus response to the question. A question was
3
L4
15
16
L7
l_8
IY
zu
)1
zz
23
4+
25
PEC2/28t00
1
z
i
5
6
8
9
10
t_1
L2
IJ
L4
15
t_b
11J_l
t_8
L9
20
2L
22
1A
25
Page 46
asked: How many stories is this intrusion inLo the
setback? And the answer was three- To me that was a
little bit of an unfair answer because in cases
relative to building heights, it's four any way you
count it. And f wanted to make that point.
MR. PETERSON: Okay, so we have 36 square
feet in that one little area. In the middle we only
really have three floors, one of which is almost a
double story. This is our lobby area. But you're
right, in that one littl-e corner which is 36 square
feet. if it's multiplied by four, that gives you an
accurate --
There's no floor fevel on thisMR. WEBER:
lower 1evel, though.
MR. LOSA:
percenE. over.
It's just that structure of the
apportioned share.
( Inaudible discussion)
MR. PETERSON: AcLually in the setback that.
we do have, isn't there three fl-oors in that setback
area?
MR- LOSA: Well, flo, this is setback so that
is not in the setback.
MR. PETERSON: So iE is over three floors.
No. You are 90 percent -.- or ,70
MR. WEBER:
PEC2/28t00
Page 47
l- It's tiaio floors in the setback because the
2 portecochere is in the setback, and this top story
3 because it's in the roof is a setback.
4 MR. WEBER: This half level is not in the
5 setback either because that,s part of the portecochere
6 as well, correct?
7 MR. PETERSON: That's right.
8 MR. WEBER: So rea11y it's 36 square feet
9 times two.
l-0 IvIR. AASLAND: Okay
Ll- MR. PETERSON: This is getting ridiculous-
L2 But a point of cl-arificat.ion, but in thau area,
3 because it's Lhis area right here that, as you can
14 see, this area is al-l open until -- the first two
L5 l-evels actually. BuE one 1evel is open.
l-6 MR. AASLAND: Okay. .Tust to keep Ehis
L7 moving, Jdy, could you speak about this portion here.
l-8 MR. PETERSON: None of that portion is in
1,9 the setback. That's ouL of the setback.
20 MR. AASLAND: Is that the way you understood
2L it too?
22 MR. PETERSON: Yeah- A11 of the blue is out
23 of the setback. Our building starts back here.
24 l{R. CAHTLL: The btue is where you could go-
25 l4R. PETERSON: The b]ue is where we coul-d
PEC2t28t00
pase 48
1 go. And that's what we looked at doing is turning and
2 rotating the building (inaudible) . So i-f we honored
3 the setback, we could do iC that way. We felt that
4 this was, one again, in the underlying zone district,
5 the 20 foot is not a magic setback. And you can
5 present reasons why you are encroaching in certain
7 areas. We feel that the encroachment here is
I cerLainly valid tradeoff for all of that. And that is
9 in the underlyingr zone disLrict.
10 MR. AASLAND: Do you have additional-
11 questions?
72 MR. SCAPELIJO: (fnaudible) We reviewed at
13 the February quarterly meeting with the board of
1,4 directors where we stood, and they asked us to
15 represent them. And we are here t.o (inaudible) the
1-6 subsequent sessions.
1-7 MR. AASLAND: Okay, so you're a homeowner,
18 and you're in this building over here?
L9 MR. SCAPEIJLO: Uh-huh. Comments on two
20 poinEs. First is the four-foot setback. Which of
2I these -- this one shows the employee housing, correct?
22 MR. LOSA: Uh-huh.
23 MR. SCAPELIJO: Employee housing is here,
24 four-foot setback is here, there is no impact on t.he
25 four-foot housing -- four-foot setback by the employee
o
PEC2t28t00
Page 49
L housing.
2 MR. WEBER: Correct.
3 MR. LOSA: Well, where that space -- this is
4 the minj-mum distance that the town engineer has
5 al-lowed us for two way. This egress and this corner
6 is where we need our second egress on our safety
7 codes- If we start to push this back, we don,t
8 maintain the integrity of our el-evation, we don't
9 maintain our egress for this employee housing.
10 MR. PETERSON: I'm aware of the employee
1-1- housing. Where is the second floor? What is this?
LZ MR. AASLAND: Third floor. This is level
3 one and a half.
L4 MR. PETERSON: What it is is when we met,
15 you feaLured all of this for the employee housing
16 because aLl of this had to do -- you sEarted all of
L7 this with the employee housing along with the setback.
l-8 Because the whole building in that. area was
19 reconfigured. So it's not just the employee housing
20 that was redone. A11 of this stuff over the employee
2L housing also had to be reconfigrured.
22 And so if somebody -- I mean to say that
23 this doesn't touch the employee housing and so
24 conseqn-rently we can't do thae, number one is this is
25 the major amendment to the SDD and this is part of our
PF.C2t28t00
Page 50
1 proposal so we have every right to ask for that. And
2 so that's what we're doing. And the reason that we
3 started that is because of the employee housing along
4 with t.he requirement of that 2O-foot setback also.
5 And, once again, f mean I think this stands
6 on its ourn-
7 MR. AASL,AND: And under the PA zoning,
8 you're allowed to encroach if you can present,
9 reasonable reasons why it should be, you,re allowed to
10 encroach into -- say you were to do this in a variance
11 procedure, you wouldn't even have to ask for a
L2 variance to do that.
13 MR. PETERSON: That's exactly right. you
14 don't even have to show a variance under the
l-5 underlying zoning law.
1,6 MR. BERNHARDT: What. is in these units?
1,7 MR. LOSA: These are fractional fee units on
18 one and a half.
L9 (Inaudible discussion)
20 MR. AASLAND: Back to that, that actually
2L occurs on single family -- every zoning property in
22 town has allowed that.
23 (Inaudible discussion)
24 MR. AASI.,AND: I guess from Ehe board,s
25 standpoint, we're reviewed SDD, but if we reviewed a
I
I
PECA28t00
page 5l
1- single family residence or most any other property in
2 t.own, a balcony would be allowed by right.
3 MR. ScApELLo: What we have here, however,
4 is the approval that was granted by the council of 96
5 hotel units. We now have 99 hotel units- So I don,t
5 see where these three additional_ feet are preventing
7 Lhe developer from providing the 38 employee housing
8 units without going into the 20-foot setback.
9 I see it as a separate incremental- request
1-0 beyond responding to the 38 employee housing units.
l-l- MR. RUTHER: Galen, if I can respond Lo
L2 that. The council did approve 96 accommodation units
13 on the property and required a 20-foot setback along
t4 the property line. That was aL second reading of the
15 ordinance. The applicant was asked: What is the
16 impact of maintaining the 2O-foot seLback on the
L7 proper:ty? The applicant guessed it was three
18 accommodation units, so we said three accommodation
19 units.
20 Obviously from this plan, the applicant was
2I incorrect in his speculation that it. was three
22 accommodation units and, in fact, iL could maintain or
23 subsLantially mainLain the 20-foot setback without
24 losing any accommodation units. f don,t know if the
25 council would have approved 99 that way or not. I
PEC2/28K}O
1
3
+
5
o
7
8
9
10
11
72
t_J
L4
t_5
16
I1
J-b
I9
20
21
23
24
)tr,
Page 52
think it's up to them.
But I think the point to consider here is
the applicant was asked at a public hearing: How many
hotel rooms are you going to fose? They estimated
three accommodation units. Three accofirmodation units
went into the ordj-nance that way.
r-Tust as the applicanLs indicated to you
there will be -- they're proposing a maximum building
height of an additional three and a haff feet;
however, with additional study, I don't think they,re
going Eo make the same mistake again and say, yeah, we
can do it at 18 inches and rea]ize we can,t do it at
18 inches and they need 20 inches to do iL. So I
think what they're saying is the same thing they said
aL the meeEing here, y€s, we're going to lose three.
Obviousl-y they did not need to fose an entire Lhree
accommodation unit.s with the intenL of the seEback on
the building.
MR. PETERSON: What
il- 'q nnl- qimnl.rr -- r^16 +- hnrrerhl-L-'ar\-/ l.1v l.r u
simple matter of just lobbing
we did not do that. We went
all of those floors after we
l:PE'A ral..\"'\ f i arrryg6l, l-OSt. tWO
of 1-hrec kor,.q tfhorr..^mo.rrrl-
they did was -- I mean
i f rnrortld be -irrst a
off the building. And
back in and redesigned
l-ost l-,200 square feet of
kel,'s. acf r'r a'l I w the f irsL
of not of hot.el- rooms
PEC2/28t00
Page 53
l- which is a posiLive thing for the town; they came out,
2 of the fractional fee.
3 MR. RUTHER: But consideration that also
4 came up at the council level very early on in this
5 project was there was a guestion as to the incremental
6 increase and the number of accommodation units that
7 this hotel project was provided. f think there's'7G
8 hotels on the site today. This will provide an
9 additionaL 23 accommodation units. Obviously there,s
l-O a fractional- fee component.
11 If I recall correctly, the council member
L2 broughE that up as a concern. Specifically wanted to
3 see more accommodation units on the property.
L4 MR. SCAPELLO: My whole point on this is the
l-5 setback. The intrusion into the setback is not
16 necessary to meet the 38 employee housing units
t7 because iL can be done by rebalancing the additional
1-8 three hotel units that are being requested.
19 I4R. AASLAND: Fractional fee units.
20 MR. SCAPELL,O: No, additional three hotel
2L uniEs
22 MR. AASLAND: Okay.
23 MR. SCAPELLO: The second point is the
24 parking. The number of additional_ units that they,ve
25 added and the employee housing units, and there is no
PECA28t00
1
2
J
+
5
1
t
9
IU
1t
I2
l_J
1A
15
J-O
1,1
18
19
20
2I
') '')
z3
24
25
increase in the parking spaces allowed for employee
housing.
MR. AASLAND: Is that true, lTay?
MR. PETERSON: Yes. What it is -- ceorge,
do you want to respond?
MR. RUTHER: If you turn in your atLachments
to the parking analysis we provided. As you're all_
aware, parking in the town of Vail is proporLioned.
based upon the square footage of the uses being
proposed in the building. In the parking square
footages that the code requires, it assumes parking
spaces for not only Ehe guests for the users of that
space, but it also takes into consideration the
employees that are either housekeepers for the
accommodation uniLs, waiters, waitresses, hostess,
chefs in a restaurant or cashiers and clerks in retail
c-rlr//-a". c^ i r takes that into account in the parkingt\,rrLau rlt uv q-r-\-\JLllL!_ -!-LI ullt
numbers.
On attachment f . when we went througrh these
numbers and looked aL Lhe employee housingr t.hat was
being provided on site, the original employee housing
required (inaudible) . fn lookinq at the parking
requirements that are proposed, it does not
contemplate that employee housing units are located at
the same siLe as the employee locaLing or where
PEC2IZSIOQ
pase 55
1 they're working. So when it takes into consideration
2 drive-in parking, in the numbers already for parking
3 at the restaurant, for example, parking is also
4 considered not only for guests but for employees of
5 the restaurant-
6 WiLh the employee housing units being on
7 site, we did not believe it was appropriate to reguire
8 an additional parking requirement for the employee
t housing units that are on the same site as the
10 l-ocation that the employees go to work. Essentially
11- we thought it's double dipping the developer or the
72 applicant for parking spaces. It,,s noL like I,m going
l-3 to leave the restaurant and go from one parking space
I
14 and move my car to the one next door.
l-5 MR. WEBER: Or, more importantly, you,re noE
16 going to live there and not work aL the hotef.
L7 MR. PETERSON: That's right. An issue was
18 raised by a gentleman earlier this afternoon, he said
Lg well, what about the employee that can potentially go
20 to another job (inaudible) . Once the employee is on
2L site, he lives there and his car is there all the
22 time. He works eight or ten hours a day. There could
23 be another employee coming in behind him to t.ake over
24 his function for the second shift, but his car is
25 still there, where if he's living off site, his car
PEC2t28t00
1_
J
4
5
6
7
a
v
10
11
L2
-L.1
)-4
15
t_b
1-7
_Ld
IY
20
2L
22
23
24
25
Page 56
would be potentially gone.
I guess there's a cerfain validity to Lhat.
But, once again, it is a matLer of us controlling our
parking. We have met 100 percent of our parking
requirement with Vail, very few valeE spaces. And
that could happen for the odd person, I would guess.
But mosL of the people that live here will probably be
working four hours at this hotel- and probably work
l-ess hours at another job because they are living
there in town
Al-so, if iL does become a problem, our
overal-l concern is the guest. The employees are
obviously importanL to us, but we can rest.rict the
fact that whether an employee can have a car or not if
he lives on site- There's very little reason for them
Lo have a car if thev are on s:i-Le. If we can control
the person that is going to be living in a facility
like this will be a person that has come to work for
us and our first six months, maybe a year, and then
when he's honcf ul'irr ef ill r^ri f h rrq ho r^zi I I nrnhah lr-', rru w4rr yL v\J<.LtJLJ
get other housing and live elsewhere. And then the
next wave of transient employees would come and st.ay
in this Llrpe of a facility.
And f Lhink it's easily conLrolled. That's
a point Lo ponder, but I guess that could happen in
PEC2/28t00
1_
z
3
4
5
A
7
t'
9
10
1L
1,2
Page 57
all facilities when you have employees- They come and
they go to work at your facility, they park there,
they go to a different job, their car is stil1 there
potentially. If they're still in town, I don,t think
they're going to move their car. But also when that
person is there during the day, at nighttime if
somebody el-se -- if we have a problem with parking, it
will obviously be at night at that point.. And the
parking structures in tor',rn are never full at night..
We should. have a parking problem in town at night.
MR- RUTHER: I think a simple solution to
this is we can simply go to the applicant, simply go
back and add val-et spaces to the parking strucLure.
It doesn't. increase the capacity of parking on the
property. It doesn'E change the parking structure
inside or configuration one bit. It just provides --
MR. WEBER: Well, that's what my guestion
is. I think we saw an apclication with tandem
parking.
l4R. PETERSON: Yeah, we took out -- in this
proposal , what we also did is we redesigrned our
parking lot, went. down another half l-evel- and so we
were able to get rid of -- we do not have many val-et
spaces l-eft. And so technically you end up with a 1oL
more spaces. So we have plenty -- if anybody wants to
l_3
L4
t-5
t_6
L7
1_8
19
20
2T
zz
23
z4
25
PEC2t28t00
1
z
J
4
5
6
7
8
10
1t-
L2
l_3
I4
"15
L6
1'7
1_8
L9
20
2I
22
ZS
24
25
Page 58
play that game, we can certainly play it as far as
valet spaces. Real-ist.icaIIy t.hey would never be used,
but we can mark them. It's just a matter of control.
The other thing is on this parking, 100
ner-Fnt- nf nrrr parking is located inside which the
parking ordinance gives you no credit for. And
Llzpically in the wintertime here in a parking lot you
are going Eo lose I would guess 30, 40, 50 percent of
your parking because you don't have the stripes and
because of snow storage. A hundred percent of our
parking is usabLe 100 percent of the time so I think
we have plenty of parking, and if we have to provide
additional parking for a nonexistent problem, iL's
ridicuLous.
I4R. SCAPELLO: There are trwo r .
interpretations, and both are extremes in this
situaLion but true. Including if the employee housing
is on site, then (inaudible). Clearly the employees
are working at the hotel-, in the time during which
they are working is accounted for as (inaudible) the
way the hotel- and service area -- hofal qn^ces versus
parking spaces are accounted for.
However, Lhe truth is in beLween. They are
working approximately eight hours a day. There's 16
hours a day that. they are residents, and that is not
PEC2/28/00
t_
z
3
A
5
Page 59
accounted for in the parking. f think you need to
address that because this may be the first time you
have seen this, and. I think you will need to address
this in a way that sets the standards of how you,re
going to address it in the future.
I don't think you can Eake either of the two
extremes- You have to account for the fact that they
are there 24 hours a day and only working eight or
nine. True, additional spaces are required. I don,L
know how many.
MR. PETERSON: I disagree with that, but
we'11- go ahead, if somebody would like us to, we will
certainly mark spaces on the map-
MR. LOSA: Only a portion of the employees
(inaudible). there are not three shi.fts for every
employee.
MR. RUTHER: Is it physically possible to
show 3B more vafet parking spaces? I believe it is.
l4R. AASL,AND: Actually I'd have a quesLion
for you then in regard to that- Beings one of the
reasons that we're here is because the tov,rn council
requested I believe it was on approval that they come
back and ask for employee housing on the site, do you
think it's an unfair burden to not only have them put
employees on site, but the parking additionally to
6
1
8
9
1-0
l_1
1,2
J
tzt
1-5
1_6
17
I.'
L9
zv
2I
22
23
z+
25
PECU28t00
I
)
4
5
7
8
Y
10
IL
t2
J-J
I4
15
I6
17
l-8
I9
20
2L
zz
)?
24
25
that, or do you think it's fair to have both?
I'IR. SCAPELLO: You cannot put employees on
t.he site and not give them any place Lo park.
MR. PETERSON: That's not true. We coufd
cerLainly not allow them to have cars. That's a
simple sol-ution. But if you wanL to tive right in
town, I mean it happens all the time. Most of t.he
employees that will be there would probably not have a
car anyway. So Lhat is the simplesL solut,ion is if
that's required, that's something that we would do.
It seems ridicufous to make that requirement when
we're going to have a parking garage that's literally
going to be 50 percent empty.
MR- SCAPELLO: I think you could declare
that and leave it up to councif as t.o wheEher they
Tr74nI fr) ar-r-onl- it..
MR. WEBER: ft's not uncommon for businesses
in Ehe Vail Village core to not provide parking. I
can think of lots of differenl --
( Inaudibf e discussion)
MR. SCAPELLO: You need to address it. You
need to either say since no additional spaces are
provided, employee parking must. be off site; or since
_t ^--^_I ^E ^soure J-ever oL- employee parking is provided, how many
additional spaces are required.
o
PEC2/28/00
1
z
3
4
5
o
7
8
page 6l
MR. PETERSON: I think that,s absolutely
correct. When we made t.he proposal for employee
housing units to the town council, I think I remember
specifically stating t.hat there woufd not be
additional parking places because of adding employee
housing to the site because they were already -- they
would be driving there anlruay. There woul_d be the
primary employees there. I just don,t think it,s
necessary.
And as part of our proposal , this is what
our proposal is, and you have every right to vote on
Lhat in the SDD process. And you certainly have the
power to allow that to happen. Not only does it from
a legal standpoint, but from a practical standpoint,
it's absolutely valid
MR. AASLAND: Actually you brought up a very
good point.. Do you have any other questions?
( Inaudible discussion)
l4R. AASLAND: Yeah, we,re doingr public
comment right now. So if you'd like to say anything
in regard to this, please just come forward and
identify yourself.
Okay, do you want to identify yourself.
MS. MACKEY: My name is Annette Mackey.
MR. AASLAND: You're just supporting?
9
1_0
1_ l-
I2
3
L4
t_5
L6
L7
18
1_9
20
2I
zz
.4J
24
25
PEC2t28t00
Page 62
1 MS. MACKEY: Yes.
2 MR. AASLAND: Okay. With Lhat, I think --
3 MR. WEBER: Galen, there's additional public
4 comment.
5 MR. AASLAND: Oh, I'm sorry, I'm sorry.
6 Certainly.
7 MR. ,JENSEN: For the record, my name is Wes
8 .fensen- I'm with MounEain Air properties',
9 fncorporaEed. It's an exclusive managing agrent for
l-0 Mountain Owners which is the proud owner of L'7 ,644
l-1 square feet of Gat.eway. We probably knovrn to Lhis man
12 as the white elephant, Ermongf other things.
13 f 'm not here today -- al_so we are the
1,4 majority owner of the Gateway building since it is all
l-5 the majority condo owner. T' m not here to speak or
L6 represenE. what the residential condo owners have
1,7 ident.if ied as their own issues - I am here to simply
18 sLate for the commercial space how we feel about these
L9 particular issues that are on Lhe table here today.
20 I praise their efforts here at -- I think
2I this is a great t.rio for this work of encroachment as
22 opposed to doing what they could do as a solution-
23 Because the commercial spaces will have little if any
24 view once this building is done. But the views are
25 not issue. View for our commercial space is -- really
PF.CU28t00
l-
z
3
4
5
6
8
9
t_u
11
L2
Page 63
do noL take on the nature that is an issue with us.
We're really more concerned about seeing
this project get developed and have the slmergy of the
hotel- with the commercial spaces that are there. The
signs in these spaces up here in this corner would
definitely impact us in this blue-shaded area if it
were built on it as Lhey could be allowed to do. So I
think this is a great tradeoff- I think it,s
substantial , and I think it,,s acceptable.
As r said, we have no issues with height
from the commercial spaces' standpoint. So those are
my brief comments. I think you should at l-east note
that part of the cateway building is supportive.
MR. AASLAND: Great. Thank you very much
for coming in. Chuck, do you --,
MR. AASLAND: Okay, if there's no additional
public comments, I think we,ll take about five
minutes. Let's Lake five minutes.
( Pause )
I4R. AASLAND: Okay, we're going to go back
on the record, please. We'd like to go back on the
record, please. Okay, we're going to go back and go
to commissioner comments and questions next. Chas,
did you want to say something first?
15
L7
l_8
L9
an
2I
22
ZJ
z4
25
PEC2/28t00
Page 64
.1- MR. BERNHARDT: Sure. In trying to learn
2 more about this whole process going on here, I have
3 been in communication with the Gateways representative
4 and which Jay has already alluded to. And I got some
5 of my information so I could get more background
6 informational stuff.
7 I'm not using any of that in my discussions.
I I'm just using the proposal -- or this packet puE
I l-nrrol-hor lrrr lfanrrra
10 MR. AASLAND: Okay. If we can gto to
11 commissioner conments and questions, let's go to Doug
12 first. please.
13 Oh, wait, start on the other side with Tom.
74 I'm sorry- It's important to alternate.
15 MR. CAHfLL: I' Il pass the table to Aom
16 again.
11 l4R. WEBER: Thanks. I guess I really have
18 too many point.s, and I'11 try t.o address the public
19 comment as well-. First of al-l, as f stated before.
20 I've been in favor of this project in that l,ve also
21 been in favor of the deviation from the master plan,
22 specifically in regard to the additional accommodation
23 units that are being placed on this site which are
24 much needed in a town which f see as a deficit in the
25 tourn. And so I believe that those are outweighed,
PECU2U00
Page 65
1 although they're not a given. And I think we,ve had
2 some give and take with these guys so far.
3 In addition, f do think that this
4 application is a lot better than the previous one that
5 frankly I approved- In fact, I approved a much larger
6 encroachment on that setback prior, and this one is
7 much better.
8 And really the reason why I did approve the
9 larger seLback is really to be more in conformance
10 with the buildings on each side in terms of their
11 encroachment on t.hat street. And just in terms of
L2 street scape archiEecture, it makes more sense to try
3 t.o line up with the buildings next Eo you
14 But I do think that this application is
15 better. I also think that they've demonstrated that
L6 vehicular access can be accommodated better with the
I7 addit.ion of that Left t.urn 1ane. I haven't seen that
18 drawn on any plans before, but f think Ehat thaL is --
L9 was an element Lhat I was concerned with before, and I
20 definitely like seeing that on there.
2I I'm also very much in favor of having the
22 EHUs on sit.e. t actually at a prior meeLing t.hat T
23 would be in favor of actual-ly addingr an entire floor
24 to get those EHUs on site because I felt like that was
25 such an i-mcortant component -
PEC2/28t00
t_
-)
3
^
5
6
B
10
11
I2
13
L4
1-5
I6
17
l_ tt
I9
20
alz1
zz
)A
25
Page 66
I think the three fooL encroachment that
they're proposing now is -- doesn't bother me that
much. And I would really be concerned with, I guess
-- how shoul-d I say this -- deviatinq from really what
needs to be quality hotel- bedrooms and t.rying to stick
these guys Lo a smal-l-er floor Lo floor height. r
definiUely wouldn't want to try to have Lhese guys
squeeze six or twel-ve inches out of it because I think
that's probably the same hol-e that other developers
fell into in the '70s and'80s when Lhey built their
hotel rooms which are frankly grossly outdated now.
And I'm also very much in support with the
addition of the AUs, as I've said. That's really Ehe
mai-n benefit of this projecL are those accommodation
units. And frankly if they could add three or four
more, I'd still be in favor of it..
Ald in terms of the parking, I can see both
sides of the argument. I cou1d al-so argue that most
of the employees that are going to be working in this
hotel frankly don'L have a car. And f do have
firsthand knowledgre of t.his in that I l-ive around
people who work in this hotel. Especially if they're
rrr'i nrr i-n 'l i "o i n -- rznrr kn rrr^r i f 1- hpl/, ro rr6i rrgorr.9 Le J-r-ve r-,- -* :,_--r9 tO get
^,.^l^ ^ ^-^^r- ,.-.1 r- , 'r- l^D..r!-rr cl' vrEaL- urr.it anlrway, I don'L see why they'd need
a car. And it's cerLainly within the devel_oper's best
PEC2t28t00
Page 67
L interest to keep parking clear for really the guests;
2 which is what it's needed for.
3 And so I guess I am in.favor of the
4 application as well as the findings as stated by the
5 staff.
6 MR. AASLAND: Doug, please.
7 MR. CAHILL: A1l_ right. Start out with
8 thanking George for all the work he,s put inEo this
9 and the efficient use of so much paper.
10 Yeah, going through the tist and starting
1l- with the building height, it was real interesting
L2 looking at those '84 plans. I hadn't seen those
3 before,. and Lhat comes right in at. Lhe same heigrht in
L4 '84.
15 The only issue I really have with the
1-6 building was, you know, which worried me from the
1,7 beginning was just t.he bulk and mass on, you know,
l-8 Vail Road itsel-f . ,.Tust creat.ing a cavern in there.
1"9 And f had an issue with that third l_ane, and those
20 have been addressed. And that,s setback, that's great
2t to have thaE setback come out within the 20 feet. And
22 that smal1 three and half foot out of the corner, no
23 matter how tal-f it is, just doesn't make any
24 difference. I think you want to keep the integrity of
25 the buildinq.
PEC2t28t00
L
2
A
5
6
7
t1
1_0
11
L2
t_J
1A
l-5
IO
L7
18
I9
20
2L
22
23
24
?q
Page 68
I think Jay mentioned something about it had
to do with the underground stuff too. And I think I'm
very comfortable with whatever -- you can go right. up
to the front underqround by keeping the setback. If
you need an extra parking space underground, I'm all-
in favor of going into the setback underground. So
the three-foot setback is not a problem at all-.
Overall- square footaqe, I think there was a
small- increase in square footage overafl from the last
proposal . And due to the employee housing, I think
that's fantastic, get that employee housing in there
and unfortunat.ely t.hat may put the height again up
that three and a half feet. But f think you/re doing
due diligence in trying to keep thaE three and a half
foot at a maximum and, as Tom said, keep Lhe integrity
of Ehe inLerior of the building. I think you've come
this far, and you're stil1 working on that portion;
you want to make it a good project so sEay with that-
Parking numbers. Parking numbers is a wash,
I think. You know, the totaL number of parking spaces
is 376 or whatever versus 387. Those numbers are
huge. I don't know what parking structure before,
other than the Vail and the Lions Head parking
struct.ures. And dealing with the parking issues, the
research going on, I think we're very ample in
PEC2t28/00
l_
z
3
5
6
'l
B
9
l-0
1l_
L2
l_3
1A
l-f
1_6
L7
18
LY
zv
2L
22
z5
z4
25
Page 69
parking. We've got plenty of parking for the project.
And if it does become a problem, the
instance of having employees park outside or
otherwise, you know. those can be handled. I don,t
Ehink you're going to run into a problem personally.
But there are inst,ance where, I think, the Sunbird
itsel-f, you know, for Vaif project, there's no parking
as an employee unit. And those employee units don,t
have parking on site eiLher, and it's handled.
The conditions, w€'ve got quite a long list
of conditions. And I hope you agree with all those
conditions, and those are part of it. Do you have any
questions against any of those conditions?
MR- PETERSON: No, flo. Actually the l-ist
has gone down a little bit. But most.of those
conditions when you read through them really have more
to do with just how we go from point A Lo point B to
get our building permit.
And on any project Ehat is approved whether
it's an SDD or you're specifically going through the
Design Review Board, you see a l-ist of probably 15
conditions where they all have Lo do with basically
engineered drawings, t.hings like that, drainage,
things that just have to be -- we have to provide at
the building permit leve1 or at TCO actually in some
PEC2t28t00
1
t
J
A
5
7
a1
9
10
11
I2
13
L4
.15
4/-J_O
I1
l_b
t9
)i
2L
z)
24
25
Page 70
So even though the l-ist seems longf, and that
bothered some people, afmost all of them are simply
housekeeping matters and everybody -- we want to have
a complete list so everybody knew, everybody was on
the same page, what was ocpected prior to building
permit.
MR- CAHILL: Yeah, and the other
recofirmendation is you approach council too -- f don't
know if you have a rebutEal Lo each of those
conditions that would kind of help you out.
l4R. PETERSON: I think we explained iE
several times. And actually Ehere was just one member
of council that continually had quesLions about. it,
saying there were so many conditions you must not be
ready to go yet. But, once again, if you sLart by
sLacking the conditions, 1zou can see what they are.
MR. CAHILL: LeL's see, as we move on to the
condit.ional- use permit for the fractional fee units, f
guess I'm in favor of warm beds. I think AUs you're
at 99 AUs and the fractional fee units, and I like the
idea of how they can transfer over, f believe, in the
summertime for use as convent.ion space also to having
all within the building.
MR. PETERSON: Actually, the fees we'll- sell
a certain number of weeks, basically the winter weeks.
PF.C2t28t00
Page 71
1 There could be some prime summer weeks that get sold,
2 but on the whole there's going to be more weeks thaL
3 we keep than we sell. And we control them l_00
4 percent, and they will operate then as part of the
5 hot.el.
6 MR. CAHILL: Has that been done in other
7 places or --
8 MR. PETERSON: I don't know. Not that f 'm
9 aware of. Now t1pica1ly what you,Il see are weeks
10 bundled. And you buy the prime week and you get
LL another week during the summer or the shoulder season,
L2 or you get one or two weeks and then you get a right
3 to make reservations for the other weeks, basica]lv
1,4 first come, first served. And that's the way iL j_s at
15 the Austria House, 1rou know, your, tlpical project
16 We feel it's very important because of t.he
'1,7 conference facility, because it is much, much larger
18 than what just the AUs would dictate. But that we
t9 have control of those rooms for the shoulder and the
20 summer seasons to be abl-e to use our convention
21, facilities. And that's why we will own those weeks.
22 They will not be given to other people, nor will they
23 be commitEed to for any length of time because we want
24 that control.
25 MR. CAHILL: I think that's a great move. f
PECv28/00
Page72
l_
z
3
4
5
6
8
9
10
11
L2
l.J
1A
1_5
J-O
L1
Id
t9
20
11
23
z4
z)
think that's about. it.
MR- AASLAND: Okay, thank you. Before we go
to Chas, Tom, did you have one more thing?
MR. WEBER: No-
MR. AASLAND: Okay. Chas.
MR. BERNHARDT: As far as the parking goes,
based on the test.imony of Johannes Faessler a few
months ago, another parking study, he had a lot of
extra parking and it doesn't appear Ehat there's going
to be any problem in parking at all.
I think it's really creative the way you've
been able to stick the 20 housing in there. It's
basical ly unused space. And, George, this was
phenomenal, putting this whole thing together. It was
so much easier to understand. Had I been able co
understand it as completely as I do now, f don't Ehink
f would have voted for it last time.
As much as I think this is a great project
that need.s to be developed, f 'rTl real1y concerned about
the height restrictions. But I think it would be
foolish to deny approval af it now for an additional
three and a half feet. for all the extra benefits that
we're getting.
The encroachment on
record, I had a project with
the front. "i rrst. for theJ sv
an encroachment this big,
PEC2/28/00
1
2
J
4
5
I
9
page 73
three inches by nine inches on a triangle that was
turned down in 1983 for effect. And I thought that
was -- nobody was served. And if the town council
still says 20 foot and you can sqnieeze that back,
terrific. But 36 square feet, I have a tough time for
all the benefits we're getLing out of it now, f,d have
to say let's go for it. And if you can move it back,
if Uhe town council says move it back, then I,m sure
you'11 figure it out.
MR. PETERSON: If I could make one comment,
Chas, and I think Chas hit on the exact t.hinq that I
think the board should be looking at. And that is is
the project as given, we have approval for it at the
town council l-evel, now is the project betLer today
with,the employee housing and with the three and a
half feet maximum, in addition to that. plus that minor
encroachment in exchange for the other, what is behind
the setback. That's the question. You were able t.o
get around that and look at that even though you said
we1l, I voted for it at the beginning. But is this
better than what's been approved, and you answered in
a positive way. And I think that is the question.
And I think that's the quesLion to the town
council afso. Tsn't this better, not from day one,
not if you go back to day one, buL from what the
l-0
11
L2
3
L4
15
IO
L7
l-8
1,9
zv
2L
22
z5
24
25
PEC2/28t00
1
2
3
4
5
6
B
9
10
11
I2
13
I4
15
_LO
L7
18
19
ZU
21
ZZ
)2
.A
25
, Page7{
approval -- where the approval currently is. And the
answer to that., lou were able to do that. That's
exactly what the question is which took me two hours
to get to.
MR- AASLAND: Thank you. Diane
MS- GOLDEN: WeIl , my answer to Ehe question
is yes, iE, is a better product.. f'm a huge proponent
of employee housing in town. I'm glad you were able
to do this on site. I think some of housing situation
is going to be tough, having three people live in kind
of a l-arge room, you know. Maybe I'm old and --
MR. WEBER: That happens all the time, by
the way.
MR. PETERSON: Usually four.
MS. GOLDEN: Wel-I, I think there's going to
have to be some monit.oring. f can see some noise
l-evels getting kind of ouL of hand and stuff- So I
Lhink there will have to be some sort of monitoring of
these employees. But they need to realize how lucky
r-harr =r-a r-r\ l-ra liVing in the middl_e Of tOWn and --
MR- PETERSON: I think that is true. Yeah,
and most of the -- there's two rooms that have three;
all the others are with just two. And you,re right, I
mean it could take some, but if it does, it does. And
that is just something Lhat we just int.ernally have to
PECU28t00
o
o
o
1
2
3
5
6
7
8
9
L0
11
L2
3
L4
1_5
J_O
L7
18
L9
zv
2L
22
23
24
z)
Page 75
do.
MS. GOLDEN: I hope it doesn,t. hurt the rest
of the project., so, you know.
MR. PETERSON: IL,s not going to hurt the
rest of the project. We can control it, if we have
to. I just don't think we have to. I mean I don,t
think it's going to be any problem. I,m excited about
ir.
MS. GOTDEN: f am too. And I do think
there's a substant.ial tradeoff for the setback, the 36
square feet, given the rest of the building moving
back so I applaud that, that you were able to move
that back and make the whole entrance better
And my question was the same as Doug's, that
you're agr:eeable to all 22 conditions,,. and you,ve said
t.hat.
And I think the height deviation, it won't
1-.: ^ ^6 - ,.r^- irJrv \J! cl (rccr-L to the overall project. And,
said, hopefully it won't be three and a half
it will be smaller than that.
MR. PETERSON: That's mv dream.
MS. GOLDEN: And the parking, thaE is an
incredible amounL of parking. And I thank you for
providing that in town. And maybe in the future we'l-l-
be abl-e t.o use some of Lhat parking. We'll come t.o
make that
like you
feet and
PEC2t28/00
Page 76
1
4
5
6
1
8
9
1n
11
t2
t-3
1A
1.5
l_o
L7
1B
L9
20
2t
22
23
1A
25
real-ize that the hotel doesn't need it all, and maybe
we can open it up to frontage road parking.
MR. PETERSON: Maybe so. I think we can
probably do that on Saturdays and Sund.ays as long as
it. doesn't affect the hoteI.
MS. GOLDEN: Right.
MR. PETERSON: We're Erying to accommodate
all the conrnercial- too- And we'll- just put in more of
a program where people can drive Eo the Vail Village
Inn and park to go shopping, and not just go t,o t.he
hotel but remember there's a .1oE of sguare f ootage on
the WI site that nobody right now drives to - And
potentially in the future they can.
MS. GOLDEN: That would be good to market it
way. That's great' So that's all . I have to say.
you.
MR. AASLAND: f 'm going to speak a littl-e
longer than my fel-low commissioners because I'm going
to deal with some housekeeping issues. George, I want
agrain, as other commissioners said, f want to thank
you for the incredible amount of work that you've put
in and a really well organized memorandum. And T want
to thank the neighbors --
MS. GOLDEN: f meant to say thank you. f'm
sorry. I didn'E say that. Thank you, George
that
Thank
PEC2t28tm
Page 77
L MR. AASI-,AND: And I want to thank the
2 neighbors for coming in because f think a lot of times
3 we review projects, and we don,t see adjacent
4 neighbors. And this is a significant project. I
5 think everybody that sits on this board realizes that
6 it's going to affect adjacent properties, and I think
7 it's really wonderful that you come in and express
8 what you feel about it because f think we all_ take it
9 very seriously.
L0 And I think the applicant has done a very
1-l- good job of explaining a very complicated project to
3,2 us -
3 George, just so we have this in the record,
L4 on this project, is there a codified -- in your
1-5 studies, is there a codified view corridor at all that
1-6 go -- okay-
L7 And there was previous discussion through
L8 the Lown council about paperwork and stuff. And have
l-9 Ehose issues been resol_ved?
20 l4R. RUTHER: Yes .
2L MR. AASLAITID: One thingr actually I would
22 like to see removed is -- I disagree with the town
23 council . I' d like to see t,he tower removed. I think
24 that adds unnecessarv mass and bulk onto the
25 neighbors, and I would like to see that Laken off.
PEC2t28t00
I
2
3
4
5
6
8
9
10
1l-
LZ
13
15
-LO
LI
I.1
L9
20
2L
zz
23
24
25
page 78
And I would basically -- the way I see this
project, after really a lot of Lhorough review, I
think t.his proposal complies with the town master plan
and associated planning documents. And I think it's
important for us as a commission if we decide to
approve this to say that-
And I real1y sincerely believe that this
project has been reviewed in context with the
neighbors, and we've rea]Ly given very serious
consideration to that. I do believe the town needs to
grow and change, and I think thaL this project is an
important part of that
On the revised leLter, f think attachment D,
that Zehern.& Associates October 19th, the second page
of that, George, a quesLion about. that would be .the
improvements that it. talks about on the frontage road,
could you jusE -- is that an issue t.hat's being
addressed through the town council, those issues, or
how is that being dealt with? Top paragraph on that
1ett.er.
MR. RUTHER:
I4R. AASLAND:
transportation. ft is
specifically exclude,
on l- i {- '.r
Public transportations .
No, above public
assumed that these items
will be provided by another
PECU28t00
o
o
o