HomeMy WebLinkAboutVAIL VILLAGE FILING 1 BLOCK 5E TRACT C AUSTRIA HAUS AKA SONNENALP SDD 35 1997 APPROVAL PART 2 OF 5 LEGALTO:
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
FILT COPY
MEMORANDUM
Planning and Environmental Commission
Department of Community Development
January 13, 1997
A request for a worksession to discuss establishing a Special Development
District overlay to the Austria Haus, located at 242 East Meadow Drive/ on a part
of Tract C, Block 5-D, Vail Village First Filing.
Applicant:
Planner:
Sonnenalp Properties, Inc., represented by Gordon Pierce
George Ruther
I. DESCRIPTION OFTHE REOUEST
The applicant, Sonnenalp Properties, lnc., represented by Gordon Pierce, is requesting a
worksession to discuss the establishment of a Special Development District at242 Easl
Meadow Drive/on a part of Tract C, Block 5-D, Vail Village First Filing. The applicant is
proposing to establish a new Special Development District overlay to the underlying zone
district of Public Accommodation, to tacilitate the proposed redevelopment of the existing
Austria Haus. The purpose of the worksession is to discuss the fractional fee
club/accommodation unit mix, parking requirements and urban design comments.
II. BACKGROUND
On January 7, 1997, the Vail Town Council reviewed and approved Ordinance #22, Series of
1996, an ordinance amending Section 18.04, Definitions, adding "Fractional Fee Club" and
"Fractional Fee Club Unif', amending Section 18.22.030, Conditional Uses, allowing fractional fee
club as a conditional use in the Public Accommodation Zone District, amending Section
18.60.060(AX7), Conditional Use Permit Criteria-Findings, on first reading. Second reading of
the ordinance is currently scheduled for Tuesday, January 21 , 1997. A copy of Ordinance #22,
Series of 1996 has been attached for reference.
The ordinance approved on first reading by the Town Council varied from the ordinance that the
Planning and Environmental Commission unanimously recommended approval of on November
25, 1996. The ordinance approved by Town Council provides definitions for fractional fee club
and fractional fee club unit. Fractional fee club and fractional fee club unit are defined as follows:
"Fractional Fee Club, means a lractional fee project in which each condominium unit,
pursuant to recorded project documentation as approved by the Town of Vail, has no
fewer than six and no more than twelve owners per unit, in whose use is established by
reservation system. Each of the fractional fee club units are made available for short
term rental in a managed program when not in use by the club members. The project is
managed on-site with a front desk operating 24 hours a day, seven days a week,
providing reservation and registration capabilities. The project shall include or be
approximate to, transportation, retail shops, eating and drinking establishments, and
recreational facilities".
,,Fractional Fee Club Unit means a condominium unit in a fractional lee club described as
such in the project documentation and not in the accommodation unit within the fractional
fee club."
As originally drafted, per the PEC's recommendation, Ordinance #22 established twelve
additidnal ionditional use permit review criteria as a new section (1 8.22.035) in the Public
.
Accommodation Zone Disirict. Section '18.22.035 will no longer be established. Instead, the
twelve new review criteria have been consolidated into five criteria, with several of the original
criteria incorporated into the definition of a fractional fee club. The five new review criteria will
now be incoiporated into the Conditional Use Permit criteria-findings Chapter (18.60) as Section
18.60.060(Ai(7xa-e) of the Municipal Code. The five new criteria will be used in conjunction with
the seven criteria already listed in Section 18.60.060. Staff believes these changes eliminate
redundancy and are more appropriately located within the Municipal Code.
Lastly, Ordinance #22 no longer allows "timeshare-estate, fractional fee units or timeshare-
licenie units" as conditional uses in the Public Accommodation Zone District. The Town Council
removed the three uses in response to concerns that such uses are not in the best interest ofthe
community. The Town Council members agreed that fractional fee clubs, as proposed bythe.
applicant lnd defined in the revised ordinance, are a form of public accommodation beneficial to
the community, since quality fractional fee clubs are an appropriate means of increasing
occupancy rates, maintaining and enhancing short-term rental availability for our guests and
diversifying the resort lodging market.
III. DISCUSSION ISSUES
As this is a worksession to discuss the applicant's proposal to establish a Special Development
District, staff will not evaluate all of the details of the proposal at this time. Staff, however, has
identified four major issues which we would like to discuss with the PEC and the applicant- Stalf
believes that in oider for the applicant to continue forward, direction must be given on each of the
discussion issues. Each of the issues is briefly described below:
1. Fractional Fee Club UniVAccommodation Unit Mix
The Planning and Environmental Commission and Town Council have each wrestled with the
issue of maintaining existing accommodation units in the Town of Vail. Maintaining and
enhancing the hotel bed base in town is identified as a goal of the community in many of the
adopted planning documents. Ordinance #22, as approved by the Town Council on first reading,
requires that redevelopment proposals for fractional fee clubs maintain an equivalency of existing
accommodation units. According to the Section 3,7(b) of Ordinance #22, Series of 1996:
"lf the proposal lor a fractional fee club is a redevelopment of an existing facility, the
fractional fee club shall maintain an equivalency ol accommodation units as are presently
existing. Whether this equivalency is maintained by an equal number of units or by
square footage shall be determined (by the PEC) on a case-by-case basis ."
Ordinance #22 also provides for the consideration of lock-off units as accommodation units for
the purpose of calculating accommodation unit equivalency. According to Section 3, 7(e) of
Ordinance #22, Series of 1996:
"Lock-off units are encouraged and may be counted up to one-half (1/2) of an
accommodation unit for purposes of calculating the equivalency of accommodation units."
The existing Austria Haus contains a total of thirty-seven (37) accommodation units (33 hotel
rooms and 4 suites). The thirty-seven accommodation units comprise a total of 11,800 square
feet ol Gross Residential Floor Area (GRFA).
The applicant is proposing a total of seventy-seven (77) possible keys (24 fractional fee club
units, 33 lock-off units and 20 accommodation units). For equivalency purposes, the total
number of accommodation units proposed by the applicant, assuming each lock-off unit is
determined to count as 112 of an accommodation unit, is 36.5 units (20 accommodation units +
33 lock-otf unit (16.5 accommodation units)). The 36.5 equivalency units comprise a total of
approximately 14,327 square feet of GRFA. The total GRFA of all units, including the 24
fractional fee club units is approximately 37,906 square feet.
Does the PEC believe the applicant has adequately addressed the equiv4lency requirements
designed to ensure the maintenance and enhancement of hotel accomr;l$tions in the Town of
Vail? W
2. Parking Requirements
Chapter 18.52 of the Town of Vail Municipal Code provides parking requirements and standards
for development in the Town of Vail. According to Section 18.52.030, existing, legal non-
conforming parking situations are "grandfathered". The "grandfathering" of the existing, legal
non-confoiming siiuation requires an applicant of a redevelopment project to construct, or pay-in-
lieu, for only those additional parking spaces required by the increase in use of the property.
The existing Austria Haus has a total of twenty-five parking spaces to accommodate the thirty-
seven accommodation units and accessory uses (restaurant, bar, retail). Of the twenty-live
existing parking spaces, only fifteen are considered legal, non-conforming. Ten parking spaces
are not legal spaces as they are constructed off-site, in Town of Vail right-otway-
The applicant is proposing to provide forty-eight on-site parking spaces with the redevelopment
of the Austria Haus. The parking spaces will be accommodated in an underground parking
structure. Staff believes that approximately seventy parking spaces will be required pursuant to
the standards prescribed in Chapter 18.52 of the Municipal Code. The applicant is proposing to
pay into the Town of Vail Parking Fund for the balance of the parking requirement (+r 7 spaces).
Parking spaces are currently valued at $16,333.38. This figure will be adjusted for 1997 to reflect
the Consumer Price Index for the Denver/Boulder Metro Area. The new figure will be available
mid-February.
The staff would like the PEC to provide direction to the applicant as to whether they should be
considering more on-site parking spaces or whether they may pay into the parking fund lor those
parking spaces required, but not provided for on-site.
3. Urban Design Comments
The Municipal Code permits the Town ol Vail to retain the services of an Urban Design
Consultant to provide consultation on matters relating to design, scale, mass, architecture, site
planning, etc. for development projects in the core areas. Staff has forwarded a complete set of
plans to Jeff Winston, of Winston & Associates, Inc., our Urban Design Consultant. Jeff has
reviewed the proposed plans and has provided his initial comments. A copy of the memorandum
from Jeff Winston has been attached for reference and was supplied to the applicant on
Tuesday, January 7.
Statf is requesting that the applicant respond to each of the comments indicating how they will
address each of the issues. Staff is also requesting that the PEC provide direction to the
applicant regarding Jeff Winston's comments. Staff will forward revisions made by the applicant,
td .lett Winslon. .teff wilt be attending the January 27, 1997, PEC meeting to discuss his
comments.
Staff has reviewed the initial comments provided by Jeff Winston. The staff agrees with each of
the issues raised. Below is a brief review of the statf's response to the issues:
1. The staff concurs with comment #1 . We would suggest that the applicant remove one
story on the west end of the building. The removal of one-story allows the Austria Haus
to bi,'tter relate in scale to the buildings on the Village Center property. Specifically, the
staff believes that removing the lofted space from unit #17, the building height on the
west end would be brought down approximately nine feet. The building is approximately
44.5 feet tall (eaveline) on the west end.
Staff further belives that the ends of the building could be stepped bacuforward
horizontally as suggested by Jeff Winston. We agree that stepping the east end back
(towards the stream) six to eight feet will increase variety and interest in both the north
and south elevations, allow the building to relate better to Slifer Square and improve
pedestrian circulation. We also agree that a horizontal step of the first floor only, on the
west end of the building, would create a better alignment of the Austria Haus with the
buildings on the adjacent property. Staff feels that the west end first floor could come
forward eight to ten feet (towards the street), without adversely affecting the tower
element or the front entry drop-off area.
2.
3.
4.
Staff concurs with comment #2. We are currently exploring the logistics of the proposed
location of the bus shelter. The town staff is concerned that the proposed location will
contlict with bus passengers loadingiunloading requirements. lf it is determined that the
proposed bus shelter location is unsuitable, we would recommend that the sheltered area
remain. Staff believes it will serve as an attractive space for covered seating, information
display, etc.
Staff concurs with comment #3. The town staff is currently reviewing the proposed street
relocation and discussing pedestrian/bus traffic circulation. We will forwarded our
comments and concerns on to the applicant and PEC once the review and discussions
are complete.
Statf concurs with comment #4. The applicant is proposing to pave the front entry drop-
off are with brick pavers as suggested. The staff is recommending that the point were
drop-off area and the pedestrian areas meet be flush. A curb is not recommended since
it tends to create the appearance of a parking area only.
Statf concurs with comment #5.
Staff concurs with comment #6. Town staff will be working closely with the applicant to
ensure that adequate access is provided to the Austria Haus from Slifer Square, that
some of the barriers which exist in Slifer Square are removed (improving pedestrian flow)
and that tree removal is kept to a minimum.
Staff concurs with comment #7.
5.
6.
7.
g. Staff concurs with comment #8. The applicant has proposed revisions to the roof plan
which correspond with Jeff's concerns'
Staff has identtied several additional urban design concerns we would like to discuss with the
applicant and the PEC.
1. The south elevation of the building appears too repetitive, too linear and lacks the
architectural appeal of the north e'ievaiion. Staff would recommend the applicant explore
ways ot introCuiing more architectural interest on the south side of the building.. One
sujgestion might 5e to eliminate the repetition of the vertical chimney elements by
refr"oving seve'ral of the chimneys. Thd fireplaces within the building are natural gas' and
therefor!, only exterior wall venis are necessary. A second suggestion might be to
exptore now the exterior building materials are applied. The introduction of a different
miterial or application may redrice the repetitive appearance on the building. A..third-.
.
suggestion wdu6 be to taie the lounge area on the first floor back into the building. This
eliir'inates the repetitive nature of the singular plane of the south elevation and creates
opportunities for additional shadow lines and reveal. These are only a few of.the..many
p[SiiOifiti"s availabte to the applicant and are not intended to be an all-inclusive list.
2. The applicant has proposed above-grade patios on the.south side of the building. Staff is
concerned with thd siie and use of the patios. The patios could be reduced in size to
provide more "green space" on the souih side of the building. As proposed, the site has
very little true "green spaces" and a lot of hardscape.
patios and decks are often designed to be private in nature. The applicant's property
adjoins public lands. Staff would like to point out to the applicant that there is no desire to
see an additional.segmenl of Gore Creek "privatized".
IV. STAFF RECOMMENDATION
Since this is a worksession to discuss the proposed establishment of a Special Development
District to the property located at 242 EastMeadow Drive/on a partof Tract C, Block 5-D' Vail
Village First Filind, arid not a request for a formal recommendation from the Planning and
Enviionmental C-ommission to the Town Council, staff will not be providing a recommendation at
this time. Staff will, however, provide a recommendation on the applicant's proposal at the time
of final review.
ORDINANCE NO,22
SERIES of 1996
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING SECTION I8.04, DEFINITIONS, ADDING
"FRACTIONAL FEE CLUB" AND "FRACTIONAL FDE CLTJB UNIT', AMENDINGSECTION 18,22.030, CONDITIONAL USES, ALLOWING T'RACTIONAL F'EE CLUB
AS A CONDITIONAL USE IN TTTE PUBLIC ACCOMMODATION ZONE DISTRICT,AMIINDING SECTION 18.60.060(AX7), CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT CRITERIA.
FINDINGS.
WHEREAS' an application has becn submitted to amcnd Sections rg.22.030 and
18.60.060 ofthe Town ofVail Municipal Code to allow fractional fee club as a conditional use
in thc Public Accommodation Zone District and to provide criteria and findings applicable to
fractional fee club requests in Vail; and
WHEREAS, all noticcs as required by Scction 18.66.080 have been sent to thc
appropriate parties; and
WHEREAS' on November 25, r 996, in accordance with Secrion 1g.66. r 40 the Town ofvail Planning and Environmental commission held a public hearing on the proposed
amendments and unanimously recommended approval of the amcndments to the Town council-
and
WHEREAS, rhe vail rorvn council believes that quality fractional fee club unit are an
appropriate means of increasing occupancy mtes, maintaining and enhancing short-tcrm rcntal
availability and diversifuing the resort lodging market within the Town of Vail; and
WHEREAS, the Vail Town Council believes that a fractional fee club is a form of public
accommodation; and
WIIEREAS, the Vail Town Council considers that it is reasonable, appropriate, and
beneficial to the Town of vail and its citizens. inhabitants and visitors to adopt oidinance No.
22. Series of 1996; and
WHER-EAS, the Vail rown council believes the proposed amendments are consistent
*'ith its adopted goals, objectives ard policies.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE TOWN COLINCIL OF THE TOWN OFVAIL, COLORADO, THAT:
SECTION 1
Chapter 18.04, Definitions is hereby amended to read as follows:
18.04.136 Fractional Fcc Club, means a fractional fce projcct in which each
condominium unit, pursuant ro recorded project documentation as approved by the To$n of Vail.
has no ferver than 6 and no more than 12 owners per unit and whose use is established bv a
reservation system. Each ofthe fractional fee club units are made available for short-ierm
rental in a managed program rvhcn not in usc by flrc crub mcmbers. The project is managed
on-site with a front desk opcrating 24 hours a day, scven days a week providing ieservation a;d
registration capabilities. The project shall include or be proximate to transportation, retail shops,
eating and drinking establishments, and recreation facilities.
I 8.04.136. I Fractional Fee club unit - a condominium unit in a fractional fee club
described as such in the project documentation and not an accommodation unit within the
fractional fee club.
Ordinitrc. No :1. Scri6or t9o6
18.04.430 FractionalFeefDeleted]
SECTION 2
Section 18.22.030 - Public Accommodation-Conditionar uses - of the Town of Vail
Municipal Code is hereby amended to read as follows:
18.22.030 Conditionaluses
The following conditional uses shall be permined in the public Accommodation Zone
District, subject to the issuance ofa conditional use permit in accordance with the
provisions of Chapter 18.60:
D.
C.
D.
E.
F.
G.
H.
I.
J.
K.
L.
M.
N.
o.
P.
a.
R.
Professional and business offices;
Hospitals, medical and dental clinics, and medical centers;
Private clubs and civic, cultural and fraternal organizations;
Ski lifts and tows:
Theaters, meeting rooms, and convention facilities;
Public or commercial parking facilities or structures;
Public transportation terminals;
Public utility and public service uses;
Public buildings, grounds and facilities;
Public or private schools;
Public parks and recreational facilitiesl
Churches:
Eating, drinking, recreational, or retail establishments not occupying more than
l0% of the total Gross Residential Floor Area of a main structue or structures
located on the site in a non-conforming multi-family dwelling;
Major arcade, so long as it does not have any exterior frontage on any public rvay,
street, walkway, or mall area;
Bed and Breakfast as further regulated by Section 18.58.310;
Type III EHU as defined in Section 18.57.060;
Type IV EHU as defined in Section 18.57.70;
Fractional fee club as further regulated by Section 18.60.060(AX7Xa-e).
SECTION 3
Section 18.60.060(4)(7), conditional uses permit criteria-findings, ofthe Town of vail
Municipal Code is hereby amended and shall read as follows:
7. Prior to the approval ofa conditional use permit for a time-share estate, fractional
fee, fractional fee club, or time-share license proposal, the following shall be considered:
a. The applicant shall submit to the town a list ofall owners ofexistins units
within the project or building; and written statemenrs from one-hunJred
percent ofthe owners ofcxisting units indicating their approval, without
condition, ofthe proposed fractional fee club. No written approval shall
be valid if it was signed by the owner more than sixty days prior to the
date offiling the application for a conditional use.
b. Ifthe proposal for a fractional fee club is a redevelopment of an existing
facility, the fractional fee club shall maintain an equivalency of
accommodation units as are presently existing. Whether this equivalency
is maintained by an equal number ofunits or by square footage shall be
determined on a case-by-case basis.
c. The ability ofthe proposed project to create and maintain a hieh level of
occuDancv.
d. Employee housing units may be required as part ofany new or
redevelopment fractional fee club project requesting density over that
allowcd by zoning. The number of employee housing units required will
be consistent with employee impacts that are expected ut u ."rurt ofth"
project.
e. Lock-offunits are encouraged and may be counted up to one_half(l/2) of an accommodrtion unit for purposes of calcuiating the
equivalency of accommodation units.
SECTION4
If any part, section, subsection, sentence, clause or phrase ofthis ordinance is for any
reason held to be invalid, such decision shall not affect the validity ofthe remaining portions of
this ordinance; and the Town council hereby declares it would have passed this ordinance, and
each part, section, subsection, sentence, clause or phrase thereof, regardless ofthe fact that any
one or more parts, sections, subsections, sentences, clauses or phrases be declared invalid.
SECTION 5
The Town Council hereby finds, determines, and declares that this ordinance is necessan'
and proper for the health, safety, and welfare ofthe Town of Vail and the inhabitants thereof.
SECTION 6
The repeal or the repeal and reenactment of any provision ofthe Municipal code ofthe
Town of vail as provided in this ordinance shall not affect any right which has accrued, any duty
imposed, any violation that occurred prior to the effective date hereof, any prosecution
commenced, nor any other action or proceedings as commenced under or by virhre ofthe
provision repealed and reenacted. The repeal of aly provision hereby shall not revive any
provision or any ordinance previously repealed or superseded unless expressly stated herein.
SECTION 7
All bylarvs, orders, resolutions, and ordinances, or parts thereof, inconsistent herewith are
repealed to the extent only ofsuch inconsistency. This repealer shall not be construed to revise
any bylaq order, resolution, or ordinance, or part thereof, theretofore repealed.
FULL oN FIRST READING this 7th day of January, 1997, and a public hearing shall be held on
this ordinance on the 2l st day of Janvry,1997, in thc council chambers of the vail Municipal
Building, Vail, Colorado.
Robert W. Armour, Mayor
AfiEST:
Holly McCutcheon, Town Clcrk
INTRODUCED, READ, ADOPTED AND ENACTED ON SECOND READING AND
ORDERED PUBLISHED ON FULL) (BY TITLE ONLY) THIS
-
DAY OF JANUARY.
1997.
Robert W. Armour, Mayor
AfiEST:
Holly McCutcheon, Town Clerk
oo
o
o
oo
I
.$
au.g:tRrA r-ror.lgE
VAIL,@LARA9O fi l$ u'lii'
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
r" - --{3
I
a;) 1F)rp
oo
o
o
o
:!r '
rE
!/t.,
-v
5t
rll
Ir- ll .-:t"l
._$
@)
I
l!
I
f
-i
I
rl
li
!ltlII
s
I
i
I
L
I
I
AIJ$fRIA HAUS
DnIIUMITni ccrcrri iiijr iiirri ,irir
o
o
o
o
!E
iF
Br
Huz
.ti r/'tl al\l I
{l
ill'fiiltxH
I AUSTRIA HAUS
RED€VETOPHA'T
v^lr- coroR^f,|o ririr iiir iijiiiJr
o
o
o
o
oo
o
o
l*
I(0t
lililil;valL,@LaRADo fn lfr nlriiflr
o
oo
o
o
s-r
tititit;
..r ri!*=
Itl -::Biriu rfi
o
o
.i.d4,
'z\
'-*<
v)rjF
v)
t;tolrloIF
l8
n
;:! =. d!
; ! I'l
-.
lf.
x$$Rt&,i $t
.j n,
I
I
I
^-i.di r'.iii F:.
l: :
lli r:
p
sF)
i .t]
:tie
;:)
ti)
R
H
ffi
<__,1 'il flJ,x i I lll
. i.l"?ffiiiiiiil(\t uix'l ,r tl ll llil---tKi 1 llrlrl$
.4-ds/'\\\\\\\\4$-.lSJr ii 'lig\ [* Ji - j -----,','
, \':rr-l \ I , I L ll//*l1") I ; J:
\ f).{l_ ---, ---r-- ' -. , 'i-'
/n"+i',tI \t-p< I I tFF I \ 1sa I \ t'.o I \!'E | \s]\
- -.a+*-a.;z
F
z
(tt
t!
dE
2z
z
t.
F
rp
EFFl
la
z
; ta0: !:.a ti.
; li;- i:ri!{:!o
liF't:t^
'Li-l"--t'r'"'-l
I
To:
RE:
MEMORANDUM
George Reuther
Jeff Winston
Design Rwiew - Sonnenalp Austria House
7 larL'oary,199'7
All in all I think the building fits the site well, it accomplishes a major objective of removing the surface parking, and it frlls
in a major piece of the pedestrian loop from the Village Center to Slifer Square. The building is tall, but that is consistent
with the direction of the Village ldaster Plan to put the taller buildings on the north periphery of the Village, st€,pping down
toward the south. If anything, the building could even be slightly taller and would still be consistent with the size of the
Mountain Haus and Village Center. Within this overall context, there are a few aspects of the building and site plan to
which I would direct attention:
l. I think the building could be stepped more, both vertically and horizontally, to give more variety and more
consistency with the surrounding buildings.
With respect to the vertical aspect, there are a few steps in the building height, and I have not seer. a 600/o-400/o
calculation for the design, but it appears to be rather uniform in height, with the majority of the building at the
tallest height. It also has a number of flat roof sections, presumably to stay within a height constraint. A number of
these flat areas will be visible from public spaces due to the chamfering of the end sections of the roof. I would
strongly favor carrying the roof to a firll gable for some distance at the ends of the building, wen if it meant
granting a height variance. This would elimirute the visibility of the flat roof sections as well as providing more
vertical variation,
With respect to the horizontal alignrnent, it seems that the east end of the building, the tunet, could be stepped back
slightly (to the South) to open up East Meadow Drive to Slifer Square - sort of a mirror image of what the
Mountain Haus does. On the other hand, the west end of the building , ttre portion that also ste,ps down, could be
stepped slightly forward (north) toward East Meadow Drive, possible covering a portion of the drop-off area,
bringing it a little closer to the alignment of the Village Center building (La Tour). I've illustrated this massing
suggestion below:
\ wvttqoVlw4*
kt-"
lo3 440-9200 . FAX 303 449 69 | | . WrN r32o@AOL.COM . 2299 PEARL STREEI SUITE 100 . EOULDER, CO 80302
I
o
Austria HouseDesign Review - Sonnenalp
01/07/9'l
Page2
2.I support the idea ofincorporating the bus shelter in the turret at the east end ofthe building, however I
wonder if it can be made more visible and accommodating for people waiting for a bus. Suggestions
include enlarging the sheltered area slightly (extending a canopy around the turret), opening the comer to
Slifer Square (removing some of the planter, may be accomplished by stepping this section of the building
back too).
I support moving East Meadow Drive to the south. It gives the sheet a more gracious, serpentine flow, and
will allow tapering and landscaping of the parking structure embankment. One of the objectives of the
Streetscape Plan is to eliminate pedestrian conflicts along bus routes - such as East Meadow Drive. The
wide sidewalk created along the front of the building is impeded by the street tree planting shown on the
plan. This being the north side ofa tall building, it will receive little sun, and is probably not a great spot
for deciduous trees anfilay. I suggest moving East Meadow Drive a little less south, creating an even
wider walking area, and then clustering tree planting (evergreen, as shown in rendered elevations) in
several pockets that still leave a broad walking surface out from under the arcade ofthe building.
Complimentary planting clusters could be created on the north side of East Meadow Drive. (see diagram
attached)
It may not be necessary that East Meadow Drive be a full two lanes wide in this area. Buses can see each other
from Slifer Square to the gate and tend to wait for each other to pass tlrough the gate anyway.
To create a stronger pedestrian connection from the Village Center, I suggest paving the auto drop-off area
with the pedestrian pavers, merely demarcating the drop-offzone with bollards so that it feels like an
extension ofthe sidewalk when not being used by cars. The factthat it feels like cars are parked in a
pedestrian areas might also tend to reinforce the notion of short-term auto usage.
The ramp down to the garage has the potential to open the window well on the opposite wall of the Village
Center building. This Village Center window will now be looking into car headlights at night. This may
be significantly overcome by a very dense evergreen planting screen or, as a last resort, a fipe-standing low
wall.
The expansion of the building creates a need, and opportunity, to make improvements to Slifer Square.
One of those is to open the plaz-ato Austria House . Some trees will likely need to be removed, but it
should be done very carefully, with a strong justification for each one removed - the mature evergreens are
a real asset. The planters could be reduced in size, with more connections through to generally open up the
full extent of the plaza.
If there is a possibility to accomplish upgrades to the plaza (paving for example) I suggest we also take the
opportunity to revisit the fountain - particularly the plumbing and heating system. "ln the old clays" ariving at
Slifer Square at night in winter was a magical experience, with lights illuminating the cascades in the fountain, a
gentle fog rising from the water. As I recall, winter operation was ceased primarily because large leaks in the
plumbing created a very high cost for heating the water. If heating the plaza is a possibility, with a boiler already in
place the additional cos of heating fountain water might be significantly less than before.
J.
4.
5.
6.
WINSTON ASSOCIATES, lNC. e303.440.9200 IFAX 303 449.6911c2299 PEARL STREET, SUITE 100 BOUIDER, CO 80302
Design Rwiew - Sonnenalp Austria House
01/01/97
Page 3
7.
8.
The plan should include provision for continuation of the streamwalk, as close to Gore Creek as possible
(ust above the high water level). It may require cantilevered boardwalks to get around trees in a few
sections.
Finally, a small but I think important point. Although I normally believe in giving maximum deference to
thearchitectinmattersofdesign, Iraiseaquestionabouttheuseofthechamferedgable-endroofdetail. I
realize it is utilized on the other Sonnenalp building. It is also used on Bishop Park, Golden Peak base and
several other buildings in Vail. It is a very visible architectural 'signature' and in fact, it has the potential
of becoming a dominant thematic element in the Village.
One of the primary traits of Vail is the continuity of the whole - that no individual building stands out, but
somehow the overall impression holds together as a village that evolved with a consistent palate of
materials and design character. The simple gable end has been a hallmark of Vail. There are variations to
be sure, and too much uniformity can be sterile. I raise the question as to whether this building cannot be
designed with primarily gable roofs to blend in better with the surrounding buildings and the Village in
seneral.
WNSTON ASSOCIATES, lNC. o303,440.9200 oF4y 39, 449.5911c2299 PEARL STREET, SUITE 100 BOULDER, CO 80302
Austria Staffing Rostcr
Position hours of operation 1997 c,rnpl 1998 empl. comments
Manager floating I IAssistant floating I I
Front Desk 7am to llpm 3 5 24 hour deskBellstaff floating I 3 parking& size
Housekeeping 8am to 5pnr 6 l0 size and # of rmsturndown 2 3Bar 3pm to midnight 1.5 1.5
Restaurant sam to noon
wait 5 .
kitchen 2.
4pm to midnight
wait 4
kitchen 3,5Retail varies 5
Engineering 7am to I lpm I
Concierge 7am to I lam
3pm to 7pm 0
36
3.5
0
0
0
unknown
2
t5
31.5
continental only
Buzz'zB&B
O Services providcd from Main Hotel Complex:
spa
Golf
Activities
Marketing & Sales
Accounting
Reservation
Telephon
Laundry
Uniforms
Room Service
Conference Services
Employee Cafeteria
Human Resources i i
Floral & Decoration
Landscaping
Employee Housing
Purchasing
!r:t-I
/
tl
<\ss-J: \r5s!
>,:
| --'---)'l./\ r-fr-\trl
\es5\\rs s\U\I $,N\s< NNr ]
NTJNf s
o
o
o
)-4.
."F-: ^{{3-.c!'' -+eP
€-** "r4'wl+-
-if-=
' )/.c/ I ..
"%i 7v I ...
"l - / ' tl, -. "' [
-'
,/ ,' ../r,,,i'1 ll .it 1,';i "t;*#'- ;r'i i'
^.)
rVltl
r L..\)
, tr!'tv/o
;/
!J
I
!
I
tt
(Y
I
\6
iqa<(
\{.)l r
T.F
S,$
AI; Il c'.'it ;. "i. ;
7. A request for a worksession to discuss establishing a Special Development District overlay
to the Austria Haus, located at 242 East Meadow Drive/ on part of Tract C, Vail Village First
Filing.
Applicant: Sonnenalp Properties, Inc., represented by Gordon Pierce
Planner: George Ruther
Greg Moffet stated that the Board would give a quick consensus on the density issue.
Gordon Pierce said he would like to give his presentation, as some new things had been added.
George Ruther gave an overview of the request and went over what would be discussed in the
worksession today. He said that delinitions of fractional lee club and fractional fee club units have
been provided. He said that staff had defined what interval ownership would be on page 1 of the
memo. George advised that on January 7, 1997, Council approved, on first reading, Ordinance No.
22 tnat included the definitions of fractional fee club and fractional fee club unit. He then proceeded
to go over Section 3, on page 2 of the staff memo, regarding the amended Conditional Use Criteria
and Findings.
Gordon Pierce said Council wanted the lock-offs to be designed to look like hotel rooms.
George Ruther then went over the changes Council made to the Ordinance and the discussion
issues for this meeting, as stated in the staff memo. He said that the 7 parking spaces not on-site
would be provided for by $16,333.38 being put in the pay-in-lieu fund. He mentioned that the 1997
pay-in-lieu rate would be available by mid-February and the figure for this project would be adjusted
to the new 1997 rate. George stated that the applicant was here today to respond to Jeff Winston's
comments and that Jeff will be available on January 27th.
Greg Moffet said the discussion issues would be addressed one at a time and density and unit mix
would be addressed first.
Bill Sullivan, representing the applicant, explained the chart that George Ruther handed out for him.
He said it showed occupancy rates as being27"/" higher for intervals than for hotels. He explained
that the second page showed interval vs. hotel nets and that you had 124 more people per room per
year with the interval. The Austria Haus provided 29,128 additional people in the Village and this
figure did not include use ol the living room being occupied. He explained that page 3 showed the
Vail Valley hotel occupancy and page 4 showed the tax revenue analysis.
Greg Amsden asked what percentage of a time-share was rented to someone other than the owner.
Bill Sullivan stated 20% of the owners rent at Sandstone Creek; 15% at Streamside and 15% at St.
James Place. He mentioned that it was broken down evenly between summer and winter.
Planning and Environmental Commission
Minutes
Janurv 13. 1997
Gordon Pierce pointed out the history of the density of the building, as well as the volume of the
building and what could be supported by tearing down the building. He said when going through the
process, the applicant dropped retail and created more hotel rooms, as asked by the PEC. He said
Council realized that this was not a totally proven product, but that they felt this was in the goals of
the Town to increase the bed base. He said by increasing the GRFA, we were more than doubling
the keys and warm pillows. Gordon proceeded to show color-coded illustrations with the units
broken down. He said that many times people would rent an entire unit, but the applicant had
created lock-offs to support the AU approach, which was what Council wanted. He showed
photographs of the Swiss Haus (one of the Sonnenalp properties) to illustrate the amenities of the
rooms. He mentioned that the lock-offs and the AU's were very similar. He said that Council
realized these rooms were important to the Town as rental units.
Johannes Faessler said that connecting hotel rooms, with one larger suite and a regular hotel room
attached, were requested often. He said that this conliguration was good and the season dictates
the type of customer room requirements. He said that at Christmas the units rent as one to families
with children, but during an off-vacation time, the inside connection room could be sold to anybody.
He said the small kitchen allowed flexibility. Johannes said a room between 360 and 400 sq. ft. was
a good size hotel room and that the present Austria Haus had rooms ranging in size from 200 - 250
sq. ft. He said that the Bavaria Haus had 500 sq. ft. rooms.
Greg Moffet asked for any public comments.
Jim Lamont, representing the East Village Homeowner's Association ( EVHA) asked Gordon how
many sq. ft. were on the first floor?
Gordon Pierce said 4,000 sq. ft.
O Jim Lamont asked where the maid's rooms and laundry were.
Gordon Pierce said laundry would be taken off the property, but that there would be maid's closets
on the different floors.
Jim Lamont asked if this was a stand-alone facility, without the benefit of the Sonnenalp
maintenance, could it be properly serviced without the Sonnenalp as a partner, or could facilities be
accommodated at a later date?
Gordon Pierce stated that there was quite a bit of space on the lower floor that had not been
reserved for anything and he mentioned that many of the other hotels send laundry oflsite.
Jim Lamont stated that the services of a hotel were what he had in mind.
Greg Moffet reminded everyone that we were focusing on density.
Jim Lamont stated that services were a part of this.
Greg Amsden asked for a comparison on what the existing building had and what was being
proposed.
Plarming and Enviromnental Commission
Minutcs
January 13, 1997 10
Johannes Faessler said to keep in mind that 30 hotel rooms and 150 hotel rooms were a big
difference and that services were very minimal now. He said that this project had a lot more space
to include more services in the future, with the exception that the restaurant was there now. He
said that maid's closets needed to be on each floor and that the lobby and front desk area had
enough space. He mentioned that there was a lot of room downstairs for expansion or for a
lunchroom that could accommodate 25 employees, which was the same number of employees as
there was now without the extensive food service. Johannes said there was a very large laundry in
the Bavaria Haus that could easily handle the laundry needs of this project.
Gordon Pierce said neighbors have asked not to have a restaurant or cafe.
Pam Hopkins stated that she had been following this project all along and had concerns regarding
the added density and she felt that the applicant would benefit more than the Town did. She felt the
applicant wouldn't need site coverage variances if they lowered the density and the Town could get
more variety in the old style. She said that the walkway was a concern and that a wide walkway
was needed to go from the Village to Slifer Square in order for skiers to pass carrying skis. She
said the walkway needed to be expanded more to the north, so that pedestrians wouldn't walk into
the bus route. Pam felt that 4' and 6' wide walkways were too narrow and that 10' to 12' wide
walkways were needed.
Gordon Pierce stated that we were ready to address exactly what Pam has brought up.
Greg Moffet asked for any other public comments. There were none.
John Schofield was comfortable with the mix at this point in time, but uncomlortable with the
parking. He said the density was a hair on the high side.
Gene Uselton asked if owners of fractional fee units or club members could have a specific unit?
Bill Sullivan said no, they could only request a 2 or 3-bedroom unit.
Gene Uselton asked if there would be any storage space?
Bill Sullivan said yes, for skis, etc.
Gene Uselton was curious about the definition of a lock-off unit. He asked if the suite was the lock-
off or was the bedroom the lock-off and were we under-valuing by not knowing which was which.
Gordon Pierce said there were 77 keys that could all be rented.
Bill Sullivan stated that the fractional fee unit could not be counted, because of the definition.
Gene Uselton thought if that unit was available to rent, then it could be counted as a hotel room.
Bill Sullivan stated that because of the ordinance language, it wouldn't count.
George Ruther then gave the definition of a fractional lee unit and explained why it couldn't be given
any credit as an accommodation unit. He said that there was some consideration to give one-half
credit, but in reality, it could be considered an AU.
Plaming and Environmenlal Comrnissron
Minutes
January 13, 1997 11
Gene Uselton said he didn't have a problem with the density issue and stated that this project would
add to the Town of Vail.
Greg Amsden didn't have a problem with what had been established by the Council. He said that
outside of the unit mix, he had no problem with the density.
Galen Aasland said the applicant did a good job at making the lock-offs look like hotel rooms. Galen
stiff felt it was slightly too dense and was driving some of the issues. He felt that 206o/o over density
allowed was too high.
Diane Golden said that counting the lock-off unit as half a unit was good and stated that she was
comfortable with the density.
Henry Pratt said the building fit the site. He said if the Athletic Club came in and asked for more
density and this density was driving the height, he would like to see less density. He stated that
counting half of the AU's, which would not be available 50% of the time, would not be equivalent to
an AU and therefore, would like to see one or two more lock-offs, as the applicant was not meeting
the 37 hotel rooms required.
Greg Moffet said he was more comfortable with the building on this site and that he was fine with
the square footage, given the location of the site on the north end of the business district. He said
he wanted to see full compliance with the square footage and would like to see the 112 unit short
made up. He said that Council had spoken, so he advised the applicant to get the 1/2 unit back.
He wanted to have it made real clear regarding the food service restriction, that the applicant would
not be putting tood service in. He asked, with the amount of AU's, where would these people go for
breakfast? Greg said, regarding the excess 100% zoning variance, that one employee housing unit
would not cut it. Greg was adamant that a lot of employee housing be attached to this application.
Gordon Pierce said that the manager's unit was on site and we would have an employee housing
u nit.
Mark Thornberg said currently the Austria Haus had 36 AU's and one dwelling unit.
George Ruther said last week he walked thru the Austria Haus and asked how many rooms were
available for rent. The front desk said they had 33 hotel rooms and 4 suites available.
Johannes Faessler explained that once a unit has a kitchen, the name changed and technically it
would be a dwelling unit.
George Ruther explained that the use should be taken into consideration.
Jim Lamont, representing the EVHA, said there was 100% GRFA overage. He said that the Vail
Athletic Club had 50% overage and more non-GRFA uses. He said if we were looking to draw lines
and be more concerned with volume than GRFA, what happens when the Vail Athletic Club came
back to ask for more GRFA, could we look at volume ?
Gordon Pierce suggested converting volume back to GRFA.
Planning and Environmental Cortrnrssron
Minutes
January 13, 1997 1,2
Jim Lamont said regarding the arguments being made, he would still advocate rezoning to a
different PA according to the design standards.
George Ruther said if fractional fee units were given some consideration, the applicant would have
37 AU's.
Greg Moffet said Council said we could count lock-offs ala 112 unit apiece.
Mike Mollica asked what the kitchen unit should be counted as, a DU or an AU?
John Schofield stated |il]|ata 112 unit was not a critical factor and he felt either way was OK.
Gene Uselton interpreted 33 hotel rooms and 3 suites as 36.
Greg Amsden said he felt it had 37 units.
Susan Connelly mentioned to use the word equivalency.
Henry Pratt felt the project had 36 units and the rest of the Board felt it had 37units.
Greg Moffet said it was unanimous with the Board expressing the project had 3Tunits'
George Ruther said the applicant was proposing to replace the 37 units with 36 and 112 units in
terms of equivalency.
Johannes Faessler said the Austria Haus used to have 41 units. He felt that the key was not to
maximize the number ol rooms, rather the occupancy number and he lelt that the quality of the
room was a more important measurement. Johannes said that 25 hotel rooms at 219 sq. ft. would
fit the formula, but would not be quality rooms.
Greg Moffet mentioned that lock-offs were being split, but no division of lock-offs would count wholly
in the equivalency calculation.
Susan Connelly said that Council did not address that point, but we could have them address it it
you would like to.
Greg Moffet said 37 was a benchmark density and summarizing the consensus stated that 36 1/2
was going to cut it.
George Ruther gave an overview of the parking discussion issue and said that the applicant had the
ability to pay into the parking fund.
Greg Moffet asked Johannes the percentage of guests that didn't have cars.
Planning and Environmental Commtsston
Minutes
January 13. 1997 l_3
Johannes Faessler said he had a fairly accurate count, as they have counted cars for 3-4 years.
He stated that summer was a bigger problem than winter and that in the summer employees were
required to park in the structure. He said that parking lots were difficult to control, as people sneak
in. He stated that in winter 70/" ot the guests arrive in vans, with the opposite happening in
summer, or 70"/o arriving by car. He did say however, that he had no experience with fractional fee
units, but that pick-up service at the Eagle Airport would be offered. He said the Austria Haus
always had sufficient parking, but he did not have a good feel tor the commercial.
Galen Aasland felt comfortable with the combination of parking on the lower level and the pay-in-lieL
fund. He did want the applicant to take some height out of the building.
Diane Golden asked where the 15 legal non-conforming spaces were.
George Ruther said the 15 spaces were grandfathered in and credit given. He said the project had
48 parking spaces. Since they were required to have 70, with a credit for 15, they were 7 spaces
short.
Diane Golden said 29 spaces are all they really have and since parking was very tight, she would
like to see a few more spaces. She said more spaces on-site would free up spaces in the structure.
Henry Pratt felt parking was adequate and he had no problem with the pay-in-lieu.
John Schofield said that with the addition of commercial, he was not comfortable with the parking
and would like to see a few more spaces squeezed in.
Gene Uselton agreed with Galen and Henry.
Greg Amsden agreed with Galen and Henry.
Greg Moffet agreed with Galen and Henry.
Henry Pratt said valet parking was a realistic option and that employees of the commercial space
would be closest to the door and could be blocked in.
Gordon Pierce said more spaces could be added downstairs, but commercial customers wouldn't'
park downstairs. He said the pay-in-lieu was a winiwin for the Town and could help reduce the debt
on the parking structures.
Greg Moffet said since food service would be kept out, the parking demand would be reduced.
Johannes Faessler said the Sonnenalp overflowed in the First Bank parking structure and that the
parking problem in the Town was caused by something else and we did not have a solution to that.
Diane Golden asked if some of the 44 parking spaces were for employees.
Johannes Faessler said for years they bussed their employees around. He said it would be dillicult
to get a parking number for their employees, as they don't all work at the same time, nor do they all
drive.
Planning and Environmental Comrusston
Minutes
January 13, 1997 L4
Diane Golden said parking was a tough issue.
Johannes Faessler thought parking money would be better used to build more parking.
Greg Moffet said on-site parking at the lodges was desirable. He asked if valet parking as a solution
would eliminate the need for pay-in-lieu.
Gordon Pierce said that valet parking was counted in the full number.
Greg Moffet summarized that Diane Golden and John Schofield wanted more parking or pay-in-lieu,
while everyone else was ok with the parking on-site.
Greg Amsden left at 5:20 p.m.
George Ruther went over discussion issue No. 3, or the Urban Design Comments.
Gordon Pierce said, regarding item No.1, that adjustments could be made to the building to
accommodate the view into Slifer Square and that the building could be pulled into the street. He
said that No. 2 was not a problem and that the bus shelter could be made smaller.
Greg Moffet said the bus shelter wasn't used that much and could be made smaller.
Gordon Pierce said that No. 3 was not a problem and that he hadn't a chance to review No. 4.
Gordon said the drop-off would be more of a 5-10 minute operation and people manning the front
desk could police that. Regarding item No. 5, Gordon said he had been working with Village Center
regarding the landscaping on the ramp. He said he concurred with ltem No. 6 and item No. 7 was a
separate issue, that would not be discussed tonight. He said that item No. 8 had the adjustments
made per Jeff Winston's suggestion, with the exception of running the gables out.
Jirn Lamont, of the EVHA, was unclear as to the width of the sidewalk between the landscaped area
and the curbline on Meadow Drive.
Gordon Pierce said the curb would be 20' away from the building and the planting areas were within
that 20' area. He said that 10'-12' would be for pedestrians from Karats to Slifer Plaz a.
Jim Lamont said his concern was having the skier close to the street, clearly separated from the
shopper.
George Ruther said the applicant was trying to have two pedestrian paths; one in the Arcade for the
window shoppers and one for the skiers in passing. He said that staff was working with Public
Works regarding the needs of bus traffic as defined in the Streetscape Master Plan.
Jim Lamont thought, with the new Golden Peak Ski Base, that there may be an increase in use for
the eastbound bustop, which they were trying to make smaller and that we should wait and see.
George Ruther said staff was working with Public Works regarding the bustop.
Planning and Environmental Commrssron
Minutes
January 13. I 997 15
Galen Aasland agreed with Jetf Winston, as to stepping down the building with regard to the parking
structure view. Galen said with regard to No. 3, that one side of the building was in a shadow all the
time and he expressed concern about snow removal. Galen supported the previous plan as it
related to item No 4. Galen thought that the ramp needed some landscaping and Galen mentioned
that very specific reasons would be required for any large tree removal in Slifer Square. Galen said
regarding the south elevation, that he was concerned with it being repetitive and this presented an
opportunity to be original.
Diane Golden agreed with Jeff Winston that the bus shelter was under-used. Diane thanked Pam
Hopkins for bringing up the wider walkway and agreed with keeping the trees.
Henry Pratt agreed with most of what Jeff Winston had said. Henry said regarding No. 1 and
stepping back, he didn't want to close off any access to the creek, or privatize it. He said to make
sure there was good public access to the stream. Regarding No. 3, Henry said to make sure that
East Meadow Drive was only one lane wide, with a wide sidewalk and close to the commercial to
generate tax revenue. Henry said regarding No. 6, that Slifer Square was a place of transit and not
a place to hang out, so when it was undergoing improvement, don't make it something it was not
going to be. Henry lelt there was too much pavement and by taking out some of the trees it would
make it an urban space. Henry felt that changing the ridge line was good.
John Schofield was agreement with the previous comments. He said to enhance the smooth flow of
pedestrian traffic.
Gene Uselton asked if Gordon was heating all the sidewalk up to Slifer Square?
Gordon Pierce said, yes.
Gene Uselton said a lot of people hang out in Slifer Square in the summer.
Greg Moffet agreed with Henry regarding Meadow Drive, but liked Slifer Square in the summer.
Greg felt that the bus stop didn't need to be that big, as there was never a great deal of traffic on
the bus going to Gold Peak. He said regarding No. 8, that he personally didn't like to see Beaver
Creek architecture in Vail, so he suggested getting rid of some of the hips.
Gordon Pierce stated that this was closer in design to the Bavaria Haus than to Beaver Creek
architecture.
Jim Lamont said the Golden Peak Master Plan anticipated a 53'h increase in bus ridership.
Greg Moffet responded that the problem was that there were not enough buses because there were
not enough employees, so therefore, there was a need to increase employee housing.
Gordon Pierce said if we were to add one more AU, it would foul up one other unit quite badly.
Gordon again brought up the warm pillow theory and said that this project would be bringing more
people into Town. He asked the PEC to consider the 20 AU's in this project as adequate.
Greg Moffet summarized that the majority of the Board said that 36 or 37 units were fine.
Galen Aasland said 36 was fine, if something could be done with the ridge.
Planning and Environmental Commrsston
Minutes
January 13, 1997 16
Greg Motfet said accommodation units become critical a couple of weeks a year when Vail hosts big
conferences. He said the fractional fee units would be unavailable at these times of the year.
Bill Sullivan said lock-offs become critical and when known in advance, occupancy could be
guaranteed.
Johannes Faessler said typically there are only a handful of groups and they come at the most
undesirable times of the year. He said these groups were not what Vail was about. He thought
instead, to create the types of programs where people want to come to Town. He said that the
World Wide Church of God had never rented a room at the Sonnenalp and he felt that this was a
long way away from becoming an issue.
Greg Moffet asked if 1SO-person groups ever came into Town?
Johannes Faessler said no, but large groups usually rent condo units in the Lionshead area.
George Ruther summarized that the configuration of East Meadow Drive be one lane wide for bus
traffic and the rest be dedicated to pedestrian traffic.
The PEC Board all agreed with Henry.
John Schofield thought the more East Meadow Drive could be narrowed down to discourage the
tourist in a vehicle who wanted to get through that way, the better.
Greg Moffet said the feeling was unanimous, with one abstention.
George Ruther asked for comments on page 5 of the statf memo.
Henry Pratt said a direct vent fireplace wasn't worlh the trouble and he didn't see that as a way to
solve the problem.
Mike Mollica stated that staff was not trying to solve the problem, just identify some architectural
concerns.
Henry Pratt said he would like to see some AU's on the south side.
Gordon Pierce said, regarding No. 1, that a change could be made through the use of material or
color and that it wasn't a major view corridor.
Greg Moffet said the site issues should be addressed in a meeting dedicated only to the site issues.
Mike Mollica asked if he meant at a future worksession, as Gordon was hoping for a final review at
the next meeting and that this would change the applicant's schedule.
Greg Moffet asked how close we were to the final.
George Ruther stated staff published this proposal for a final review and that assumes Gordon
could change the plans around by 8 a.m. tomorrow. George said the PEC had the ability to table it
though.
Planning and F,nvironmental Coml sslon
Minutcs
January 13, | 997 17
Greg Moffet said Sherry's site plan couldn't be addressed in the final review.
Plrnniag x1d lwllsnm6ntal Commission
Minutes
January 13, I 997 18
ORIGINAL
MEMORANDUM
Planning and Environmental Commission
Department of Community Development
February 10,1997
A request for a worksession with the Design Review Board for the establishment
of special Development District #35, Austria Haus, located at242 Easl Meadow
Drive/on a part of Tract C, Block 5-D, Vail Village First Filing.
Applicant: Sonnenalp Properties, Inc., represented by Gordon Pierce
Planner: George Ruther
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
DESCRIPTION OF THE REOUEST
The applicant, Sonnenalp Properties, Inc., representedby Gordon Pierce, is requesting a
workse'ssion to discuss the establishment of a Special Development District at242East Meadow
Driveion a part of Tract C, Block 5-D, Vail Village First Filing. The applicant is proposing to
establish a new Special Development District overlay to the underlying zone district ol
public Accommodation, to facilitate the proposed redevelopment of the existing Austria
Haus. The purpose of the worksession is to discuss the landscape design, employee housing
requirements and Jeff Winston's urban design commenls'
II. DISCUSSION ISSUES
As this is a worksession to discuss the applicant's proposal to establish a special Development
District, staff will not evaluate all of the details of the proposal at this time. Staff, however, has
identified three major issues which we would like to discuss with the Planning.and Environmental
Commission (PEC) and the applicant. Staft believes that in order for the applicant to continue
forward, direi1on must be given on each of the discussion issues. Each of the issues is briefly
described below:
1. Urban Design Comments
The Municipal Code permits the Town of Vail to retain the services of an Urban Design
consultant to provide consultation on matters relating to design, scale, mass,
architecture, site planning, etc. for development projects in the core areas. Staff has
forwarded a complete set of plans to Jeff Winston, of Winston & Associates, Inc., the
Town's Urban Design Consultant. Jeff has reviewed the revised plans and will be
providing his comments at the February 10, 1997, PEC worksession meeting. In general,
Jeff's oniy concern after reviewing the revised plans, is the treatment ol the northeast
corner of the building. In his initial comments, Jeff recommended that the applicant step
the northeast corneiof the building back to open the Austria Haus up to Slifer Square.
The applicant has revised the plans and stepped the building back, however, Jeff
2.
believes that more of a step is needed. Jetf does recognize that the recommended step
i" tnl OriiOi"g is somewhai limited by the two la-rge Spruce trees loiated on the south
;;;p;rit rine." n copy ot Jeff's initial comments from the January 13, 1997' meeting have
been attached for reference.
Staff is requesting that the applicant respond to the comment that there is a need
roii oiggdr step in the building at the northeast corner and indicate how they might
aOOresiinis issue. Staff is furiher requesting that the PEG provide direction to the
applicant regarding Jeff Winston's comments on the revised plans'
Landscape Design
The Public Accommodation Zone District development standards require that at least
30% of the total Site area shall be landscaped. In addition to trees, shrubs, flowers, turf'
"t..
(gr""nscape), up to 2O/" of the required landscaped area can be walks, decks,
pati,ii
""0
iit e teltules (hardscape). The applicant has proposed that approximately
SjzS iqrar" teet (15%i of the Airsiria Haud iroperty belandscaped with trees, shrubs,
flowers, iurf, etc., drnd ah additional 1,445 square feet (20%) of the landscaped area be
walks, decks, patios and like features.
while the applicant is proposing a development which does not meet the minimum
landscape iequirements iresciiOeO by th6 Municipal Code, they are proposing significant
off-site tanOsiape improvements adja-cent to their property. For example,.the applicant
wif f Oe impfementing ine suggested;treetscape- improvements along East Meadow Drive
recommended in th6 Town -oi Vait Streetscape Master Plan, improvements to the western
poition of S1ifer plaza and landscaping along the west prop_erty (both.on and off the
b.p"rtyl to buffer the developmerit iripactslo the Village Center residential units. A
bopy ofthe landscape plan has been attached for reference.
At the direction of the Town council, the staff has requested that the applicant prepare
conceptuaL Oesigns of a streamwalk on the Town-owned tract of land south of the Austria
Haus.' The appn'cant has worked with the Town's public works staft and is proposing a
conceptuat sirbamwaf design. The proposed design indicates th.e new segment of
streamwalk will connect to S-lifer Square on the east, and to an adjacent Town-ownecl
tract of land south of the Village Center Condominiums. The streamwalk design also
p.por"r revegetation of the 6ore Creek streambank adiacent to th.e Austria Haus. The
'apjticant has igreed, only if it should become necessary as-a 991{tlon of approval ol the
ilritd Haus S[ecial'Development District, to escrow up to $100,000 to be used by the
Town of Vail foi the construciion of the streamwalk adjacent to the Austria Haus.
Staff believes the applicant has done an excellent iob of improving the landscape
JuiiounOing tne Ruiiria Haus. Staff would recommend that the applicant provide
additional iirprovements to the exterior of the building. Staff recommends that the
Jppf icant incbrporate irrigated llower boxes. and ground level plant containers into the
ObSig; of the exterior ot ine buitOing. The flowerboxes will reintroduce some of the
archltectural interest and detail losias a result of the removal of the balconies on the
north elevation.
Staff is requesting that the PEG provide feedback and direction to the applicant
regarding the proposed on-site and off'site landscape improvements'
3.Employee Housing Requirements
As indicated in a number of the goals and objectives of the Town's Master Plans'
providing affordable housing for
-employees is a critical issue which should be addressed
inrougn tne planning process for Special Development District proposals. ln reviewing
the Aistria Haus prodosal for employee housing needs, staff relied on the Town of Vail
Employee Housing Report.
The Employee Housing Report, was prepared for the Town by the consulting firm Rosall'
Remmeh a'nd Cares. ine ieport was completed in December, 1991' The report provides
the recommended ranges of employee housing units needed based on the type of use, .
and the amount of floor area dedicdted to each use. Utilizing the guidelines prescribed in
the Employee Housing Report, the staff analyzed the incremental increase of employees
(squard tobtage per ule), ihat result from the Austria Haus redevelopmelt. A copy of the
; suggested Employment categories and R4nges for Vail Exoressed as Employees per
1000 Square Feet" has been attached for reference'
The figures identitied in the research completed by Rosall, Remmen and Cares are based
on sufreys of commercial use employment needs of the Town of Vail and other mountain
resort communities. Telluride, Aspen-and Whistler B.C. all have "employment generation"
ordinances requiring development to provide affordable housing for a percentage of the
.
"new" employees resulting fiom commercial development. "New" employees are defined
as the incremental increaae in employment needs resulting from commercial
redevelopment. Each of the communities assesses a different percentage of affordable
housing b developer must provide for the "new" employees. For example, Telluride
requirel developers to provide housing tot 4Oh (0.40) of the "new" employees, Aspen
re{uires that 60b/" (0.60) of the "new" employees are provided housing and Whistler
requires that 1 00% (1 .00) ol the "new" employees be provided housing. by the developer.
In comparison, Vail has determined that developers shall provide housing for 15% (0.15)
or 307. (0.30) of the "new" employees resulting from commercial development.
When determining employee housing needs, the multiplier oI15/" ( 0.15) or 30% ( 0.30)
is used in the calCulations. When a project is proposed to exceed the density allowed by
the underlying zone district, the 30% (0.30) figure is used in the calculation- lf tprolect-1s
proposed it, or Oetow, the density allowed by the underlying zone district, the 1 5% (0.1 5)
iigdre is used. The Austria Haus Special Development District proprlsil exceeds the
density permitted by the underlying zone district, and therefore, the 30% figure shall be
used.
In 1997, Sonnenalp Properties, Inc., will employ 36 individuals to operate the Austria
Haus in its current configuration. This employee figure takes into account the maximum
staffing requirement for ihe christmas and President's Day weeks. of the 36 individuals'
five ar6 nebded to staff the front desk, 13 are required for housekeeping purposes and,
16 are needed to operate the bar and restaurant, with the remaining two individuals
providing other facilities support functions.
Sonnenalp Properties, Inc. has provided proposed employment figures for the operation
of the redbveloled Austria Haus. Sonnenalp Properties, Inc. estimates a need for
approximately 32 employees, plus an unknown retail need. This figure, indicates a slight
rdduction in the employment need. The reduction in employment need is due to the
removal of the bar and restaurant operation from the Austria Haus. After redevelopment'
the Sonnenalp will only be providing continental food service to the guests of the Austria
Haus. A copy of the "Austria Haus Staffing Roster" has been attached for reference'
EMPLOYEE HOUSING GENERATION ANALYSIS
The staff analysis below indicates the top, the middle and the bottom of the ranges' as
well as a staff recommended figure which was used in determining the employee housing
needs of the Austria Haus. A s-ummary of the Employee Housing Generation Analysis is
as follows:
Bottom of Range Calculations:
a) Retail/service commercial = 3,887 sq. ft. @(5/1000 sq.lt.)=19.4 employees
b) Office: RealEstate = 750 sq. ft. @(6/1000 sq. ft.)= 4.5 employees
c) Lodging- = 25 units @(0'25/room) = 6'2 employees
d) Multi-Family (club units)= 22units @(0.4/unit)
Total
(-36 existing emPloYees)
(X 0.30 multiplier)
= 8.8 employees
=38.9 employees
= 3 employees
= 1 new employee
Middle ol Range Calculations:
a) Retail/Service Commercial
b) Office:RealEstate
c) Lodging'
d) Multi-Family (club units)
= 3,887 sq. ft. @(6.5/1000 sq. ft.)=25.3 employees
= 750 sq. ft. @(7.5/1000sq. ft.)= 5.6 employees
= 25 units @(0.75koom) =18.7 employees
= 22 units @(O.a/unit)
Total
(-36 existing employees)
(X 0.30 multiplier)
= 8.8 employees
=58.4 employees
=23 employees
=7new
employees
Top of Range Calculations:
a) Retail/Service Commercial =3,887 sq. ft. @(8/1000 sq. ft.) =31.1 employees
A
b)
c)
d)
Office: Real Estate
Lodging'
Multi-Family (club units)
750 sq. ft. @(9/1000 sq. ft.)
25 units @(1.2Slroom)
22 units @(0.a/unit)
= 6.7 employees
=31.2 employees
= 8.8 employees
Total
(-36 existing employees)
(X 0.30 multiplieO
=77.9 employees
=42 employees
=13 new
employees
Staff Recommended Range Calculations:
The staff believes that the Austria Haus redevelopment will create a need for 35
additional employees. Of the 35 additional employees, 11 employees (30%) will need to
be provided deed-restricted housing by the developers of the Austria Haus. The statf
recommended range is based on:
1.the type of retail and office use proposed in the commercial space within
the Austria Haus:
the size of the Austria Haus lodging component; and
the high-level of services and amenities proposed by the developers for
the guests of the Austria Haus.
z.
3.
a)
b)
c)
d)
Retail/Service Commercial
(middle of range)
Office: Real Estate
(middle of range)
Lodging'
(top of range)
Multi-Family (club units)
(range does not vary)
= 3,887 sq. ft. @(6.5/1000 sq. ft,\=25.7 employees
= 750 sq. ft. @(7.5/1000 sq. ft.1 = 5.6 employees
= 25 units @(1.2slroom) =31 .2 employees
= 22 units @(0.4iunit)
Total
(-36 existing employees)
(X 0.30 multiplier)
= 8.8 employees
=70.9 employees
=35 employees
=11 new
employees
-Lodging has a parlicularly large variation of employees per room, depending upon factors such as size ol facility and level of
servic€/suppon services and amenilies provided.
Depending upon the size of the employee housing unit provided, it is possible to have-up
to fuvo emptoyees per bedroom. For example, a two-bedroom unit in the size range of
600 - 900 square feet, is possible of accommodating three to four employees. .A two-
bedroom, with a size less than 600 square feet, would only be capable of housing one
employee per bedroom. Each of these figures are consistent with the requirements for
the vaiying types of employee housing units outlined in the Municipal Code.
Based on the analysis provided above, staff is requesting that the PEG provide
direction to the applicant regarding employee housing requirements.
IV. STAFF RECOMMENDATION
Since this is a worksession to discuss the proposed establishment of a Special Development
District to the property located at242Easl Meadow Drive/on a part of Tract C, Block 5-D, Vail
Village First Filind, arid not a request for a formal recommendation from the Planning and
Enviionmental Commission to the Town Council, staff will not be providing a recommendation at
this time. Staff will, however, provide a recommendation on the applicant's proposal at the time
of f inal review.
To:
From:
RE:
Date:
MEMORANDUM
George Reuther
Jeff Winston
Design Review - Sorurenalp Austria House
7 January, 1997
303-440-9200 . FAX 303.449-6911 . WlNl320@AOL.COM . 2299 PEART STREEI SUITE 100 . BOULDER, CO 80302
I
All in all I think the building fits the site rvell, it accomplishes a major objective of removing the surface parking, and it fills
in a major piece of the pedestrian loop from lhe Village Center to Slifer Square. The building is tall, but that is consistent
with the direction of the Village Master Plan to put lhe taller buildings on the north periphery of the Village, stepping down
toward the south. If anything, the building could even be slightly taller and would still be consistent with the size of the
Mountain Haus and Village Centcr. Within this overall context, there are a fcw aspects of the building and site plan to
which I would direct attention:
l. I think thc building could be stepped more, both vertically and horizontally, to give morc variety and more
consistency with thc surrounding buildings.
With respect to 0re vertical aspect, there are a few steps in the building height, and I have not seen a 60yo-40yo
calculation for the design, but it appears to be rather uniform in height, with the majority of the building at the
tallest height, It also has a number of flat roof sections, presumably to stay within a height constraint. A number of
thcse flat areas will be visible from public spaces due to the chamfering of the end sections of the roof. I would
strongly favor carrying the roof to a full gablc for some distance at the ends of thc building, even if it meant
granting a height variance. This would eliminate the visibility of the flat roof sections as well as providing more
vertical variation.
With respect to the horizontal alignment, it sccms lhat the east end of the building, ure turret, could be stepped back
slightly (to the South) to open up East Meadow Drive to Slifer Square - sort of a mirror image of what the
Mountain Haus does. On the other hand, the west end of the building , the portion that also steps down, could be
stepped slightly forward (north) toward East Meadow Drive, possible covering a portion of the drop-off area,
bringing it a little closer to the alignment of the Village Center building (La Tour). I've illustrated this massing
suggestion below:
Mw
\ wvtrqoV
a
Design Review - Sonnenalp Austria House
0r/0't t97
Paee 2
I support the idea of incorporating the bus shelter in the turret at the east end of the building, however I
wonder if it can be made more visible and accommodating for people waiting for a bus. Suggestions
include enlarging the sheltered area slightly (extending a canopy around the tunet), opening the comer to
Slifer Square (removing some of the planter, may be accomplished by stepping this section of thc building
back too).
I support moving East Meadow Drive to the south. It gives the strcet a more gracious, serpentine flow, and
will allow tapering and landscaping of the parking structure embankment, One of the obiectives of the
Streetscape Plan is to eliminate pedestrian conflicts along bus routes - such as East Meadow Drive. The
wide sidewalk created along the front of the building is impeded by the street tree planting shown on the
plan. This being the north side of a tall building, it will receive little sun, and is probably not a great spot
for deciduous trees anlnvay. I suggest moving East Meadow Drive a little less south, creating an even
wider walking area, and then clustering tree planting (evergreen, as shown in rendered elevations) in
several pockets that still leave a broad walking surface out from under the arcade ofthe building.
Complimentary planting clusters could be created on the north side of East Meadow Drive. (see diagram
attached)
It may not bc necessary that East Meadow Drive be a full two lanes wide in this area. Buses can see each other
from Slifer Squarc to the gate and tend to wait for each other to pass through the gate an)"!vay.
To create a stronger pedestrian connection from the Village Center, I suggcst paving the auto drop-offarea
with the pedestrian pavers, merely dcmarcating the drop-off zone r.vith bollards so that it feels like an
extension ofthe sidewalk when not being used by cars. The fact that it feels like cars are parked in a
pedestrian areas might also tend to reinforce the notion of short-term auto usage.
The ramp down to the garage has the potential to open the window well on the opposite wall of the Village
Center building. This Village Center window will now be looking into car headlights at night. This may
be significantly overcome by a very dense evergreen planting screen or, as a l:tst resort, a free-standing low
wall.
The expansion ofthe building creates a need, and opportunity, to make improvements to Slifer Square.
One of those is to open the plazato Austria House. Some trees will likely need to be removed, but it
should be done very carefully, with a strong justification for each one removed - the mature evergreens are
a real asset, The planters could be reduced in size, with more connections through to generally open up the
full extent of the plaza.
If there is a possibility to accomplish upgrades to the plaza (paving for example) I suggest we also take the
oppornmity to revisit the fountain - particularly the plumbing and heating system. "In the old days" arriving at
Slifer Square at night in winter was a magical expcrience, with lights illuminating the cascades in the fountain, a
gentle fog rising from the water. As I recall, winter operation was ceased primarily because large leaks in the
plumbing created a very high cost for heating lhe water. If heating the plaza is a possibility, with a boiler alrcady in
place the additional cost of heating fountain water might be signiftcantly less than before.
fo
5.
6.
WINSTON ASSOCIATES, lNC. o303.440.9200 rFAX 303 449,6911t2299 PEARL STREET, SUITE 100 BOULDER CO 80302
Design Review - Sonnenalp Austria House
0t/07 /97
Pagc 3
7. The plan should include provision for continuation of thc streamwalk, as close to Gore Creek as possible
(ust abovc the high water level). It may require cantilevercd boardlvalks to get around trees in a felv
sections.
8. Finally, a small but I think important point. Although I normally believe in giving ma,rimum deference to
the architect in matters ofdesign, I raise a question about the use ofthe chamfered gable-end roof detail. I
realize it is utilized on the other Sonnenalp building. It is also used on Bishop Park, Golden Peak base and
several other buildings in Vail. It is a very visible architectural 'signature' and in fact, it has the potential
of becoming a dominant thematic element in the Village.
One of the primary traits of Vail is the continuity of the lvhole - that no individual building stands out, but
somehow the overall inrpression holds together as a village that evolved with a consistent palate of
materials and design character. The simple gable end has been a hallmark of Vail. There are variations to
be sure, and too much uniformity can be sterile. I raise the question as to whether this building cannot be
designed with primarily gable roofs to blend in better with the surrounding buildings and the Village in
general.
WINSTON ASSOCIATES. lNC. o303.440.9200 oFAX 303 449,6911c2)99 PEARL STREET, SUITE 100 BOULDER CO 80302
:ue F:: l.: la: a0.22 :9!i :S: - ,J:::
o
3
Y
6l(')itm
{lB
lz
lul|-lm
t<
lmFtlllrtotop
l-0lr-IL
)
i
I /-\
--------r
1- lt1tltl
Ilt:lt
;
r__+__._r.\
ilt!ai
i-l -<a
IIF,rl
I
__ I 1a\t"
i
It!JF
it^__]=a,
i
IE
l
It^
--T
1'
t:
l
l') at\)
$ilii
'il1
,t
i
a
r I
/{ | r/r +atAU?tt<tA HAU9
vAll- Co||JC'?AEO $i u} iilifg{i
I
@
i
I
eY
I
I
I
I
I
I
!
Q
i
I
k
F:.
k
F
=kF
I
l
#:rli
f{ ,$ *l:iiii
F: \PRJ\Aust.la_House\iAD\Levei_3 ir: Feo C,: 1C: .il trr 19!- tsr - r:tl
l-
@\=/
I
I
e
6 lls
Jsc'il
!!:E*ir#-':g$3
r
Ef
F
:
k
lr,!
8i
i[
i:ti
Bi
fi ti oliiii'
'jt :i: ll :l-.j.i :: 1?:_ :::
I
6) rn
I
G) 06)
i
.-t :::? -lll:i9iirrl-tsFri;
i. \ltJ\Au5ir:e-:!rse\C;,r'\r?/e1 _:
oe 6) 6)YY
l
l
tltiil
(-,
AU9TRIA t-.tAug
FEDEVELOFI,G}TI
valt-@apo fn *i ni;Eii:
oo
o
o
o
I
I
I
I
I
I
l
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
1
il
it
?
tptl
tI,
l
I
I
tI.
rI
ll
,il ,ilr! l,
I
I
,i!
!ilt
!t
1l
F
E
I
l
I
Lfil
iJ
I
i
,B
tilt
illi
,l! ,lliit tFo9
li
TI
l,hlli':t
>l
b -i
liili:
iili,
:!ti'
, rlil
: lrl
-lt:AUSTRIA HAUS
RED€\'ETOPreT'
VNL@(OnADO
9.. .:
!1:ii ..r
:!lrl !;li:'iiii :*t
o
o
o
I
\
L_.ffi,L.l-z I
:l:t
:h
:il .:!t !:!i:ttt I
z
s
c
BIa.oIt
.rFl
zE'zzI
,l
(J
cttaz
Ff
/;\O ai
{6
td /tt
\/
ity
f8
tc
f
al
:;
!t
I
a
Y
()
(/)p
&t'(r/)
I
at
lr
l!
tl
Fi
E.
Oor
z
z!! rtl!:l
o
FIL E COPY
2' A request for a worksession with the Desip Review Boardfor the establishment of
Special Development District #35, Austia Haus, located at 242 East Meadow Drive/on a
part of Tract C, Block 5-D, Vail Village First Filing'
Applicant Sonnenalp Properties, Inc., representedby Gordon Pierce
Plannsr; George Ruther
Greg Moffet thanked two of the DRB members, Brent Alm and Ted Hingst, for joining the PEC'
Andy Ifuudtsen invited all present to attend an open house next Monday, February 17,1997,to
disouss two different altematives for the Public Works employee housing project' He said there
would be displays, and the meeting would be from 4-8pm'
Plaoning and Environmental Cornmission
Minutes
FebruarY 10, 1997
o
George Ruther identified the three discussion issues for the worksession; landscape design,
emplly"e housing and JeffWinston's Urban Design comments. George gave a sunmary from the
last'meeting ana idvised the PEC that at this meeting they would discuss the changes using the
model that reflected the latest proposal.
Jeff Winston, the consultant, said that in the Village Master Plan, tallcr buildings and the more
dense projects were meant to be towards the freeway, backing up along th9 Frontage Road- He
said there was quite a bit of variety in the roofs in thc surrounding area and that he felt it
important that tile Austria Haus to be stepped down at both ends of the building' He said the
towcr at the enkyway helped do this. Jeffsaid the building moved lcss horizontally in order to
preserve trees inthe southeast comer, which were a restraint on the site. He felt thc hcight would
Lt*d io and was not highly visible from I-70, nor did it block view corridors. He explained that
views would be blocked coming down on the west end of the structure, but he felt the flat roof
was the bigger issue and more sipificant. He said that since thc building was highly visible' flat
roofs woul-d'be against what Vaii was about. Jeff illustrated the Core experience, in the early
years, as being uith" intersection of Bridge St. and Gore Creek Drive. He said that throughout
th, y"-, *. f,ud developed a variety of corners with something around each corner. He said the
biggest hole in the system was between LaTour Restaurant and the Covered Bridge, as a
pedestrian was not drawn around the corner. He said this project would accomplish that. He said
inis project was creating a new wall to Slifer Square. He thought the Covercd Bridge should
draw people around thc corner and it could be done by scaling down the northeast corner ofthe
building,io a pedestrian scale. He said that East Mcadow Drive should have the pedestrian way
as broad as poisible for buses to be able to pass. He thought the pedesfian way could be made
wider with an alley for the buses. He said pedestrians should be on thc building side of the
landscape buffer. He stated as the garage area got excavated on the west side, car lights would bc
a problem, so landscaping needed to be increased. He felt this was another opportunity to take a
look at Slifer Square as not just a way to get to the parking structure. Jeff said the large trees
were an asset.
George Ruther said that 30o/o of aproject should be landscaped. He said as proposed by the
appli-ant, there would be l5Yo landscape and the rest hardscape. He explained that the applicant
reduced the south side patios in order to bring thc project out ofthe 50' stream setback. He said
that along the west property line was a landscape buffer, and stated that a letter was rcceived from
Village Center approving this landscape buffer to be planted partially on their property. He said
that staffwould like to see regrading further between the two properties. He said he was
working with the applicant and Public Works to devise a path for the streamwalk. Hc said there
was a conceptual design that would be shown and the ability to consfuct the streamwalk was
there. He said that staffwas requesting that flower boxes be installed on the building. George
said with the elimination of the patios in order to come into compliance, stafffelt the need to
bring some green into that area. Georgc asked the PEC to provide direction for on-site and off-
site landscape improvements.
Planning and Environmental Commission
Minutes
February 10, 1997
Gordon Pierce said he had been agreeing with staff for four months now and they have come up
with good solutions. He said that he was opposed to the streamwalk, but in order to move on
with this project, he would escrow money fo get the project through. He felt it was better use of
the funds and more beneficial to make improvements on the Bridge Street side or in Slifer Squarc'
Greg Moffet opened up the urban design landscape issues for any public comments.
Jim Lamont, representing the East Village Homeowner's Association (EVHA), submitted a letter
from Maude nukc regariing the steamwalk issue. He asked George how the Council dealt with
No. 2 in the staff memo.
George Ruther said staff met intemally with the Departrnent headsand the direction was to
pw5rr; the sfieamwalk at this time. Bob Mclaurin took this direction to the Town Council and
'Council
directed the applicant to come up with a conceptual desigrr for the streamwalk'
Jim Lamont said to define plans as referenced in No. 2 in the staffmemo'
George Ruther stated the Recreation Trails Master Plan, the Vail Village Master Plan, the
Streetscape Master Plan and the Transportation Master Plan'
Jim Lamont said in 1993, the Council designated this not to be removed from the Open Lands
Plan.
George Ruther said he would have to check into that.
Jim Lamont said the Council did not fully understand the issue and wanted the streamwalk
removed from the Open Lands Plan. He said the neighborhood, unanimously, did not wish to see
the sfeamwalk completed, since it was wildlife habitat and should be presenred. He said they
were against it and advised to maintain the integrity of tle natural habitat that the steam hact was
to protict. He said the Town, by taking ownership became the propertl owner, and it was clearly
understood that the Town would be a protectorate of that property and that was the reason that
VA took so long to sell the property to the Town. He said by dorng a streamwalk, the Town
would be in violation of thai covenant. He said if the Town and VA would rescind the covenant,
they would move to incorporate the provisions of the covenant. He said the area needed to be
returned to some level of habitat and not become a public pa,rk, as it didn't bleud itself to heavy
traffic. He mentioned that the Ford Park walk didn't have a high quality level, nor was it propcrly
maiotained. He said not to encourage any more areas of steamwalk, when we can't maintain
what we already have, i.e., lights kicked out and sand all over the place. He said unless you can
figure out the dRl,L oo tnis site, as it relates to density, the volumetric altemative has justification
u"a n. also mentioned that the EVHA would continue to argue for the PA-l Zone Disfict.
Planning and Environmental Comnisslon
Minutes
February 10, 1997
Robert Preeo, an attorney from Denver on behalf of the Village Ccnter Association, explained
that he was here in lieu of Rick Rosen who would be back for the next meeting. He said the
Village Center Association opposed the streamwalk. He said n 1972 restrictions were placed on
the sieam tract and in 1989, the City Attomey questioned the legality of it, but did not challenge
it. He said in 1975, the Village center Association wanted to landscape and entered into an
agreement with the ToV to lindscape. He stated that $22,000 was spent by the Town and the
V'illage Center to do the landscaping and if a steamwalk was includod at that time, the Village
CentJr would not have done the landscaping. He went on to say that for 21 years the Villagc
Center has maintained the landscaping. He said that in 1978, the property was deeded to the
Town, with the provision that it would be open space and if any violation of this provision
occurred, it would go back to VA. He explained that there were cnvironmental impacts, costs
involved to maintain il issues of security, as well as the economic impacts to the businesscs on the
other side of the creek. He said in 1989 it was a dead issue, but in 1993, it was brought back
before the Council and soundly defeated to pull it from the Open Space Master Plan' He said it
was back again in 1996 and staff, at the direction of the Town Council, was asked to revisit it. He
said there iere legal issues with enforceable oovenants. He stated that twice the Town looked at
it and turned it down. He felt if the plan that had been out for 21 years was now no longer
appropriate, the beautification that had already occurred along the stream would be hindered or
trurt. He also felt that the money could be spent in more appropriate areas.
John Hardy, President of the Edelweiss Condominium Association, said the Edelweiss building
was never designed to have people on the back side and so they wcre opposed to the streamwalk.
Fred Hibbard, an adjacent property owner, said that progress had been made on the walkway
from the Village Center to Slifer Square. He said the paved area was the samc elevation as the
road and that pedestians were forced offby the buses now. Hc stated his recommendation was
the 14' wide bus-way should be madc wider with a step up to the pedestrian walkway. Hc
encouraged staff to talk with Public Works. He said the Town needed to bc a good administrator
of the property they owned, as well as being in the best interest of the Town. He said a major
issue was thaithe building was twice the size of what the PA zoning allowed, with only half the
landscaping that was required in the PA Zone District. He felt that the crurent zoning should
remain, plus a percentage.
Greg Moffet asked if thc Council addressed mass.
George Ruther said Council had a general discussion of the bulk and mass, but the issue at the
time was the ordinance.
David Kenyon, a consultant to the applicanl said the pavers and width of the sfreet had been
dictated byPublic Works to be a 14'wide asphalt bus lane with a l0'wide pedestrian paver and
curb.
Plandng and Environmental Commission
Minutes
February 10, 1997
George Ruther said this was 2'wider than the residential requirement and the width was mandated
by the need for emergency vehicle access'
John Schofield asked what Public Works said regarding the change in grade and the planters'
David Kenyon said there wcre no conrments from Public Works. He said Dcsigrr Workshop was
in agreement with Jeffwinston. He said they would like to separate pedestrians from vehicular
faffrc and that this was a result of their discussions. He said that the streamwalk was prepared as
a separate component. He stated that the site was not made for an ongrade pedestrian walkway'
as if was 3-4' above the water. He said it would tcrminate at a dead-end and would encourage
people to walk across property that didn't have a walkway'
Roy Plum, President of the River Haus Association, said at their annual rneeting this past Friday,
they were against the steamwalk and they didn't want any bridges'
Joe Treleven, the director of the Village center condominiums, said he had lived here since the
condos were constructed and he represented 56 Village Center owners who were also taxpayers'
He felt the reasons the streamwalk was tumed down in 1989 and 1993 were still applicable' He
said there was already public access between the Covered Bridge and the lnternational Bridge'
He said the Gore Creek Promenade had public access and that the Town spent $70,000 upgrading
the bridge so people could look down on the creek. He said that another $200,000 to be spent on
this streamwalk should not be a priority, when there were not enough buses and housing' He said
the Town had provided access to Gore Creek. He said that if there was not a legal restaint with
the landscaping agreement entered into with the Town and VA, then there should be an ethical
restraint. fie was against putting a lighted sidewalk wherc a "natural area" was supposcd to be'
Gordon pierce showed a drawing of the Vail Athletic Club with an overtay of the Austria Haus
project. He explained that the vec naa a hrger profile, with less GRFA' He said this site had
ioottra tit" GRfR, but quadrupled the number of warm pillows, He said if the building was
smaller, they wouldn't be able to pay their tax bills.
Ted Hingst, a DRB member, was not passionate about the steamwalk' He said that the
p.o*"nu-d. across the way gets a lot of use and the improvement should be directed towards
^slifer
Square. He felt that feople should be walking away from the buses and closcr to the stores.
Brent Alm stated the streambank should be restored to its riparian habitat and he agreed with Jeff
that the northeast corner be stepped down. He said to soften the north side with additional
landscaping or pots.
Gordon pierce said flower boxes had been added to the windows, similar to the Bavaria Haus and
that the entire pedestrian area was heated out to the planter'
Planning and Environmental Commrssion
Minutcs
February 10, 1997 10
Fred Hibbard said he had experience with heated sidewalks and thcy were excellent, especially
with shaded buildings.
Diane Golden said the steamwalk would be invasive and the existing landscape didn't lend itself
to a streamwalk.
George Ruther explaincd the $100,000 landscape money had been retained for the steambank
improvements.
Diane Golden asked if we didnl build the streamwalk, did that mean we didn't get any money'
Gordon Pierce said the money was earmarked for off-site improvements on the east side of the
building.
Dianc Golden said it was a shame to lose the view of the mountain, but it was a wonderfirl
pedesfian connection from Crossroads into the Town. She said thc heated sidewalk would make
i"opf" walk on the sidewalk and that the large trees needed to be preserved in Slifer Square '
Henry Pratt said in terms of the turret being stepped down and made smaller, that it didn't benefit
*yo.r", as well as destroying usable space in the building. He said that putting pavers in the
strect encouraged people to walk in the street and it was a waste of money, since they were not
heated. H" suia tni ptanter was there to meet the landscape requirement. He felt that the
pedestrian flow broke down by the bus stop. He said he was a proponent of the streamwalk with
it
" $IOO,OO slush fund, but if ihere were legal issues, he would want all the money spent on Slifer
Square.
John Schofield said to maximize the sidewalk in front of the building, but not at the expense of the
planter. He said if the streamwalk was not a possibility, then the area adjacent to the stream had
to be addressed with landscaping. He eucowaged the Town to work on Slifer Square and the
stream area in conjgnction witn tfris project, since everything would be torn up and it would be a
good time to do it.
Gene Uselton said everyone would walk on heated sidewalks. He agrced with Henry regarding
the northeast comer of the building. He said there should be landscaping where the streamwalk
would have been built, as he was not an advocate of the steamwalk' Cene said the irrigated
flowerboxes were a nice addition.
Greg Amsden was not an advocate of the sheamwalk once he heard the legal end, the feelings of
adjacent properly owners and the elevations not working. He felt the applicant could look at
pottiog u *t oog, i.tigated rock garden with perennials to beautifu the area' He said to eliminate
ihe peiest iatr *.u Jn the north side adjacent to the street and delineate pedestrians and the buses
with a planter. He felt the northeast comer of Slifer Square needed to be modified to lend itself
for people to go arounc.
Planning and Environmental Commisslon
Minutes
February 10, 1997 1L
Greg Moffet summarized to Fred that the comrnission expressed a good degree of comfort with
size-of building, with the exception of Henry and Galen, Greg wanted the really big trees
unmolested during this p.o."r-r, so they would survive . He said if the building was stepped back'
the trees would bi history. He said not to confuse the pedestrian pavers in the steet and to move
the whole planter towards the parking structure and widen the area between the planter and the
building. ile stated that given the degree of opposition and litigation that would flow' he would
like to see the streambank fixed up sincc you could see it from the Promenade.
Todd Oppenheimer stated that the Streetscape Master Plan dcsiguates this area as pedestrian
slared with buses and that was the reason for the l0' widc pedestrian area aloug the strect' He
said that moving the planter out will only gain a couple of feet because of the minimum road
width.
Henry Pratt said hc didn't like the flush nature of it and he agreed with Jim that we hadn't
addressed the pedestrian going west'
Todd Oppenheimer said there was a trade-off with the wider asphalt for buses to pass and that a
curb would give pedestrians a feeling that buses would not jump the curb.
David Kenyon said pavers at the same level would allow snow removal at one pass through'
Gordon Picrce said the applicanfs preference was not to have pavers, and it was silly to have 12'
pavcrs in the sfieet, so he recommended dropping the pavers in ilre steet.
Jim Lamont said to work on the interconnect between Lionshead and Vail Village and get the
Meadow Drive done with the Lionshead project. We don't need to get tied up in this detail for
that portion.
Greg Moffet asked for additional comments on the Urban Design concept'
George Ruther addressed the employee housing issuc, per the staff memo, with the recommended
calcJation of figures showing the number of cmployee housing units. George recommended that
the top and middle of the ranges be used and he stated that the number of employees per housing
unit were not codified, but only a staffrecommendation.
Johannes Faesslcr said he had always been against the govcmment solving the cmployee housing
problem and that he had always taken care of his employees. He stated that if you wanted to run
a business you had to take care ofyour employees and he didn't believe in deed restrictions.
Greg Moffet asked for any additional public comment' There was none'
John Schofield said to assure a reasonable supply, he tended to refer to staffs calculations.
George Ruther went over the square footage/ tenant ratio occupancy'
Planning and Environmental Commission
Minutcs
February 10, 199?LZ
Gene Uselton asked George, in oalculating the number of ernployees, was that the way the Lodge
or the Red Lion was calculated and why only 30% of employees'
George Ruther said in 1991 the Council decided on a policy requiring developers to provide
housing for 30o/o ofthe employees generated by redevelopment'
Mike Mollica said in the Tov we do not have this requirement; only through an sDD
redevelopment do we use this methodology.
Greg Amsden agreed with staff
Diane Golden said employee housing was critical and it was disheartening that Vail had such a
low ratio in comparison to other places. She felt the employee housrng needed to be new, so as
not to take away-from other housing that a smaller business might use and also be within the
Town of Vail.
Johannes Faessler asked what Dane meant.
Diane Golden said buying an existing house for his employees would displace someone else and
that it needed to be new units that were deed restricted.
Greg Moffet suggested taking something out of a short-term pool would work.
Henry pratt said he would be willing to reduce the required number of detd resticted units by
atoi SO-lOyr. if the housing would be new constnrction or taken from the short-term pool.
Greg Moffet said how woefully inadequate our multiplier is in this Town in comparison with other
towns. He said he was clearly in favor of the I I employce units. He said net new housing should
count more, however, he disagreed with Henry's weight of 60-70%'
Mike Mollica said the memo was for a Type III and the number in the memo was generated from
staff. He said code requires 450 sq. ft. for a unit housing one employee'
John Schofield had no commetrt.
Gene Uselton had no corffnent.
Greg Amsden said once the deed resfiction was in place it had to be occupied by a local person.
He ielt the applicant should have flexibility to buy an existing home and deed restrict'
Diane Golden asked who followed up on deed resfrictions.
Mike Mollica said Andy Knudtsen.
Planning and Environmental Commission
Minutes
Febnrary 10, 1997 13
Greg Moffet sumrnarized and told the applicant that staffhad a sense of what the PEC wanted
and to work with staff.
Gordon pierce said he assumed this matter needed to be taken care of prior to the issuance of a
co.
Mike Mollica said Prior to a TCO.
Plambg aod Environmental Cornrni ssion
Mindes
Fobnrary 10, 1997 t4
oo zlaln
6-0- l ,
o
o
STAFF MEMORANDUM
o
il.
il.
tv.
AUSTRIA HAUS REDEVELOPMENT
Stsff llomortndum
TABLE OF COiTTENTS
DESCilmONOFTHEREOUESTS.......' ""''-""1
A Estabtl3hmontof aspeclalDevelopmentDlsirlct '...""" 1
B. Gonditional U8o Permit ...... " " - 2
BACKGROUND ..... ""' 2
ZONINGANALYSIS "'"" 3
THE SPECIAL DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT ESTABLISHMENT PROCESS - . . . . 5
(nine SDD Cdterla)
A. Deslon comoatlblllty and senshlylty to tha Immedlrto enylronment, nelghborhood and sdiacent
pio-riEiir-"il56iinE-i6 ilCrrlrdiirni 6eirgn, rcare, butk, bulldlng hellht, Suffer zonor, ldsntlty,
bhaiacter, vlsual Integrlty and orlentatlon --.... ' ' " ' " b
B. Uses, actlvlty and denslty whlch provlde a compatlblg efflclent and workable relatlonshlp whh
Jundunotng'usesandacllvhy .:..... ".'" 9
Emplovoe Housing Foquhement ..."'"'' 9
Employee Housing Generatlon Analysig .... " " " 10
F.
Compllance whh parklng and loadlng roqulrements as outlln€d In Chaptor 18.52. of the Town ol Valliliiilciiii'iCtiiii-.-....:':..-... ....."''13
Contormlry whh the appllcable elements of the Vall Comprehenrlve Plan, Town pollcles and Urban
oeJtiin Fl-dn . .. ....: :. - . - - - - . ' - - 14
Vall Land Ugs Plan ."""14
Vrll Vlllaoe llaster Plan --.---'-''15
Vall Vlllaoe Deslon Conslder8tlons . -... . '. ' ' 18
Urban Deslon Conslderatlons .. -.. -. - " " 18
Archllect Landscape Conslderatlons . ... '24
Identlflcarlon and mltlgatlon ol natural and/or geologlc hazards that affect the property on whlch the
i-p-#'Eii;66fi#'id6ilia6F;daod- .. ' ':... ': '...
Slte Dlan. bulldlnq deslqn and locatlon and open spaco provlslons deslgned to P-roduce a funcllonal
J;;efi;rilfr'6flonstirl'bni-se-n-sltivd t6'na'urat i6aturis, vegetatlon ai<l overdll aesthetlc quallry oJ-
the cothmunhy . . . . . . . . ..""""35
A chculatlon system deslgned for both vehlcles and pedeEtrlans sddreerlng on and off-she traftlc -;ir;i'hiil:.::.:.......:............ """"3s
Funstlonal and aelthetlc landscaplng and open rpece In order to optlmlze and precerve natural
i6id6l;rLcieauon, vlewiana tuhaTone .......'.. .. -.. " ' 36
phaslnq olan or rubdlvlllon plan that wlll malntaln a workable, functlonll !nd eftlclent relatlonship - -througtrdut tho development'of tho tPochl devolopment dlstrlcl . -.-..-.....3tt
CRITERIA AND FINDINGS FOR A CONDTTPNAL USE PERMIT . . . . .37
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
D.
E.
G,
H.
v.
vt.
ATTACHMENT 1
ATTACHMEiIT 2
ATTACHMENT 3
ATTACHME}IT4
1. An increase in the annual occupancy of the Austria Haus by approximately four
times.2. The addition of approximately 4,000 square leet of retail space (sales tax
generating).3. The implementation of the recommended Streetscape Master Plan improvements
to East Meadow Drive.4. The completion of the commercial loop in the Village via the construction of a
well-lit, heated pedestrian walkway.5. The removal of 25 surface parking spaces and the construction of an underground
parking structure.6. Landscape improvements to Slifer Square, East Meadow Drive and the Gore
Creek streambank.
B. Conditional Use Permit
The appllcant is also requesting a condltlonal use permit to allow for the
construction of a Fractional Fee Club as part of the Austria Haus redevelopment- As
mentioned previously, the applicant is proposing to incorporate 22 fractional fee
club units into the Austria Haus. Each of the club units will be sold in one-ninth
shares.
On January 21 , '1997, the Vail Town Council adopted Ordinance #22, Series of 1996, an
ordinance amending Section 18.04, Definitions, adding "Fractional Fee Club" and
"Fractional Fee Club Unit", amending Section 18.22.030, Conditional Uses, allowing
fractional fee club as a conditional use in the Public Accommodation Zone District,
amending Section 18.60.060(AX7), Conditional Use Permit Criteria-Findings. The review
of the Austria Haus proposal will be according the procedures prescribed in Ghapter
18.60 of the Municipal Code. A copy of Ordinance #22, Series of 1996, has been
attached for reference.
II. BACKGROUND
The Austria Haus was originally constructed in the mid-l960's as an inn to accommodate
destination skiers. In 1979, the Austria Haus was purchased by the Faessler family who planned
to redevelop the property into the Sonnenalp Hotel.
In 1984, Ordinance #8 was approved by the Vail Town Gouncilestablishing Special Development
District #12. Special Developrnent District #12 adopted an approved development plan for the
redevelopment of the Austria Haus. When Ordinance # I was adopted, the Town Gouncil placed
an eighteen-month time limit on the approval of the SDD. The approval of SDD # 12 lapsed
eleven years ago, on October 2, 1985. The approved development plan was never implemented,
and instead, the Austria Haus underwent a remodel. Since the completion of the remodel, the
Austria Haus has served as an annex to the Sonnenalp Bavaria Haus located at 20 Vail Road.
b
The Austria Haus has 3f hotel rooms (accommodation units) totaling 10,100 sq. ft. wifl
approximately "T5 pillows'and is operated eight months each year by Sonnenalp Properties, Inc.
There is a small restaurant and bar in the Austria Haus that serves the guesb and a small retail
oudet on the east end of the bullding. The hotel rooms are marglnal in size (300 sq. ft. a\rerage)
and lack certain hotel amenities, by todays standards.
2
MEMORANDUM
TO: Planning and Environmental Commission
FROM: Department of Community Development
DATE: February 24,1997
SUBJECT: A request for a final review of the establishment of Special Development District
#35, Austria Haus, and a request for a conditional use permit to allow for a
Fractional Fee Club, located el242Easl Meadow Drive/on a part of Tract C, Block
5-D, Vail Village First Filing.
Applicant: Sonnenalp Properties, Inc., represented by Gordon Pierce
Planner: George Ruther
I. DESCRIPTION OF THE REOUESTS
A. The Establishment ol a Special llevelopment District
The applicant, Sonnenalp Properties, Inc., represented by Gordon Pierce, is requesting a
linal review meeting with the Planning and Environmental Commission lor the
establishment of Special Development District #35, located at242Easl Meadow Drive/on
part of Tract C, Block 5-D, Vail Village First Filing. The appllcant is ploposing to
establish a new Special llevelopment Dbtrict overlay to the underlying zone district
ol Public Accommodation, to facilitate the redevelopment of the exbtlng Austria
Haus.
The applicant has proposed significant improvements to the existing Austria Haus
property. The Austria Haus is intended to become a member-owned resort club/lodge,
comprising a mix of hotel accommodation units and two and three-bedroom club units
with associated club amenities/facilities. The Augftia lbus proposal ls Intended to
provlde additional hotel and "hotel-type" a@ommodatlon unlts In the Town of Vail.
The applicant ls proposlng to Incorporate 22 member-owned club unlts (fractlonal
fee club unitsr wlth Slock-off units), wlth I notel rooms and one on-slte manager's
resldence (employee houslng unlt). The appllcant ls proposing 44tO square fest of
new commerclaUrehil spacg on the maln level of the A$tria llaus. The Austria
Haus proposal Includes a front desk receptlon/rcgbtntion area operating 24 hours
a day and seven days a week, a lounge, an exerclse rcom, member ski storage and
other acoessory facilitles commonly assoclated wfth hotels and lodges.
The applicant has identified what they believe to be public benefits which will be realized
as a result of the Austria Haus redevelopment. The publlc benefits identified by the
applicant include:
An increase in the annual occupancy of the Austria Haus by approximately four
times.
The addition of approximately 4,000 square feet of retail space (sales tax
generating).
The implementation of the recommended Streetscape Master Plan improvements
to East Meadow Drive.
The completion of the commercial loop in the Village via the construction of a
well-lit, heated pedestrian walkway.
The removal of 25 surface parking spaces and the construction of an underground
parking structure.6. Landscape improvements to Slifer Square, East Meadow Drive and the Gore
Creek streambank.
B. Gonditional Use Permit
The applicant ls also requesting a conditlonal use permit to allow tor the
construction of a Fractional Fee Club as part of the Austria Haus redevelopment. As
mentioned previously, the applicant is proposing to incorporate 22 fractional fee
club units into the Austria Haus. Each of the club units will be sold in one-ninth
shares.
On January 21 , 1997, the Vail Town Council adopted Ordinance #22, Series of '1996, an
ordinance amending Section 18.04, Definitions, adding "Fractional Fee Club" and
"Fractional Fee Club Unit", amending Section 18.22.030, Conditional Uses, allowing
fractional fee club as a conditional use in the Public Accommodation Zone District,
amending Section 18.60.060(A)(7), Conditional Use Permit Criteria-Findings. The review
of the Austria Haus proposal will be according the procedures prescribed in Chapter
18.60 of the Municipal Code. A copy of Ordinance #22, Series of 1996, has been
attached for reference.
II. BACKGROUND
The Austria Haus was originally constructed in the mid-1960's as an inn to accpmmodate
destination skiers. In 1979, the Austria Haus was purchased by the Faessler family who planned
to redevelop the property into the Sonnenalp Hotel.
In 1984, Ordinance #8 was approved by the VailTown Councilestablishing Special Development
Dlsrict #12. Special Developnent District #12 adopted an approved development plan tor the
redevelopment of the Austria Haus. When Ordinance # I was adopted, the Town Gouncil placed
an eighteen-month time limit on the approval of the SDD. The approval of SDD # 12 lapsed
eleven years ago, on October 2, 1985. The approved development plan was never implemented,
and instead, the Austria Haus undenrrrent a remodel. Since the completion of the remodel, the
Austria Haus has served as an annex to the Sonnenalp Bavaria Haus located at 20 Vail Road.
b
The Austria Haus has 3l hotelrooms (accommodation units)totaling 10,100 sq. ft. witt
approximately "75 pillows'and is operated eight monhs each year by Sonnenalp Properties, Inc.
There is a small restaurant and bar in the Austria Haus that serves the guests and a small retall
outlet on the east end of the building. The hotel rooms are marglnal ln size (300 sq. ft. average)
and lack certain hotel amenities, by todays standards.
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
According to the Official Zoning Map of the Town ol Vail, the applicanfs property is zoned Public
Accommodation. The Public Accommodatlon Zone District is intended to provide sites for lodges
and residenfial accommodations tor visitors, together with such public and semi-public facilities
and limited professlonal offi@s, medicalfacllltes, private recreation, and related visitor-oriented
uses as may be located in the same district. The Public Accommodation District is intended to
provide sites for lodging units with densities not to exceed 25 dwelling units per acre. The Public
Accommodation Zone District, prior to January 2'l , 1997, did not permit interval ownership.
Interval ownership was only allowed as a conditional use in the High Density Multi-Famif Zone
District pursuant to Ordinance #8, Series of 1981.
III. ZONING ANALYSIS
The development standards for a Special Development District shall be proposed by the
applicanl Dewlopment standards including lot area, site dimensions, setbacks, height, density
control, Slte coverage, lardscaflrq and pafting and loading shall be determined by the Town
Gouncil as part of the approved development plan, with consideration of the recommendations of
the Planning and Environmental Commission and staff. Before the Town Council approves
development standards that deviate from the underlying zone district, it shall be determined that
such deviations provide benefits to the Town that outweigh the adverse effects of such
deviations. This determination is to be made based upon the evaluatlon of the proposed Special
Development District's compliance with the Review Criteria outlined in the following section.
The Gommunity Development Department staff has prepared a Zoning Analysis for the proposed
Austria Haus redevelopment based on the revised plans submitted by the applicant on February
12, 1997. The Zoning Analysis compares the development standards outlined by the underlying
zone district of Public Accommodation and Ordinance #8 (SDD #121198/.) to the proposed
Special Development District #35. For comparative purposes only, and at the request of the
Planning and Environmental Commission, staff has included the approved development
standards of Special Development District # 30, (the Vail Athletic Club).
Wherever the proposed development standards deviate from the underlying zoning of Public
Accommodation, the standards are highlighted in bold type.
Lot size:
Buidable area:
Development
Standard
24,089 sq. ft. /0.553 acres
24,089 sq. ft. /0.553 acres
Underlylng Zonlng
of Publlc Accommodation
Ordlnance #8
(sDD ill2/1984)
Proposed SDD
GRFA:
Dwelling
units per acre:
Site coverage:
Setbacks:
front:
sidEs:
rgar:
Height:
Parking:
807. or 19,271 sq. ft.
13.8 DU's
55% or 13,249 sq. ft.
20'
20'
20'
48' sloping
45' flat
60'tower
per T.O.V. code S€ction 18.52
118o/" or 28,591 sq. ft.
34.5 DU's
(2 DU's & 65 AU's)
71V" ol
17,103 sq. ft.
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
5 short-lorm
spaces on-sne
71 parking spaces
pay-in-lieu
A detailed plan
was to be submitt€d
for DRB approval
I berth
367o ot
11,555 sq. ft.
N/A
168% or40,429 sq. ft.
35 DU's (22 DU's,
25 AU's, 1 Type lll EHU)
68%ort6371 tq.ft.
0'
5' t20'
7'
56.5'
52'
68'
48 space. in garage and
16.26 spaceg
pay-ln-lleu
19.8el"or 4,782.6 sq. ft.
I berth at drop-off area
11% or 4,449 3q. 6.
38% or ls,3(E !q. ft.
Landscaping:
Loading:
Commercial
sq. footage:
Common area:
g0o/" ot 7,227 sq. tl.
per T.O.V. code S€ction 18.52
10F,/. or '1,927 sq. ft.
35% of allowable GRFA
or 6,745 sq. ft..---71qq7h tt . rr 6q trr ", 1trqe
Vail Athletlc Glub
Lot Size: 30,486 square feeV0.699 acre
Buildable: 30,486 square feeV0.699 acre
Development UnderlylngzonlngStandard of Publlc Accommodation
Speclal Development
Dlstrlct #ilo Approval
GRFA: 80o/" or 24,388 sq. ft.
Dwelling
units per acre: 17.5 DU's
Site coverage: 55% or 16,767 sq. ft.
Setbacks:front: 20'
sides: 20'rear: 20'
Height: 48'sloping
113% or 34,505 3q. ft.
33 DU's (4 DU's,
55AU's,4 Typs lV EHU's)
TOqo oJ
21,35O sq. ft.
0'
12',t12'.
2'
67',
Parking: per T.O.V. clde section 18.52 29 valet spaces
(87 spaces)
O Landscaping: 30o/. or 9,145 sq. ft-32% or 9,730 sq. ft
Loading: per T.O.V. codE section 18.52 N/A
Commercial
sq. footage: 10o/" or 3,049 sq. ft. 13% or 4,066 sq- ft.
Common area: 35o/o of allowablE GRFA
or 8,536 sq. ft. 44% or 15,054 sq. ft.
IV. THE SPECIAL DEVELOPMENT DETRICT ESTABLISHMENT PROCESS
chapter 18.40 of the Town of vail Municipal code provides for the establishment 0f special
Development Districts in the Town of Vail. According to Sectlon 18.40.010, the purpose of a
Special Development District is,
"To encourage flexibility and creativity in the development of land, in order to
promote its most appropriate use; to improve the design character and quality of
the new development within the Town; to facilitate the adequate and economical
provision of streets and utilitles; to preserve the natunl 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 Speclal Development
District, in conjunctlon with the proportles underlying zone dlstrlct, shall establish
the requirements for guiding development and uses of property included in the
Special Development District."
The Municipal Code provides a framework for the establishment of a Special Development
District. According to the Municipal Code, prior to site preparation, building construction, or other
improvements to land within a Special Development District, there shall be an approved
development plan for the Special Development District. The approved development plan
establishes requirements regulating development, uses and activity within the Special
Development District.
Upon final review of the proposed establishment of a Special Development District, a report from
the Ptanning and Environmental Commission stating its findings and recommendations and a
staff report shall be fonnarded to the Town Gouncil, in accordance with the provisions listed in
Section 18.66.060 of the Municipal Code. The Town Council's consideration of the Special
Development District shall be in accordance with the provisions of Section 1 8.66.1 30 - 1 8.66.1 60
and apiroved by two readings of an ordinance. dli+r+r;> rtae Arr+cJ'reo
An approved development plan is the principal document in guiding the development, uses and
activities of the Special Development District. The development plan shall contain all relevant
material and information necessary to establish the parameters with which the Special
Development 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 properties underlying zone district.
The Municipal Code provides nine design criteria, which shall be used as the principal criteria in
evaluating he meriF of the proposed Special Development Distrlct. lt shall be the burden of the
appllcant to demonstrate that submittal material and he proposed development plan comply with
each of the following standards, or demonstrate that one or more of them is not applicable, or
that a practical solution consistent with the public interest has been achleved. The statf has
addressed each of the nine SDD review criteria below:
A. Design compatibility and sensltlvity to ths immediate envlronment, neighborhood
and adiacent properties relatlve to archltectural design, scale, bulk, building height,
buffer zones, identity, character, visual integrity and orientation.
The staff believes it is helpful to summarize the architectural design issues that have
been previously identified by the staff and the PEC, and have been addressed by the
applicant over the course of the five preceding worksession meetings.
Jeff Winston of Winston & Associates, Inc., has provided consultation on the proposed
urban design elements, architecture and site planning proposed by the applicant. Jeff's
comments are in response to the revisions made by the applicants after the worksession
meeting held on January 13, 1 997. Jeff was at the February 1 Oth PEC worksession and
discussed his comments.
North Elevation
1. The front entry to the Austria Haus was relocated to the west of the building to
accommodate guest drop-off and reduce vehicular traffic on East Meadow Drive,
east of the existing tratfic control gate location. The front drop-otf area was also
reconfigured to provide better traffic circulation and reduce conflicts between
pedestrians and vehicles.
2. The northeast corner ot the building was reduced in size to open this portion of
the site to Slifer Square, and to provide additional articulation and visual interest
to the north elevation. These changes were made in response to concerns
expressed by Jeff Winston and the staff.
3. The northeast corner of the building will no longer be used for a bus shelter. The
proposed bus shelter was determined to be too lar removed from the actual
location where a bus will stop. The applicant has proposed a new location for a
bus shelter east ol the Austria Haus in Slifer Square. The bus shelter has been
designed in cooperation with the Town of Vail Public Works Department.
4. The balconies on the north side of the Austria Haus have been eliminated. The
elimination is a result of the applicant's desire to increase the square footage of
the accommodation units located on the second and third levels of the building.
The loss of the balconies has created more building mass along East Meadow
Drive, however, staff believes this change has been successfully mitigated by the
applicant.
South Elevation
1. Staff was concerned that the south elevation was too repetitive, too linear and
lacked the architectural interest of the north elevation. The applicant has
removed two of the chimney chases from the south elevation in an attempt to
eliminate the repetitive nature of the design. Statf would recommend that the
applicant further modify the south elevation as the elevation still appears too
repetitive. Staff would again recommend that the applicant explore ways of
reducing the repetitive nature of the south elevation. Statf believes these
changes are aesthetic in nature and can be addressed at the time of Design
Review.
2. The original design proposed commercial retail space on the first level, on the
south side of the building. After discussions with the PEC, this space was
removed because there was a concern about pedestrian circulation, the need for
ofFsite improvements and potential impacts on adjacent property owners. The
commercial retail space was replaced with three, fractional fee club units.
East Elevation
1. The eastern end of the building has been reduced in width and the corner "cut
back," as recommended, to open up the Austria Haus to Slifer Square. This
change also provides a horizontal step in the alignment of the building, along East
Meadow Drive.
2. Concerns were expressed over the use of a flat roof on a portion of the east end
of the building. The flat roof portion has been eliminated and a dormer and
exterior deck have been introduced. Staff believes this change results in a much
improved east elevation by providing an increase in architectural interest and
detail.
West Elevation
1. The west end on the Austria Haus has been changed substantially in response to
concerns raised by the staff, Jeff Winston, Village Center merchants and the
adjoining property owners. The applicant originally proposed a much taller west
elevation and a covered garage entry. The covered entry has been removed to
reduce building mass and eliminate building encroachments into the 2OJoot side
setback. The height of the west elevation has been reduced by further clipping
the hip back, lowering the eaveline and dropping the ridge elevation.
2. The west end of the buiHing was increased slightly in width. The increased width
allows the northwest corner of the building to move closer to East Meadow Drive,
improving the streetscape.
3. Additional landscaping plantings are proposed along the western end of the
building. The additional landscaping is intended to screen the garage entrance
from the Village Center residential units and buffer the vehicle activity in this area.
The landscaping extends onto Village Center property. A copy of an approval
from Village Center has been attached for reference.
Statf believes the ap,plicant has designed a structure which relates well to the site and the
surrounding neighborhood. The mass of the Austria Haus is appropriate for the site and
takes into consideration the massing of the buildings on the adjoining properties. The
building steps down on the east and west ends to insure a smooth transition between
properties and does not create an imposing "canyon" along property lines. The north side
of the Austria Haus was designed with a pedestrian scale in mind. The retail shops on
the north slde of the Austria Haus create a commercial connectlon along East Meadow
Drive, between Slifer Square and the Village Center retail shops. The commercial
connection has been missing along this portion of East Meadow Drive and staff believes
that the Austria Haus will enhance the character of the village.
The exterior building materials of the Austria Haus are a mixture of stone, stucco and
wood. The roof material is proposed to be a reddish, tile-type roof similar to the material
used on the Sonnenalp Bavaria Haus. The applicant has proposed to incorporate
irrigated flower boxes into the design of the structure. The use of divided light windows
all around the building creates a European{eel and reduces the appearance of too much
glass. Staff believes that the combination of building materials has been well
incorporated into the design of the Austria Haus. The applicant has proposed that the
exterior stucco color be an off-white to yellowish/cream color to blend in with the exteriors
of the Mountain Haus and the Village Center buildings.
The height of the Austria Haus exceeds fie allowable building height of the Public
Accommodaflon Zone Distdct by approximately nine feet. The development standards for
the underlying zone district indicate that the maximum height for buildings with sloping
roofs shall be 48 feet. The applicant is requesting hat the maximum building height for
the Austria Haus be approximately 57 feet. The 57-foot building height is based on
existing (1997) topography of the Austria Haus property, and not the original topography
V of the site (pre-1963). Original topography of the site is not available, since the Austria
'1\ Haus was constructed in Vail prior to zoning (and prior to the requirement that a
B.
topographic survey be submitted prior to development). Staff believes, based upon the
location of the existing retaining walls and the condition of the streambank, that the site
was "cut" when the Austria Haus was built. While it is difficult to know exactly how much
of the site was "cuf', staff would conservatively estimate that approximately 2 - 3 feet of
soil was removed. Given this conservative consideration, staff would estimate the actual
building height proposed for the Austria Haus would be 54 - 55 feet. According to the
Vail Village Master Plan Conceptual Building Height Plan, the Austria Haus should be 3-4
stories in height, with a building story being approximately nine feet, excluding the roof.
The plan further indicates that one additional floor of residential/lodging may also be
accommodated on the Austria Haus site.
Uses, activity and density which provide a compatible, efficient and workable
relationship with surrounding uses and activity.
The Austia Haus is located immediately adjacent to the Vail Village Commercial Core.
The Austria Haus is bound on the east by Slifer Square and the Mountain Haus, on the
west by the Village Genter residential/commercialbuildings and on the south by Gore
Creek, the Covered Bridge Building, Gasthof Gramshammer and the Creekside Building.
Each of these buildings are a mixed-use development incorporating commercial/retail
space with residential and/or accommodation units.
The applicant is proposing a mixed-use development that is in compliance with the uses
allowed in the underlying zone district. The underlying zoning of Public Accommodation
encourages the development of lodges (accommodation units) and accessory eating,
drinking and retail establishments at a density of twenty{ive dwelling units per acre. The
applicant is proposing to redevelopment the Austria Haus at a density of 35 dwelling units
per acre, with 4,440 sq. ft of commercial/retail space on the main level of the building.
Included in the density figure are twenty-two member-owned club units (fractional fee),
twenty-five hotel rooms (accommodation units) and one on-site manager's residence
(Type lll, Employee Housing Unit).
The applicant's proposal ditfers greatly from the existing use of the property. Currently,
the Austria Haus includes thirty-six accommodation units, and one dwelling unit, equaling
nineteen dwelling units per acre, a restaurant and a limited amount of commercial/retail
space on the east end ol the building. Parking at the Austria Haus is accommodated by
a twenty-five space surface parking lot. Of the twenty{ive spaces, lifteen are considered
legal, non-conforming parking spaces. The other ten spaces are off-site and are not
considered legal parking spaces for zoning purposes. An informal loading/delivery/trash
area exists on the west end of the building.
Employee Housing Requirements
As indicated in a number of the goals and objectives of the Town's Master Plans,
providing affordable housing for employees is a critical issue which should be addressed
through the planning process for Special Development District proposals. In reviewing
the Austria Haus proposal for employee housing needs, staff relied on the Town of Vail
Employee Housing Report.
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 the incremental increase of employees (square footage per use), that result
from the Austria Haus redevelopment. A copy of the " Suggested Employment
Categories and Ranges for Vail Expressed as Emoloyees per 1000 Square Feef' 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
generation" ordinances requiring developers to provide affordable housing for a
percentage of the "new" employees resulting from commercial development. "NeW'
employees are defined as the incremental increase in employment needs resulting trom
commercial redevelopment. Each of the communities assesses a different percentage of
affordable housing a developer must provide for the "new" employees. For example,
Tefluride requires developers to provide housing lor 40/o (0.40) of the "neW' employees,
Aspen requires that 60% (0.60) of the "new" employees are provided housing and
Whistler requires fiat 100% (1.00) of the 'new' employees be provided housing by the
developer. In comparison, Vail has conservatively determined that developers shall
provide housing lor 15/" (0.15) or 30% (0.30) of the "new" employees resulting from
commercial development. When a project is proposed to exceed the density allowed by
the underlying zone district, the 30% (0.30) figure is used in the calculation. lf a projecf ls
proposed it, br below, the density allowed by the underlying zone district, the 1 5% (0.1 5)
figure is used. The Austria Haus Special Development District proposal exceeds the
density permitted by the underlying zone district, and therefore, the 30% figure shall be
used.
According to the applicant, in 1997, Sonnenalp Properties, Inc., will need to employ 36
individuals to operate the existing Austria Haus. This employee figure takes into account
the maximum staffing requirement for the Christmas and President's Day weeks. Of the
36 individuals, five are needed to staff the front desk, 13 are required for housekeeping
purposes, 16 are needed to operate the bar and restaurant, and the remaining two
individuals are needed to provide other facilities support functions.
Sonnenalp Properties, lnc. has provided proposed employment figures for the operation
of the redeveloped Austria Haus. Sonnenalp Properties, Inc. estimates a need for
approximately 32 employees, plus an unknown retail need. Excluding retail, this figure
indicates a slight reduction in the employment need. The reduction in employment need
is due to the removal of the bar and restaurant operation from the Austria Haus. After
redevelopment, the Sonnenalp will only be providing continental food service to the
guests of the Austria Haus. A copy of the "Austria Haus Staffing Roster" has been
attached for reference.
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
Austria Haus. A summary ol the Employee Housing Generation Analysis is as follows:
10
Bottom of Range Calculatlons:
a)
b)
c)
d)
Retail/Service Commercial
Office: Real Estate
Lodging*
Multi-Family (club units)
= 3,660 sq. ft. @(5/1000 sq. ft.) =18.3 employees
= 780 sq. ft. @(6/1000 sq. ft.) = 4.7 employees
= 25 units @(0.25/room) = 6.2 employees
= 22 units @(O.4/unit) = 8.8 employees
Total =38.0 employees
(-36 existing employees)
(X 0.30 multiplier)
= 2 employees
= 1 new employee
Middle of Range Calculations:
a)
b)
c)
d)
Retail/Service Commercial
Otfice: Real Estate
Lodging'
Multi-Family (club units)
= 3,660 sq. ft. @(6.5/1000 sq. ft.)=23.8 employees
= 780 sq. ft. @(7.5/1,000sq. ft.) = 5.9 employees
= 25 units @(0.75lroom) =18.7 employees
= 22 units @(0.4/unit)
Total
(-36 existing employees)
= 8.8 employees
(X 0.30 multiplier) = 7 new employees
Total
(-36 existing employees)
(X 0.30 multiplier)
=57.2 employees
=22 employees
=76.3 employees
=41 employees
=13 new employees
Top of Range Calculations:
a) Retail/Service Commercial
b) Office: Real Estate
c) Lodging.
d) Multi-Family (club units)
= 3,660 sq. ft. @(8/1000 sq. ft.) =29.3 employees
= 780 sq. ft. @(9/1000 sq. ft.) = 7.0 employees
= 25 units @(1.2S/room) =31.2 employees
= 22 units @(O'4/unit) = 8'8 employees
11
"Staff Recommended Range Calc :
The safi believes that the Austria Haus redevelopmentwill create a need for 34 additional
ernployees. Of the 34 additional employees, at least 1'l employees (30%) will need to be
provided deed-restricted housing by the developers of the Austria Haus. The stafl
recommended range is based on:
1. the type of retail and office use proposed in the commercial space within the
Austria Haus:
2. the size of the Austria Haus lodging component; and
3. the high-level of services and amenities proposed by the developers for the
guests ol the Austria Haus.
a) Retail/Service Commercial = 3,660 sq. ft. @(6.5/1000 sq. ft.)=23.8 employees
(middle of range)b) Office: real estate = 780 sq. ft. @(7.5/1000 sq. ft.) = 5.9 employees
(middle of range)c) Lodging* = 25 units @(1.25/room) =31.2 employees
(top of range)d) Multi-Family (club units) = 22 units @(O.4/unit) = 8.8 employees
(range does not vary)
Total =69.7 employees
(-36 existing employees) =34 employees
(X 0.30 multiplier) =11 new employees
'Lodging has e particularly large variation of employees per room, depending upon lactors such a size of tacilily and level ol
service/suppoat sewices and amenilies proviied.
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 MunicipalCode.
The applicant has indicated the many of the Austria Haus' operational and functional
needs will be met by combining services with the Sonnenalp Bavaria Haus. For example,
the following services will be shared with the Bavaria Haus:
r Marketing and Salesr Accountingr Reservationsr Laundry Facilitiesr Room Servicer Employee Caleteriar Human Resourcesr Purchasingr Trash Removal
t2
c.
While it makes sense from a operational standpoint for the Austria Haus to share certain
operational and functional needs with the Bavaria Haus, there is some question as to
whether the Austria Haus should be required to be a stand-alone operation. Staff further
questions how the delivery of goods (linens, trash, food, etc.) will be accomplished and
whether an adequate amount of common storage space for housekeeping purposes is
being provided. The use of East Meadow Drive for the delivery of goods and services has
been increasing, resulting in pedestrian conflicts and traffic congestion, and therefore,
additional delivery vehicle traffic should be avoided. Staff would recommend that the
applicant address these issues and concerns with the PEC.
Overall, staff believes that the density and uses proposed by the applicant for the Austria
Haus do not conflict with the compatibility, efficiency or workability of the surrounding
uses and/or activities. In fact, staff feels that the proposed Austria Haus redevelopment
will enhance the existing uses and activities in the Village.
Gompliance with parking and loading requirements as outlined in Chapter 18.52. of
the Town of Vail Municipal Code.
Parking and loading requirements for development are established in Chapter 18.52 of
the MunicipalCode. The parking and loading requirements are based on the square
footage of the uses proposed within a building. Based on the square footage ol the uses
proposed by the applicant, 79.26 parking spaces and one loading/delivery berth are
required on-site. The Municipal Code allows "grandfathering" of the existing legal non-
conforming parking spaces. Currently, fifteen legal, non-conforming parking spaces exist
on the property. Therefore, the parking requirement for the proposed Austria Haus
redevelopment is 64.26 new paking spaces. The applicant is prciposing an underground
parking structure designed to accommodate forty-eight parking spaces and an enclosed
trash facility. This leaves 16.26 additional parking spaces required. The applicant is
proposing to meet the additional parking requirement by paying into the Town of Vail
Parking Fund. Parking spaces are currently valued at $16,333.38. The cost per parking
space will increase on January 1 , 1997, as the figure is adjusted based on the Consumer
Price Index. The applicant will be required to pay-in-lieu at the designated rate, at the
time of building permit application. The Town of Vail Finance Department states that the
1997 adjusted rate is not yet available. lt is believed the adjusted rlte will be available by
March 1;1ee7. tb7re,P
The applicant is proposing one loading/delivery berth in the front entry drop-off area,
located on the north side of the building, adjacent to East Meadow Drive. Much of the
drop-off area is within Town of Vail right-of-way. Statf recognizes that this area is
conveniently located near the entrances to the front desk and the commercial/retail
shops, however, we feel that the use of the drop-off area may be compromised by the
loading and delivery of goods. In staff's opinion, the front entry drop-otf area should be
used by the guests of the Austria Haus. staff believes that trying to accommodate
loading and delivery in this area will result in conflicts between guests, vehicles accessing
the parking structure, and delivery trucks. Staff would recommend that the applicant
revisit the alternative of providing the loading and delivery facili$ in the underground
parking structure. Staff understands this is not the desire of the owners of the Village
Genter Gondominiums, yetwe believe the impact can be mitigated with appropriate
screening.
13
D. Gonformity with the applicable elements of the Vail Comprehenslve Plan, Town
policies and Urban Design Plan.
Vail Land Use Plan
The goals contained in the Vail Land Use Plan are to be used as the Town's policy
guidelines during the review process of establishing a new Special Development District.
Staff has reviewed the Vail Land Use Plan and believes the following policies are relevant
to the review of this proposal:
l- General Growth/Development
1.1 Vail should continue to grow in a controlled environment, maintaining a
balance between residential, commercial and recreational uses to serve
both the visitor and the permanent resident.
1.2 The quality of the environment including air, water, and other natural
resources should be protected as the Town grows.
1.3 The quality of development should be maintained and upgrade whenever' possible.
1.4 The original theme of the old Village Core should be carried into new
development 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).
1 .13 Vail recognizes its stream tract as being a desirable land feature as well
as its potential for public use.
A 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.
3.4 Commercial growth should be concentrated in existing commercial areas
to accommodate both local and visitor needs.
4. Village Gore/Lionshead
4.1 Future commercial development should continue to occur primarily in
existing commercial areas. Future commercial development in the Core
areas needs to be carefully controlled to facilitate access and delivery.
4.2 Increased density in the Core areas is acceptable so long as the existing
character of each area is preserved through the implementation of the
Urban Design Guide Plan and the VailVillage Master Plan.
!4
5,Resadential
Jltt Quality timeshare units should be accommodated to help keep occupancy
rates up.
Staff believes the proposed establishment of the new Special Development District (f35)
is in concert with the goals and policies of the Vail Land Use Plan as outlined above.
Vail Village Master Plan
The Vail Village Master Plan is intended to serve as a guide to the statf, review boards
and Town Council in analyzing future proposals for development in Vail Village and in
legislating effective ordinances to deal with the such development. The statf has
identified the following goals, objectives and policies as being relevant to this proposal:
&<h is @'er+bl€
Goai *t Encourage high quality rcdevelopmentwhile preserving the unique
architectural scale of the Village in order to sustaln lts sense of
community and identaty.
1.1 Objective: lmplement a consistent Development Review Process to
reinforce the character of the Village.
Development and improvement projects approved in
the Village shall be consistent with the goals,
objectives, policies and design considerations as
outlined in the VailVillage Master Plan and Urban
Design Guide Plan.
1.2 Objective: @ Encourage the upgrading and redevelopment of residential- and commercial facilities.
1.2.1 Policy: Additional development may be allowed as
identified by the action plan as is consistent with the
VailVillage Master Plan and Urban Design Guide
Plan.
1.3 Obiective: 6 Enhance new development and redevelopment throughV public improvements done by private developers working in
cooperation with the Town.
Qr.s.t poticy:Public improvements shall be developed with the
participation of the private sector working with the
Town.
Goal #2 To foster a strong tourbt lndBtry and promote year-round economic
health and viabiliry lor the Village and for the communlty as a whole.
Recognize he 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 patterns.
2.1 Objective:
15
Goal#3
2.3 Objective:ncrease the number of residential units available for short-
term, overnight accommodations.
2.3.1 Policy: 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-term overnight
rental.
2.4 Objective: Encourage the development of a variety of new commercial
activity where compatible with existing land uses.
2.5 Objective:
O
Encourage the continued upgrading, renovation and
maintenance of existing lodging and commercial facilities to
better serve the needs of our guests.
2.5.1 Policv: Recreation amenities, common areas, meeting
tacilities and other amenities shall be preserved and
enhanced as a part of any redevelopment of lodging
properties.
2.6 Objective: Encourage the development of affordable housing units
through the efforts of the private sector.
@ z.o.t poticy:Employee housing units may be required as part of
any new or redeveloped project requesting density
over that allowed by existing zoning.
To recognize as a top priority the enhancement of the walking
experience throuEhout the Vlllage.
3.1 Objective:Physically improve the existing pedestrian ways by
landscaping and other improvements.
A 3.1.1 Policy: Private development projects shall incorporateU, streetscape improvements (such as paver
treatments, landscaping, lighting and seating
areas), along adjacent pedestrian ways.
3.1.3 Policy: Flowers, trees, water features and other
landscaping shall be encouraged throughout the
Town in locations adjacent to, or visible from, public
areas.
3.2 Objective: Minimize the amount of vehicular traffic in the Village to the
greatest extent possible.
3.2.1 Policy: Vehicular traffic will be eliminated or reduced to
absolutely minimal necessary levels in the
pedestrianized areas of the Village.
16
3.4 Obiective:Develop additional sidewdks, pedestrian-only walkways
and accessible green space areas, including pocket parks
and stream access.
Private development projects shall be required to
incorporate new sidewalks along streets adjacent to
the project as designated in the Vail Village Master
Plan and/or Recreation Trails Master Plan.
Goal#4 To preserve exlstlng open space areas and expand green space
opportunitles.
4.1 Objective: lmprove existing open space areas and create new plazas
with green space and pocket parks. Recognize the
different roles of each type of open space in forming the
overall fabric of the Village.
4.1.4 Policy: Open space improvements, including the addition 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 projects.
Goal#5 Increase and improve the capacity, efficiency and aesthetics of the
transportation and circulation system throughout the Village.
5.1 Objective:Meet parking demands with public and private parking
facilities.
5.1.5 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.
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 rhe village.
6.1 Objective: Provide service and delivery facilities for existing and new
development.
Qe.q.zporicy,
C VailVillage Master Plan and Building Height Plan
Generally speaking, it is the goal of the Bullding Height Plan to maintain the concentration
of lorrr-scale buildings in the Core area, while positioning larger buildings along the
nor$ern periphery. According to he Conceptual Building Height Plan contained within
the VailVillage Master Plan, the Ausfia Haus is located within an area proposed to have
building heights ol a maximum range of three to four stories. A building story ls defined
as 9' of height, not including the roof.
t7
,According to the Action Plan, the Austria Haus property is an area intended for
GsidenfaUlodgilng Inflll along the south slde of the property and commercial infill along
the north side of the property.
According to the Vail village Master Plan, the Austria Haus property is located within
mixed-use sub-area #1-8, Sonnenalp (Austria Haus)/Slifer Square:
"Commercial infillalong East Meadow Drive to provide a stronger edge to street
and commercial activity generators to reinforce he pedestrian loop throughout the
Village. Focus of infill is to provide improvements to pedestrian circulation with
separated walkway including buffer, along East Meadow Drive. Accommodating
on-site parking and maintaining the bus route along East Meadow Drive are two
significant constraints that must be addressed. One additional floor of
residential/lodging may also be accommodated on this site. Specific emphasis
should be placed on the following Vail Village Master Plan objectives: 2.3,2.4,
2.6, 3.1, 3.2, 3.3, 3.4, 4.1, 5.1, 6.1.'
Vail Village D,esign Conslderatlons
The Town of Vail adopted the Vail Village Design Considerations in 'l980. The Design
Considerations were revised in '1993. The Design Considerations are considered an
integral part of the Vail Village Urban Design Plan. The Design Considerations are
intended to:
' guide growth and change in ways that will enhance and preserve the essential
qualities ol the Village; and
> serve as design guidelines instead ol 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 CONSIDERATIONS
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, pleasant pedestrian ways. Many of the improvements
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 streets (bus routes, delivery
access), a totally care-free pedestrian system is not achievable throughout the entire
Village. Therefore, several levels of pedestrianization have been identified. The level of
pedestrianization most appropriate for the proposed Austria Haus redevelopment is the
joint vehicle/pedestrian use of the roadway.
18
Staff Response:
The applicant has met on numerous occasions with the Town staff to discuss pedestrian
improvements. Ths staff has concluded that the improvements recommended for East
Meadow Drive ifithe '|991 Town of Vail Streetscape Master Plan should be implemented.
Thls includes a reduction in street width from 30 feet to 26 feet (1 4 foot bus lane and 12
foot attached, paver pedestrian walk). The applicant is further proposing to construct a
12 - 20 foot wide, heated pedestrian walkway immediately adjacent to the north side of
the building: Staff believes fiat these improvements reinforce and slgnificantly improve
the pedestrian walkways throughout the Village by providing places for people to walk
without forcing them into the bus lane. The creative use of concrete unit pavers
emphasizes the pedestrian character and offers a clear and attractive pedestrian route.
The retail space on the main level of the Austria Haus closes the commercial loop from
Slifer Square to Village Center.
B. VEHICLE PENETRATION
To maximize to the extent possible, all non-resident traffic should be routed along the
Frontage Road to Vail Village/Lionshead Parking Sfuctures.
In conjunction with pedestrianization objectives, major emphasis is focused upon
reducing auto penetration into the center of the Village. Vail Road and Vail Valley Drive
will continue to serve as major routes for service and resident access to the Village.
Road constrictions, tratfic 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. Alternative access points and private parking relocation, where feasible,
should be considered to lurther reduce traffic conflicts in the Village.
. Slaff-Elespelss;
The redevelopment of the Austria Haus will increase vehicular traffic on Village Center
Road. According to the Environmental lmpact Assessment-Austria Haus
Redevelopment, prepared by Design Workshop, Inc.:
"A slight increase automobile traffic is expected because of the projected increase
in the number of visitors generated annually by the project. What is not known,
however, is how many of these additional guests will arrive by car; it is likely the
largest number of guests will continue to arrive in the winter and that most will
arrive by van from the airport. Van deliveries will increase somewhat. Those
guests that arrive in their own car are likely to leave the car in the garage after
they arrive, as the center village location of the project eliminates the need for a
car. lf there is a potential for congestion anywhere, it is most likely to be in the
small drop-off parking area in front of the building, where check-ins, deliveries and
lost drivers may converge. To some extent, this can be mitigated by improved
roadway directional signs, speedy guest valet service, careful management of
deliveries and incentives to encourage guests to leave their cars at home."
Atong with the increase in automobile traffic, there will be an increase in delivery vehicle
traffic due to an increase in the commercial square footage on the property. The
applicants anticipate that deliveries to the retail shops will likely arrive via UPS or similar
types of couriers. Deliveries are to be accommodated in the drop-off area in the front of
the building.
19
Staff agrees with Design Workshop's assessment of the potential traffic impacts. While
there will likely be an increase in traffic on Village Center Road, there will not be an
increase in traffic on the pedestrian portion of East Meadow Drive. The traffic control
gate located at the intersection of Village Center Road and East Meadow Drive will
continue to prohibit all vehicle traffic except Town of Vailbuses. Staff feels he applicant
has addressed traffic issues to the extent possible.
C. STREETSCAPEFRAMEWORK
To improve the quality of the walking experience and give continuity to the pedestrian
ways, as a continuous system, two general types of improvements adjacent to the
walkways are considered:
1. Open space and landscaping, berms, grass, flowers and tree planting as a
soft, colorful framework linkage along pedestrian routes; and plazas and
park greenspaces as open nodes and focal points along those routes.
2- Infill commercial storefronts, expansion of existing buildings, or new infill
development to create new commercial activity generators to give
streetlife and visual interest, as attractions at key locations along
pedestrian routes.
It is not intended to enclose all Village streets with buildings as in the core areas. Nor is it
desirable to leave pedestrian streets in the open in somewhat undefined condition evident
in many other areas of Vail. Rather, it is desired to have a variety of open and enclosed
spaces, both built and landscaped, which create a strong framework for pedestrian walks,
as well as visual interest and activity.
Statf Response:
The Ausria Haus redevelopment improves me sfieetscape framework through the
Creation of new commerclal activity and increases visual interest along East Meadow
Drive. As stated previously, staff believes the proposed redevelopment closes the critical
commercial loop in the Village and provides new street life where very little currently
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 ol exterior spaces have been
developed by designers, based on the characteristics of human vision. They suggest
that:
"an external 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 height is greater than the width it comes to
resemble a canyon".
20
In 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 1/2 to 1 ratio.
Using the average facade height on both sides will generally still be a guide to the
comfortableness of the enclosure being created.
In some instances, the "canyon" effect is acceptable and even desirable. For example,
as a short connecting linkage between larger spaces, to give variety to the walking
experience. For sun/shade reasons it is often advantageous to orient any longer
segments in a north/south direction. Long canyon streets in an east/irvest 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 pedestrian emphasis to overcome the
"canyon" effect.
Canopies, awnings, arcades and building extensions can all create a pedestrian focus
and divert attention from the upper building heights and "canyon" etfect.
. Statf Response:
East Meadow Drive, and the pedestrian walkway adjacent to the Austria Haus, averages
approximately 50 teet in width. The Austria Haus (eaveline) adjacent to East Meadow
Drive and the pedestrian walkway is approximately 30 feet in height. Given that East
Meadow Drive is enclosed only on one side, and the arcade and landscaping creates an
emphasis on the ground level of the building,ffifl belleves the proposed Austria Haus
creaEs a "comfortable" enclosure of the stredtand does not create a'canyon" effect.
E. STREET EDGE
Buildings in the Village core should form a strong but irregular edge to the street.
Unlike many American towns, there are no standard sehack 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 to give strong
definition to the 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
tends to be monotonous. With only a few exceptions in the Village, slightly irregular
facade lines, building jogs, and landscaped areas, give the life to the street and visual
interest for pedestrian travel.
Where buildings jog to create activity pockets, other elements can be used to continue
the street edge: low planter walls, tree planting, raised sidewalks, texture changes in
ground surface, arcades, raised decks.
Plazas, patios, and green areas are important focal points for gathering, resting, orienting
and should be distributed throughout the Village with due consideration to spacing, sun
access, opportunities for views and pedestrian activity.
2t
Staff Response:
lnitially, the Austria Haus design lacked the irregular street edge of other properties in vail
Mllage. The applicant, at the request of the staff and PEC, has attempted to introduce a
more lrregular sreet edge through the horizontal stepping of the building on the east and
west ends. The east end of the building has been stepped back 10 feet from the property
f ine and the northeast corner has been cutback an additional 3-112 teet, opening this end
of building up to Slifer Square. The front entry tower was moved to the west end of the
building and the west-end of the building was stepped towards the street. While it would
be the staff's desire to see more stepping in the building, statf recognizes the constraints
in doing so. Staff believes the irregular configuration of the landscape planters in front of
the building helps to lessen the rather long, linear and uninterrupted street edge along the
center portion of the Austria Haus.
F. BUILDING HEIGHT
Vail Village is perceived as a mix of two and three story facades, although 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.
. SlafflGsponss:
As discussed previously, the Austria Haus exceeds the allowable building height
prescribed for the Public Accommodation Zone District. However, staff does not feel that
the proposed height of the Austria Haus is excessive, given the locatlon of the building in
relation to the Village and the height of the buildings on the adjoining propefiies. The
Mountain Haus (to the east) has an existing roof ridge of 74'above grade. The
approximate height of the Village Center Condominiums (to the west) is as follows:
Building A (closest to the Austria Haus = 45'; Building B = 78'; and Building C = 56'.
The Austria Haus roof steps down on both ends of the buiHing, reducing the creation of a
"canyon" along the west property line and resulting in a building that is less obtrusive (on
Slifer Square) on the east end. The applicant has submitted a scale model of the new
structure in its Village Core conte)C and this modelwill be available for use by the PEC
during the final hearing.
G. VIEWS AND FOCAL POINTS
vail's mountain/valley setting is a fundamental part of its identity. views of the
mountains, ski slopes, creeks and other natural features are reminders to our visitors of
the mountain environment and, by repeated visibility, are orientation reference points.
Certain building features also provide important orientation references and visual focal
points. The most significant view corridors in the Village have been adopted as part of
Chapter 18.73 of the Vail Municipal Gode. The view corridors adopted should not be
considered exhausted. When evaluating 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 public spaces, and include
views of the ski mountain, the Gore Range, the Clock Tower, the Rucksack Tower and
other important man-made and natural elements that contribute to the sense of place
associated 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 corridor, unless approved under Chapter 18.73. Adopted corridors are
zz
listed in Chapter 18.73 of the Vail MunicipalCode. Whether affecting adopted view
corridors or not, the impact ol proposed development on views from public ways and
public spaces must be identified and considered where appropriate.
. Statf Resoonse:
Although not directly impacting one of the five adopted view corridors, as listed in chapter
18.73 of the Vail Municipal code, rhe height of the building will have impacts from the Vail
Transportation Center (transit terminal) and will also impact views from the west and
central stairs. Public views of the Village (roofline of structures) will be blocked from
these areas, however, views of Vail Mountain will remain. Overall, staff feels that the
benefits providing a comfortable enclosure to the street, and completing the pedestrian
and retail connection from Crossroads to the Covered Bridge is positive. Staff feels that
tfie completion of this pedestrian connection is in compliance with Goal #3 of the Vail
Village Master Plan:
"To recognize as a top priority the enhancement of the walking experience
throughout the village.'
H. SERVICE AND DELIVERY
Any building expansion should preserve the functions of existing service alleys. The few
service alleys that exist in the Village are extremely important to minimizing vehicle
congestion on pedestrian ways. The use of, and vehicular access to, those alleys should
not be eliminated except where functional alternatives are not provided.
In all new and remodeled construction, delivery which avoids or reduces impacts on
pedestrian ways should be explored; and adopted whenever practical, for immediate or
future use. Rear access, basement and below ground delivery corridors reduce
congestion. Weather protection increases delivery efficiency substantially.
Below grade delivery corridors are found in a few buildings in VailVillage (SiEmark/Gore
Creek Plaza, Village Center, Vail Village Inn). Consideration should be given to e)ftending
these corridors, where feasible, and the creation of new ones. As buildings are
constructed or remodeled, the opportunity may exist to develop segments of a future
system.
. Staff Response:
Through the course of the review of the Austria Haus redevelopment proposal, several
loading and delivery options were explored.
The applicant had originally proposed to provide one loading and delivery berth in the
underground parking structure. However, concerns were expressed by the Village Center
Condominium owners that they would be negatively impacted by the noise generated
from the delivery vehicles, since the access to the underground location was immediately
adjacent to their units.
The applicant had also explored the possibility of gaining underground access to their
structure through the Village Center garage. lt was determined that delivery vehicles
could not enter through Village Center due to height limitations in the garage.
As mentioned previously, fre applicant is proposing to provide for loading/delivery in the
front entry drop-oft area. The applicant anticipates that deliveries to the retail/commercial
shops will arrive via UPS or similar types of courier. Staff continues to believe that this
23
location may negatively impact the pedestrian use of this area of East Meadow Drive and
suggests the applicant continue to explore placing the loading and delivery berth in the
underground structure, as originally contemplated.
I. SUN / SHADE
Due to Vail's alpine climate, sun is an important comfort factor, especially in winter, fall
and spring. Shade areas have ambient temperatures substantially below those of
adjacent direct sunlight areas. On all but the warmest 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.
ln all building construction, shade shall be considered in massing and overall height
consideration. Notwithstanding, sun/shade considerations are not intended to restrict
building height allowances, but rather to influence the massing of buildings. Limited
height exceptions may be granted to meet this criteria.
. Slaff-Elespsnss
Although the proposed height of the building will diminish the amount of sun, and likewise
increase shading, along East Meadow Drive (north side of the project), the provision of
heated public walkways effectively mitigates this consideration, thus providing ice-free
and snow-free sidewalks. Additionally, the "opening up" ol Slifer Square will insure
adequate light, air and open space to a public gathering space. Overall, staff believes the
applicant's proposal complies with the above-described considerations.
2. ARCHITECruRE/LANDSCAPE CONSIDERATIONS
ROOFS
Where visible, roofs are often one of the most dominant architectural elements in any built
environment. In 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 consistenily 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 within the Village are typically gable in form and of moderate-to{ow pitch. Shed roofs are
lrequenfly 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, to the general
criteria, but do have an established local vernacular-style which should be respected.
24
Statf Response
The roof form of the Austria Haus has been revised several times from what was
originally proposed. The original roof design ol the Austria Haus had a significant amount
of flat roof area. The majority of flat roof has now been replaced with a sloping roof
leading to a more traditional ridge. Three areas of flat roof, compromising a total of
approximately 444 square feet, remain on the building. These flat roof portions break up
the ridge line and provide locations for screened mechanical equipment (fans, vents, etc).
The addition of the sloping roof leading to a ridge increased the overall building height by
approximately three feet, since the roof pitch ot 6l'12 was not changed. The ends of the
ridge have been "clipped", resulting in a hip roof form. While a hip roof is generally
considered inconsistent with the character of the Village, the applicant believes this roof
form helps to reduce the mass of the building. The applicant had at one time provided
gable ends to both the east and west ends of the building, but has since "clipped" the
gable ends and lowered the roof eaveline at the request of the Village Center
Condominium owners.
Staff would like to see the ridge carried to the ends of the roof creating a gable end,
rather than a hip. However, staff recognizes that this roof form does tend to increase the
perceived height of the building, especially on the east and west ends. Staff will raise this
issue with the Design Review Board.
Pitch
Roof slopes in the Village typically range from 3112to 6/12, with slightly steeper pitches in limited
appfications. Again, for visual consistency this general 3112-6112 range should be preserved.
. Staff Response
The pitch of the proposed Austria Haus roof is 6/12 and is in compliance with this
guideline.
Overhangs
Generous roof overhangs are also an established architectural leature in the Village - a
tradtional 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
ways adjacent to buildings. Snow slides and runoff hazards can be reduced by roof orientation,
gutters, arcades, etc.
Overhang details are treated with varying degrees of ornamentation. Structural elements such
as roof beams are expressed beneath the overhangs, simply or decoratively carved. The roof
fascia is thick and wide, giving a substantial edge t0 the roof.
. Slall-Elesperss
Staff suggests that the applicant increase the roof overhangs on the building. Currently,
the overhangs vary from two feet to three feet. Stafl would like to see all the roof
overhangs at least three feet. Again, statf will review this consideration with the Design
Review Board.
za
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.
. Staff Resoonse
The roof form on the Austria Haus would be considered a simple composition of rool
planes. Statf believes the roof composition proposed by the applicant is consistent with
the intent of this architectural consideration.
Stepped Roofs
As buildings are stepped io reflect existing grade changes, resulting roof steps should be made
where the height change will be visually significant. Variations which are too subtle appear to be
more stylistic than functional, and out of character with the more straight-fonrvard roof design
typical in the Village.
. SlaflEesponse
The Austria Haus site is relatively flat (by Vail standards). While the building does not
need to step to follow the topography, vertical and horizontal steps have been
incorporated into the roof design. The vertical and horizontal steps provide a reduction in
the overall mass of the buiEing and add to the architectural and visual interest of the
building.
Materials
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 the appearance
of the above.
. Staff Response
Most recently, wood shakes and wood shingles are being discouraged for use as a
roofing material due to fire salety concerns. At the recommendation of the Town of Vail
Fire Department, the staff has been encouraging developers to use gravel, asphalt, tile,
metal and other more fire-resistant rooling materials on new buildings.
The applicant is proposing to use reddish tiles on the roof of the Austria Haus. The tiles
will be similar in appearance to those used on the Sonnenalp Bavaria Haus. The staff
believes this is an appropriate roof material to use on this project.
Construction
Common roof problems and design considerations in this climate include:
- snowslides onto pedestrian walks
- gutters freezing
- roof dams and water infiltration
- heavy snow loads
26
Careful attention to these functional details is recommended, as well as lamiliarity with the local
building code, proven construction details, and Town ordinances.
For built-up roofs, pitches ot 4112 or steeper do not hold gravel well. For shingle roofs, pitches of
4112 or shallower often result in ice dams and backllow leakage under the shingles.
Cold-roof construction is strongly preferred, unless warm-roof benefits for a specific application
can be demonstrated. Cold-roofs are double-roofs which insulate and prevent snow melt from
internal building heat. By retaining snow on the roof, many of the problems listed can be
reduced. Periodic snow removal will be required and should be anticipated in the design.
Roof gutters tend to ice-in completely and become ineffective in the Vail climate, especially in
shaded north-side locations. Heating the interior circumference with heat-tape elements or other
devices is generally necessary to assure adequate run-off control in colder months.
. Slaflllesponse:
The applicant is proposing a cold-roof construction atop the Austria Haus. Through the
review of a building permit, staff will ensure the roof construction complies with the
standards prescribed for the Vail climate.
FACADES
Materials
Stucco, brick, wood (and glass) are the primary building materials found in the Village. While not
wishing to restrict design freedom, existing conditions show that within this small range of
materials much variation and individuality are possible while preserving a basic harmony. Too
many diverse materials weaken the continuity and repetition which unifies the streetscape.
of the above materials, 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 stucco by its use in portions, at least, of all new
facades, and by assuring that other materials are not used to the exclusion of stucco in any sub-
area within the Village.
. Staff Response
The exterior materials proposed by the applicant are a combination of stone, stucco and
wood. No one material is proposed to dominate the exterior of the Austria Haus. Statf
believes the applicant has complied with this particular architectural consideration.
Color
There is greater latitude in the use of color in the Village, but still a discernible consistency within
a general range of colors.
For wood surfaces, trim or siding, darker color tones are prefened - browns, greys, blue-greys,
dark olive, slate-greens, etc. Stucco colors are generally light - white, beige, pale-gold, or other
light pastels. Other light colors could be appropriate, as considered on a case-by-case basis.
Bright 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 accent elements.
27
Generally, to avoid both "busyness," and weak visual interest, the variety of major wall colors
should not exceed four, nor be less than two.
A color/material change between the ground tloor and upper floors is a common and effective
reinforcement of the pedestrian scale of the street.
. Slaff-Elesp@se
The applicant has proposed an exterior building color that is compatible with the color of
the existing buildings in the vicinity of the Austria Haus. Staff would like to point out that
the applicant is required to obtain Design Review Board (DRB) approval prior to
construction and that any concerns of the PEC on this topic will be brought to the
attention of the DRB.
Transparency
Pedestrian scale is created in many ways, but a major factor is the openness, attractiveness, and
generally public character of the ground floor facade of adjacent buildings. Transparent store
fronts are "people attractors," 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
proportionately more transparent than upper floors. Upper floors are typically more residential,
private and thus less open.
As a measure of transparency, the most characteristic and successful ground floor facades
range from 55% to 70% of the total length of the commercial facade. Upper floors are often the
converse, 30/o-45"/" transparent.
Examples of transparency (lineal feet of glass to lineal leet of tacade) on ground level.
- Covered Bridge Building 58o/"- Pepi's Sports 71"/"- Gasthof Gramshammer 48/"- The Lodge 86/"- Golden Peak House 62/"- Casino Building 30/"- Gorsuch Building 51V"
. Slaff-Elespense
A measure of transparency of the Austria Haus (north and east elevations) indicates that
46% (120lineal feet of glass exists along the 263 linealfeet of building) of the ground
floor facade is transparent. Staff recommends that a minimum of 25 lineal feet of
additional glass (55%) be added to the ground floor. This would make the Austria Haus
generally consistent with the transparency of other buildings in the Village.
Windows
ln addition to the general degree of transparency, window details are an important source of
pedestrian scale-giving elements. 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 characteristics of human vision. (Large glass-wall store-fronts
28
suggest uninterrupted viewing, as from a moving car. The sense of intimate pedestrian scale is
diminished). Ground floor display windows are typically raised slightly 18 inches t and do not
extend much over 8 feet above the walkway level. Ground floors, which are noticeably above or
below grade, are exceptions.
The articulation of the window itself is still another element in giving pedestrian scale (human-
related dimensions). Glass areas are usually suMivided to express individual window elements -
and are further subdivided by mullions into small panes - which is responsible for much of the
old-world charm of the Village. Similarly, windows are 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 contrast, as long as they are
generally consistent in form with other windows. Long continuous glass is out of character. Bay,
bow and box windows are common window details, which further variety and massing to facades
- and are encouraged.
Reflective glass, plastic 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.
. Slatfllesponsc
The Austria Haus proposal is in compliance with the abovedescribed design
consideration. Staff believes the use of dormers with windows, bay windows and
windows with mullions adds to the architectural charm and visual integrity of the Austria
Haus. Staff recommends that the use of mullions in the windows be a condition of
approval.
Doors
Like windows, doors are important 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.
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 t0
retaif commercial facades. Although great variations exist, 25-30% t transparency is felt to be a
minimum transparency objective. Private residences, lodges, restaurants, and other non-retail
establishments have ditferent visibility and character needs, and doors should be designed
accordingly. Sidelight windows are also a means of introducing door-transparency as a
complement or substitute for door windows.
Articulated 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, protected entry-ways are encouraged. Dooruays may be recessed,
extended, or covered-
. Staff Resoonse
Staff believes the applicant's proposal complies with the above-described criteria.
29
Trim
Prominent wood trim is also a unifying feature in the Village. 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.
. $laff-Elespensg
Staff believes the applicant's proposal complies with the above-described criteria.
DECKS AND PATIOS
Dining decks and patios, when properly designed and sited, bring people to the streets,
opportunities to look and be looked at, and generally contribute to the liveliness of a busy street-
making a richer pedestrian experience than if those sfeets 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 to give views into the pedestrian walk (and not the reverse).
- physical separation from pedestrian walk.
- overhang gives pedestrian scale/shelter.
Decks and patios should be sited and designed with due consideration to:
- sun
- wind
- views
- pedestrian activity
. Staff Response:
The majority of the decks and patios on the Austria Haus are located on the south side of
the building, facing Gore Creek. These decks and patios are for the use of the guests of
the Austria Haus and not the general public. Staff does believe, however, that the arcade
designed along the north side of the building will provide shelter from the elements for
pedestrians using the heated walkway.
BALCONIES
Balconies occur on almost all buildings in the Village which have at least a second level facade
wall. As strong repetitive features they:
- give scale to buildings.
- give life to the street (when used).
- add variety to building forms.
- provide shelter to pathways below.
30
Statf Response
The majority of the balconies on the Austria Haus are located on the south side of the
building. Several french balconies have been incorporated into the design of the north
side of the building on the upper floors. Staff would like to discuss the design and
repetition of the balconies on the south elevation with the PEC and the applicant. Staff
would like to see less repetition of the balconies, particularly on the south elevation.
Color
They contrast in color (dark) with the building, typically matching the trim colors.
Staff Resoonse
Like the exterior color of the building, the DRB will be reviewing this aspect of the
proposal.
Size
They ertend far enough from the buiEing to cast a prominent shadow pattern. 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.
. Stafi-Bespoose
Statf believes this criteria relates to statf's concerns regarding balconies mentioned
above.
Mass
They 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.
. Slaff.-Besponss
The balconies on the Austria Haus are proposed to be semi-transparent in appearance.
Materials
Wood balconies are by far the most 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-transparency.
Pipe rails, and plastic, canvas or glass panels should be avoided.
3L
. Staff Resoonse
The material to be used in the construction of the balconies on the Austria Haus is wood,
with vertical structural members. A detail of the railing will be reviewed by the DRB.
ACCENT ELEMENTS
The life, and lestive quality of the Village is given by judicious use of accent elements which give
color, movement and contrast to the Village.
Colorful accent elements consistent 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
octaslons.
Umbrellas - over tables on outdoor patios.
Annual color flowers - in beds or in planters.
Accent lighting- buildings, plazas, windows, trees (even Ghristmas lights all winter).
Painted wall graphics - coats of arms, symbols, accent compositions, etc.
Fountains - sculptural, with both winter and summer character.
. Staff Response:
Accent lighting on the buibing, annual flowers in containers and in the planting beds,
potted trees decorated with Christmas lights and irrigated flower boxes are proposed to
provide colorful accent elements on the Austria Haus. An additional accent symbol
(clock, crest, etc.) is proposed for the tower at the front entry. The final design has yet to
be determined.
LANDSCAPE ELEMENTS
Landscape considerations include, but go beyond, the placement of appropriate plant materials.
- plant 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.
Native plants are somewhat limited in variety, but are clearly best able to withstand the harsh
winter climate, and to tie the Village visually with its mountain setting.
32
Trees Shrubs
Narrow{eaf cottonwood Willow
Balsam poplar
Aspen
Lodgepole pine
Colorado spruce
Subalpine fir
Dogwood
Serviceberry
Alpine currant
Chokecherry
Mugho pine
Potentilla
Buffaloberry
. Slaff-Elesponse
A landscape plan has been submitted by the applicant. The landscape plan has been
developed with the assistance of Town statf, since a majority of the landscape
improvements are proposed on Town property. The proposed landscape design takes
into consideration factors such as the location of the plantings (sun/shade), maintenance,
climate, etc. Staff believes the landscape design for the Austria Haus complies with the
above-described criteria.
Paving
The freezelthaw cycle at this altitude virtually eliminates common site-cast concrete as a paving
surface (concrete spall). High-strength concrete may work in selected conditions. Asphalt, brick
(on concrete or on sand), and concrete block appear to be best suited to the area.
In general, paving treatments should be coordinated with that of the adjacent public right-of-way.
The Town uses the following materials for all new construction:
- asphalt: general use pedestrian streets
- brick on concrete: feature areas (plazas, intersections, fountains, etc.)
. Slaff-Besps!.ie
The paving material used in the public areas around the Austria Haus will be the "Vail",
concrete unit paver, laid in the "Vail-pattern" (heningbone). These surfaces will be
heated and will include the access ramp to the parking structure, the front entry drop-off
area and the pedestrian walkway along the store fronts, The applicant has worked with
the Town staff in developing the design of improvemenF in the public right-of-way.
Retaining wdls
Retaining walls, to raise planting areas, often protects the landscape lrom pedestrians and
snowplows, and should provide seating opportunities:
Two types of material are already well established in the Village and should be utilized for
continuity:
- split{ace moss rock veneer - Village Gore pedestrian streets (t}4cical).
- rounded cobble hidden mortar - in open space areas if above type not already
established nearby.
33
. staff Response
No landscape retaining walls are proposed in the construction of the Austria Haus. The
new landscape retaining walls proposed in Slifer Square will match the existing walls in
terms of both type of materials, and application.
Lighting
Light standards should be coordinated with those used by the Town in the public right-of-way.
. Staff Response
As part of the streetscape improvements along East Meadow Drive, the applicant will be
installing six new Village light fixtures. The number and locations of the six new lights
was determined through consultation with Town staff.
Signage
Refer to Town of Vail Signage Ordinance
. Staff Resoonse:
The staff has requested that the applicant prepare a comprehensive sign program for the
Austria Haus. The comprehensive sign program will be reviewed 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 corrected and future ones avoided.
Trash, especially from food service establishments, must be carefully considered; including the
following:
- quantities generated
- pick-up trequency/access
- container sizes
- enclosure location/design
- visual odor impacts
Garbage collection boxes or dumpsters must 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 consistent with that of adjacent buildings.
34
5E.
L.F.
*1. G.
Construction
Durability of the structure and operability of doors in all weather are prime_concerns. Metal
frames and posts behind the preferred 6xterior materials should be considered to withstand the
inevitable abuse these structures suffer.
Staff Response:
The applicant has proposed to incorporate a trash dumpster into the design of the
undergiound parking structure. The trash dumpster will be completely enclosed and
accessible from inside the parking structure. Without a restaurant, the building is not
expected to generate an unusual amount of trash. The driveway is designed to
accommodate trash trucks. Staff believes the applicant's proposal complies the above-
described criteria.
ldentification and mitigation of natural and/or geologic hazards that affect the
property on which the special development distlict is proposed.
Siere are no natural and/or geologic hazards, including the Gore Creek floodplain, that
effect the Austria Haus ProPefi.
Site plan, building design and location and open space provisions designed to
produCe a functiOnal development responsive and sensitive to natural features,
vegetation and overall aesthetic quality of the community.
The applicant has revised the site plan in response to comments received from the
Planning and Environmental Commission and staft during previous worksession
meetings. Most importantly, the applicant has shifted the building on the site to further
buffer the surrounding properties. The applicant has designed the building to respect the
50' Gore Creek Stream setback along the south side of the property and is also
maintaining the required 20'setback along the west property line.
A circulation systEm designed for both vehicles and pedestrians addressing on and
off-site traff ic circulation.
The Austria Haus redevelopment will have major positive impacts on both otf-site and on-
site vehicle and pedestrian tratfic systems surrounding the property. Staff believes that
pedestrian circulation will be substantially improved as result of the redevelopment.
improvements include a new 14-foot wide bus lane and a dedicated, 1 2-foot wide
pedestrian lane along East Meadow Drive, as well as an improved pedestrian streetscape-atong
the north side of the building adjacent to the retail shops. The pedestrian
streetscape will be heated, thus providing ice{ree and snow-free sidewalks. All new
pedestriah improvements propose the use of concrete unit pavers and will connect into
ihe existing improvements to the east (Slifer Square), to the west (Village Cente| and to
the Vail Transportation Center to the north.
Vehicular circulation will also be effected by the redevelopment. The current parking
situation will be improved by removing the surface parking lot and replacing it with an
underground parking structure and a front entry drop-off area. Access to the parking
structure shall be via a heated ramp located at the west end of the project'
35
H. Functional and aesthetic landscaping and open space in order to optimize and
preserve natural features, recreation, views and functions.
The proposed landscape plan will have important beneficial impacts on the quality of the
public spaces in the vicinity of the Austria Haus, due to the improvements to East
Meadow Drive, Slifer Square and the Gore Creek streambank.
The streetscape improvements recommended in the Town of Vail Streetscape Master
Plan will be implemented. The improvements will enhance the pedestrian experience
along East Meadow Drive through the construction of a wider and more attractive heated
walkway adjacent to the retail shops. The implementation of the streetscape
improvements will separate pedestrians from bus traffic by delineating the pedestrian
areas and bus lanes through the use of different paving surfaces.
The applicant has designed improvements to the western portion of Slifer Square. The
improvements have been developed with the help of Town staff. The applicant's design
is sensitive to the numerous mature trees existing in Slifer Square. Only those trees
which impact pedestrian circulation, etfect sun exposure to the seating areas, and would
othenrise be damaged due to construction, are being removed. The removal of the trees
will be mitigated by the planting of additional trees elsewhere in Slifer Sguare.
lmprovements are proposed for the Gore Creek streambank adjacent to the Austria Haus.
The improvements are intended to improve the visual appearance of the streambank and
stabilize the soil by reducing the grade of the slope and revegetating the bare soils. The
applicant will also be implementing an erosion and sedimentation control plan to prevent
run-off from the construction site from entering Gore Creek.
l. Phaslng plan or subdivision plan that wlll malntaln a workable, functional and
efficient relationship throughout the development of the special development
district.
Phasing of development is not proposed. The applicant is required to submit a
construction phasing and staging plan to the Town prior to receiving a building permit.
The plan will be used to ensure an efficient and workable relationship with surrounding
uses during the development of the Ausfia Haus.
At this time, the applicant is anticipating a minor subdivision to amend the location 0f the
north property line. The applicant is proposing to trade land with the Town in order to
gain an additional one - two feet along the northerly property line. In exchange for this
land, the applicant is proposing to trade a triangular piece of property adjacent to Slifer
Square to the Town. Any proposal to trade land with the Town must be reviewed and
approved by the Council.
36
V. CRITERIA AND FINDINGS FOR A CONDITIONAL USE PERIIIT
Upon review of Section 18.60, the Community Development Department recommends approval
of the conditional use permit based upon the following factors:
A. Gonsideration of Factors:
Before acting on a conditional use permit application, the Planning and Environmental
Commission (PEC) shall consider the factors with respect to the proposed use:
1. Relationship and lmpact of the use on development obiectives of the
Town.
Staff believes that this review criteria has been satisfied as previously
discussed in Section lV of this memorandum.
2. The effect of the use on light and air, distribution of population,
transponafion facilities, utlllties, schools, parks and recreation
facllities, and other public facilities needs.
Staff believes that this review criteria has been satisfied as previously
discussed in Section lV of this memorandum.
3. Effect upon traffic with particular reference to congestion, automotive
and pedestrian safety and convenience, traffic flow and control,
access, maneuverability, and removal of snow from the street and
parking areas.
Staff believes that this review criteria has been satisfied as previously
discussed in Section lV ot this memorandum.
4. Effect upon the character of the area In which the proposed use is to
be located, Including the scale and bulk of the proposed use ln
relation to surrounding uses.
Staff believes that this review criteria has been satisfied as previously
discussed in Section lV of this memorandum.
5. Prlor to the approval of a conditional use permit for a timeshare
estats, fractional fee, fractional fee club, or timeshare llcense
proposal, the following shall be considercd:
a. lf the proposal for a fractional fee club is a redevslopment of
an existang taclllty, the fractional fee club shall malntain an
equivalency of accommodation units as presently existing.
Equivalency shall be maintalned either by an equal number of
unlts or by square footage. lf the proposal is a new
development, it shall provlde at least as much accommodatlon
unit GRFA as fractional fee club unit GRFA.
The Austria Haus proposal is a redevelopment of an existing
facility. The Austria Haus shallbe required to maintain an
equivalency of the presently existing accommodation units. The
37
c.
applicant is proposing to meet the equivalency requirement by
replacing an equal amount of accommodation unit square footage.
According to as-builts prepared by the applicant, 1 0,1 00 square
feet of accommodation unit square footage exists in the Austria
Haus. Calculations of the proposed accommodation unit square
footage indicates that the applicant needs to provide an additional
181 square feet of accommodation unit square footage. In order to
meet this requirement, staff would recommend that the applicant
convert the lock-off for unit # 10 to an accommodation unit. This
would increase the total number of accommodation units to 26 and
increase the equivalency square footage.
Lock off unlts and lock-off unlt square footags shall not be
Included in the calculaUon when determinlng the equivalency
of existing accommodation units or equlvalency of existing
square footage.
Even though lock-offs cannot be counted towards meeting the
equivalency requirement, the applicant has maintained 28 lock-off
units in the Austria Haus. The staff and applicant feel these units
will be rented as short-term accommodations and thus enhance
the hotel bed base in Town.
The ability of the proposed project to create and maintain a
high level ol occupancy.
The Austria Haus proposal is intended to provide additional hotel
and "hoteFtype" accommodation units in the Town of Vail. The
applicant is proposing to incorporate 22 member-owned club units
(fractional fee club units with 28 lock-off units), with 25
accommodation (hotel) rooms. Although not included in the
equivalency requirement, the fractional fee club units have been
designed to accommodate lock-off units. Statf believes that lock-
off units provide an additional community benefit of added
"pillows". lf a fractional fee club unit owner purchases an interest
in a multiple bedroom unit, and does not desire to utilize all the
bedrooms, they can then have the opportunity of returning the
unused bedrooms (lock-offs) to a rental program.
Staft leels 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 accommodation units in the Town of Vail.
Through our research on the fractional fee issue, statf has
identified some potential positive impacts 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 attraction of revenue-generating tourists;
38
C) The efficient utilization of resources. This is the "warm
beds" concept;
D) More pride of ownership with fractional fee club units
than with accommodation units;
E) Increased levels of occupancy; and
F) lncreased resort exposure due to the extensive number
of interval owners.
d. Employee houslng may be requlred as part of any new or
redevelopment fractional fee club project requesting density
ovsr that allowed by zonlng. The number of employee housing
units will be consistent with employee impacts that are
expected as a result of the prolect.
The staff included the fractional fee club units into the calculation
of the employee generation resulting from the establishment of the
Special Development District. Based strictly on the number of club
units, the development will generate a need for 8.8 "new"
employees. When the multiplier of 0.30 is factored in, 3 of the 11
"neW'employees which the developer must provide deed-restricted
housing tor, are generated by the fractional fee club.
e. The applicant shall submit to the Town a list of all ownerc ol
existing units within the proiect or bullding; in written
statements from 100% ot the owners of existing unlts
indicating their approval, without condition, of the proposed
fractional lee club. No wrinen approval shall be valid if it is
signed by the owner more than 60 days prior to the date of
fillng the appllcatlon for a condltlonal use.
The applicant, Sonnenalp Properties, Inc., is the sole owner of the
property. No other wriften approval is required.
YI. STAFF RECOMMENDATION
The staff is recommending approval of the request for the establishment of Special
Development District #35, Austria Haus,pnd the conditional use permit to allow for a fractional
fee club. The staff believes that all the ibview criteria have been met, as identified in this
memorandum. We would recommend that the approval carry with the it the tollowing conditions:
1. That the applicant meet with the Town staff, prior to appearing before Town Council for
the first reading of an ordinance establishing Special Development District #35, to
formulate a construction phasing plan and to determine financial responsibilities for the
off-site improvemenF to Slifer Square, East Meadow Drive and the revegetation of the
Town-owned stream tract, south of the Austria Haus. Staff will then make a
recommendation to Council regarding the construction phasing and financial
responsibilities of the otf-site improvements.
f :\everyone\pec\msmos\sonnensd.224 39
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
That the applicant prepare a deed restriction or covenant, subject to the Tor|n Attorney's
review and hpproval, thereby restricting the current and future owne(s) ability to locate a
restaurant, oi similar food service operation on the Austria Haus property. Said deed
restriction or covenant shall be recorded with the Eagle County Clerk and Recorder's
Otfice prior to the applicant submitting for a building permit.
That the applicant submit the following plans to the Department of Community
Oevelopmbht, for review and approval, as a part of the building permit application for the
Austria Haus:
a.
b.
c.
d.
e.
f.
A Tree Preservation Plan;
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.
7.
That the applicant provide deed-restricted housing, which complies with the Town of Vail
Employee Housing requirements (Chapter 18.57), for a minimum of 11 employees, and
tnai saiO deed-restricted housing be made available for occupancy, and the deed
restrictions recorded with the Eagle County Clerk & Recorder, prior to requesting a
Temporary Certificate of Occupancy for the Austria Haus.
That the applicant pay into the Town of Vail Parking Fund for the required number of pay-
in-lieu parking spaces, as determined at the time of building permit, prior to requesting. a
.
Temporary Certiticate of Occupancy for the Austria Haus. The applicant shall be required
to purchase the pay-in-lieu spaces at the rate in effect at the time of building permit
application.
That the applicant either remove that portion of building floor area (enclosed areas)
currently proposed on Town of Vail property (northwest portion of building/porte-cochere),
or appear belore the Town Gouncil with a request to subdivide and trade land with the
town'. Snould the Council agree to a trade of land, all costs incurred to accomplish the
land trade shall be paid by the applicant. At this time, the applicant is anticipating a
minor subdivision to amend the location of the north property line. The applicant is
proposing to trade land with the Town in order to gain an additional one - two feet of
iroperty along the northerly property line. In exchange for this land, the applicant is
proposlng to trade a triangular piece of property, adjacent to Sllfer Square, to the Town.
That the applicant revise the building floor plans to provide at least 10,100 square feet ol
accommodation unit square footage, to conform with the equivalency requirement for
fractional fee club units, prior to appearing before the Vail Town Council for the first
reading of the ordinance establishing Special Development District #35. According to
as-builts prepared by the applicant, 10,100 square feet of accommodation unit square
footage dxists in the Austria Haus. Galculations of the proposed accommodation unit
square footage indicates that the applicant needs to provide an additional 181 square feet
of accommodation unit square footage. In Order to meet this requirement, staff would
recommend that the applicant convert the lock-otf for Unit # 10 to an accommodation
unit. This would increase the total number of accommodation units to 26 and increase
the equivalency square footage.
f :\everyone\pec\mEmos\sonnensd.224 40
8.That the following design considerations be carefully reviewed by the Design Review
Board (as previously discussed in Section lV of this memorandum):
A) That the mullions on the windows and doors, as depicted on the building elevations,
be a required element of the Austria Haus project.
B) That the applicant further modify the south elevation of the structure, as this elevation
continues be too architecturally repetitive.
C) That the applicant revisit the originally contemplated design which incorporates the
loading and delivery facility in the underground parking structure. Statf believes that
trying to accommodate loading and delivery in the porte-cochere area will result in
conflicts between pedestrians, vehicles accessing the parking structure, and delivery
trucks. Staff understands the original design option may not be the desire of the owners
of the Village Center Condominiums, yet we believe the impact can be mitigated with
appropriate screening.
D) That the improvements recommended lor East Meadow Drive, as depicted in the
approved Town of Vail Streetscape Master Plan, be implemented as a part of the Austria
Haus project. This includes a reduction in street width from 30 feet to 26 feet (14 foot
bus fane and 12 foot attached, paver pedestrian walk).
E) That the roof ridge of the structure be carried to the east and west ends of the roof,
thereby creating gable ends, rather than a clipped hip. Staff does recognizes that the
gable roof lorm may increase the perceived height of the building, especially on the east
and west ends, however, we believe that this will bring the structure more into
compliance with the Design Considerations.
F) That the applicant increase the roof overhangs on the building. Currently, the
overhangs vary from two feet to three feet. Staff would recommend that all the roof
overhangs be a minimum of three feet.
G) That a minimum of 25 lineal feet of additional glass area (55o/d be added to the
ground floor (north and east elevations) of the structure. This would make the Austria
Haus generally consistent with the transparency of other buildings in the Village.
H) That the applicant review and modify the balcony configuration on the building, in order
to eliminate the repetitive nature of the existing design, particularly on the south elevation.
The majority of the balconies on the Austria Haus are located on the south side of the
building, although several french balconies have been incorporated into the design of the
north side of the building on the upper floors.
l) That the applicant prepare a comprehensive sign program for the Austria Haus. The
comprehensive sign program will be reviewed by the DRB.
f :bveryone\pec\rne mos\sonnensd.224 4t
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
MEMORANDUM
Planning and Environmental Commission
Department of Community Development
April14, 1997
A request for a final review with the Design Review Board of the amended
prop6sal for the establishment of Special Development District #35, Austria Haus'
iociteO aI242 East Meadow Drive/on a part of Tract C, Block 5-D, Vail Village
First Filing.
Sonnenalp Properties, lnc., represented by Gordon Pierce
George Ruther
,, Applicant:
Planner:
BACKGROUND
On February 24,1997, the Planning and Environmental Commission held a public hearing
to review a iequest for the establishment of Special Development District #35, Austria
Haus, located 'at 242 East Meadow Drive/on a part ol Tract C, Block 5-D, Vail Village First
Filing. Upon review ol the applicant's request, the Planning and Environmental
Comhisdion forwarded a reiommendation of approval to the Vail Town Council (6-0-1).
The PEC's recommendation of approval to the Vail Town Council included eight
conditions.
On March 25, 1997, the Vail Town Council held a worksession and public hearing to
review the first reading of Ordinance #4. Series of 1997. Upon review of the proposed
ordinance, the Vail Town Council approved the ordinance on first reading (5-2) with seven
conditions. The conditions are as lollows:
That all the required parking spaces be constructed on-site rather than paying into
the Town Parking Fund. The Council will consider a land trade and/or a land
lease with the applicant to achieve the on-site parking requirement.
That two (2) creekside dwelling units (fractional fee club units) be converted to
accommodation units.
That the applicant install and operate the street heating system under East
Meadow Drive, adjacent to the Austria Haus.
That the applicant agrees not to remonstrate against a streamwalk' in the T-O.V.
stream traci, adjacent to the Austria Haus should the Town choose to expand the
streamwalk.
That the applicant creale 11 new, deed-restricted employee housing units rather
2.
3.
4.
5.
4@ ' \ddll oe.or 'Rr',nict ll ari-t1 ouellir'1 u..il5
-4- fiO Calmil vJiA ertflorlee h".,t:..r1 @oi@rreuB
than deed-restricting 11 existlng, dwelling units.
6. That the applicant return to the Plannlng & Environmental Commlsslon prior
to second readang of the ordinance for consideration of the new roof ridge
line design Intended to reduca the height ot the building and the newly
. proposed building elevatlons.
7, That the applicant present an alternate loading/delivery/parking plan prior to
second reading of the ordinance.
ln addition to the conditions, other issues raised by the various council members relating to the
establishment of special Development District #35 included:
1. Reconsider the restriction on reslaurant use in the building.
i2. Increase the stream setback distance along the south side of the building to
provide further protection of Gore Creek.
3. Explore removing several lock-off units with the intent of reducing the overall
.... square footage of the building
4. Remove the clock tower from the building.
5. Increase the ratio of accommodation units to fractional lee units.
Second reading of Ordinance #4 is scheduled for review by the Council on Tuesday, April
15,1997.
II. DESCRIPTION OF THE REOUEST
The applicant is requesting a final review of an amended proposal for the establishment
of Special Development District #35 as required by the Town Council.
The amended proposal includes the following changes:
1. The underground parking slruclure has been redesigned to accommodate
all required vehicle parking on-site and to eliminate the need to pay-in-lieu
into the Town Parking Fund. The applicant has increased the on-site
parking spaces from 48 spaces to 66 spaces. This was accomplished by
extending the underground slructure to the north underneath the l,
pedestrian walkway adjacent to the building and by adding one additional
valet parking space.
2. The applicant has reconfigured the interior layout of the Austria Haus. The
proposal now includes 22 tractional fee club units with 21 lock-otf units, 28
accommodation units, 4,649 square feet of commercial area, and 14,004
square leet of common area. These changes include the conversion of
one fractional fee club unit on the creekside of the building to four
accommodation units.
3. The building footprint of the Austria Haus is proposed to be shifted seven
feet to the north as requested by Council. The shift in the building footprint
o
4.
5.
has increased the distance ol the building from the centerline of Gore
creek and reduced the amount of impervious surface north of the building.
The additional seven feet is intended to provide more green space south
of the Austria Haus and provide greater protection of the Gore Creek
corridor.
The 68 foot-tall clock tower/front entrance has been removed' The
removal of the clock tower was in response to concerns expressed by
members of the Town Council and the community.
The architectural elevations have been changed significantly. To reduce
the appearance of bulk and mass, the applicant has broken the building
masd into three building forms and redesigned the roof ridge line. The
redesign of the roof ridge line reduced the overall building ieight and
lessened the building's impact on views to the mountain. The new
building architecture and massing is intended to replicate the building
mass and architecture along Bridge Street and the Village Center
Buildings.
The ratio of fractional fee club units to accommodation units has been
reduced lrom 0.85 fraclional fee club unit for every 1.0 accommodation
unit (0.85:1) to 0.78 lractional lee club unit for every 1.0 accommodation
unit (0.78:1).
The proposed development standards for Special Development District
#35 were amended. The changes are indicated in the analysis below:
AUSTRIA HAUS
6.
7.
*"#ffi"llt .{S:H,:3b
nnl,r. ilJl"'ll'$Ft +l-
i4i
Dwelling Units:. 35.5 D.U.'s (22 O.U.126 A.U.. 1. EHU)
GRFA:
(0.u.)
(A.u.)
Site Coverage:
Parking:
Loading:
Commercial
Area:
Common
Area:
40,449 sq. ft.
(30,329 sq. fi.)
(10,100 sq. 11.)
16,371 sq. ft.
64.26 spaces
(48 spaces on-sile
16.26 spaces pay-
in-lieu)
1 berth
4,440 sq. ft.
15,308 sq. ft.
36.5 D.U.'s (22O.U.128 A.U.
1 EHU)
.
40,554 sq. fi.
(30.354 sq. lt.)
(10,200 sq. tl,)
19,634 sq. ft.
66 spaces on-site
1 berth
4,649 sq. tl.
14,004 sq. ft.
3
+ 1 D.U.
(2 A.u.)
+ 1 25 sq. tt.
(+ 25 sq. fi.t
(+ 1oo 6q. tl.)
+ 3.263 sq. ft.
+ 1 .74 spacas
N/C
+ 209 sq. tl.
- 1,304 sq. ft.
Toral Building
Area:
Employee
Generalion:
72,667 sq. ft.
1 I new omploye€s
74,378 sq. ft.
12 new employees
March 25, 1997
SDD Proposal
+ 1,71 1 sq. ft.
+ 'l new employ€e
IV. ZONING ANALYSIS
The Community Development Department staff has prepared a Zoning Analysis for the proposed Austria
Haus redeveloppent. For comparative purposes only, the staff has included the development standards
outlined by the underlying zone district of Public Accommodation, the Development standards proposed
at first reading on March 25, 1997, and the amended development standards for Special Development
District #35 as of April 14,1997.
Wherever thq proposed development standards deviate from the underlying zoning of Public
Accommodation, the standards are highlighted in bold type.
AUSTRIA HAUS
DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS COMPARISON
I
Lot sizs: 24,089 sq. ft. /0.553 acrss
Buidable area: 24,089 sq. tt. /0.553 acres
Development UnderlylngZonlngSlandard of Publlc Accommodatlon
Aprll 14,1997
SDD Proposel
GRFA:
Dwelling
unrts pgr acre:
Site coverage:
Setbacks:
front:
sides:
rear:
Height:
Parking:
Landscaping:
Loading:
80o/. or 1 9,271 sq. tt.
13.8 DU's or 25 units/acre
55% or 13,249 sq. fr.
20'
20'
20'
48' sloping
45' flat
60' tower
per T.O.V. code
Seaion 18.52
30o/. ot 7,227 sq. n.
per T.O.V. code
Section 18.52
1680/0 or 4q429 sq. ft.
$ * rs
35.5 DU's (22 DU's,
26 AU's, 1 Type lll EHU)
6870 or 16,371 sq. ft.
o'
5' 120'
7'
56.5'
52'
68'
48 spaces on-slte &
16.26 spaces
pay-in-lieu
19.8 % or 4,782.6 sq.
66 soaces on-site
1 bsrth at drop€ff area
1680/0 or 40,554 sq. ft. I$5 8S.5 *tl*c,*,.
36 DU's (22 DU's,
28 AU's, 1 Type lll EHU)
81o/o or 19,634 8q. ft.
2',t20'
7"
V^
1 b€rth at droo-otf ar€a
o Comm€rcial
sq. foolage:10% or 1.927 sq. ft.
Common area: 35% of allowable GRFA
. 016,745 sq' ft.
Total Building Area:
11% or 4,440 sq. ft.
38% or 15,308 sq. fl.
72,667 sq. tt.
11% or 4,469 3q. ft.
35% or 14,0(X sq. ft.
74,302 sq. ft.
v.
' Assumes thE approval of tho amended lot area and lot configuration
Chapter 18.40 of the Town of Vail Municipal Code provides for the_eslablishment of Special
Devblopment Districts in the Town of Vail. According to Section 18.40.010, the purpose of a
Special DeVelopment District is,
,'To encourage flexibility and creativity in the development of land, in order to
promote its most appropriate use; to improve the design character and quality of
ihe new development within the Town; to facllltate 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 lor 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."
The Municipal Code provides nine design criteria, which shall be used as the principal criteria in
evaluating ihe merits ot the proposed Special Development District. The staff has addressed
each of t6e nine SDD design criteria in detail in the memorandum to the PEC dated February 24,
't997(see attachment). Staff will not be addressing each of the design criteria in detail again.
Staff's review of the criteria is only of those issues which have changed as a result of the
amended proposal.
A. Design compatibility and sensitivity to the immediate environment, neighborhood
and adjacent properties relative to architecturql design, scale, bulk, building height'
buffer zones, identity, character, visual integrity and orientation.
The applicant has amended the architecture of the Austria Haus to reduce the
appearance of the bulk and mass. The Austria Haus has been broken down into three
separate "building" forms. Most notably, the height of the center and eastern portions of
the building have been reduced and the architectural style of the Austria Haus has been
changed to provide the appearance of three different "buildings". The architectural style
of the lhree "buildings" is intended to replicate that of the buildings in Vail Village.
As mentioned above, the building height of the Austria Haus has been reduced. This has
been accomplished by separating the Austria Haus into three "building" forms (east, west
& cente|. The height of the "west building" form has remained unchanged with the
exception of the removal ol the 0g foot-tall Clock tower. The "west building" form has a
maximum building neight of EdTEEj[ The height of the "center building" form has been
lowered from 56.5 tee[to aaJee-i]The heighi of the "east building" foim has been
B.
lowered from 56.5 feet The 56-foot building height is based on existing (1997)
topography ol the Austria Haus property, and not the original topography of the site (pre-
1963). Original topography ot the site is not available, since the Austria Haus was
constructed in Vail prior to zoning (and prior to the requirement that a topographic survey
be submitted prior to development). Staff believes, based upon the location of the
existing retaining walls and the condition of the streambank, that the site was "cut" when
the Austria Haus was built. While it is diflicult to know exactly how much of the site was
"cut", staff would conservatively estimate that approximately 2 - 3 feet of soil was
removed. Given this conservative consideration, staff would estimate the actual building
height proposed for the Austria Haus would be 53 to 54 feet.
According to the Vail Village Master Plan Conceptual Building Height Plan, the Austria
Haus should be 3-4 stories in height, with a building story being approximately nine feet,
excluding the roof. The plan lurther indicates that one additional floor of
residential/lodging may also be accommodated on the Austria Haus site.
Although the proposed height of the building will diminish the amount of sun, and likewise
increase shading, along East Meadow Drive, the provision ol heated public walkways
effectively mitigates this consideration, by providing ice-free and snow-free sidewalks.
Additionally, the "opening up" of Slifer Square will insure adequate light, air and open
space to a public gathering space.
Staff believes the applicant has redesigned a structure which continues to relate well to
the site and the surrounding area. Staff further believes that the amended proposal is
appropriale for the site and takes into consideration the massing and scale of the
buildings in the vicinity. The new north elevation further enhances the pedestrian
experience and character of the Village. Staff would recommend that the Design Review
Board carefully review the proposed exlerior building materials and how are applied to
ensure that a high-level of architectural quality is maintained.
Uses, activlty and density which provide a compatible, efficient and workable
relationship with surrounding uses and activity.
The uses and activities proposed within lhe Austria Haus have not changed from the
proposal ol February 24,1997. The density and commercial square footage, however,
have changed as a result of the applicant adding accommodation units to the creekside
of the Austria Haus and the reconfiguration of the commercial area layout. The total
increase in density is one dwelling univacre and 125 square feet of GRFA with a 209
square foot increase in commercial area.
As a result ol the increase in the number of accommodation units and commercial area
square footage, the employee needs of the Austria Haus have increased. A revised
summary of the Employee Housing Generation Analysis using staff's recommended
ranges is as follows:
EMPLOYEE HOUSING GENERATION ANALYSIS
Staff Recommended Range Calculations:
The staff believes that the Austria Haus redevelopment will create a need for 39
additional employees. of the 39 additional employees, at least 12 employees (307o) will
need to be provided deed-restricted housing by the developers of the Austria Haus. The
staff recommended ranges are based on:
1. the type of retail and otfice use proposed in the commercial space within
the Austria Haus;
2. the size of the Austria Haus lodging component; and
3. the high-level ol services and amenities proposed by the developers for
the guests of the Austria Haus.
Retail/Seivice Commercial = 4,208 sq. ft. @(6.5/1000 sq. lt.1=27.0 employeesa)
b)
(middle of range)
OFfice: real estate
(middle of range)
Lodging'
(top of range)
Multi-Family (club units)
(range does not vary)
c)
d)
= 441 sq. ft. @(7.5/1000 sq. ft.) = 3.3 employees
= 28 units @(1.25lroom) =35 employees
= 22 units @(0.4/unit)= 8.8 employees
Total =74.5 employees
(-36 existing employees)
(X 0.30 multiplier)
=39 employees
=12 new employees
o
.Lodging has a parlicularly large varialion ol employees p€r room. dep€nding upon taclors such as size of facilily and l€vel ol
servic€r'support services and amenities provided.
The staff continues to believe that the density and uses proposed by the applicant for the Austria
Haus do not conflict with the compatibility, efficiency or workability of the surrounding uses and/or
activities. In fact, staff feels that the proposed Austria Haus redevelopment will enhance the
exiEting uses and activities within the Village.
C. Compliance with parking and loading requirements as outlined in Chapter 18.52. of
the Town of Vail MuniciPal Code-
Parking and loading requirements for development are established in Chapter 18.52 of
the Municipal Code. The parking and loading requirements are based on lhe square
footage of the uses proposed within a building. Based on the square footage of the uses
proposed by the applicant, 80.24 parking spaces and one loading/delivery befih are
ieqirireO on-site. The Municipal Code allows "grandfathering" of the existing legal non-.
conforming parking spaces. Currently, fifteen legal, non-conforming parking spaces exist
on the property. Therefore, the parking requirement for the proposed Austria Haus
redeveiopmeni is 65.24 new parking spaces. In response to concerns expressed by
various Council members, the applicant is proposing an undergroundparking structure
designed to accommodate 66 parking spaces and an enclosed trash facility. The .
applicant is no longer proposing to m-eei any ol the parking requirement by paying into the
Town Parking Fund.
D. Gonformlty with the applicable elements of the Vail Comprehensive Plan, Town
policles and Urban Design Plan.
E.
F.
The staff continues to believe that the proposed SDD conforms with the Vail Land Use
Pf an as identified in the staff memorandum to the PEC dated February 24, 1997.
ldentification and mitigation of natural and/or geologic hazards that aftect the
property on which the special development district ls proposed.
There are no natural and/or geologic hazards that affect the Austria Haus property.
Site plan, building design and location and open space provisions designed to
produce a functional development responsive and sensitive to natural features,
vegetatlon and overall aesthetic quality of the community.
The applicant has revised the site plan in response to comments received from various'
Council members and the adjoining property owners. The building fooFrint of the Austria
Haus has been shifted seven feet to the north to accommodate the increase in on-site
parking, to provide additional green space south of the Austria Haus and to increase the
width of the riparian corridor along Gore Creek. The shift in the building does not atfect
the proposed east, west or north setbacks. The shift does increase the setback of the
building lrom Gore Creek. The building had previously been approximately 55 feet from
. the centerline of Gore Creek, it is now approximately 62 feet from the creek centerline.
Staff believes the proposed site plan and building location is sensitive to the natural
features, vegetation and overall aesthetic quality of the community. The shift in building
location will permit additional protection of the critical root zone of two large spruce trees
and allow additional regrading of the slreambank lo increase the success of the
revegetation.
A circulation system designed lor both vehictes and pedestrians addresslng on and
off-site traff ic circulation.
As required by the Planning and Environmental Commission and the Town Council, the
applicant has revisited the loading/delivery/parking plan. The pedestrian and vehicular
circulation system on and oft the site has not changed. The applicant is continuing to
propose the loading and delivery in the lront drop-off area and on the parking structure
access.ramp- The applicant has prepared a Turning Radius Plan to iliustrate how loading
and delivery is to be accomplished
Through the course of the review of the Austria Haus redevelopment proposal, staff has
reviewed several loading and delivery options were. The applicant had oiiginally
proposed to provide one loading and delivery berth in the underground parting 6tructure.
However, concerns were expressed by the Village Center Condominiurir owners that they
would be negatively impacted by the noise generated lrom the delivery vehicles, since th'e
access to the underground location was immediately adjacent to their units.
The applicant had also explored the possibility of gaining underground access to their
structure through the Village Center garage. lt was determinedlhat delivery vehicles
could not enter through Village center due to height limitations in the garage.
As mentioned previously, the applicant is proposing to provide for loading/delivery in the
front entry drop-off area. The applicant anticipates that deliveries to theietaiycommercial
shops will arrive via UPS or similar types of courier. Staff continues to believe that this
location may negatively impact the pedestrian use of this area of East Meadow Drive and
suggests the applicant continue to explore placing the loading and delivery berth in the
underground structure, as originally contemplated.
G.
H.Functional and aesthetic landscaping and open space in order to optimize and
preserve natural features, recreation' views and functions'
The landscape plan has remained substantially unchanged. Minor modifications were
made to tne'rejraOing around the building to facilitate better surface drainage.and. to
.
increase views to the creek for the adjoining property owners. As Stated previously' the
initiin tne building footprint witl help freserve two large spruce trees.located at the top of
the streambant<. Tne a'pplicant is cbritinuing to propose improvements to the Gore Creek
streambank adjacent to ihe Austria Haus. The improvements are intended to improve the
aesthetic quality of the streambank and stabilize the bare soils'
Phasing plan or subdivision plan that will maintain a workable, lunctional and
efficieni ielationship throughout the development of the special development
district.
The applicant is proposing a minor suMivision of the Austria Haus property. The minor
subdivi'sion is intbnded to facilitate the relocation of the building and the expansion of the
underground parking structure. The proposed minor subdivision increases the total lot
area by apprdximately 930 square feet. The increase in lot area is a result of ensuring a
minimum'of two-foot ietbacks from the property line around the building, and that all
improvements are on the Austria HauS property. Statf would recommend that an
approval of the amended proposal to establish sDD #35 be conditioned upon the
apiroval of a minor subdivision request within sixty days of the effective date of
Cirdinance #4, Series of 1997. Staff would lurther recommend that all costs incurred to
subdivide the property be the responsibility of the Austria Haus.
STAFF RECOMMENDATIONvt.
The staff recommends that the Planning and Environmental Commission and the Design
Review Board recommend approval of the request to amend the proposed establishment of
Special Development District #35, Austria Haus, located al 242 East Meadow Drive to the Vail
Town Council. The staff believes that each of the SDD design criteria continue to be met, as
identified in this memorandum and the staff memorandum dated February 24, 1997. Staff would
recommend that the approval carry with the it the following conditions:
1. That the Design Review Board carefully review the combination ol the proposed exterior
building materials and how they are applied to ensure that a high-level of architectural
quality is maintained.
2. That an approval of the amended proposal to establish SDD #35 be conditioned upon the
approval of a minor subdivision request by the PEC within sixty days from the eflective
date of Ordinance #4, Series of 1997 and that all costs incurred to subdivide the property
be the responsibility of the Austria Haus and not the Town of Vail'
3. That the appticant provide deed-restricted housing, which complies with the Town of Vail
Employee Housing requirements (Chapter 18.57), for a minimum of 12 employees, and
that said deed-restricted housing be made available for occupancy, and the deed
restrictions recorded with the Eagle County Clerk & Recorder, prior to reguesting a
Temporary Certificate of Occupancy for the Austria Haus.
t:bveryonebec\memos\sonnensd.4 1 4
oo
o
o
.a'-0
Fl
z
rdrAv
FoAVfv.-Ft
rdtv_
,-)
cyao
,-)
F
-(
tl.Fl
i-rO
-a
qJ
z.
-
lrJ
qJ
(u
6t
(t) a)rO0
EE,o .oFEr
rE
<tth
a\
s
o€
r*
(r)
E
U)€€6
=
E
v,
raFe
rn
E
ottat\l
c
v,r\t,-
(\
E
0
t\t
ttl
=F
(,)rOO.d !qc)=t.F
trE
J=
<t o'tu (t)
(,
F*
I
I
I
E
U,
rr
ra
.i crgJ oO
9p ri.= c)
=r-ar G,>)*a6
(,sc.l
aa
d
ahve.lc{
@
;
\orir
(\.l
o\
.:.
!co\o\
F-
\o
@
E
(t
Ottal
cr)
(.2|
.= c)q€€aEa r.,trro06gS3.E R<Dti I
o\
a.l
ta
c.lo\s
ooo\I
,t
v,
(\o
9cr<s?6E8HptrEA)-od I
I
o\lif\o
lil
a
v)g\.c\o
!
ro
gE'
<RFriEe
5B
o\
co
r-s
v)
o\a.lr-
o\ril
@
:
\o
c.l
e.l
E
o€(\o\
(+|
ahH6x>ds €9di
L
l&
tt)
a^l
8
c.l tf
!.)
()
-l
,-l
rl
F
ti o
t.c:
PTI.
trr'1!
ii,t:!t r
;!i i
;iri
dz
vi
Fc
a.
&!r
A.tr
zctz7ou,,
':
91F
u)
Fli
&
o
x
4
a
oo
?
t)p
F,t(A
;)
o
!!l
!t I
ii
II
i
t
a
i
i
II
ir
i!
i!tl't
o
t-
IcmA.U
:I:l
:horlrllr!l
;il
CJ7
vt
FF&
EIAoxt
F.-I
7
7z
v)
A
U'
z
!
R
aq
x
(np
&Fv,
D
E,.
vt
ta 4n\/
Fr-r.cr
i
s li:iii
u'5 $rill
3$lt3lli
!i ltr ;z: !
ET!6[t
:! 6t:i?r tri! !i
-1: ii
ft Ii;;!t
c
5
;.3 i
r[il8
ldt!
t)
l looeU
r.'i.';::
ii{i-i-::lit:"'=.
l1: :.-.":
i-:.i .:
.; :i,i 'i, :
a€LsJ ,occs'ce?'{I
^t*la.()
Ir
\\t\
ti
I{t
tl
n<
!l
te
FI
z
A
&o
'\-z'
l_.,,
c:
EErLJ-dI
:t
;1, I:{!
iii i
;ii!
CJz
s
Fc
Ao4t
tr
z
EI7zo.A
R
t
5I
rt)
ilFu)p,,{
{r
ta
q
$i
{lit
'trIIli
I
I
rl
a
ffir
iir
:il
;il
c
{
*li
gEJ
!ti
U
i:LYliiu5c
t
d
x
-
6
z
vt
F&
trlt.o&A
Iil
2
zzoc>
v)
&FIA
D
+.
d
I
Lt
,.:
ufi
-Ry.t1
J
t:r:
EEr\Ldr
li'l
:ir i
;!ii
z
ltl
l;g
F&
ox**A
z
EIzzout
z
FIA
U'
&
z
z
p
F
q
\\F
d8J
o\
r
-\__j
(
c=oX
:d
EE
OF'.
c1
i I- ----------l I ri.r .Frtvf
E
=!c!=
an c4aE
YFh.=
-l
. r.,..f-,.-.{-
Io['i\ '''-t fi
I
8
&q
8
u)
D
&
F"u)
/1l)TJ(<
Fi
ffir
ti'
:!l
:!I
3
/
z
vt
EJ
F&!lAo/9.
it
zBl ,,7:2o
9>
8
4Io(J
(Ap
&
F.rt)p
&
Foo
E]u)oA
7
z
Fat)
x!lr
z
ut
Eo
I
IT
it$(.
T
tl
i
,t
'l
,I
ll
I
I
I
TtI
;
!
I
I
.l ti
Ilt:
:l!l
!Hr
DIJI
llil
., l.
!l
il;7 ,,/
U{ I
5: i'
o
l|\
Hil,0
lh
IF
l';
t;
I8
F
r0
tilz
ll I i
tl
iltl
I
a
'-t'-
II __.
a
a
rh(: I-.')tiiITq
IT
Itil
lrn
lr-
IP
t8
Pm
l!
lz
'o
o
I-'r"-- -- -
i
i
iii;iili
o
ft fli ui;iilr
o
o
ft, Hf liiiiilr
_._,.._,.1.
I
I
I
I
oo
o
o
/fl\L/
5t;0:lo:lo
ITlrl>
t!rII;
rl
it#ul},ii
o
\ilrlil\J
r-l
Ir'
I
!__,
r-
ni,FITil
,'
.ti,
tc
m
F's{xz
t
!l
.t;
Illlf:l
E
Itiu
l.t
t
u
?
tI
t
{
i
:lt!
?
hl,l'hit rt ;t il{ t {{,
IrllliltIflh
nE-
\i
I.FI:!>Fl(',l
tltnilPt>
iz
!,r "
4*t t
6Ael ; Afpt*-roa u*] V %r ltpc. utt6Qv* of CJocJcTo*&,.
ufl,raac h rret}u*L*t q,r;p? l'@ chr'nr€1s fo hrog.
' lrkas ryc stcpp.l o..r l}.C ilcrrt7r. dan*L;oJ ?:
A1e*.' .^r/ Qi,n u6retl1 lcrrtr-.
lif@r lhc Qar.liod i.,t Qqt ltgE"
Ucs lo+ l;lc€ fi'€ finre fr +{€' bt;lJrq 1"
lilct {.he F'aer br-iUlu1 be,sl-,,
E hE# lilc Ner/ Plru' [t€s t'{.s dJ
6a,:,:
Ji4,r,.r:
*eno.
rLG)
,L+t
'!
,
.t
,*,.- {f
-. 1.'{
. ,., ;. ,"
D*rc:
-1' *J\ ir.rririo ir A $trErlnz:xdr-is 1oi3 iJ'
?e#B lo*o,'dl *I qn*6-
hoAA. ltbco |+G '|pplscr;Hat a exr. m*cni*ls.
DEi u+ 4cre- fl ?et'.* to cbie't- b Fvhe€'w*lL-
C*.lrul e. lo,rJ wc cor*l Wmtr+ ,Ja.t vrtilv,
eYisri{ oY. kee +lffi 1' ttwvc is br'oll
6rq m.
"€{y
[l/ca el,raqe r.r p4 fu.
t;U€6 Qg,.rgr*l oF ddc ]euu.
fnoc€ Ae\tq oA AbcTh ele.la.l-rorl
Cateb \rrr{4 *r-u *ler1 ,.1C, rletL SJnc.
iu *uaolr'*z "tl clvwry k<- s.t W.1. (
Z. *r/ns.o hlocln etqr'fi'd Pqlrdr
3. Pd foieaat f*t e Fl.r*. Dcet
6- | l..nsn.
lF.-:rv
FtL t coP y
4. A request for a joint final review with the Design.Review_lqro.o! an amended plopo-s.ql
for the establisliment of Special DevelopmeniDistrict #35, Austria Haus, located at 242
East Meadow Drive/on a iart ot Tract C, Block 5-D, VailVillage First Filing.
Applicant: Sonnenalp Properties, Inc', represented by Gordon Pierce
Planner: George Ruther
George Ruther gave an overview of the requeslper the Planning and Environmental Commission
rer6 OateO npiit f +, 1997. He said that the PEC was being asked to make a recommendation
to Town Council to approve, to approve with modifications, or to deny'
Greg Moffet asked what the DRB'S role would be'
George Ruther said the DRB would review architectural improvements.
Galen Aasland disclosed for the record that Gordon Pierce had called him.
Gordon Pierce, representing the applicant, made a presentation. The presentation included
discussion on hod the applicant hii addressed each of the Council's conditions of approval.
Greg Moffet stated for the record that Clark Brittain arrived at 3 pm. He then asked for any public
comments.
Gordon pierce said he would like to confine the subject to building height reduction only.
Greg Moffet said despite voting on the entire SDD, the ridge line and elevation per the Council
request were the issues.
Jim Lamont said he sent a letter from the EVHA on Friday and asked if the PEC received it?
Greg Moffet said, yes.
Ted Hingst said it was an interesting building and he liked it. He asked if it carried over to the
south side.
Gordon Pierce said the building had been broken up with the addition of smaller buildings and
different building materials.
Ted Hingst said it did a good job of being a sonnenalp building and was.a nice gateway property
to Bridg6 st. He said he apfreciated th-e efforts to drop the .roof line. He said comments he
heard frere that it would create a canyon of buildings along the creek'
Planning and Environmental Comrnrsston
Minutes
APril 14, 1997
Clark Briftain complimented Gordon on the change from a huge block of building' He said the
Oitf"r"nt Jtyns of buiklings were very effective and that the various styles and rootlines were very
pleasing to the eye.
Gordon pierce said he walked around Town with a 28' pole to measure the eave lines around the
VirrJd
"nJ
nJ srrowed thit in every case, this project was below what was on Bridge Street.
Greg Moffet rendered comments from the commission members.
Galen Aasland applauded the roof design and said he liked the reduction in the tower. He then
asked where the mechanicals were going.
Gordon pierce said there would be a lew more chimneys, but they hadn't gotten to that yet. He
JaiO tney would probably be building a small bunker, but that a few more chimneys would break
up the roof mass
Galen Aasland asked if there would be any air conditioners'
Gordon Pierce said, no.
Galen Aasland said that the nofih elevation bothered him, as the plans and model didn't match'
as shown on the second and third levels of the plans.
Greg Moffet said the break of I' was not much of a break.
Gordon Pierce said looking at larger scale plans showing a lot of relief would help.
Galen Aasland said that the light was not going to shine on the north side of the building. Two of
the main reasons he supporte-d the buildinb before had been adequate steps on the north
building elevations and ine loggia, which were now gone. He also said.that by moving the
buildin[ 7' to the north, it was-ipparent that the landscaping at the building and the west end of
the par-king structure was a nug'e missed oopportunity, as many pedestrians pass by there each
day.
Ann Bishop commended Mr. Faessler and Mr. Pierce and said her preference was the first
drawing. She said she didn't receive Mr. Lamont's letter until 1 pm today and that Mr. Lamont
raised iome good concerns and that she appreciated his concerns. She said she felt if Mr.
Faessler waJinvolved in this it would be a first class building with a standard of excellence and
that given the fact that he intended to remain involved with this, she had no problem.
Dane Golden said the ridge line coming down was good, however the west end was a concern'
She said she was sorry to see the building move to the north, but glad to see two more
accommodation units.
Gene Uselton asked if Gordon had paid for the Town's consultant.
Gordon Pierce said, yes.
Gene Uselton said he liked the first drawing. He asked for clarification on condition #5 of the
seven conditions that Council imposed.
Gordon Pierce said Johannes responded to Council that he had 86 units that he was not required
to have at all to deed restrict.
Planning and Environmental Commission
Minutes
April 14. | 997
O John Schofield asked for an overview of the current proposal'
Dave Kenyon, from Design Workshop, said that the 55'turnaround design was for large trucks' .
He said deliveries tor shdps and ,"tait'*ould occur seasonally and that all other deliveries would
Ue OJne OV UpS, He said me large turnaround would still allow ingress and egress from the
parking stiucture. He said there was 4" of clearance in the 7'6" high garage.
John Schofield had no problem with the roofline. He said the 7' movement to north was ok if
there would be a streamwalk, otherwise it would be wasted. He encouraged loading in the lower
garage.
Greg Amsden was impressed with the bulk and mass of the building and asked if the height of
the chimneys were dictated bY code.
Gordon Pierce explained the plans that showed the correct chimneys'
Greg Motfet said he really liked the change in the roofline and was glad fo see the clock tower
g""E. HJ iau he would iike to request a-n opportunity to review the roof projections or have staff
ieview them and asked George how it should be done procedurally'
George Ruther said a condition could be placed on the approval to have all projections enclosed
in the building or creatively disguised.
Greg Moffet said he respected Galen's opinions, as he was an architect. He said the PEC could
coniition the approval t6 include the roof on the north side of the building and a covered
walkway, but oiher than that, he said he was comfortable with the design'
Greg Amsden said the 7' movement towards the north was not effective'
Galen Aasland said he supported the roofline and the 3 building forms, but there were a couple
of items he still had a problem with.
Greg Amsden made a motion, in accordance with the staff recommendation and the 3
conj1ions, and with the additional condition that the applicant review the relief on the north
elevation.
Ann Bishop seconded the motion.
John schofield asked Gordon if the 60 days in condition #2 was appropriate.
Mike Mollica said 90 days was more appropriate'
Greg Amsden amended condition #2 to read 90 days.
Ann Bishop seconded the amended motion'
Greg Moffet said to include relief to the north elevation and more loggia.
Ann Bishop said not to require it, but to have it be considered.
Planning and Environmcntal Commission
Minutes
April 14. 1997
Greg Amsden amended the motion to request that staff receive a pl{t, prior to construction'
inoiing all roof projections and that the plan be reviewed by the DRB'
Ann Bishop seconded the amended motion'
The motion passed by a vote of 6-1 , with Galen Aasland opposed'
Planning and Envirorunental Cornmission
Minutes
Aoril 14. | 997
ORI6INAL
SUBJECT: A request for a worksession to discuss the establishment of Special Development
District#35,AustriaHaus,toallowfortheredevelopmentoftheAustriaHaus,
located at242EastMeadow Drive/on a part of Tract c, Block 5-D, vail village
First Filins.
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
MEMORANDUM
Planning and Environmental Commission
Community Developmant Departnent
May 19, 1997
Applicant Sonnenalp Properties, Inc', represented by Gordon Pierce
Planncr: Ceorge Ruther
I. BACKGROUNI)
On March 25,lg97.the Vail Town Council held an afternoon worksession and evening public
hearing to discuss the first reading of Ordinance #4, Series of 7997, an ordinance providing for
thc est-ablisnment of Special DcvJlopment District #35, Austria Haus; adopting a devclopment
plan for special Dcvelopment Distiit #35; and setting forth details in regard thereto' upon
ieview ofbrdinance #4,theTown Council approved the ordinancc on first reading with sevcn
conditions. one of the conditions required ttrat ttte applicant rcappear before the Planning and
Environmental Commission with an amendcd proposal for the commission's review and
recommendation.
On April 14,7gg7,the Planning and Environmental Commission held a public hearing to consider
an amended-proposal for the eJtablishment of Special Development District (SDD) #35, Austria
Haus. The
"rn"oaed
proposal was in response to changes requested by the Vail Town Council at
the f,rst reading of a proposed ordinance establishing SDD #35. Upon review of the amended
proposal, the Planning and Environmental commission voted 6-l to recommend approval of the
u-*a"a proposal for the establishment of sDD #35 to the vail Town council.
On April 15,lggT,ttre applicant appearcd before the Vail Town Council for the second reading of
Ordinance # 4, Series of iSSZ. Upon consideration of the Planning and Environmental
Commission's recommendation of approval and review of the amended proposal, the Town
Council voted (4-3) to deny the ordinance stating that the applicant had not met the intention of
the conditions ofapproval placed on the project at first reading'
On April 23,lggl,the Town Staff met with the Town Council to discuss the future of the Austria
Haus redevelopment and for the Council to provide specific direction to the Austria Haus
developers. The following direction was given by the Council:
Town Council Direction
l.ReducetheproposedGRFAwithintheAustriaHausby5,000squarefeet.
2.ThemaximumbuildingheightfortheAustriaHausshallNoTexcecd4S',
3.Removethepenthouseleveltoreducethenumberofbuildingstoriesfromfiveto
four.
4. No less than 10,100 square feet of accommodation unit square footage shall be
consfucted in thc Austria Haus. The 10,100 square feet shall be apportioned into
whichever number of units the dcvelopers feel are appropriate to successfully
operate a hotel.
5. Two 20, foot setbacks on the property shall be maintained. Preference should be
given to the west and south setbacks'
6. The proposed 4,649 square feet of commercial spaces shall be maintained as it
p.ouid", the necessary commercial link between thc village and crossroads.
7 . All parking shall be on-site and a land tade is an acceptable means of
accommodating the necessary area of the parking structure'
O g. A community room shall be provided within thc Austria Haus for mcetings,
brcakfasts and the like.
g. The loading and delivery plan shall be redesigned to reduce the negative impacts
on the streetscape (pedcstrians' guest vehicles, etc')
10. The staff will make brief presentations to the council during the normal PEc
reports. Thesc presentations will include full size plans and copies of all
memoranda.
1 I , Thc proposed deadlines of June 22 and July 22 are extemely aggressive' Thc
developers should rethink the deadlines and request extensions as necessary'
12. The staffwill make a presentation to the Town council and PEC on May 6th
regarding the p.o, und cons of both SDDs and the East Village Homeowner's
advocated PA-l zone district. on May 6th, the council will decide which
application theY will review'
13. The Town council did not feel it was appropriate to express thcir preference on
the architectural design. Instead, they felt the design ofthe building should be left
to the architect.
on May 6, |gg7,at the request of the Town Council, the Town Staffmade a presentation to the
Council regarding tfr. Sp"iiJOevclopment District and rezoning processes' The purpose of the
pr"r"it"ti.-n *urt infor* the Council of the pros and cons of using an SDD vs rezoning in the
redevelopment of the Austria Haus. Upon listening to staff s preseltation,the council
unanimously (6-0) directed the Austria Haus developcrs to proceed with a Special Development
District.
II. DESCRIPTION OF'THEREOUEST
The applicant, Sonnenalp Properties, Inc.' represented by Gordon Piercc' is requesting
worksession with the Planning and Environmcntal Commission to discuss the establishmcnt of
speoial Development uistrici#3j, located at242EastMeadow Drive/on a part of Tract c, Block
S-p, Vail Villale First Filing. The applicant is proposing to establish a new Special
Development District o".il"y to the underlying zone district of Public Accommodation' to
facilitate the redevelopment of the existing Austria Haus'
The applicant is proposing significant improvements to the existing Ausfria Haus property' The
Austria Haus is intended to become a member-owned resort club/lodgc' comprising a mix of hotel
accommodation units and two and three-bedroom club units with associated club
amenities/facilities. The Austria Haus proposat is intended to provide additional hotel and
..hotel-type" accommodation units in the Town of Vail. The appticant is proposing to
incorpoiate 18 member-owned club units (11 three-bedroom & 7 two-bedroom), with 25
hotel rooms and one on-site manager's residence (Type IIt Employee Housing unit)' The
applicant is proposing 5,582 square feet of new commercial/retail space on the main level of
the Austria Haus. The Austria Haus proposal includes a front desk reception/registration
area operating 24 hours a day and seven days a week, a lounge, an exercise room' meeting
room iacilitiei a food servici pantry, member ski storage, an outdoor pool and other
accessory facilities commonly associated with hotels and lodges'
Summary of Changcs
The following summarizes the changes:
l.
2.
3.
4.
5.
The number of club units was reduced from22 to 18, the number of hotel rooms was
reduced from 28 to 25, and all lock-offunits have been climinated'
7,405 square fcct of gross building area has been removed (5,189 sq. ft. of GRFA/2'216
sq. ft. of other building area).
The building height has been reduced to 48 feet maximum'
A meeting room, food scrvice pantry and an outdoor pool have been added'
The parking requirement continues to be mct on-site'
6.Thebrickpaverpedestrianwalkwayhasbecnreplacedwithanasphaltwalkway.
7. 933 square feet ofcommercial square footage has been added'
S.Atleastl0,l00squarefeetofaccommodationunitsquarcfootagehasbeenmaintained.
Thc applicant has identified what they believe to be thc public benefits.which will be realized as a
result of the Austria Haus redevclopment and Spccial Development District #35'
Public Benefits
l. An increase in the annual occupancy of the Austria Haus'
The addition ofapproximately 5,600 square fcct ofretail space (sales tax generating)'
The partial implementation of the rccommended Sheetscape Master Plan improvements to
East Meadow Drive.
The completion of the commercial loop in the Village, via the construction of a well-lit'
heated pedestrian walkwaY.
The removal of25 surface parking spaces and the conshuction ofan underground parking
structure designed to accommodate 63 vehicles'
Landscape improvements to Slifer Square, East Meadow Drive and the Gore Creek
streambank.
J
3.
4.
5.
6.
ilI. ZONING AI\ALYSIS
The development standards for a Special Developmcnt District shall be proposed by the applicant'
Development standards including lot u."u, site dimensions, setbacks, hcight, density contol, site
.our.ug", landscaping and parking and loading shall be determincd by the Town Council as pad
of the approved de,neiop-eot ptai, witn consideration of the rccommendations of the Planning
and Enviionmental commission and staff. Before the Town council approves development
standards that deviate from the underlying zone district, it shall be determined that suoh deviations
fr*iO" U"n"nts to the Town that outweigh the adverse effects of such deviations' This
determination is to be made based upon the cvaluation of the proposed Special Development
pistict,s compliance with the review criteria outlined in the following section'
The community Development Departrnent staffhas prepared az.olingAlalysis for the proposed
Austria Haus redevelopment based on the revised plans. The Z*iog l:ut'sis compares the
development standards outlined by the underlyinglone district of Public Accommodation' the
e,pril f+, 1997, proposal and the May 19' 1997, proposal'
Lot sizc: 24,089 sq. ft. /0.553 acres
Buildablo area: 24,089 sq. ft' /0.553 acres
I)evelopment Underlylng Zonlng April 14, 1997 May 19' 1997
Standerd of Publlc Accomm-odatlon SDD proposrl SDD proposal
GRFA:80%or19,27tsq.ft.168%o140,429sq.ft.|460/oo135,24osq.ft.
Dwolling units: 13.8 DU's 35.5 DU's (22 DU's, 3l DU's_(18 DU's, 25 AU's
28 AU's, I Tvpo III EIIU) I Typo III EHU)
Site coverage: 55% or 13,249 sq. ft. 8l% or 19,634 sq' ft' 73Vo or 17 '525 sq' {t'
Sotbacks:
front: 20' 0' 2'
sides: 20' 5'120' 4'/22'
rear: 20' 7' 19' (l-ll2'@ the pool deck)
Height: 48' sloPing 56'5' 48' max'
45'flat 52' 45'max'
6o' tower n/a a
Parking: per T.O.V. oodc Section 18.52 65 spaces requirod 6! spaces required
66 spacesproposed 63 spaces proposed
in tho garage in the garage
Landscaping: 3O%or7,227 sq.ft- ll'2Voor4,542sq'ft' 19%or4'619 sq' ft'
Loading: pcr T.O.V. code S€ction 18.52 I berth at drop-off area I berth at drop'off area
Commercial
sq.footage:l}%orl,927q.ftll%o14,469sq'ft'16%or5'582sq'ft'
Common area: 35% of allowabls GRFA 35% or 14,0M sq. ft. 36% or 12,810 sq' ft'
Gross sq. ft: nla 74,3O2 q' ft' 66'897 sq' ft'
(includes garage) (includes garage)
(D
v) q1
I Ol)
jjo
FFr
E
at)
al
\o
.tr
ao
io\
E
en€GI
c'.1
(-)
tr
0
\el,a
{.)
atr
lo
tao\€e
fi
q
r.o€€\c
I bI)€q6)::t,F
i-g.v=
.dq*u)
j
\o
C\
co
I
I
ci
o
lf)\o
GI
(.I
sgoqx
oo ri.3 c,69
_?dAA
'F
t
aa
c{
co
,+.
c-c-
t\
\o
E
q
1n
6€o\tGI
.= o)g!
Ea uFrbOXrac!x.E t<50X
;F-,:
a
\ora)
r.l
v,
a.l
s
a
c-t
atr
!r)
".1ra({
;9c>lb0\c6
.E9!? ,y().,EVEgx4l)a
,P
(t)
c.l€
I
I
I
E
Io
t{arn
to
ro
ES<PFri
EEtrEAAd;
/P
(t)
ral
r-(\
a
s
a
la|
.f
(t)
carfl
*
at)
@N
c.l
fi
ln
€
e{
H6x>;ql+r fi
o0
"89
d,.5
L,i
e.l
|.i
lrtl
|.
5
|rI
s
F
F
oo
o
a
a
F1
azp<
#ns<=3EHitFeDlr(<Fig
-)a0
o
o
IV.
Chapterls.40oftheTownofVailMunicipalCodeprovidesfolt\9s1{|i$mentofSpecial
Development Districts in the Town of Vaii. According to Section l8'40'010, the purpose of a
Special DeveloPment District is,
..To encourage flexibi|ity and creativity in the deve|opment of land, in order to
promote its most approiriate use; to improve the design character and quality of
the new development r"itt in the Town; io facilitate the adequate and economical
provision of streets and utilities; to pres€rve the natural and scenic features of open
spaceareas;andtofurthertheovera||goalsofthecommunityasstatedintheVail
domprehensive plan. An approved development plan for a s-pecial Development
District, in conjunction with the propertieJunderlying zone district, shall establish
the requirements for guiding development and uses of property included in the
Special DeveloPment Distrlct."
The Municipal code provides nine design critcria, which shall be used as the principal criteril y
evaluating tlc merits of the proposcd Special Development Distict. lt-shall be the burden of the
applicant to demonstrate ttrat suUmittal material and the proposed development plan comply with
each of the following standards, or demonstate that one or more of them is not applicable' or thal
a practical solution consistent *ittt ttt" public interest has been achieved. The staffhas addressed
each of the nine SDD review criteria below:
Design compatibility and sensitivity to the immediate environment, neighborhood
ano iC;"cent propeitius relative to architecturat design, scale, bulk, building height'
buffer iones, identity, chlracter, visual integrity and orientation'
Staff believes the applicant has designed a structure which relates well to the site and the
surrounding neighborhood. The mais of thc Austria Haus is appropriate for thc site and
takes into consideration the massing of the buildings on the adjoining propcrties. The
building steps down on thc east and west ends to insure a smooth transition between
propertles uod do., not create an imposing "canyon" along properlry lines' The north side
of the Austria Haus was designed with a pedestrian scale in mind. The retail shops on the
north side of the Austia Hau-s create a commercial connection along East Meadow Drive,
betweeu Slifer Square and the Village Center retail shops. The commercial connection
has been missing along this portion bf East Meadow Drive and staff believes that the
Austria Haus will enhance the character of the Village'
The exterior building materials of the Austia Haus are a mixture of stone, stucco and
wood. The roof material is proposed to bc a reddish, tile-type roof similar to the material
used on the Sonncnalp Bavaria Haus. The applicant has proposed to incorporate irrigated
flower boxes into the design of the structure. The use of divided light windows all around
thc building creates a euripean-feel and reduces the appearance oftoo muoh glass' Staff
believes that the combination of building materials has bcen well incorporated into the
design ofthe Austria Haus. The applicant has proposed that the extelgr stucco color be
un ofr-*ttit. to yellowish/crcam colbr to blend in with the exteriors of the Mountain Haus
and the Village Center buildings'
The developmcnt standards for the underlying zone district indicatc that the maximum
i"iet t f". t"ildings with sloping roofs shall be 48 fcet. The applicant is requesting that
the"maximum buil,cing hcight for the Austria Haus be approximately 48 fect. The
uppro*i*ut" 4g_foot buildlng hcight is based_on existing (lgg7) topography of the Austria
;ilt ;.tp".ly, and not thc original topography of the site (pre- I 963)' Original
topog.ufiV oithe site is not ar''ailablc, since tfre Austria Haus was constructed in Vail
pi"it" ""ri"g (and prior to thc requirement that a topographic survey be submitted prior
io O"uaop-"ig. Staff believes, based upon the location of the existing retaining walls
and thc condition of the sfieambank, that thc site was "cut" when the Austria Haus was
built. While it is difficult to know exactly how much of the site was "cuf', staff would
conservatively estimate that approxim ately 2 - 3 fcet of soil was removcd. Given this
conservative consideration, staiTwould cstimate the actual building height proposed for
thc Austria Haus would be 50 - 5l feet. According to the Vail Village Master Plan
Conceptual Building Height Plan, the Austria Haus should be 3-4 stories in heighl with a
building story being approximately nine fcet, excluding the roof. The plan fi[ther
indicatJs thai one additional floor of rcsidentiaUlodging may also bc accommodated on the
Ausfia Haus site.
uses, activity and density which provide a compatible, efficient and workable
relationship with surrounding uses and activity'
The Ausfia Haus is located immediately adjacent to the Vail Village Commercial Core'
The Austria Haus is bound on the east by Slifer Squarc and the Mountain Haus, on the
west by the Village Centcr residential/commcrcial buildings and on the south by Gore
Creek, the Couered Bridge Building, Gasthof Gramshammer and the Creekside Building'
Each of these buildings are a mixcd-use dcvelopment incorporating commerciaUretail
space with rcsidential and./or accommodation units'
The applicant is proposing a mixcd-use development that is in compliance with the uses
allowed in the underlying zonc district, The undcrlying zoning of Public Accommodation
encourages the developmcnt of lodges (accommodation units) and accessory eating,
drinkin;and retail establishments at a dcnsity of twenty-five dwelling units per acre' The
applicait is proposing to redevelop the Austria Haus at a density of 56 dwelling units per
u"ie, *ittt 5,58i sq. ft of commerciaVretail space on the main level of the building.
Included in the density figurc are eighteen mcmber-owncd club units (fractional fee),
twcnty-f,rve hotel rooms (accommodation units) and one on-site manager's residence
(Type lll, Employee Housing Unit)'
The applicant's proposal diffcrs greatly from the existing use of the property. curently,
the Austria tlaui iniludes thirty-six accommodation units, and one dwelling unit' equaling
nineteen dwelling units, or 34 bweiling units per acre, a rcstaurant and a limited amount of
oommercial/retail space on the east end of the building. Parking at the Austria Haus is
accornmdated by a twenty-five space surface parking lot' Of the twenty-five spaces'
fiftecn are considered tegait, non-rotforming parkingiputtt' The other ten spaces are off-
site and are not considerJ iegal parking spacis mr zoning purposes' An informal
ioJlng/A"tiln"tyltrash area exists on the west cnd of thc building'
Employee Housing Requirements
As indicated in a nwnber of the goals and objectives of the Town's Master Plans'
providing affordable housing foierulgyees is a critical issue which should be addrcssed
it'ougt ihe planning pro."ri fo. Speciat Development District proposals' In reviewing
the Austria Haus proposal fo..-pioy". housing needs, staffrelied on the Town of Vail
Employee Housing RePort.
Staff Recommended Range Calculations:
The staff believes that the Austria Haus redevelopment will create a need for additional
employees.ofthe40additionalcmployees'atleast12employees(30%)willneedtobe
prorria"a deed-restrictcd housing byihe aevelopers of the Austria Haus' The staff
recommended rangc is based on:
a)
b)
c)
d)
L the type of retail and office use proposed in the commercial spaces within
the Austria Haus;
2. the sizc of the Austria Haus lodging component; and
3. the highJevel of scrvices and amenitics proposcd by thc developers for thc
guests of the Austria Haus.
= 4,802 sq. ft. @(6.5/1000 sq. fr.1=31., employees
= 780 sq. ft. @(7.5/1000 sq. ft.) = 5.9 employees
= 25 units @(1.25lroom) =31.2 employees
= 18 units @(O.a/unit) = 7.2 employees
Total =75'5 employees
(-36 existing employees) =40 employees
(X 0.30 multiplie$=12 new employees
RetaiVscrvice Commerci al
(middlc of range)
Office: real estate
(middle of range)
Lodging*
(top of range)
Multi-Family (club units)
(range does not vary)
*Indging has a particularly large variation of employees per room, depending upon
factoi ri.t, u, size offacility ai'd tevel ofscrvicelsupport services and amenities provided'
c.
Dependinguponthesizeoftheemployeehousingunitprovid{,-itispossibleto
haveuptotwoemployeesperbedroom'Forexample,atwo-bedroomunitinthe
size range or+so - sob squarc feef is possible of accommodating three to four
e-ployJes. These figures are consistcnt with the requirements for the Type III
"-ptoy""
housing units outlined in the Municipal Code'
Overall, staffbelieves that the density and uses proposed by the applicant for the Austria
Haus do not conflict with the compatibility, efficiency or workability of thesurrounding
uses and/or activities. ln fact, stafffeels that the proposed Austria Haus redevelopmalt
will enhance the existing uses and activities in the Villagc'
compliance with parking and loading requirements as outlined in chapter 18'52' of
the Town of Vail MuniciPal Code.
Parking and loading requirements for development are established in Chapter l8'52 of the
Municipal Code. ihe parking and loading requirements are based on the square footage
of the uses proposed witnin a Udtaing. Bised on the square footage of the uses proposed
by the applicant, 75.73 parking ,p"... and onc loading/delivery berth are lequired on-site'
tire tntunicipal Code allows "fandfathering" of the existing legal non-conforming parking
spaces. Currently, fifteen legal, non-conforming parking spaces exist on lhe property.
Thereforc, the parking requirement for the proposed Austria Haus redevelopmcnt is
60.73 new pu.tiog rpi."t, The applicant is proposing an underground,parking stucture
designed to accommodate 63 parking spaces, an employec lounge, mechanical space, and
an encloscd nash facility.
The applicant is proposing one loading/delivery berth in the front en@ drop-offarea'
locatJ on the north side of the building, adjacent to East Mcadow Drive' Much of the
drop-off area is within Town of Vail right-of-way. Staffrecognizes that this area is
convcniently located near the entances to the front desk and the commercial/retail shops'
however, we feel that the use of the drop-off area may be compromised by the loading and
delivery of goods. In staffs opinion, the front entry drop-off arca should be used by the
guests of ttre Austria Haus. Staff believes that trying to accornmdate loading and
iclivery in this area will result in conflicts bctween gucsts, vehicles accessing thc parking
stucture, and delivery trucks. Staff would recommend that the applicant revisit the
altemative of providing the loading and delivery facility in the underground parking
stucture. Staff understands this is not the desire of the owners of thc Village Center
Condominiums, yet we belicve the impact can be mitigated with appropriate screening'
conformity with the applicable elements of the vail comprehensive Plan' Town
policies and Urban Design Plan.
D.
l0
Vail Land Use Plan
The goals contained in the vail Land use Plan are to be used as the Town's policy
did;lio", during the ,eni"* process of establishing a new Special.Development District'
Staffhas reviewed the vail r.a"a use Plan and believes the following policies are relevant
to the review ofthis ProPosal:
t General GrowtM)evelopment
1.1 Vail should continue to grow in a contolled environment, maintaining a
balance between residential, commercial and recreational uses to serve both
the visitor and the permanent resident'
l.2Thequalityoftheenvironmentinc|udingair,water,andothernatural
re$ouroes should be protected as the Town grows'
1.3 The quality of developmcnt should be maintained and upgrade whenever
Possible.
|.4TheoriginalthemeoftheoldVi|lageCoreshouldbecarriedintonew
development in the Village corc through continued implementation of the
Urban Design Guide Plan.
l.l2 Vail should accommodate most of the additional growth in existing
develoPed areas (infill)'
l.13 Vail recognizes its st'eam tract as being a desirable land feature as well as
its Potential for Public usc.
L 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'
3.4Commercialgrowthshouldbeconcentratedinexistingcommercialareas
to accommodate both local and visitor needs'
{, Village Core/Lionshead
4.lFuturecommercialdevelopmentshouldcontinuetooccurprimarilyin
cxistingcommercialareas.FufurecommercialdevelopmentintheCore
areas needs to be carefirlly controlled to facilitate access and delivery.
ll
Increased dcnsity in the Corc areas is acceptable so long as the existing
character of each area is preserved through the implementation of the
Urban Design Guide Plan and the Vail Village Master Plan'
5, Residential
5.1 Quality timcshare units should be accommodated to help keep occupancy
rates up.
Staff believes the proposed establishment of thc new Special Developmcnt District (#35)
is in concert with the goals and policies of thc vail Land Use Plan as outlined above'
Vail Village Master Plan
TheVailVillageMasterPlanisintendedtoserveasaguidetothgs!{-f.1e;iewboards
and Town council in analyzing future proposals for development in Vail Village and in
r"giriuting effective ordin*."ito deal with the such development. The staffhas identified
td foilorilng goals, objectives and policies as being relevant to this proposal:
Goa|#lEncouragehighqua|ityredeve|opmentwhi|epreservingtheunique
architectirralicale ofthe Village in order to sustain its sense of
communltY and identitY'
4.2
1.1 Objective:Implement a consistent Development Review Process to
rcinforce the charactcr of the Village.
L I .l Policy: Development and improvement projects approvcd in
the Village shall be consistent with the goals.
objectives, policies and design considerations as
outlined in the Vail Village Master Plan and Urban
Design Guide Plan.
1.2 Objective: Encourage the upgrading and redevelopment of residential
and commercial facilities.
|.2.1 Policy: Additional development may be allowed as identified
by the action plan as is consistent with the Vail
Village Master Plan and Urban Desigrr Guide Plan'
1.3 Objective: Enhance new development and redevelopment through
public improvements done by private developers working in
cooPeration with the Town'
t2
Goal #2
2.1 Objective:
2.3 Obiective:
2.4 Objective:
I .3. I Policy: Public improvements shall be developed with !he-
participation of the private sector working with thc
Town.
To foster I strong tourist industry and promote year-round economic
health and viability for the Village and for the community as a whole'
Recognize the variety ofland uses found in the l0 sub-areas
throuihout the Village and allow for development that is
compatible with these established land use patterns'
Increase thc number ofresidential units available for short-
tcrm, ovemi ght accommodations'
2.3.1 Policy: 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 managcd in a manner that
makes thcm availablc for short-term overnight
rental.
Encourage the development of a variety of new commercial
activity where compatiblc with existing land uses'
2.5 Objective: Encourage the continued upgrading, renovation a-nd.-
maintenanceofexistinglodgingandcommercialfacilitiesto
better serve the needs ofour guests'
2.5.1 Policy: Recrcation amenities, common areas' meeting
facilities and other amenities shall be preserved and
enhanced as a part ofany redevelopment oflodging
properties.
2.6 Objective: Encourage the development of affordable housing units
through the efforts ofthe private sector'
2.6.1 Policy: Employee housing units may be required as part of-
anynew or redeveloped project requesting density
over that allowed by existing zoning'
To recognize as a top priority the enhancement of the walking
experience throughout the Village.
l3
Goal #3
3.4 Objective:
3.1 Objective:
3.2 Objective:
To preserve existing open spac€ areas and expand green space
opportunities.
4.1 objective: Improve existing open space areas and create new plazas
with gt""tt space and pocket parks' Recognize the different
roles of each type of open space in forming the overall
fabric of the Village.
4.1.4 Policy: Open space improvements, including the addition of-
accessible green space as described or graphically
shown in the Vail Villagc Master Plan and/or Urban
Design Guide Plan, will be required in conjunction
with private infrll or redevelopmcnt projects'
Physically improve the existing pcdestrian ways by
landscaping and other improvements'
3.1.1 Policy: Private developmentprojects shall incorporate
streetscape improvements (such as paver freatrnents'
landscaping, lighting and seating areas)' along
adj acent Pedestrian waYs'
3.1 .3 Policy: Flowers, trees, water features and other landscaping
shall bc encouraged throughout the Town in
locations adiacent to, or visible from' public arcas'
Minimize the amount of vehicular traffic in the Village to
the greatest cxtent Possible'
3.2.1 Policy: Vehicular traffrc will be eliminated or reduced to
absolutely minimal necessary levels in the
pedesfianized areas of the Village'
Develop additional sidewalks, pedestrian-only walkways
and accessible green space areas, including pocket parks
and stream access.
3.4.2 Policy: Private development projects shall bc required to
incorporate ncw sidewalks along streets adjacent to
the projcct as designated in the Vail Village Master
Plan and/or Recreation Trails Master Plan'
Goal #4
t4
Goal #5 Increase and improve the capacity, efficiency and aesthetics ofthe
transportation and circulation system throughout the Village'
5.lobjective:Meetparkingdemandswithpublicandprivateparking
facilities.
5.t.lPo|icy:Fornewdevelopmentthatislocatedoutsideofthe
Commercial Core I 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. I .5 Policy: Redevelopment projects shall be stongly
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 Objective:Provide service and delivery facilities for existing and new
development.
Vail Village Master Plan and Building Height Plan
Generally speaking, it is the goal of the Building Height Plan to maintain 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 Vittug" Master Plan, ihe Austia Haus is located within an area proposed to have
buildiug heights of a maximum range of three to foru stories. A building story is defined
as 9'ofheight, not including the roof.
Vail Village Master Plan Action Plan
According to the Action Plan, the Austria Haus property is an area intended for
residentiJ4odging infill along the south sidc of the property and commercial infill along
the north sidc ofthe ProPertY'
According to the Vail Village Master Plan, thc Austria Haus properly is located within
mixed-use sub-area #l-8, Sonnenalp (Austria Haus/Slifer Square:
"Commercial infill along East Meadow Dnive to provide a stronger edge to steet
and commcrcial aotivity generators to reinforce the pedestrian loop throughout the
Village. Focus of inhliis to providc improvements to pedestian circulation with
15
Separatedwalkwayincludingbuffer,alongEastMeadowDrive.Accommodating
on-siteparkingandmaintainingthebusroutealongEastMeadowDrivearetwo
signifrcant
"oo'rt
uint, that musi be addressed. one additional floor of
residentiaVlodglngmayalsobeaccommodatedonthissite'Specificemn!a{s.
should be pfu.-"6 in thl foUowing Vail Village Master Plan objectives" 2'3,2'4'
2.6. 3.1, 3.2, 3'3, 3.4, 4.7, 5' l' 6.1."
Vail Village Design Considerations
The Town of vail adopted the vail village Design considerations in 1980' The Desigt
Considerations were revised in 1993. The Design Considerations are considered an
integralpaltoftheVailVillageUrbanDesignPlan'TheDesignConsiderationsare
intended to:
> guide growth and change in ways that will enhancc and preserve the esse'ntial
qualities of the Village; and
> serve as design guidelines instead of rigid rules of development; and
' help influence the form and design ofbuildings'
The Vail Village Design Considerations are divided into two categories (urban design
considerations and architecturalfl andscape considerations):
1. URRANDESIGNCONSIDT'RATIONS
These considerations relate to general, large-scale land use plnnniug 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 utcourage pedcstrian circulation through an
interconnected network of safe, pleasant pedestrian ways. Many of the irnprovements
recognized in the Urban Design
-Guide
Plans, and.accompanying Dcsign Considerations,
are ti reinforce and expand the quality of pedestrian walkways throughout the Village'
Since vehicular t'affic cannot be removed from ccrtain sfieets (bus routes, delivery
acccss), a totally care-frec pedestrian system is not achievable throughout the entire
Village. Thereiore, ,"n.rui levels ofpedestrianization have bcen identified' The level of
pedes-tianization most appropriate for the proposed Austria Haus redevelopment is the
joint vehicle/pedestrian use of the roadway.
r6
StaffResponse:
The staffhas concluded that the improvements recommended for East Meadow Drivc in
the 1991 Town of vail streetscap. tntaster Plan should be implemented.- This includes a
reduction in street widtr, from 30 feet to 26 feet(14 foot bus lane and 12 foot attached,
paverpedestrianwalk).rhcapplicantisproposingtoreplacethcsqeellfreconstructit
to the desired width. The appticant is NOT proposing to construct the l2-foot wide
pedestrian walk out ofPavers.
The applicant is also proposing to construct a-l5 - 20 foot wide' heated pedestrian
walkway immediately uOiu..oito the north sidc of the building. Staff believes that these
improvements reinfoice and significantly improve the pedestrian walkwaV; throughout the
viilage by providing places foipeople to walk without forcing them into the bus lane.
The creative use of concrete *it puu"tt emphasizcs the pedestrian chalacler and offers a
clear and athactivc pedestrian route. The retail space on the main level of the Austria
Haus closes the commercial loop from Slifer Square to village center. staffwould
recommend that the l2-foot pedestrian walk beconstructed of pavers (and not asphalt), as
suggested in the Streetscape Mastcr Plan'
B. VEHICLE PENETRATION
To maximize to the extent possible, all non-rcsident traffic should be routed along the
Frontage Road to Vail VillageiLionshead Parking Stnrctures'
In conjunction with pedestrianization objectivcs, major emphasis isfocused upon reducing
auto pcnetration into thc center of the Village. Vail Road and Vail Vallcy Drive will
continue to serve as ma.;or routes for service and rcsident access to the Village'
Road constrictions, haffic circles, signagc, and other measures are indicatcd in the Guidc
Plans to visually and physically discourage all but esscntial vehicle pcnefation upon the
Frontage Road. ,qltemutiu" u.""rr pointi and private parking relocation, where feasible,
shouldle considered to furlhcr reduce traffic conflicts in the village.
' Staff Response:
The redevelopment of the Austria Haus will increase vehicular traffrc on Village Center
Road. According to the Environmental Impact Assessment-Austria Haus Redevelopment,
prepared by DesiP WorkshoP, lnc.:
"A slight increase automobilc traffrc is expected because ofthe projected increase
in the number of visitors gcnerated annually by the project. what is not known'
howevcr, is how many ofih.t" additional guests will arrive by oar; it is likely the
largest number of guests will continuc to arrive in the winter and that most will
anive by van from-the airport. Van deliveries will increase somewhat. Those
guests tirat arrive in their L*n .ut are likely to leave the car in the garage after they
l7
arrive,asthecentervillagelocationoftheprojecteliminatestheneedforacar.lf
there is a potential for coigestion anywheri, it is most likely to be.in the small
drop-offparking area in frint of thc
-building,
where check-ins, deliveries and lost
driversrnayconverge'Tosomcexten!thiscanbemitigatedbyimproved
roadway directlonaisigns, speedy gucst valet servicc, carefrrl management of
deliveries and incentives to encourage guests to leave their cars at home'"
Along with the increase in automobile traffic, thcre will be an increase in delivery vehicle
traffrc due to an increase in the commercial square footage on the propcrty' The
uppfi.unt" anticipate that deliveries to thc retaii shops will likely anile via UPS or similar
ffis of couriers. Deliveries are to bc accommodatcd in the drop-offarea in the front of
the building.
staff agrees with Design workshop's assessmerrt of thc potential fraffic impacts' while
thcre rill likely be an increase in traffrc on Village Center Road, there will not be an
increase in traffic on the pedestrian portion of East Meadow Drive. The traffic control
gate located at the intersection of Villagc Center Road and East Meadow Drive will
iontinue to prohibit all vehicle haffic eicept Town of Vail buses. Stafffeels the applicant
has addressed traffrc issues to the extent possiblc'
C. STREETSCAPE FRAMEWORK
To improve the quality of the walking expcrience and givc continuity to thc pedestrian
ways, as a continuous system, two gcneral types of improvements adjacent to the
walkways arc considered:
1. open space and landscaping, berms, grass, flowers and tree planting as a
soft,colorfulframeworklinkagealongpedeskianroutes;andplazasand
park greenspaces as open nodcs and focal points along those routcs.
2. Infill commercial storefronts, expansion of existing buildings, or new infill
developmcnt to create new commercial activity generators to give streetlife
and visual interest, as attractions at key locations along pedestrian routes'
It is not intended to enclose all Village steets with buildings as in the core axeas' Nor is it
dcsirable to leave pedcstrian strccts in the opcn in somewhat undefined condition evident
in many other areas of vail. Rather, it is desired to have a variety of open and enclosed
,pu."r, both built and landscaped, which create a shong framework for pedestrian walks,
as well as visual interest and activity.
Staff Response:
l8
TheAustriaHausredevelopmentimprovesthestrcetscapeframeworkthroughthe
creation of new commercial activity and increascs visual interest along East Meadow
Drivc. As stated previously, staff believes thc proposed redevelopment with 5'582 square
feet of commercial arca closes the critical commercial loop in the Village and provides
new street life where very little currently exists'
D. STREETENCLOSURE
While building facade heights should not be uniform from building to building, they should
provide a "comfortablC'enclosurc for the street'
pedestian 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 (3dimensional
variations), which give much of the visual interest and pedestian scale-unique to Vail'
very general rules, about the perception ofexterior spaces have been devcloped by
desi'gl'ers, based on thc characteristics of human vision' They suggest that:
,.an extcrnal enclosure is most comfortable when its walls are approximately l/2 as
high as the width of the space enclosed; if the ratio falls to l/4 or less, the space
seems unenclosed; and if the height is greater than the width it comes to resemble a
canyon".
ln actual application, facades arc seldom uniform in height on both sides ofthe street, nor
is this desired. Thus, some latitude is appropriate in the application of this 1/2 to 1 ratio'
Using the avcrage facadc height on both sides will generally still be a guidc to the
comfortableness of thc enclosure bcing created.
In some instances, the "canyon" effect is acceptable and even desirable' For cxample' as a
short connecting linkage between larger spaces, to give variety to the walking expericnce'
For sun/shade.iuroos it is often advantageous to orient any longer segments in a
north/south direction. Long canyon streets in an easVwest direction should generally be
discouraged.
When exceptions to the general height oriteria occur, special consideration should bc given
to create a welldefined ground floor pedestrian emphasis to overcome the "canyon"
effect.
canopies, awnings, arcades and building extensions can all create a pedestian focus and
diveri attention from the upper building heights and "canyon" effect'
t9
Staff Response:
East Meadow Drive, and the pedestrian walkway adjacent to the Austria Haus, averages
approximately 43 feet in widih. The Austria Haus (eaveline) adjacent to East Meadow
tilue ana tne pedestrian walkway is approximately 29 fect in height. Given that East
Meadow Drive is enclosed only on one side, and the arcade and landscaping creates an
cmphasis on the ground level of thc building, staff belicves the proposed Austria Haus
creates a "comfortable" enclosure ofthe street and does not create a "canyon" effect'
E. STREETEDGE
Buildings in the Village core should form a sfiong but incgular edge to the street.
Unlike many American towns, there are no standard setback requirements for buildings in
vail village. consistcnt with the desire for intimate pedestrian scale, placement of
portions oia building at or near the property line is allowcd and encouraged to give sfrong
definition to the pedestrian streets.
This is not to imply continuous building frontage along the property line. A strong strect
cdge is important ior continuity, but perfectly aligned facades over too long a distancc
tends to be monotonous. With only a few exceptions in the Village, slightly irregular
facade lines, building jogs, and landscaped arcas, give the life to the street and visual
interest for pcdestrian havel.
Where buildings jog to create activity pockets, other elements can be used to continue the
steet edge: low planter walls, tree planting, raised sidewalks, texture changes in ground
surfacc, arcades, raised decks.
Plazas, patios, and green areas are important focal points for gathering, resting, orienting
and should be distributed tkoughout the Village with duc consideration to spacing, sun
access, opportunities for views and pcdestrian activity.
. StaffResponse:
The original Austria Haus desigl lacked the incgular street edge of other properties in
Vail Viilage. The applicant, at the request of the staff and PEC, has attempted to
intoduce i more inigular street edge through the horizontal stepping ofthe building on
the east and west ends. Thc east end ofthc building has been stepped back from the
property line and the northcast comer has been cutback, opening this end ofbuilding up to
3Ufe. Square. The west-end of the building was steppcd towards thc street. While it was
the PEC's desire to see more stepping in the building, shff believes and recognizes the
constraints in doing so. Staffbelievcs the irregular configuration of the landscape planters
in front of the building helps to lcssen the rather long, liuear and unintemrpted steet edge
along the center portion of the Austria Haus.
20
F. BUILDING HEIGHT
Vail village is perceived as a mix of two and three story facades, atthough there are also
four and five story buildings. rh" -i* of building heightt giu"t variety to the street' which
is desirable. The height citeria are intended to encourage height in massing variety and to
discourage uniform building heights along the street'
' Staff Response:
The Austria Haus roof steps down on both ends of the building, reducing the creation of a
..canyon" along the west property line and resulting in a building that is less obtrusive (on
Slifei Square) on the east enO. itt" applicant has submitted a scale model of the new
stucture in iis Village Core context and this model will be available for use by the PEC
during the hearings.
G. VIEWS AND FOCAL POINTS
Vail's mountain/valley setting is a fundamental part of its identity. vicws of the
mountains, ski slopes, creekJand other natural features are remindcrs to our visitors of the
mountain environment and, by repeated visibility, are orientation referencc points' Ccrtain
building features also provide imiortant orientation references and visual focal points'
The mo-st significant view corridors in the Village have been adopted as part of Chapter
18.73 of the Vail Municipal Code. The view corridors adopted should not be considered
cxhausted. when evaluating a development proposal, priority should be given to an
uiutyri, of the impacted proJect oo ptibli" niews. Views that should be preserved originate
from cither major pedestrian areas or public spaces' and include views of the ski mountain,
the Gore Range, the clock Tower, the Rucksack Tower and other important man-made
and natural elements that contribute to the sense of place associated with Vail' These
views, which have been adoptcd by ordinance, were chosen due to their significance, not
only iom an aesthetic standpoint, but also as orientationreference points for pedestrians'
Development in Vail Village shall not encroach into any adopted view corridor, unless
upprou"d under Chapter tt.Zl. Raopted corridors are listcd in Chapter 18'73 of the Vail
Municipal code. wfoether affecting adopted view corridors or not, thc impact of
proposed development on views tom public ways and public spaces must be identified
and considered where appropriate'
. StaffResponse:
Although not directly impacting one of the five adopted view corridors,.as listed in
Chaptei 18.73 of the Vaii tvtuniclpal Code, the height of the building will have impacts
from the Vail Transportation Cenler (transit terminal) and will also impact views from the
west and central stairs. Public views of the village (roofline of stuchrres) will be blocked
from these areas, however, views of Vail Mountain will rcmain' Overall, staff feels that
2l
the benefits of providing a comfortable enclosure to the street, and completing the
pedestrian and retail connection from crossroads to the covered Bridge is positive' staff
i"Jt tn"t tfr" completion of this pedestrian connection is in compliance with Goal #3 of the
Vail Village Master Plan:
"To recognize as a top priority thoenhancemcnt of the walking experience
throughout the Village."
H. SERVICE ANDDELIVERY
Any building expansion should preserve the functions of existing service alleys' The few
,.*i." alley-s that exist in the Viilage are cxtrernely important to minimizing vehicle
.ong"rtiont. pedestrian ways. Th1 usc of, and vehicular access to, those alleys should
not be eliminated except where functional altematives are not provided'
In all new and remodeled construction, dclivery which avoids or reduces impacts on
peJestrian ways should be explored; and adopted whenever practical, for immediate or
futor. ur". Riar access, basement and below ground delivery corridors reduce
congestion. weather protection increases dclivery effi ciency substantially.
Below grade delivery corridors arc found in a few buildings in Vail village
(sicrnik/core creek Plaza, village center, vail village Inn). consideration should be
given to extending these corridors, wherc feasible, and the creation of new ones. As
;uildings are constructed or remodcled, thc opportunity may exist to develop segments of
a future system.
. Staff Response:
Through the course ofthc review ofthe Austria Haus redcvelopment proposal, several
loading and delivery options were explored'
The applicant had originally proposed to provide one loading and delivery berth in the
undergfound parking structure. However, concerns were expressed by the Village Center
CondJminium o*o"i, that they would be ncgatively impacted by the noise generated from
the dclivery vehioles, since the access to the underground location was immediately
adacent to their units.
The applicant had also explored the possibility ofgaining underground lccess to their
stuctoie through the Village Centeigarage. It was detcrmined that delivery vehicles
could not enter-through village center due to height limitations in the garage.
As mentioned previously, the applicant is proposing to provide for loading/delivery in the
front entry drop-off area. The aiplicant anticipates that deliveries to the retaiVcommercial
22
shops will arrive via uPS or similar types of courier. staff continues to believe that this
location may negatively impact the peiestrian use of this area of East Meadow Drive and
suggeststheapplicantoooti*.toe*ploreplacingtheloadinganddeliverybedhinthe
uode.ground structure, as originally contemplated'
I. SUN / SHADE
Duc to vail,s alpine climate, sun is an important comfort factor, especially in winter' fall
and spring. Shade areas have ambient tcmperaturcs substantially below those ofadjacent
Air".i ,"iignt areas. On all but thc *ut*.tt of summer days' shade can easily lower
temperaturJs below comfortable levels and thcreby' negatively impact use of thosc areas'
All new or expanded buildings should not substantially increase !!: tq":tc and fall shadow
line (March 2i - sqptembe.I:; on adjacent properties or thc public right-of-way.
In all building construction, shade shall bc considered in massing and overall height
consideration. Notwithstanding, sun/shade considerations are not intended to restict
building height allowances, but-iather to influcnce the massing of buildings' Limited
height Jxceftions may be granted to meet this criteria'
. sbIfRgsnoqsgl
Although the proposed height of the building will diminish the amount of sun, and likewise
increase shading, along Eait Mcadow Drive (north side of the project), the provision of
heated public *utt*uy, effectively mitigatcs this consideration, thus providing ice-free and
,no*-fr"" sidewalks. Additionally, thc;opening up" of Slifer Square will ins're adequate
light, air and open space to a public gathering spacc. Overall, staffbelieves the applicant's
p.oposal complies with the abovedescribed considerations'
ROOFS
where visible. roofs arc often one of the most dominant architectural elemcnts in any built
cnvironment. In thc Village, roof form, color and texture are visibly dominant, and generally
consistent. which tends to unii' the building diversity to a great dcgree'
The current expression, and objective, for roofs in the village is to form a consistently uniffing
backdrop for the architecture and pedestrian steetscape, and to avoid roofs which tend to stand
out individually or disfiact visually from the overall character'
2.
Roof Forms
Roofs within thc Village are typically gable in form and of moderate-toJow pitch' Shed roofs-are
frequently used for ,."1 uaditbos to ilger buildings. Free-standing shed roofs, butterfly roofs
andflat roofs, can be found in the Villagi, but they are generally considered to be out ofcharacter
and inappropriatc. Hip roofs likewise, are rare and generally inconsistent with the character of the
Core Area. Towers are exceptions, in both form and pitch, to the general criteria, but do have an
established local vernacular-style which should be respected'
Staff Response
The roof form ofthe Austria Haus has been revised several times from what was originally
proposed. The original roof design of the Austria Haus had a significant amount of flat
i*iur"u. The majority of flat roof has now been replaced with a sloping roof leading to a
more traditional ridges. The ends of the ridges have been "clipped", resulting in a hip roof
form. while a hip roof is generally considered inconsistcnt with the character of the
Village, the applicant believes this roof form helps to reduce the mass of the building'
Staff recognizes that the sloping roof form increases the perceived height ofthe building,
cspecially on the east and wlst ends. Staffbelieves it is critical that the roof materials on
.u"n of tir" three building forms be compatible with one another. Staffwill raise this issue
with thc Design Review Board'
Pitch
Roof slopcs in the Village typically range from 3ll2 to 6/12,,ludrth slightly steeper pitches in
limitcd applications. Again, for visual consistency this general 3l12-6112 range should be
preserved.
. Slaff-Bsspqse
The pitch of the proposed Austria Haus roof is 4ll2 andis in compliance with this
guideline.
Overhangs
Generous roofoverhangs are also an established architectural feature in the Village - a traditional
expression of shelter in a$ine environments. Roof overhangs typically range from 3 to 6 feel on
alfedges. Specific design consideration should be given to protection ofpedestrian ways adjacent
to buillaings. Snow slid-es and runoffhazards can be reduccd by roof orientation, gutters, arcades'
ctc.
24
Overhang details are treated with varying degrees of ornamentation' Stnrctural elements such as
roof be#s are cxpressed beneath the overhangs, simply or decorativcly carved. The roof fascia
is thick and wide, giving a substantial cdge to the roof'
. StaffRcsponse
Staffsuggests that the applicant increase the roof overhangs on the building. currently,
the overhangs vary f.om-two feet to three feet. Staffwould like to see all the roof
overhangs'at least three feet. Again, staff will review this consideration with the
Design Review Board.
Compositions
The intricate roofscape of the Village as a whole is the result of many individual simple roof
configurations. For any singlc building a varied, but simple composition of roof planes is
pref#ea to either a single Jr a comple* arrangement of many roofs. As individual roofs become
,,'orc corrrplex, the rooiathacts visual attention away from the streetscape and the total roofscape
tcnds toward "busyness" rather than a backdrop composition'
. Sdf3espeusc
The roof form on thc Austria Haus would be considered a grouping of a simple
composition of roof planes. Staffbelieves the roof composition proposed by the applicant
is consistent with the intent of this architecttral considcration.
Stcpped Roofs
As buildings are stepped to reflect existing grade changes, resulting roof steps should be made
where the heigbt changc will be visually significant. Variations which are too subtle appear to be
more stylistic than functional, and out of character with the more sfiaight-forward roof design
typical in thc Village.
. StaffResponse
The Austia Haus site is relatively flat (by Vail standards). While the building does not
need to step to follow the topography, vertical and horizontal steps have been
incorporatid into the roofdesign. The vertical and horizontal steps provide a reduction in
the overall mass of the building and add to the architectural and visual interest of the
building.
25
Materials
wood shakes, wood shingles, and built-up tar and gavel are almost exclusively used as roof
materials in the village. For visual consistency, ariy otho matcrials should have the appearance of
the above.
Staff Response
Most recently, wood shakes and wood shingles arc being discouragld for use as a roofing
material due to firc safety concems, At the recommendation of the Town of Vail Fire
Departmenl the staffhas bcen enoouraging developers to use gravel' asphalt' tile' metal
ai other more fire-resistant roofing materials on new buildings'
The applicant is proposing to use reddish tiles on the roof of the Austria Haus' The tiles
will be similar in upp"*ui.. to those uscd on the Sonnenalp Bavaria Haus. The staff
believes this is an appropriate roofmaterial to use on this project'
Construction
common roof problems and design considerations in this climatc include:
- snowslidcs onto pedestrian walks
- gutters freezing
- roof dams and water infrltration
- heavy snow loads
Careful attention to these functional details is recommendcd, as well as familiarity with the local
building code, proven construction details, and Town ordinances'
For built-up roofs, pitches of 4ll2or stecper do not hold gravel well. For shingle roofs, pitches
of 4/12o, ,hullo*"i often result in icc dams and backflow leakage under the shingles'
cold-roof construction is strongly preferred, unless warm-roof benefits for a specific application
can be demonstrated. Cold-roofs are doublc-roofs which insulate and prevent snow melt from
internal building heat. By retaining snow on the roof, many of the problems listed can be reduced'
Periodic snow removal will be required and should be anticipated in the design'
Roof gutters tcnd to ice-in completely and become ineffective in the vail climate, especially in
shadei north-side locations. Heating the intcrior circumference with heat-tape elements or other
devices is generally neccssary to assure adequate run-offcontrol in colder months'
. $gfflesPortsel
The applicant is proposing a cold-roof constuction atop the Austria Haus. Through the
review of a buildingpermit, staffwill ensure the roof constuction complies with the
standards prescribed for the Vail climate'
26
FACADES
Materials
Stucco, brick, wood (and glass) are the primary building materials foundin the Village' while not
wishing to restrict design fteedom, exisiing conditions show that within this small range of
materials much variation and individuality are possible while preserving-a basic harmony' Too
many diverse materials weaken the continuity and repetition whioh unifies the sfeetscape'
Of the above materials, stucco is the most consistently uscd material' Most of the buildings in the
Village exhibit some stucco, and there are virtually no ."ut where stucco is entirely absent' lt is
lnteniea to preserve the Jo#nance of stucco by its use in portions, at leas! of all new facades'
and by assuring that other materials are not used to the exciusion of stucco in any sub-area within
the Village.
. Staff Response
The exterior materials proposed by the applicant for the three building forms are a
combination of stone, stoc.o und *ood. No one material is proposed to dominatc the
exterior of the Austria Haus. Staff believes the applicant has complied with this particular
architectural consideration.
Color
There is gleater 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 toncs are preferred - browns, greys' blue-greys'
dark olive, slate-greens, etc. Stricco colors are generally light - whitc, beige, pale-gold, or other
light pastis. OGr light colors could bc appropriate, as considcrcd on a case-by-case basis'
niight colors (red, orange, blucs, maroon, iic.) should be avoided for major wall planes, but can
bc ised effectively (witi rcstraint) for decorative trim, wall graphics, and othcr accent elements'
Generally, to avoid both "busyness," and wcak visual interest, the variety of major wall colors
should not cxceed four, nor be less than two.
A color/material change between the ground floor and upper floors is a common and effective
reinforcement of the pcdestrian scale of the stcct'
27
StaffResponse
The applicant has proposed an exterior building color that is compatible with the color of
the existing buildings in thc vicinity of thc Austria Haus. Staffwould like to point out that
iie applicalnt is reqJired to obtain lesign Review Board (DRB) approval prior to
construction and that any concems of tie PEC on this topic will be brought to the
attention of the DRB.
Transparency
Pedestrian scalc is created in many ways, but a major factor is thc openness, attractiveness' and
generally public characterofthe ground floor facadc ofadjacentbuildinss' Transparent store
fronts are ..people attractors," opiqo. or solid walls are more private, and imply "do not
approach."
on pedestrian-oriented streets such as in thc village, ground floor commercial facades are
proportionately more transparent than upper floo.i. Upper floors are typically more rcsidential,
private and thus less oPen.
As a measure oftransparency, the most characteristic and successful ground floor facades range
from 55% to 700 0f the total length of the commcrcial facade. upper floors are often the
converse, 30%-4 5% transParent.
Examples oftransparency (lineal fcet ofglass to lineal feet offacade) on ground level'
- Covered Bridge Building 58o/o
- Pepi's SPorts 71%
- Gasthof Gramshammer 48%
- Thelodge 66%
- Golden Peak Housc 62%
- Casino Building 30%
- Gorsuch Building 5l%
Staff Response
The Austria Haus has a ground floor transparency of 50% along East Meadow fhive'
While the percortage falL short of the recommended minimum of 55Vo, staffbelieves the
intent of the tansparency requirement has been met. stafffeels the arcade, large panes of
glass, and sfieetscape benches will all servc as "people atfactors" giving life and activity
io the ground level ofthe building. Staffbelieves that ifthere is an opportunity for
additional glass (transparency), iiexists on the west-end of the easternmost building form'
Staffwould suggest, but not require, that the applicant explore the possibility of increasing
the size of the window on the west-end of the eastemmost building form.
28
Windows
In addition to the general degree of tansparency, window details are an important source of
pedestrian scale-giving ele#nts. The sizc and shape of windows ar9 ofte1 a response to the
function of the adjacent street. For close-up, casual, pedestian vbwing windows are typically
sized to human aimensions aoa characterisiics of human vision. (Large glass-wall store-fronts
;r*.i *iot"r.pt"a ui"*ing, as from l moving car. Thc sense of intimate pedestian scale is
diminished). Ground noor diiplay windows are typically raised slightly.l8 inches + and do not
extend much over g fect above the walkway levci.- Ground floors, which are noticeably above or
below gtade, are excePtions.
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 elements -
and are further suuiviAJfy mullions intosmall panes - which is responsible for much of the old-
world cbarm of the Village. Similarly, windows are most often clustered in banks' juxtaposed
with plain wall surfaces io gi.rre a pleasing rhythm. Horizontal rcpetition of single window
elements, especially over long distances, should be avoidcd'
Large single pane windows occur in the Village, and provide some contrast, as long as thcy are
g.rififyi""sistent in form with other windows' Long continuous glass is out of charactcr' Bay'
bow and box windows arc cornmon window details, which further varicty and massing to facades
- and are encouraged.
Reflective glass, plastic panes, and aluminum or other mctal frames are not consistent in the
Village aoisfrouid be avoided. Metal-clad or plastic-clad wood frames, having the appearance of
painted wood have been used successfully and are acceptable'
. Slaff&enpo$te
Thc Austria Haus proposal is in compliance with the abovedescribed desip
consideration. Staff Uelieves the use of dormers with windows, bay windows and
windows with mullions adds to the architectural charm and visual integrity of the Austria
Haus. Staff recommends that the use of mullions in the windows be a condition of
approval.
Doors
Like windows, doors are importrant to character and scale-giving architectural elcments' They
should also be somewhat tansparent (on retail commercial facades) and consistcnt in detailing
with windows and other facade elements.
Doors with glass contribute to overall facade transparency. Pu9 tothe. visibility of people and
mcrchandise inside, windowed doors are somewhat more effective in drawing people inside to
29
retail commercial facades. Although great variations exist, 25-30%o t transparency is felt to be a
minimum transpaxency oU3".ti"" i.iiate residences, lodges, restaurants, and othcr non-retail
establishments have differLt visibility and character needs, and doors should be designed
accordingly. Sidelight windows are also a means of introducing door-transparency as a
complement or substitute for door windows'
Articulated doors have the decorative qualrty desircd for Vail. Flush doors, light aluminum
frames, plastic applique elements all are considered inappropriate, As an expression of entry,9f
sheltered welcome, protected entry-ways a." "nroo."g.d.
Doorways may be recessed, extended'
or covered.
StaffResponse
Staff believes the applicant's proposal complies with the abovedescribed criteria.
Trim
Prominent wood trim is also a unirying feature in the Village. Particularly at ground floor levels'
doors and windows have strong, contrasting framing elemcnts, which tie the various elements
together in one composition. frindows and doors arc treated as sfiong visual features. Glass-
wall detailing for either is typically avoided.
. StaffResponse:
Staff believes the applicant's proposal complies with the abovedescribcd criteria.
DECKS AND PATTOS
Dining decks and patios, when properly designed and sited, bring people to the streets'
opporirniti". to look and be looked at, and generally contribute to the liveliness ofa busy street-
making a richer pedeshian cxperience than if those streets were empty'
A review of successful decks/patios in Vail reveals several cornmon characteristics:
- direct sunlight from l1:00 - 3:00 incrsases use by many days/year and protects from
wind.
- elevated to give views into the pedestrian walk (and not the reversc).
- physical separation from pedestian walk.
- overhang gives pedestrian scale/shelter.
Decks and patios should be sited and designed with due consideration to:
- sun
30
- wind
- views
- Pedestrian activitY
. StaffResponse:
The majority of the decks and patios on the Austria Haus are located on the south side of
the building, facing Gore creet. These decks and patios are for the use ofthe guests of
the Ausfia Haus and not the general public'
BALCONIES
Balconies occur on almost all buildings in the Village which have at least a second level facade
wall. As strong repetitive features they:
- give scale to buildings'
- give lifc to the street (when used)'
- add varietY to building forms'
- provide shelter to pathways below.
. Slallf3eil@lc
Again, the majority ofthe balconies on the Austria Haus are located on the south side of
tni UoitOiog. 3everat french balconies have bcen incorporated into ihe design ofthe north
side of the building on the upper floors.
Color
They contrast in color (dark) with the building, typically matching the hjm colors.
. Sbf,[Retpossc
Like the exterior color of the building, the DRB will be reviewing this aspect of the
proposal.
Size
They extend far enough from the building to cast a prominent shadow pattern. Balconies in vail
are hrnctional 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'
. Staff Responsc
Staffbelievcs this criteria has been met.
3l
Mass
They are commonly massive, yet semi-transparent, distinctive from the building, yet allowing the
building to be somewhat visitie behind. soiid balconies are found occasionally, and tend to be
too dominant obscuring the building architecture. Light balconies lack the visual impact which
tics the Village together.
. StaffResponse
The balconies on the Austria Haus are proposed to be semi-transparent in appearance'
Materials
Wood balconies are by far the most common. Vertical stnrctural members are the most dominant
visually, often decoraiively sculpted. Decorative wrought iron balconies are also consistent
visuatty'wnere the verticai m".b"r, are olosc enough to create serni-transparency. Pipe rails, and
plastic, canvas or glass panels should be avoided'
' Staff Response
The material to be used in the construction of the balconies on the Austria Haus is wood'
with vertical structural members. A detail of the railing will be reviewed by the DRB'
ACCENT ELEMENTS
The life, and festive quality of the Village is given by judicious use of accent elements which give
color. movement and confiast to the Village'
Colorful accent elements consistent with existing character are encouraged, such as:
canvas, bright color or stripes oftwo colors.
hanging from buildings, poles, and even across streets for special
occasions.
over tables on outdoor Patios.
in beds or in Planters.
buildings, plazas, windows, hees (even Chrishnas lights all winte|'
coats of arms, symbols, accent compositions, etc'
sculptural, with both winter and surnmer character'
Staff Response:
Accent ligbting on ttre building, annual flowers in containers and in the planting beds'
pott"a ti, diorated with Cf,ristrnas lights and irrigated flower boxes are proposed to
Awnings and canopies -
Flags, banners -
Umbrellas -
Annual colorflowers -
Accent lighting-
Painted wall graphics -
Fountains -
3Z
provide colorful accent elements on the Austria Haus. An additional accent symbol
tclock, crest, etc.) is proposed for the area above the front entry' The final design has yet
to be determined.
LANDSCAPE ELEMENTS
Landscape considerations include, but go beyond, the placement ofappropriatc plant materials'
- plant matcrials
- Paving
- retaining walls
- sfieet fumiture (bcnches, kiosks, trash, etc')
- lighting
- signage
Plant Materials
Opportunities for planting are not extensive in the Village, which places a premium on the plant
seiection and design of tie sites that do exist. Framework planting of trees and shrubs should
include both deciduous and evcrgreen species for year round continuity and interest'
Native plants are somewhat limited in variety, but are clearly best able to withstand the harsh
winter climate, and to tie the Village visually with its mountain setting.
Trees
Narrowleaf cottonwood
Balsam poplar
Aspen
Lodgepole pine
Colorado sprucc
Subalpine fir
Shrubs
Willow
Dogwood
Serviceberry
Alpine currant
Chokecherry
Mugho pine
Potentilla
Buffaloberry
Staff Response
A landscape plan has been submitted by the applicant. Thc landscape plan has been
aevetpiwittr the assistance of Town staff, sincc a majority of the landscape
improvements are proposed on Towr property. The proposed landscape $esign takes into
consideration factors such as the location ofthe plantings (sun/shade), maintenance'
climate. etc. Staff believes the landsoape design for the Austria Haus complies with the
above{escribed criteria.
JJ
Paving
The freezelthaw cycle at this altitude virtually eliminates conrmon site-cast concrete as a paving
surface (concrete spall). High-sfrength concrete may work in selected oonditions' Asphalt, brick
(on concrete or on sand), and concrete block appear to be best suited to the area'
In general, pavrng treahncnts should bc coordinated with that of the adacent public right-of-way'
fhi town uses the following materials for all ncw construction:
- asphalt: general use pedestrian streets
- brick on concrete: featurc areas (plazas, intersections, fountains, etc.)
. SjaffBs,!@ss
The paving material uscd in the public areas around the Austria Haus will be thc "Vail",
concrete unit paver, laid in the "Vail-pattern" (hcrringbone). These surfaces will be heated
and will include the access ramp to the parking structurc, the front entry drop-offarea and
the pedestrian walkway along tle store fronts. The applicant has worked with the Town
stati'in developing the desigr of improvements in the public right-of-way.
Retaining Walls
Retaining walls, to raise planting areas, often protects the landscape from pedestrians and
snowplows, and should provide seating opportunities:
Two types of material are already well established in the Village and should be utilized for
continuity:
- split-face moss rock veneer - Village core pedestrian streets (typical).
- rounded cobble hidden mortar - in open space areas ifabovc type not already
established nearbY.
. SbflBesPoqse
No landscape retaining walls are proposed in the construction of the Austria Haus. The
new landscape raaining walls proposed in Slifer Square will match the existing walls in
terms of both type of materials, and application.
Lighting
Light standards should be coordinated with those uscd by the Town in the public right-of-way.
34
. StaffResponse
As part of the streetscape improvements along East Meadow Drive, the applicant will be
insalling four new Viliage light fixtures. The numbcr and locations of the four new lights
was determined through consultation with Town staff'
Signage
Refcr to Town of Vail Signage Ordinance
. Staff Response:
The staffhas requested that the applicant prepare a comprehensive sign program for the
Austria Haus. The comprehensive sign program will be reviewed by the DRB.
SERVICE
Trash handling is extrcmely sensitive in a pedestrian environment. Trash collection is primarily
made in off-peak hours. tf is tne building owners responsibility to assure that existing frash
storage problems are corrected and future ones avoided'
Trash, especially from food service establishments, must be carefully considered; including thc
following:
- quantities generated
- pick-up frequencY/access
- container sizes
- enclosure location/design
- visual odor imPacts
Garbage collection boxes or dumpsters must be readily accessiblc for collection at all times yet
fully sireened from public view - pedestrians, as well as upper level windows in the vicinity.
Materials
Exterior materials for garbage enclosures should be consistent with that ofadjaoent buildings'
Construction
Dwability of the stucture and operability of doors in all weather are prime concems. Metal
frames and posts behind the preiened exterior matcrials should be considered to withstand the
inevitablc abuse these structures suffer.
35
F.
StaffResponse:
The applicant has proposed to incorporate a fash dumpster into the design of the
underground parking structure. the rash dumpster will be oompletely enclosed and
accessible from inside the parking structure. without a restaurant, the building is not
cxpected to generate an unusual amount oftrash. The driveway is designed to
accommodate hash trucks. Staffbelieves the applicant's proposal complies the above-
described critcria.
Identification and mitigation of natural and/or geologic hazards that affect the
property on which the special development district is proposed'
There are no natural and/or geologic hazards, including the Gore Creek floodplain, that
effect the Austria Haus ProPertY.
Site plan, building design and location and open space provisions designed to
proouce a functional dJvebpment responsive and sensitive to natural features'
vegetation and overall aesthetic quality of the community'
The applicant has revised the site plan in response to comments received from the Town
Council and staff. Most importanity, ttt" apilicant has shifted the building 7'on the site to
further buffer the sunounding properties. The applicant has designcd the building to
respect the 50' Gore Creek stt.o- setback along the south side ofthe property and to
maintain the required 20' setback along the west property linc'
A circulation system designed for both vehicles and pedestrians addressing on and
off-site traffi c circulation.
The Austia Haus redevelopment will have major positive impacts on both off-site and on-
site vehicle and pedestrian traffrc systems surrounding the properly. Staffbelieves that
pedeshian circuLtion will be substantially improved as result of the redevelopment'
'Improvements include a new l4-foot wide bus lane and a dedicated, l2-foot wide
peiestrian lane along East Meadow Drivc, as well as an improved pedestian streetscape
along the north side ofthe building adjacent to the retail shops. The pedestrian
.t
"Jtrrup"
will be heated, thus providing ice-free and snow-free sidewalks. All new
pedesfian improvement, p.opo*" the use of concrete unit pavers, with the exception of
the l2-foot wide walkway along East Meadow Drive, and will connect into the existing
improvcments to thc.utilStif"i Square), to the west (Village Center) and to the Vail
Transportation Center to the north.
Staffwould recommend that the applicant redesign the pedesfian access through Slifer
Square. The original design indicated improvements to slifer Square which would
improve pedestrian u...tJto and around the Austria Haus' Staff believes that the
elimination of this access will have negative effccts upon the ciroulation system on and off
the site.
G.
36
H.
vehicular circulation will also be positively effected by the redevelopm.t Th" curent
p*G "*"oon
will Ue ir,rprouei by removing the surface parking lot and replacing it
with an underground parking structure and a front entry &op-offarea' Access to the
p*kiG J-.tir" shali be vii a heated ramp located at the west end of the project.
Functional and aesthetic landscaping and open space in order to optimize and
preserve natural features, recreation, views and functions'
The proposed landscape plan will have important beneficial impacts on the quality of the
p"Ufi" tpu""t in the vicinity of the Austria Haus,-due to the improvements to East
iirteadow Drive, Slifer Square and the Gore Creek streambank'
The streetscape improvements recommended in the Town of vail steetscape Master Plan
will be partiaily implcmented. The partial improvements will enhance the pedestrian
experience along Elast Meadow Drive tbrough the consfruction of a wider and more
attractive heated walkway adjacent to the retail shops' Thc implementation of the
streetscape improvements, howcver does not include a separate pedestian walkway from
bus traffic. The applicant is no longer proposing to delineate the pedestrian areas and bus
lane in East Meadow Drive through the use of different paving surfaccs.
The applicant has designed improvements to the wcstem portion of Slifer_Square. The
improvements have been deveioped with the help of Town staff' The applicant's desip is
sensitive to the numerous mature trees existing in Slifer Square. Only those trees which
impact pedestrian circulation, effect sun exposure to the seating areas, and would
otrr"r*is. be damaged due to construction, are being removed. The, removal of the trees
will be mitigated by the planting of additional trces elsewherc in Slifer Square.
Staff is concerned with the redesign of the pedestrian area immediately west of the new
bus shelter. The applicant had originally pioposed a landsoape planter in this area. The
planter and the Z4--ioot,22-foot,and l8-foot tall spruce trees were to be in the planter to
^help frame the northeast corner of the building and to reduce the vastness of the paved
ar"a. The new trees were also intended to mitigate thc loss of several other mature trees
existing on the site. Staffwould recommend that the applicant retum the originally
proporld planter design and plantings to the landscape element of the development plan.
lmprovements are proposed for the Gore Creek streambank adjacent to the Austia Haus'
The improvements'are intended to enhance the visual appearance of the streambank and
stabilizl the soil by reducing the grade of the slope and revegetating the bare soils' The
applicant will alsobe implementing an erosion and sedimentation control plan to prevent
run-off from the constmction site from entering Gore Creek'
JI
I.Phasingplanorsubdivisionplanthatwil|maintainaworkab|e,functionaland
efficieni relationship throughout the development of the special development
district.
Phasing of development is not proposed' The applicant is required to submit a
construction phasing and staging pian to the Town prior to recciving a building permit'
fn" pf* *ifibe usi to enrrie
-ao efficient and workable relationship with surrounding
uses during the development of thc Austria Haus'
At this time, the applicant is anticipating a minor subdivision to amend the location of the
north property tine. ttrc applicantis proposing to trade land with thc Town in order to
guinunadditionalone-twofeetoflandareaalongthenortherlyploper.tyline.In
E*"n*g" f- tnis land, the applicant is proposing to frade a fiangular piece of property
adjacent to Slifer squarc to the Town. Any proposal to trade land with the Town must be
reviewed and approved by the Council,
DISCUSSION ISSUES
l. Streetscapelmprovements
TheTownofVailSficctscapeMastcrPlanrecommendsimprovcmentstothe
streetscape of East Meadow Drivc adjacent to the Austria Haus. In particular, the
plan suggests the construction of a l2-foot wide, at-grade, concrete paver
walkway along the south side of East Meadow Drive. The use of concrete pavers
is intended to beautifo the street as well as introduce a different paving material to
designate thc pedestrian areas. The applicant proposes to construct the l2-foot
wide walkway, howevcr,, they propose to use asphalt rather than concrete pavers'
The staffbelieves that pavers should be used for the reasons stated in the
StreetscaPe Master Plan.
The staff would recommend that the PEC and the applicant discuss this issue
and determine whether the use of concrete unit pavers'
2. Slifer Square Improvements
The applicant had originally proposed substantial improvements to slifer Square.
Some of ilre original improvements have been eliminated' The applicant has
removed a large landsoape planter located immediately west of the relocated bus
shelter. The planter and'thi plant material has been replaced with a paver surface'
Additionally, a pedcstrian walkway through Slifer Square to the applicant's
buildingisnolongerbeingproposed,Theapplicanthassuggestedthatifanew
v.
38
_).
walkway is required, the walkway should be constructed by thc Town of Vail as
part of ihe improvements proposed to Slifer Square'
Staffbelieves the applicant should add the landscape planter and th; plant material
i".t i" ,n" plans as originally proposed. Staff feels the planter and plantings are
"riti.ut
to the design of the area and neccssary to mitigate the loss of some.of the
"*irtiig ""g"tutioi. Staffalso believcs thc pedestrian walkway through Slifer
Squu."l" c-onstructed by the applicant. Stafffeels the walkway is a vital link in
itre pedestrian circulation systern and that the walkway is necessitatcd by the
design of the Austria Haus and the improvements proposed by the applicant'
Theiefore, staffwould recommend that the applicant bc required to constnrct these
improvements.
staff would recommend the PEC and the applicant discuss this issue and
determine whether the landscaping and the walkway should be reintroduced.
Pool Deck
The applicant has proposed an outdoor swimming pool as a recrcational amenity
for the guests of the Austria Haus. The pool deck is proposed at the- southwest
,orn". Jfth" building and encroachcs l8-1/2 fcet into the required, 2o-foot rear
yard setback . lccoiding to the regulations prescribed in the Municipal Code of
ih" to*o of Vail, pool decks may encroach up to l0 feet into the required
setback.
Staff would recommend that the PEC and the applicant discuss this issue and
determine whether an additional 8-1/2 feet of encroachment is acceptable'
Architccture
The architect has redesigned the northeast corner ofthe building. The redesign
eliminates floor area onihe second floor of thc building in " the hrrrct." The
elimination of the floor area on the second floor and the inclusion of floor area on
the third floor causes the tunet to become somewhat awkward looking.
The staffwoutd suggest that the PEC and architect discuss this issue in an
attempt to create a less awkward looking turret'
Outstanding Submittal Information
The application for the establishment of sDD #35 is currently incomplete. There
are outstanding items which must be submitted prior to final review by thc PEC.
Thesc items include:
4.
5.
39
l.SubmitaregradingplanwhichshowsALLgpdingtothepointwhercthe
proposed improvements tie into existing conditions'
2.Submitareviscdlandscapeplanwithalegend'includingthequgltityand
sizcsofallproposedplantmaterials,andspecificationsforinstallation.
3'Submitplans,priortoDRB'fortheproposedbussheltcrdesign.
4.Resubmitasnowmeltareaplanindicatingthoseareasthatwillbe
snowmelted bY the aPPlicant'
5. Submit a letter of intent, indicating how and where the employce housing
requirement will be met'
6. Submit a roof plan with existing and proposed contours indicated beneath
so building height maY be verificd
The above-listed items must be submitted to the Town of Vail Community
Development Department by no later than noon, Tuesday' M'ay 27' 1997' in
order for the pEC to make a recommendation on this request on Monday'
June 9, 1997.
VI. STAFFRECOMMENDATION
The staffhas identified the following conditions, which we will recommend be includcd in a PEC
vote on June 9, 1997:
l. That the applicant meet with the Town staff, prior to appearing before Town Council for
the first reading of an ordinance establishing Special Development District #35, to
formulate a construction phasing plan and to dctermine financial responsibilities for the
off-site improvements to Slifer Square, East Meadow Drive and the revegetation of the
Town-owned strearn tract, south of the Austria Haus. Staff will then make a
recommendation to council regarding the constnrction phasing and financial
responsibilities of the off-site improvements'
2, That the applicant prcpare a deed restriction or covenant, subject to the Town Attorney's
review and approval, thereby restricting the current and futwe owne(s) ability to locate a
restaurant, oi similar food service operation on the Austria Haus property' said deed
restriction or covenant shall be recorded with the Eagle county clerk and Recorder's
Office prior to the applicant submitting for a building permit'
f :\everyone\pec\memos\sonnensd.224 40
J.That the applicant submit the following plans to the Department of community
Development, for review and approval, as a part of the building permit application for the
Austria Haus:
a.
b.
c.
d.
c.
f.
A Tree Preservation Plan;
An Erosion Control and Sedimentation Plan;
A Constnrction Staging and Phasing Planl
A Stormwater Management Plan;
A Site Dewatering Plan; and
A Traffrc Conhol Plan.
4.
5.
6.
That thc applicant provide deed-restricted housing, which complies with the Town of Vail
empfoyeelfo"singrequirements(Chapterl8'57),foraminimumof12employees'and
tnui ruid deed-restricted housing be made available for occupancy, and the deed
restrictions recorded with the Eagle County Clerk & Recorder, prior to requesting a
Temporary Certificate of Occupancy for the Austria Haus'
That the PEC approval of Special Development District #35, the approval of the
conditional use permit to allow for the operation of a fractional fee club in the Public
AccommodationzoneDistrict, and the approval of a minor subdivision shall be
conditioned upon the approval of this SDD establishment request by the Vail Town
Council.
That this approval is conditioned upon the approval of a minor subdivision, as follows:
..A minor subdivision will amend the location of the nodh property line. The
applicant is proposing to trade land with the Town in order to gain an additional
one - two feet of proferty along the northely properly line. In exchange for this
land, the applicant is proposing to hade a triangular piece ofprop.erty, adjacent to
Slifer Square, to the Town. lf a minor subdivision is requested, all costs incurred
to oompiete the subdivision and the exchange of land with the Town shall be the
responsibility of the applicant."
That the following design considerations be carefully reviewed by the Design Review
Board (as previously discussed in Section IV of this manorandum):
A) That the mullions on the windows and doors, as depicted on the building elevations,
be a required element of the Austria Haus project.
B) That the improvements recommended for East Meadow Drive, as depicted in the
approved Town of Vail Streetscape Master Plan, bc implemented as a part of the Austria
riaus project. This includes a reduction in street width from 30 feet to 26 feet (14 foot
bus lane arrd 12 foot attached, paver pedestrian walk)'
7.
f :bveryone\pec\memos\sonnensd.224 41
C)Thattheapplicantinoreasetheroofoverhangsonthebuilding'Cunently'the
overhangsvaryftomtwofeettothreefeet.Staffwouldrecommendthatalltheroof
overhangs bc a minimum of three feet'
D)Thattheapplicantprepareacomprehensivesipandexteriorlightingprogamforthe
Austria Haus. The compiehensive exterior ligbting and sip program will be reviewed by
the DRB.
E) That the applicant revisit the originally contunplated design which incorporates the
i".ang *A d"ii.'"ry facility in the undergroundparking structure. Staff_believes that
od;;" accommoiate toaaing and delivery in the porte-cochcre area willresult in
"oonlot,
between pedestrians,-vehicles accessing the parking structure, and delivery
trucks. Staff understanas ihe originat design opion may not be the desire of the owners of
ihe Village Center Condominium-s, yet we believe the impact can be mitigated with
appropriate scrcening.
f :\everyone\pec\memos\sonnensd'224 42
c.l
.l
1l
al
8lql
dl
JItrl
4l
al,
FII
r--F\\.v
ili!:irr ft *ii
-l
1l
El
UIol
9lil[|
4I
4li
pt;
@
It--'-'--'---
._-_ _,_.il___'- -'i--t-'-'---.
I
I
ililliu r$i ull
r r i { ,l
flLt c0Py
2. A request to establish a Special Development District #35, the Austria Haus, located at
2q2iast Meadow Drive/Part of Tract C, Vail Village 1st Filing'
Applicant: Sonnenalp Properties, lnc. represented by Gordon Pierce
Planner: George Ruther
George Ruther gave an overview of the worksession and gav€ a summary ol the changes'
He w6nt over tha discussion issues for the PEC and the applicant'
Greg Moffet suggested going over all the discussion issues and said that the PEC would then
addiess them c6llectiveiy, as the PEC had all read the staff memo'
Planning and Environmental Commisslon
Minutes
May 19, 1997
George Ruther said, while generally staff doesn't make recommendations at worksessions' a
reco;mendation was included in the staff memo with conditions'
Greg Moffet asked il the applicant had anything to add.
Gordon Pierce, representing the applicant said, regarding streetscape.improvements, that the
ippri""nt lost 207. of the pr6ject Oirb to Council and so therelore, had to cut down the budget on
;h:;ii" i;tto"ements. Hd saiO that Council said that the City could afford to make the
irptou"tbnts. Gordon said that they were still rebuilding a.bus.shelter, doing creekside
tanOscaping, as well as the heated didewatXs. He said paving the other side of the street was
,nreasona6t'e. He said that Slifer Square was still on the landscape plan. He stated that the
iorn ranteO to build the walkway to the Bridge and could have our contraclor design it and
prorate it for the Town. He suggbsted moving the pool,.so.as not to be so close to the
heighboring building. He said tih"ey planned to reshape.the bank to drop. the grade between the
OriiOings a-pproximitety 5'-7', making the view corridor better. He said they would like to argue
tor an 6ncrbachment oi A.S'. He staled that you can't stop people from walking in the setback.
He said the architectural improvement was significant, in terms of the shape.
George Ruther said the northwest corner appeared top heavy, from a preference standpoint, and
staff was throwing it out to the PEC as a discussion issue.
Gordon Pierce explained that the corner was now transparent and that Council said the
architecture shouid be up to the architect. He said they didn't have contours from which to
r""rut", regarding the iubmittal requirements. Gordon Pierce said the definition olgrades were
based from the street to the creek. He said they needed an interpretation and consideration on
where the grade was.
Jim Lamont, representing the EVHA, said he sent copies ol the staff memo to adjacent p.rgpgrty
o*neii yesietday anO so" it was premature to have received any comments back. He said since
pools are noise generators, the iool should be farther east. He said that the streamwalk dealt
fuitn i ieconfiguation of the stream and he said if there was anything the property owners would
take offense at, they would like to know ahead of time'
Gordon pierce said the applicant was leaving a parking space for the travel agency,.which they.
prLientfy enjoyed and th6i were curving thelandscaping to give-a better view corridor. He said
inat ruci<s cbjtO OacX out into the parking area and then go out facing lorward into the street.
He said this would accommodate ggZ" oftrucfs they would need and that the frequency of
semi's would be so small, it was not worth it to accommodate them.
George Ruther said that this was the 6th loading and delivery plan. He said that the northwest
corne-r of the property was only for small truck access and from a realistic standpoint, the
applicant had addressed this issue.
Galen Aasland said he liked this proposal a lot better. He said since this was an SDD' the
applicant should come up with an appropriate level of streetscape and Slifer Square
iririrovements and he sdid tnat the siaff'recommendations were very good. He said that paving
th6 street was less important and he had no problem with the amount of encroachment or
moving the pool farth6r east. He said the north elevation architecture was an improvement, as it
was flit befbre. He said he was concerned about the snow coming off the building onto the
pedestrians. Galen then asked about 4 people in a 450 sq. ft. employee housing unit.
Planning and Environmental Cotnmisston
Minutes
MaY 19, I 997
George Ruther said the applicant was proposing to deed restrict 12 Solar Vail units ol600 sq ft'
each and he told Caten ttii, accordinj to ihe siandards, 4 people would need a 2-bedroom unit'
Galen Aasland mentioned as far as the next applicant that came through' that 450 !9' ft' was too
small. He said he agreed with the staff recommendations and again said he would like the
streetscape improvements, since this was an SDD'
Ann Bishop agreed with what Gordon said, regarding the Town sharing.the cost of concrete
pi"'.ol jfi"-i"io lt woutO be an improvemenlover;hat's there; especially the bus stop in Slifer
$";; snl t"rt that the Town should share some ot the costs associated with moving the.
trees. She said the rown oi Vail encouraged decks and so she was in favor of the pool deck and
inJgranting of the 8.S' encioacnment. Shle said that the turret was fine. She said she wanted to
Xnow it Johannes was still involved in lhe project.
Gordon pierce said there was an agreement with Johannes Faessler, regarding.purchasing-the
Jomrerciaf space and that he didilt want to be involved in the public. process' He said he felt
ttlat n" naO Oben unfairly insulted, and people had forgotten what he had brought to the
community. Gordon said that otheruise, nothing had changed.
Ann Bishop said if we looked at the goals, those goals had a much better chance of being
anained. if Mr. Faessler was involved'
John Schofield disagreed with the staff, regarding increasing the distance between the planters.
He said he would ericourage people to nofwak with the wheeled vehicles. He felt that the
northeast corner ol the Briigd shbuu be a strong connection. He said he had no problem with
tne pooLOecX and no problem putting the streamwalk under the pool, H_e said he liked the
ir"n!p.rJ*V under tie tunet wnicn-encouraged the connection to the Bridge. He said he would
like to see the loading separated from the lobby area.
Gene Uselton asked if trash containers were going to be rolled out.
Gordon Pierce said, yes.
Gene Uselton was concerned about measuring the building height from contour lines.
George Ruther said the height would be over the height allowed, if it was.measured from the
conro-ur lines, but Council siiO tney would like the building "brought out of the hole," so it could be
up to 51'.
Gene Uselton asked Gordon what was being eliminated from slifer square.
Gordon Pierce explained the loss of improvements'
Gene Uselton asked if more improvements were made, would Council then give back another
unit in the SDD.
George Ruther explained that if the building changed an access, then the applicant would have
to pay for improvements.
Planning and Environmental Commission
Minutes
Mav 19. I 997
Gene Uselton suggested negotiating lor more GRFA. He stated that the snow falling from the
roof bothered him.
Gordon Pierce explained that the flat part of the roof went back about I feet and would catch
snow in the centei of the building. Hd said there were lots ol snow guards on the roof and that
they were taking all the precautions that were reasonable'
Greg Amsden said he was shocked that Council requested q lgductl.o.n in the size of the building'
as iireduced bodies in tne iOv. He fett that the Town should be liable tor paying.for Slifer
Sqrire. ie thought by moving the pool deck to the east, it would then be in the view of the
CduereO eridge a-nd n6 oiOn't i'ninf ieopte should see sunbathers as part of the view corridor.
ie ttrougnt th-e pool should be more towards Village Center. He said to fill in the 2nd floor for
more GRFA, as architecturally speaking, it looked better'
Greg Moffet agreed with the asphalt on the street and thought it reasonable to expect a decre.ase
in tn-" sCop" oi otf-site improvements when decreasing the size oJ the building' As a.practical
matt"r, nri liked the Z-story atrium, but wanted a goodllow of traffic' He said he liked the pool
deck where it was and wa's a great place for a beverage service operation. He had no prOblem
with the 12 deed-restricted unlts. H'e agreed with Gordon on the loading, not to plan for an 18-
wheeler that might come through'
George Ruther said that according to the preliminary results from the community surye-y
[g"riing the streamwalk, that 80% of thd responddnts were in favor ol a streamwalk from the
Covered Bridge.
Mike Mollica asked the PEc if they wanted 12 employees housed, or 12 employee housing units.
Greg Moffet wanted reasonable housing with reasonable square footage for 12 employees-
George Ruther stated, regarding #5, submittal information, that staff would know prior to June
gth, what the applicant was proposing.
Gordon Pierce said he was looking for a consensus.
Planning and Environmcntal Commisslon
Minuics
May 19. I 997
a MEMORANDUM
OR/CIIVAL
Planning and Environmental Commission
Comm unity Dcvclopment Departmcnt
Junc 9, 1997
A request for a final review for the establishment of Special Development District
#35, Austria Haus, to allow for the redcvclopment of thc Austria Haus, located at
242East Meadow Drive/on a part of Tract c, Block 5-D, vail Villagc First Filing,
Applicant: Sonncnalp Propertics, lnc., represented by Cordon Piercc
Planner: Georgc Ruther
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
I. BACKGROUND
On March 25.lggT,thc Vail Town Council hcld an aftcrnoon workscssion and cvcning public
hcaring to discuss thc first rcading of Ordinancc #4, Scrics of I 997, an ordinancc providing for
thc cstablishmcnt of Spccial Dcvclopmcnt District #35, Austria Haus: adopting a dcvclopmcnt
plan for Spccial Dcvclopmcnt District #351 and setting forth dctails in rcgard thcrcto. Upon
rcview of Orclinance M, thc Town Council approvcd thc ordinancc on first rcading with scvcn
conditions. One ofthc conditions required that thc applicant rcappcar bcfore thc Planning and
Environmcntal Commission with an amcndcd proposal fbr thc Comlnission's revicw and
rccommendation.
On April 14,1997,thc Planning and Environmental Commission held a public hearing to considcr
an amendcd proposal for thc cstablishmcnt of Spccial Developmcnt District (SDD) #35, Austria
Haus. Thc amendcd proposal was in responsc to changcs rcquestcd by thc Vail Town Council at
the first reading of a proposed ordinance establishing SDD #35. Upon review of the amended
proposal, thc Planning and Environmental Commission voted 6-l to recommend approval of the
amended proposal for thc establishment of SDD #35 to the Vail Town Council.
On April 15, lggT,the applicant appeared before thc Vail Town Council for the second reading of
Orclinancc # 4, Scrics of 1997. tJpon considcration of thc Planning and Environmcntal
Commission's recommendation of approval and review of the amcnded proposal, thc Town
Council voted (4-3) to deny thc ordinance stating that the applicant had not met the intention of
the conditions ofapproval placed on the project at first reading.
On April 23,1gg7,thc Town Staff met with the Town Council to discuss the future of the Austria
Haus redevclopment and for the Council to provide specific direction to the Austria Haus
developers, The following direction was given by thc Council:
Town Council Direction
l.RcduccthcproposcdGRFAwithinthcAustriaHausby5,000squarcfcct'
2. Thc maximum building height for the Austria Haus shall NoT cxcccd 48'.
3. Rcmove thc penthousc lcvel to rcduce thc numbcr of building storics from five to
four.
4. No less than 10,100 square fect of accommodation unit square footage shall bc
consfiucted in the Austria Haus. Thc I 0,100 square feet shall bc apportioned into
whichever number of units the developers feel arc appropriate to successfully
operate a hotcl.
5. Two 20' foot setbacks on the propcrty shall be maintaincd. Preference should be
givcn to thc west and south sctbacks.
6. Thc proposcd 4,649 square fect of commcrcial spaces shall bc maintained as it
p.ouia.r the ncccssary commcrcial link bctwecn thc Village and Crossroads'
7. All parking shall bc on-sitc and a land tradc is an acccptablc mcans of
accomrnodating thc nccessary arca of thc parking structurc'
g. A community room shall bc providcd within thc Austria Haus for mcctings,
brcakfasts and thc likc.
g. Thc loading and dclivcry plan shall bc rcdcsigncd to rcducc thc ncgativc impacts
on thc strcctscapc (pcdcstrians, gucst vehiclcs, ctc')
10. The staff will makc brief prescntations to thc council during thc normal PEC
rcports. Thcsc prcscntations will includc full size plans and copics of all
memoranda.
I I . The proposed dcadlines of June 22 and July 22 are cxtremcly aggressive. The
dcvelopers should rethink the dcadlines and rcquest extensions as necessary.
12. Thc staff will make a prescntation to the Town council and PEC on May 6th
rcgarding the pros and cons of both SDDs and thc East villagc llomeowncr's
advocated PA-l zone district. on May 6th, the council will dccide whioh
application they will review.
13. The Town Council did not feel it was appropriate to express their preference on
the architech[al design. Instead, they felt the design ofthe building should be left
to the architect'
o
.a-
On May 6, lggT,at thc rcqucst of thc Town Council, thc Town Staff madc a prcscntation to thc
Councij rcgarding thc Spccial Dcvelopmcnt District an{ rczoning proccsscs' Thc purposc of thc
prcscntatio"n waslo inform thc Council of thc pros and cons of using an SDD vs rczoning in the
rcdevclopmcnt of thc Aushia Haus. Upon listcning to stafFs prcscntation,thc Council
unanimously (6-0) dircctcd thc Austria Haus dcvclopcrs to procccd with a Spccial Dcvclopmcnt
District.
On May 19, 1gg7,the Planning and Environmcntal Commission hcld a worksession to discuss the
establishment of SDD #35. Th; Planning and Environmental Commission reviewcd thc rcvised
plans and rcsolved four issucs with the applicant. The Planning and Environmental Commission
icsolved that thc l2-foot widc, concrcte unit pavcr walkway in East Mcadow Drive nccd not be
constructcd, that pcdcstrian acccss through a portion ofslifcr Square as originally proposed
should bc constructed and a landscape plantcr be addcd west of thc proposed bus sheltcr, that the
pool 6cck location, as proposcd is appropriate, and lastly, that thc architccture ofthe "turrct" at
the northcast corner ofthc building is acccptablc.
II. DESCRIPTION OF THE REOUEST
Thc applicant, Sonncnalp Propcrtics, Inc., rcprcscnted by Gordon Picrcc, is requcsting a
workscssion with thc Planning and Environmcntal Commission to discuss thc cstablishment of
Spccial Dcvclopmcnt Districi#35, locatcd at242East Mcadow Drivc/on a part of Tract C, Block
S-O, Vait Villagc First Filing. The applicant is proposing to establish a new Special
Development District overlay to the underlying zone district of Public Accommodation, to
facilitate the redevelopment of the existing Austria Haus.
Thc applicant is proposing significant improvcmcnts to thc existing Austria Haus properly. The
Austria Haus is intcndcd lo bccomc a mcmbcr-oMcd rcsort club/lodgc, comprising a mix of hotcl
accommodation units and two and threc-bcdroom club units with associated club
amcnitics/facilitics. The Austria Haus proposal is intended to provide additional hotel and
.,hotel-type" accommodation units in the Town of Vail. The applicant is proposing to
incorpoiate l8 member-owned club units (11 three-bedroom & 7 two-bedroom), with 25
hotel rooms and one on-site manager's residence (Type III Employee Housing unit). The
applicant is proposing 5,402 square feet of new commercial/retail space on the main level of
tfie Austria Haus. The Austria Haus proposal includes a front desk reception/registration
area operating 24 hours a day and seven days a week, a lounge, an exercise room, meeting
room iacilities, a fnod service ptrntrv, member ski storage' an outdoor pool and other
accessory facilities commonly associated with hotels and lodges'
Summary of Changes
Thc following summarizes the changes from the April 14 and May 19 SDD proposals:
l. The number of club units was reduced from22 to 18, the number of hotel rooms was
rcduced from 28 to 25, and all lock-offunits have been eliminated.
2.
4.
5.
6.
8.
7,697squarc fcct of gross building arca has bccn rcmovcd (5,205 sq. ft. of GRFA/2'492
sq. ft. oiothcr building arca) from thc April l4 SDD proposal'
Thc building hcight has becn rcduccd to 48 fect maximum from finish grade.
A mceting room, food scrvice pantry and an outdoor pool have been addcd'
Thc parking rcquircment continues to be mct on-sitc'
The brick paver pcdestrian walkway has bcen replaccd with an asphalt walkway.
933 squarc fcet of commercial square footage has been addcd to the April 14 sDD
proposal.
At lcast 10,100 (10,261) squarc fect of accommodation unit squarc footage has been
maintaincd.
Thc applicant has idcntificd what they bclievc to bc thc public bencfits which will bc realized as a
resulfof thc Austria Haus rcdevclopmcnt and Special Dcvclopment District #35.
Public Bcncfits
l. An incrcasc in thc annual occupancy of thc Austria Haus'
2. Thc addition of approximatcly 5,400 square fect of rctail spacc (salcs tax gencrating)'
3. Thc partial implcmcntation of the recommcndcd Strcetscapc Mastcr Plan improvcments to
East Meadow Drivc.
4. The completion of thc commcrcial loop in the Villagc, via thc construction of a well-lit,
hcated pedcstrian walkwaY.
5. Thc removal of25 surfacc parking spaccs and thc construction ofan underground parking
structurc designed to accomrnodate 63 vehicles'
6. Landscapc improvcmcnts to slifcr Squarc, East Mcadow Drivc and thc Gorc creek
strcambank.
III. ZONING AI\ALYSIS
The development standards for a Special Development District shall be proposed by the applicant'
Dcvelopment standards including lot area, site dimensions, setbacks, height, density conhol, site
',1
covcragc, tandscaping and parking and loading shall bc dctcrmincd by thc Town Council as part
of thc a-pprovcd devclopmcnt plan, wittr considcration of thc rccommcndations of thc Planning
and Environmcntal Commission and staff. Bcforc thc Town Council approves devclopment
standards that dcviatc frorn thc undcrlying zonc district, it shall bc clctcrmincd that such deviations
providc bcnefits to thc Town that outwcigh thc advcrsc cffccts of such dcviations' This
4etcrmination is to bc madc based upon thc cvaluation of thc proposcd Spccial Dcvelopment
District's compliancc with thc rcvicw critcria outlincd in thc following scction'
Thc Community Devclopmcnt Dcpartment staff has prcparcd aZoning Analysis for thc proposed
Austria Haus rcdcvclopmcnt basea ou the rcviscd plans. The Zoning Analysis compares the
dcvclopmcnt stan<lards outlined by the underlying zonc district of Public Accommodation, thc
April ia, 1997 proposal, thc May 19,lg97 proposal and the Junc 9, 1997 proposal'
Lot sizc:24,089 sq. ft. /0.553 acrcs
Buildabte arca: 24,089 sq. ft. /0.553 acrcs
Dcvclopmcnt UndcrlYlngZoning
Standard ofPubllcAcconrnrodatlon
Aprll 14' 1997
SDD proposal
May t9, t997
SDD proposal
Junc 9, 1997
SDD proposal
Sctbacks:
front:
sidcs:
rcar:
I lcight:
Parking:
Landscaping:
Loading:
GRIIA:80% or 19,271 sq. ft.
Dwclling units: 13.{i DU's
Sitc covcragc: 559/n or 13,249 sq. ft.
168%' or 40,429 sq. ft.
3(5.5 DU's (22 DU's,
2tl AU's, I Typc ltl llllU)
8l % oL 19,634 sq. ft.
0'
5'/20'
7',
56.5'
52',
nla
65 spacos rcquired
66 spaccs proposcd
in thc garagc
18.2 % or 4,542 sq. l\.
I bcrlh at drop-off area
I l% or 4,469 sq. ft.
35% or 14,004 sq. ft.
74,302 sq. ft.
(includes garage)
| 46Vu or 35,240 sq. ft.
3l DU's (18 DU's,25
AU's I 'l-ypc lll EIIU)
73% or '17,525 sq. ft.
2',
4'/22',
l9' (l-l/2'@ thc Pool
dcck)
48' max.
45'max.
nla
6l spaces requircd
63 spaces proposed
in thc garage
19'% or 4,619 sq. ft.
1 berth at drop-off area
16% or 5,582 sq. ft.
36% or 12,810 sq. ft.
66,897 sq. ft.
(includes garage)
| 461Yu or 35,224 st1. tr.
3l DU's (18 DU's,25
AU's I Type lll lrllU)
737o or 17,525 sq. ft.
z'.
4',/22',
19' (l-l/2'@ the pool
deck)
48' (from finish gadc)
47.4',
nla
60 spaces requircd
63 spaces proposed
in thc garagc
19%r or 4,619 sq. ft.
I bcrth at droP-off area
l5% or 5,402 sq. ft.
36Vo or 12,714 sq. ft.
66,605 sq. ft.
(inclgdes garago)
ao",le i,((sa(
20'
20'
20'
48'sloping
45'flat
60' towcr
pcr T.O.V. codc Scction 18.52
30Yo or 7,721 sq. fI.
pcr T.O.V. codc Section I 8.52
Commcrcial
sq. footagc: l0% or 1,927 sq. ft.
Common area: 35% of allowable GRFA
Cross sq. ft: nla
r rt'I I
,\l
(l)
v) otrbO
5E
FFi
t-r-
rn
o
\c)F.€\
al
rtr
\.a\o
?n
c.)t)lal
t?)ln
tr
ra
rrai
\c
\c\c
(..)I bl)Gddo=
<,9
o0 .,trE-v:
cdO
Q-4 a
;
qt
d
cn
I
I
E
?,,
ra\aFI
(.4)
t c.l.gl bo
clij
bo Li.E cr
c):B*a6
v
ca
F
@
.{-
r-
t--
.?
<t
ra\ao\tat
.9t
(!ct'ot
Eul arFrOOXa:S
X;i)<:<_rr<.rHr
q:
d
.f
v}c{
.if
oor-
c.l
rt
\o
a.l
9 c.r?oorco
9rY
9cr(1 liHE
d;
F
an
C.l
s
\n
I I
I et)
GI
rc
m
l()d bI)9S.70-oE Ir.ii-Xd)C r-rFE
_Q+l) (t)
;v)
(..l
F.
N
F
Aa
$rs
t.-|r)s
;
o
\o
c.l
c.l
tt,rt
F.
at
..Iii c)x>-: 0)fr{ F.l
.Y;
id 0J
F"F1 a,
x
c-.1
l-r
(,
co
L
rq
Fl
F
t'r
\oo
a
0
F]
azp<
3E:Eclc<<E|.l t-'{ O\E;^>F-XrtAYIflr{< Frlil
-Jaa
}
I
IV.
A.
Chaptcr 18.40 of thc Town of Vail Municipal Codc providcs for thc cstablishmcnt of Spccial
Dcvclopmcnt Districts in thc Town of vail. Accord'ing to Scction l8'40.010' thc purposc of a
Spccial DcvcloPmcnt District is,
(.'I'o encourage flexitrility and creativity in the development of land, in order to
promote its most approiriate use; to improve the design character and quality of
the new Oevetopment *itnin the Town; to facilitate the adequate and economical
provision of stieets 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
iomprehensive plan. An approved development plan for a s_pecial 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."
Thc Municipal codc provides ninc dcsign critcria, which shall bc used as thc principal criteria in
evaluating t'hc mcrits of thc proposed Spccial Dcvclopmcnt District. It-shall be thc burden of thc
applicant to clcmonstratc tnai suUmittat material and thc proposcd dcvclopmcnt plan comply with
.u.n of tn" following standards, or dcmonstratc that onc or morc of thcm is not applicable, or that
a practical solution consistcnt with thc public intcrcst has bccn achicvcd. Thc staffhas addrcsscd
cach of thc ninc SDD rcvicw criteria bclow:
Design compatibility and sensitivity to the immediate environment, neighborhood
ano io.lacent properties relative to architectural design, scale, bulk, building height'
buffer iones, identity, character, visual integrity and orientation'
Staff bclicvcs thc applicant has dcsigncd a structurc which rclatcs wcll to thc sitc and thc
surrounding ncighborhood. The mass of thc Austria Haus is appropriatc for the site and
takcs into considcration thc massing of thc buildings on thc adjoining propcrtics. Thc
building stcps down on thc cast and wcst cnds to insurc a smooth transition bctwccn
propertics ond.1o", not crcatc an imposing "canyon" along propcrty lincs. Thc north side
of thc Austria Haus was designcd with a pedestrian scalc in mind. The retail shops on the
north sidc of thc Austria Haui crcatc a commcrcial connection along East Meadow Drive,
bctwcen Slifer Square and the Villagc Ccntcr rctail shops. The commercial connection
has bcen missing along this portion of East Meadow Drivc and staff believcs that the
Austria I Iaus will cnhancc the charactcr of thc Villagc
The extcrior building materials of the Austria Haus are a mixturc of stone, stucco and
wood. Thc roof material is proposed to be a rcddish, tile-type roof similar to thc material
used on thc Sonnenalp Bavaria'Haus. The applicant has proposed to incorporate inigated
flower boxes into thetesign of the struoturc. The use of divided light windows all around
thc building creates a EurJpean-feel and reduces thc appcarance of too much glass' Staff
believes that the combination of building materials has bcen well incorporated into the
design of the Austria Haus. The applicant has proposed that the exterior stucco color be
i \i
B.
an off-white to ycllowish/crcam color to blcnd in with thc cxtcriors of thc Mountain Haus
and thc Villagc Ccntcr buildings.
Thc dcvclopmcnt standards for thc underlying zonc district indicatc that thc maximum
hcight for buildings with sloping roofs shall bc 48 fcct. The applicant is rcquesting that
the maximum building hcight for thc Austria Haus bc approximatcly 48 fcet, from finish
gradc. The approximate height is based on cxisting (1997) and proposed topography of
thc Austria Haus property, and not thc original topography of thc sitc (prc- I 963).
Original topography of thc sitc is not available, since the Austria Haus was constructed in
Vail prior to zoning (and prior to the requircment that a topographic survey be submittcd
prior to dcvelopment). Staffbelieves, based upon the location of the existing retaining
walls and the condition of the streambank, that the sitc was "cut" whcn the Austria Haus
was built. Whilc it is difficult to know cxactly how much of the site was "cut", staff
would conscrvatively cstimatc that approximately 2 - 3 fcet of soil was rcmovcd. Given
this conservative considcration, staffwould cstimatc thc actual building height proposed
for thc Austria Haus would bc 50 - 5l fcet. According to thc Vail Villagc Master Plan
Conccptual Building Hcight Plan, thc Austria Haus should bc 3-4 storics in hcight, with a
building story bcing approximatcly ninc fect, cxcluding thc roof. Thc plan furthcr
indicatcs that onc additional floor of rcsidcntial/lodging may also bc accommodated on thc
Austria Haus sitc.
uses, activity and density which provide a compatible, elficient and workable
relationship with surrounding uses and activity.
Thc Austria Haus is located immcdiatcly adjacent to thc Vail Villagc Commcrcial Core.
Thc Austria Haus is bound on the east by Slifcr Square and thc Mountain Haus, on thc
west by thc Villagc Ccnter rcsidcntial/commercial buildings and on thc south by Gore
Crcck, the Covcrcd Bridge Building, Casthof Gramshammcr and thc Creekside Building.
Each of thcsc buildings arc a mixed-use dcvelopmcnt incorporating commercial/retail
spacc with rcsidcntial and/or accommodation units.
The applicant is proposing a mixcd-usc devclopmcnt that is in compliancc with the uses
allowed in the undcrlying zonc district. The underlying zoning of Public Accommodation
encouragcs thc devclopmcnt of lodges (accommodation units) and accessory eating,
drinking and rctail establishments at a density of twcnty-five dwelling units pcr acre. The
applicant is proposing to redcvelop ths Austria Haus at a density of 56 dwelling units per
acrc, with 5,402 sq. ft of commcrcial/rc{ail spacc on thc main lcvcl of thc building.
Included in thc density figurc are eightccn mcmbcr-owned club units (fiactional fce),
twenty-five hotel rooms (accommodation units) and one on-site manager's residcnce
(Typc III, Employce Housing Unit).
The applicant's proposal differs greatly from the existing use of the property. Currently,
the Austria Haus includes thirty-six accommodation units, and one dwelling unit, equaling
ninetcen dwclling units, or 34 dwelling units pcr acre, a restaurant and a limited amount of
commercial/retail space on the east end of thc building. Parking at the Austria Haus is
accommodated by a twenty-five space surfacc parking lot. Of the twenty-five spaces,
fiftccn arc considcrcd lcgal, non-conforming parking spaccs' Thc other tcn spaces arc off-
sitc and arc not considcrcd lcgal parking spaccs for zoning purposcs. An informal
loading/dclivcry/trash arca cxists on thc west end of thc building'
Emnloyee Housing Requirements
As indicated in a number of the goals and objcctivcs of thc Town's Mastcr Plans,
providing affordablc housing for-employees is a critical issuc which should be addresscd
ifu.ougt t=hc planning pro..r=, for Spccial Dcvelopment District proposals. In reviewing
the Austria Haus proposal for cmpioyee housing needs, staff relied on thc Town of Vail
Employec Housing RePort.
Staff Recommended Range Calculations:
Thc staff believcs that thc Austria Haus rcdevclopment will crcate a need for additional
cmployecs. of thc 39 additional employces, at least l2 cmployccs (30%) will need to bc
proviacd decd-restricted housing by the devclopcrs of the Austria Haus. The staff
rccommcndcd rangc is based on:
L the typc of rctail and officc use proposcd in the commercial spaces within
thc Austria Flaus;
2. thc sizc of thc Austria Haus lodging componcnt; and
3. thc highJcvel of scrviccs and amenities proposcd by thc devclopcrs for thc
gucsts of thc Austria Haus.
a) Rctaivscrvicc commcrcial - 4,622 sq. ft. @(6.5/1000 sq. ft.)=30.0 cmployces
b)
c)
d)
(middle of range)
Officc: real cstatc
(middlc of rangc)
Lodging*
(top ofrange)
Multi-Family (club units)
(range docs not vary)
= 780 sq.ft. @(7'511000 sq. ft.) = 5.9 employees
= 25 units @(1,25lroom) =31.2 cmployees
= l8 units @(0.4/unit) = 7.2 employees
Total
(-36 existing employees)
(X 0.30 multiPlier)
=74.3 employees
=39 employees
=12 new employees
*Lodging has a particularly large variation of employees per room, depending upon
factoi sich as size offacillty and level ofservice/support services and amenities provided.
C.
Dcpcnding upon thc sizc of thc cmploycc housing unit providcd, it is possiblc to have up
to t*o
"*-ployccs
pcr bcdroom. For cxample, a two-bcdroom unit in thc sizc range of
450 - 900 ,quur" fcct, is possiblc of accommodating thrcc to four cmployces' Thesc
frgurcs arc consistcnt wittr ttre rcquircmcnts for the Typc III cmployce housing units
outlincd in thc MuniciPal Codc.
Thc applicant intcnds to comply with thc employee housing rcquiremcnt. The applicant
propor., to providc housing i-oi tZ cmptoyecs by dccd restricting 6 cxisting one-bedroom
uniis at Solai Vait. Each olthe one-bedroom units is approximatcly 600_square feet in
size, has full kitchcn facilities and is convcniently located on the Town of vail Bus Route'
A letter ofintent from the applicant has becn attachcd for refcrencc'
overall, staffbclieves that the density and uses proposcd by the-applicant for the Austria
Haus do not conflict with thc compatibility, cffiiicncy or workability of thc sunounding
uses and/or activitics. In fact, staif feels that thc proposed Austria Haus redevelopmcnt
will enhance thc cxisting uses and activitics in thc Villagc'
compliance with parking and toading requirements as outlined in chapter 18'52' of
the Town of Vail MuniciPal Code.
Parking and loading rcquircmcnts for dcvclopmcnt arc cstablishcd in Chaptcr l8'52 of the
Municlpal Codc. Thc parking and loading requircmcnts arc bascd on thc squarc footagc
of thc uscs proposcd within a building. Bised on the squarc footage of thc uses proposed
by the applicant"74.2l parking spacci and onc loading/dclivcry berth arc rcquired on-sitc'
f"hc Municipal Codc allows "grunafu*t".ing" of thc cxisting lcgal non-conforming parking
spaces. Cunently, fifteen legal, non-conforming parking spaccs cxist-on the property'
Thcreforc, thc pirking rcquircmcnt for thc proposed Austria Haus rcdcvclopment is
59.21 ncw parking tpu."t. The applicant is proposing an undcrground parking structurc
dcsigncd to accorimodatc 63 parfing spaccs, an cmployec loungc, mcchanical space' and
an encloscd trash facilitY.
The applicant is proposing onc loading/delivery bcrth in the front cntry drop-offarea,
locatcd'on thc northside irtt. uuitaing, adjacent to East Meadow Drive. Much of the
drop-off arca is within Town of Vail right-of-way. Staff rccognizes that this area is
convcnicntly located near the enhanccs to the front desk and thc commercial/rctail shops,
howevcr, wl feel that the use of the drop-offarea may be compromised by the loading and
dclivcry ofgoods. ln staffs opinion. thc front cntry drop-offarca should bc uscd by the
gu"rt, lf tni Austria Haus. Stalf bclieves that trying to accommodatc loading and
dclivery in this area may result in conflicts betwcen guests' vehicles accessing the parking
sfucture, and delivery trucks'
conformity with the applicable etements of the vail comprehensive Plan, Town
policies and Urban Design Plan.
D.
l0
t
Vail Land Use Plan
Thc goals containcd in thc vail Land usc Plan arc to be uscd as the Town's policy
guidJlincs during the rcvicw proccss of cstablishing a ncw spccial.Dcvclopmcnt District,
5tuffhu, rcviewcd thc Vail Land Usc Plan and bclieves thc following policics are relcvant
to thc revicw of this ProPosal:
General Growth/DeveloPment
LI Vail should continue to glow in a controlled cnvironment, maintaining a
balance between residcniial, commercial and recreational uscs to serve both
thc visitor and the pcrmanent resident.
1.2 Thc quality of the environment including air, watcr, and other natural
resources should bc protected as thc Town grows'
1.3 Thc quality of dcvelopment should bc maintained and upgradc whenever
possiblc.
1.4 Thc original thcmc of the old villagc corc should bc carried into ncw
dcvclop=mcnt in thc Village Corc through continued implemcntation of thc
Urban Dcsign Guidc Plan.
1.12 Vail should accommoclate most of thc additional gowth in cxisting
dcvclopcd arcas (infi ll)'
l.l3 Vail recognizcs its strcam tract as bcing a dcsirablc land featwc as wcll as
its potcntial for Public usc.
Commercial
3.1 Thc hotcl bed basc should be prcservcd and uscd more efficiently'
3.2 The Village and Lionshead are thc best location for hotels to serve thc
future needs ofthc destination skier.
3.4 Commercial growth should bc concentratcd in existing commercial areas
to accommodatc both local and visitor nceds'
Village Core/Lionshead
4.1 Futurc commercial development should continue to occur primarily in
existing commercial areas. Future commercial development in the Core
areas needs to be carcfully controlled to facilitate access and delivery.
3,
L
i'.1 \ I
r'il
ll
Incrcased dcnsity in thc Corc areas is acccptablc so long as thc cxisting
charactcr of cach arca is prcscrved through thc implcmentation of thc
Urban Dcsign Guidc Plan and thc Vail Villagc Mastcr Plan'
5, Residential
5.1 euality timeshare units should be accommodatcd to hclp kccp occupancy
ratcs uP.
Staff believes thc proposcd cstablishment of the new Special Dcvclopment District (#35)
is in conccrt with the goals and policics of the Vail Land Use Plan as outlincd above'
Vail Village Master Plan
Thc vail village Master Plan is intended to servc as a guide to the staff, review boards
and Town council in analyzing futurc proposals for clevelopmcnt in Vail Village and in
iegisfati"g effcctive ordinanccito deal-wiih the such devclopmcnt. Thc staff has idcntified
tfri fottowing goals, objcctivcs and policics as being rclevant to this proposal:
Encourage high quality redevelopment while preserving the unique
architectural icate of the village in order to sustain its sense of
communitY and identitY.
A'
Goal #l
l.l Objcctivc:
L2 Objectivc:
Implcment a consistcnt Dcvclopmcnt Revicw Process to
rcinforce thc charactcr of thc Villagc.
I . I .l Policy: Development and improvemcnt projects approved in
thc Village shall bc consistent with thc goals,
objcctivcs, policics and dcsign considerations as
outlincd in thc Vail Village Mastcr Plan and Urban
Dcsign Guidc Plan.
Encouragc the upgrading and rcdevelopment ofrcsidential
and commcrcial facilities'
]2-l-Pdql Aclditional dcvclopmcnt ma'y bc allowcd as idcntificd
by the action plan as is consistcnt with the Vail
Village Master Plan and Urban Design Guide Plan'
1.3 Objectivc: Enhancc new devclopment and redevclopment through
public improvernents done by private dcvelopers working in
cooPeration with thc Town'
,i
12
1.3.1 Policy: Public improvcmcnts shall bc dcvclopcd with the
participation of the privatc sector working with thc
Town'
To foster a strong tourist industry and promote year-round economic
health and viability for the Village and for the community as a whole.Goal #2
2.1 Objcctivc:
2.3 Objectivc:
2.4 Objcctivc:
2.5 Objeotivc:
Recognizc thc varicty of land uscs found in the l0 sub-areas
throughout the Villagc and allow for developmcnt that is
compatiblc with thesc establishcd land use patterns'
Incrcase the number ofresidential units availablc for short-
tcrm, ovcrni ght accommodations'
2.3.1 Policy: The dcvclopment of short-tcrm accommodation
units is strongly encouragcd, Residcntial units that
arc devclopcd above cxisting dcnsity lcvels arc
requircd to bc designcd or managed in a manner that
makcs thcm availablc for short-tcrm overnight
rcntal.
Encouragc thc dcvclopmcnt of a varicty of ncw commcrcial
activity whcrc compatible with cxisting land uscs'
Encourage the continucd upgrading, rcnovation and
maintcnance of cxisting lodging and commcrcial facilities to
bcttcr scrve thc nceds of our gucsts.
2.5.1 Policy: Rccrcation amenitics, common arcas, mccting
facilitics and other amenities shall bc preserved and
cnhanced as a part ofany redevelopment oflodging
propcrties.
2.6 Objective: Encourage thc devclopment of affordable housing units
through the efforts ofthe private sector'
2.6.1 Policy: Employcc housing units may bc requircd as part of
any new or redeveloped project requesting density
over that allowed by cxisting zoning'
To recognize as a top priority the enhancement of the walking
experience throughout the Village.
?
'.1 \t
,i
Goal #3
13
3.1Objcctivc:
3.2 Objectivc:
Physically improvc thc cxisting pcdcstrian ways by
landscaping and other improvcmcnts'
3.1.1 Policy: Privatc dcvclopmcnt projects shall incorporatc
strectscapc improvcmcnts (such as paver ffeatrnents'
landscaping, lighting and scating areas)' along
ad.iaccnt Pedcstrian waYs'
3.1.3 Poliqr: Flowcrs, trees, water fcatures and othcr landscaping
shall be encouragcd throughout the Town in
locations adjacent to, or visible from' public areas'
Minimizc the amount of vchicular traffic in the Villagc to
the grcatest extcnt Possiblc.
3.2.1 Policy: Vchicular traffic will be climinatcd or reduced to
absolutely minimal nccessary levels in thc
pcdeshianized areas of thc Villagc'
3.4Objectivc: Dcvclopadditionalsidcwalks,pcdestrian-onlywalkways
and acccssiblc grcen spacc arcas, including pockct parks
and strcam acccss.
3.4'2 Policy: Privatc dcvclopmcnt projccts shall bc rcquircd to
incorporate ncw sidcwalks along strccts adjacent to
the project as designated in the Vail Village Mastcr
Plan and/or Rccrcation Trails Master Plan'
Goal *14 To preserve existing open space areas and expand green space
oPPortunities.
4.1 Objective: lmprovc cxisting opcn spacc arcas and creatc new plazas
*rih gt .n space and pocket parks' Recognize the diffcrcnt
rolcs of cach type of opcn spacc in forming thc overall
fabric of thc Village'
4,1.4 Polisy- Opcn spacc improvcmcnts, including thc addition of-
ac.ccssiblc grecn spacc as dcscribed or graphically
shown in the Vail Village Master Plan and/or Urban
Dcsign Guidc Plan, will be required in conjunction
with privatc infill or redcvclopment projects'
t
14
Goal #5 Increase and improve the capacity, efficiency and aesthetics of the
transportation and circulation system throughout the Village'
Mcct parking dcmands with public and privatc parking
facilitics.
5.l.lPolicy:Forncwdcvelopmentthatislocatedoutsidcofthc
Commcrcial Core I Zone Dishict' on-site parking
shall bc providcd (rather than paying into the
parking lund) to meet any additional parking
dcmand as requircd by the Zoning Code'
5. I .5 Policy: Redcvclopment projects shall bc strongly
"n.ourug"d
to providc undcrground or visually
conccalcd Parking'
Goal #6 To insure the continued improvement of the vital operational elements
of the Vilhge.
5.1 Objcctivc:
6.1Objectivc:Provide scrvicc and dclivcry facilitics for cxisting and ncw
dcvelopmcnt.
Gcncrally speaking, it is thc goal of thc Building Hcight Plan to m1i1lain the conccntration
of low-scalc buildings in thctore area, whilc positioning largcr buildings along thc
northcmpcriphcry'AccordingtotheConceptua|BuildingHeightPlancontaincdwithin
thc Vail Vittug" Mastcr Plan, ihe Austria Haus is locatcd within an area proposed to havc
building heighls of a maximum range of three to four storics. A building story is dcfined
as 9'ofheight, not including thc roof.
Vail Villagc Mastcr Plan Action Plan
According to the Action Plan, the Austria Haus propcrty is an area intendcd for
,l.ia"itiuU.aging infill along the south side of the property and commercial infill along
thc north sidc of the Property'
According to thc Vail Village Master Plan, thc Austria Haus propcrty is locatcd within
mixed-usi sub-area #l-8, Sonnenalp (Austria Haus)/Slifer Square:
,,commercial infill along East Meadow Drive to provide a stronger edge to street
and commercial activityienerators to reinforce the pedestrian loop throughout the
Village. rocus oiinfiliiJto provide improvements to pedestian circulation with
'i \, t
;tcr P lan-andBuilding-Hcigh
l5
scparatcd walkway including buffcr' along East Mcadow Drive' Accommodating
on_sitc p".ti"g "ra
*aintaiiing thc bus routc along East Mcadow Drivc arc two
significantcon-straintsthatmustbcad<lressc<l'oncadditiona|floorof
rcsidcntiaVl.odgingmayalsobcaccommodatcdonthissitc.Spccificcmphasis.
should bc ota;; ;" tnc follo*ing Vail Villagc Mastcr Plan objcctivcs: 2.3,2.4,
2.6, 3.1, 3.2, 3'3, 3.4, 4.1, 5' l' 6' l .''
Vail Village Design Considerations
The Town of Vail adopted the Vail Village Design considerations in 1980' The Dcsign
considerations wcre rerrised in 1993. Thc Design considcrations are considered an
intcgralpartofthcVailVillageUrbanDcsignPlan.ThcDesignConsiderationsare
intendcd to:
'guidcgrowthandchangeinwaysthatwillcnhanccandpreservethccssential
qualitics of thc Village; and
> scryc as design guidclines instcad of rigid rulcs of dsvelopmcnt; and
' hclP influcncc thc form and design ofbuildings'
Thc Vail villagc Dcsign considcrations arc dividcd into two catcgorics (urban dcsign
considerationsind architectural/landscapc considcrations):
I. URBAN DESIGN CONSIDERATIONS
Thcsc considcrations rclatc to gcneral, largc-scalc land usc planning issucs, as wcll as form
considcrations which affcct morc than one property or cvcn wholc arcas' Thcsc considcrations
".r pti-*ify thc purvicw of thc Planning and Environmcntal Commission'
A. PEDESTRIANIZATION
A major objcctive for Vail Villagc is to cncourage pedestrian circulation through an
interconnectcd nctwork of safc, plcasant pedestrian ways' Many of the improvcments
recognized in the urban Design buide plans, and.accompanying Design considerations,
arc to rcinforcc and expand th'e quality of pedcstrian walkways throughout the village'
Sincc vchicular traffic cannot be rcmovcd frorn ccrtain streets (bus routcs, dclivcry
u",es,),atotallycarc-freepcdesfiiansystemisrrotachievablethroughoutthcentire
Villagc, Thercfore, s"u"Jl"u"l, of pedcstianization have been identihed. The level of
pedeshianization most appropriate for the proposed Austria Haus rcdevelopment is the
joint vehicle/pedestrian use of the roadway'
i.{
l6
Staff Rcsponsc:
The staffhas concludcd that the improvcmcnts rccommcnded for East Mcadow Drive in
thc l99l Town of vail Strcctscape Mastcr Plan should bc implcmcntcd, This includcs a
reduction in sFeet width from 3o fcct to 26 fect (14 foot bus lanc and l2 foot attachcd,
puu..p"a,,t,lanwalk).Thcapplicantisproposingtoreplacethcstrcctandrcconstructit
to thc desircd width. Thc appticant is NO.t. proposing to construct thc l2-foot wide
pcdestrian walk out ofPavers.
Thc applicant is also proposing to construct a-l5 - 20 foot widc' hcatcd pcdcstrian
walkway immediately ada.enito the north sidc of thc building. Staff belicves that these
improvements reinforce and significantly improvc the pedestrian walkways throughout thc
Viilagc by providing places foipcoplc tL walk without forcing thcm into thc bus lane.
The creative use ofconcrcte unit pavers cmphasizes the pedestrian charactcr and offers a
clcar and attractivc pcdcstrian rout.. Th.."tuil spu." on thc main lcvel of the Austria
Haus closcs the commcrcial loop from Slifcr Squarc to Village Centcr'
B. VEHICLE PENETRATION
To maximizc to thc extcnt possiblc, all rron-rcsidcnt traffic should bc routcd along the
Frontagc Road to Vail Villagc/Lionshcad Parking Structurcs'
In conjunction with pedcshianization objectivcs, major cmphasit _t_ti9:l*9 upon rcducing
auto pcnefiation into thc ccntcr of thc Villagc. Vail Road and Vail Valley Drivc will
continuc to scrve as major routcs for servicc and resident acccss to thc Villagc'
Road constrictions, traffic circlcs, signagc, and othcr measures arc indicated in thc Guidc
Plans to visually and physically discouragc all but cssential vehiclc pcnchation upon thc
Frontagc Road. Altemativc access points and private parking relocation, where fcasible'
should bc consiclcrcd to further rcduce traffic conflicts in thc Villagc.
. Slaff-&esponss:
Thc redevelopment of thc Austria Haus will increase vehicular traffic on Village Centcr
Road. According to thc Environmental Impact Asscssment-Austria Haus Redcvelopment,
prepared by Design WorkshoP, Inc.:
,,A slight incrcase automobile traffic is cxpcctc<l bccausc ofthc projccted inorcasc
in the number of visitors generatcd annually by the project. what is not known,
however, is how many oilh"t. additional guests will arrive by car; it is likely the
largest number of guests will continue to arrive in the wintcr and that most will
arrive by van from-thc airport. van deliveries will increase somewhat. Those
guests tiat arrive in tt rir o*tt car are likely to leave the car in_the garage after they
arrive, as the center village location of the project eliminates the need for a car' If
there is a potential for coigestion anywhere, it is most likely to be in the small
I ri
l7
C.
drop-offparkingarcainfrontofthcbuilding'whcrcchcck-ins'dclivcriesandlost
drivcrs *uy .onuffi"io to*" cxtcnt' this can bc mitigatcd by improved
roadway airr.tionuiJigni ,p""oy gucst vrrlct servicc, careful managcmcnt of
dclivcricsandinccntivcstoencouragcgucststolcavgthcircarsathome,''
A|ongwiththcincreascinautomobiletraffic,therewillbcanincrca.scindelivcryvehicle
traffic duc to an increasc in thc commcrcial squarc footagc on the property-' Thc
applicants anticipatc trrat aetiverics to thc retaii shops will likcly anivc via UPS or similar
types of couricrs. Deliveri"' u'" to be accommodaied in thc drop-off area in thc front of
thc building'
Staff agrecs with Dcsign workshop's assessm€nt of the potcntial traffic impacts' whilc
there will likcly be an increasc in tiaffic on Village centcr Road, therc will not be an
increascintraffico"tt,cpca"st'ianportionofEastMcadowDrivc.Thctrafficcontrol
gatc located at thc intcrsJciln of vittug. ccntcr Road and East Meadow Drive will
continue to prohibit all vehiclc traffic ciccpt Town of Vail buses' Staff feels the applicant
has addresscd traffic issues to thc cxtcnt possible'
To improvc thc quality of thc walking cxpcricnce and givc continuity.to thc pcdcsfrian
ways, as a continuous system, two gJnctal typcs of improvcmcnts adjaccnt to the
walkways arc considcrcd:
l. Opcn spacc and landscaping' bcrms' grass' flowcrs and trec planting as a
soft, coloiful framcwork linkagc along pcdcstrian routcs; and plazas and
park grccnspaces as opcn no<lcs and focal points along thosc routes'
2. Infill commercial storefronts, cxpansion of cxisting buildings, or new infill
dcvclopmcnttocrcatcnewcommcrcialactivitygcncratorstogivestrcetlife
andvisualintcrcst,asattractionsatkcylocationsalongpedcstrianroutcs.
It is not intcndcd to cnclosc all Villagc shcets with buildings as in the core areas' Nor is it
dcsirable to lcavc p.O"rt.Ln tt ""t, iln th. opcn in somewhat undefincd condition evident
in many other areas of Vail. Rathcr, it is dcsired to have a varicty of open and enclosed
spaces'bothbuiltandlandscaped'whichoreatcastrongframcworkforpedcsfianwalks,
a.s wcll as visual intcrcst and activity'
. StaffResponse:
TheAustriaHausrcdcvclopmentimprovesthcstreetscapeframeworkthroughthe
creation of ncw commcrcii activity and increases visual interest along East Meadow
Drivc. As stated previousiy, staff beticvcs the proposcd redevelopmcnt with 5,402 square
l8
i \t
{
fcctofcommercia|arcacloscsthccritica|commcrcialloopinthcVi||agcandprovides
ncw strcct lifc whcre vcry little currcntly exists'
D. STREETENCLOSURE
whilc building facadc hcights should not be uniform from builcling to building' they should
providc a "comfortablc" enclosure for thc strcct'
pcdcstrian strcets are outdoor rooms, whosc walls are formed by thc buildings' Thc shape
and fccl of thcse ".*rnri'-*" .reated by thc varicty of hcights and massing (3-dimcnsional
variations), which givc much of the visual intcrest and pedestrian scalc-uniquc to vail'
Verygcncralrulcs,aboutthcpcrccptionofexteriorspaccshavebecndevelopcdby
a"Gn'"tt, based on the charaitcristics of human vision' They suggest that:
,.an extemal enclosurc is most comfortable when its walls are approximately l/2 as
high as thc width ofthc space encloscd: ifthe ratio falls to l/4 or less, thc space
scems uncnclosed; and ifitrc treigtrt is grcatcr than thc width it comes to rcsemble a
canyon".
In actual application, facades arc scldom uniform in height on both sidcs ofthe sfreet, nor
is this dcsircd. Thus, somc latitudc is appropriatc in thc application of this l/2 to I ratio'
using thc avcragc facade hcight on both sidcs will gcnerally still bc a guidc to thc
"o-fo.tubl"n"ss
of thc cnclosure being crcatcd'
In somc instanccs, thc "canyon" effect is acccptablc and cven desirablc' For cxample, as a
short connccting linkage bctween largcr spaccs, to give variety to thc walking cxpcricncc'
For sun/shadc rcasons it is often advantagcous to orient any longcr scgmcnts in a
north/south dircction. Long canyon strcelts in an cast/wcst dircction should gcncrally bc
discouragcd.
When cxccptions to thc gencral height critcria occur' spccial considcration should bc given
to crcate a wcll-dcfincd lround floor pcdcstrian emphasis to overcomc thc "canyon"
cffect.
canopics, awnings, arcades and building extensions can all crcate a pedestrian focus and
divert attention fiom the upper building heights and "canyon" effect'
. StaffResponsc:
East Meadow Drive, and the pedestrian walkway adjacent to the Austria Haus, averages
afpro*i-ately 43 feet in widih. The Austria Haus (eaveling) {j.a9ent19 East Meadow
pri\r" und the pedcstrian walkway is approximately 29 feet in trgjsttt Given that East
Meadow privi is enclosed only on one side, and the arcade and landscaping creates an
n
t9
cmphasisontheground|cvclofthcbuilding'staffbclicvcsthcproposcdAustriaHaus
crcatcs a ,.comfortabl"" "*l;;"; "f thc str-cct and docs not crcatc a "canyon" cffect'
E. STREET EDGE
Buildings in thc Villagc core should form a shong but inegular edgc to thc street'
UnlikemanyAmericantowns'thercarcnostandardsctbackrequiremcntsforbuildingsin
vail Villagc. consistent with ihc dcsire for intimatc pedestrian scalc, placemcnt of
portionsofabuildinguto.n.u,thepropertylincisallowedandcncouragedtogivestrong
dcfinition to the pcdcstrian streets'
This is not to imply continuous building frontage along the property linc' A strong street
cdgc is important fo, "oniinui V,but pcifcctly alligncd facades over too long a 6istancc
tcnds ro bc monotonour.'wiit'lo"rv a few c*ccpiions in thc Village, slightly irregular
facadc lines, buildingjogs, and landscapcd areas' givc the lifc to thc strect and visual
intcrest for Pcdcstrian travel,
Whcrcbuildingsjogtocrcatcactivitypockets,otherelemcntscanbcuscdtocontinucthc
strcct c4gc: low plantcr;uilr' tr." piunting, raiscd sidcwalks, tcxturc changcs in ground
surfacc, arcadcs, raiscd dccks'
plazas, patios, and grccn arcas arc important focal points for gathcring, rcsting, oricnting
and should bc distributcd throughout itt" vittug" with duc considcration to spacing, sun
acccss, opportunitics for vicws and pedcstrian activify'
. Straff Rcsponsc:
Thc original Aushia Haus dcsign lacked the irrcgular strect edgc,of other properties in
vail Vi"llagc, The applicant, uith" ,.qu.rt of thc staff and PEc, has attcmpted to
introducc a more lrr.guiu,. ,ir""t cdgeihrough the horizontal stcpping ofthc building on
thc cast and wcst .nor, it. cast cn-d of thc building has bcen.stcP-Pid ba.ck from thc
propertylineandthenortheastcorncrhasbcencutback,opcningthiscndofbuildingupto
Slifer Squarc. Thc wcst-cnd of the building was steppcd lg*gldt the street' While it was
thc PEc,s dcsire to ,"" -or" stcpping in ttre uuitoing' staff believes^andrccognizes the
constraints in doing so. Staffbciieu", th. irregular ionfiguration ofthc landscape planters
in front of thc building hclps to lcsscn thc ratlrcr long, lincar and unintcmrpted street edgc
along thc ccntcr portion of ths Austria l'laus'
F. BUILDING HEIGHT
Vail village is pcrceived as a mix of two and three story facades, although there are also
four and fivc story brilj;r ii" ,ni. of building heigirts gives variety to the street' which
is desirable. rhe heigtri cn:teria arc intended to eicou.age height in massing variety and to
discourage uniform building hcights along the strect'
20
G.
. staffRcsponsc:
Thc Austria Haus roof steps down on both cnds of thc building, rcducing thc crcation of a
"canyon" along thc *"tt;;;;;y linc and rcsulting in a building that islcss obtrusivc (on
Slifer Squarc) on tne cast'ena. Th. applicant has submittc<t a scalc modcl of thc new
structurc in its village corc contcxt uno tttit modcl will bc availablc for usc by the PEC
during the hcarings'
Vail,smountain/vallcysettingisafundamentalpartofitsidentity.Vicwsofthc
mountains, ski slopcs, ..""tJurrO othcr natural ieaturcs arc reminders to our visitors of the
mountain cnvironment u"J, iv."p"utcd visibility, are orientation refcrcncc points' Ccrtain
f uilding featurcs utro p.*ia. important orientaiion rcfcrcnccs and visual focal points'
The molt significant view corridors in the Village havc bccn adopted as part of Chapter
1g.73 of thc vail Municipur coa". Thc vicw .o-t.idot* adoptcd should not bc considcred
cxhaustcd. Whcn evaluating a dcvclopmcnt proposal' priority should be givcn to an
analysis of thc impacted pro]cct on publi. .nic*s. Vicws that should be prcscrvcd originatc
from cithcr rnajor pedcstriu,i u."u, or public spaccs, and includc vicws of thc ski mountain'
thc Gorc Rangc, thc clock Towcr, thc Rucksack Towcr and othcr important man-madc
and natural clcmcnts that contributc to thc scnsc of placc associatcd-with vail' Thcsc
vicws, which havc bccn adoptcd by ordinancc, wcrc choscn duc to thcir significancc, not
only from an acsthctic standpoint,iut also as orientation rcfcrcncc points for pcdestrians'
Dcvclopment in Vail villagc shall not cncroach into any adoptcd vicw corridor' unlcss
approved undcr chapte. ts".z:. Adopted corridors arc listcd in chapter l8'73 of thc Vail
Vunicipal Codc. Wircther affecting udopt.a vicw corridors or not, thc impact of
proposcd dcvclopmcnt on vicws ftom pubtic ways and public spaces must be idcntificd
and considcrcd whcrc appropriatc.
. Staff Rcsponsc:
Although not dircctly impacting one of the five-adopted view corridors'.as listed in
Chaptei I 8.73 of th; Vaii Vunicipal Code, the hcight of thc building will have impacts
from the vail Transportution c"*et (transit terminal) and will also impact vicws from the
west and central stairs, public views of the village (roofline of structwcO will be blocked
{lom thcsc arcas, howcvcr, vicws of Vail Mountain will rcmain. overall, staff fcels that
the bcncfits of providing a comfortablc cnclosurc to thc strcet, and cornploting thc
pedestrian andietail coinection from Crossroads to the Covered Bridge is positive' Staff
fcels that the complction of this pedestrian connection is in compliancc with Goal #3 of the
Vail Village Master Plan:
..TorccognizeaSatopprioritytheenhancementofthewalkingexperience
throughout the Villagc."
l \r
,
. -i.
2l
H.
Anybui|dingcxpansionshou|dprcscrvcthcfunctionsofcxistingscrviccal|eys.Thefcw
servicc alleys that .*irt in'ii.'Viiiug" ut. cxtrcmcly important to minimizing vchiclc
congcstion on pcdcstrian ;;;, ifi;c of,.and vchicular acccss to, thosc alleys should
not be climinatcd cxccpt whcre functional altcrnativcs arc not providcd'
In all ncw and rcmodcled construction, dclivcry which avoids or reduces impacts on
pcdcstrian ways should;;;;i;;,.nd adopted whcncver practical, for immediate or
futureuse.Rearaccess'bascmentandbclowgrounddcliveryconidorsrcducc
congestion. Weather prorcoion incrcascs dcl ivery cffi cicncy substantially'
Bclow gradc delivcry corridors are found in a few buildings in Vail Villagc.
(Sitzmark/Gorc crcck pl;;;: vili;c; c"nt.., v_ail Viltage lnn). considcration should bc
given to extencling tt.re .oliao'siwherc feasible' and thc crcation of new oncs' As
buildings arc constructcd or rcmodclcd, thc opportunity may exist to devclop segments of
a future system.
. StaffRcsponsc:
Through thc coursc of thc rcvicw of thc Austria Haus rcdcvclopmcnt proposal, scveral
loading and dclivcry options wcrc cxplorcd'
Thc applicant had originally proposed to providc onc loading and dclivery berth in the
undcrground parking structurc. Howcvcr, conccms wcrc cxprcsscd by the village centcr
Condominium owners,h", il;y would bc negatively impactctl by the noisc generated from
tr," a"tiu".y vchiclcs, sincc thc acccss to thc undcrground location was immcdiatcly
adjaccnt to thcir units.
Theapplicanthadalsocxploredthcpossibilityofgainingunderground.accesstothcir
structurc through tt c viiilgc Centcigaragc. it *"t detcrmincd that dclivery vchicles
could not cntcr-through villagc ccntcr duc to height limitations in the garagc'
As mentioncd prcviously, thc applicant is proposing to providc for lo^ding/delivery in the
front entry drop-off areJ.' Thc applicant anticipatcs thai delivcrics to the retaiVcommercial
shops will arrivc via UpS or simiiar typcs of courier. Staff continucs to believe that this
locationmayncgativcryimpnctrhcpcdcstriantrscofthisareaofEastMeadowDrive'
Staff fecls thc afplicant has addrcssctl this issue to thc cxtcnt possiblc'
I. SLTN / SHADE
Due to vail,s alpinc climate, sun is an important comfort factor, especially in winter' fall
and spring. Shadc areas have ambient temperatures substantially below thosc of adjacent
I ri
I{
)')
dircctsunlightarcas.ona|lbutthcwarmcstofsummcrdays,shadccancasilylowcr
tcmpcratures bclow comfortablc lcvcls and thcrcby, ncgativcly impact usc of those arcas'
All ncw or cxpandcd buildings should not substantially incrcase l!: .iti.ns and fall shadow
linc (March 2l - Septcmbc, Il; on adjaccnt propcrties or thc public right-of-way'
In all building consffuction, shadc shall bc considered in massing and ovcrall hcight
considcration. Uotwitt sianJini, tuVtt'udc considcrations arc not intcnded to rcstrict
building height allowanr".r, bui*th., to influencc the massing of buildings. Limitcd
height Jxcepions may be grantcd to mcet this critcria'
. StaffRcsponsc:
Although the proposed height of the building will diminish the amount of sun, and likewisc
incrcase shading, along Eait Mcadow Drive (north side of the projcct), the provision of
hcated public walkways ciicctivety mitigatcs this considcration, thus providing ice-frce and
snow-frce sidcwalks. Additionally, the;opening up" of Slifcr Squarc.will insure adequatc
light,airandopenspacctoapublicgatheringspacc. Ovcrall,staffbclievestheapplicant's
ploposal .otpii.t with the abovc-dcscribcd considcrations'
ROOFS
whcrc visiblc, roofs arc often one of thc most dominant architectural clcments in any built
cnvironmcnt. In the villagc, roof form, color and tcxturc arc visibly dominant, and gcnerally
consistcnt, which tcnds to unifo thc building divcrsity to a grcat degrec'
Thc currcnt cxprcssion, and objectivc, for roofs in the village is to form a consistently unifying
backdrop for the architccturc and pedcstrian strcetscapc, and to avoid roofs which tend to stand
out individually or dishact visually from the overall character'
Roof Forms
Roofs within the Village are typically gable in form and of moderate-to-low pitch' shed roofs arc
i..qulrruv used for ,*utt uoaitions to iarger buildings. Free-standing shed roofs, butterfly roofs
and flat roofs, can bc lbuncl in thc Villagc, but they arc gcncrally considcrcd to be out ofcharacter
and inappropriate. Hip roofs likewise, aro rarc and gencrally inconsistcnt with thc charactcr of tbe
Core Area. Towers are exccptions, in both form and pitch, to the general criteria, but do havc an
established local vernacular-style which should be respccted'
2.
'-l \t
l
,r..l
23
Staff Rcsponsc
Thc roof form of thc Austria Haus has bccn rcviscd scveral timcs from what was originally
proposcd. Thc original ;;;;;G;;ttt'c nu.'ttia Haus ha<l a significant amount of flat
roof arca. Thc majority oinut .ir nus now bccn rcplaccd with a -sloping
roof lcading to a
morc traditional ridgcs. ihe
"nds
of thc ridgcs havc bccn "clippcd", rcsulting in a hip roof
form. While a hip roof is g;;.;lly consideicd inconsistcnt with thc charactcr of thc
Villagc, thc applicant U.fiJut' tf it toof fonn hclps to rcducc the mass of thc building'
Staffrccognizcsthatthcslopingroofform.inc.reasesthcpcrceivedheightofthebuilding'
cspccially on the east unJ*iri-.nat, Staffbelicves it is iritical that the roof materials on
cach of the thrce buildin!;;;;;patible with one anothcr' Staff will raisc this issue
with the Dcsign Revicw Board'
Pitch
RoofslopcsinthcVillagctypicallyrangefrom3l|2to6ll2,withslightlystecpcrpitchesin
limitc<l applications. again, for visual consistcncy this gcncral 3112-6112 range should be
prcscrvcd.
. Staff Rcsponsc
ThcpitchofthcproposcdAustriaHausroofis4l|2andisincomplianccwiththis
guidelinc.
Overhangs
Gcncrous roof ovcrhangs arc also an cstablishsd architcctural featurc in the villagc - a traditional
cxpression of shcltcr in u1fin. environmcnts. .Roof
overhangs typically rangc from 3 to 6 fcct on
all edges. Spccific O"rig.r'.o"tiaeration should be givcn to protcction of pedcstrian ways adjaccnt
to buildings. Snow slidcs and runoff hazards can b-c rcduccd by roof orientation' gutters' arcades'
etc.
Overhang details are treatcd with varying dcgrccs of ornamcntation' Structural elements such as
roof bcams arc exprcsscd bcncath thc overhangs, simply or decoratively carved' Thc roof fascia
is thick and wide, giving a substantial cdge to the roof'
Staff Rcsponsc
Staffsuggests that the applicant increasc the roof overhangs on the building' Currently'
theoverhangsuaryfro.twofeettothrecfect.Staffwouldliketosecalltheroof
"".itt""gr
uileastihree feet. Again, staff will review this consideration with the Design
Review Board.
o
'i \ I
.{
z.l
Compositions
The intricatc roofscapc of thc Village as a whole is thc result of many individual simple roof
configurations. For any ,i"gr. uriili"g a varicd, but simplc compo-sition of roof plancs is
ffc?lil;ithcr a singlc o-r a complcx arrangcmcnt of many roofs' As individual roofs becomc
morc complcx, the roof attracts visual attcntion away from thc strcctscape and thc total roofscapc
tcnds toward "busyness" rather than a backdrop composition'
StaffResponsc
Thc roof form on thc Austria Haus would be considercd a grouping of a simplc
compositio' of roof planes. Staffbelieves the roof composition proposed by thc applicant
is consistent with thc intent of this architectural consideration'
Steppcd Roofs
As buildings are stepped to reflect existing grade changes, resulting. roof stcps should be made.
wherc thc hcight changc *ltt u" visually signifrcant. V;ariations which are too subtle appcar to bc
morc stylistic than functional, and out of character with the morc straight-forward roof design
typical in thc Villagc.
. StaffResponsc
Thc Aushia Haus sitc is relativcly flat (by Vail standards). whilc the building docs not
nccdtostcptofollowthetopography,verticalandhorizontalstepshavebcen
incorporated into the roof dcsign. Thc vertical and horizontal stcps provide a rcduction in
thc ovcrall mass of the buildin! and add to the architectural and visual intcrcst of thc
building.
Materials
wood shakes, wood shingles, and built-up tar and gravel are almost exclusively used as roof
materials in the Village. For visual consistency, an-y other materials should havc the appearance of
the above.
StaffRcsponsc
Most recently, wood shakes and wood shingles are being discouraged for use as a roofing
material due to fire safety concems. At the recommendation of the Town of vail Fire
Department, the staffhai been encouraging developers to use gravel, asphalt, tile, metal
ani other more firc-resistant roofing materials on new buildings'
25
Thcapplicantisproposingtouscrcddishti|csonthcroofofthcAustriaHaus.Thctilcs
wiil bc simitar i" ;;;;;;.; to thosc used on thc sonncnalp Bavaria Haus. The staff
bclicvcs this is an appropriatc roof matcrial to usc on this projcct'
Construction
Common roof problems and dcsign considcrations in this climate includc:
- snowslides onto pcdcstrian walks
- guttcrs frcezing
- ioof dams and water infiltration
- heavY snow loads
careful attention to theso functional details is recommended, as wcll as familiarity with the local
building codc, proven construction details' and Town ordinanccs'
For built-up roofs, pitches of 4ll2or stccpcr do not hold gravel well' For.shingle roofs' pitchcs
of 4/l2or shallower oftcn rcsult in icc dams and backflow lcakagc undcr the shingles'
cold-roof construction is strongly prefcrrcd, unless warm-roof bencfits for a specific application
can bc dcmonstratcd. c"ri-itJri arc doublc-roofs which insulatc and prevent snow melt from
intcrnal building r,.ot. nv rcruining.no* on thc roof, many of thc.problcms listed can bc rcduccd'
pcrio6ic snow removal *itt U" rcqiircd and should bc anticipatcd in thc dcsign'
Roof guttcrs tend to icc-in complctely and bccomc incffcctivc in the vail climate' cspccially in
shaded north-side locations. Hcating the interior circumfcrcncc with hcat-tape elcmcnts or othcr
dcviccs is gcnerally neccssary to ass]urc adcquate run-off control in colder months.
. StaffRcsponse:
Thc applicant is proposing a cold-roof construction atop thc Austria Haus' Through thc
rcvicw of a buitcling'pcrmi, staffwill cnsurc thc roof construction complics with the
standards prescribed for the Vail climatc'
FACADES
Matcrials
stucco, brick, wood (and glass) are thc primary building materials l9u.nd]" thc villagc' whiic not
wishing to restrict desig; fi;;i";, e*isiing ,onditiont show that within this small range of
materials much variation and individuality are possiblc while prescrving_a basic harmony' Too
,nuny diuc.se materials wcaken the continuity and rcpetition which unifies thc streetscape'
Of the abovc materials, stucco is the most consistcntly used material' Most of the buildings in the
Village exhibit ,oln. ,to".o, *d there are virtually oo *""t where stucco is entirely abscnt' It is
intcnded to preserve tnc aominance of stucco by iis usc in portions, at least' of all new facades'
',} \ \
:
I.t,
i{
26
and by assuring that othcr materials arc not uscd to the cxclusion of stucco in any sub-area within
thc Villagc.
. StaffResponsc
Thcextcriormatcrialsproposedbythcapplicantforthcthreebuildingformsarea
combination of stone, .tu.co and *ood. No onc matcrial is proposcd to dominatc thc
cxtcrior of thc Austria Haus. Staff believes the applicant has complicd with this particular
architectural considcration.
Color
Thcre is grcater latitude in thc usc of color in thc Villagc, but still a disccmible consistency within
a gcncral range of colors'
For woocl surfaces, trim or si<ling, darker color tones are prefcrred ; br91ns' greys' bluc-grcys'
dark ol ivc, slate-grccns, etc. stucco colors are generally iight - *trit", bcige, pale-gold, or othcr
light pastcls. Othcr light colors could be appropriate, as considered on a case-by-case basis'
Bright colors ir"a, orung", fiu"*, *uroon, lic,)-should bc avoided for major wall plancs, but can
bc uscd cffcctivcly (with rcstraint) for dccorativc trim, wall graphics, and other acoent clements'
ccncrally, to avoi<l both "bus1mcss," and wcak visual intercst, the variety of major wall colors
should not cxcccd four, nor bc less than two'
A color/material changc between thc ground floor and upper floors is a common and effcctive
rcinforccmcnt of thc pedcstrian scale of the street'
ftaff Response
Thc applicant has proposed an extcrior building color that is compatible with thc color of
ttre existing buildings in the vicinity of thc Austria Haus. staff would like to point out that
it. uppfi"ulnt is reqiired to obtain Design Review Board (DRB) approval prior to
construction and that any concems of the PEC on this topic will be brought to the
attcntion of the DRB.
Transparency
Pedcstrian scalc is crcated in many ways, but a major factor is the openncss, attractivcncss, and
generally public character of the gfound floor facadc of adjaccnt buildingS' Transparent store
iront, aici.p"ople attractors," opiquc or solid walls are morc privatc, and imply "do not
approach."
,l \ \
27
On pcdcstrian-oricnted strccts such as in thc Villagc'-grounlfl*t::TTercial facadcs are
proportionatcly more t.""*pui*t than upper noori. Upp". floors arc typically more residential,
privatc and thus lcss oPcn'
As a measurc of transparcncy, the most charactcristic and succcssful ground floor facades range
from 55%o to llvnof the total lcngth of the commercial facadc. Uppcr floors are oftcn the
convcrsc, 30Vr-45o/o transparcnt'
Examplcsoftransparcncy(linealfectofglasstolinealfeetoffacade)ongroundlevel.
58%
7l%
48%
66%
62%
30%
5lo/o
Staff Rcsponsc
ThcAustriaHaushasagroundfloortransparcncyofapproximately50Toa|ongEast
Mcadow Drivc. Whilc ti. p.it.ntugc falls short of thc rccommcnded minimum of 55Y"'
staffbclicvcs thc intcnt of thc transparcncy rcqulrcmcnt has bccn mct' staff fcels thc
arcade, large pancs ofglass, and stectscapc benchcs will all scrvc as "pcoplc attractors"
giving lifc and activity tothc ground lcveiof the.building. Staffbclicves that if thcrc is an
Epp"i"ii v for additional glais (transparcncy), it cxists on thc west-end of thc
"urt"rnror,
building for*] Snff*ould suggest, but not rcquirc' that the applicant
;;;l;r" thc possibilily of increasing ttrc size of thc window on the west-cnd of the
castcrnmost building form'
Windows
In addition to the gcneral degree of transparcncy, window details are an important sourcc of
pedestrian scalc-giving cf".""nts. The size and shape of windows are often a response to thc
function of the adjacent strect. For close-up' casui, pedcstrian viewing windows are typically
sizcd to human dimensions and characterisiics of human vision. (Large glass-wall store-fronts
suggcst unintcrruptcd vicwinq, as from a moving car. The scnse of intimatc pedcshian scalc is
diminishcd). Ground floor <lisplay windows are typically raised slighlly.l8 inchcs t and do not
extend much over g fcet above thc walkway level. Ground floors, which are noticeably above or
below gradc, are cxcePtions.
The articulation of thc window itself is still another clemcnt in giving pedestrian scale (human-
relatcd dimcnsions). Ctass areus ute usually subdivided to express individual window elements -
o
- Covered Bridgc Building
- Pepi's SPorts
- Gasthof Gramshammer
- Thc Lodgc
- Golden Pcak Housc
- Casino Building
- Gorsuch Building
i \.i
',t
,t!
i{
28
and arc furthcr subdividcd by mullions into small pancs - which is rcsponsiblc for much of thc old-
world charm of thc Villagc. Similarly, windows arc most oftcn clustcred in banks' juxtaposcd
with plain wall s*rfaccs tlo-giuc a plcasingrhythm. Horizontal rcpctition of single window
clcments, espccially over long distanccs' should bc avoidcd'
Largc singlc pane windows occur in thc Village, and providc somc contrast, as long as they arc
gencrally consistcnt in form with othcr windows. Long continuous glass is out of charactcr' Bay'
bow and box windows arc corunon window dctails, *f,i.h futth"t varicty and massing to facades
- and arc cncouraged.
Rcflective glass, plastic panes, and aluminum or othcr mctal framss are not consistent in thc
Village and should Uc avoided. Mctal-clad or plastic-clad wood frames, having the appearance of
paintid wood havc bcen uscd successfully and are acccptablc'
. StaffRcsponsc
ThcAustriaHausproposa|isincomplianccwiththcabove-dcscribeddesign
considcration.Staffbe|ievestheuscofdormcrswithwindows,baywindowsand
windows with mullions adds to thc architcctural charm and visual intcgrity of the Austria
Haus. staff rccommends that thc usc of mullions in thc windows bc a condition of
approval.
Doors
Likc windows, doors are important to charactcr and scalc-giving architectural clemcnts' Thcy
should also bc somcwhat fransparent (on retail commcrcial facadcs) and consistcnt in detailing
with windows and othcr facade elemcnts'
Doors with glass contributc to overall facadc transparcncy, Duc tothc.visibility of pcople and
mcrchandisc insidc, windowcd doors arc somcwhat morc cffcctivc in drawing peoplc insidc to
retail commcrcial facades, Although grcat variations cxist, 25-30% t transparency is fclt to bc a
minimum transparcncy objectivc.
"pri-vate
residenccs, lodgcs, rcstaurants' and othcr non-retail
establishments have differcnt visibility and charactcr nccds, and doors should be designed
accordingly. Sidelight windows are also a mcans of introducing door-transparency as a
complcment or substitute for door windows'
Articulatcd cloors havc thc dccorative quality <lcsired for vail. Flush doors, light aluminum
framcs, plastic applique clemcnts all arc consiclcrcd inappropriatc. As an exprcssion of cntry, and
sheltered wclcome, protected entry-ways ."
"o.outag.d,
Doo*ayt may be recessed, extcnded,
or covered.
29
StaffRcsponsc
Staff bclicvcs thc applicant's proposal complics with thc abovc-dcscribcd critcria'
Trim
promincnt wood trim is also a unifiing featurc in thc villagc. Particularly-at ground floor levels,
doors and windows have-t"o""g, .,j"ttisting framing elcments, which tie the various elcmcnts
together in one composition. ffindows and doors a-rc treatsd as strong visual featurcs' Glass-
*ult d"tuiling for cither is typically avoidcd'
. StaffResponsq:
Staffbelievesthcapplicant'sproposalcomplieswiththcabove-describcdcriteria.
DECKS AND PATIOS
Diningdccksandpatios'whenproperlydcsignc<landsitcd,bringpeopletothcstreets'
opportunitics to look und b" look"d at, and gcncrally contributc to thc livclincss ofa busy strcct-
-ut.ingarichcrpcdestriancxpcricnccthanifthosestrcctswerccmpty.
A rcvicw of succcssful dccks/patios in vail rcvcals scvcral common charactcristics:
- dircct sunlight from I l:00 - 3:00 incrcases usc by many days/year and protects from
wind,
- clcvated to givc views iOtQ the pedcstrian walk (and not thc rcvcrsc)'
- physical scparation from pcdestrian walk'
- ovcrhang givcs pedcstrian scalc/shelter'
Decks and patios should be sited and designed with due consideration to:
- sun
- wind
- views
- pcdestrian activitY
Staff RcspolNei.
Thc majority of the dccks and patios on the Austria Haus are located on the south side of
the building, facing Gore Creei.. These decks and patios are for the use of the guests of
the Austria Haus and not the general public'
,| \:
l
'{
30
BALCONIES
Balconics occur on almost all buildings in thc villagc which havc at lcast a sccond level facade
wall. As strong rcpetitive featurcs thcy:
- givc scale to buildings'
- givc life to the street (whcn uscd)'
- add varictY to building forms'
- providc shclter to pathways below'
. Staff Responsc
Again,themajorityofthebalconies.on.thcAustriaHausarelocatedonthesouthsideof
thebuilding. Several french balconies havc becn incorporated into the design ofthc north
side of the building on the upper floors'
Color
Thcy contrast in color (dark) with thc building, typically matching thc trim colors'
. Staff Re sponse
Likc thc cxtcrior color of thc building, thc DRB will bc rcvicwing this aspcct of thc
proposal.
Sizc
They extend far cnough from thc building to cast a prominent shadow- pattcm' Balconics in Vail
arc functional as will as dccorativc. As such, they should be of uscable sizc and located to
cncourage usc. Balconics less than six feet decp are seldom used, nor arc thosc always in shadc'
not oricntcd to views or strcct lifc.
. StaffResponsc
Staffbelieves this criteria has been met'
Mass
They arc commonly massivc, yct semi-transPlt:nt'distinctivc from the building, yct allowing thc
building to be somewhat visitie behind. Soiid balconies are found occasionally, and tend to be
too dominant obscuring the building architechrre. Light balconies lack the visual impact which
ties the Villagc together.
. StaffResponse
The balconies on the Austria Haus are proposed to be semi-transparent in appeaxance'
.i \i
3l
Matcrials
wood balconics arc by far thc most common. vcrtical structural membcrs arc thc most dominant
,ir""ffy,'"t"" Oecoraiivety srutpi.a. Dccorativc wrought iron balconics arc also consistent
visually wherc thc verticaimcmters are closc cnough ti crcatc semi-hansparcncy' Pipe rails' and
plastic, canvas or glass pancls should be avoidcd'
. StaffResponsc
Thc material to bc used in the construction of the balconies on the Austria Haus is wood'
with vcrtical structural members. A dctail of the railing will bc revicwed by thc DRB'
ACCENT ELEMENTS
The life, and fcstive quality of thc Villagc is givcn by judicious use of acccnt elcments which give
color. movemcnt and conffast to thc Villagc'
Colorful acccnt clcmcnts consistent with existing charactcr are cncouragcd, such as:
Awningsandcanopics-canvas,brightcolororstripcsoftwoco|ors.
Flags, banncrs - hanging fro-m Uuitalngs' polcs, and cvcn across strcets for special
occaslons.
over tablcs on outdoor Patios.
in bcds or in Plantcrs'
buildings, plaras, windows, trecs (even Christmas lights all winter)'
coats of arrns, symbols, accent compositions, etc'
sculptural, with both winter and srrrlmcr charactcr'
Staff Rcsponsc:
Acccnt lighting on the building, annual flowcrs in.containcrs and in thc planting beds'
potted tris dioratcd with Cf,ristmas lights and inigated flower boxes are proposcd to
provide colorful acccnt elcmcnts on thc Austria Haus. An additional acccnt symbol
iclock, crest, ctc.) is proposed for thc arca above thc front entry. The final dcsign has yet
to be determined.
LANDSCAPE DLEMENTS
Landscape considcrations include, but go bcyond, thc placement ofappropriatc plant materials'
- plant materials
- paving
oUmbrcllas -
Annual color flowcrs -
Acccnt lighting-
Paintcd wall graPhics -
Fountains -
'{
32
- rctaining walls
- strcct fr'r-itut" (bcnchcs, kiosks' trash' ctc')
- lighting
- signagc
Plant Matcrials
opportuniticsforplantingarcnotcxtsnsivginthcVillagc,whichplaccsapremiumonthep|ant
sclcction and design of tlie sites that do exist. FramewJrk planting of trees and shrubs should
includc both deciduous and evergreen species for year round continuity and interest'
Native plants are somewhat limited in variety, but are clearly best ablc to withstand the harsh
winter climate, and to tie the Village visually with its mountain setting'
Trecs
Narrow-lcaf cottonwood
Balsam poplar
Aspcn
Lodgepolc pinc
Colorado sprucc
Subalpinc fir
ghrubs
Willow
Dogwood
Serviccberry
Alpinc currant
Chokcchcrry
Mugho pinc
Potentilla
Buffalobcrry
StaffRcsponse
A landscapc plan has been submittcd by the applicant. Thc landscape plan has bccn
dcvelopcd with thc assistancc of Town staff, since a majority of thc landscape
improvemcntsarcproposcdonTownproperty.Thcproposcdlandscapedcsigntakesinto
considcration factors such as thc location ofthc plantings (sun/shade), maintenancc'
climate, etc. staff bclievcs thc landscape designfor the Austria Haus complics with the
abovc-dcscribed criteri a.
Paving
'l-hc frcczc/thaw cyclc at this altitudc virtually eliminatcs common sitc-cast concrcte as a paving
surface (concrcte spall). High-strcn$h concrete may work in selected conditions' Asplialt' brick
i"n .on.r"t. or on sand), un? "on.tit"
block appcar to be best suited to the area,
In general, paving treatments should be coordinated with that of the adjacent public right-of-way'
fti fown uses the following materials for all new construction:
'I \ t
33
- asphalt: gcncral usc pcdcsfrian strocts
- brick on concrctc: fcatut" arcas (plazas' intcrscctions' fountains' etc')
StaffRcsponse
Thepavingmatcrialuscdinthcpublicareas^aroundthcAushiaHauswillbcthe..Vail'',
concretc unit paver, faiA in if'" "Vail-pattem" (hcningbonc)' Thcse surfaccs will be hcatcd
and will include the access ramp to the parking strucirre, the front entry drop-off area and
thc pedcstrian walkway "ilrgifi, u"tc ironts. the applicant has worked with the Town
,rurf in dcvcloping thc design-of improvcmcnts in the public right-of-way.
Rctaining Walls
Rctainingwalls,toraiseplantingarcas,oftenprotcctsthelandscapefrompcdestriansand
snowplows, and should providc seating opportunltles:
Two types of matcrial arc already wcll cstablished in the villagc and should be utilized for
continuitY:
- split-facc moss rock vencer - Village Corc pcdestrian strccts (typical)'
- roundcd cobblc hiddcn mortar - in opcn ,pu." u."ut if abovc typc not alrcady
cstablishcxl ncarbY.
StaffRcsponse
No landscapc rctaining walls are proposcd in the construction of the Austria Haus' Thc
ncw landscape rctaining *uiit p.op.t"d in Slifcr Squarc will match the cxisting walls in
terms of both typc of matcrials, and application'
Staff Response
AspartofthcstrectscapeimprovementsalongEastMcadowDrive,theapplicantwillbe
installing four new Village light fixturcs, The number and locations of thc four new lights
was detJrmined through consultation with Town staff'
Lighting
Light standards should bc coordinatcd with thosc uscd by the Town in the public right-of-way'
Signage
Refer to Town of Vail Signage Ordinance'
,,i \i
:
r{
34
Staff Rcsponse:
The staffhas requcstcd that thc applicant preparc a comprehensive sign program for thc
Austria Haus. The comprchcnsive sign program will bc reviewcd by the DRB'
SERVICE
Trash handling is cxtremely scnsitive in a pedestrian cnvironmcnt' Trash collection is primarily
made in off-pcak hours. tiis thc building owners responsibility to assure that cxisting trash
storagc probiems are corrected and future ones avoided'
Trash, cspccial|y from food servicc establishments, must bc carcful|y considered; including the
following:
- quantitics generatcd
- pick-uP frequencY/acccss
- container sizcs
- cnclosurc location/dcsign
- visual odor imPacts
Garbagc collcction boxcs or dumpstcrs must bc rcadily acccssiblc for collcction at all timcs yct
fully screcncd from public vicw - pcdcstrians, as wcll as uppcr lcvcl windows in the vicinity'
Matcrials
Extcrior matcrials for garbage enclosures should bc oonsistent with that of adjacent buildings'
Construction
Durability of thc structure and opcrability of doors in all weather arc prime concems' Metal
frames and posts bchind thc prciened exterior materials should be considercd to withstand the
incvitable abusc these stuctures suffer'
Staff Response:
Thc applicant has proposccl to incorporate a trash dumpster into the dcsign of the
underground parking structure. Thetrash dumpstcr will bc complctcly encloscd and
u"r"rr-ibl" from insidc the parking structure. without a restaurant, the building is not
expected to generatc an unusual amount oftrash' The driveway is designed to
accommodate trash tucks. staffbelieves the applicant's proposal complies the above-
dcscribed criteria.
Identification snd mitigation of natural and/or geologic hazards that affect the
pi"p*ty on which the ipecial development district is proposed'E,
'.) \t35
F.
Thcrc arc no natural and/or gcologic hazards, including thc Gorc creek floodplain, that
cffcct thc Austria Haus ProPcrtY'
Site plan, building design and location and open space provisions designed to
proOuce a functional divelopment respon_sive and sensitive to natural features'
vegetation and overall aesthetic quatity of the community'
ThcapplicanthasrcviscdthesiteplaninresponsctocommcntsreceivedfromtbeTown
Council and staff. Most importanily, ttte upili.unt has shifted the building 7' on the sitc to
furthcr buffer the surrounding prop".ti"r. ihe applicant has designcd the building to
rcspcct the 50' Gore Crcck S-tieam sctback along the south side of the property and to
ma'intain the required 20' setback along the west property line'
A circulation system designed for both vehicles and pedestrians addressing on and
off-site traffic circulation.
Thc Austria Haus rcdcvelopmcnt will havc major positivc impacts on both.off-site and on-
sitc vehiclc and pedcstrian traffic systems surrounding thc propcrty. Staffbclicvcs that
plOcstriun circuiation will bc substantially improvcd as rcsult of the redcvelopment.
improvemcnts includc a ncw l4-foot widc bus lanc and a dedicated, I 2-foot widc
pcdcstrian lanc along East Mcadow Drivc, as wcll as an improvcd pcdcstrian strcetscape
along thc north sidc-of thc building adjaccnt to thc rctail shops. Thc pcdcstrian
strcJscapc will bc heated, thus providing icc-frcc and snow-frcc sidewalks. All ncw
pcdcstian improvcmcnt, p.opor" thc usc of concretc unit pavers, with thc cxccption of
thc | 2-foot widc walkway along East Mcadow Drivc, and will conncct into thc cxisting
improvemcnts to thc "urilStif"i Squarc), to thc west (Villagc Centcr) and to thc Vail
Transportation Ccntcr to thc north.
Thc applicant has redcsigncd the pcdcshian acccss through Slifer Square. Thc original
dcsign indicatcs improvelments toSlifcr Squarc which improvc pcdcstri.an acccss to and
around thc Austria Haus. Staff bclievcs that this access will havc positive cffocts upon the
circulation system on and offthe site'
vchicular circulation will also bc positivcly cffectcd by the rcdcvelopment' The current
parking situation will be improved by removing the surfacc parking lot and replacing it
with a; underground parking structure and a front entry drop-offarea. Access to thc
parking structirc shali bc via a hcatccl ramp locatcd at the west cnd of the projcct'
Functional and aesthetic landscaping and open space in order to optimize and
preserve natural features, recreationt views and functions'
The proposed landscape plan will have important beneficial impacts on the quality of the
public spaces in the vi-cinity of the Austia Haus, due to the improvcments to East
Meadow Drive, Slifer Square and the Gorc Creck streamtank'
G.
H.
i \r
i
'{
36
I.
Thc strcctscapc improvcmcnts rccommcndcd in thc Town of vail Streetscapc Mastcr Plan
will bc partially implcmcntcd. Thc partial improvcmcnts will enhancc thc pcdcstrian
"xpcrienc"
along E'ast Mcadow Drivc through thc construction of a widcr and morc
attractivc heated walkway adjaccnt to thc rctail shops' The implementation of thc
shcctscapc improvcmcnts, hJweu". docs not includc a separatc pcdestrian walkway from
bus traffic. Thc applicant is no lo,,ger proposing to dclincatc thc pcdcstrian arcas and bus
lanc in East lvtcadow Drivc through thc usc ofdiffcrcnt paving surfaccs'
Theapp|icanthasdcsigncdimprovcmentstolhcwcstemportionofslifcr-Square.The
i-prorr.n.,.nts havc bccn Jeu"lopcd with thc hclp of Town staff. Thc applicant's dcsign is
scnsitivc to the numerous mature trees existing ln Stiter Squarc' Only thosc trees which
;;p; pcdestrian circulation, cffect sun cxposurc to the scating arcas' and would
otherwisc be damagcd due to construction, arc being removed. Thc removal of the trees
will be mitigatcd by thc planting of additional trccs clsewhcrc in Slifcr squarc'
staff was conccmcd with the rcdesign of thc pcdcstrian arca immediatcly west of thc ncw
bus shelter. Thc applicant has reintioduccd a landscapc planter in this.area. Thc planter
and thc 24-foot,Z)-foot,and l8-foot tall sprucc trccs in the plantcr will frame thc
nofthcast comcr of thc building and to rcducc thc vastness of the pavcd arca' Thc new
trccs will also mitigatc thc loss of several othcr maturc trecs existing on thc site'
lmprovemcnts arc proposcd for thc Gorc Crcck strcambank adjaccnt to thc Austria Haus'
Thc improvcmcnts arc intcndcd to enhancc thc visual appcarance of thc streambank and
stabilizt thc soil by reducing thc gradc of thc slopc and rcvcgetating thc bare soils' The
applicant will alsobc implementing an crosion and sedimcntation conhol plan to prevont
run-off from thc construction site from cntering Gorc Crcck'
phasing plan or subdivision plan that will maintain a workable, functional and
efficieni relationship throughout the development of the special development
district.
Phasing of dcvelopmcnt is not proposcd. Thc applicant is requircd to submit a
.onrt--.tion phasing and staging plan to thc Town prior to recciving a building permit'
the plan wilf be ur"d to .nt,i.. utr efficient and workable rclationship with sunounding
uscs during thc dcvelopment of the Austria Haus'
At this timc, thc applicant is anticipating a minor subdivision to amcnd the location of the
north property line.-Thc applicant is proposing to tradc land with thc Town in ordcr to
gain an addltionat one - two feet of land arca along the northerly property line. In
ixchange for this land, the applicant is proposing to trade a tiggulal piece of property
adjacen-t to Slifer Square to the Town. Any proposal to trade land with the Town must be
rcviewed and approved by the Council.
5I
The community Dcvclopmcnt Departmcnt staff rccommcnds that thc Planning and Environmental
commission rccommcnd approval of the requcst to cstablish Special Dcvc'lopment District #35'
Austria Haus, located atZiigastMeadow Drivc to the Vail Town Council' The staffbelieves
that each of thc SDD O.tig" .-tit.tiu continuc to bc mct, as identified in this memorandum and that
the applicant has addressJi the numcrous issucs identified by the Planning and Environmental
Commission and the Town Council'
The staff has idcntified thc following conditions of approval, which we rccommend bc included in
a PEC motion:
l.ThatthcapplicantmeetwiththeTownstaff,priortoappearingbcforcTownCouncilfor
the first reading oian ordinance establishing spccial Development District #35' to
formutatc u "o"ri..iio"lt uting plan and to dctermine financial responsibilities for thc
off-site improvcments to'slifcr-Squarc, East Meadow Drive and the revegetation of thc
Town-owncdstrcamtract,southofthcAustriaHaus.Staffwil|thcnmakea
rccommcndationtoCouncilregardingtheconstructionphasingandfinancial
rcsponsibilitics of thc off-sitc improvcmcnts'
That the applicant prcparc a decd rcstriction or covenant, subjcct to thc Town Attorney's
rcvicw and approval, ihcrcby restricting thc cuncnt and futurc owncr(s) ability to locatc a
rcstaurant, or similar food scrvicc op"ition on thc Austria Haus property' Said dced
rcstriction or covcnant shall be rccorded with thc Eagle County Clcrk and Recordcr's
Officc prior to thc applicant submitting for a building permit'
ThattheapplicantsubmitthcfollowingplanstothcDepartmcntofCommulity
n*n"fop,nrnt, for rcview and approva[ as a part of thc buil6ing pcrmit application for the
Austria Haus:
2.
J.
vl.STAFF RECOMMENDATION
a.
b.
c.
d.
c.
t.
A Trcc Prcscrvation Plan;
An Erosion Control and Sedimcntation Plan;
A Construction Staging and Phasing Plan;
A Stormwater Managemcnt Plan;
A Site Dewatering Plan; and
A Traflic Conhol Plan'
4.That the applicant provide deed-restricted housing, which cornplics wr-th thc Town of vail
e-pf.v""ff*sini requirements (Chapter l8::7)' for a minimum of l2 employees' and
that said deed-restrictcd housing u" tuo. available for occupancy, and thc deed
rcstrictions recorded with the E-agle County Clerk & Recorder, prior to requesting a
Temporary Certificate of Occupancy for the Ausfia Haus'
i \1
l
38
5.
6.
That thc PEC approval of Spccial Dcvclopmcnt District #35, thc approval of thc
conditional usc'permit to allow for the opcration of a fractional fcc club in thc Public
Accommodation Zonc Dishict, and thc approval of a minor subdivision shall be
conditioncd upon thc approval of this SDD cstablishment rcqucst by thc Vail Town
Council.
That this approval is conditioned upon the approval of a minor subdivision, as follows:
,'A minor subdivision will amend thc location of thc north property line. The
applicant is proposing to trade land with thc Town in order to gain an additional
o* - t*o feet ofproferty along thc northerly propcrty line. In cxchange forthis
land, the applicant is proposing to tradc a triangular picce ofproperty, adjacent to
Slifer Squarc, to the Town. lf a minor subdivision is rcqucsted, all costs incurrcd
to compictc the subdivision and the cxchange of land with thc Town shall be the
responsibility of the applicant."
That the following design considerations bc carcfully rcvicwcd by the Dcsign Review
Board (as previously discussed in Scction IV of this mcmorandum):
A) That thc mullions on the windows and doors, as depictcd on thc building clevations,
bc a rcquircd clcmcnt of the Ausfia Haus projcct.
B) That partial improvoments rccommendcd for East Meadow Drivc, as depictcd in the
upprou.a Town oiVail Strcctscape Mastcr Plan, bc implcmentcd as a part of thc Austria
Fiaus project. This includes a rcduction in strcct width from 30 feet to 26 fsct (14 foot
bus lane and 12 foot attachcd, asphalt pcdestrian walk)'
C) That the applicant incrcase thc roof ovcrhangs on thc building. Cunently, thc
ouerhangs uury fror two fcct to three fcct, Staff would rccommend that all the roof
ovcrhangs be a minimum of three fect.
D) That the applicant preparc a comprehensivc sign and exterior lighting program for the
Ausbia Haus. The compiehensive exterior lighting and sign progfttm will be reviewed by
the DRB.
E) That the applicant revisit the originally contcmplated design which incorporates the
loading ana d^.tiu.ry facility in thc undcrground parking structurc. Staff bclievcs that
tryingio accommodate loading and dclivery in the porte-cochcre arca will result in
conflicts between pedestrians, vehicles accessing the parking stnrcture' and delivery
trucks, Staff undcistands the original design option may not be the desire of the owners of
the Village Center Condominiums, yet we believe the impact can be mitigated with
appropriate scrccning.
7.
i \tt
39
F) That the applicant submit plans indicating the proposed desien of-the lus shelter in
Siifer Squarc. The plans shall be submitted prior to DRB conceptual rcview.
G) That the applicant submit plans indicating the location, type, and quantity of roof top
mechanical equipment prior to DRB conceptual review'
H) That the applicant submit detailed building elevation plans adequately.labeled to
ij*tify arcttitiqtu at details (railings, trim, fascia, etc.) and cxterior building materials and
colors priorto DRB conceptual review.
i,I \'t .
'r I:.i,ii:r, t'. 1
it
2
40
./onnenqlp llerort
ol Uoil
May 20, 1997
Town of Vail
Departnenr of Communify Development
Vail, Colorado t 1657rtT-rqfl/
Anendon: George Ruther
Dear George,
it ismy understanding that you require a documcnt speciffing rhe location and nature of cmploycc housing
for 12 employces to be deed reskicted for the purposc ofrhc SDD proceeding of the Austia llaus projea.
We arc proPosing ro decd reskict 6 units in our Solar vail Complcx located just east of Red Sandstone
Elernenta{y, The units arc one bedroom units ofabout 600 square foot cach with one bathroorn tnd full
kirchen. For tha past several years, Sonnenalp has becn using Solar Vail for cmployee housing purpoges.
Solar Vail due its close-in location and units make-up is an exccllent cmployee housing prolect.-
We are proposing to deed resrricr unit # I l, #lZ, #13,#14, #ls,and #t 6.
As a condition for dccd rcsUiction ure rcqulre that Sonnenalp wilt be pennidcd ln the future to transfcr the
specific urtits to differenr units wirhin the projcct and to units outsidcbf the project of comparable location
and size panmeters.
Let me know if you need anything funher at rhis point in timc.
Sinccrely,ti'-;-V
,ofrn*tfl*o.,
President
Soaaenalq Properties, Inc.I
tl I d
Ottnccl and olreratcd by lhe l,tixcle,r puml$t :i \ ,
20 Vrif ll<-ra<f, vril, citkrnr<lo fll65z . 970/476.5(t56 r t-li0(t-fii4Jttl ) . trd)i mnt41t;-1r\1,g[8]'0N J[0siu dlvNgN}l0s , inv09:8 160l Tz 'Isr{
o
o
rq)\L/
.:til|
ulu
lfr
I's
ID
t-
Io
,{..,\
I \V
-l \.r
,l a
io
| lt.:
liii i
ltl
ll',
Fllil
l,'
9l
iI
I'
)i;
Iri
j!
!
I
I
,
I
t
i
I
lt
/1hq.7
l8
!l,[i,i
il$ i
lo(n
liri:IlY
lci m
lirSt/1toz
ltn o
t.
I
4_ulSJ#HA*-"pl ','fii,ir iiiir riiiiiii
l.
i
t__
il
"iti__l . -:,it"'
-i-1-,ll
/;T\
sti
i l,o
h
ll
lr
iii;iiii
o
o
o
ll
-.-a-. -.!-. -,l-r! | |
-t; ----l-
I
tz"Y' &l''""'
I --r--
nqffrFriB
i
!iL.-.
l,f\
iv
.t I
ii!;;fli
I
rr!1.
il[iItiI'
I
!i*r |iii;iii
o
o
o
\l
Pa
I
I ??_ _i_?_J
ii
llii
I i_
'I r l
- AUSTRIA HAUSI iv^tr,coLOmDo-Fj'ir iiiir iii;iili
o
o
@.t,0
':toqlo
llt0tit'
NJi_l ffii
i:ltiI
rIt-
;la
o
tr+ t { $i li I ; i
/iT\tly
ilSPalc (,\
lir
l-r
|trl i
l<rrrIlir
ld
lz
- - i--O
l:| /-\__i_*
t-.- +--{nI-
I
r
- - l---r;''l"t,-t-t,-_'_.----1..,
lT\ i F--- /-r(D irurrcr (D
illn ii :: il=$1l! rl\)Cilu' ili i :r : .l.oo19 l .: .__f..t lr,r'I'h :t: :: --r"l l;,1tr ii ,: : tr'lr''; i :: :: :: : l9nil.{ j r_ i: , _: :_. lillT .1::f-, . l:: 11 l:.jt'-'rF.-€{<,t')u'" lz
o
o
o
Appnov:sittN z B ESl
Ff I t 80Py
10. A request for a final review to establish a specialDevelopment.District #35, the Austria
Haus, located at 242 EaslMeadow Drive/Part of Tract G, Vail Village 1st Filing.
Applicant: Sonnenalp Properties, Inc. represented by Gordon Pierce
Planner: George Ruther
Planning and Environmental Commission
Minulss
June 9. 1997 L4
George Ruther gave an overview ol the memo and noted the direction-given by the Town council
on page 2. He then g"u" i.r;tiry of the changes and said that staff was recommending that
codoiiion no. 7b, be created as a separate condition'
Galen Aasland asked about condition no' 4'
George Ruther explained that it may not be practical for 4 people in a 450 sq' ft' unit'
Galen Aasland said the condition was too loose'
Gordon Pierce said one of the conditions that council wanted, had to do with the off-street
toading and he stated th;i i io- wneet truck could prtt in. He suggested posting a sign.in front of
the buitding rhat said "ruJGtiverles." He said the iwimming pooliocation was another issue and
il;; ;;;|ii"ie OJrou"O o*i, Oui *. would rather not, sinc-e it worked better with the terrace
and bathrooms where it was now'
Jim Lamont, representing the EVHA, said that day-to-day parking conditions could be handled'
r"ittr t[" iesbtuiion being"in lront of the porte cochere' H-e said as long as the trash was
contained in the building with its own storage room, there wasn't a problem. Jim stated he didn't
i"l-Erpf"V"" nousing iisted as a public benel1 on page 4 of the staff memo.
George Ruther said the public benefits on page 4 were only 6 of the many public benefits that the
applicant chose to identifY.
Jim Lamont said the EVHA still advised that this property would be better included with its sister
piopenies and to clean ,p tn" fangrage in the Viit Vlt6le Master Plan. He said the EVHA
inolgnt the pool should be moved further to the east.
John Schofield suggested not changing the design of the loading/delivery in the driveway' He
suggested not changing the design, but changing the management'
Greg Amsden stated that the original approval was better. He said Council. in their efforts to
sau6 GnfA, have hurt tne fown"Uy recirjcing the number of hotel rooms eliminating a potential
source of accomodation Jsage Oy hot feepi-ng the lock-offs in the development plan and only
effectively lowering the building 4'5'.
Galen Aastand liked this plan better and thought it an excellent building, but would like to see a
deed restriction on the units. tte questioned the flat roof being 47.4' in height'
George Ruther said, regarding the discrepancy in the height, that the zoning analysis w€s done
*itno-ui a roof plan anOlnsteai, numbers'were used that were requested by the Town Council'
C"oig" iuthel advised using the April 14th number' as they were accurate representations'
Ann Bishop read Mr. Lamont's zoning change and thought it was appropriate for the next project'
She said to keep the pool where it was'
Diane Golden said she was disappointed that this proiect lost 3 AU's'
Planning and Envirnnmenlal Commission
Minutes
June 9, 1997 15
a Gordon Pierce agreed that some AU's were lost, but the remaining were very luxurious in their
size.
Greg Moffet thought it a splendid projectwith the pool ok and witr the stafl conditions amended'
John Schofield made a motion for approval, in accordance with tre staft recommendations' wift
;;odifiltd"to condition no. 4 and itrat 7b become a new condition no. 8.
Greg Amsden seconded the motion.
The motion passed bY a vote of 6-0.
Plarming and Environmontal Commission
Minul,es
JunE 9. 1997
o
L6