Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2006-11-21 Support Documentation Town Council Work SessionTOWN COUNCIL WORK SESSION VAIL TOWN COUNCIL CHAMBERS 75 S. Frontage Road W. Vail, CO 81657 11:20 A.M., TUESDAY, NOVEMBER 21, 2006 NOTE: Times of items are approximate, subject to change, and cannot be relied upon to determine at what time Council will consider an item. Council will be served lunch. 1. George Ruther _ ITEMITOPIC:. PEC/DRB_Update._(15 min.)__ _ 2. Suzie Huxford ITEMlTOPIC: A request for a work. session with the Vail Town Council to present and discuss the recommendations from the Vail Economic Advisory Council regarding the Town of Vail Municipal Code Title 11 Sign Regulations. (20 min.) ACTION REQUESTED OF COUNCIL: Listen to a presentation by the staff and provide feedback regarding the presentation. BACKGROUND RATIONALE: On August 15, 2006, Council reviewed a presentation from staff regarding the current sign code and current issues in Vail Village and LionsHead. The Town Council directed staff to make several modifications to the code. Based on that Council meeting and subsequent discussions with merchants, the Council directed staff to evaluate and update the code as it relates to several specific issues: 1. Seasonal (summer) promotional signage 2. Menu Special Boards 3. Creating a lease option for outdoor displays on public property Council directed staff to utilize the Vail Economic Advisory Council to develop policy recommendations and then have 1-2 broader discussions with the merchant community to discuss proposed policy solutions. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: The Community Development Department recommends that the Town Council listen to the presentation, provide feedback and give direction regarding the next step. 3. Kathleen Halloran ITEM/TOPIC: Discussion of the First Reading of the 2007 Budget Ordinance No. 28, Series 2006. (20 min.) ACTION REQUESTED OF COUNCIL: Approve or approve with amendments first reading of the 2007 Budget Ordinance No. 28, Series 2006. BACKGROUND RATIONALE: To be provided in separate memo STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Approve or approve with amendments the first reading of the 2007 Budget Ordinance No. 28, Series 2006. Compensation and benefits review. Consider the data provided in relation to the 2007 budget. 4. Elizabeth Reed ITEM/TOPIC: Discussion of the First Reading of Ordinance No. 30, - -Series of - X005; - AN- ORDINANCE - ESTABL-ISHING-- SPECIAL- -- - - DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT NO. 40, THE WILLOWS, PURSUANT TO ARTICLE A, SPECIAL DEVELOPMENT (SDD) DISTRICT, CHAPTER 9, TITLE 12, ZONING TITLE, TOWN CODE OF VAIL, AND SETTING FORTH DETAILS IN REGARD THERETO. (1 hr.) ACTION REQUESTED OF COUNCIL: Approve, approve with modifications, or deny Ordinance No. 30 Series of 2006, on first reading. BACKGROUND RATIONALE: On November 13, 2006, the Town of Vail Planning and Environmental Commission held a public hearing on a request to establish Special Development. District No. 40, The Willows. The purpose of the new Special Development District is to facilitate the redevelopment of The Willows Condominiums, located at 74 Willow Road. Upon review of the request, the Planning and Environmental Commission voted 4-1-0 (Pierce opposed) to forward a recommendation of approval of the request to establish Special Development District No. 40, The Willows, to the Vail Town Council. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: The Community Development Department recommends that the Vail Town Council approves Ordinance No. 30, The Willows, on first reading. 5. Matt Mire ITEMITOPIC: Discussion of First Reading of Ordinance No. 31, Series of 2006, An Ordinance Amending Section 2-6-9 of the -Vail Town Code, Concerning use of the Real Estate Transfer Tax Fund, and Setting Forth Details in Regard Thereto. (15 min.) ACTION REQUESTED OF COUNCIL: Approve, approve with amendments, or deny first reading of Ordinance No. 31, Series of 2006. BACKGROUND RATIONALE: In an effort to be the premier mountain resort community, the Town has committed to provide its citizens and guests with "a superior level of environmentally sensitive services" in addition to "vision, leadership and stewardship in an environmentally responsible manner." To achieve the goals stated above and for the environmental sustainability of the Town of Vail and the Vail Valley, the Council has determined that certain text amendments are necessary to the Vail Town Code as they relate to the use of the Town of Vail Real Estate Transfer Tax Fund to include expenditures related to environmentally sustainable practices. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Approve, approve with amendments, or deny first reading of Ordinance No. 31, Series of 2006. 6. Matt Mire ITEM/TOPIC: Resolution Number 22, Series 2006. A resolution ----- - - ------- --- - - -declaring-the-intent-of-the-Town-of Vail to aegaire-a fee-simple-- interest in the property located at 2399 North Frontage Road West for Fire Protection facilities, further continuance of good faith negotiations to acquire said property interest, and authorization to initiate an action in eminent domain to acquire said property in the event good faith negotiations do not result in an agreement to acquire said property interest. (10 min.) ACTION REQUESTED OF COUNCIL: Approve, approve with amendments, or deny first reading of Resolution No. 22, Series of 2006. BACKGROUND: The Town has negotiated in good faith with the record owner and. others having an ownership interest in the property commonly known as Wendy's, located at 2399 N. Frontage Road West, and legally described as Parcel A, resubdivision of Tract D, a resubdivision of Vail Schone Filing 1, Town of Vail, Eagle County, Colorado (the "Property"). Negotiations to purchase the Property have, to this point, been unsuccessful. This resolution represents the Town Council's formal determination that it is necessary to acquire a fee simple interest in the Property, and that, in the event that good faith negotiations do not result in voluntary granting of the Property,. it is necessary that the Town acquire said interest in the Property through the use of the Town's power of eminent domain as provided for in the Charter. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Approve, approve with amendments, or deny first reading of Resolution No. 22, Series of 2006. 7. ITEM/TOPIC: Information Update. (10 min.) • Ice Dome Update. Hybrid Bus Showing. 8. ITEMlTOPIC: Matters from Mayor & Council (10 min.) g• ITEM/TOPIC: Executive Session: 1) Pursuant to CRS § 24-6- 402(4)(a)(b)(e) - to .discuss the purchase, acquisition, lease, transfer, or sale of property interests; conference with attorney to receive legal advice on specific legal questions; and to determine positions, develop a strategy, and instruct negotiators regarding the redevelopment of LionsHead parking structure. AND 2) Pursuant to CRS § 24-6-402(4)(a)(b)(e) - to discuss the purchase, acquisition, lease, transfer, or sale of property interests; conference with attorney to receive legal advice on specific legal questions; and to determine positions, develop a strategy, and instruct negotiators regarding the redevelopment of Timber Ridge. (2 hrs.) 0• ITEMlTOPIC: Adjournment. (4:00 p.m.) _.__ NOTE UPCOMING MEETING START TIMES BELOW: (ALL TIMES ARE APPROXIMATE AND SUBJECT TO CHANGE) THE NEXT VAIL TOWN COUNCIL REGULAR WORK SESSION WILL BEGIN AT TBD, TUESDAY, DECEMBER 5, 2006 IN THE VAIL TOWN COUNCIL CHAMBERS. Sign language interpretation available upon request with 48-hour notification. Please call 479-2106 voice or 479-2356 TDD for information. DESIGN REVIEW BOARD AGENDA _ PUBLIC MEETING # November 15, 2006 ~~~~li ~r ~~a~ ~ 3:00 P.M. PROJECT ORIENTATION /LUNCH WILL NOT BE SERVED- Town Council Chambers 1:OOpm MEMBERS PRESENT Mike Dantas Sherry Dorward Pete Dunning Margaret Rogers SITE VISITS 1. Ranallo - 1695 Buffehr Creek Road Driver: Warren 2:OOpm PUBLIC HEARING -TOWN COUNCIL CHAMBERS 3:OOpm Solaris (Crossroads) Redevelopment DRB05-0640 / 60 minutes Warren Final review of new construction (new mixed use development) 141 and 143 East Meadow Drive/Lot P, Block 5D, Vail Village Filing 1 Applicant: Crossroads West One, LLC, represented by Mauriello Planning Group, LLC ACTION: Tabled to December 6, 2006 MOTION: Dunning SECOND: Dantas VOTE: 4-0-0 2. Vail Cascade Residences DRB06-0164 / 15 minutes Warren Final review of new construction (residential condominiums, first-floor commercial and parking garage) 1310 Westhaven Drive/Cascade Village/Development Area A Applicant: Vail Cascade Residences, LLC, represented by RKD Architects ACTION: Approved with condition(s) MOTION: Dantas SECOND: Dunning VOTE: 4-0-0 CONDITION(S): 1. The applicant shall use a bronze window system to match the windows on the west elevation, not the green as proposed. 3. Landmark Condominiums DRB06-0487 / 30 minutes Bill Conceptual review (major exterior alteration) 610 West Lionshead Circle/Lot 1, Block 1, Vail Lionshead Filing 3 Applicant: Landmark Condominium Association, Inc., represented by Geoff Wright ACTION: Conceptual review, no vote 4. Northland Holdings, Inc. (Mountain Haus) DRB06-0497 / 5 minutes Bill Final review of a minor alteration (windows, deck) 292 East Meadow Drive/Block 5, Vail Village Filing 1 MEMBERS ABSENT Lynn Fritzlen Page 1 Applicant: Northland Holdings, Inc., represented by Shepherd Resources ACTION: Tabled to December 6, 2006 MOTION: Dunning SECOND: Dantas VOTE: 4-0-0 5. Ranallo Residence DRB06-0507 / 10 minutes Warren Final review of change to approved plans (hot tub location) 1695 Buffehr Creek Road/Lot 6, Eleni Zneimer Subdivision Applicant: Pat Ranallo, represented by RAL Architects ACTION: Approved MOTION: Dunning SECOND: Dorward VOTE: 4-0-0 6. Heather of Vail Condominiums DRB06-0527 / 15 minutes Warren Conceptual review (new windows) 5197 Black Gore Drive/Heather of Vail Applicant: Heather of Vail Condominium Association, represented by TRD Architects ACTION: Conceptual review, no vote Staff Approvals Mirus LLC DRB06-0472 Warren Final review of changes to approved plans (chimney shrouds, railings, stone veneer, windows) 1325 Westhaven Drive/Cascade Village unplatted Applicant: Mirus LLC, represented by J.L. Viele Construction White RocK Properties DRB06-0482 Bill Final review of change to approved plans (windows, landscaping) 736 Forest Road/Lot 11, Block 1, Vail Village Filing 6 Applicant: White Rock Properties, represented by William Restock Vail Rowhomes DRB06-0484 Warren Final review of a minor alteration (windows) 303 Gore Creek Drive/Lot 9, Vail Village Filing 1 Applicant: Harris Trust & Savings Bank, represented by K.H. Webb Architects, PC Alfond Residence DRB06-0500 Elisabeth Final review of change to approved plans (fence) 1345 Westhaven Circle/Lot 50, Glen Lyon Subdivision Applicant: John and Jill Alfond, represented by K.H. Webb Architects, PC Rickman Residence DRB06-0501 Final review of change to approved plans (stairs) 1495 Lion's Ridge Loop/Lot 2, Block 3, Lion's Ridge Filing 2 Applicant: Patricia Rickman, represented by Neils Lunceford George Prince Residence DRB06-0502 Elisabeth Final review of change to approved plans (exterior railing) 636 Forest Road/Lot 6, Block 1, Vail Village Filing 6 Applicant: Erik and Joanna Prince, represented by Morter Architects Page 2 ~` Gore Creek Place DRB06-0503 Final review of change to approved plans (decks) 825 Forest Road/Lot 3, West Day Subdivision Applicant: Vail Resorts, represented by Todd Goulding Crossroads East One, LLC DRB06-0504 Final review of a new sign (awning sign) 143 East Meadow Drive/Lot P, Block 5D, Vail Village Filing 1 Applicant: Crossroads Redevelopment, LLC Apollo Park DRB06-0505 Final review of a sign 442 South Frontage Road East/Tract D, Vail Village Filing 5 Applicant: John Zahner Loper Residence DRB06-0508 Final review of a minor alteration (landscaping) 784 Potato Patch Drive/Lot 15, Block 1, Vail Potato Patch Applicant: William and Ann Loper Apollo Park Condominiums DRB06-0509 Final review of a minor alteration (temporary hot tub) 442 South Frontage Road East/Tract D, Vai( Village Filing 5 Applicant: John Zahner Sutphin Residence DRB06-0510 Final review of a minor alteration (re-roof) 4842 Meadow Lane/Lot 10, Block 7, Bighorn 5th Addition Applicant: Elisabeth Sutphin Dingfelder Residence DRB06-0511 Final review of a minor alteration (handrail) 1546 Matterhorn Circle/Matterhorn Village Subdivision Applicant: Judi Dingfelder, represented by Home Works, Inc. Vail Associates DRB06-0515 Final review of a minor alteration (wireless system) 862 S. Frontage Road and 953 South Frontage Road/Unplatted Applicant: Vail Associates Coolwaves DRB06-0516 Final review of a sign 333 Bridge Street/Lot C, Block 2, Vail Village Filing 1 Applicant: Gaston Garcia Nugget Lane Partners, LLC DRB06-0517 Final review of change to approved plans (driveway material) 4264 Nugget Lane/Lot 3, Bighorn Estates Subdivision Applicant: Nugget Lane Partners, LLC, represented by Michael J. Smith Page 3 Warren Warren Elisabeth Rachel Elisabeth Joe Bill Warren Elisabeth Elisabeth E i Maloff Residence DRB06-0518 Warren Final review of change to approved plans (roof line) , 770 Potato Patch Drive/Lot 6, Block 2, Vail Potato Patch Condominiums Applicant: Perry and Gail Maloff, represented by Nedbo Construction Loper Residence DRB06-0508 Final review of a minor alteration (landscaping) 784 Potato Patch Drive/Lot 15, Block 1, Vail Potato Patch Applicant: William and Ann Loper. Rachel The applications and information about the proposals are available for public inspection during regular office hours in the project planner's office, located at the Town of Vail Community Development Department, 75 South Frontage Road. Please call 479-2138 for information. Sign language interpretation available upon request with 24 hour notification. Please call 479-2356, Telephone for the Hearing Impaired, for information. Page 4 PLANNING AND ENVIRONMENTAL COMMISSION PUBLIC MEETING November 13, 2006 `Tt~4~ Gr'v'~.~' 1:OOpm TOWN COUNCIL CHAMBERS 1 PUBLIC WELCOME MEMBERS PRESENT MEMBERS ABSENT Doug Cahill Chas Bernhardt Dick Cleveland Anne Gunion Bill Jewitt Rollie Kjesbo Bill Pierce No sites visited Public Hearing -Town Council Chambers 5 minutes A request for a final review of a conditional use permit, pursuant to Section 12-9C-3, Conditional Uses, Vail Town Code, to allow for a ski storage facility, located at 395 East Lionshead Circle/Lot 1, Block 2, Vail Lionshead Filing 1, and setting forth details in regard thereto. (PEC06-0068) Applicant: Town of Vail, on behalf of All Mountain Sports, LLC Planner: Bill Gibson ACTION: Approved with conditions MOTION: Kjesbo SECOND: Jewitt VOTE: 5-0-0 CONDITIONS: 1. This conditional use permit approval shall expire and become void upon expiration or termination of the lease agreement between the applicant and the Town of Vail. 2. The hours of operation for this ski storage facility shall occur no earlier than 6:OOAM and no later than 10:OOPM daily. 3. The applicant must obtain Town of Vail design review approval for any exterior signage and/or lighting for this ski storage facility. Bill Gibson presented the project according to the memorandum. The applicant, Phil Horseman, was available for questions. No new information had surfaced since the worksession, he commented. No public comments were added. Dick Cleveland asked about Staff's rationale for defining hours. Bill Gibson noted that the Commission could delete the hours recommended in the memorandum. Doug Cahill agreed with the Staff memorandum. 5 minutes 2. A request for a final review of a variance, from Section 12-6D-9, Site Coverage, Vail Town Code, .pursuant to Chapter 12-7, Variances, Vail Town Code, to allow for a residential addition, located at 2339 Chamonix Lane/Lot 11, Block A, Vail Das Schone Filing 1, and setting forth details in regard thereto. (PEC06-0069) Applicant: Robert Stephanoff, represented by Jack Snow, RKD Architects Planner: Bill Gibson ACTION: Approved MOTION: Kjesbo SECOND: Cleveland VOTE: 5-0-0 Page 1 Rollie Kjesbo commented that Bob Stephanoff was currently working on framing his duplex in East Vail. He did not, however, feel that this would be a conflict of interest. Bill Gibson presented the project according to the memorandum. The applicant, Robert Stephanoff, had nothing to add aside from the comment that this request had been approved the board previously. Bill Jewitt asked the applicant if the job was expected to be built. The applicant answered in the affirmative. There was no public comment. 5 minutes 3. A request for a final review of a conditional use permit, pursuant to Section 12-7A-3, Conditional Uses, Vail Town Code, to allow for a business office (real estate), located at 1 Willow Bridge Road/Lot 2, Sonnenalp Subdivision, and setting forth details in regard thereto. (PEC06-0066) Applicant: Vail Dover Associates, LLC, represented by Mauriello Planning Group Planner: Warren Campbell ACTION: Approved with condition(s) MOTION: Kjesbo SECOND: Jewitt VOTE: 5-0-0 CONDITIONS: 1. The approval of this conditional use permit for a professional (real estate) office shall expire on June 1, 2009. 2. The applicant shall submit a separate complete Design Review application for all signage associated with the professional (real estate) office. 3. The approval of this conditional use permit for a professional .(real estate) office shall limit the sale of real. estate within the office to solely the product offered by the Solaris development, located at 141 and 143 Meadow Drive/Lot P, Block 5D, Vail Village Filing 1. Warren Campbell presented the project according to the memorandum. He outlined the concerns from the previous meeting. Allison Ochs, representing the Mauriello Planning Group commented that she had nothing further to add. The Commission generally supported the location of a solely Solaris real estate office in One Willow Bridge. Commissioner Cleveland commented that he would not support another real estate office within One Willow Bridge for the sale of any remaining One Willow Bridge product that is not sold prior to the demolition of Crossroads. Commissioner Pierce commented that no real estate offices are allowed in the CC1 zoning district on the ground floor. Most people would not realize that they had just crossed a zone district boundary. Why then, would a real estate office be allowed within an adjacent zone district, such as in PA? 15 minutes 4. A request for a recommendation to the Vail Town Council of a proposed text amendment to Section 12-6E-3, Conditional Uses, Vail Town Code, to allow for professional offices and business offices, as conditional uses in the Residential Cluster Zone District, and setting forth details in regard thereto. (PEC06-0065) Applicant: Booth Creek Management Corporation Planner: Elisabeth Reed Page 2 ACTION: Approved MOTION: Kjesbo SECOND: Jewitt VOTE: 5-0-0 Bill Pierce noted that he has done architectural work for this project in the past, but not this specific application. He does not feel it will be a conflict of interest. Elisabeth Reed presented an overview of the proposal and the Staff memorandum. Jay Peterson, applicant's representative, Norm Wayne and Herman Stauffer were available for questions. Jay clarified that this is a text amendment proposal and not the site specific conditional use permit application. Doug Cahill question how the existing office came into existence. Neither the applicant nor Staff could determine from the files how the office was approved to replace the former restaurant. Dick Cleveland asked the applicant's perspective on a potential loss of housing. Jay Peterson responded that he did not think this would be an issue due to the relatively small number of expected applications of this sort. No public comment was added. Bill Pierce agreed with the proposal and thought positively of the dispersal of office uses throughout the community. Doug Cahill agreed with BIII Pierce. There were no other Commissioner comments. 30 minutes 5. A request for a final review of a recommendation to the Vail Town Council of a proposal to establish Special Development District No. 40, pursuant to Article 12-9(A), Special Development Districts, Vail Town Code, to allow for the redevelopment of the Willows Condominiums, located at 74 Willow Road/Lot 8 Block 6, Vail Village Filing 1St Filing, and setting forth details in regard thereto. (PEC06-0061) Applicant: The Willows Condominium Association, Inc., represented by Triumph Development, LLC Planner: Elisabeth Reed ACTION: Approved, with conditions MOTION: Kjesbo SECOND: Jewitt VOTE: 4-1-0 (Pierce opposed) CONDITIONS: The Developer shall address the following conditions of approval prior to appearing before the Vail Town Council for second reading of an adopting ordinance for the establishment of Special Development District No. 40, The Willows: 1. The Developer shall prepare a written agreement, for Town Council review and approval, outlining the responsibilities and requirements of the stated public benefits, as indicated within this memorandum. This agreement shall include, but not be limited to, the provision of one Employee Housing Unit onsite, which shall be allocated for sole use by The Willows Condominium Association; the provision of eleven (11) employee beds offsite, provided through the "buy down program" and averaging five hundred (500) square feet per bed in units with at least two bedrooms; alt streetscape improvements along Willow Road, including an eight foot (8') paver sidewalk for pedestrians and a twelve foot (12') wide right-of-way lane; and details for $70K of public art, which location shall be determined by the applicant and reviewed with the Art in Public Places Board. Page 3 The Developer shall address the following conditions of approval prior to submitting a building permit application (a grading permit/excavation permit shall constitute a building permit); 1. The Developer shall comply with all outstanding final comments of the Town of Vail Public Works Department outlined in the attached memorandum dated October 20, 2006. 2. The Developer shall ensure that the proposed redevelopment plans comply with all requirements of the Town of Vail Fire Department. The Developer shall address the following conditions of approval prior to requesting a temporary certificate of occupancy or a final certificate of occupancy; 1. The Developer shall commence initial construction of the Willows improvements within three years from the time of its final approval at second reading of the ordinance establishing Special Development District No. 40, and continue diligently toward the completion of the project. If the developer does not begin and diligently work toward the completion of the special development district or any stage of the special development district within the time limits imposed, the approval of said special development district shall be void. The Planning and Environmental Commission and Town Council shall review the special development district upon submittal of an application to reestablish the special development district following the procedures outlined in Section 12- 9A-4, Vail Town Code. 2. The Developer shall provide one deed-restricted housing unit onsite that complies with the Town of Vail Employee Housing requirements (Chapter 12- 13), and is allocated for sole use by The Willows Condominium Association; and secure eleven (11) additional beds within the Town of Vail through the buy down program, averaging five hundred (500) square feet per bed in units with at least two bedrooms, as stated in the written agreement to be drafted for the passage of Special Development District No. 40. Elisabeth Reed presented an overview of the application and the Staff memorandum. Rick. Pylman, applicant's. representative, presented the project further and noted the design changes made since the Commission's last hearing. The applicants highlighted the proposed public benefits of streetscape improvements, employee housing, and public art. The applicant's architect Mike Foster, of Resort Design Associates, presented an overview of the architectural changes made since the Commission's last hearing using a 3-dimensional physical model. John Alfond, adjacent property owners' representative at 44 Willow Place, noted his (and his parent's) support of the proposal. Skip Seamers, owner and Board of Director Member at Willows, complimented Steve Virostek, the developer, and his design team. Jim Lamont, Vail Village Homeowner's Association, asked Elisabeth to summarize and clarify the results of the neighborhood development statistics analysis. He commented that the proposed courtyard is a benefit to the Willows and the adjacent eastern building, but this was not necessarily a benefit to the general public. He also discussed the impacts of the setback encroachments to Vail Road and possible impacts to bike traffic. He recommended the construction of a pedestrian/bike path alohg the south edge of Vail Road. He also noted concerns about the longevity of a for-sale vs. rental employee housing unit and concerns about considering the EHU's as public benefit. Page 4 i Dick Cleveland noted his concern regarding whether or not the public benefits outweigh the requested deviations. He noted that the actual number of hot beds will be diminished and the proportion of deviation from the standards is much higher than buildings in the neighborhood. He noted that the applicant really needed 15 employees at peak season. The street improvements are a public benefit and the public art contribution. He clarified that $70,000 is budgeted for art, not $125,000, which is actually the total amount needed for the Seibert Circle fund. In conclusion, he believes it's a good project, but the public benefits do not necessarily outweigh the deviations. . Bill Jewitt noted that the employee housing calculation is worthless and no formulas apply since this is a Special Development District. He believes five EHU's are inadequate and 15 to 20 units would be more appropriate. He commented that there is a serious shortage of employee housing units which is a problem which this project-has the chance to begin to rectify. Rollie Kjesbo doesn't believe a Type III employee housing unit with no price cap, a small size, and potentially high- association dues will be feasible in this location. He believes the building is still too large for the lot size. Bill Pierce noted examples of other Associations which actually own their EHUs and use them for on-site management employees. He recommended updating the Town's zoning regulations to determine if .8 is a realistic square footage ratio for a high density building (as .76 is the percentage for HDMF). Maybe that ratio should be larger? Doug Cahill is comfortable with the bulk and mass of the project if the neighbors support the project. Doug asked Tom Kassmel, Town Engineer, if there were any additional streetscape improvements could be considered. He identified a long term desire for a walk along Vail Road, but identified numerous challenges with adjacent property owners. Russ Forrest summarized the possible employee housing requirements currently being discussed by the Town Council Bill Jewitt clarified that he liked the proposed building, but he is concerned about the public benefits. Essentially, the Town is selling 13,000 square feet of additional development rights, and the Commission needs to ensure the Town receives a fare price. He believes EHU's provide the best public benefit compared to other types of benefits. Doug Cahill noted is concern about the applicant's meeting the public benefits as well. Steve Virostek clarified that the management company's 15 employees manage three other properties in addition to the Willows. He clarified that the additional square footage is not a clear profit, but facilitates other components of the project. He would be willing to allocate the on-site EHU to the Willows condominium association. The scale of the building was determined by the neighborhood, and the existing buildings and building owners' concerns. He noted that these hot beds will be highly rentable. He is willing to discuss provision of more EHUs, but not 15-20. Bill Pierce asked Steve to summarize how they initially calculated the density and square footage of the proposed building, which the developer clarified. Russ Forrest asked the Commission to set a target for the EHU requirement, so that the applicant could make an attempt to meet that target or not. He provided some of the inclusionary zoning calculations being discussed by Council as a point of reference, which currently ranged from providing 10 - 30% (in employee housing square footage) of net new square footage on the site. Page 5 'r Dick Cleveland suggested the item be tabled so that the applicant could prepare a proposal. He believed additional streetscaping and employee housing were secondary to the need for employee housing. Bill Jewitt mentioned that 1.5 million dollars for a combination of pay in lieu or buy down would be reasonable. He believes the on-site unit mostly benefits the association and not the public. Dick Cleveland believes units in the village are a good thing. He is concerned about the proposed Type III which has no price cap. Russ, Bill Jewitt, and Steve discussed the current market rates for employee housing. Steve would like to do what the Commission wants. However, he believes the current proposal already surpasses what any other developer would propose. Russ Forrest noted that the most recent Council discussion regarding the pay in lieu program would assess a cost of $150,000 to $160,000 per bed. Bill Jewitt noted that his concern is actually finding the appropriate number of units to buy down, versus finding money. He suggested 12 off-site beds at a minimum 500 sq. ft. per bed within a minimum of 2 bedroom units. Steve noted that the requested deviation from GRFA was already financing the streetscaping, hot beds, etc. Steve proposed 1 on-site EHU and 11 off-site EHU's and the item was approved. 5 minutes 6. A request for final review of a conditional use permit pursuant to Section 12-6H-3, Conditional Uses, allow for the construction of timeshare estate units, fractional fee units and timeshare license units, located at 74 Willow Road/Lot 8 Block 6, Vail Village Filing 1St Filing, and setting forth details in regard thereto. (PEC06-0062) Applicant: The Willows Condominium Association, LLC Planner: Elisabeth Reed ACTION: Approved, with conditions MOTION: Jewitt SECOND: Kjesbo CONDITIONS: Inc., represented by Triumph Development, VOTE: 5-0-0 1. The approval of this conditional use permit shall be contingent upon passage of the associated Special Development District request by the Vail Town Council 2. The approval of this conditions use permit shall be contingent upon approval of the associated design review request by the Design Review Board. 3. Written approval by the future Willows Partnership, without condition, of the proposal to construct nine (9) timeshare units upon the site shall be submitted to the Community Development Department within thirty (30) days of the passage of the SDD." The Commission reviewed this item concurrently with Item 5. 5 minutes 7. A request for a final review of a conditional use permit, pursuant to Section 12-6H-3, Conditional Uses, Vail Town Code, to allow for the construction of a Type III Employee Housing Unit, in Page 6 association with The Willows redevelopment, located at 74 Willow Road/Lot 8, Block 6, Vail Village Filing 1, and setting forth details in regard thereto. (PEC06-0076) Applicant: The Willows Condominium Association, represented by Triumph Development, LLC Planner: Elisabeth Reed ACTION: Approved with conditions (association maintain ownership) MOTION: Dewitt SECOND: Kjesbo VOTE: 5-0-0 CONDITIONS: 1. This conditional use permit approval shall be contingent upon Town Council approval of the request for the formation of Special Development District #40. 2. This conditional use permit approval shall be contingent upon the applicant receiving Town of Vail approval of the related design review application. 3. Prior to the issuance of a building permit, the applicant shall execute a Type III EHU deed restriction with the Town of Vail Department of Community Development to permanently restrict the use of the EHU for employee housing and allocation for sole use by The Willows Condominium Association. The Commission reviewed this item concurrently with Item 5. 30 minutes 8. A request for final review of an appeal of an administrative action, pursuant to Section 12-3-3, Appeals, Vail Town Code, appealing a staff determination that Chapter 7, Development Standards, Lionshead Redevelopment Master Plan, does not supersede the setback. requirements prescribed by Section 12-7H-14, Setbacks, Vail Town Code, located at 610 West Lionshead Circle/Lot 1, Block 1, Vail Lionshead Filing 3, and setting forth details in regard thereto. Applicant: Landmark Condominium Association, Inc., represented by Geoff Wright Planner: Bill Gibson ACTION: Staff Determination Upheld MOTION: Cleveland SECOND: Dewitt VOTE: 4-0-1 (Pierce recused) Bill Pierce recused himself for items 8 and 9 due to a conflict of interest. Bill Gibson presented the. project according to the memorandum. He discussed with the Planning and Environments( Commission the sequence of events related to Town Code and Master Plan sections. Tyson Davidoff, applicant's representative, presented the issues according to the applicant, using a presentation to further those issues. He commented that the proposed underground parking clearly met the intent of the Master Plan regulations. He requested that the Commission understand that the. documents, when reviewed as a whole, exempt the below grade parking areas from site coverage calculations. Dick Cleveland clarified that the state views the Zoning Regulations as enforceable and the Master Plan documents as not enforceable. Geoff Wright, condominium association representative, commented that he was quite involved with the drafting of the Lionshead Redevelopment Master Plan. He was in shock that the regulation of below grade site coverage was being enforced. There was little other place for parking to be placed, he finished. When asked what the intent was of proceeding through the Master Plan process, Mr. Wright commented .that it was clear that the area needed to be improved. Rollie Kjesbo believed that the Town needs to not count parking as site coverage. The discrepancy between the Master Plan and zoning needed to be clarified. Page 7 Bill Jewitt would be in favor of supporting a variance and suggested a text amendment as soon as possible. Dick Cleveland agreed with his fellow Commissioners, stating that the appropriate way to deal with this problem was both through a variance and a text amendment. Doug Cahill asked that Staff be aware of the flexibility the Commission would give to a variance in this scenario. 15 minutes 9. A request for a final review of a major exterior alteration, pursuant to Section 12-7H-7, Major Exterior Alterations or Modifications, Vail Town Code, to allow for additions to, and the renovation of, the Landmark Condominiums; and a request for a final review of variances from Sections 12-7H-10, Setbacks, 12-7H-14, Site Coverage, and 12-7H-15, Landscaping and Site Development, Vail Town Code, pursuant to Chapter 12-17, Variances, to allow for an underground parking structure and a staircase within the setbacks, and deviations from the maximum site coverage and minimum landscape area requirements, located at 610 West Lionshead Circle/Lot 1, Block 1, Vail Lionshead Filing 3, and setting forth details in regard thereto. (PEC06-0074) Applicant: Landmark Condominium Association, Inc., represented by Geoff Wright Planner: Bill Gibson ACTION: Tabled to November 27, 2006 MOTION: Kjesbo SECOND: Jewitt VOTE: 4-0-1 (Pierce recused) Bill Pierce recused himself for items 8 and 9 due to a conflict of interest. Bill Gibson presented the project according to the memorandum. He outlined the deviations from the zone district and the overall aspects of the proposal. He commented that today's meeting should be treated as a worksession and not as a final review. Tyson Davidoff, representing the Landmark Condominiums Association, commented that portions of the plan, including setback and landscaping issues, were still under consideration today. Geoff Wright, the general manager of Destination Resorts, which manages the Landmark Condominiums, commented that the ownership supports the Association and its efforts to renovate. The idea to renovate was put on hold in the mid-90's as the Lionshead Redevelopment Master Plan was drafted and approved. The ides became real again for the Association a couple of years ago. Additional proposed for sale units will assist with the costs. He outlined the various aspects of the architecture and plan via a PowerPoint presentation. He finished by stating that the commercial and tower improvements would be part of phase one of a project, and the arrival facility and the overbuild for the townhouses the following year, with a total construction phasing of about 24 months. James Ohlson, of Fritzlen Pierce Architects, spoke about the major residential components of the Landmark redevelopment. Materials would be changed, and the roof line will be changed through overhang additions and infill along the top floor. Dormers, shutters, noise dampening measures, an elevator tower fulfilling safety and access concerns, a new lobby and entry drive, improved circulation, and other salient aspects of the application were discussed. Bill Jewitt warned the applicant that commercial ski storage would not be allowed at the first floor of the site. Geoff Wright commented that he was fairly certain that the Antlers contained some Page 8 ski storage on the first floor. He also added that the storage proposed by the Landmark was interior to the building and for owner/guest use only. Staff clarified with the applicant that this was not "commercial ski storage" as prohibited by the Town Code, but instead ski lockers only for the Landmark guests. Tyson Davidoff continued the presentation further commenting that very little increase to square footage was being proposed. Dick Cleveland commented that the idea of stone columns terminating in glass did not look feasible or realistic. He did ask how much thought had been paid to the redevelopment at the north of the property. Tyson responded that most of the plans presented today dealt with the south side of the property primarily due to the ambiguity for redevelopment of the North Day Lot. Howard Olson of Alter Construction summarized the applicant's comments by saying that the Association as a whole was in favor of the proposal..- The new project was proposed to be code compliant, safe, architecturally compatible, and new. Rollie Kjesbo asked if the applicant would be asking for variances to construct near Concert Hall Plaza. The applicant replied that the only variances currently being considered were variances to construct to the property line below grade. Dick Cleveland commented that one elevator seemed inadequate. He also commented that he would like to see some dormers and interest along the north roof line, as it appears from the highway. Some sense of life above the Townhouses expanse should be considered. The applicant responded that something of this nature would be considered. Jim Lamont, Vail Village Homeowners Association commented that for the first time under review, the project held some merit. He asked about the turnaround in the new lobby area. Was this standard circulation for cars only? He continued to ask questions about the various aspects of the proposed redevelopment. Dick Cleveland commented that he had stated his concerns, aside from some concern about the location of the fire lane. Todd Donze of Fritzlen Pierce commented that certain walkway widths would be required for the development per building code and the zoning regulations. Doug Cahill commented that the guest arrival aspect was well conceived.. The loading and delivery area looks like it goes nowhere. He understood that variance requests were still being thought out. The retail aspects look good, but should be considered in light of the Arrabelle development. 10 minutes 10. A request for a final review of a variance, from Section 12-6H-6, Setbacks, Vail Town Code, pursuant to Chapter 12-17, Variances, to allow for the enclosure of a deck, located at 400 East Meadow Drive, Unit 3/Block 5, Vail Village Filing 1, and setting and setting forth details in regard thereto. (PEC06-0070) Applicant: John R. Lewis and Patricia Lewis, represented by Michael Suman Architect Planner: Elisabeth Reed ACTION: ®enied (grant of special privilege) Page 9 MOTION: Cleveland SECOND: Pierce VOTE: 3-1-1 Rollie Kjesbo recused himself due to a conflict of interest. Elisabeth Reed presented the project according to the memorandum. Mike Suman, the applicant's representative, presented an overview of the proposal. No public comment was added. Bill Pierce noted that he originally designed this building and that the negative spaces were intentionally designed and shouldn't be filled with square footage. He doesn't see a physical hardship that justifies a variance. He noted that a 250 GRFA addition is not a guaranteed right, especially when a variance is needed. Dick Cleveland expressed the same concerns as Bill Pierce. Bill Jewitt will reluctantly agree with the PEC precedent of the previous variance approvals. Doug Cahill noted a concern that the original design and a PEC variance approval is granting continued "creep" into the setbacks. Mike Suman noted that Bill Pierce was on the DRB at the time the other additions were approved, and was trying to preserve the effect of the infill by using glass. He noted other units in the association received the same variance only 18 months ago, but was confused that now the PEC does not support the concept. 10 minutes 11. A request for final review of variances from Section 12-6H-6, Setbacks, and Section 12-6H-9, Site Coverage, Vail Town Code, pursuant to Chapter 12-17, Variances, to allow for the enclosure of a deck, located at 400 East Meadow Drive, Unit 5/Block 5, Vail Village Filing 1, and setting forth details in regard thereto. (PEC06-0071) Applicant: Elliot and Margie Davidoff, represented by Michael Suman Architect Planner: Elisabeth Reed ACTION: Denied (grant of special privilege) MOTION: Cleveland SECOND: Pierce VOTE: 3-1-1 The Commission reviewed this item concurrently with Item 10. 10 minutes 12. A request for a final review of a variance, from Section 12-6H-6, Setbacks, Vail Town Code, pursuant to Chapter 12-17, Variances, to allow for the enclosure of a deck, located at 400 East Meadow Drive, Unit 8/Block 5, Vail Village Filing 1, and setting and setting forth details in regard thereto. (PEC06-0072) Applicant: Sue Thurow, represented by Michael Suman Architect Planner: Elisabeth Reed ACTION: Denied (grant of special privilege) MOTION: Cleveland SECOND: Pierce VOTE: 3-1-1 The Commission reviewed this item concurrently with Item 10. 15 minutes 13. A request for a final review of a conditional use permit, pursuant to section 12-7B-5, Permitted and Conditional Uses, Above Second Floor, Vail Town Code, to allow for the operation of a Page 10 "quasi-public" club, located at 333 Hanson Ranch Road/Lot C, Block 2, Vail Village Filing 1, and setting forth details in regard thereto. (PEC06-0067) Applicant: Remonov & Company, Inc. Planner: Warren Campbell ACTION: Approved MOTION: Kjesbo SECOND: Cleveland VOTE: 5-0-0 Elisabeth Reed presented the proposal per the Staff memorandum on behalf of Warren Campbell. Rick Mueller, applicant, presented an overview of the proposal. Bob Vannerick, Cordillera Homeowner Association, described the proposal in further detail. Doug Cahill asked if there were any hours of operation. Mr. Vannerick replied that typically it will not be used after 9 or 10 at night. There was no public comment. Bill Pierce clarified that the issue is to decide if this is a "quasi-public" club. Elisabeth Reed clarified that the Council determined that this use is not commercial ski storage and that it is similar to a cocktail lounge and bar in its operation. Bob and Rick clarified how this will be open to the public through the Cordillera Hotel and Spa, Cordillera Golf Course, and Cordillera homeowner's guests. The Commission felt that the proposal and concept for operation was a better use of the space than previous proposals and better than the space being converted to a dwelling unit. Doug Cahill recommended a text amendment to allow more options for conditional uses on the third floor and above. 30 minutes 14. A request for a final recommendation of a proposed amendment to the Lionshead Redevelopment Master Plan, pursuant to Section 2.8, Adoption and Amendment of the Master Plan, Lionshead Redevelopment Master Plan, to amend the Lionshead Study Area Boundaries, and Chapter 5, Detailed Plan Recommendations, to include the study "West Lionshead" area, generally located at 646, 862, 890, 923, 934, 953, 1000, and 1031 South Frontage Road West/Lot 54 and Tract K of Glen Lyon Subdivision, Tracts C and D, Vail Village Filing 2, and several unplatted parcels (a more complete legal description is available at the Community Development Department), and setting forth details in regard thereto. (PEC06-0008) Applicant: Vail Resorts Development Company, Town of Vail, and Glen Lyon Office Building Genera! Partnership Planner: Warren Campbell ACTION: Tabled to November 27, 2006 MOTION: Kjesbo SECOND: Pierce VOTE: 5-0-0 Russ Forrest gave a presentation per the staff memorandum. Tom Braun further outlined the aspects of the proposed plan that were different than had been previously seen by the Planning and Environmental Commission. He commented that there would be several benefits to allowing the Frontage Road to move in several different phases. Much emphasis was being placed on the prospective life and feel of the new portal area. He Page 11 outlined the various aspects of the Lionshead Redevelopment Master Plan which addressed employee housing units which would replace the housing from the Sunbird Lodge. Specific sites were delineated within the plan. He addressed the parking needs and felt the proposed development of West Lionshead would satisfy the .requirements. Utility availability and needs had been discussed as well, he commented. If the redevelopment plans were to continue, the Planning and Environmental Commission could evaluate such plans at the appropriate time. The proposed amendments could truly be a gift to existing landowners in this area, he finished. Jay Peterson added that David Viele, representing the Glen Lyon Office Building, was in favor of the project. He said that David's only interest was to be kept appraised of the plans for the area. Jim Lamont asked if the Interstate had always been included in the study area. Tom Braun answered in the affirmative. Russ added that it should be acknowledged that the Simba Run area was included in the study area as well. Dick Cleveland asked about p. 17, paragraph C, 2"d line...this should read "above" instead of "about". He clarified that he would not vote for the amendment as long as the Glen Lyon Office Building (GLOB) was included. He felt that the LRMP was only intended to satisfy future development for aging infrastructure. He did not feel that Cascade Crossing and the Vail Professional Building were aging pieces of infrastructure. He did not think that Tract K should be included as well. Because of the lift across the street and the potential for realignment of the Frontage Road, the other two buildings (aside from GLOB) could be appropriately redeveloped. Jay Peterson commented that Tract K could be removed, but it was asked by Staff to add. Tract K into the area. Tom Braun asked why Dick felt so strongly about the inclusion of Glen Lyon. Dick commented that it was a very narrow parcel and redevelopment could expand the area all the way into Cascade. There is no need to continue the development "creep". Russ Forrest responded that there was originally an approval for a brewery, then a subsequent approval for offices, etc, on the GLOB site since his time at the Town began. Jay Peterson commented that an additional road would have to be directed to the GLOB if it was not included in the study area. Bill Jewitt commented that a Simba Run connection should be "encouraged" vs. "not precluded". On page 18, Bill added that the goal to have people skiing into West Lionshead ("access routes") should not be encouraged. Lionshead businesses would likely be opposed if skiers were to end up in West Lionshead. Regarding the criteria. on page 22, Bill felt that the items of "mediocre architectural character," etc., did not apply to the areas being considered for inclusion/redevelopment. He'd like to keep "the line" at Sandstone Creek. Rollie Kjesbo asked if the area was rezoned to LMU-1, what was being gained? Tom Braun commented that 2 acres would be added. He did not wish to see a new Arrabelle constructed at the Cascade site. He thought that the parameters of LMU-1 were too broad for the proposed redevelopment site. A re-zoning or the creation of an SDD may be a better way to address the desires. Jay Peterson asked if anyone had a problem with the lift coming into the area, thereby allowing an additional access point to the mountain. Page 12 The overall concern was that too much mass might end up existing in the area if the area was rezoned to LMU-1. Tom Braun commented that language already existed which required step downs to the Creek, and other sensitive areas. Bill Pierce didn't agree with his fellow Commissioners regarding the GLOB. He thought that if it was not included, it would remain one random parcel. He remembered reviewing, at some point, another building for that site. He wished to understand the true benefits of re-zoning the property. He thought that some public benefits should be required. Rollie Kjesbo countered that if a re-zoning occurred, only ause-by-right scenario would exist and the developments would proceed carte blanche. Bill Jewitt thought the better avenue was to not include these areas in the LRMP area. Tom Braun commented that substantial controversy already existed between the Master Plan and the related zoning regulations for this area. Bill Pierce continued to say that he would like to see specific language addressing Sandstone Creek. He thought it should be used as a true benefit to the area. ft was verified that similar text was already included. Bill added that the way existing buildings edge Gore Creek is generally pretty awful. He felt that a firm commitment should be made to put service yard uses underground and out of sight. Regarding the parking garage, the space outside of it should be developed. Something could be built around it (i.e. Denver Art Museum). Doug Cahill added that lift access would be an amenity in this area. This should help Vail Resorts to meet its goals. He thought that ski access back to the area should be allowed as well. Lionshead should be doing fine by then. Overall, he was in favor of the changes to the Master Plan. He wanted to make sure that the language specifying "tapering the buildings down" should be emphasized in the proposed amendments. Russ Forrest verified that some language could be added which continued the "taper" to Gore Creek. Jay Peterson asked that GLOB be included in the plan. Ownership could then be put into one set of hands and property lines could be realigned. If a proposed project were stepped back, after that realignment, the buildings could be placed farther from the Creek and more appropriate address of the Creek could occur at that time through new construction than exists today. The benefit of keeping that parcel in was substantial as long as protections could be drafted for the Town according to its concerns. Russ Forrest added that much debate had occurred over this issue. The original thought was to extend the mass to the west to extend commercial spaces. Jay Peterson answered that, as far as concealing uses goes, that was underway and absolute. Bill Jewitt commented that the Gore Creek Residences were kept at a meager height to allow for bigger buildings at the rear. Jay Peterson stated that no variances were asked in that case. Doug Cahill outlined the section of the memo which addressed height, scale, and responsiveness of such. 10 minutes Page 13 15. Report to the Planning and Environmental Commission of an administrative action approving a request for a minor amendment to SDD No. 4, Cascade Village, pursuant to Section 12-9A-10, Amendment Procedures, Vail Town Code, to allow for modifications to the approved building Plans for the Vail Cascade Residences (Cascade movie theaters and Colorado Mountain College), located at 1310 Westhaven Drive/Cascade Village, and setting forth details in regard thereto. (PEC06-0075) Applicant: Vail Cascade Residences, LLC, represented by Mauriello Planning Group Planner: Warren Campbell ACTION: Upheld Staff's approval MOTION: Jewitt SECOND: Kjesbo VOTE: 5-0-0 16. A request for a recommendation to the Vail Town Council of an amendment to the Town of Vail Streetscape Master plan, pursuant to Chapter 1, Master Plan Process, to relocate. Checkpoint Charlie, and setting forth details in regard thereto. (PEC06-0078) Applicant: Town of Vail, represented by Greg Hall Planner: George Ruther ACTION: Table to November 27, 2006 MOTION: Kjesbo SECOND: Jewitt VOTE: 5-0-0 17. Approval of October 23, 2006 minutes MOTION: Jewitt SECOND: Kjesbo VOTE: 5-0-0 18. Information Update 19. Adjournment MOTION: Jewitt SECOND: Kjesbo VOTE: 5-0-0 The applications and information about the proposals are available for public inspection during regular office hours at the Town of Vail Community Development Department, 75 South Frontage Road. The public is invited to attend the project orientation and the .site visits that precede the public hearing in the Town of Vail Community Development Department. Please call (970) 479-2138 for additional information. Sign language interpretation is available upon request with 24-hour notification. Please call (970) 479-2356, Telephone for the Hearing Impaired, for information. Community Development Department Published November 10, 2006, in the Vail Daily. Page 14 MEMORANDUM TO: Town Council FROM: Community Development-Department DATE: November 21, 2006 SUBJECT: Town of Vail Municipal Code Title 11 Sign Staff: Susie Huxford, Russ Forrest PURPOSE The goal of the work session is to review the Vail, Economic Advisory Council recommendations regarding the sign code issues that Town Council had referred to them in August. Staff requests feedback and direction. 11. BACKGROUND On August 15, 2006, Council reviewed a presentation from staff regarding the current sign code and current sign issues in Vail Village and Lionshead. The Town Council directed staff to make several modifications to the code. Council also directed staff to utilize the Vail Economic Advisory Council to assist in developing policy recommendations. Based on that Council meeting and subsequent discussions with merchants, the following issues were addressed: * Seasonal (summer) promotional signage/displays * Menu Special Boards * ~ Creating a lease option for outdoor displays on public property On September 19, 2006, Staff met with the Vail Economic Advisory Council. There were 10 members present and 9 members absent. The VEAC made several recommendations. Staff reviewed the recommendations and went back to the VEAC meeting on November 14, 2006 to reiterate and confirm the recommendations. III. SIGN CODE ISSUES The following is a summary of the issues addressed at the VEAC meetings held on September 19, 2006 and November 14, 2006. 1. Issue Dry Erase Boards Recommendation from VEAC Eliminate Dry Erase Boards replace with Chalkboards. (See further details in the following Issue, "Multiple Menu Boxes and Special Boards"). 2. Issue Multiple Menu Boxes and Special Boards Recommendation from VEAC Allow 1 Menu Box and/or Chalkboard for each Public Entrance. A. The menu box and/or chalkboard will be all inclusive, for a total dimension of 6 square feet. B. Maximum of 2 per frontage with two primary public entrances. C. Example: If a business has 3 ublic entrances on the same frontage, then 2 would be allowed on that frontage. D. This change only involves restaurants. Menu boxes on theaters and real estate offices will not be affected by this change. They will remain with one per business. E. This will not apply to retail. F. If a business chooses to use a chalkboard as a part of their 6 square feet, it must be attached to the menu box. No free flying signs!! G. The application will be evaluated through the sign planning permit process. Staff denials may be appealed. 3. Issue Excessive Outdoor Display Racks Recommendation from VEAC Allow Outdoor Representative Sample Displays. Eliminate Outdoor Storage/Rack Displays. A. A "Representative Sample Display" is a sample of what is inside your store, such as skis, bikes, lawn mowers, and clothing. Only a representation of what you sell will be allowed. B. Excessive outdoor arrangements of inventory, including sale racks and displays of merchandise will not be permitted. C. The same standards will apply for public and private property. D. A ey arly permit process in which businesses apply to display a "representative sample" on public and private property will be implemented. E. In regards to allowing "Representative Sample Displays" year round., the vote was a 60-40 in favor. F. Discretion will be given to the "administrator" to ensure standards are met in the permit process. This discretion will apply to the prevention of excessive displays, safety precautions, and the location of the displays. 4. Issue Banners located on businesses for advertising. Recommendation from VEAC Banners will not be allowed. A. The TOV Code will remain the same. TOV Code 11-7-1 Advertising Prohibited: Pennants, banners, and bunting that are not associated with community events or activities but 2 are for the purpose of advertising a business or product only are not allowed. (Ord. 19(2003) § 1) 5. Issue Sale Signs Recommendation from VEAC Sale Signs will be allowed. A. The Code will remain the same; the change will be in regards to the wording. The phrase "representative sample display" will be inserted in place of the words "display rack". Number: 1 window sale sign per business or 1 sign on a representative sample display. Area: Not to exceed 1.5 square feet. Height: Top of sale sign not to extend more than 10 ft above existing grade. Special Provisions: If located outside, the sale sign shall be placed on a representative sample display only. 6. Issue Enforcement Recommendation .from VEAC Eliminate current procedure; no more registered letters. A. Discretion will be given to the "administrator" to issue warnings and summonses. B. The intent will be to issue awarning/education on the first violation and a summons to court on the second violation. IV. NEXT STEP If the Town Council approves of this general policy direction outlined above, staff would begin a text amendment for the sign code which would include a recommendation from the PEC and approval of an ordinance by the Town Council TOWN OF VAIL PROPOSED 2007 BUDGET NOVEMBER 21, 2006 First Reading Town of Vail Proposed 2007 Budget Table of Contents 2007 Budget Highlights This is a verbal summary of the key assumptions, changes, and results of the 2007 proposed Budget. Impact of Redevelopment -Revenue Summary of Changes in Personnel 7 Ten-Year Summary of Budgeted Positions by Department 9 Employee Benefits Summary 11 This report shows the list of employee benefits by percentage and costs. Economic Vitality This report shows the spending related to this topic. 12 General Fund Revenue and Expenditures 13 This schedule shows the major revenue and expenditures by category in the General Fund for 2007 compared with 2006. Contributions and Special Events Proposed expeditures for the 2007 budget. 14 Capital Projects Fund Revenue and Expenditures 16 This schedule shows revenue by type and expenditures by project in the Capital Projects Fund for 2005, 2006 and proposed 2007. Real Estate Transfer Tax Fund Revenue and Expenditures 19 This schedule shows revenue by type and expenditures by project in the RETT Fund for 2005, 2006 and proposed 2007. Marketing Fund Revenue and Expenditures 21 This schedule shows the major revenue and expenditures by category in the Marketing Fund for 2007 compared with 2006. Debt Services Fund and Expenditures 21 This schedule shows the major revenue and expenditures by category in the Debt Services Fund for 2007 compared with 2006. Heavy Equipment Fund Revenue and Expenditures 22 This schedule shows the major revenue and expenditures by category in the Heavy Equipment Fund for 2007 compared with 2006. Health Insurance Fund Revenue and Expenditures 22 This schedule shows the major revenue and expenditures by category in the Health Insurance Fund for 2007 compared with 2006. Dispatch Services Fund Revenue and Expenditures 23 This schedule shows the major revenue and expenditures by category in the Dispatch Services Fund for 2007 compared with 2006. Changes Highlighted .. TOWN OF VAIL 2007 BUDGET PROPOSAL The Town of Vai12007 budget proposal presented in this document continues to support the five areas of focus identified by Town Council: 1) facilitate Vail's redevelopment; 2) address issues proactively; 3) elevate community leadership; 4} improve local economy; and 5) add to Vail's appeal as a place to live, work, and play. GENERAL FUND The General Fund supports. the town's basic municipal operations. Compared with the. draft budget proposal presented on November 7, the attached proposal includes an increase of $$6,687 in the. "Contributions, Marketing, and Special Events" line per. Council direction and an increase of $8,2$2 to reflect .the xecent increase in Colorado minimum wage, which applies to the fire student program. With these changes, expenditures for the year exceed revenue by $44,022. REVENUE - $26,489,894 The General Fund's primary source of revenue is sales tax ($10.7 million) followed by parking and charter bus service ($3.6 million), property and ownership tax ($3.0 million) and lift tax ($2.9 million). Licenses and permit fees are also expected to provide significant amounts of revenue ($1.9 million) in 2007, primarily due to major redevelopment projects. Sales Tax - $10,741,500 In this budget proposal, 63% of the town's 4% general sales tax is allocated to the General Fund. The remaining 37% is allocated to the Capital Projects Fund. By Charter, approval of this budget will require an affirmative vote by five out of the seven Council members because less than 50% of the sales tax revenue will be dedicated to capital acquisition and improvements. Total sales tax is projected conservatively at $17,050,000. Sales tax revenue is impacted by many variables including: snow conditions, the number of days Vail Mountain is open; i_ocal a_nd international travel conditions; construe±ion activity in Mail; and the economy in general. The 2005/2006 ski season generated excellent sales tax revenue due to good snow and a late April closing of the mountain. Our projections do not anticipate the same favorable conditions in 2007. We have, however, assumed inflation at 3.5% on an average year base. We have also adjusted for redevelopment projects -upward for One Willow Bridge Road, Sonnenalp addition, Tivoli, Vail Plaza Hotel, and Westhaven Condos, and downward for Annabelle/LionsHead, Crossroads, and Lodge Tower. Parking and Charter Bus - $3,600,380 Parking rates for 2006/2007 were adjusted to meet increased operating costs and to lessen the previous steep increase between the one-and-a-half and two-hour time frame. Paid parking will also be in effect one week early than previous years to correspond with the opening of Vail Mountain. These changes are expected to result in a revenue increase of approximately $225,000. Property Tax and Ownership Tax - $ 3,012,000 Property tax is estimated based on information from the Eagle County Assessor's Office. Final numbers should be available in late November and any changes will be incorporated in the -1- Changes Highlighted second reading of the budget ordinance on December 5~'. Property tax is budgeted at $2,840,000 with ownership tax expected to contribute $172,000. Lift Tax - $2,890,000 This is a 4% tax on ski area admissions. We have conservatively budgeted a 3.2% increase over 2006, again recognizing 2006 may have been an unusually good snow year. Licenses and Permit Fees - $1,883,550 The largest component of licenses and permits is construction permit fees, which includes building, mechanical, plumbing, and electrical permits. The 2007 budget for construction permits totals $1,125,000 with $600,000 coming from non-major projects and $525,000 from redevelopment projects including Arrabelle, Front Door, Manor Vail, and Mountain View. To be conservative in revenue projections, we have included only major projects currently under construction or with a building permit application currently in house. Compared with the 2006 amended budget, construction fees from major redevelopment projects are down $255,000. Plan check fees represent an additional $550,000 of the license and permit fees category in 2007, with design review, Planning & Environmental Commission (PEC), contractor's licenses, liquor licenses and various other categories making up the remainder. Plan check fees are down from the 2006 amended budget by approximately $378,875. These fees are also budgeted conservatively with major projects budgeted only when the submittal for plan review is received. Since many of the large development plan reviews are outsourced, the associated costs are also appropriated only when the submittal is received. A new construction mitigation fee may be requested for implementation in 2007. Details will be presented to Council at a future meeting. The proposed fee would be applied to all new construction projects with a valuation of $10 million or more. The fee will be used to fund construction mitigation activities such as planning, traffic control, code enforcement, .and construction mitigation programs. Projects which are already approved but .have not yet submitted for a building permit, such as the Crossroads, Four Seasons, and Manor Vail would be exempt from the fee as currently proposed. Revenue from this fee has not been included in the 2007 budget pending determination of fee structure by Community Development and approval by Council. Changes to PEC and DRB application fees may also be proposed. These fees have not been increased since 2001 and do not reflect the true cost of the process. No increases have been included in the 2007 budget proposal. Miscellaneous and Project Reimbursements - $70,000 This category includes potential rebates from Holy Cross Energy and reimbursement for shared positions and other reimbursement agreements. Three items contributed to the reduction from 2006 to 2007. The Vail Resorts Development Company agreement to provide funding to sugport a portion of incremental costs related to redevelopment has not been renewed, VRD is no longer sharing a public relations position with the town; and. reimbursemen#s from the Solaz~s for legal work will not recur in 2007. EXPENDITURES - $26,533,916 Salary and Benefits Approximately two-thirds of the town's expenditures for municipal services are salary and benefits. The 2007 budget proposal includes aperformance-based merit increase pool averaging -2- Changes Highlighted 5% of salaries. Staff feels this increase will prevent us from falling farther behind our comparator group. In 2006, Council approved a strategic change in compensation for the .fire student resident program. Previously, students worked one 24-hour shift per ,week in exchange far tuition, training, and living quarters. As of September 1, 2006, students are paid for all shifts worked and pay rent to the town for quarters. This change. is seen as the. first step in an improved program to recruit and retain firefighters. The 2007 budget includes an increase in seasonal salaries and also. in seasonal headcount, .which is based on salaries.: Although the students were on-board previously, they were only included in the headcount for hours worked beyond the required one. shift a week.. Seasonal salaries and headcount have also increased for expanded bus service. The Commission on Special Event (CSE) Coordinator, who was initially a contractor, will be converted to a regular benefited position. The 2007 budget proposal also includes a combined benefits rate of 37.2 % (40.3% for full time regular employees and 10.4% for seasonal and part-time employees.) The full-time benefits rate is approximately one percentage point higher than last year as a result of increased health care costs. The seasonal rate is slightly lower than last year as a result of a change in some hourly rates-and in the wellness program to make the salary and benefit package equitable for seasonal drivers and seasonal parking attendants. Redevelopment In 2005 and 2006, 12.23 FTE's were added as fixed-term employees to support various aspects of redevelopment activity, including plan review, inspection, and traffic control. Fixed-term positions are intended to be in place only for the duration of a project. These positions will be carried into 2007 to support the ongoing billion dollar renewal. In addition, the proposed budget includes $247,000 for outsourced building inspection under contract with Colorado Inspection Agency (CIA) for work on the Front Door and Mountain View (Apollo Park); $35,000 for CIA to perform routine plan reviews two days a week; and $15,000 overtime for town employees to perform plan review and inspection. We also have contracts with CIA for the Four Seasons and the Kitt-Carlton; however, neither the building permit revenue nor the inspection costs are included in the proposed budget pending submission of a building application for each. Environmental Sustainability As the town moves forward with an increased emphasis on environmental sustainability, staff is requesting.. Council to approve. an ordinance upon: first reading November 21 identifying environmental health as an allowable use of the Real Estate Transfer Tax (RETT) Fund revenue. Therefore, the proposed General Fund budget for 2007 excludes costs of the Environmental Health Department and environmental programs which were included in the General Fund in previous years. Economic Vitality Staff is considering creation of a new department to collect costs in support of Economic Vitality. Currently, these costs are included in three departments -the Town Manager's Department, Community Information, and Contributions, Marketing and Special Events -and are recorded alongside other expenditures not related to economic vitality. Collecting costs in one department would allow staff to manage the available funds more effectively and to report results to Council more easily. For 2007, proposed spending for Economic Vitality totals $1.3 million, approximately the same amount as 2006, as shown on the enclosed schedule. Noteworthy -3- Changes: Highlighted changes from 2006 include: dedicating a portion of the Communications and Special Projects Manager specifically to Economic Vitality; reduction from $50,000 to $25,000 for town-wide construction mitigation activities, including the climbing wall, buskers, shopping spree, etc., with the expectation that construction in the most heavily impacted area will be nearing completion next summer; and potential addition of the Commission on Special Events (CSE) Coordinator as a town employee. The latter change is subject to further review and discussion with the CSE Board. When the CSE was created, the coordinator was a contractor working under agreement with the CSE Board. As the CSE has evolved and the coordinator has taken on additional hours, a change in arrangements to a TOV benefited employee is under consideration. Funds are provided in the current budget for such a change. Contributions With the creation of the Economic Vitality department, contributions that support economic vitality, the visitor centers, and all special events would be included in the Economic Vitality department. Remaining General Fund contributions would include three categories -education, recreation, and contracts/arrangements. Examples of contribution recipients are: Eagle Valley Child Care, Vail Valley Exchange, Vail Valley Athlete Committee, Channel 5, and Youth Recognition Award. All Other Operating Expenditures This category of expenditure reflects a 3% increase overall, with more substantial increases in utility costs and the addition of heat for streetscape offset by reductions in other areas. CAPITAL PROJECTS FUND REVENUE - $6,539,300 Sales tax is the primary revenue source for capital projects. For 2007, $6,308,500 or 37% of the town's projected sales tax revenue is allocated the Capital Projects Fund PROJECT EXPENDITURES - $7,622,300 In addition to ongoing capital maintenance, noteworthy projects for 2007 include: • Streetscape - $1,100,000 for continuation of West and east Meadow Drive plus $1,180,000 for continuatio:. of hear cn East l`~Ieadow Drive • Town of Vail planning - $150,000 added as a placeholder for additional work to be done as an outcome of the Vail 2020 process now underway; may include updates to Vail Village master plan and/or Vail land use plan • Interactive inspection system - $65,000 ($47,000 software and $18,000 hardware) to improve building inspection process and provide customer access to inspection information residing in the existing Permits-Plus system; annual software maintenance of $7,300 begins in 2008 • Public safety radio amplification system - $50,000 added for purchase of amplification system in the Village parking structure; assures communication of emergency service providers within and outside the structure; complies with proposed ordinance establishing a "Life Safety Standard" for public safety communications • Fire suppression in computer rooms - $35,500 added to protect public safety computer equipment • Expansion Vehicles - Code Enforcement Officer (CEO) vehicle - $22,300 for fully-equipped CEO truck; increases CEO vehicles to four shared by eight officers on patrol and assigned to the construction/special events work team; needed until major redevelopment is complete and will not be replaced thereafter -4- Changes Highlighted - Public Works vehicle - $22,500 for new utility truck to be used by Facilities department; old flatbed truck will be re-assigned to landscapers to improve efficiency. REAL ESTATE TRANSFER TAX (RETT) FUND REVENUE - $8,654,970 The primary revenue source for this fund is the 1 % real estate transfer tax, accounting for $8,179,952 in projected revenue for 2007. Additional funding is provided by the golf course lease with Vail Recreation district (VRD); recreational amenities fees assessed on new residential square footage; and cost-sharing with VRD on ADA compliance and GreenPlay. The transfer tax revenue projection includes $2.b million in 2007 from large developmeni projecis including Arrabelle, Forest Place, One Willow Bridge, Vail Plaza Hotel, and Westhaven Condos. EXPENDITURES - $7,580,930 Use of the RETT Fund is restricted by ordinance to parks, recreation, and open space. Council will be asked to approve an ordinance upon first reading on November 21 expanding the use to include environmental sustainability. In addition to ongoing maintenance items and park/path development, the following noteworthy items are included in the proposal: • 2.5 full-time equivalent positions are added for landscaping and park maintenance as a result of increased services, particularly at Donovan Park. Although dollars were budgeted for Donovan Park maintenance in prior years, the positions were not added until appropriate staffing levels were determined. • Streetscape - $920,000 for continuation of the Meadow Drive project. • Environmental Sustainability - $250,000 to fund programs and staffing for wind power; green programs; recycling, etc.; contingent upon approval of the above-mentioned ordinance change. • Public Art - $186,644 reflects Art in Public Places (AIPP's) request to have funding for public art at a level that is approximately 4% of the transfer tax revenue. This is an increase from previous years when public art was budgeted at $75,000 annually. Approval of the 2007 budget as presented will authorize this increase. • Bear-proof containers - $180,000 added to 2007 to allow for the purchase of containers compliant with the new ordinance. • Recreation master planning with VRD - $50,000 each as a placeholder for implementation of the GreenPlay recommendations, starting with updating the leases and operating agreements between the town and the Vail Recreation District. • Turf top dresser - $12,000 for equipment to pull behind an existing tractor to top dress turf with sand and organics; suitable for spaces unable to be reached by larger equipment. VAIL MARKETING FUND Business license fees provide the revenue for this fund, which is restricted to marketing Vail. Revenue is expected to be flat with the 2006 budget as a result of fewer business licenses being issued during redevelopment. Accordingly, expenditures for marketing through the Commission on Special Events (CSE) are flat at $280,000. -5- Changes Highlighted DEBT SERVICE FUND This fund is used to manage principal and interest on the town's outstanding debt. Funds are transferred from the Capital Projects Fund to meet annual debt service requirements and to cover the next upcoming principal and interest payments on the 1998 and 2002B bonds. HEAVY EQUIPMENT FUND This is an internal services fund that manages the maintenance and repair of town vehicles and equipment and the purchase of replacement vehicles other than buses and fire trucks. Costs are charged back to departments using the vehicles and equipment. A 7% increase ire costs is attributable to higher fuel costs and an increase in the amount of funds being set aside for future vehicle replacements. HEALTH INSURANCE FUND This internal services fund manages the costs of providing health and short-term disability insurance to employees. Net costs are charged to departments as employee benefits. Since the town is self-insured on these items, a sufficient fund balance is maintained to absorb extraordinary claims. DISPATCH SERVICES FUND This is an enterprise fund, e.g., more than half of its revenue is from sources outside of the town, managing emergency communication for all of Eagle County. The county and 911 Board currently funds six dispatcher positions and a systems engineer. The 911 Board has agreed to fund an additional dispatcher position for 2007 in response to the increasing county population. The fund balance is to provide a capital reserve fund for future communications center needs. -6- Town of Vail Impact of Redevelopment Included in Revenue Projections Revenue Source Pro'ect Projected Dates Sales Tax Construction Permits Real Estate Transfer Tax Arrabelle 08/04 to 3/08 Reduced 2006/2007; increases projected 2008 Received 2005/2006; additional projected 2006 Projected for 2007 Crossroads 4/07 to 3/09 Reduced 2007/2008; increased 2009 Not included pending submission of building permit application Sale of condos projected 2009/2010 Forest Place 2004 -2006 No Im act Received 2005/2006; additional projected for 2006 Projected 2006/2007 Four Seasons Plan review submittal 07/06 Not included Not included pending submission of building permit application Sale to developer received in 2005 Front Door 2/06 to 11/07 Increases projected be innin in 2008 Received 2006; additional projected 2006 Lodge at Vail Chalets 2007?? Gore Creek Place 07/04 to 10/05 No Im act Received in 2004, 2005 and 2006. Projected for 2006 LionsHead Center 2007 Reduced 2007'for retail off-line Not Included No Im act Lod a Tower 07/06 - 12!07 Reduced 2007;. increased 2008 Received and projected 2006 No Im act Manor Vail Plan review submittal 07/06 Not Included Projected for 2007/2008 Not Included Mountain View A ollo Park Not Included Not Included Not Included One Willow Bridge 08104 to 12/06 Increases projected beginning in 2007 Received 2004/2005/2006 Pro'ected beginning in 2006 Ritz-Carlton Plan review in 2006 Not included Not included pending submission of building permit application Not Included Roost Pro osai submitted Not included Not included pending submission of building permit application Not Included Vail Plaza Hotel 11/04 to12/06 Increases projected beginnin in 2007 Received 2004/2005!2006 Projected be innin in 2007 Westhaven Condos Ruins 8/05 to 12!06 Increases projected be inning in 2007 Received 2005/2006 Projected for 2007 061107 Redevelopment Project Matrix - 7 - 11/16/2006 Town of Vail 2007 Budget Summary of Changes in Personnel From 2006 Original Budget to 2007 Budget Expanded Services: Bus Service (seasonal) Landscaping & Maintenance (seasonal) Dcncvan Park Mainte~ Dance (seasonal) Dispatch position added (funded by E911 Board) Total FTEs related to Expanded Servcies: Adjustments: Converted 2 fixed-term employees to Full-time regular (no net change) Restructuring of Fire Student Program (no employees added) CSE coordinator was contract employee -converted to full-time Other scheduling adjustments Total FTE Changes: 2.54 0.96 1,53 1.00 6.03 5.52 0.75 (0.45) 5.82 11.85 -8- TOWN OF VAIL 2007 BUllGET TEN-YEAR SUMMARY OF BUDGETED POSITIONS BY DEPARTMENT Positions Department 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 I Change Full-Time Regular Positions - Funded by TOV Town Officials 6.90 6.90 6.90 6.50 7.10 7.10 6.50 6.90 6.90 7.06 0.16 Administrative Services 16.60 18.20 16.40 18.45 18.00 18.00 18.00 19.15 18.15 19.68 1.53 Community Development 16.00 16.00 15.00 14.00 15.00 15.00 14.00 13.85 13.85 15.18 1.33 Fire 18.00 18.00 18.00 16.00 18.20 18.20 18.00 18.00 18.00 18.00 0.00 Police and Communications 58.50 64.50 63.50 57.25 56.25 54.25 54.25 56.25 54.25 54.50 0.25 Library 8.75 8.75 8.75 8.75 8.75 8.75 6.38 6.38 6.38 6.63 0.25 Public Works, Streets & Roads, Lang 31.65 30.65 29.50 30.00 29.00 29.75 29.75 31.25 31.75 31.75 0.00 Transportation & Parking 27.35 30.3.5 28.50 28.50 28.50 28.50 27.50 30.50 31.00 31.00 0.00 Fleet Maintenance 13.00 13.00 13.00 13.00 13.00 13.00 13.00 13.00 13.00 13.00 0.00 Facility Maintenance 19.00 19.00 21.00 21.50 21.50 20.50 20.50 20.00 20.00 20.00 0.00 Capital Projects 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Total FTE's -Full-Time Re ular 215.75 225.35 ZZ0.55 214.95 216.30 214.05 208.88 216.28 213.28 216.80 3.52 Fixed Term and/or Externally Funded Employees Administrative Services 1.00 1.00 1.00 - 1.00 - (1.00) C ommumty Development 2.00 6.00 6.00 5.00. (1.00) Frre 1.00 2.00 2.00 - Police and Communications 2.00 2.00 4.00 4.00 7.50 .8.00 7.98 11.48 12.48 1.00 Public Works, Streets & Roads, Landscaping 1.75 1.63 1.63 (0.00) Capital Projects 0.75 2.00 2.38 2.38 - Total Fixed-Term/Funded 0.00 2.00 2.00 4.00 5.00 8 50 11 75 18 73 24 49 23 49 (1 O1) Town Officials 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Administrative Services 0.82 0.42 0.42 0.42 0.42 0.42 0.42 0.98 1.04 0.59 (0.45) Community Development 0.48 0.48 0.48 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.48 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 -9- TOWN OF VAIL 2007 BUDGET TEN-YEAR SUMMARY OF BUDGETED POSITIONS BY DEPARTMENT 2007 Positions 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 Fire 1.40 1.40 1.40 1.51 1.6R 7.20 5.52 Police and Communications 3.36 1.02 1.02 0.93 0.93 0.48 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Library 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 1.09 2.48 2.48 2.48 1.70 (0.78) Public Works/ Streets & RoadslL.and 8.39 8.82 9.26 10.18 10.18 9.55 7.57 $.69 8.94 11.42 2.48 Transportation & Parking 23.18 25.90 25.90 25.75 28.00 26.89 25.84 23.24 22.78 25.31 2.53 Facility Maintenance 0.83 0.83 0.83 0.83 0.83 0.83 1.33 1.33 1.36 1.38 0.02 Total Seasonal /Part-Time 37.99 38.4() 38.84 40.00 43.65 41.62 39.52 38.23 38.28 47.60 9.32 All FTE's (Full-Time Equivalents) Town Officials 6.90 6.90 6.90 6.50 7.10 7.10 6.50 6.90 6.90 7.06 0.16 Administrative Services 17.42 18.62 16.82 18.87 19.42 19.42 19.42 20.13 20.19 20.27 0.08 Community Development 16.48 16.48 15.48 14.96 15.96 15.96 16.48 19.85 19.85 20.18 0.33 Fire 18.00 18.00 18.00 16.00 19.60 19.60 19.40 20.51 21.68 27.20 5.52 Police and Dispatch 61.86 67.5E 66.52 62.18 61.18 62.23 62.25 64.23 65.73 66.98 1.25 Library 9.68 9.68 9.68 9.68 9.68 9.84 8.86 8.86 8.86 8.33 (0.53) Public Works, Streets & Roads 40.04 39.47 38.76 40.18 39.18 39.30 37.32 41.69 42.32 44.80 2.48 Transportation & Parking 50.53 56.2.5 54.40 54.25 56.50 55.39 53.34 53.74 53.78 56.31 2.53 Fleet Maintenance 13.00 13.00 13.00 13.00 13.00 13.00 13.00 13.00 13.00 13.00 0.00 Facility Maintenance 19.83 19.83 21.83 22.33 22.33 21.33 21.83 21.33 21.36 ~ 21.38 0.02 Ca ital Pro~ects 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.75 3.00 2.38 2.38 0.00 Total FTE`s 253.74 265.75 261.39 258.95 264.95 264.17 260.15 273.24 276.05 287.88 11.84 -10- Town of Vail Employee Benefits 2007 Budget Proposal $ % Salary Full-Time Regular Employees Fee Based Health Insurance 2,186,900 17.6% Group Term Life and Acciderta! Death Insurance 73;500 0.6% Long-term Disability Insurance 60,000 0.5% Survivor's Life Insurance 72,000 0.6% Short-term Disability Insurance 56,000 0.5% Wellness Benefit 96,000 0.8% Sworn Officer Death and Disability Insurance 41,000 0.3% Subtotal Fee Based 2,585,400 20.8% Payroll Based Pension Contribution 1,966,006 15.9% Medicare 179,809 1.5% Workers' Compensation Insurance 233,000 1.9% Unemployment Compensation Insurance 37,200 0.3% Subtotal Payroll Based 2,416,015 19.5% Total Full-Time Benefits 5,001,415 40.3% Part-Time and Seasonal Employees Fee Based 1,'V211ness 75,900 5.3% Payroll Based Pension contriburion 21,598 1.5% Medicare 20,878 1.5% Workers' Compensation Insurance 27,000 1.9% Unemployment Compensation Insurance 4,320 0.3% Subtotal Payroll Based 73,795 5.1 Total Part-Time and Seasonal Benefits 149,695 10.4% Total Benefits -All Employees 5,151,111 37.2% ae~efts os~o23 - 11 - 11/16/2006 Town of Vail Spending on Economic Vitality Community Information Communications and Special Projects Manager (portion of salary/benefits) 2006 2007 Amended Proposed Budget 26,000 Increase (Decrease) 26,000 Town Manager's Economic Development Construction Mitigation Programs Other programs and initiatives Town Manager's Economic Development Contributions, Marketing, and Special Events Bravo! New York Philharmonic Bravo! Colorado Bravo! Philadelphia Orchestra Hot Summer Nights (WF) International Dance Fesitval (WF) Street Beat (VVF) Vail Jazz Foundation Special Events -Cultural Air Service Council (VVCTB) Travel/Tourism Trends (WCTB Lodging Occupancy) Commission on Special Events -Salary & Benefits Commission on Special Events -Events Subtotal Commission on Special Events ($280K from business licenses) Farmers' Market Visitor Information Centers Subtotal Contributions, Marketing, and Special Events Town of Vail Total Economic Vitality 50,000 25,000 (25,000) 100,000 100,000 - 150,000 .125,000 (25,000) 100,000 100,000 - 25,000 25,000 - 50,000 50,000 - 25,000 25,000 - 15,000 15,000 - 20,000 28,500 8,500 7,500 7,500 - 242,500 251,000 8,500 11,200 12,000 800 5,000 5,000 36,000 48,000 12,000 614,000 632,420 18,420 .650,000 680,420 30,420 5,000 5,000 - 205,000 207,284 2,284 1,113,700 1,160,704 47,004 1,263,700 1,311,704 48,004 Economic Vitality - 12 - 11/16/2006 TOWN OF VAIL 2007 BUDGET PROPOSAL SUMMARY OF REVENUE, FJ(PENDITURES AND CHANGES IN FUND BALANCE GENERAL FUND 2006 2006 2007 2005 Original Amended Proposed Actual Budget Budget Budget Revenue Local Taxes: Sales Tax Split b/t Gen'I Fund & Capital Fund 52/48 60/40 56/44 63/37 Sales Tax Property and Ov~nership Ski Lift Tax Franchise Fees, Penalties, and Other Taxes Licenses & Permits Intergovernmental Revenue Transportation Centers Charges for Services Fines & Forfeitures Earnings on Investments Rental Revenue Miscellaneous and Project Reimbursements Total Revenue $ 8,796,600 $ 9,345,660 $ 9,345,660 $ 10,741,500 2:627,877 2,914,000 2,929,068 3,012,000 2,777,698 2,620,000 2,800,000 2,890,000 864,543 790,000 869,000 790,000 2,552,470 1,936,575 2,536,575 1,883,550 1,401,068 1,268,684 1,282,601 1,283,200 3,651,538 3,298,000 3,423,000 3,600,380 936,865 853,832 719,582 837,856 215,105 195,000 195,000 201,500 428,851 150,000 150,000 425,000 780,214 765,913 . 770,921 754,908 538,808 290,550 315,834 70,000 25,571,637 24,428,214 25,337,241 26,489,894 Expenditures Salaries Benefits Subtotal Compensation and Benefits 10,733,956 11,250,569 11,322,000 12,099,741 3,664,993 3,928,957 3,937,526 4,240,927 14,398,949 15,179,526 15,259,526 16,340,668 Fav (Unfav) vs 2005 Amended 1,395,840 82,932 90,000 (79,000) (653,025) 599 177,380 118,274 6,500 275,000 (16,013) (245,834) 1,152,653 (777,741) (303,401) (1,081,142) Contributions and Special Events 746,306 954,650 851,460 921,250 (69,790) ' All Other Operating Expenses 4,969,365 5,650,663 6,358,537 6,181,430 418 1 4 177,107 941) (110 Heavy Equipment Operating Charges 1,604,875 1,803,299 1,835,477 ,9 6, 723 1 , 985) (52 Heavy Equipment Replacement Charges 575,527 578,738 578,738, , 63 427 , 13 567 Dispatch Services 559,034 525,994 525,994 512, , 056 22 854 870 692 24 732 409 25 26,533,916 (1,124,184) Total Expenditures , , , , , , Revenue Over (Under) Expenditures Transfer to Capital Projects Fund Transfer from Capital Projects Fund Transfer to RETT Transfer to Dispatch Services Fund Beginning Fund Balance Ending Fund Balance 2,717,581 (264,656) (72,491) (44,022) (68,990) (2,000,000) 29,300 (38,197) {9,378) (19,500) 11,053,614. 11,533,797. 13,673,803 11,591,934 $ 13,673,808 $ 11,269,141 $ 11,591,934 $ 11,547,912 45.8% 43.6% 2$.469 -13- TOWN OF VAIL 2006 BUDGET SUMMARY OF REVENUE, EXPENDITURES, AND CHANGES IN FUND BALANCE CAPITAL PROJECTS FUND Revenue Sales Tax Federal Grant Revenue Lease Revenue Transfer from General Fund Transfer from Dispatch Project Reimbursement Eagle County Grant Revenue Earnings on Investments and Other Total Revenue Expenditures Land Purchases Wendy's Property Capital Maintenance Expenditures Bus Shelters Parking Structures Facilities Capital Street Maintenance Dobson Ice Arena Creekside Housing Improvements Street Light Improvements Fire infrastructure improvements Fire Truck Rebuild /Refurbish Patrol Car Video Cameras Jail Video System Upgrade Police Radio AMP in parking structures Comm Dev Plotter Document Imaging Software Licensing Computer Software/Hardware Comm Dev Interactive Permit software Fire Suppression in Computer Rooms Website and e-commerce 2006 2006 2007 2005 Original Amended Proposed Actual Budget Budget Budget Project Information 7,994,557. $ 6,230,440 7,430,440 $ 6,308,500 37% of total sales tax projections 19,500 811,800 2,191,832 Bus replacements & Intermodal site in 2008 188,160 150,000 190,000 187,800 Lease revenue from City Market & employee housing 68,990 To fund Multi-Purpose Recreation Facility 17,020 2,099,960 27,000 357,000 27,000 CDOT Reimbursement for Intergovernmental Agreement on Street R&M - 250,000 500,000 West Vail Fire Station 412 , 765 19 , 000 19, 000 16, 000 10,800,952 7,488,240 10,688,272 6,539,300 15,494 472,865 286,612 1,290,398 2,100 33,123 403 26,495 15,755 161,521 47,914 Vehicle Expansion 7,371 Donovan Park Pavilion 12,366 Gymnastics Facility 57,992 Flammable storage / Mag Chloride secondary contaimt 2,026,000 Cost of land and associated surveys, soil tests, attorney fees, etc. 10,000 10,000 30,000 627,000 662,875 455,000 Various Pking Structure Improv,'06 heat entry ramp,'07 elevator replacmnt Various Facility Capital Improv.,'07 re-roof MV Fire Station,'08 re-roof E. Vail Fire 365,000 409,888 446,000 Station,'09 re-roof Library. 1,006,940 1,600,874 830,000 Street R&M related to Interngovernmental Agreement with CDOT 7,900 50,000 66,877 75,000 Add new street lights and refurbish residential lighting program Masterplan Costs/Design/W. Vail Fire Station contingent on the ability to fund 500,000 770,264 2,000,000 operations. Remodel of Main Vail Station 50% Replace pumper'06, 50% pumper and refurbish Aerial Pumper'07, '08 Fire 240,000 323,000 truck W. Vail ; '09 refurbish ext~acation equip 45,000 12,000 50,000 Would allow for radio coverage in lower levels of parking structures 9,000 9,000 40,000 40,000 97,000 OCE maintenance, software upgrades, contract position 67,000 67,000 77,000 80,417 72,000 65,000 Allows customers to order inspections and review results online - 35,500 Desktop OS upgrades, replacement PC's, server upgrades, AS400 12,000 12,000 20,000 Internet security & application interfaces 06 Gator for parking structure enforcement; '07 CEO vehicle & truck for Public 45,429 44,800 Works 29,634 $400K in 2007 to change ventilation & improve noise 12,000 Red Sandstone facility 24,000 24,000 Flammable storage cabinets,Mag Chloride secondary containment -16- TOWN OF VAIL 2006 BUDGET SUMMARY OF REVENUE, EXPENDITURES, AND CHANGES IN FUND BALANCE CAPITAL PROJECTS FUND 2006 2006 2007 2005 Original Amended Proposed Actual Budget Budget Budget Project Information Fiber Optics in Buildings 72,823 15,000 15,000 15,000 Cabling /Network Infrastructure Way Finding Improvements 49,984 2007/2008: new variable message signs for parking structures; Info kiosks Buy-down Program 10,000 100,000 283,500 100,000 E Vail Radio Tower - Tower used for dispatch systems Repower Buses 126,000 Building Remodels 50,000 Networking upgrades /new UPS for compute r room 45,000 CAD/RMS 234,633 50,000 52,260 92,500 County wide Computer Aided Dispatch/Records Mgmt System Maintenance Paid for by Capital Fund 2,747,865 3,078,940 .4,533,902 4,857,800 Capital Replacement Expenditures Construct streetscape, drainage, lighting, public art, landscaping; adds maintenance West & East Meadow Drive 192,268 900,000 907,092 1,100,000 from Library to Fire Station East Meadow Drive-streetscape Heat 965,000 965,000 1,180,000 Per Council's request 9/21!04 Village streetscape 2,953,677 1,535,300 2,996,797 Crossroads streetscape Removed a $1.3M item; developer responsible for streetscape in that area Neighborhood Road Reconstruction - Overhaul residential streets Neighborhood Bridge Reconstruction Overhaul residential bridges Fire Breathing Apparatus 24,470 30,000 30,000 - Replacement of cylinders/compressor Parking Equipment Replacement - - 800 Radio Equipment Replacement of existing radios for PW, F'ire, PD Heavy Duty Tire Changer (22 yrs old) 17,500 GPS for Buses 31,169 375,000 362,500 Police Copier 10,489 New copier for Comm Dev 17,000 Replace Buses 31,758 2,398,942 - Replacement Paid for by Capital Fund 3,243,831 3,805,300 7,660,331 2,314,500 Other Improvements I-70 Noise 115,491 250,000 592,209 250,000 TOV Strategic Planning 57,527 50,000 168,282 150,000 Including Village, LionsHead, West Vail, Strategic/Community Planning LH Parking Structure RFP Process 42,500 Timber Ridge Legal/Zoning 25,000 Continue implementation of drainage master plan,'06 w/Cap Streets Timber Ridge Loan 700,000 Timber Ridge Debt Service Guarantee 925,000 925,000 Design costs to implement Town improvements: Construction costs for LH Lionshead Improvements 115,367 200,695 Redevelopment will be funded from developer contributions, TIF ik other sources Drainage Improvements 11,128 Intermodal Site - - Federal funding included in revenue Total Other Improvements 999,513 1,225,000 1,953,886 400,000 Discretionary Projects Bio-Mass Study 50,000 -17- TOWN OF VAIL 2006 BUDGET SUMMARY OF REVENUE, EXPENDITURES, AND CHANGES IN FUND BALANCE CAPITAL PROJECTS FUND Frontage Road -Ford Park Municipal Bldg - HVAC Renovation Creekside Housing Improvements LH Information Center Renovation Total Discretionary Projects 2006 2006 2007 2005 Original Amended Proposed Actual Budget Budget Budget Project Information - - - 50,000 Total Expenditures 6,991,209 8,109,240 16,173,919 7,622,300 W. Vail Station Bonds - 2,000,000 Certificates of Participation (GOP's) 25 year term Main Vail Renovations Bonds - (GOP's) 15 year term W. Vail Station Debt Service - (57,213) Main Vail Renovations Debt Service - Transfer for Debt Service (2,422,154) (2,236,200) (2,236,200) (2,322,497) To fund debt service on all Town bonds Transfer From General Fund 2,000,000 Transfer to General Fund (29,300) Total Financing (2,451,454) (2,236,200) (236,200) (379,710) Revenue Over (Under) Expenditures 1,358,289 (2,857,200) (5,721,847) (1,462,710) Beginning Fund Balance 7,150,902 4,847,985 9,209,191 3,487,344 Ending Fund Balance $ 8,509,191 $ 1,990,785 $ 3,487,344 $ .2,024,634 -t8- TOWN OF VAIL 2007 BUDGET SUMMARY OF REVENUE, EXPENDITURES, AND CHANGES IN FUND BALANCE REAL ESTATE TRANSFER TAX FUND 2006 2006 2007 2005 Original Amended Proposed Actual Budget Budget Budget Project Information REVENUE Real Estate Transfer Tax $ 6,206,058 $ 6,175,000 6,175,000 $ 8,179,952 Federal Grant 28,000 - Grant award for TimberRidge-Buffehr Crk road seperation Golf Course Lease 109,462 119,435 119,435 123,018 Lottery Revenue 21,987 20,000 20,000 20,000 Project Reimbursements 199,769 202,034 150,000 VRD ADA compliance &Greenplay, Cascade Village, Holy Cross Earnings on Investments and Other 255,235 56,000 56,500 57,000 Transfer from GF 38,197 9,378 For Manhole cover sales profits in 2005 Recreation Amenity Fees 370,157 125,000 125,000 125,000 Total Revenue 7,228,865 6,495,435 6,707,347 8,654,970 EXPENDITURES RETT Collection Costs 304,393 308,750 308,750 408,998 Collection fee remitted to the General Fund Park, Path & Landscape Maintenance 920,195 1,213,768 1,213,768 1,260,802 Ongoing path, park and open space maintenance, project mgr Rec. Path Capital Maint 63,628 140,000 112,000 216,300 Capital maintenance of the town's rec. path system Tree Maintenance 47,349 33,000 72,651 87,000 Tree health within the town; spraying, removing, new trees Forest Health Management 50,000 250,000 342,188 250,000 Pine beetle mitigation in conjunction w! forest service VRD Agreements !Recreation Master Planning 60,000 50,000 Recreation master planning with VRD contract with Greenplay Street Furniture Replacement 6,539 25,000 55,491 20,000 Additions and replacement of street furniture ADA Compliance w/VRD 69,626 50,000 120,000 50,000 Shared costs with VRD -recreational facilities Katsos Ranch Bike Path 500,000 500,000 750,000 Resurface rec path from Sunburst to E. Vail Cascade Skier Bridge 3,793 60,000 - Adjustment to skier bridge reconstruction per June 6th Council Meeting Cascade Bike Path 331,016 313,984 - Widen recreation path from W. Haven to tennis courts Widening of W.Haven Dr. Ped Bridge 94,620 - Timber Ridge-Buffehr Creek Rd separation - 675,000 From TimberRidge to Roost Lionshead to Meadow Bridge - - Streamwalk DA & Safety improvements - - Trailhead Development 32,163 20,000 24,392 21,000 Improve trailheads Village Streetscape Design & Implement 2,525,000 1,250,000 1,250,000 - Meadow Drive 7,973 1,025,000 1,042,027 920,000 Construct widened 6' shoulders along all frontage roads; first priority is Blue Frontage Road Bike LaneslTrails 66,716 - - Cow Chute to East Vail Dobson Roof Replacement Raw Water project 540 27,557 Convert parks from treated water to raw water Stream Tract Incursion Survey 119 34,881 Pirate Ship Park 47,900 Big Horn Park -Per Safety plan 6,003 218,997 Fund Path from Red Sandstone Pedestiran Brdg to Roundabout Red Sandstone Park -Per Safety plan 58,000 Stephens Park Safety Improvements Ellefson Park Safey Improvements Retrofit Park Restrooms - 3 seasons 200,000 200,000 Park !Playground Capital Maintenance 112,831 95,000 100,000 To maintain playgrounds, restrooms, etc. Public Art 19,474 95,000 261,578 186,644 Adjusted to approx. 4°l0 of RETT -PENDING APPROVAL Art in Public Places 55,127 58,732 58,732 60,356 AIPP salary and operating expenses related to RETT -19- Bear Proof Containers Alpine Garden Support Black Gore Creek Sand Mitigation Seibert Circle Donovan Park White Water Park Gore Creek Promenade Bridge Skate Park Vail Memorial Park Booth Creek Playground Ford Park Master Plan -Improvements Lionshead park Landscape Medians Public Restrooms Environmental Sustainability Turf Topdresser Open Space Land Acquisition Capital Paid for by RETT Funds: Discretionary Projects Greenhouse Booth Creek Park Redevelopment Dobson Ice Arena Tennis Centerlmprovements Golf Course & Clubhouse Improvements Nature Center Total Discretionary Projects Total Expenditures Revenue Over (Under) Expenditures Beginning Fund Balance Ending'Fund. Balance TOWN OF VAIL 2007 BUDGET SUMMARY OF R EVENUE, EXPENDITURES, AND CHANGES IN FUND BALANCE REAL ESTATE TRANSFER TAX FUND 2006 2006 2007 2005 Original Amended Proposed Actual Budget Budget Budget _ Project Information 19,500 180,000 In TOV parks & trailheads; '07 bring our cans into compliance 122,000 80,000 80,000 54,080 06 Interpretive stations/payers 100, 000 100, 000 100, 000 100, 000 548,294 75,000 620,706 639 49,050 118,317 118,317 Funds 3rd hole at Whitewater Park 125,000 295,000 300,000 400,000 Per councils request 10/19/04 50,000 50,000 Part of council's contributions 422,000 100,000 139,000 570,000 250,000 12,000 6 553 300,000 793,447 5,447,871 6,317,587 8,992,636 6,941,180 Resulting from Recreation Master plan (parking, recreation buildings); Left entry lane; Re-master Ford Park b/c of parking potential Crossroads construction a factor; may be in 07/08 W. Meadow Drive & Vail Road (linked to W. Vail Fire Stn) Wind power; Green programs; Recycling, etc PENDING APPROVAL 100,000 New and expanded greenhouse Reconstruct playground 56,000 483,750 639,750 5,447,871 6,317,567 8,992,638 7,580,930 1,780,994 177,868 (2,285,289) 1,074,040 5,682,551 4,689,040 7,483,505 5,198,216 $ 7,463,545 $ 4,888,908 5,198,216 $ 6,272,256 -20- TOWN OF VAIL 2007 BUDGET PROPOSAL SUMMARY OF REVENUE, EXPENDITURES AND CHANGES IN FUND BALANCE VAiL MARKETING FUND 2006 2006 2007 2005 Original Amended Proposed Actual Budget Budget Budget Revenue Business Licenses $ 302,854 $ 304,000 $ 304,000 $ 304,000 Earnings on Investments 2,410 - - - Total Revenue 305,264 304,000 304,000 304,000 Expenditures Commission on Special Events 279,500 280,000 280,000 280,000 Collection Fee -General Fund 15,143 15,200 15,200 15,200 Total Expenditures 294,643 295,200 295,200 295,200 Revenue Over (Under) Expenditures 10,621 8,800 8,800 8,800 Beginning Fund Balance 25,590 32,030 36,211 45,011 Ending Fund Balance $ 36,211 $ 40,830 $ 45,011 $ 53,811 DEBT SERVICE FUND 2006 2006 2007 2005 Original Amended Proposed Actual Budget Budget Budget Revenue Transfer from Capital Projects Fund $ 2,422,154 $ 2,236,200 $ 2,236,200 $ 2,322,497 Earnings on Investments and Other 17,527 - - - Total Revenue 2,439,681 2,236,200 2,236,200 2,322,497 Expenditures Principal 1,695,000 1,755,000 1,755,000 1,810,000 Interest Expense 620,299 562,324 562,324 512,099 Fiscal Agent Fees 1,098 2,500 2,500 2,500 Total Expenditures 2,316,397 2,319,824 2,319,824 2,324,599 Revenue Over (Under) Expenditures 123,284 (83,624) (83,624) (2,102) Beginning Fund Balance 182,238 286,593 305,522 221,898 Ending Fund Balance $ 305,522 $ 202,969 $ 221,898 $ 219,796 -21- TOWN OF VAIL 2007 BUDGET PROPOSAL SUMMARY OF REVENUE, EXPENDITURES AND CHANGES IN FUND BALANCE HEAVY EQUIPMENT FUND 2006 2006 2007 Revenue Town of Vail Interagency Charge Insurance Reimbursements & Other Earnings on Investments Equipment Sates and Trade-ins Total Revenue Expenditures Salaries & Benefits Operating, Maintenance & Contracts Capital Outlay Total Expenditures Revenue Over (Under) Expenditures Beginning Fund Balance Ending Fund Balance 2005 Original Amended Proposed Actual Budget Budget Budget 2,240,908 2,452,651 2,484,829 2,553,141 63,834 37,900 37,900 37,900 21,286 8,000 8,000 8,000 93,612 49,330 49,336 49,330 2,419,640 2,547,881 2,580,059 2,648,371 765,702 878,289. 878,289 926,331 917,740 937,100 994,868 987,873 557, 593 384,171 384,171 671, 300 2,241,035 2,199,560 2,257,328 2,585,504 178,605 348,321 322,731 62,867 663,856 802,191. 842,461 1,165,192 $ 842,461 $ 1,150,512 $ 1,165,192 $ 1,228,059 HEALTH INSURANCE FUND 2006 2006 2007 2005 Original Amended Proposed Actual Budget Budget Budget Revenue Town of Vail Interagency Charge -Premiums 1,859;046 1;970,800 1,970,800 2,242,900 Employee Contributions 243,675 248,600 248,600 241,600, Insurer Proceeds 16,108 - - 5,000 Earnings on Investments 25,745 13,500 13,500 27,200 Total Revenue 2,144,574 2,232,900 2,232,900 2,516,700 Expenditures Health Inusrance Premiums 255,276 279,000 279,000 299,400 Claims Paid 1,806,867 1,864,300 1,864,300 2,143,800 Short-term Disability. Pay 57,144 56,000 56,000 .56,000 Professional Fees 26,750 33,600 33,600 17,500 Total Expenditures 2,146,037 2,232,900 2,232,900 2,516,700 Revenue Over (Under) Expenditures (1,463) - - - Beginning Fund Balance 907,317 907,317 905,854 905,854 Ending Fund Balance 905,854 907,317 905,854 905,854 -22- TOWN OF VAIL 2006 BUDGET PROPOSAL SUMMARY OF REVENUE, EXPENDITURES, AND CHANGES IN FUND BALANCE DISPATCH SERVICES FUND 2006 2006 2007 2005 Original Amended Proposed Actual Budget Budget Budget Revenue E911 Board Revenue 345,660 473,074 488,465 563,654 Interagency Charges 819,504 864,376 864,376 901,858 Tovrn of Vail Interagency Charge 559,034 525,994 525,994 512,427 Earnings on Investments 8,582 - - - E911 BOARD Capital Grant - - - - Project Reimbursement 21,870 - 24,750 - Other 23,040 9,186 Transfer from General Fund 19,500 - - Total Revenue 1,797,190 1,863,444 1,912,771 1,977,939 Expenditures Salaries & Benefits 1,349,772 1,418,874 1,428,060 1,470,322 Operating, Maintenance & Contracts 389,908 367,398 392,148 471,070 Capital Outlay - 12,250 27,641 50,000 Total Expenditures 1,739,680 1,798,522 1,847,849 1,991,392 Revenue Over (Under) Expenditures 57 510 64,922 64,922 (13,453) Transfer to Capital Projects Fund (17,020) - - - Beginning Fund Balance 207,114 233,175 247,604 312,526 Ending Fund Balance 247,604 298,097 312,526 299,073 -23- ORDINANCE N0.28 SERIES OF 2006 ANNUAL APPROPRIATION ORDINANCE: ADOPTING A BUDGET AND FINANCIAL PLAN AND MAKING APPROPRIATIONS TO PAY THE COSTS, EXPENSES, AND LIABILITIES OF THE TOWN OF VAIL, COLORADO, FOR ITS FISCAL YEAR JANUARY 1, 2007 THROUGH DECEMBER 31, 2007 WHEREAS, in accordance with Article IX of the Charter of the Town of Vail, Colorado, the Town Manager prepared and submitted to the Town Council a proposed long range capita! program for the Town and a proposed budget and financial plan for all Town funds and activities for the fiscal year; and WHEREAS, it is necessary for the Town Council to adopt a budget and financial plan for the 2007 fiscal year, to make appropriations for the amounts specified in the budget; and NOW, THEREFORE, be it ordained by the Town Council of the Town of Vail, Colorado, that: 1. The procedures prescribed in Article IX of the Charter of the Town of Vail, Colorado, for the enactment hereof, have been fulfilled. 2. Pursuant to Article IX of the Charter, the Town Council hereby makes the following annual appropriations for the Town of Vail, Colorado, for its fiscal year beginning on the first day of January, 2007, and ending on the 31St day of December, 2007; FUND AMOUNT General Fund 26,533,916 Capital Projects Fund 7,622,300 Rea! Estate Transfer Tax Fund 7,580,930 Vail Marketing Fund 295,200 Debt Service Fund 2,324,599 Heavy Equipment Fund 2,585,504 Health Insurance Fund 2,516,700 Dis atch Services Fund 1,991,392 Total 51,450,541 3. The Town Council hereby adopts the full and complete Budget and Financial Plan for the 2007 fiscal year for the Town of Vail, Colorado, which are incorporated by Ordinance No. 28, Series of 2006 reference herein and made part hereof, and .copies of said public records shall be made available to the public in the Municipal Building of the Town. This Ordinance shall take effect five (5) days after publication following the final passage hereof. 4. If any part, section, subsection, sentence, clause or phrase of this ordinance is for any reason held to be invalid, such decision shall not affect the validity of the 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 of the fact that any one or more parts, sections, subsections, sentences, clauses or phrases be declared invalid. 5. The Town Council hereby finds, determines, and declares that this ordinance is necessary and proper for the health, safety, and welfare of the Town of Vail and the inhabitants thereof. 6. The repeal or the repeal and reenactment of any provision of the Municipal Code of the 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 virtue of the provision repealed or repealed and reenacted. The repeal of any provision hereby shall not revive any provision or any ordinance previously repealed or superseded unless expressly stated herein. 7. All 6yiaws, orders, resolutions, and ordinances, or parts thereof, inconsistent herewith are repeated to the extent only of such inconsistency. This repealer shall not be construed to revise any bylaw, order, resolution, or ordinance, or part thereof, theretofore repealed. INTRODUCED, READ ON FIRST READING, APPROVED AND ORDERED PUBLISHED ONCE IN FULL, this 21st day of November, 2006. A public hearing shall be held hereon on the 5th day of December, 2006, at 6:00 pm at the regular meeting of the Town Council of the Town of Vail, Colorado, in the Municipal Building of the Town. Rod Slifer, Mayor ATTEST: Lorelei Donaldson, Town Clerk Ordinance No. 28, Series of 2006 TOWN OF VAIL COMPENSATION AND BENEFITS REVIEW NOVEMBER 21, 2006 • SUMMARY • COMPENSATION PRINCIPLES • MARKET INCREASE COMPARISIONS • REGRESSION CHARTS SUMMARY Base Compensation: The TOV targets to be a 60 percentile payer or, simply stated, to be a better than average payer in our chosen market. The town now has slipped below the average actual practice line (see all municipal average chart). This has occurred because over the last 4 years, salary increase budgets have fallen below our municipal market average (see market increase comparisons). The requested 5% budget will prevent the organization from falling farther behind, but will not improve our overall market position. Additionally, the range maximums comparison line has fallen to last (see range maximums chart). Future market adjustments will be required to become a 60 percentile payer. In particular, most senior staff positions are 10% market deficient. Benefit Cost: TOV total benefit cost for full time and seasonal is forecast to run 37% of payroll in 2007 and full time cost may slightly exceed 40%. The largest component of this cost is health care which has increased 10% over last year. This increase has been passed through to employees who will see 10% increases in their monthly 2007 co-premiums. The town's cost sharing burden of the health care dollar is 30% employee contribution and 70% town contribution. In other words, for every health care dollar spent, employees pay 30 cents and the town pays 70 cents. From a competitive perspective, a number of governmental and special districts (Eagle County, Avon, Snowmass, and Ambulance District) shift no or very little cost to employees and absorb full health care cost as a retention/recruitment strategy. Combined with our base compensation position, shifting more cost to employees at this time must be carefully weighed in light of the tightening labor market. Longer term, TOV's present compensation, benefit, and housing strategies will. need to be reviewed in order to maintain a competitive position in the municipal marketplace. COMPENSATION PRINCIPLES PAY PHILOSOPHY: • Be a competitive payer in our chosen markets • Establish pay ranges based on those markets • Compensate employees based on performance • Position jobs in range based on the TOV internal equity point factor committee process TARGET MARKETS: • Non-exempt Tracks the Vail Valley regional market • Exempt Tracks the resort market • Emergency Services Tracks the Denver front range (Sworn non-exempt Officers) COMPENSATION BUDGET • The compensation budget is established annually by the Town Manager and approved by the Council • The compensation budget may be changed at any time based on the best interests of the TOV MARKET INCREASE COMPARISONS Percentage of payroll increase comparisons for resort area market. Forecast 2003, 2004 2005 2006 2007 ASPEN 4% 4% 4% 5% 5% AVON 0% 5.5% 4% 5% 8% (3+5) BRECKENRIDGE 5% 3% 4% 4.5% 4.5% EAGLE COUNTY 3% 3% 4% 5-10% N/A PITKIN COUNTY 4% 4% 4% 4% 4% STEAMBOAT 5% 4°l0 4% 5% 5% SUMMIT COUNTY 4% 3.2% 6% 5% 5% AVERAGB 3.5% 3.8% 4:3°/a 5;2% 5.25.°/ VAIL 2.5% 3.25% 4% 4% 5% Summary: Town of Vail has been deficient to the market average since 2003. To compete in the resort municipal market and to support our pay philosophy, TOV needs to match the market average over the long term. 120000 100000 80000 ~ 60000 c Q 40000 20000 TOWN OF VAIL All Munis Avg. Base Practice vs. TOV Base Practice October, 2006 Points 0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 TOWN OF VAIL 140000 120000 100000 80000 c a 60000 40000 20000 Range Maximums Comparison October, 2006 3reckenridge ;ty :ty -oat --fit--Summit Cty + ° Vail 0 0 200 .400 600 800 1000 1200 Points -~; MEMORANDUM T0: Vail Town Council FROM: Community Development Department DATE: November 21, 2006 SUBJECT: First Reading of Ordinance No. 30, Series of 2006, an ordinance establishing Special Development District No. 40, The Willows, and setting forth details in regard thereto. , Applicant: The Willows Condominium Association, represented by Triumph Development, LLC Planner: Elisabeth Reed I. DESCRIPTION OF THE REQUEST The applicant, The Wiilows Condominium Association, represented by Triumph Development, LLC, is requesting a first reading of Ordinance No. 30, Series of 2006, an ordinance establishing Special Development District No. 40, The Willows, and setting forth details in regard thereto. The purpose of Ordinance No. 30, Series of 2006, is to facilitate the redevelopment of The Willows Condominiums, located at 74 Willow Road. The staff and applicant are requesting that the Town Council listen to a presentation on the proposed ordinance and approve Ordinance No. 30, Series of 2006, upon first reading. II. BACKGROUND On November 13, 2006, the Town of Vail Planning and Environmental Commission held a public hearing on a request to establish Special Development District No. 40, The Willows, The applicant received approval for the establishment of a new special development district with the following deviations: • A deviation from the density requirements including: 0 18 dwelling units (not including EHU) proposed vs. 12 dwelling units allowed by underlying zoning; 0 32,240 square feet of Gross Residential Floor Area (GRFA) proposed vs. 16,069 square feet of GRFA allowed by underlying zoning. • 14,110 square feet (66.7%) of site coverage proposed vs. 11,629 square feet (55% of site) of site coverage allowed by underlying zoning; and • Deviations from the front, side and rear setbacks. Upon consideration of the request, the Commission voted 4-1-0 (Pierce opposed) to 1 ;_~. forward a recommendation of approval of the request to the Vail Town Council. The Commission's recommendation of approva{ includes five (5} conditions, as outlined in Section 4 of Ordinance No. 5, Series of 2006. The Commission's recommendation of approval includes the following findings: "That the proposal to establish Special Development District No. 40, The Willows, complies with the nine design criteria outlined in Section 12-9A-8 of the Vail Town Code. Furthermore, the applicant has demonstrated to the satisfaction of the Commission, based upon the testimony and evidence presented during the public hearing, that any adverse effects of the requested deviations from the development standards of the underlying zoning are outweighed by the public benefits provided. Lastly, the Commission finds that the request is consistent with the development goals and objectives of the Town. With regard to proposed building setbacks, That: a. Proposed building setbacks provide necessary separation between buildings and riparian areas, geologically sensitive areas and other environmentally sensitive areas. b. Proposed building setbacks comply with applicable elements of the Vail Village Urban Design Guide Plan and Design Considerations. c. Proposed building setbacks will provide adequate availability of light, air and open space. d. Proposed building setbacks will provide a compatible relationship with buildings and uses on adjacent properties. e. Proposed building setbacks will result in creative .design solutions or other public benefits that could not otherwise be achieved by conformance with prescribed setback standards. With regard to proposed Gross Residential Floor Area, that: a. The proposed gross residential floor area of 200% of the allowable, and the additional six dwelling units over the allowable, or 150% of the allowable number of units in the High Density Multiple Family zone district, are in conformance with applicable elements of the Vail Comprehensive Plan. With regard to proposed site coverage, that: a. Though the proposed site coverage of 67% of the site exceeds that which is allowed within .the High Density Multiple Family zone district, the proposed above grade, or perceived, site coverage of 50% of the site area is in conformance with the 55% site coverage allowance within the High Density Multiple Family zone district and is in conformance with the applicable elements of the Vail Comprehensive Plan. That the development is in compliance with the purposes of the High Density Multiple Family zone district, that the proposal is consistent with applicable elements of the Vail Village Master Plan, the Vail Land Use Plan, the Vail Streetscape Master Plan, 2 F pT 1 (. and the Vail Village Urban Design Guide Plan and that the proposal does not otherwise have a significant negative effect on the character of the neighborhood, and that the proposal substantially complies with other applicable elements of the Vail Comprehensive Plan." ZONING ANALYSIS Staff has performed a zoning analysis of The Willows redevelopment proposal which can be used for comparison purposes. The following is the zoning analysis of the proposal the PEC recommended approval of with conditions on November 13, 2006. The deviations to the prescribed development standards are shown in bold text in the table below. Development Standard Allowed Existing Proposed Lot Area: 10,000 sq. ft.(min.) 0.4854 acres (21,144 sq. ft.) no change Setbacks: Front: 20 feet 8 feet 11' (above grd.) Side: 20 feet 4 feet 7.5' (above grd.) Rear: 20 feet 5.5 feet 6.2' (above grd.) Bldg. Height: 45 ft. flat/mansard 48 feet 48 feet 48 ft. sloping Density: 12 dwelling units 28 dwelling units 9 Dwelling Units (+5 Lock offs) 9 Timeshare Units 1 EHU GRFA: 16,069 sq. ft. 18,607 sq. ft. 32,240 sq. ft. (76% of site area) (115% of allowable GRFA) (200% of allowable GRFA) Site Cvge: 11,629 sq. ft. (55%) 12,638 sq. ft. (~60%) 14,110 sq. ft. (~67%) Land. Area: 6,343 sq: ft. (30%) 2,848 sq. ft. (~13%) 8,540 sq. ft. (40%) Parking: FFU = 0.7 sp/unit 42 spaces 29 spaces DU = 1.4 sp/unit EHU = 1.4 sp/unit 20.3 total spaces req'd IV DISCUSSION ITEMS Staff believes there are several items regarding the adoption of Ordinance 30, Series of 2006, which require a discussion with the Town Council in order to gain feedback. Those items are as follows: 3 ~~ a • Does the Town Council believe the employee housing requirement asked of the developer by the Planning and Environmental Commission is appropriate considering recently assessed employee housing requirements of other proposals to the Town of Vail? The applicant originally proposed to provide six Employee Housing beds, one in the form of an onsite Employee Housing Unit, and five (5) others via a buy down or eventual pay-in-lieu program. Because four fewer employees will be generated by the proposed development than the existing Willows, this proposal was not the result of an employee housing requirement, but was a part of the developer's public benefit program. Based on employee generation rates historically used by the Town, which are based on net new employees generated, the developer would be under no obligation to provide any employee housing units or beds. However, the Planning and Environmental Commission generally believed that the applicant's proposal fora public benefit of six employee beds was not sufficient. Does the Town Council have any comments and feedback regarding the remaining public benefits proposed to the Town, including streetscape work and the provision of public art? As a part of the public benefit proposal, the applicant is proposing to complete the streetscape along Willow Road from Vail Road to the intersection adjacent to Checkpoint Charlie with an eight foot (8') pedestrian paver treatment and a new twelve foot (12') asphalt automobile lane. The applicant is also proposing to allocate $70K to the provision of public art, whether on or off site, which specifics will be determined together with the applicant and the Art in Public Places Board. • Any other comments or suggestions on Ordinance 30, Series of 2006? V. STAFF RECOMMENDATION The Community Development Department recommends that the Vail Town Council approves Ordinance No. 30, Series of 2006. VI. ATTACHMENTS A. Ordinance 30, Series of 2006 B. Copy of the Staff Memorandum to the Planning and Environmental Commission dated November 13, 2006 and the proposed plans for redevelopment dated November 6, 2006. C. Comparison of recently approved developments/EHU requirements 4 TOWN COUNCIL Attachment A ,. ORDINANCE NO. 30 Series of 2006 AN ORDINANCE ESTABLISHING SPECIAL DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT N0.40,THE WILLOWS, PURSUANT TO ARTICLE A, SPECIAL DEVELOPMENT (SDD) DISTRICT, CHAPTER 9, TITLE 12, ZONING TITLE, TOWN CODE OF VAIL, AND SETTING FORTH DETAILS IN REGARD THERETO. WHEREAS, Title 12, Zoning Title, Chapter 9, Article A, Special Development(SDD)bistrict, Town Code of Vail establishes a procedure for establishing special development districts; and WHEREAS, The Willows Condominium Association and Triumph Development, LLC, have submitted an application to the Town of Vail Community Development Department to establish Special Development District No. 40, The Willows, to facilitate the redevelopment of an existing residential development; and WHEREAS, the Planning and Environmental Commission of the Town of Vail held a public hearing on November 13, 2006, on the application to establish Special Development District No. 40, The Willows, in accordance with the provisions of the Town Code of Vail; and WHEREAS, upon due consideration, the Planning and Environmental Commission of the Town of Vail found that the request complies with the design criteria prescribed in the Title 12, Zoning Regulations, Vail Town Code, and furthers the development objectives of the Town of Vail; and WHEREAS, the Planning and Environmental Commission of the Town of Vail has forwarded a recommendation of approval with conditions by a vote of 4-1-0 of this request to establish Special Development District No. 40, The Willows, to the Vail Town Council; and WHEREAS, the Vail Town Council finds that the request to establish Special Development District No. 40, The Willows, complies with the design criteria prescribed in the Title 12, Zoning Title, Town Code of Vail; and provides a harmonious, convenient, workable relationship among land uses consistent with municipal development objectives; and W HEREAS, the Vail Town Council considers it in the interest of the public health, safety, and welfare to adopt Ordinance No. 30, Series of 2006, and establish a new special development district in the Town of Vail. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE TOWN COUNCIL OF THE TOWN OF VAIL, COLORADO, THAT: Section 1. District Established Special Development District No. 40, The Willows, is established for development on a parcel of land, legally described as Lot 8, Block 6, Vail Village 1St Filing, which comprises a total of 21,144 square feet (.4854 acres) in the Vail Village area of the Town of Vail. Said parcel may be referred to as "SDD No. 40". Special Development District No. 40 shall be Ordinance No. 30, Series 2006 ~ __ , reflected as such on the Official Zoning Map of the Town of Vail. The underlying zoning for Special Development District No. 40, The Willows, shall be High Density Multiple Family {HDMF) District. Section 2. Special Development District No. 40, The Willows, Approved Development Ptan An approved development plan is the principal document in guiding the development, uses and activities of a special development district. The Vail Town Council finds that the Approved Development Plan for Special Development District No. 40, The Willows, complies with each of the requirements set forth in Sections 12-9A-5 and 12-9A-6 of the Town Code of Vail. The Approved Development Plan for Special Development District No. 40, The Willows, shall be comprised of materials submitted in accordance with Section 12-9A-5 of the Town Code of Vail and those plans prepared by Resort Design Associates, entitled "The Willows", dated November 6, 2006, and stamped approved November 13, 2006. Section 3. Development Standards In conjunction with the Approved Development Plan described in Section 2 herein, the following development standards are hereby approved by the Vail Town Council. These standards are incorporated in the Approved Development Plan to protect the integrity of the development of Special Development District No. 40, The Willows. The development standards for Special Development District No. 40, The W illows, are described below: A. Permitted, Conditional, and Accessory Uses: The permitted, conditional, and accessory uses allowed in Special Development District No. 40, The Willows, shall be those uses listed in Title 12, Chapter 6, Article H, High Density Multiple Family zone district, Town Code of Vail, as may be amended from time to time. B. Lot Area: The minimum lot area for Special Development District No. 40, the Willows, shall be 21,144 square feet (.4854 acres). C. Setbacks: The minimum setbacks for Special Development District No. 40, The Willows, shall be as indicated on The Willows Approved Development Plan, described in Section 2 herein. D. Height: The maximum allowable building height for Special Development District No. 40, The Willows shall be forty eight feet (48') and as indicated on The Willows Approved Development Plan, described in Section 2 herein. E. Density Control: The maximum allowable Gross Residential Floor Area (GRFA) for Special Development District No. 40, The Willows, shall be 32,240 square feet and the maximum allowable density shall be nine (9) dwelling units, nine (9) timeshare units, one (1) onsite Employee Housing Unit, with potential for five (5) lock-off units, as indicated on The Willows Approved Development Plan, described in Section 2 herein. F. Site Coverage: The maximum allowable site coverage shall be sixty six and seven tenths percent (66.7%) or 14,110 square feet of the total iot area, and as indicated on The Willows Approved Development Plan, described in Ordinance No. 30, Series 2006 2 Section 2 herein. G. Landscaping and Site Development: At least forty and three tenths percent (40.3%) of the total site shall be landscaped. The minimum width and length of any area qualifying as landscaping shall be fifteen (15) feet with a minimum area of not less than three hundred (300) square feet. The landscaping and site development shall be as indicated on The Willows Approved Development Plan, described in Section 2 herein. H. Parking and Loading: Off street parking and loading shall be provided in accordance with title 12-10 of the Vail Town Code. At least seventy five percent (75%) of the required parking shall be located within the main building or buildings and hidden from public view or shall be completely hidden from public view from adjoining properties within a landscaped berm. The minimum number of loading and delivery bays shall be one (1) as indicated on The Willows Approved Development Plan, described in Section 2 herein. Section 4. Conditions. of Approval The following conditions of approval shall become part of the Town's approval of the establishment of Special Development District No. 40, The Willows: The Developer shall address the following conditions of approval prior to appearing before the Vail Town Council for second reading of an adopting ordinance for the establishment of Special Development District No. 40, The Willows: 1. The Developer shall prepare a written agreement, for Town Council review and approval, outlining the responsibilities and requirements of the stated public benefits, as indicated within this memorandum. This agreement shall include, but not be limited to, the provision of one Employee Housing Unit onsite, which shall be allocated for sole use by The Willows Condominium Association; the provision of eleven (11) employee beds offsite, provided through the "buy down program"and averaging five hundred (500) square feet per bed in units with at least two bedrooms; all streetscape improvements along Willow Road, including an eight foot (S) paver sidewalk for pedestrians and a twelve foot (12) wide right- of-way lane; and details for $70K of public art, which location shall be determined by the applicant and reviewed with the Art in Public Places Board. The Developer shall address the following conditions of approval prior to submitting a building permit application (a grading permibexcavation permit shall constitute a building permit): 1. The Developer shall comply with all outstanding tlnal comments of the Town of Vail Public Works Department outlined in the attached memorandum dated October 20, 2006. 2. The Developer shall ensure that the proposed redevelopment plans comply with all requirements of the Town of Vail Fire Department. The Developer shall address the following conditions of approval prior to requesting a temporary certificate of occupancy or a final certificate of occupancy: Ordinance No. 30, Series 2006 3 1. The Developer shall commence initial construction of the Willows improvements within three years from the time of its final approval at second reading of the ordinance establishing Special Development District No. 40, and continue diligently toward the completion of the project. If the developer does not begin and diligently work toward the completion of the special development district or any stage of the special development district within the time limits imposed, the approval of said special development district shall be void. The Planning and Environmental Commission and Town Council shall review the special development district upon submittal of an application to reestablish the special development district following the procedures outlined in Section 12-9A-4, Vail Town Code. 2. The Developer shall provide one deed-restricted housing unit onsite that complies with the Town of Vail Employee Housing requirements (Chapter 12-13), and is allocated for sole use by The Willows Condominium Association; and secure eleven (11) additional beds within the Town of Vail through the buy down program, averaging five hundred (500) square feet per bed in units with at least two bedrooms, as stated in the written agreement to be drafted for the passage of Special Development District No. 40. Section 5. If any part, section, subsection, sentence, clause or phrase of this ordinance is for any reason held to be invalid, such decision shall not effect the validity of the remaining portions of this ordinance; and the Vail Town Council hereby declares it would have passed this ordinance, and each part, section, subsection, sentence, clause or phrase thereof, regardless of the fact that any one or more parts, sections, subsections, sentences, clauses or phrases be declared invalid. Section 6. The Vail Town Council hereby finds, determines and declares that this ordinance is necessary and proper for the health, safety and welfare of the Town of Vail and the inhabitants thereof. The Council's finding, determination and declaration is based upon the review of the criteria prescribed by the Town Code of Vail and the evidence and testimony presented in consideration of this ordinance. Section 7. The amendment of any provision of the Town Code 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 proceeding as commenced under or by virtue of the provision amended. The amendment of any provision hereby shall not revive any provision or any ordinance previously repealed or superseded unless expressly stated herein. Section 8. All bylaws, orders, resolutions and ordinances, or parts thereof, inconsistent herewith are repealed to the extent only of such inconsistency. This repealer shall not be construed to revise any bylaw, order, resolution or ordinance, or part thereof, theretofore repealed. INTRODUCED, READ ON FIRST READING, APPROVED, AND ORDERED PUBLISHED ONCE IN FULL ON FIRST READING this 21St da~ of November, 2006 and a public hearing for second reading of this Ordinance set for the 5t day of December, 2006, at Ordinance No. 30, Series 2006 4 6:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers of the Vail Municipal Building, Vail, Colorado. ATTEST: Rodney E. Slifer, Mayor Lorelei Donaldson, Town Clerk Ordinance No. 30, Series 2006rJ TOWN COUNCIL Attachment B ' MEMORANDUM TO: Planning and Environmental Commission FROM: Department of Community Development DATE: November 13, 2006 SUBJECT: A request for recommendation to the Vail Town Council of a proposal to establish Special Development District No. 40, pursuant to Article 12-9(A), Special Development Districts, Vail Town Code, to allow for the redevelopment of The Willows Condominiums located at 74 Willow Road/Lot 8 Block 6, Vail Village Filing 1St Filing, and setting forth details in regard thereto (PEC06-0061). Applicant: The Willows Condominium Association, Inc., represented by Triumph Development, LLC Planner: Elisabeth Reed I. SUMMARY The applicant, The Willows Condominium Association, Inc., represented by Triumph Development, LLC, is requesting a recommendation from the Planning and Environmental Commission to the Vail Town Council regarding a proposal to establish Special Development District No. 40, The Willows, pursuant to Article 12-9(A), Special Development Districts, Vail Town Code, to allow for the redevelopment of The Willows Condominiums, located at 74 Willow Road/Lot 8, Block 6, Vail Village Filing 1St Filing. Upon review of the applicable elements of the Town's planning documents and. adopted criteria for review, the Community Development Department recommends that the Planning and Environmental Commission forwards a recommendation of approval, with conditions of the applicant's request to establish Special Development District (SDD) No. 40, The Willows, to the Vail Town Council. A complete summary of the Staff's review is provided in Section VII of this memorandum. II. DESCRIPTION OF THE REQUEST The applicant, The Willows Condominium Association, represented by Triumph Development, LLC, met with the Planning and Environmental Commission on September 25, 2006 for a worksession to present a proposed redevelopment application and two requests: one for the establishment of a new special development district intended to facilitate the redevelopment of The Willows Condominiums, and the second for review of a conditional use permit, to allow for the "construction of timeshare estate units and timeshare license units", located at 74 Willow Road/Lot 8, Block 6, Vail Village 1st Filing. Since that time, the applicant has submitted an additional application for review by the PEC of a request to construct a Type III Employee Housing Unit as a Conditional Use upon the property. 1 The key elements of the proposal to create Special Development District No. 40 are as follows: • Demolition of existing structure and construction of a new structure; • Nine (9) new 2-bedroom Timeshare Units; • Nine (9) new Whole Ownership Units with five (5) lock-off unit options; • One (1) new onsite Employee Housing Unit; • Front desk, lobby, pone cochere, library, pool, courtyard, spa, guest/owner ski storage, below grade parking structure, and other amenities. As part of the Special Development District request, the applicant is proposing the following deviations from the underlying High-Density Multiple-Family (HDMF) zoning district: • A deviation from the density requirements including: 1. Number of dwelling units; 2. Amount of Gross Residential Floor Area (GRFA). • Deviations from the front, side and rear setbacks; and, • A deviation from the allowable site coverage. A complete zoning analysis of the site has been provided in Section 1V of this memorandum. A vicinity map has been attached for reference (Attachment A) as has the applicant's request and a reduced copy of the floor plans and elevations (Attachments B and C). III. BACKGROUND The existing building of the Willows Condominiums was built in 1971 and is in need of many repairs and upgrades, including but not limited to the following: • Demolition or extensive repair of the parking decks; • Installation of a fire sprinkler system; • Upgrades to the mechanical systems within the building; • .Renovation of all units and common spaces; and, • Renovation to the exterior of the building. Because the building was constructed using a concrete "T" system, any renovations or upgrades would compromise the already low (7', 6") head height. Considering the type of existing construction and the non-conformities of the existing building and site, the applicant and The Willows homeowners have chosen a proposal to demolish and rebuild the building instead. The Willows Condominium building currently houses twenty- eight (28) units; twenty seven (27) one bedroom, 596 square foot units and one (1) studio unit that is 446 square feet in size. The units are owned by 26 different owners, with each owner allotted thirty days of summer use and thirty days of winter use per year. When units are unoccupied, they are placed into an active rental pool. The applicant has undergone one worksession with the Planning and Environmental Commission on September 25, 2006. A comprehensive list of the Commission's primary 2 concerns follows: Regarding deviations and public benefits: • The Commission asked that more thought be paid to the provision of public benefits to offset the requested deviations. • Several of the Commission members suggested that more Employee Housing Units be provided, but in another location. This would include the Unit proposed within the building itself. However, other members disagreed with that suggestion, stating that the vitality of the Village was better preserved through onsite Employee Housing Units. The Commission strongly urged further consideration of the setback deviations being requested. Egress issues become more of a problem with less of a setback as do safety separation, snow storage, review and constructability of future development proposals, and other issues. One member felt that such encroachments of the building would be better allowed below grade only. Others felt that some height deviations maybe considered if the setbacks were to be improved simultaneously. Regarding architecture/site design: • The Commission requested renderings of all facades to be provided for study by the next meeting. • One member of the Commission encouraged the natural transition of grades across property lines in order to make property lines indecipherable. • Better integration of the exit staircases into the building's design was mentioned by several members. • Some concern was expressed regarding the possible eventual widening of Vail Road. • There was strong support of maintaining some architectural continuity with the rest of the neighborhood. • One member asked that all trees to be removed be tagged prior to the next meeting. Regarding the proposal in general: The Commission was quite interested that incentives to rent continue to be proposed and that the number of hot beds be maintained, if not increased, within the core of the Village. • One member of the Commission commented that the proposed provision of a front desk should be portrayed as more of a benefit than was currently being portrayed. 3 • Many of the Commission members requested that Staff analyze the build-out potential of all the surrounding properties on Willow Circle to better decipher the effect which current/proposed deviations may have on the neighborhood. Furthermore, the applicant met with the Town of Vail Design Review Board for a conceptual review on Wednesday, November 1, 2006. The Board commented on the following items at the time of that review: • Much attention will be paid by the Board to the preservation of existing landscaping, the promised arborist's report, and the final landscaping plan to ensure proper screening and appropriate site treatment. • The Board expressed concern regarding the site design. !t was thought that less site coverage may be possible if the "U" shape of the building was defined differently. The development proposal is scheduled for review by the Board on December 6, 2006, provided that a recommendation of approval is forward to the Town Council by the Planning and Environmental Commission. IV. ZONING ANALYSIS The proposed deviations to the prescribed development standards outlined by the underlying zone district, High Density Multiple Family, are listed in bold font. Zoning: High Density Multiple Family (HDMF) Land Use Plan Designation: Village Master Plan Current Land Use: Village Master Plan Address: 74 Willow Road/Lot 8, Block 6, Vail Village 1St Filing Development Standard Allowed Lot Area: 10,000 sq. ft.(min.) Setbacks: Front: 20 feet Side: 20 feet Rear: 20 feet Existin Proposed 0.4854 acres (21,144 sq. ft.) no change 8 feet 4 feet 5.5 feet 11' (above grd.) 7.5' (above grd.) 6.2' (above grd.) Bldg. Height: 45 ft. flat/mansard 48 feet 48 ft. sloping Density: 12 dwelling units 28 dwelling units 48 feet 9 Dwelling Units (+5 Lock offs) 9 Timeshare Units 1 EHU GRFA: 16,069 sq. ft. 18,607 sq. ft. 32,240 sq. ft. (76% of site area) (115% of allowable GRFA) (200% of allowable GRFA) 4 Site Cvge: 11,629 sq. ft. (55%) 12,638 sq. ft. (~60%) 14,110 sq. ft. (~67%) Land. Area: 6,343 sq. ft. (30%) 2,848 sq. ft. (-13%) 8,540 sq. ft. (40%) Parking: FFU = 0.7 sp/unit 42 spaces 29 spaces DU = 1.4 sp/unit EHU = 1.4 sp/unit 20.3 total spaces req'd V. SURROUNDING LAND USES AND ZONING'" Land Use Zonin North: Residential High Density Multiple Family South: Residential Two-Family Primary/Secondary East: Residential High Density Multiple Family West: Residential Two-Family Primary/Secondary ('`See Attachment D for specific development standards of surrounding properties) VI. ROLES OF REVIEWING BOARDS Special Development District Order of Review: Generally, applications will be reviewed first by the PEC for impacts of use/development, then by the DRB for compliance of proposed buildings and site planning, and final approval by the Town Council. Planning and Environmental Commission: The PEC shaft/ review the proposal for and make a recommendation to the Town Council based upon the findings made on the criteria located in Chapter 12-9A, Special Development District, Vail Town Code. Design Review Board: The DRB has no review authority on a SDD proposal, but must review any accompanying DRB application. The DRB review of an SDD prior to Town Council approval is purely advisory in nature. Staff: The staff is responsible for ensuring that all submittal requirements are provided and plans conform to the technical requirements of the Zoning Regulations. The staff also advises the applicant as to compliance with the design guidelines._Staff provides a staff memo containing background on the property and provides a staff evaluation of the project with respect to the required criteria and findings, and a recommendation on approval, approval with conditions, or denial. Staff also facilitates the review process. Town Council: The Town Council takes into consideration the PEC's recommendation when reviewing an application for a special development district and is responsible for final approval/denial of an SDD. The Town Council shall review the proposal and approve/approve with conditions/deny the application based upon the findings made on the criteria located in Chapter 12-9A, Special Development District, Vail Town Code. VII. THE SPECIAL DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT DESIGN CRITERIA Chapter 12-9 of the Town Code provides for the establishment of special development 5 districts in the Town of Vail. According to Section 12-9A-1, the purpose of a special development district is, "To encourage flexibility and creativity in the development of land, in order to promote its 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 utilities; to preserve the natural and scenic features of open space areas; and to further the overall goals of the community as stated in the Vail Comprehensive Plan. An approved development plan for a Special Development District, in conjunction with the property's underlying zone district, shall establish the requirements for guiding development and uses of property included in the Special Development District." An approved development plan is the principal document in guiding the development, uses, activities and public benefits of the Special Development District (SDD). The development plan shall contain all relevant material and information necessary to establish the parameters to 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 SDD, permitted, conditional and accessory uses. shall be limited to those permitted, conditional and accessory uses in the property's underlying zone district. The Town Code provides nine design criteria which shall be used as the principal criteria in evaluating the merits of the proposed SDD. It is the burden of the applicant to demonstrate that submittal material and the proposed development plan comply with each of the following standards, or demonstrate that one or more of them is not applicable, or that a practical solution consistent with the public interest has been achieved. Following, is a staff analysis of the compliance with the nine SDD review criteria of the Willows Condominium Association's request: A. Compatibility: Design compatibility and sensitivity to the immediate environment, neighborhood and adjacent properties relative to architectural design, scale, bulk, building height, buffer zones, identity, character, visual integrity and orientation. The Willows site is located within a neighborhood of three to four story residential buildings which have been developed or redeveloped over the years with minimal buffer zones, but which have each maintained a unique intimate neighborhood identity, an alpine character, similar visual integrity, and orientation to either the mountain at the south or the creek to the north. A description of the specific development statistics of the surrounding properties has been attached for reference (Attachment D). The design of The Willows redevelopment proposal is quite compatible with that of its neighbors, in part due to the fact that Bishop Park and 44 Willow Place. are products of the same architectural entity responsible for the design of The Willows proposal. The scale of the proposed building is sensitive to and similar to that of surrounding buildings, 6 which range from occupying one half a city block (The Edelweiss) to appearing as single family dwellings (Bishop Park). The height of the proposed building (48') is very similar to that of surrounding buildings, which range from three to four stories. Regarding compatibility, the proposed building is similar to its surroundings partially because it includes some encroachment into the setbacks, similar to that of each of its neighbors, and less of a buffer zone than the underlying zone district requires. Many of the surrounding buildings are located within mere feet of the property lines. However, the neighborhood has been able to maintain its intimate residential feel as a result. Buffer zones have instead been provided through mature landscaping and variation of the building facades. The applicant has paid specific attention to the portions of the structure which overhang the setbacks and also approach neighboring buildings, particularly along the eastern (Riva Ridge South) and western (44 Willow Place) property lines and has designed a large courtyard and swimming pool along the eastern property line, partially to provide a "buffer zone" of sorts between the new building and its nearest neighbor (see Attachment E for illustration of the transformation of the site plan entitled "Different Design Outlines"). The subterranean improvements along the northern property line remain the greatest encroachment of the proposal, seconded by the encroachment into the setbacks along Vail Road at the southern property line. However, this area is less sensitive to design compatibility since no structures exist along the south of the property. At this time, the amount of Gross Residential Floor Area located within the setbacks is 10,097 square feet, or 31% of the amount of proposed GRFA (32,240 square feet). The architectural design of The Willows redevelopment is governed by the Design Guidelines prescribed in Chapter 11, Design Review, of the Vail Town Code and by the recommendations Vail Village Master Plan. The proposed architectural design of the development is intended to be compatible with the unique European alpine village character prescribed for Vail Village.. The exterior design of the development is a mixture of stone, stucco, wood, and copper which will be much better integrated into the surroundings than the existing brick and stucco building. Many of the design details are yet to be determined, as the Design Review Board has only reviewed the project conceptually. However, Staff believes that additional work with the Design Review Board will ensure optimal synchronicity with the surrounding architectural themes. Staff believes that the proposed project is compatible with and sensitive to the immediate environment and neighborhood relative to design, scale, bulk, building height, buffer zones, identity, character, visual integrity and orientation because of the similarity of the design and placement of the building on its site to the design and placement of surrounding buildings on their sites. B. Relationship: Uses, activity and density which provide a compatible, efficient and workable relationship with surrounding uses and activity. The proposed uses, activities, and density for The Willows development site provide a compatible, efficient and workable relationship with surrounding uses and activity. The uses proposed within the new building are similar to what exists today and include multiple family dwelling units, which are a permitted use; timeshare units, which are a conditional use; and an Employee Housing Unit, which is also a conditional use (see 7 table below for employee housing requirements). Surrounding properties include multiple family dwellings and short term rental units as well. Therefore, similar activity levels will result from the proposal as result today from the existing Willows building and its neighbors. The High Density Multiple Family (HDMF) district is intended to provide sites for multiple family dwellings at densities of twenty five (25) units per acre. The proposal to construct a multiple-family residential dwelling building with eighteen units per half acre exceeds that which is allowed. However, the overall density upon the site will be reduced; from 28 units to 18 dwelling and timeshare units and 1 Employee Housing Unit. Regardless, per Attachment D and the following section of the Urban Design Guide Plan, higher densities than are allowed by the underlying zone district are quite common, and even expected, in the Willows neighborhood. Although immediately adjacent to the mixed use developments found in the Commercial Core and Mixed Use sub-areas, the willow circle sub-area has retained an exclusively residential character. Condominium developments have occurred on all but one of the sub-area's parcels and many of these properties are actively "short-termed" to overnight guests. In most cases, parking has been provided in underground structures. This design feature, coupled with the Town-owned open space (Willow Circle Park), contributes to the pleasing appearance of this area. In most cases, the levels of development throughout this sub-area greatly exceed what is allowed under existing zoning (High Density Multi-Family). Gross residential floor area ratios (GRFAR) range from .6 to 9.3, with an average of 9.09. With the exception of one parcel, all properties within this sub- area are, developed at, or over, their permitted levels of development. As such, there is little development potential left in this sub-area. Residential uses dominate this sub-area and are proposed to continue with the exception of one potential commercial space at the east end of the sub-area facing Willow Bridge Road. This concept is discussed further under Sub-Area 2.2. Staff believes the uses (including the Employee Housing Unit, details below) and activity level resulting from the proposed Willows redevelopment are clearly compatible with those of surrounding uses and. activity levels. Though the amount of GRFA exceeds what is allowed, Staff believes that the proposed density (1.5 FAR) is relatively compatible to the density levels expected in the Urban Design Guide Plan within this area. Employee Housing as a use is addressed further below. Employee Housing Assessment 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 is appropriately addressed through the review process of SDD proposals. In reviewing the proposal for employee housing needs, staff relies on the Town of Vail Employee Housing Report. The Employee Housing Report was prepared for the Town by the consulting firm Rosall, 8 Remmen and Cares and 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. The guidelines contained within the report were used most recently in the reviews of the Austria Haus, Marriott, Four Seasons, Manor Vail Lodge, SDD No. 6/Vail Village Inn, and the SDD No. 39/Crossroads development proposals. The figures .identified in the report are based on surveys of the ,commercial-use employment needs of the Town of Vail and other mountain resort communities. As of the drafting of the report, Telluride, Aspen and Whistler, B.C. had "employment generation" ordinances requiring developers to provide affordable housing for a percentage of the new employees resulting from commercial development. "New" employees are defined as the incremental increase in employment needs resulting from commercial redevelopment. Every community uses a different percentage to determine the amount of housing a developer must provide for its employees. Vail has. conservatively determined that if a project is proposed at, or below, the density allowed by the underlying zone district, the 15% (0.15) figure is used. 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. However,. because the number of dwelling units upon the Willows site will be reduced by ten, there was actually a reduction in the number of employees generated. Four (4) fewer employees than are currently generated will fulfill the proposed needs and uses of the site. Proposed Willows Project Employee Generation Calculations -Middle of Range a) Multi-Family (Dwelling Units) 18 new units proposed @ (0.4/unit) = 7.2 employees Existing Willows Project Employee Generation Calculations -Middle of Range a) Multi-Family (Dwelling Units) 28 units existing (a (0.4/unit) = 11.2 employees Total net new = - 4 employees The applicant has no obligation to provide any employee housing un{ts or beds because the housing requirement is only applied to developments for which an employee generation will occur. However, the applicant is proposing that one of the public benefits of the project include the addition of one new onsite Employee Housing Unit and five new employee beds elsewhere in the Town. This number was generated by the applicant's desire to house 100% of the employees required for the scope of the new project. Using the Town's calculation that the average employee within the Town holds 1.3 jobs, the site creates a need for 5.5 employee beds (7.2 employees divided by 1.3 jobs each). The applicant will deed restrict the units appropriately, depending upon the zone districts in which the purchased properties are located. The off site employee housing beds will be provided through the purchase of units throughout Town (the "buy down" program) or through a pay-in-lieu program, if established by the Town prior to requesting a Temporary Certificate of Occupancy (TCO). 9 Staff believes that the proposal for additional employee beds will be of substantial benefit to the Town. C. Parking and Loading: Compliance with parking and loading requirements as outlined in Chapter 12-10 of the Vail Town Code. The proposed redevelopment plan complies with the parking and loading requirements outlined in Chapter 12-10. As indicated in the Zoning Analysis outlined in Section VI of this memorandum, the total number of required parking spaces for The Willows redevelopment project is 21 spaces (rounded up from 20.3 spaces). The applicants are proposing to provide a total of 29 below grade parking spaces. The applicant is proposing to fulfill its loading and delivery requirement through the provision of one loading "bay", which is to be located at the porte cochere entrance to the north of the building. The proposed area will be accessed from Willow Road. In a memorandum to the applicant dated October 20, 2006 (Attachment F), the Public Works Department outlined several outstanding items to be resolved. The applicant has since verified compliance with most of these issues, with the exception of the width of the driveway entrance and related signaling for ingress/egress and automobile safety reasons. Attachment G includes a reduced copy of the applicant's possible solution to this issue pending Public Works approval. Staff has addressed remaining Public Works issues as a condition of approval, to be resolved to the satisfaction of the Public Works Department prior as part of the request to establish a new SDD. Staff believes that the application sufficiently complies with this criterion. D. Comprehensive Plan: Conformity. with the applicable elements of the Vail Comprehensive Plan, Town policies and Urban Design Plan. The goals contained in several of the Town's comprehensive, guiding documents are applicable during the review process for the establishment of a Special Development District. Staff. has reviewed the Comprehensive Plans and outlined the applicable plan sections below as relevant to the review of this proposal. Vail Land Use Plan (in part) 1.0 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. 1.3 The quality of development should be maintained and upgraded whenever possible. 1.12 Vail should accommodate most of the additional growth in existing developed areas (infill areas). 10 3.0 Commercial 3.1 The hotel bed base should be preserved and used more efficiently. 3.2 The Village and Lionshead areas are the best location for hotels to serve the future needs of the destination skiers. 3.3 Hotels are important to the continued success of the Town of Vail, therefore conversion to condominiums should be discouraged. 3.4 Commercial growth should be concentrated in existing commercial areas to accommodate both local and visitor needs. 4.0 Village Core /Lionshead 4.2 Increased density in the Core areas is acceptable so long as the existing character of each area is preserved thorough implementation of the Urban Design Guide Plan. 4.3 The ambiance of Vail Village is important to the identity of Vail and should be preserved.. (scale, alpine character, small town feeling, mountains, natural setting, intimate size, cosmopolitan feeling, environmental quality.) 5.0 Residential 5.1 Additional residential growth should continue to occur primarily in existing, platted areas and as appropriate in new areas where high hazards do not exist. 5.2 Quality time share units should be accommodated to help keep occupancy rates up. 5.3 Affordable employee housing should be made available through private efforts, assisted by limited incentives, provided by the Town of Vail with appropriate restrictions. 5.4 Residential growth should keep pace with the marketplace demands for a full range of housing types. 5.5 The existing employee housing base should be preserved and upgraded. Additional employee housing needs should be accommodated at varied sites throughout the community. Staff Response: Staff believes that the outlined sections of the Vail Land Use Plan are being met, as the proposed development includes a balanced mix of residential uses, high quality redevelopment of the existing site, infill 11 development withi increased density, quality time share affordable beds. Vail Village Master Plan (in part) n the Village area, a better use of the bed base, maintenance of Vail's ambiance, the provision of units, and provisions (via public benefit) for six new The applicant's proposed redevelopment site is located within the "Vail Village Master Plan" land use category. Staff believes that the following stated goals of the Vail Village Master Plan are applicable to this application: Goal #1: Encourage high quality redevelopment while preserving the unique architectural scale of the Village in order to sustain its sense of community and identity. Objective 1.2: Encourage the upgrading and redevelopment of residential and commercial facilities. Objective 1.3: Enhance new development and redevelopment through public improvements done by private developers working in cooperation with the Town. Policy 1.3.1: Public improvements shall be developed with the working participation of the private sector working with the Town. Goal #2: To foster a strong tourist industry and promote year-around economic health and viability for the Village and for the community as a whole. Objective 2.3: Increase the number of residential units available for short term overnight accommodations. Policy 2.3.1 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. Objective 2.5: Encourage the continued upgrading, renovation and maintenance of existing lodging and commercial facilities to better serve the needs of our guests. Policy 2.5.1: Recreation amenities, common areas, meeting facilities and other amenities shall be preserved and enhanced as a part of any redevelopment of lodging properties. Policy 2.5.2: The Town will use the maximum flexibility possible in the interpretation of building and fire codes in order to facilitate building renovations without compromising life, health, and safety considerations. Objective 2.6: Encourage the development of affordable housing units through the efforts of the private sector. Policy 2.6.1: Employee housing units maybe required as part of any new or redeveloped project requesting density over that allowed by existing 12 zoning. Policy 2.6.2: Employee housing shall be developed with appropriate restrictions so as to insure their availability and affordability to the local work force. Policy 2.6.3: The Town of Vail may facilitate in the development of affordable housing by providing limited assistance. Goal #3: To recognize as a top priority the enhancement of the walking experience throughout the Village. Objective 3.1: Physically improve the existing pedestrian ways by landscaping and other improvements. Policy 3.1.1: Private development projects shall incorporate streetscape improvements (such as paver treatments, landscaping, lighting and seating areas), along adjacent pedestrian ways. Policy 3.1.2: Public .art shall be encouraged at appropriate locations throughout Town. Policy 3.1.3: Flowers, trees, water features, and other landscaping shall be encouraged throughout the Town in locations adjacent to, or visible from, public areas. Objective 3.4: Develop additional sidewalks, pedestrian-only walkways. and accessible green space areas, including pocket parks and stream access. Policy 3.4.2: 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 #5: Increase and improve the capacity, efficiency, and aesthetics of the transportation and circulation system throughout the Village. Objective 5.1: Meet parking demands with public and private parking facilities. Policy 5.1.1: For new development that is located outside the Commercial Core /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. Policy 5.1.3: Seek locations for additional structured public and private parking. Policy 5.1.5: Redevelopment projects shall be strongly encouraged to provide underground or visually concealed parking. 13 Goal #6: To ensure the continued improvement of the vital operational elements of the Village. Objective 6.1: Provide service and delivery facilities for existing and new development. Objective 6.2: Provide for the safe and efficient functions of fire, police and public utilities within the context of an aesthetically pleasing resort setting. Policy 6.2.1: Development projects and other improvements in Vail Village shall be reviewed by respective Town Departments to identify both the impacts of the proposal and potential mitigating measures. Staff Response: Staff believes that the goals, objectives and policies of the Vail Village Master Plan are being met through the upgrading and redevelopment of the Willows facilities; through the provision of public improvements via private developers; an increase in the number of residential uses within the Village which are above allowable density, but which are available for short term rental; the development of an affordable housing unit and the provision of five more affordable beds; physical improvements to the pedestrian experience; the provision of public art; on-site concealed required parking; and .service and delivery facilities that will improve automobile and pedestrian circulation and interaction along Willow Road. 14 WILLOW CIRCLE SUB-AREA (#2) ~~ ~y ~~, ,> ~ ~~ ~• -__ ..- ~~'~~` ~' t:,~ d J,r? 1 • x ~~~ ~ P ~ ~` , ,,~ ~ ~~ -~' /. i ~,i 7 ~ r r° `~ 1 ~" J l J .rte V ~ ~~~ ~~~ }• ~ ~ 1 j'fl i ~ -~ ~ ~~ ~ •~ a ~ :~~'"~'".. L--'=.~ - '~~ .. ~ ., ~ `, -~ ~"~ ,. ~ -~ _ " .`/ s ` ~ t ~ ~ 1 .~^ ,/ REVEA H#?~i$~~: I t ~ ~~~~~~ '~ ~ : ~~; : ~ r- ,~~ ~.. 1 ~ w M ~ P tC~ .•: :~~..-::. y ~,,. s r r^t ~, ~'' f ~ (.'°.':. ,, ~ ~ ~ s. ~:~ r / d l~ a. ..~. ~•. ~ a . -- ~r,.~-~" Lew ,.:___~~-.._. ~ t ! ,~sa~rt~:l y ..` ,, ~~ ` --.~~ `` ~ ~,,...r f ^-.,.~~ ~ _ ~~ '~ ` ~`^ w ~~ ~ 7 1 _ ~.. ~_ Rry __ ~~ -~- ~. .~- ll _. _ _~ .- ~ ~ ~.~.~.~ .~ 'i~'~~.-. f ~~ ~ ~~ .,L,'.~f '^.'~ 'w" 1 ~ ~~ ~ .` .. Lid ,.,r _ '^."~,... .. _ `~,~ ---.. ~- _ Although immediately adjacent to the mixed use developments found in the Commercial Core and Mixed Use sub-areas, the willow circle sub-area has retained an exclusively residential character. Condominium developments have occurred on all but one of the sub-area's parcels and many of these properties are actively "short-termed" to overnight guests. In most cases, parking has been provided in underground structures. This design feature, coupled with the Town-owned open space (Willow Circle Park), contributes to the pleasing appearance of this area. In most cases, the levels of development throughout this sub-area greatly exceed what is allowed under existing zoning (High Density Multi-Family). Gross residential floor area ratios (GRFAR) range from .6 to 1.3, with an average of 1.01. With the exception of one parcel, all properties within this sub-area are, developed at, or over, their permitted levels of development. As such, there is little development potential left in this sub-area. Residential uses dominate this sub-area and are proposed to continue with the exception of one potential commercial space at the east end of the sub-area facing Willow Bridge Road. Staff Response: Staff believes that the residential character specified for this area, the 15 proposed short term rental opportunities, underground parking, and high density residential uses are each congruent with the goals of the Master Plan as they were stated for the Willows Circle Sub Area. Vail Village Urban Design Guide Plan and Design Considerations (in part) Certain. aspects of the Vail Village Urban Design Guide Plan and Design Considerations apply to The Willows redevelopment site. Only those sections which Staff found applicable to The Willows redevelopment proposal are outlined below. 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. PEDESTRlAN1ZATION 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 (illustration outlined in Plan and not included in this memorandum). Staff Response: An aspect of The Willows redevelopment public benefit involves providing an improved pedestrian experience through the construction of a paver walk and new asphalt drive lane. Additionally, the applicant is proposing to remove loading and delivery from Willow Road by constructing a porte cochere at the entry to the site. Staff believes that the "Pedestrianization" goal of the Urban Design .Considerations is being upheld in this redevelopment proposal and its associated public benefits (see Attachment H for streetscape details). C. STREETSCAPE FRAMEWORK 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: 7. 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. 16 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. Staff Response: Staff believes that the "Streetscape Framework" along Willow Road will be improved, through the architectural variation of the north edge of the building and roof ridges, the increased setback from Willow Road (from 15' to 23' at the main entrance to the building) and the proposed streetscape improvements. 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 setback requirements for buildings in Vail Village. Consistent with the desire for intimate pedestrian scale, placement of portions of a building at or near the property line is allowed and encouraged 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. Staff Response: Staff believes that the "Street Edge" as specified in the Urban Design Considerations will be preserved through "irregular facade lines, building jogs, landscaped areas", low walls, front-facing patios, and other architectural aspects of the proposed plan. Additionally, the porte cochere will further vary the street edge, which Staff believes is congruent with this aspect of the Design Considerations.. 17 1. 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. In 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 criterion. Staff Response: The applicant has submitted asun/shade analysis which reflects the shadow of the proposed Willows building at three separate times of the year; March, September, and December (Attachment I). It appears that the most notable areas of new shading will occur along the 44 Willow Road building and property during the winter months. This increased shading is likely a result of the increased mass of the building at the southern half of the property, replacing the area that is currently designated to the above grade parking structure. Staff believes that the uses "underneath" the newly shaded uses will not be negatively affected, because the shadows primarily occur over the driveway aisle entrance to the new Willows building (which drive is heated) and along the property line of 44 Willow Road, which does not appear to be a common pedestrian or use corridor. Regarding the spring and fall shadow lines, Staff believes that since the height of the proposed building is essentially the same as the height of the existing building, the. shadows cast during those seasons will primarily occur upon the Willows property, with some shadow overlap onto the 44 Willow Road property. Overall, Staff believes that the sun/shade analysis will not negatively impact the use of the affected areas. 2. ARCHITECTURE/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 consistently unifying backdrop for the architecture and pedestrian streetscape, and to avoid roofs, which tend to stand out individually or distract visually from the 18 overall character. Roof Forms Roofs within the Village are Typically gable in form and of moderate-to-low pitch. Shed roofs are frequently used for small additions to larger buildings. Freesfanding 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. Pitch Roof slopes in the Village typically range from 3/12 to 6/12, with slightly steeper pitches in limited applications Again, for visual consistency this general 3/12-6/12 range should be preserved. (See Construction below) Overhangs Generous roof overhangs are also an established architectural feature in the Village - a traditional expression of shelter in alpine environments. Roof overhangs typically range from 3 to 6 feet on all edges. Specific design consideration should be given to protection of pedestrian ways adjacent to buildings. Tee falls, 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 to the roof 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 tend toward "busyness" rather than a backdrop composition. Stepped Roofs As buildings are stepped to 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 wifh the more straightforward roof design typical in the Village. Materials Wood-shakes, wood shingles, and built-up tow and gravel are almost exclusively used as roof materials in the Village. (See Construction below.) For visual consistency, any. other materials should have the appearance of the above. 19 Staff Response: The applicant is primarily proposing .gabled roof forms, with the exception of several secondary shed roof forms and one tower element above the entryway to the site. Overhangs occur at every roof edge, with an average overhang of three and a half feet (3 '/2 `). The pitches of the proposed roof range from 2:12 in one area to 12:12 at the tower element, with the majority of forms portraying a 4:12 - 6:12 pitch. The applicant is proposing to locate most of the mechanical equipment within the lower parking structure level. However, all additional mechanical equipment designated for rooftop use will be placed along the single flat portion of the roof and screened by a parapet wall. The screening and design will be discussed further by the Design Review Board. Staff believes that the proposed plans adequately comply with the Roof guide-ines specified within the Design Considerations. FACADES Materials Stucco, brick, wood (and glass) are the primary building materials found in the Village. While not wishing to restricf design freedom over-much, 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. Color The intent of these regulations regarding color shall be to provide greater latitude in the use of color in Vail Village in order to create visual interest and to enliven the area. Colors used should retain a discernible consistency within a general range of colors relating well to the colors found in the surrounding mountain backdrop of Vail, but need not be specifically found in that environment. All colors used shall relate to the colors of the natural materials found on the buildings like wood tones, slate roof colors, stone colors and the like. Additionally all building colors shall work with the colors of the buildings in proximity as well as with all natural landscape materials found nearby. While there is no restriction per se on specific hues, primary colors of high chroma shall not be used on building surfaces but can be used in a limited fashion for accents. Body colors, both siding and stucco, shall be rich and lively but must be less chromatic shades, which relate to natural 20 colors and can. be either light or dark. All stucco shall have a flat finish. Generally, to avoid both "busyness'; and weak visual interest, the variety of major wall colors (and materials -excluding glass) should not exceed four nor be less than two. A color/material change between the ground floor and the upper floors is a common and effective reinforcement of the pedestrian scale of the street. High chroma colors can be used for signage, accents, doors, canopies, wall graphics and other streetscape (see E. Accent Elements).similar elements as long as they do not dominate either the building they are used on, the adjacent buildings, or the The color schemes for all properties shall be considered on a case-by- case basis. 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, 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%-45% transparent. Staff Response: The proposed building is composed of a variety of wood, stucco, and stone, all of which are specified as preferable for use within Village areas. Natural colors will be used, though the specifics of number and location of colors will be discussed between the Design Review Board and. the applicant in subsequent meetings. A material change is specified between fioors and the amount of transparency at the lower floor is greater than that of above floors, in spite of the lack of any commercial space. Staff believes that the applicant is fully compliant with the "Facades" section of the Urban Design Considerations. WINDOWS In addition to the general degree of transparency, window details are an important source of pedestrian scale-giving elements. 21 The size and shape of windows are often a response to the function of the street adjacent. For close-up, casual pedestrian viewing windows are typically sized to human-sized dimensions and characteristics of human vision. (Large glass-wall storefronts suggest uninterrupted viewing, as from a moving car. The sense of intimate pedestrian scale is diminished.) Ground floor display windows are typically raised slightly (sic) 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 subdivided 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. Staff Response: The architecture of the building includes provision of subdivided glass, which the Considerations point out as integral for Village applications. There is some horizontal replication of glass at the lowest level, an item which Staff will address before the Design Review Board at the appropriate time. Overall, Staff believes that the architecture meets the intent of the "Windows" specifications of the Urban Design Considerations. 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 to retail commercial 22 facades. Although great variations exist, 25-30% 9 transparency is felt to be a minimum transparency objective. Private residences, lodges, restaurants, and other non-retail establishments have different 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. NOTE: Security is an important design consideration in Vail. Deadbolt locks are encouraged. Locks, door handles and glass should all be designed to discourage break-ins. Security-design discussions with the Town police staff are encouraged. As an expression of entry, and sheltered welcome, protected entryways are encouraged. Doorways maybe recessed, extended, or covered. Staff Response: The applicant is proposing to construct doors with glass and a Porte cochere (i.e. "protected overhang") at the entrance to the building, thus satisfying the "Doors" specifications of the Urban Design Considerations. TRIM Prominent wood trim is also a unifying feature in the Village. Particularly at ground floor levels, doors and windows have strop, contrasting (see Color-Facades) 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. Staff Response: The applicant is proposing to add wood trim to the fenestration at all levels of the building. Staff believes that the applicant thus satisfies the "Trim" specifications of the Urban Design Considerations 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 streets were empty. A review of successful decks/patios in Vail reveals several common characteristics: - direcf sunlight from 19:00 - 3:00 increases use by many days/year and protects from wind - elevated feet to give views into the pedestrian walk (and not the reverse) 23 - physical separation from pedestrian walk of to (planter better than a wall) overhang gives pedestrian scale/ shelter. Decks and patios should be sited and designed with due consideration to: - sun -views - wind -pedestrian activity Staff Response: According to the submitted elevation drawings, the applicant is proposing to add approximately eighteen (18) decks and two (2) patios to the north side of the building alone. Similar numbers of decks, balconies, and patios are located upon other elevations of the building. Staff believes that the decks proposed upon the building will offer views upon the pedestrian walk at Willow Road at the north elevation, direct sunlight during many days of the year at the south elevation, and physical separation from adjoining residential uses at the east and west elevations. Staff believes that through these provisions, the applicant thus satisfies the "Decks and Patios" specifications of the Urban Design Considerations. 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. The prominence of balcony forms is due to several fairly common characteristics: Color They contrast in color (dark) with the building, typically matching the trim colors (see Facade-Color). Size ' They extend far enough from the building to cast .a prominent shadow pattern. Balconies in Vail are functional as well 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. 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 fhe building architecture. Light balconies lack the visual impact which ties the Village together. 24 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. Construction Cantilevered beams, beams extended to support the balcony, are most often visibly exposed on the underside of balconies. As such they are an expression of structure and tie the balconies to the building visually. Staff Response: According to the submitted elevation and plan drawings, the proposed balconies range from three feet (3') to eleven feet (11') in depth, likely of a significant enough depth to cast a shadow. The proposed decks will be constructed of wood, and most will include vertical structural members. Specific aspects of color will be discussed by the Design Review Board. Staff believes that the applicant has satisfied the "Balconies" specifications of the Urban Design Considerations. ACCENT ELEMENTS The life and festive 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 occasions. Umbrellas -over tables on outdoor patios. Annual color flowers - in beds or in planters. Accent lighting -buildings, plazas, windows, trees (even Christmas lights all winter). Painted wall graphics -coats of arms, symbols, accent compositions, etc. Fountains -sculptural, with both winter and summer character. Staff Response: Specific aspects of accent elements will be discussed by the Design Review Board. Staff believes that "Accent Elements" specified within the Urban Design Considerations will be well addressed at that time. LANDSCAPE ELEMENTS Landscape considerations appropriate plant materials. - plant materials - paving - retaining walls include, but go beyond, the placement of Landscape considerations include: 25 - 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. Some typical local plant materials include: Trees Shrubs Narrow-leaf Willow cottonwood Dogwood Balsam poplar Serviceberry Aspen Alpine currant Lodgepole pine Chokecherry Colorado spruce Mugho pine Subalpine fir Potentilla Buffaloberry Pavin The freeze/thaw 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 public R.O.W.' adjacent. The Town uses the following materials for all new construction: - asphalt -general use pedestrian streets - brick on concrete -feature areas (plazas, intersections, fountains, etc.) Retaining Walls Retaining walls to raise planting area 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 if above type not already established nearby. (example: Town of Vail entry wall) 26 Wood retaining walls are strongly discouraged due to deterioration caused by the harsh climate. .They may be effectively used with appropriate detailing to resist rot and express crafted joint conditions. Li htin Light standards should be coordinated with those used by the Town in the public R.O. W. Si~cL Refer to Town of Vail Signage Ordinance Colorful annuals are used in key location accent pedestrian areas, highlight building These color accents can be provided in: - retained planting beds - flower boxes - hanging pots, baskets - ground beds s throughout the Village to entries, and as plaza focii. Staff Response: Currently, the applicant has submitted a general landscape plan signifying landscaping between structures at the east and west sides of the property and landscaping along the entire southern property line. Specific landscaping materials have yet to be specified. However, Staff is confident that "Landscape Elements" will be well addressed to the satisfaction of the Design Review Board at the appropriate time. E. Natural and/or Geologic Hazards: Identification and mitigation of natural and/or geologic hazards that affect the property on which the special development district is proposed. According to the Official Town of Vail Geologic Hazard Maps, The Willows development site is not located in any geologically sensitive areas. Therefore, Staff believes that the application complies with this criterion. F. Site plan, building design and location and open space provisions designed to produce a functional development responsive and sensitive to natural features, vegetation and overall aesthetic quality of the community. The proposed site plan shows the building encroaching into each of the required setbacks .upon the property. However, the site design reflects areas of less encroachment into the sensitive areas between buildings. Additionally, less encroachment now occurs at the above grade portions of the north side of the building than has occurred previously. The areas of greatest encroachment occur at the south side of the property, adjacent to Vail Road. Staff believes that the site plan signifies a functional development that is responsive to natural features and the overall aesthetic quality of the community. 27 The building. design is quite similar to that of recently renovated or rebuilt structures in the vicinity. The applicant has stated that each of the notable existing trees upon the site will be able to be maintained throughout construction, though submittal of an arborist's report stating the same is pending, per the Design Review Board's request. The south side of the property is the only area in which some grade change naturally occurs upon the property. However, due to the similar locations of the existing parking structure and the proposed new building, extensive. site changes and reconfiguration will be unnecessary. Therefore, Staff has found that the design is responsive and sensitive to natural features, vegetation and the aesthetic quality of the neighborhood. The proposed location of the building upon the site is the result of consideration for both the interest of the existing and future Willows owners as well as the interests of surrounding neighbors to the east and west. The open space areas proposed upon the redeveloped property pay respect to the adjacent property owners and the future owners of the proposed units, particularly the areas of lower height at the west side of the building, and the courtyard area at the east side of the building. Staff believes that the applicant has proposed a responsive and sensitive design upon the subject site. G. Traffic: A circulation system designed for both vehicles and pedestrians addressing on and off-site traffic circulation. The Town of Vail Public Works Department has reviewed the proposed plans for circulation to ensure that the site design and vehicular and pedestrian interaction are satisfactory. Following the review of the plans, the Public Works Department forwarded their written final comments in a memorandum dated October 20, 2006 (Attachment F). Subsequently, an additional site plan and a revised driveway proposal have been submitted by the applicant, both of which address the comments within that memorandum. Staff has requested that as a condition of approval of this SDD request all remaining items be addressed to the satisfaction of the Public Works Department prior to building permit submittal. Staff is confident that outstanding items will not be of primary importance to the PEC. A traffic report has been submitted by the applicant which addresses weekday peak trip generation rates (Attachment J). An overall decrease in the number of AM and PM peak hour trips will occur with the construction of eighteen (18) dwelling units, ten fewer dwelling units than exist today. The interaction between pedestrians and vehicles along Willow Road is expected to improve due to the applicant's proposal for streetscape improvements, including an eight foot paver pedestrian sidewalk, and a twelve foot newly-paved right-of-way lane. Currently, no curb and gutter or sidewalk exists along Willow Road. Additionally, the proposed pone cochere will lessen the amount of temporary parking which occurs along Willow Road currently. Staff believes that the applicant has designed a circulation system that will result in improved functionality for both vehicles and pedestrians and which addresses well the issues of on and off site traffic circulation. 28 H. Landscaping: Functional and aesthetic landscaping and open space in order to optimize and preserve natural features, recreation, views and functions. The proposed building is shaped as a "U", providing a large open plaza area at the east side of the property which includes heavy landscaping, the recreational amenity of a pool for owners and guests, and views to and from the mountain. Additional landscaping is being proposed along the northern (front), western, and southern property lines to allow for screening to and from the proposed Willows building. Staff believes that additional meetings with the Design Review Board will allow for even more improvement to the landscaping proposal. However, Staff finds that the landscaping proposal, as submitted today, has achieved optimization and preservation of natural features, such as the grade to the rear of the property; recreation, in the provision of an onsite pool and spa; views, both for homeowners towards the mountain and towards the park; and functions for owners and guests of the Condominiums. I. Workable Plan: Phasing plan or subdivision plan that will maintain a workable, functional and efficient relationship throughout the development of the special development district. The applicant is proposing to construct the project in one phase. No subdivision of the property will be necessary to facilitate the development of the project. Staff believes that the proposal complies with this criterion. VIII. STAFF RECOMMENDATION The Community Development Department recommends that the Planning and Environmental Commission forwards a recommendation of approval, with conditions to the Vail Town Council of the development application to establish Special Development District No. 40, The Willows, located at 74 Willow Road/Lot 8, Block 6, Vail Village 1St Filing. Staff's recommendation is based upon a review of the criteria and findings as outlined in this memorandum and from the evidence and testimony presented. Should the Planning and Environmental Commission choose to forward a recommendation of approval, with conditions, of the applicant's request, staff recommends that the following findings be made as part of the motion: Special Development District No.40, The Willows "That the proposal to establish Special Development District No. 40, The Willows, complies with the nine design criteria outlined in Section 12-gA-8 of the Vail Town Code. Furthermore, the applicant has demonstrated to the satisfaction of the Commission, based upon the testimony and evidence presented during the public hearing, that any adverse effects of the requested deviations from the development standards of the underlying zoning are outweighed by the public benefits provided. Lastly, the Commission finds that the request is consistent with the development goals and objectives of the Town. 29 With regard to proposed building setbacks, that: a. Proposed building setbacks provide necessary separation between buildings and riparian areas, geologically sensitive areas and other environmentally sensitive areas. b. Proposed building setbacks comply with applicable elements of the Vail Village Urban Design Guide Plan and Design Considerations. c. Proposed building setbacks will provide adequate availability of light, air and open space. d. Proposed building setbacks will provide a compatible relationship with buildings and uses on adjacent properties. e. Proposed building setbacks will result in creative design solutions or other public benefits that could not otherwise be achieved by conformance with prescribed setback standards. With regard to proposed Gross Residential Floor Area, that: a. The proposed gross residential floor area of 200% of the allowable, and the additional six dwelling units over the allowable, or 150% of the allowable number of units in the High Density Multiple Family zone district, are in conformance with applicable elements of the Vail Comprehensive Plan. With regard to proposed site coverage, that: a. Though the proposed site coverage of 67% of the site exceeds that which is allowed within the High Density Multiple Family zone district, the proposed above grade, or perceived, site coverage of 50% of the site area is in conformance with the 55% site coverage allowance within the High Density Multiple Family zone district and is in conformance with the applicable elements of the Vail Comprehensive Plan. That the development is in compliance with the purposes of the High Density Multiple Family zone district, that the proposal is consistent with applicable elements of the Vail Village Master Plan, the Vail Land Use Plan, the Vail Streetscape Master Plan, and the Vail Village Urban Design Guide Plan and that the proposal does not otherwise have a significant negative effect on the character of the neighborhood, and that the proposal substantially complies with other applicable elements of the Vail Comprehensive Plan." Should the Planning and Environmental Commission choose to recommend approval the applicant's requests, staff recommends the following conditions: The Developer shall address the following conditions of approval prior to appearing before the Vail Town Council for second reading of an adopting ordinance for the establishment of Special Development District No. 40, The Willows: The Developer shall prepare a written agreement, for Town Council review and approval, outlining the responsibilities and requirements of the stated public 30 benefits, as indicated within this memorandum. This agreement shall include, but not be limited to, the provision of one Employee Housing Unit onsite; the provision of five employee beds offsite, provided through contribution to a pay-in- lieu system or purchased through the "buy down program"; .all streetscape improvements along Willow Road, including an eight foot (8') paver sidewalk for pedestrians and a twelve foot (12') wide right-of-way lane; and details for a specific provision of public art, which amount and location shall be determined by the applicant and reviewed with the Art in Public Places Board. The Developer shall address the following conditions of approval prior to submitting a building permit application (a grading permit/excavation permit shall constitute a building permit); The Developer shall comply with all outstanding final comments of the Town of Vail Public Works Department outlined in the attached memorandum dated October 20, 2006. 2. The Developer shall ensure that the proposed redevelopment plans comply with all requirements of the Town of Vail Fire Department. The Developer shall address the following conditions of approval prior to requesting a temporary certificate of occupancy or a final certificate of occupancy; The Developer shall commence initial construction of the Willows improvements within three years from the time of its final approval at second reading of the ordinance establishing Special Development District No. 40, and continue diligently toward the completion of the project. If the developer does not begin and diligently work toward the completion of the special development district or any stage of the special development district within the time limits imposed, the approval of said special development district shall be void. The Planning and Environmental Commission and Town Council shall review the special development district upon submittal of an application to reestablish the special development district following the procedures outlined in Section 12-9A-4, Vail Town Code. 2. The Developer shall provide one deed-restricted housing unit onsite that complies with the Town of Vail Employee Housing requirements (Chapter 12-13) and secure five (5) additional beds within the Town of Vail, as stated in the written agreement to be drafted for the passage of Special Development District No. 40. X. ATTACHMENTS A. Vicinity Map B. Applicant's Request and Application Forms C. Reduced plans of the proposal dated November 6, 2006 D. Adjacent properties development summary E. Different Design Outlines diagram F. Public Works memo dated October 20, 2006. G. Driveway option plan dated November 6, 2006. H. Proposed streetscape drawings dated November 8, 2006. 31 I. Sun/Shade Analysis dated November 7, 2006. J. Traffic report and site distance diagram from Alpine Engineering dated October 12, 2006. K. Gross Square Footage of Units by Floor, dated October 13, 2006. L. Public Notice M. Adjacent owners mailing list N. Letters from Public 32 _r~tf~ •~ ~f`~' r-• ...--- -. r - - #' d" q... -- +k. -~'.°[ ~gy" y `i" :r~' ~ .cK .I' - ~'' ~ ~ `;7 ~ ~' ~ '.'w.-• ~ ter- rP Y,~~ ", J ~~~~ ~ i §° _ ~. ~ The Willows '~ ~~ ~ ~ ~~ f.~~~ "~ "'~ .x ' ~~'~~ Lot 8, Block 6, Vail Villa a 1st Filin 74 Willow Road ~ _ ''~ ~, .~- ~~ ` * L ~.~ ~~~~ ~ ~ ~ Planning and Environmental Commission -November 13, 2006 - ~ ° s `,- zr q ~ kt ~.... .. 3~ ..,.a - ~rA.C° e ,fir _ _... ~. ~p ~ '' w,. "r~. ., -..... _'..' ' S ~'~. ~ .~{ . _: i .' 3 ~ ~~..~ - r 4-,,fn ~ _ ~ C ~~v ...,~ ;y > y ~~ ti; a 4 • LL~ ~ t S:.-«-.-_ .' ^, w. 5 ' _ '"~' ~hf ~`~ 1 ' `i _ c iT ~ r ~. 4 r ~ .. u ,~~t. '' ~ ~ ' a ' ~ ~ Via' ti ~ ~ y~ ;~ ~~ ~. ~ ~ ~" •~ ~~ ~ ~' ~ ,. }ic. ~~t,~SK._ S h • t t.f~" ~-'y....•3,'f ~ rp~Y r~~~~~ ~ ~- ___ C~ cer'E~~ - L f{~J'~ ~ cTa .. --. y. -~'mJ~ "('~-~i t, g ~ ~y'~ ~ 4 t;ta. ~J~ ~~ Cav.~,~'. ~ ..J~ ~~` t~ ~n _rv .F, f'. :'~ r~ ~ wC$ 2. .- ~ IJ r ?'~ f ,~. ~! t4}'~ :f ~ 7;~ (' ~ ~ ,t~4 t, r i- "~A frR ••~ -I 'wH`^hRPY'.-y~~ t' 4~'~3. e ~~ ~ f,-~~~ __ a..x ZF~~ ~` 1 - r~ ~~,i 1 m-c ~ ~~~ t ,r.•~~ ?'x€x`,'•; ~ i. a ;i+.., ~ . - ~ v_, , ., . ~ ;.,±M1x~Y ~ f~ '~ ~ q w - 1 r~ `~.>i' ~ c+l j • r,: t`+ a. ..'A ~ ~ ~ '-,--.t-_v_ - .~ _ 4 V. ' i~4ry ~y /, _"~ C1. ~1 't .fig? .,'°a °i.; S J-. ?~ `,.a `" 1 `~--- t - `'~`•~'~, ~>t7 ~~> 4b ~T'~.....`~m..3.ar-.~.,«~ '~.y. ~' w;.r„ , ;, -.'l.r ~k ?~. u7~_ u ~. '9~ , , ~ '' -" ~' - y . ~, „ . . c~~'~~~ F °' ~''~ ~' i fa V' '~ ~ti.':-"" a t,' ~ ^'')~ 1 >< ~ ta~Tt '~! ~` - b a . ~ } x kt ~': ri fd ~ -~~ t''t'. ~ Y _ ~ ~~ 'v. , . ~ _ ~ ~':.4 ~ «s y~rf a e , :'., °.,'.:, r ~, "' ~ r". ~ 4r; ~~. .~ ,~4 9~~t ,i._} l.;,n 7 ~ ;t 'mac .t_,• t.....5 i' 1 x t ~~~ f' _ ~ 1~~: ,k, y - I ~~'~. Y: ~,$<;~ ,~;.;~ y~~'!~~ r'" i4 ~'~n~~r' ....,~`{~ Lt, ;. -:~ Y _ ~v. d ~~l ``~'+~y.~ ~ ~vV~~~aa. i, i . t':.i. 4, ~,# *~1-`~ ~ t i :. ''-.. i 1 ~..'.l ~k ., . -:.. ,,,. ~ `x= vim... _ _ ~ `, ~ _ _ - ~ . ~,'~ ~'~;`. 9r. f 'r'y .. r.:- '7 ~~ ~r.: fir`, ~c~..-.. xr ~E_. ~ J*~ ~~ 1, e y u. ~.,t .~ .. -'_".--.. -. ~ -.~ .~ a ~ ik`'T~' ~ µ s~ayr~",c~'!cf,.^ l~ r ~`•~ S J3 '+}.<A. - ~+t~nr ~o '. n - - `+i'~-~. = e f tr~.~i r( ~' rr.~`: '_"'-~ S' 1~..-J~ fr ~1k rd~ `3'+~;J ~ ~%,re'. r S~'_ ~ ,,... t, 7.. ~~ ~i~..' S~. ~~, '~{t ~M_fhy,,,,, 'rs- ',~~~ ,~,«. ~',""~~ .-.Tt.~!~~ -k4.1~i4~'- i~-,~ „,K y _ r. ''.,p '~ f t':'y -t ,.~~.TK' 6 ,~ ~ ~ • ~~-t ~....;~ 3r `,i-~ .{i. is ~y~ - - _ ~~ : , ; .,_t ti `9 i ,~y, ~f '~'.~ ~ r 5tE r. '' . ~ '~; - r--, ~'~ ~ t ~'Mrt,;yr1 > ~~ - ~ ~~t~~ i ~:~tE.[y~~,yvJ_'4 c*~''`Y`~`•r+ <'-! ~1. t .a..i~,aY ~ ~- jgl ~'~ tr s- ~ ~° a ~ C ~ ~ ~ ~, ~ £j+`."yt~.;t 'i ).t ~ 2~ ~ .C' r .4 'y~~:? r' ~4 ~ .a~~2 trh~ ~ "~ ~ , H ' a ~y ji ~ p+r- •.a r to k. r. i. ~i w 4r r /y ~f~i~f...~...~...:. ~~: Y ' by ~x V CE" r-~4~`",~jj~ f ~,-L}jr z x.+ ~ ~ r€a .T -1_~ ` r ~u ',', a...~' x, . l.'~,„: r ~ :•h' t .. ~' z, ~ A ` r.~• r Z ~ ~~ _ { =>R ~ a aj § p. a}, ~; ~ x x~ ~ ••~. ((i :'' ~ ~' ,' t-., .,.fit'. ~ Pr , r .~' ~*.. ,. '~t*'si`" rr~'. a ?'"k r ~u,.J -'~,.! v.7rfi r i'~ ; } a :~ `'i ~. ; "~ ^~.1y ta_ ~~, 1 ~;~ k, ,~. ~+~ ~~ l ,..c,~i~ .l. 1 I ^4. ~ ~,,. _ r ~...+~'. i1~' ~ i' te' 'fit; ,1:"i:,, ~ ~.: Tt~ ,i;1. .a~ ~~-r-k t,y ~~' :~•,~,{~r. ~.,, +t~ vz~: a,. `~ f ~ "r,te~. ` ~ i ~~ t r. ~ ": ~- ; a r.'~~s.r~, ..?,;~- ~, %,,. ,., ~, r ~ y'~ ; . J~; ~y ~~.'; i ;;~~'"t'' ^ ~ • ~~ ~~ '~ ~ = I .4 lc.;'~ :Z i.~a i ~ xi n:,.._ ~~.°"-T-~[,~t~ ~f.~., s r~ £-+~'"r , =M[; ' 'r ,C ~{I~, .j;~" : ~»` '-~~.. -- , t-y..R -4'i lye :a r.:-it ! ~: 1~. ` 3F~S _ arb "`!~.`a u.'.'53.~ ~ t-:;Yr 1 ,i ~~~ ~ s ~ i 4''aci_ ......u :'f~' ~~ r~"~o-'et ,v ;^`.~~ ~tu~.~ .i1.~~,, -~~ „~~ ~~, ~ ~ ~~. -3^~`~ ~ _ .. ..:'sx a.~= x ';7 ~..r ~r;, Y "~ : 7i4~: ~' .`^.f' ~ ["~'e `~.~ ~tL'~~~ ~.l'.~-~ ~~~~a } i R '~Fy. ~.y+fC3 r~, ~~~r. ~~. +rr r ;..i~ ;'~v , -~r ~ N ~::~ r~ f'r S ~-:~' r + '~- cH Y.%i ~.. 3 ~. ~~~~,a 1._ ,}kt~~pn .'~.F r L' r 4 F a. r - _ ' ., S'S.f r .{ ~ - r-h ,~~y ~~3 '.'b.~ V ~ _,-'fi--'a~'fi. `3' ~ c y'-~ ~~:o~. -,? s * _ ~' ~,Sr°`"~[. "'- -e ::ta 4 d~+ R~ . --''~,` ''.~ t r ~": r :1 1~.,,.' _ ,--~ ~+. ~ ~ `: - _µ4'~..Cr 3 ~. - ~ 3 r~ ~'<~~~...'.. ~ ~ ?,a~. R~, y, i$ y ~ 11 .i ~ .r F .il%'`-~ k k1 ~ - ~s-~:- r C` = ~~-f, r r~, it ` ,, <.:. ' -, ~ ,~ 1 a" Y v r.~,' t 1 ::~: ~ ' ~^l f. ! f_.: .'~rAAS'f=~ ~... ~ d, 'e W'~o~ 'xr -.L }c' ` ra ~, F~ {'` t , r~ rt y, `~ "~' { '1` ~? 7t~ -~i,aJ ,*~s r ~~4 4.r_~ E ~'~ .,.a (~ ` +-. ~~t;'> ^ ~,'~'^ /.. 4 `.~ ~ ''b~• ..7"7 r~`~ ...~ .S r tr~ a.;.3~ ~ - C Jn~ - b - - 5 r~ _~~7,r,'uK-•~ j a, ! .,t ,. F. ~ 3._ ;..?1 ~a,,r~ c.. .-~.r _~v,,• yFi'.} ~ ~ 1-:C'3~`•i --^t y~9.. --may ,.,. ~ k , >~, ,( .,~,...i`~'4~, R'{~ E; 5 t~, :i ~.' r r_Y" ,y .ar- ? ` ~': ~`C,~~ I ~,~`r y., _aa'~~ , ~ ,.~J 4q yra. -_-:! . ~.%,,,,1: '~'f.r `x'.ir 3 ~ \.. ..f, ,~ :3 . 0. - ~r - - a r~.' /.. i ~ ~'-5~.. ~ t ~ ~j - ~~:'j <. ~d-,'~' `' £'.,:'~j, t " r?': r~ ~ ~ ''~L`. ;;~'~f•„w.rr.:~a-. ~-r`'-~§i:iW ~R•.. ~. .J ~~ fi .,~. `~~- _`. ~.7 k < ~r ~'•~ r:.~Z ~ n-' ^ ~':-r c' krr 2 1. 1 ~ ". ~.• s y~ .,.^r^r,. t tM` ~.: ~!? ~..x r 1vY' ~'. ~ v 4a:_ c y4j ~.. k ~.~y. i +- v~~ ry .°`-~ .. i i r, .~ L ~'~ .i~,. }~ D r .~'s '~_.•re e.. `~ aL a ~~ ~ -- 3• +Gc z~"} t , ': S, 1 .ff ~< ~ ~ i .3:. ! "`~ f~ '; 4 v I . . "~"~3 ~ ,3r'. ~ p ,`."`~- r ;'. i _ f S" :;r~ , r T - ~ ; y S a • ~ /;y. ~~~ '~4 ~.1, '.~ ~ 1 Y. T ~~'Y.µ;;~ „.5,. ~. ~.. ~y~ :~'~~ Y ,t '..-• ~ -F ~ ~'~'; r ,~.~.,._ tc.~..~ Y-'r~ ..~ Y x~vti~.;ly,, • t ~ }; .t 54 +t r, ;.iC - f '~t:.' ~.tir .: k ' ~ ~.. {'c•}.'~"~yy9`~ ~ v ~.~' `•'3 r ~ti-~ '~ ~5j1'1 Z y~ ~ ,:~. -.'."E~ { `i ~;5.:.::~ ru# ~,'k ~,.J <,~y~ S -fe',~. r~, ` _.~:p.'S ( ,.. w i ~`~: _~ ., -~ fit, _ - ~ + c" -~ : _ ~ - . L' ~, :, t - i' 7 x , r t S ~ ref • r L. ~ ~ ;xyC~ L~" w - % y - - ~ 6` %.:i `.~•}.. S`. .l. -',Gw. vr=.,r± 3 ..3 t' ;''p'it .r ® 50 0 50 Feet This map was createtl hY the Town of Vail GIS Department. Use of this map should he for general purpo ~ The Town of Vail does not warrant the accuracy of the info'- n wntain[ (part rk is app Attachment B THE WILLOWS ANEW TOWN OF VAIL SPECIAL DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT October 17, 2006. THE WILLOWS A NEW TOWN OF VAIL SPECIAL DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT Applicant Triumph Development, LLC in partnership with The Willows Condominium Association Inc. Architect Resort Design Associates International Civil Engineer Alpine Engineering, Inc. Land Planning Pylman & Associates, Inc. TABLE OF CONTENTS 1.0 Introduction 1. 1.1 Summary of Request 1. 1.2 Purpose of Report 2. 2.0 2.1 3.0 3.1 3.2 3.3 3.4 3.5 3.6 3.7 4.0 S.0 5.0 7.0 Attachments: Existing Conditions 3. The Willows History 3. Proposed Plan - 5. Project Description 5. Architectural Design 7. Utilities 7. Detailed Zoning Analysis 8. Employee Housing 12. Rental Opportunities 14. Public Benefits 15 Special Development District Review Criteria 17. Conditional Use Permit Review Criteria 21. Town of Vail Comprehensive Plan and Master Design 23. Key Features 27. Town of Vail application form Letter of authorization Architectural plans and topographic site survey 1.0 INTRODUCTION 1.1 Summary of Request The Willows Condominiums is truly one of Vail's early residential buildings. Originally developed by Bob Lazier over the span of two years, from 1970 to 1971, the four story brick and stucco clad building has been well maintained but has changed very little over the past 36 years. There is very little ownership turnover in the Willows and most of the owners have been involved in the building, and in the community, for many years. Due to several factors, including,the age of the building, the original construction methods and updated life safety code requirements, the owners are facing a significant capital investment requirement. The Willows Condominium Association has spent considerable time investigating various options and opportunities. This application represents a request for the establishment of a new Special Development District in the Town of Vail to allow the owners and a development partner, Triumph Development, LLC, to pursue an opportunity to redevelop the Willows building in a manner that addresses the goals of the owners and also addresses many of the goals of the Town of Vail that are articulated in various master planning documents. The existing Willows Condominiums building, like most of the buildings in the Willow Circle neighborhood, is non- conforming to almost every development standard of the High Density Multiple Family Zone District (HOME). The applicants believe that this application represents the type of `flexibility and creativity in the development of land in order to promote its most appropriate use" that the Special Development Zone District was designed to encourage. The owners at The Willows understand that change for the Willows building is necessary yet they also have a deep affinity for their neighborhood and feel very strongly about protecting the existing character of Willow Circle. The owners have worked very carefully with Triumph Development to create a thoughtful solution that will not impact the character of the neighborhood in a negative manner. The redevelopment proposal will not increase the building height and will maintain conformance with the height allowance of the HDMF Zone District. In fact, the new building height will be lower than the existing building in some areas. The proposal results in a net decrease in the number of units on site, increases the amount of landscape area, creates a greater setback from Willow Road and maintains a similar number of actively rented beds. The redeveloped active beds will be a tremendous improvement from the existing accommodations. 1.2 Purpose of Report The purpose of this report is to provide information relative to an application for a Town of Vail Special Development District (SDD) zoning designation and for a Town of Vail Conditional Use Permit (CUP). Submittal requirements for the formal establishment of an SDD and for the review of a Conditional Use Permit are set forth in the Town of Vail development regulations. This application complies with all of the submittal requirements as outlined in the Town of Vail SDD Application Form and CUP Application Form packets. 2 2.0 EXISTING CONDITIONS 2.1 The Willows History The Willows Condominiums are located at 74 Willow Road on Lot 8 Block 6, Vail Village 1~ Filing. The lot size is 0.4854 of an acre (21,144 square feet). The site is bounded on the west by 44 Willow Place, on the east by the Riva Ridge South Condominiums, on the north by Willow Road and on the south by Vail Road. The Bishop Park Special Development District is located just across Willow Road. The four story building consists of twenty-seven identical 596 square foot qne- bedroom units and one studio unit of 446 square feet. The upper three floors each have eight of the one-bedroom units located off of a central comdor with an exit stair located at each end of the building. The ground level consists of three of the identical 596 square foot one-bedroom units, aone-bedroom managers apartment, a management office, a small hot tub and sauna room and a front desk and common lobby area. An elevator in the lobby adjacent to the west stair tower also provides access to the upper floors. The building construction technique utilized apre-stress concrete "T" beam system for the building floors/ceilings. This type of concrete structural system limits the ability to make any kind of significant remodel or upgrade to the existing building. The existing floor to ceiling clear height to the bottom of the concrete "T's " is seven foot six inches. The. building does not have a fire suppression sprinkler system. The concrete structural system will make the installation of a fire sprinkler system very difficult and will be both expensive and unsightly. The seven foot six inch clearance height would most likely be further compromised. The exterior brick and stucco skin of the building has been well maintained but it no longer meets the level of quality of building materials. of the immediate neighborhood. The rear yard of the lot is occupied by a two-story open air concrete parking structure that has approximately forty-two spaces. This thirty-six year old parking deck has significant structural issues and is a candidate for complete removal and reconstruction in the near future. The existing building isnon-conforming to almost every development standard of the High Density Multiple Family Zone District (HDMF). The HDMF Zone District allows a density of twenty-five units per acre. This equates to an allowable density of twelve units on the 0.4854-acre site. The existing building consists of twenty-eight units. The building or the parking structure encroach well into every required setback, the site coverage exceeds the 55% maximum, the minimum landscape requirement of 30% of the site area is not even close to 3 conformance and the building exceeds the allowable GRFA limitation. The only HDMF development standard that is met by the current building is the 48' building height. The Willows Condominiums has always been governed by a very interesting and unique set of condominium association documents and covenants. The twenty-eight units are each owned in fee simple. There are currently twenty- six owners, with two owners each holding title to two units. The condominium declarations restrict the owner of each unit to thirty days of summer use and thirty days of winter use. All of the other. time the units are placed in an actively managed rental pool. Each unit owner is a partner in the Willows Management Company, which provides the management, marketing and rental operations. Each of the twenty-seven one-bedroom units is identical in floor plan and in decor. Since the completion of the building in 1971 all of the units have been maintained and furnished in an identical manner. Owners have not, and are not allowed to, make any individual upgrades or to conduct remodels of their own unit. In fact, while using the property, owners often stay in the most desirable unit. available and not necessarily in the unit to which they actually hold title. Since all of the units are finished and furnished in an identical manner the upper floor mountainside units tend to be favored. This type of condominium declaration is fairly unique and appears to be a predecessor to the fractional fee concept. 4 3.0 PROPOSED PLAN 3.1 Project Description The Willows Condominium Association and Triumph Development have spent the better part of the past year carefully studying remodel and redevelopment opportunities that would address the needs of the building, and the various goals and objectives of the homeowners, Triumph Development, the neighbors and the Town of Vail. The relatively near term building needs include: • a complete demolition and reconstruction of the~parking decks. • installation of a fire sprinkler system to meet current building codes and Town of Vail Fire Department requirements. • a significant upgrade or complete replacement of the electrical, heating and ventilation system. • a complete renovation of the interior of all twenty-eight units and all common spaces. • an upgradelreplacement of the original brick and stucco. exterior building facades. The overwhelming majority of existing owners wish to retain some ownership and use of the building. However, the scope of improvements required, the capital investment required and the difficulties of working with the existing concrete structural "T" system to upgrade units and common areas .create an overwhelming task for a homeowners association to address. This coupled with the realization that after all that capital investment and construction effort, the owners would still each have a 596 square foot unit with a seven foot six inch ceiling height has led to a conclusion that the best course of action for the owners is to redevelop the site to a standard appropriate to the neighborhood and the community. The fact that no individual owner has invested significant~sums of money in specific remodel projects or is emotionally vested in a particular unit location lends itself well to this type of group consensus. There are probably very few if .any other condominium buildings in V ai] that have a similar set of circumstances. The Triumph Development, LLC and Willows Condominium Association partnership proposes to completely remove and replace the existing twenty-eight 5 unit building with a new building that will include nine two-bedroom fractional fee units and nine whole ownership units. The nine fractional units will be divided as 1/4 shares, resulting in thirty-six available shares. Each of the existing Willows twenty seven 596 square foot, thirty-six year old one-bedroom units and the 44-6 square foot studio unit will be exchanged for one 1/4 share fractional fee ownership of a brand new beautifully finished two-bedroom unit of approximately 1200 square feet in size. The existing Willows Condominium Association will receive title to the remaining two units (eight 1/4 shares). Although these shares may eventually be sold to individual buyers the initial concept is that the Willows Condominium Association will hold these shares for several years and place them in the active rental pool. All nine of the fractional units will be subject to a similar use restriction as the existing Willows units. The owner of each 1/4 share will be allowed four weeks of summer use and four weeks of winter use. The remaining four weeks of each 1/4 share will be placed in the rental pool. The Willows Association. will continue to operate an active rental and management program. The nine whole ownership units will be marketed for sale. Five of the whole ownership units have been designed to include a bedroom with lock-off capability. Each of the five lock-offs may be accessed and rented separately from the primary unit. The redeveloped Willows building also includes an on-site Employee Housing Unit. This unit, located in a very desirable ground floor corner of the building, is designed as a 670 square foot one-bedroom unit. This EHU will be subject to the standard Town of Vail EHU deed restriction and will be made available for sale. The new building will also include a full front desk operation, a common lobby area and a separate library room. The design includes an extensively landscaped courtyard with a swimming pool and spa facility. This pool garden will be a tremendous amenity to the site and will be a focal point for both guests and owners. The new Willows will consist of three and four story building forms and will not exceed the building height allowance of the existing HDMF Zone District. The building will actually be lower than the existing building in some areas. The redesign will also pull the building back further from the street, increasing the front setback area. Existing landscape wall improvements will be removed from the street right-of-way. The area available for landscaping treatment is significantly increased and all required parking will be located in a completely enclosed parking garage directly below the building. 6 3.2 Architectural Design Resort Designs Associates International is the project architect for the redeveloped Willows building. Gordon Pierce, Principal of RDAI, is the lead design architect for the project. Gordon has designed many of the most notable buildings in Vail Village and is well versed in the design style that forms the fabric of the Vail Village urban design pattern. Gordon also designed two of the adjacent buildings to the Willows, 44 Willow Place and the Bishop Park Special Development District. The architectural design of the proposed building will be a dramatic upgrade from the original Willows building in style, form and materials. The intent of the design is to establish a high level of quality and character that is sensitive to the neighborhood and pays tribute to the alpine design style of Vail Village. The three and four story building heights create a simple but varied form that is very compatible with adjacent buildings. The building is designed with a strong stone base, stucco;and wood materials on the main massing forms and a steep well articulated roofline with gable dormers and hip roof forms at the building ends. The building forms provide articulation across the facade and the well- developed window patterns and the wood railings of the numerous balconies provide for interesting and welcoming elevations. The stone, stucco and wood siding materials, the generous roof overhangs, the wood balcony railings and the small pane, true divided light window elements are all consistent with the Vail Village Urban Design Plan and with the established character of Vail Village. A covered porte-cochere creates a focal point for the front door and provides a weather protected entrance. This creates a significantly improved check-in and loading function and will reduce congestion caused by cars temporarily parking on Willow Road during the check-in procedure. 3.3 Utilities Water and sanitary sewer mains are located within Willow Road and should be adequate to serve the redeveloped building. Alpine Engineering, Inc. is the project engineer and will work closely with town staff and the utility service providers to ensure appropriate utility connections are designed and implemented. Natural gas, cable television and telephone services are all available at the site. 7 3.4 Detailed Zoning Analysis A. Proposed Uses The HDMF Zone District allows for multiple family residential units and lodges including accessory eating, drinking, recreational or retail uses not occupying more than 10% of the total GRFA. The HDMF district also allows a fairly lengthy list of Conditional Uses, including fractional fee units. The historic use of the Willows property has been residential with a unique form of covenant controlled usage. The Willows redevelopment proposal maintains the residential use of the property. There will"be no commercial component to the Willows redevelopment proposal. The redesigned building includes a total of nineteen dwelling units. Nine of these units will be designed as two-bedroom units of approximately 1200 square feet in size. These nine units will be deeded as 1/4share fractional fee units and will be operated in a very similar manner to the existing Willows Condominiums. Each of the current Willows property owners will assume ownership of one 1/4 share of a unit. Each owner will be allowed four weeks of summer season and four weeks of winter season use. Any unscheduled owner time and the remaining four weeks of time allocated to each 1/4 share will be required to be placed in the Willows rental program. " Fractional fee use is listed as a Conditional Use in the underlying HDMF zone district. This application has been written to include a request for Conditional Use permit to allow the fractional fee use. A specific response to the Conditional Use review criteria is included in a later section of this report. The current Town of Vail definition of a Fractional Fee Club defines a fractional fee unit as "a condominium unit, pursuant to recorded documentation as approved by the town of Vail, has no fewer than six (6) and no more than (12) owners per unit..." The planned program for the Willows will result in four owners per unit so the Conditional Use Pemmt may not actually be a strict legal requirement of this request. There will also be nine whole ownership condominiums and one deed restricted Employee Housing Unit.. The whole ownership use is allowed as a use by right in the HDMF Zone District. A Conditional Use Permit has been submitted for review of the Type III EHU request. All other aspects of the project, such as the parking garage, the front desk operation and the pool garden courtyard are allowed as accessory uses to the HDMF Zone District. B. Density The Town of Vail Land Use Code defines density as the number of dwelling units allowed per lot or per acre. The HDMF Zone District allows for twenty-five units per acre. The lot size of 0.4854 equates to a permitted density of twelve dwelling units. Like most of the Willow Road/Willow Circle properties, the original development of the Willows Condominium greatly exceeds this permitted density. The existing building includes a total of twenty-eight dwelling units. The proposed redevelopment of the Willows will reduce the overall density to eighteen units plus one deed restricted Employee Housing Unit. C. Residential Floor Area The HDMF Zone District permits a total of 76% of the site area as Gross Residential Floor Area (GRFA). The permitted GRFA equates to 16,069 square feet. The existing Willows building exceeds the allowable GRFA and measures at 18,607 square feet of GRFA. The re-development proposes a total of 32,240 square feet of GRFA. The Vail Village Master Plan includes the following description of the Willow Circle sub-area: "In most cases the levels of development throughout this sub-area greatly exceed what is allowed under existing zoning (High Density Multiple family). Gross residential floor area ratios (GRFAR) range from .6 to 1.3 with an average of 1.01. With the exception of one parcel, all of the properties within this sub-area are, developed at, or over, their permitted levels of development." At the time of the adoption of the Vail Village Master Plan 44 Willow Place had not yet been redeveloped. The original building on the 44 Willow Place lot represented the low end of the GRFA range stated in the above description of the neighborhood. 44 Willow Place has now been redeveloped to the full extent of the allowable GRFA so the neighborhood range and average has increased. The redeveloped Willows GRFA is not inconsistent with other buildings in the neighborhood. D. Building Height The HDMF Zone District Allows for a 4S' building height for a sloped roof building. The existing Willows building is approximately 48' in height and is one of the few aspects of conformance with the existing zoning. 9 The redevelopment proposal consists of three and four story building elements and will maintain conformance with the 48' height allowance. In fact, the three story elements of the proposed building are lower than the existing building. E. Site Coverage The HDMF Zone District includes a site coverage allowance of 55% of the total site area. This equates to an allowable site coverage of 11,595 square feet for the Willows property. The existing building and parking structure have a site coverage calculation of 12,638 feet, thus exceeding the allowance. The actual building footprint of the proposed new building at grade, i. e. the perceptible site coverage of the building, measures 10,820 square feet. This perceptible site coverage of the actual building footprint equates to 50% of the site area and would be in conformance with the 55% site coverage development standard. The definition for measuring site coverage, however, includes all portions of a building, including below grade portions. The parking garage below the new Willows building extends beyond the building footprint. There are extensive areas of landscaping and courtyard on top of the parking garage, at grade level, that will not appear as site coverage and will qualify as landscape area. The design team believes this meets the intent, if not the definition, of the site coverage development standard. The proposed building, due to the extent of the underground parking garage, and as site coverage is formally defined, has a site coverage measurement of 14,110 square feet. F. Landscape Area The proposed redevelopment plan includes 8,540 square feet of landscape and courtyard area and brings the site into conformance with this development standard. This represents a substantial increase in the amount of landscape area on the site. The primary means of accomplishing this is by moving the existing at grade parking to an enclosed garage underneath the building. The HDMF Zone District requires 30% of a site to consist of landscape improvements such as lawn areas, flower beds, courtyards, patios, walks or water features. For the Willows site this equates to a requirement of 6,343 square feet of landscape area. The existing site has been calculated to have only 2,848 square feet of landscape area, which is well below the development standard of the zone district. 10 G. Parkin The Willows falls within the area described as the commercial core area on the official Town of Vail parking maps. The parking requirements for the commercial core areas are listed in Schedule A of the Town of Vail Land Use Regulations. Schedule A details a requirement of 0.7 parking spaces for fractional fee units and 1.4 parking spaces per dwelling unit. 9 fractional fee units x 0.7 = 6.3 9 dwelling units x 1.4 = 12.6 1 EHU x 1.4 = 1.4 Total parking required = 20.3 parking spaces The proposed parking garage as designed includes 27 parking spaces. In addition to the quantitative parking requirements, the HDMF Zone District requires that 75% of all parking spaces "shall be located in the main building and hidden from public view or shall be completely hidden from public view from adjoining properties within a landscape berm ". The existing Willows parking deck is clearly not in conformance with this criterion and is generally considered to be a highly visible eyesore to the neighborhood. The redevelopment proposal will resolve the existing non-conformance of the visible parking by locating all of the parking spaces in the building- and hidden from public view. With the development of the Front Door project and the increase of traffic on this portion of Vai] Road the removal of this parking deck becomes a significant benefit. H. Setbacks The HDMF Zone District requires a uniform 20' setback on all sides. The existing buildings encroach into the setback to various degrees on all sides. The building encroaches up to seven feet from the property line in the front and some landscape wall improvements currently extend over the property line and into the road right of way. Tie building and/or the parking garage encroach up to sixteen feet from the west lot line, six feet from the rear lot line and four feet from the east lot line. The driveway and a related retaining wall encroach onto the adjacent 44 Willows Place property. 11 The building setbacks as proposed in the redevelopment plan vary greatly over the site. The proposed building increases confornlance with the front setback as the building has been pulled back from Willow Road to allow for a loading and drop off/pick up area. A porte-eochere roof extends out over the pick up/drop off area to the property line to provide a sheltered entry. Setbacks on the east, west and rear sides of the building vary considerably. This design allows for a creative articulation of the architectural forms and building mass and avoids long continuous walls and flat elevation planes along the property lines. Along the east property line, where the adjacent building encroaches to within inches of the property line the building design steps deeply back into the site, creating a significant space and separation between the buildings. In the underground parking garage the walls have been designed close to the property line in order to design efficient parking and circulation spaces. These subsurface portions of the building will be imperceptible from the exterior. 3.5 Em~loyee Housing 1) Town of Vai] existin~~policy The Town of Vail has traditionally required the owners of new and redeveloped projects to provide employee housing for the incremental increase in the number of employees generated by a project. The Town has never formally codified-this requirement but has consistently applied a housing generation formula developed by the firm of RRC Associates, Inc. For development projects that comply with underlying zoning the policy has been to provide housing for 15% of the incremental increase in employees. For development projects that exceed underlying zoning standards the policy has been to provide housing for 30% of the incremental increase in employees. The RRC employee generation formula lists a 0.4 employee demand per residential dwelling unit. The existing Willows project includes 28 condominium units. This equates to an existing employee generation of 11.2 employees. (28 x 0.4 = 11.2) The proposed Willows redevelopment includes 18 condominium units. This equates to an employee generation of 7.2 employees. (18 x 0.4 = 7.2) The Willows redevelopment proposal would result in an overall reduction of 4 employees. Housing mitigation is required for the incremental increase in employee generation. In this case there is no incremental increase and therefore, 12 consistent with past application of this housing formula, no mitigation requirement. 2) Actual conditions The Willows Condominium Association owns and operates the Willows Management Company. The Willows Management Company manages a total of 45 units in the Willows, Riva Ridge South and other Vail Village properties. The management company has a total of 15 full time equivalent employees. This averages to 0.33 employees per unit under management. The redevelopment of the Willows would result in a total of 10 less units under Willows management. The revised average, assuming no decrease in employees, is 0.42 employees per unit. This actual conditions experience at Willows Management is remarkably consistent with the RRC employee generation figure of 0.4 employees per unit. An actual conditions calculation results in a-full time employee demand of 6 to 7.5 employees generated by the proposed Willows redevelopment. 3) Willows housing/public benefit proposal Although the application of the traditional employee housing requirements indicates that the Willows proposal does not create a net incremental increase in employee housing the applicant recognizes that employee housing is an important issue to the town and, as a public benefit of the project, believes it appropriate to provide a reasonable measure of employee housing within the community. Without taking credit for the employee demand already generated by the existing building, the new Willows building would generate 7:2 employees under the existing town employee generation formula. This 7.2 employee generation number is also very consistent with the actual employee levels experienced by the Willows Management Company. Utilizing the town's housing demand methodology 7.2 employees, divided by the 1.3 jobs per employee figure equates to a demand for 5.5 employee beds. The Willows redevelopment proposal will commit to providing 100% of this employee housing demand. The current proposal includes one 670 square foot one bedroom apartment on site and the applicant will commit to providing five additional beds off site. These off-site beds will be provided via a buy down program or through a direct payment-in-lieu to the Town of Vail or the Vail Housing Authority. This housing commitment of one on-site one-bedroom unit and five off-site beds addresses 100% of the actual employee housing demand of the proposed Willows building. 13 3_6 RentalOp~ortunities A primary goal of the Vail Village Master Plan is to maintain and to encourage an active bed base in the Vail Village area. The Willows owners intend to continue to operate the existing homeowner owned management company and to establish a use and rental program for the fractional units that is very similar to the current Willows use pattern. The'~venty-eight fractional shares that are exchanged for the current Willows units will be subject to a condominium association covenant that will allow each owner four weeks of summer use and four weeks of winter use. All other weeks and all weeks not actually utilized by the owners will be placed in the active rental pool. The eight additional fractional shares will be owned by the Willows Condominium Association. Although these shares may eventually be sold, subject to the same use covenants as described above, the intent of the association is to hold these units in the active rental pool for at least a few years. In addition, five of the wholly owned units have been designed to include alock-off studio unit. This results in eighteen brand new high quality beds that will be fully utilized for short term occupancy and the potential for five more rental beds within the lock off units. This is a total of five beds less than currently available in the existing Willows building. And these new beds will be a significant improvement over the existing Willows beds. The existing one-bedroom units are 596 square feet in size with 7'6" floor to ceiling heights. The size and configuration of these units is not consistent with the marketplace and no longer meets the expectations of many of the guests looking for Vail Village based accommodations. 3.7 Public Benefits As an integral part of the Town of Vail SDD review and approval process there has been a standard of public benefit that must be met. In general the appropriate level of public benefit to be provided by a project has been directly relative to the Level of variation requested from the standards of the underlying zone district. As has been stated above, the existing Willows Condominiums, as well as most of the other properties of the Willow Circle neighborhood, exceed most of the development standards of the existing zone district, including the density and the GRFA. A redevelopment of the Willows Condominiums that would meet the strict and literal standards of the HDMF Zone District, including density and GRFA would include 12 or less units and 16,069 square feet of GRFA. In order to meet these standards the redevelopment would most likely consist of 4 to 6 large townhome units of 2500 to 4000 square feet in size. This type of redevelopment scenario, while meeting the standards of the underlying zone 14 district, would result in a very exclusive, low density project that would likely have the following consequences: • The loss of Vail Village based short-term rental inventory. ' The probability of an exclusive yet seldom used bed base. • The loss of the existing, long term Willows owners from the community • No on-site Employee Housing Unit or provision of other housing. • No inclusion of public benefits. This type of redevelopment, while meeting the zoning code, would go against many of the principles, goals and objectives expressed in Town of Vail master plain documents. In the case of the Willows Road neighborhood the underlying HDMF Zone District is not necessarily fully harmonious with the goals and objectives of the Vail Village Master Plan. The Willows Condominium Association and the principals of Triumph Development believe that the SDD process allows for a redevelopment of the Willows property in a manner that can more successfully address many. of the overall goals of .the community than a redevelopment under the parameters of the existing zone district would allow. The proposed Willows redevelopment plan is able to address many of the Town of Vail master plan document objectives and also provide a public benefit in a fair relation to the deviation from the underlying zoning. Specifically the redevelopment proposal represented by this request for SDD Zone District designation will: • Allow the existing Willows owners, many of whom have. owned there for many years, to maintain property ownership and to remain a vital part of the Vail community. • Provide employee housing for 100% of the employee housing demand of the proposed building, without deducting any credits for the existing level of development. • Provide a 670 square foot one-bedroom on-site Employee Housing Unit. This is an extremely rare opportunity to create a new Vail Village based EHU. • An upgraded pedestrian/automobile streetscape along the entire length of Willow Road. Willow Road currently exists as a one-way street with a twenty-two foot wide asphalt section and no curb, gutter or sidewalk. This section of Willow Road will be reconstructed to a design that includes a twelve-foot wide asphalt automobile travel lane and an eight-foot wide stone paver pedestrian walkway. This streetscape design will match that of other recent Vail Village streetscape improvements. The pedestrian walkway will connect to the sidewalk along Vail Road on the west end and to the streetscape improvements currently under construction as part of the Front 15 Door improvements on the east end. This streetscape improvement will provide a significant public benefit to all pedestrian traffic that flows through Willow Road from the west. This streetscape will provide an enhanced pedestrian alternative to Meadow Drive and will allow direct pedestrian access to Vail Village from Beaver Dam Road, the First Bank area and Meadow Drive properties such as Villa Cortina. This improvement represents a significant contribution to the goal of pedestrian connectivity from Vail Village towards the west. The redevelopment of the Willows will result in a very desirable, high quality fractional ownership and rental program that will meet a key Town of Vail goal of providing and maintaining active beds in the Vail Village core area. These beautiful new two bedroom units will provide a much superior rental product over the existing one bedroom units. The larger unit size will open the Willows to a family friendly market that the property has not been able to serve over. the years. The ownership and rental requirement covenant structure will ensure that these beds remain actively occupied. All of these public benefits can be accomplished with a building design that increases conformance of many of the underlying zone district standards and maintains the charm, character and integrity of the Willow Circle neighborhood. The applicant believes this level of public benefit is appropriate to the level of variation requested from the underlying zone district. 16 4.0 SPECIAL DEVELOPlV1ENT DISTRICT REVIEW CRITERIA Title 12, Chapter 9 of the Town of Vail Municipal Code provides for the establishment of Special Development Districts in the Town of Vail. According to Section 12-9A-1, the purpose of a Special Development District is, "To encourage flexibility and creativity in the development of land, in order to promote its 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 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 hail .Comprehensive Plan. An approved development plan for a Special Development District, in conjunction with the property's underlying zone district, shall establish the requirements for guiding development and uses of property included in the Special Development District. " The Vail Municipal Code provides nine design criteria which shall be used as the principal criteria in evaluating the merits of the proposed Special Development District. It shall be the burden of the applicant to demonstrate that submittal material and the proposed development plan comply with each of the following standards, or demonstrate that one or more of them is not applicable, or that a practical solution consistent with the public interest has been achieved. The applicant has addressed each of the nine SDD review criteria below: A. Design compatibility and sensitivity to the immediate environment, neighborhood and adjacent properties relative to architectural design, scale, bulk, building height, buffer zones, identity, character, visual integrity and orientation. AQplicant response: The proposed Wi]lows redevelopment plan creates a high level of compliance with this criteria. In fact, the applicants believe that the quality of the architectural design, the proposed building materials, the elimination of surface parking and the sensitivity of the design to the neighborhood result in a significant improvement over the existing conditions. 17 The alpine style of Vail Village architecture and the quality of building materials have evolved and improved a great deal since the 1970 construction of the Willows. The monolithic facade and the brick and stucco exterior are not up to par with the surrounding neighborhood or with recent Vail Village improvements. The design team has put a great effort into ensuring the proposed design is compatible and sensitive to the immediate neighborhood. An ovemding goal of the design team has been to achieve the program goals of the building without increasing the building height. We believe that the character, identity and visual character of the proposal are in complete harmony with the objectives of this SDD criteria. B. Uses, activity and density which provide a compatible, efficient and workable relationship with surrounding uses and activity. Applicant response: The existing neighborhood is singularly residential in use, with a mix of highly active rental programs and quiet exclusive second homes. The proposed program strives to strike a compatible balance with this mix of neighborhood activity levels while simultaneously meeting the goals of the existing Willows owners, the goals of the development partner and the overall goals of the Town of Vail. We believe the proposed density and use structure is the optimal program to balance these goals and objectives and provide an appropriate balance to the level of residential activity of the immediate neighborhood. C. Compliance with parking and loading requirements as outlined in Title 12, Chapter 10, of the Town of Vail Municipal Code. Applicant response: The proposed Willows redevelopment meets or exceeds all requirements of the parking regulations. The new building presents an improved loading and drop off/pick up area that will reduce congestion on Willow Road. The existing parking deck is in dire need of replacement and does not meet the screening and visibility requirements of the zone district. All of the required parking for the proposed building. will be located in a fully enclosed parking garage below the building. D. Conformity with the applicable elements of the Vail Comprehensive 18 Plan, Town policies and Urban Design. Plan. Applicant response: The proposed redevelopment of the Willows is in compliance with all relevant Town of Vail master plan documents, goals and policies. A separate chapter of this application details the many specific areas of compliance. E. Identification and mitigation of natural and/or geologic hazards that affect the property on which the special development district is proposed. Applicant response: There are no known natural and/or geologic hazards, including the Gore Creek floodplain, that affect the property. F. Site .plan, building design and location and open space provisions designed to produce a functional development responsive and sensitive to natural features, vegetation and overall aesthetic quality of the community. Applicant res onset The proposed site plan and building. design have been carefully designed to respond to adjacent properties and to the overall aesthetic quality of the community. The front facade of the building had been pulled back from the street to allow for a more functional loading and drop off area and to enhance the pedestrian streetscape experience. The pool garden has been sited to create an open light and air region in an area where the adjacent building encroaches to within inches of the property line. This courtyard design will minimize sunshade noise and visual impacts to the adjacent- Riva Ridge South building. G. A circulation system designed for both vehicles and pedestrians addressing on and off-site traffic circulation. 19 Applicant response: The on site vehicular circulation system is designed to allow for simple and convenient access to a single level of underground parking. An off street loading/pick up area with a covered porte-cochere will eliminate existing congestion on Willows Road. H. Functional and esthetic landscaping and open space in order to optimize and preserve natural features, recreation, views and functions. Applicant response: The site plan includes a functional and esthetic landscape design that is appropriate to the site. This landscape plan is only designed to a conceptual level at this point in the review process. A fully detailed landscape plan will be prepared for review by the Design Review Board. I. Phasing plan or subdivision plan that will maintain a workable, functional and efficient relationship throughout the development of the special development district. Applicant response: All construction will take place in a single phase. The applicant will work with both the Town of Vail and the neighborhood to develop an appropriate construction management plan. 20 5.0 CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT REVIEW CRITERIA The proposal to redevelop the existing Willows property includes a request for two separate Conditional Use Permits. One is to allow a fractional fee ownership structure for nine of the proposed units and the second is to allow an on-site Type III Employee Housing Unit. The uses are described in detail in the above project narrative. The Planning and Environmental Commission uses the following criteria in the evaluation of a Conditional Use Permit request. The applicant response to each criteria is included. A. The effect of the use on light and air, distribution of population, transportation facilities, utilities, schools, parks and recreation facilities, and other public facilities needs. ApTlicant Response: The use of a portion of the site as fractional fee ownership will have no discernable effect upon the above referenced facilities and issues beyond what the permitted uses would generate. There will be no impact upon schools and the usage of transportation, utility, park and recreation facilities will be very similar to that of a lodge or actively managed rental property that is allowed as a use by right. The proposed 670 square foot EHU will have no discernable negative effect upon the facilities listed in the criteria. ,Re~T? EfI'eet=~ig~n=traffic with particular reference to congestion, automotive and ed ~ ~ pec3:e~triaa~ safety and convenience, traffic. flow and control, access, - ~- - --maneuvei ability, and removal of snow from the street and parking areas. Applicant Response: The fractional fee ownership pattern of nine of the proposed dwelling units will result in a usage pattern of the Willows site that is very similar to the existing use pattern. We do not believe there will be an effect upon congestion, safety, traffic flow, access or ~ra~~ni~idtabili't~e ,'fl~~rew mite design, irrespective of the ownership pattern, will rrzp~~i>ucWhl~~~us12~~tro~x~gestion, access to the Willows site and maneuverability of vehicles on -the site. There will be no impact on snow operations due to the ownership pattern. The inclusion of one 670 square foot Type III EHU in the building should not have a measurable impact upon congestion, safety, traffic flow or snow removal. 21 C. 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 in relation to surrounding uses. Applicant Response: The architecture of the proposed redevelopment of the Willows is a significant upgrade from the existing building in style, form and materials. The architecture is very compatible with the character of the area and with the established vernacular of Vail Village and the surrounding residential environs. The ownership format does not have an effect upon the architectural design of the building. The usage pattern of the proposed building will remain very similar to the current use of the current building. The inclusion of a Type III EHU does not negatively impact the character of the area or the bulk and scale of the proposed building. The redevelopment proposal is in full compliance with the height allowance of the HDMF Zone District and the bulk and mass of the building is in character with the surrounding uses. The Willows owners, Triumph Development and the design team have made protecting the character of the neighborhood a high priority of the proposed redevelopment plan. 22 6.0 TOWN OF VAIL COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AND MASTER PLANNING DOCUMENTS The design team and the applicant have carefully analyzed the Town's master planning documents in order to address and incorporate as many of the relevant goals and policies as possible into the proposed redevelopment plan. The list below is a summary of the goals and policies of various planning documents that are consistent with the proposed Willows redevelopment plan. Items listed in italics are particularly relevant to the proposed plan. A. Vail Land Use Plan 1. General Growth/Development 1.1 Vail should continue to grow in a controlled environment, maintaining a balance between residential, commercial and recreational uses to serve both the visitor and the permanent resident. 1.3 The guality of development should be maintained and acpgraded 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 areas). 4. Village Core/Lionshead 4.2 Increased density in the core areas is acceptable so long as the existing character of each area is preserved through implementation of the Urban Design Guide Plan and the Vail Village Master Plan. 5. Residential 5.1 Additional residential growth should continue to occur primarily in existing platted areas and as appropriate in new areas where high hazards do not exist. 5.2 Quality time share units should be accommodated to help keep occupancy rates up. 23 5.3 Affordable employee housing should be accommodated through private efforts, assisted by limited incentives, and provided by the Town of Vail, with appropriate restrictions. 5.4 Residential growth should keep pace with the market place demands for a full range of housing types. S.S The existing employee housing base should be preserved and upgraded. Additional employee housing needs should be accommodated at varied sites throughout the community. B. Vail Village Urban Design Guide Plan The Vail Village Master Plan. includes a map that details the area subject to the Vail Village Urban Design Guide Plan. The Willows Road -Willow Circle neighborhood does not technically fall within the guide plan area of influence. The design team has, however, incorporated many of the relevant architectural design elements of the plan into the building design. In particular, the roof compositions and overhangs, the building materials, the style and placement of windows and the balcony railing treatments are all in complete compliance with the Vail Village Urban Design Guide Plan. C. Vail Village Master Plan The Vail Village Master Plan does cover the general area from (and including) Ford Park to Vail Road. This does include the Willow Road -Willow Circle neighborhood. The following is a list of goals and objectives that support the Willows redevelopment plan. Goal 1 -Encourage high quality redevelopment while preserving unique architectural scale of the Village in order to sustain its sense of community and identity. Objective 1.2 -Encourage the upgrading and redevelopment of residential and commercial facilities. Objective 1.3 -Enhance new development and redevelopment through public improvements done by private developers working in cooperation with the town. Goa12 - To foster a strong tourist industry and promote year-round economic health and viability for the Village and for the community as a whole. Objective 23 -Increase the number of residential units available for short term overnight accommodations. 24 Objective 2.5 -Encourage the continued atpgrading, renovation and maintenance of existing lodging and commercial facilities to better serve the needs of our guests. Goal 3 - To recognize as a top priority the. enhancement of the walking experience throughout the Village. Objective 3.1 -Physically improve the existing pedestrian ways by landscaping and other improvements. Goal 4 - To preserve existing open space areas and expand greenspace opportunities. There are no objectives of this goal that are relevant to the Willows redevelopment proposal. Goal 5 -Increase and improve the capacity, efficiency, and aesthetics of the transportation and circulation system throughout the Village. Objective 5.1 -Meet parking demands with public and private parking facilities. Goal 6 - To ensure the continued improvement of the vital operational elements of the Village. Objective 6.1 -Provide service and delivery facilities for existing and new development. 2_ Land Use Plan The VVMP designates the Willow Circle neighborhood as Medium/High Density Residential. The proposed plan is in conformance with this designation. 3. Open Space Plan The VVMP designated areas to be protected as open space. The Willows redevelopment is in complete conformance with this portion of the Vail Village Master Plan. 4. Parking and Circulation Plan The Willows redevelopment proposal is in conformance with all aspects of this element of the Vail Village Master Plan. 25 5. Building Height Plan The building height plan designates the Willow Circle neighborhood as appropriate for three and four story buildings. The proposed Willows building includes both three and four story elements and is in complete conformance with this plan. 26 7_0 Ke_y Features In summary, the following are key elements and features of the proposed Willows redevelopment plan: The existing Willows building is in need of significant capital investment. The two level exterior parkingdeck is in extremely poor condition and will require a complete demolition and reconstruction. The main building structure was built with pre-cast concrete "T" beams. This form of construction makes any type of significant upgrade or renovation, including installation of fire sprinkler systems, extremely difficult. • The floor to ceiling clear height in the existing units is 7'6". • The existing owners, through careful and thorough analysis conducted by their condominium association, have determined that an attempt. to upgrade the. existing building does not make economic sense. • The proposed plan allows existing Willows owners to maintain ownership in the property and maintain the exact usage pattern they are accustomed to. • The proposed plan maintains an active rental management program with a similar number of beds. The existing Willows has twenty-seven 1-bedroom units and one studio unit. The proposed redevelopment plan proposes nine 2-bedroom fractional fee units and includes opportunities to rent five additional lock off units for a total of twenty-three actively rented beds. • The redevelopment proposal includes a commitment to provide deed restricted affordable housing in an amount equivalent to 100% of the employee generation demand of the building. • The proposed plan places all parking underneath the building. All parking will be completely screened from public view in accordance with the zone district standards. • The proposed plan meets the allowable height limit for the HDMF Zone District. • The proposed plan incorporates public benefits that are appropriate to the level of deviation requested from standard of the underlying HDMF Zone district. The Willows owners, the principals of Triumph Development and the members of'the design team believe that this proposal is in keeping with the spirit and intent of the Special Development District and maintains the character and integrity of the Willow Circle neighborhood. 27 August 16, 2006 Mr. George Ruther Town of Vail Community Development Department 75 South Frontage Road Vail, CO 81657 Re: Willows Condominiums Dear Mr. Ruther: The purpose of this letter is to provide authorization for Triumph Development LLC to represent The Willows Condominium Homeowners Association with regard to Town of Vail review of the attached application for a new Special Development District. By the signature below such authorization is granted. Sincerely, Connell President Willows Condominium Association ~II~.~::~~I~ 74 Wilia~e~• ]t~>a~j, Vail, l'~~lurncG, NlhSi • S~iti-~,'~~ILt~t)~x~S (~)44_56~)i) ° `>70-4i(~-233 • 970-4i(?•5714 f~~x ,~ ,~r '~~~ ~~ ~~~' Application for F~QView by the ~~ Rlannin~ and ~nvlronmental Commission ~tJ Y1'1Vf ~~ VIAL Department of Community Development 75 South Frontage Road, Vaii, Colorado 81657 ta1:970.479.2139 fax: 970.479.2452 web: www.vailgov.cam General l nforrnation; Ail protects requiring Planning and Environmental Commission review must receive approval prior to submitting a building permit application. Please refer to the submittal requirements far the particular approval that is requested. An application for Planning and Environmental Commission review cannot be accepted until aH required information is received by the Community Development Department. The project may also Head to bo reviewed by the Tawn Gauncll and/or the Design Review E3oard. Type of Application and Fee: • Rezoning $1300 • Major Subdivision $1500 • Minor Subdivision $050 • Exemption Plat $650 • Minor Amendment to an SDD $1000 • New Special Development District $G000 • Major Amendment to an SDq $6000 • -Major Amendment to an SDD $9250 (no exterior modifications) • Fiaodplain Modification $400 • Minor Exterior Aiteratfan $650 • Major Exterior Alkeration $800 • Development Plan $1500 • Amendment to a Development Plan $250 • Zoning Code Amendment ~ $1300 • Variance $500 • Sign Variance $200 Description of the Request: ~ Pleasc: see attached narrative descrtprinn _ Location of the Proposal: dot: 8 Block: 6 Subdivision: Vai V; ~ 1~gQ 1 ~r Physical Address: 74 Willow Road Parcel No,; 21010821900 (Contact Eagls Co. Assessor at 970-328-8640 for parcel na.) ~aning: HDMF Name(s) of Owner(s): The Willows Condominium Association, Inc. Mailing Address: 74 Willow Phc~ne• see attached letter Owner(s) Signature(s): Name of Applicant: Triumph Development, LLC Melling Address: 8120 Woodmont Avenue Suite 800 Bethesda,MD 20814 PhAne; 301-657-],Z-12 E-mail Address: sieve@triumphdev.com Fax 301-657-5948 For Office se Only: G Fee Paid: i~~i.Q._iQ~ Check No.:.1.? Z-~ 13Y~ J/•i ~I k J • ~ ~ ~- Meeting Date: ~ ~:~ ( PEC No.: Planner: __ _ - ____ _ Project Na ?age 1 of 7-04!01104 ~c(~ ~(o • ~ J u (i~ 0 Application for Review by the Planning and Environmental Commission ~o YVIV ~,~ ~~~~~ Department of Community Development 75 South Frontage Road, Vail, Colorado 61657 te1:970.478.2138 fax: 870.479.2452 web: www.vailgov.cam General f nforrraa#lon: All proJacts requiring Planning and Environmental Commission review must receive approval prior to submkting a buEiding permit appgaatian. Please refer to the submittal requlremsnts far the particular approval that is raquestecl. An application far Planning and Environmental Commission review cannot be accepted until sit requked information is received by the Community Development Repartment. Tho project may also need to be revlcawod Uy tho Town Council andlar the Resign Review Board. Type of Application and Fee; _ • Rezoning $1300 Conditional Use Permit j $05Q • MaJar Subdlvisian $1x00 Flao p stn-MlodiNeatt~n $400 • Minor Subdivision $850 Miner Exterior Alteration $650 • Exemption Plat ~i650 • Ma}or Exterior Alteration $400 • Minor Amendment to an SDR $1000 • Ravelapment Plan $1500 0 • New Special Ravelopment District $0400 Arnandment to a Development Plan $260 • Major Amendment t4 an SDp :66000 7_aning Code Amendment $ 9300 • Major Amendment to an SDD $1250 Variance ~ ~a00 (no exterior modiflcationa) Sign Variance $200 t]escrlptiQn of the Request: Please: see attached narrative desSriprinn. ~. t.oeatlon of the Proposal: ~.ot: 8 Block: 6 Subdivision: L1~~, jji 11 ag~l ~t Physical Address: 74 Willow Road Paraei Lo,: 210108219001 (Contact Eagle Co. Assessor at 970-328-8640 for parcel na.) zoning: NDM~ Lama(s) a# Q Her(s): The Willows Condominium Association, Inc. Mal{ing Address: . 74 I~i17}.ow Road Voila~0 81 h'1,Z Phone: see attached letter t3wner(s) Signature(s): Lame of Appiican#: Triumph Development, LLC Mailing Address: 8120 Woodmont Avenue Suite 800 Bethesda,NID 20814 Phone; 301-657-1, 7l1<$ E,mallAddress• Steve@triumphdev.com Fax 301-657-5948 For 4fflce use or,ly_ Q ~ ~..~ ~~C. • Fee Pald: _,,.~..,~ Check No.:.1 ~„ By: ~ ~ 4+~" Sb C-~ Meeting f0ate:_T_Z 3-~ p G, PPC Na.: Planner: ProJact Na.: Page 1 of 7.04/01 /04 lJ ~ ~~p - O~ ~~~~~ `''~~~ - Application for Review by the ~~ ~, y,~ Planning and Environmen ~ ~I Commission ~~]~j ~~_ TOrYIY OF VAIL'' Department of Community Development 75 South Frontage Road, Vail, Color;~do 81657 te1:970.479.2139 fax:970.47~T.2452 web: www.vailgov.com Genera! Information: All projects requiring Planning and Environmental Commission review mast receive approval prior to submitting a building permit application. Please refer to the submittal requirements for the particular approval that is requested. An application 4or Planning and Environmental Commission review canna t,e accepted unfit all required information is received by the Community Development Department. The project r• ,~ also need to be reviewed by the Town Council and/or the Design Review Board. Type of Application and Fee: • Rezoning • Major Subdivision • Minor Subdivision • Exemption Plat • Minor Amendment to an SDD • New Special Development District • Major Amendment to an SDD • Major Amendment to an SDD (no exterior modifications) $1300 " Condition:~l Use Permit $650 $1,500 •- Floodplair.:.1odiiication $4p0 $650 $650 Minor Exterior Alteration Major Extor~~r Alteration $650 $800 $1'000 Development Plan $1500 $6000 Amendm~~~t to a Development Plan $250 $6 000 Zoning Cr'° Amendment $1300 , $1250 Variance $~0 • Sign Varia ~e $200 Description of the Request: Conditional Use Permit for TXpe TTT EHtT. .~. _. V Location of the Proposal: Lot:_.8_`Block: 6 Subdivision: Vail Village 1st Physical Address: 74 Willow Road Parcel No.: 21.0108219001 (Contact. Eagle Co. Ae ~ssor at 970-328-8640 for parcel no.) Zoning: Name(s) of Owner(s) The Willows Condominium Association, Inc Mailing Address: 74 Willow Road Vail, CO 81657 Phone: Owner(s) Signature(s): see attached letter Name of Applicant: Triumph Development LLC - -- 8120 Woodmont Ave. Suite 800 . ~ .. __ yr.N.. Mailing Address: "' ^~ °"' ' Bethesda 1rID 20814 Phone: 301-657-1112 E-mail Address: Steve@Triumphdev.com Fax 301-657-5948 k~r ,~. -~ For Office,Us,~pnly,; .~(~ ~,j/' ~~~ s~~ Fee Paid: ((ter ~S ~V heck N T U I By. _ •~ Meeting Date:----- ~~ ``b~ PEC No.::...: , , ,,: •~.~, -- , Planner:___ Project No.: -- ~-~ ~ Page I ul ~-1)-alU 1 /Od d ~} d. s roject data project team vicinit ma p y p r a~l°°G Weal ael nAe°°clel ~ wnrLOws ND7FpRr~-Y15iRKTION •----- g p IrieraUaul be genera I notes ..~-~.. OC lion: b]d FbrVat SMM, Meh Ftr VA1T MT X171 ~ 71f1 r4 WIIOW Rudd Oen Farclew, C4911dd lb+M L.VLV1V11J~! , Vdll, GO Fhone !45)39] K33 NR: !4B)a9]~HB4 I. ALL CONSTRUCTION SHALL COMPLY WITH GODEB LISTED ON THIS TITLE SHEET Code n(OrInd LIOB~ /3/9Fxuc°BVM,bdl. b INCLUDING ALL TOLLN GP VAIL CODE Saldx, L00930] fll°n, (3031419•M93 AMENDHENTb. CONTRACTOR TO BE RE9PON91BLE FOR CDDE COMPLIANCE. I RESDaT DBiGN ".. ~ Fru !30314/9.9366 E FOR ~N NE I ] R O I Lot glm: 3m gndxap pcad or~~3J3Y~OWlllowe~y732~m1ma as4]ma webby 9 I BT IGAT ING AND VERIFY G ALL 9uIG 270 f p THE S E A N O ~ AvaD C4 01670 l F F'R0.1 eHALL TI THE G ND ARCHITECT Gf ANY DI9GREPANGIEB A55 D[3.1i E9 $Ite COVRd De: Prl°r;e. (9!9)]49 SB99 Fav 1919/869 G333 L ~.I \ BETU.EEN PRAWINGe, 9PECIFIGATION9 4ND ~ EXISTING CONDITIONS PRIOR TO SUBMITTING Blp ANP PRIOR TO START OR I GON9TRUGTION. $OUdre FDOtdg{,(.dwdtlon: _ Allowable GRFA: ~ 3. GONiRACTOR TO VERIFY FIELD GONpIT10N0 WItN GEOTEGHNIGAL ~rzcNITFCTUaO FUNNING AClUd GrfA: . d d ENGINEER: CONTRACTOR BHALL PERFOR'I II , i INFERIOR DESIGN p~ I ~_ °FM 1 In eX t0 rawings ALL WORK IN STRICT ACCORDANCE WITH THE 601L'b AND GEOLOGICAL REPORT. V ARCHITECTURAL C]RAWINCaB. <. GONiRAGTOR 6HALL NOTIFY ARCHITECT $an Frarc4m OlNce NDTE~ALL GlFA (GR0B9 REEIDdtIµ RDGp AF£A)cLLGNAiIGNB AH IffAB.R010 Wr91DE F4:E QE%2RIOR 6HFA7HIIYa. i ~~ I .I II AI.I GO VQr .Sheet r M Gl T f• I ABOUT GONDITIONB REQUIRING A MODIFICATION OR GRANGE BEFORE PROCEEDING WITH THE WORK 6ES BWYn S>eµ 146 Fbw ren<xo GRIN ~ifl; els,i4~f +~ elssa architectural $ mbo$ mbols material S OpOg dp I Cd ep A2.1 $Ife dnd Grd ding Pldn g. REFER TO STRUCTURAL, MEGHANIGAL. B W Ofi y y A~.1.0 Ht. GdIG4IdflOn 0heei A2.1.1 BxiSkln] VB. propoeed PLUMBING AND ELEGTRIGAL DRAWINGS FOR OTHER GENERAL REOUIREMENT9 AND COORDINATE WITH ARCHITECTURAL ou el tt IIBl lprvwSe.R b;Yl1D srtldv, CD ww] _ /~ ~, rn.a•;r cry. {=yey-.[~-~- kJ II L ' f ~ "'''°° ®e`T A2.2 Site eectlona A79 Siie a®GfIOYIB DRAwll~s. d~, 1m.«sdw r.<rw.ws.nBe . ..,«,~ wr«rm;e:ee. ~_ 1 ~T m~ ~ er, 6 ~ ~~ ®~rv µv'vO° '~'~'4' Slie BCClIOnO A2.5 SIiB dOGtlOna 6. ALL CONSTRUCTION TO PROVIDE 4 WATERPROOF, WEATHER-LIGHT BUILDING. CONTRACTOR BHALL FLASH AND CAULK A5 NEGE65ARY TO ACHIEVE TH19 P~ II ,~ rtuvar;°,u s Y no•ore>•;u ®~ ~O~ ~~ A3.0 dfd a FIOOf Pldn REQUIREMENT. I~_-.,_, nay A3,0. gdrege pion W/ Bcl.ft. A M * © Rc A3. let. FIOOr Pdn T. FINISH GRADE SHALL SLOPE WAY FRO pUILDING TO A DRAINAGE OWALE OR eLevar;cw ~ °~~~ m ~ • ws, x n, e ®+ rtmnn 4^~n ~ A3.1.1 IBk, plan W/ Bo~.fk. A3 ~ HARD PIPE SYSTEM DIRECTING WAtER GUT AND CWAY F OM UILDING TO 1i 9111TABLE v°a. naM ® '°,y,~ aanwc °con rrye ~ . bp°narw - cwc;mn ®`nr wwLanw . 2nd. fOOr Pdn A3.Z. 2nd. plan W/ BOl.rt. A3.3 3rd. FIoOr Pldn R B OUTLET N.O.N.I. COORDINATE SLOPES WI1H LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT AND CIVIL ENGINEER ~"~"~ """°°'"n ® ~~ ° A3.3.1 3rd. plan w/ Bq.R. 1I ~, murwc wwau nrae r .vRneen ~„ ,°„ ® r A3.4 4kh. FOOT Pdn B. HANDRAILfi SHALL BE PROVIDED AT ALL y ~ 0 w°;urnx; °raa Rn° ~wooc ~cv A3.4.1 4if1. Idn W/ B .ft. p q A4 1 Roof Plan 6TAIRWAYO, INTERIOR AND EXTERIOR WITH FOUR OR MORE RISERS. HANDRAILS BHALL ®E 36" HIGH FROM TREAD NOSING WITH A J / O ~ ..r:u.. ~8$P. k'FXP R~evnrlpr eeruL m°wm ~ nawe .v-.~~ _ I~~ I ®ra+nan a.ocx ~nn,u arm ®ere¢w na. ecaur . A5.1 EdtVeilOnB A5.1.1 enlar ed elevatlo g n AS.Z Eavd tlOna MIN. OP IK" CLEARANCE FROM WALL AND A CR099 SECTIONAL DIMEN9IGN OF Uy" MIN. AND.1"MA%. HANDRAIL95HALL BE GONTINUOUO THE FULL LPNGTH OF THE y ~ ~ ~ 0 M ~ t }0 d W hil U ~ ~ I /A 11 J ~oeTalw DRAW;NG TITLE e ,,©,,~J a.r•ew. Fam r"ac~l.°, 9TAIR5 AND SHALL TERMINATE IN NEWEL POSTS OR SAFETY TERMINALS. ~ l f rt y I ~ °nwuna nna ae Ir~ 1' 9, OPEN SIDES of LANDINGS, TERRACES, 1 r x+n;l. ry w DEGK9 AND BALCONIES MORE THAN 30" 'ABOVE ADJACENT GRADE 6HALL NAVE ~ ®unnoe;clw ®~ 36" MIN. HEIGHT GUARDRAILS AND HAVE NO OPENING THAT WILL 4LLOW PASSAGE "'~' rvoRTw nrnecw ; ~ OF 4 4" DIAMETER SPHERE. ~° ®°rJ°0 ALL FIREPLACES AND ACCESSORIES TO 10 xwo+: as avoe ~,,,,., rvortiu . MEET LOCAL ANp STATE GODEB D *'~"-ce INCLUDING FIRE RATINGS. ETC. ol¢4rgvlc bc4Le rtme~we°uove ,RCw°u~a°, n. m°rt;w ro of ~ y - II. DOORNIINDOW SCHEDULE INDICATES SIZE AND TYPE FOR FRAMING INFORMATION gerh Dnl f abdreVatlOnS ONLT, CONTRACTOR TO BE RESPONSIBLE FOR ROUGH OPENINGS REQUIRED BY WINDOW AND DOOR MANUFAGTURER~ 1W1LL~I ~ ° ~ I]. ALL TUBS 6HALL HAVE A CNE-PIECE ~ ~ WELDED TRAP. 13. ALL CONCRETE RETAINING WALLS SHALL PROOFING At BACK AND 4T HAVE WATE K ra ou oi+vum R FOOTING BACK FILL TO BE BAND OR / rh ~ . GRAVEL. +, /"^ r, r w ~~` W M lun w 'r""r ^°°1U n cman ere a nr a01' n , 14. WRITTEN DOCUMENTATION SHALL PREVAIL OVER SCALED DIMENSIONS ON DRAWINGS. IN NO EVENT IS A DIHENS70N t0 BE SCALED OFF OF THE DRAWINGS WITHOUT PRIOR APPROVAL FROM ARCHITECT. E.7reaD ; wm ~ vi v,°e°nw w r ~ "A° Ib. PROVIDE RADON MITIGATION INJDER ALL eLABb. //II~~ ry uua rw rM urn. ns wcn o w, ''` rma: r~ urt Ib.CONTRAGTOR AND ITS SUBCONTRACTOR WILL DE01GN AND BUILD ELECTRICAL, MECHANICAL, PLLIMBiNG SYSTEMb AND •"~ DmWrt a^ INTEGRATE THESE SYSTEMS INTO CC '-°'~ uri, ua ' ^ .c - '~ +e ARGHITEGTURAL AND bTR'JGTURAL ELEMENTS. ARCHITECT WILL REVIEW AND ~~ ASSIST WITH COORDINATION. ARCHITECT WILL NOT BEAR LIABILITY FOR ELEGTRIGAL, MECHANICAL, PLUMBING DESIGN AND F'ERF010'fANCE. C N~.~. . ~~;~rua,~,~, ~ C ~ ° . _ ~ iw ~ m i C ; µ R xsi eu cnewrm r w, ""m' Sheet ew< ~.~,~N,Wr .~ , ~ .. ~.Fr.n ~Qe~. Al . -~ i~ ~> 5 WIIIOW RO a~YB91'D0' p'iais - ° 1 AD (qp' R O Mnl - - ~ - °----- __~ _ . .W.) I I ~ I ' IW Y~Yru ~ Lo/: nom wn ``~~ m I 57a'aa' W aaoo' ~~C -_ 5 a I 1 # ! ai W // u 1 ! M \ \~Ipal Ga93'0o' R~/78.0O• L. 1O 4fi' a nw I A0.T / awtwo" n ~ ~ I em /~ lA ~ /~ ~ nw ~\~ ,r~ . . ~ wa{11'00' P.ISB J{ I ~ w . I I~ian~ ~i ~ / \ \ MW . \` .x we ° a \~ ~ I n arm ue pamx ~ MMaR 1Wa 11YCW BMW I OWf \ YW e1YnNM I M n •Mm ... u I W! m~ ea glpY \ to THE N1LlOWS e. \ MetaY 8 p ryYy Y1 M M nn ae~ n w / Y~T [ 6 YMi .. a n 1 W ~a .. ~, ._.._.._.._ a neu _~.. ___.._.._..~ v ane.e 44P AC ~ na _.._. eea _. QI I T M II e~ ~ "u N61' ~-~JI 1 aYR nn V ° Me ,1~ Opla[li "~` p4 41Y qn1 m I eMA a q MM I I w kOMp WMOFR MM1 fYp Iai6lMYq ~ ~ pdf MW~A~~YIn~l.p6a¢k nis I C n I ~ MIM 1 ~ naa I mnn Mna na, ~~~ ~ \ ~ MIN N N ~ o / e1J ~, i ~ \ 6 44 `\ pMpM mUYrz / WMMY/RMIe ° / neL~~ /, N \~ / Y~u\ xuo R{t ~\ d ee~W [y, is exst ~~~ SrBa ~~~ . N neu 6 I1 ~q eMlmtl Is/ ieww ~gi~bgkry~wlr IM Yw d `\ atlp lrlr me ak~Wr my~Y~'a~ gaddtlM M vq' Y a~moY M \ OW~~ mp4,.u M eY eM a mr YMYetlpe. ~q/( ~~~ ROg0 uMr a rpee (R 0 ax.ap ra.s 7nx . w ~ ~ owp ~4RiES~ ``\Ye~ \_ e.p eus 0oa. eMO n ~~ .. MM Moue I M -.~ nMa \\ mao `' ana'' ~W a, ~~a N MflA --._ ~ wlu n aY n Yerale eyYAe n dim u ~m tnna~OBnnuRe°ipr.~ ~ ~ Y~~nwm~cY°µ°'°uxpwi,(rz°w noapc >~p1om~~. n umm acapcw m manor ur la p0RaII1MIR Mn unpL MAOX IITD IYM MK fl6T N TAI {Ia.Y YTM MYS YIIY 1/IM m ipaf R0aN1111W avxs N M I1pf Wr Nfi pEA011 NYa l{'pp MY aYmr M AW YefRY [ 1{Y!1(O Yas auu s xxu nia nY arz n Yt aMmcpYa aaM wnYt n r n Y01 a Im.i K w eLYnr~eoY Man nr eYar enaM YOW rl MY Moe YOM nM a{Mn nu~im°1s npa~~aeWi%W~linal°m"'IM WPI Mp. n .ten ur.~wau n~i i aiuiip ~ow u l~mnt Yuan. IQ aF'~i n nwln xo OIMm uou rMrolrc uo sMw wanx xY M YOM M MF YaaMaM Mi Y.Y. / Yl1YYlY a11RY euaa M I®UYY A M1OYY M MR ~ n K WI IIO ^Ye03 YWI WY tlRY YX11 M Mina 01n1YM n raem amv %YUn Yao. n+ ewrc enx.+o. eYa Yung. M t exam eawurc nun uo aru ala ea ne MR n x Wan A abooMY I.IfLI. It) Ylnla CI6N(eaYwaM ! IOt MTIn paYa ID IM paM n mBIAaCAal laapeOMYa M IMYIIM, Aa RMa n YL Yloua M anacYO ra mpM;t euaw Mva eroM+Ya RIVA RIDGE (SDUTH) CHALETS aunn YII/y~/~" =~•c' xr worn uaown na pm ew.m wnu wiM auem. M1/~IN~ uraaammuM.an.wpmmwpwc,pwioupcm ar mam MM arm eer.m.lpn wec ne[IM a la xr 7e C~ -"`---~°°~ ~a ~~ _, r-- _--- ~' ~,~~y~~ ~a^ -~-- to Ot~ su~oms aaN GHALETB RIVA RIDGE (90~iN) ee~ ie a ~ ei,~m snore ~~ . e~`o`ia NOT FOR GON9TFdL^iION RFSOnTOFSIGN AS SOGIATFS ARCHITECTURE, %ANNING, INTERIOR DESIGN Sm FnMleco OAIa e WfntbwL tedfbor Sm M1nxlu'a,U%Im ld~, IteJ91A0J fis 1i1.H1A1f1 Baulder0lf iwsp~w.xwiio ewu~, co eo3m iJ: bt H9 ~P»NCU~ .P~nUetran ~-l (~ V/ 44 WILLOW PLACE 0 ~ ,~ 44 WILLOW 'IN ~$ PLACE o~ n ome ~~ ~ ~ ~,ro 11 a > M I Revi+ PEC SUBNITTdL FTrm+mlWm: ^ rv as ~ ~- L.. J ~~I _ _ Wr ~.}5o°I ~~gjJR' ~~_ atW fhrmng TNle: ~ +, . ~ ~` ~"',t~ SITE lo~,°~~ ~ I ~ ~~~ , toy ~ a~ ~ _~ -,~---~ ~,y ~~N j PLAN -~ f I ~ , 7 .x~um t i ~ ~~ ~e se '~ I reummm~cw ~ ae ~- ~ ___ rt ~~ ~ ~Re,~ v~e~io n;e vat ~ hn• ~e~»eav se.,, ~ t{ rwe: Nov. zr,, smmv . ~ t'~ '•P' Y ~ ~ -_~ ~, ~ We R.axm m~~ ' wim.eoaelk.ueo RVO o.u•ol~mm^ WILLOW ROAD 140' R.O.W.) ~ ~ Dnxn 6y: or. rlEF Ld®.Nv' R•IeOA' rna,Rrc etmuc ' 4 ~ ehedud M' neF _ ~"04•µ,m„ ~~~~~~~~w~~ L.,~+~ ~ ~51TE PLAN R~~5E339`-.,. 7 ~ n"10~.p" I - 9RR ~aweaese route uem ~roerz cacw.e owr ,uw evs 0 5' 10' 20' l l~ 1 ~- _ -' _ _---- rnrs.+a rox~veR eu ^xieaemole ~amr« ©:aoe eon R SOItt DESIGX ASSOCIATES NOL FOR CCNSLWCTION III A~ ~,_-~ _ (IU.91 ~~ (IIeGM1!# a ~~'@ vAll ROgp L ans; 5no~ ' `L.` ~ '~W. VgRIE61 ~ NOTE: ~ _ _ _ - ~~ -- B6 ~'Sr I. EHISTING GRADES BEFCRE DEVELFMEN7 ARE SHOW ~ ~ ~ ~ _ _ __ - '_l _ ~ '~' DARK AND DA6AED (EVERY I' GONTOllRI. 7. REFER TO ROOF pLdN9, A4,1 FOR ADDITIONAL RIDGE ~Ilwl else- -.~ -- , ~~~ aND EA~iE ELEVAflCNS AND CLARIEIOATIgJS. ~ ~ (1551 E\4 ~ / _/ ~ ~ - - E~5,00 ~„~ 5 81'00'00 ~ _ ~„ai ~ ~ ~ \\ ~~\ ~ lb5515b: rl®351 eb0- _ / ~ j v- ~ !_ _ ,.' ----- ~ ~~ ~ 11035) l d i ---_ ~~ --J f -- ~'- -- i s oUO ~---- - -------- ~ ~ r ~ I ~ . -J _ ~ '~ ~ ~ ~ers5 nmtz~ 1b05r ~ ~ 1 ~n J ~ Y d - ~ l //~I N5l ~ llmm5) g ,5, -0156 1 ~ L _ - a S ~ ~' _J of -- --_ _ .I L_~ r , / / y / / tea5 L- __ --~ J i ii I I ~ 63 [9 ~et5) / / / / 1 ~ I ~ u ,~. ' - ~ i ~ i 1~ ~ ~' ~- _ ~ a° ~ 91, 0 f ~ ~ ~ I ~ - ~ I ~ I~----- -~- §I, _~;- / ~~~a2 ~ ~ ~ ~ / ~ ~_ r- ~ I / ~ I 1 I cuueTa RIVA RIDGE f5IX1TH) oi~/ - ---- ~ ~ I ~~ i ~ ~ eir. ~ro r ~ ~~ ~ ( ~ ~ I ~ fl ~ •~ ,~ ~C.. o ~ ~ ~I ~ q C ~~ i rl9a, % Y, ~ I L_ ~ I JI ~ ~ I I I `~ 1 ~ W I I ~~ r~/~ I t ~ x,.e ~( / A el I ~, ~ I 1 ~ ~ L . - . I / , i - . . ~ i i i ~ i -~. I exiei rnee RCUEO o -- _T __ BY I i ~~ _ _ II - - = _ J ~ /W ~:F~ ~ ~~N I C _._ ~ %M5 ~~ ,, W1LLOW RCNO (4m~,R'uw~ pAJ / ~~HT. GALC, ON EXISTING GRADES ~ ~ Im©' .81665' ~ 5' 18' 20' ARCHfIEC9URE, PLANNING, san fanclsw omo wde~ Gaiwar 6eni~l. iis~»iM~tos Boolder~ce +sws wd,wbno e Ids, co eo9m t~: 9m.w9.an i ~303A19.f366 evrx.Mwn4dPmn O ~ A yw~~~ 0 p~ ~haa a ~ > ' RevbbPEG 50&1litdL ^~I Einnsmissian: ~ o''a lwIinBTitie: I"IT. IGALGS ~ oarc: Nov. mm, ~mam~ Pm~nt NO: 25nmma orewnby: oT nEF ~ CTeclred by: MEF~ A2.1.0 ~~~ . GH RIVA RI NOT FOR LO9BTRJLTICN - - - - -- " -, .~ _ VAli, ROgp rRO.W, V'~IFSI _` ' \, \\ ~~__ 5 61'4='pL. ~ \ ~ ~ ~ n _~ ~~ ~ .~ ~J ' ~ ~ - ---- --~-~_,_. --'--' EXISTING BAILDING ~ -------~1 1 %f - ~ ', ® '~: ~~-1i F ____- pE81GN 19-15-P00b) I. i5 ' f~~µ~.tlPl~---REVISED DESICdd l10.0d-Y006) ~~ y I I~---- L`~i~/ -I l b r---------, `~\~ ---------------------p-v-~ I J I ~:`~ \~f~j j`°"~ r---------J ~ ~ ''~ ~~~, ~.;-~~ L____ ~ ~ , I ~~~ ~~-~~ ~ I ~~ I / I I \\9~ TT N I 1 I I m I J II}J 1~• ~! I I ,~ ~" I j ~ ~ I4lY~ I ,~ £ / ! ~ ~ --- ~ I r ~-L.~-----~"1i `~ 1 ~ a 9'~~ rr ---JIJ m~ I, 1 n i~~~ I I CAI ji 7i , I ` I ~~IJ 11 1 ~I I `` L" ~ ` \ Ili 1 nI~'"~ J II / ,T____~ I B~,4y' I i I ~ ~ ~ fip.6o L _-L .- ~ I I ~, ~ o W '~-I lL___~J yP6~D ~~. -------- WILLOwKpADl40`RO.w.) .Low 1GE B£SORf DESIGN A550(IAi ES ARCNITECNRE, PUNNING, INTERgR DESIGN San FNncllcD Olflce wAw.o,..~,14a rum 6u P~Mim, G 94tH la: nsn:.4w r... ~19.lunlu aD~ua.ari9 ~=~s~sutialD Id,, co emm li 3D3M9Ft3) he ]D3.W.a366 ~P~ VI 9 °wO~D Q '~ ~ ~U ~~~~> N Rw6bne PEG fiUBMIitAL ^;f-DuwnluM; ^ Drn+ingTitle: S I?E PLAN Dde: NC)Y, 06,1006 ~PmjG N¢ 13110IDO DnryD y„ DT, HEFT DIFI=ERENT gESICxN OUTLINES I"~" ' I ,,~. im'-m' Sh9rt ': ~I m ~~ ~ zm~ iA2.1. ©~~, E 8 i, 1~ OP GF FPR4PE1 WALL rI~ . ,{ WJRiN LEVEL L 19D'-0" 161Bb.El ~~.8~, 9,.~~~ i,L Nirm LEvEt "~~ ~120'-0"(BIlB6) O Wv !!~~ 6~ a m ~ "&~ BErcvo LEVEL I ~q I I f I Af I I II II I I I FiRBi LEN.L Imm'-o" relws~ ~ ~ ~ I T f ~ 1 I Ilm A I~ Ilo Ila I~ Im L I~ .. I° f~ .. 1 I Im I GARAGE LEVEL ' I 1 I I i i woGE D IAt' Z"(e1m31) _Q Sf°RING r't. Y 99'0"f8199.5J FWRiH LEVEL 190'0° (BI%5) iNIRD LEVEL 110'0" lel'165) 6EGGIVD LEVEL Ilp'•®' fe16v51 Fd_ I_~i. LE_vEL 1~ Em'~p"[015651 GARAGE LEVEL BE'~0"(81.159! NOi FDR DON9iPolGTION diN LEVEL ~ - . PATIO _ Y¢508t 0¢BIGN 3 RD. LE`/EL ] ND. i essocle¢¢s LEVEL t AR[HItECfURF, PUNNING, INTERIOR DESIGN Ibi. LEVEL ~., San kucbCO (NAce GAGE ~ SITE /BUILDING SECTION Irg~, : 1,.0n Y/ ~w~~~ W 0~ ~~x~ a~~~> H I RfVlabm YcC SJBI'I1TAL ^I Eirenemlxim: ~~ DRwYy title: SITE ' SECTIONS i { ~ Dnr. NOV. 06, 10CF, I Profe[i Nn iB1'IB,Oo ~Mxn by Di, NEi SITE /BUILDING SECTION ~ `~cMed"` "E5 A2.2 ~~~~ NOL FORC~iRl0TI0N ~, - z AESOAT -¢.iIGN a 550CI~ieS ~ __FO,R~fH LEVEL ~ 13m'-m" (01069) MCHITECNRE, PUNNING, INTERIOR DESIGN TNIp llYEL tlm'-m'(mt68/ Sao Frandsca Olllca 6UMaW 4~A 1M fiw a~ N„n..a a wlBs Tx, llsn:xm ~LEVlL fu; 1i5J9]AW Im-m^ (ewbbl Boulder (Nflce uRSPe,asewwn.llo eau,, meow] lel: wI.W.MIe fu: wa,Rewee F_~ Ip6i LEVEI. ~ Imm'-m" telBeni naewww.uB,om w..w.mw.leua, GAR<fiE LEVEL _ -~- o~'-m' (mlaAnl r~ I o w ~~ n 51TE / BUILDINCs SECTION ~ ~ °p; ~ Ilm" . L-m.. - -- - O M m 0 a ~b aNu~^> TORIDGE N Ib'-0"(OIm~nJ 6F'PoNG PT. IBB'•0"(Moan) ( AMlbne: PEG 811P."111TAL rV.. _ftURfM LEVEL ~r 30'.0"INBe~ THIIBD LEKL _ Im'-m"(BltebJ I E-Tranemisbre~ 0lODND LEvlL Ilm'-m"lBWebT E.awnErm~ Flpnilmm''-m"!&585) ~ SITE SECTIONS ~~~~L~ NOV. 06, ]¢06 y 09'-m'fBiWb) 1 IiwkG NC ]Yttmmll I Drrr.~r b(: DT, MEJJF SITE / BUILDINCs SECTION ia""""~ MEFJ Il8" • i'-0" Ehen A2.3 ©]~,e0~ Nor ~ G6NBrglCii W ~r IBB'~0"tDW.361 ral¢rw ~eveL 130'•0"(BIB6.U i~ 'BEVEL __ ]0'~0'lenSE) ~ EECO~NGLEVEL _ 1 110'®"(BW65J ,~ HPet LEVEL l~ 100'"!815551 ~_ GFR~RGE LEVEL _ Y B9'~0" (614551 5 517E / BUILDING SECTION jl ~~PEC YJeMIirLL g~ Af 4 Y tulF/ LEVEL 19'3 ut" ,{ BEGGNO LE'YcL Y ~9'~l 3/4" fl(iei LEVEL 100'0' Aft?GE LEVEL ~ (86/IDl EesoQ oE59crc A~SSOGI Ai[~5 Ak[HI TECRIRE. ~ Sn lryxka, U 95tH id'. H539].Nll BoulderOPoce SNlpua3YM Bio I10 I VI 1 ~ ~ n9 W ~w4~o la > I M i ~6Tnmmle~bn~ ^ 'I pnwingittk: SITE ~+ SEC71ON8 FlR~BL~L~EVEL J~ ~i~ (86651 ~T ~ pyi..~. NCV. 06,16061 i, Pro~eR No: ti'.t0D6 GFft4GE LEVEtt}},, 'e1158~f I, p~ y~~, pt, MEF I--SHGAING '. C}wcNetl By: MEF ShefL n RIVA RIDGE SOUTN /BUILDING SECTION _ _ I,B~.,_6. --- - ~'i A2.4 ~ G,m,~6 - - - -- NOT FOR GONETIaA:TION 9ESORT Oe51GN i ASSOCIATES g~ Fp 5 E ~ 1.C Rlq'.E _ lar.o• reio~- A._ aFryzln~Fnwr Y t38' 0"(01965) FOi1RiN LEVEL I+A'~0'lBIE65) THIRD IEVEL 110'0° (EI163) ~ SECOfp ILE VEL I~, ARCHITECTURE, PUNNING, ~~I IMERIOR DESIGN San Francisco ONia 6flWMSUr~INA flmr Ln haN~m, U N1~S BodderOffa ~meue~, m mwioxtia Vl D ~ 99 NyWO~a M f{ -u °Ha~> Rev4lma PEC 5JBI11tiAL F.Tremmulan: I DkwITn8r71t1e: 15i. LEVEL ENTRY SIC ~~~~ . ~ LE~L ~ SECTIONS I i ~ I GARAGE /// / /~ - / / Dek: NOV. 06, 3006 / Pm~ect NO: 3,1T0~00 ~~ / Drown by Di, I`EF Chttked by MEF ~~ Sheee _- 44 UJILLOW PLACE I BUILDING SECTION AS SNOI.UN ON PLANS I,e : I~.m A2.5 ,~~~, /l A z _ ~~ ~~ ~.. NDT FOR C411eifdJDTIQJ ELECTRIGd. R90M CM1Q1 AIWA U(I 3ESIIRT DESIGN I - I Bif.RYaE peal ' ~ ' 155 GG1AT [5 r ~ Q ELE oR e 1 , MCHITFRURE, PUNNNG, IMERION DESIGN ~~ I 3 9 9 ~ ]B $an FiancidW Olflm . ~ ~ ~ 6]l Ma,M Wp41M Sbor SnE ,Ga9ie! I ~ ~ ~ ~ dam: 113.391AO3 d13. 91,M31 ~. III ~ -J~~ - + I t y~ I 1 ~ Ealdai OfAro I U ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ I ~ rr---~- ~ paon ~ 9wso~3.r, sr iio emu.,, w ww1 is mu9ixs - - - _ ~ ~J ~ . .w.Rrm.~.,~ \~ I I i ~ 1 44 WILLOW I I / I I d oeRxe LexL eE~-m~ mu»~ I ~ I I y II PLAGE I~DRG OIIiLINE I^ VJ I ; 1 ~ w 2~ 0 Euaolw amirff •~ &flERil~ ~ Q M b C d W -u ,a,. ~ ~ L ~ a m -- - E EL I RIVA RIDGE lSOUTH) ]. ~ II! ~J ~~ , L ~ 15 '~ PEC YRMRTAL I I E~ I ~-~ ~ -~I ]I / ' ' ~i / I ie ~ 1 ~ ,~i~, J I ~ ) I ~ / I h 33 ~ ]t ~ ~ I ~, ~ ~ -~ E.Tmdmlem~, ~ : ~, -~ / . Uawirg Tik I ~ ~~p EMRY / i .~ N~a~N . FLOOR PLAN I'IECHWVIC4'. i 1 ( / / /9' Dw: NaV. E6, ]006 ` '`~ / \ ~ Pmf9G N¢ 13110ID0 ~ rGnm yy Di. MEF ~ CsARAC~E LEVEL FLOOR PLAN ' °i~edb' "E` IlB'•I'-0" m~~ .Net' 0 A3 ©NOdRM . _- _` NCT FOR CONSiRIGLION .~„-..._ ~~ ~~` _~-.- ~ ~_ ~~ ~--- ~- 1 __ RPS00.T aES1GN I III I I / ~ I f Aa50CIATES 1 .~ 1 ~ i ~ ~ ~ 1 ~ U ELE * ARCHITECTURE, ~---) ,a ~ awir;4 / ` PLANNING, 1 INTERIOR DESIGN I 5 T ! ~-~ to ~~ i San FraNCI5C0 OXi[e I ~~ r~ U) 3se4~.Nibor l i01: 115,)93M))I~ i ~ ~ ~I ~ ~ ~~ ~ 1 ~Ea:,l))))M,. ~--~ 0'~0 ~ - ~ ~ 0 ~ ~ EoolderINfice ~ _ _ D ~I ~ _ D_ 0 ~ ~ ~ ~ 0 '1 ''F~~°°~~~)„e ~--- ~tB - 10 Q ~ ~ I ~ ~~ T~ ~~ a~xe.~ ~ e u~.~. ~ ~ 1, 44 WILLOW r P555QFf. II L~ ~ PLAGE / ~ GARAGE LFiEL 00fSDE 7O I 9 1 ~n e~ 5EIHAGK LM1~E I ~ V I ~ m III II I I \ ILOIw aLUNE I` I I I I1 ~ 90 ny W &MLERFLUE N ~ O y o 0 €o I / , a -u oT,~3= ' ~ ~- - - ~ ~ la~.o" d ~ ^> ~ - - - - ~ ,~~~~GAL_ _ H E~ EL '' R ~ ., .~~ ,` GPI '~ III O ~ Qo ~)~ = D~0 ~ ~ R~,~e) )a , PEC 5116MIti4L' i 1. ~~ I~~ I /// ~~~, FTmmmNeivn: \ J p - - '.. Uawing title: ~ I FLOOR Eu~ i ~~N II PLAN NEr~„N~ ~ i ~ ~- '~ N2~ ma z~j / Plokq NO: 13.1002 ~` ~. __ ~- Oman bp. Dt, HEF ii Checked by: MEF n CsARACzE LEVEL FLOOR PLAN - SQ.FT. oUT81DE 2~D' SE7 6ACK II - i i 1~8~.1.m. aaeer i ':. 4; 4' 8' I6' pp~ee, i A3.0.1 I _ __ _ _ _.__ _ __ - -- -- -- - emLOIN; omun GNALEiS RIVA RIDGE (50A'µ) '~-~ _ L uP BEDROLH `~ ~ c III ~F D ' I o ~ ;~ ENTRY ill ;. ~~ 5FxCH ~ ~ ~ ~ v r ~ i'° L _. '~ t ~ ~ i ; P 9~ n <<~r~ S~ , ~ROR II ~;, I_ ~ __ ~. \~ -~ ~r - ~~II~`~ .I ~ ~ %~ ~w~ ~ ~ /'II rmm E%151. EDGE P401Ep ROGp ~~ WILD-0~ ROAD (40' R,O.IU.) ~.. • _- ~ 1\ ,~~~ ~~ "~ 1` Ib' ~~ NOT FOR GLYl61R10110N RESDRi 0251GN ASYDCIATES li ARCHITECTURE, PLANNING, ~ INTERIOR DESIGN Sa~fxandfro Office swasnnl~~ 1 6~~ik ns.nz«iei~ Fu: nsas:.«sI Boulder fNGa es~ue sw+.wle ilo " ~eo',De, co oum Td: ws.es.un A~ 303. ~9.II66 In~AxswMxAnmm I~wwu`APmn A4 WILLOW PLACE &IILDING DUTLME ow o ~ O ~ol oo O T}^ '' ~ U II R' l ' ~ a m I d ~~ N ~~ Y 3 PEC~SUP111TTAL '' ,~ Ir Ilum ~) _~ # ~~/n2 ~ ETranemisdon. ~ N ~ \~~\ ~ya~ i y I FLeooR ~,' PLAN E fDero. NOV"©6,7096 IPm'pa Na 3:710.00 FIRST LEVEL FLOOR PLA~1 it Drrxn by'. p1,. r1EF -~"-"`~"~- MEF IIBv~E~9" '~° ~Zb ILA SII~ -~ A3.1 j Nor roR ccisrlacncN `@~~ IIE5081 DESIGN r AS SOCi ALES i ARCNITEC1l1RE, PUNNING, INTERIOR DESIGN San Fnncisw ONlce ; uwrknsxn,t.m 4loor' 65m N.ca~.o, c~ unos iei, Ii1.19].Nll II iu .if]snua. BoulderC~ce ~ asp:usee.:,v.rio r blbr, GO BO103 io: bl N9]J66 E/ i:M~pwlptlynswi i ~..~~~~ 4 WILLC f PLACE 1 } OURME 9 W O Bry In C`pl ~ ~ ~ 3 q' ~ ~d ~ ~ GFJ ~ RIVA RI ~I II// I I Remekm: / ==c sueNl*T5~ ETrammia:m. ~~ ora~Ir~Tmg FLOOR PLAN I _ mre: Nov.oS.:®me~ ~ Ien Na s3noa oa ey: oz ME Checked by: MEF Shen A3e1.1 ©_~, m 4' 9' I6' ~. s d 3 r4~ RIVA RI --- r `~ ` ~ ~-.. _ ~ eeoRacn ~{ y - ~ ~ ~ enru eeowDC ~ n . aaru "~- ~cs ~ y/, ~ir~ ~ cicccr~ /2. ` t ~ ~ ~ ~ I LIVIN.i ~1 "~ I}' ux ~ NdLL wrER ~ ELE ~ EN1RT I 1 ~~ ~ ~~® _ _ LC g1 oE~R - kfi~ "'~ r>N { ^ ~ ENDT~ICSi eEDroon q ''~ ® V II I 1 , l ~ K i ...~ I ' ®~ ~ 1 ~WH 1 ~" ~ ! d - - I ~ ~ ® ~., ~ z _ _ - _ J 3 .: ~ MWiER `~ ~B4iN I \ ~ I ~ 6EOieDan ~ r C9 I E~ I I o / I / I I ~ ~ ~' ©l~vllri ry~-- Y""() ~' I ~ KITCHEN o ~ 1 VVV~VVV . . } l ~ ~ ~-_- -- E~. _ ~, ~ ~~ enw I _ _ _ ~ /1 ~ 1 IELf~ \E/M ~T\/ el plies 1 ' / \ - ' ~ ~ eEDenm 1 Dom ' ~~ DN ~ ~~~ m EecwD LEV~'L FNi ftr 1 ~ ~ ~,~I r ~ ~ t - ep 1 1 DN .~, ~J ~ E R rF~ ENTRT `~ ~~~ ~1 ~~ L~.~F _JI uP oN ~N - ~ ~ _ ~ - ~ ~ 1 ~ ~ hwSM ~® ~ 1 ~' ~. OIN ~~ ~ ~~ I a ~~ ~~ .__ ~ I i ~_ IbT wR CadsTaucTiaN VIII..-,.-.,•T-..... .~ ~~ ~ DINeY ~ ~osEl ~ I -~. \/I -~ ^qf ll~ ~ 6tER 1 ~ R~~ ` Ij nL~_ i BPDRODl1 n n~-~~ '''~~ III ~~~P ~' '~'~ ~`~T / ~ ~,1; 1 (~ ~i ~L{ ~ r i Nya~N ~- ~' / -~" ~- .-' I ~' / -~, __, - ' ~ ~ SECOND LEVEL FLOOR PLAN x~.e.vEPL ~eDROm/r----- ~~~LLOU1 ROG~D (40' R~~'~'~ m 4' a' le' xesou neslcN essoc~eres ~I ARQiITERURE, PLANNING, ~I INTERIOR DESIGN Sa f I 0IR e 6II A4A SM, Wfloor i y E ~ ~~'. 1fEA151 BouldE Ofilu II ia~P~,asMU V,ls iia ie., co mm rte. ~mee.uv F lO~.H9.J366 II N ~W~~~ axa~ oL ~- a('~~~> FEC 811BHILi6L ~6Tammistlon'. ^ I FLEOOR I iPLAN o~~.O6,1OO6 PwjM NO'. 131 iO0Z D„~y; Di,MEF en«wea A3.2 ~,~R~ H9r FcR cavsrrmcncN g~ N E ppkBZ tl n ~ cu viva R~ ..~ '~ 1 `~ 1 I 6 I i i I I i ., 1 II 1 ,1 1 tt l 1 1 0.¢SOtt0e51GN AS e0G1AT¢5 ARCHITECTURE, PIANNINC 1N7FPJOR DESIGN San Frandao OHke M1ae ~HlM1ekv wlos w6id ai5.3aUAt3 fu..te.en.uee Eoulder OHlce .saspN~.smx,wi.II6 ~ eam., m emoz r~: 666.µgw6s 3Vi. .]366 we~roai6~.6an .,,..m.nd,p..wm a~ o ui ggv ~ r 4 po p !'1 ~ ~~I I~~ap, Revlslo~r,' PEG 51r'SMiiiA~. D ~: ~ ~ ~LVJSEi~ h11 (1 IEI Tranynlalm: i' I!r~ I / i iJ ~ 1~~1,n % :.Dewing Ttk: Er Y~'~ ~ FLOOR I~IPLAN ~ _ p.le: NO 06,]996 ~_-_ ~ Pm~ect Na: 21'10D0 ~. ~ - Dawn by Dt. HEF ' Lhakee by MEF VEL FLOOR FLA~t'= SQ.FT. OUTSIDE 2(0' SET BACK '"°` .. r'" "~ m 4' B' _ ~ ~ IB A3.2.1 Ci0o60.W _ _ I f. as @@ d 3 CF ~~.. Ri`/A R -" ~~ ~I 1 \, I /I II I ~ J I~11 1 '' ~~ 1 1 :~ 1 1 Nor wR ca+sTRUCna / 1 i ~ ,,, ~~N I ~ / ~_ / ~ ~~ .--- ~ -~_ _,_, -''- ~,~HIRD LEVEL FLOOR PLAN ~'-~- ---------"~ ~ IB", L_m~~ -------r------- Row. '~ ~ I ul;r. sae F7.olleD Rom ~~ ' LOUT RO/aD (4~0 m a' 8' It' ©]~,AO~ ~! "" ~ ``~ _ ~-~ "f ~ ~~ ~~~ USD0.i DESIGN i .1b50Glei[5 ~_. I ~N~ry17ECTURP, ~ PUNNING, INTERIOR DESIGN I ~ Sen Francisco Olflro wsuMasma,exnvla- oGn1M Lnf~ V1! 391A41] 419.39]Ae91 Balder DRlce eaida, io'eo~11e e ieA 3~9.M9M]J I ~i s«. ]o3.u9a]w ii i xvri,N~a7~An.mn V/ O~ O ~ O ~0 ~~a3p a' 1 ^> H Re+idwe PFG 911BHiiiAL E~Tren~miaion~, ~ ' ureWng title I FLOOR II PLAN I om<: NOV. me. ZD;w ProJetl NO: 1i:iD0D Drown by: DT,I~F ~bHE~ b,: H~F A3.3 Wi roa ca~sTrarcriov GH RIYA RI -- "~ ~- - I I I I~ as wl~LOw ~ PLACE I I eul~ow; dJILNE ~ i I'' I I I V .-~aoN \ \ 5E7BAGK U 18.,1,_0.. ':. 0 L' ~ 16' eESOer oFStcn ASSOCIAEES ARCHITERURE, PUNNING, INTERIOR DESIGN say F~ana~« om« M,r~ m«~.,.m F~~ wnLl: atlil9l~l ~ RauMer Office avsP~....w~,wwilo ewu., co eaw~ iu: ~buw. xi's wmv.AmnOnlBn.ran ~~~~ VI 0 ~ 'n v° ~W~~o ~1 00 II 0rM3u ~N~~> a M RMSlens, PEG Sl19MIT1GL IIE~Tronmision~, ^ Uawi~TiOe: FLOOR 1 PLAN tDam~. NOV. 06,10061 ~I PNIM NU 2c31DD0 Drawn by Di, MFf ~~CFecNed by. MEF !~ A3.3.1 ~~~~ --- -~ -- 1 L- --~ ~ ,--------f"-- ~ ,tR , 1 I f-I I D4 I ~ I'A1I0 ` ~ Ll ~~ ELE OR _Y ~ '. LJ ~ A ~ 1 1r _ - 1 I ~ BEGFGfM 1 1 ~ r_ _ 11 i Lr. -----L-----~ N~~B~, ~ L- ~ I ~ ~ ~:~, ~, ~ I ~ ATN 1 I ` / I ~ 1 / / I ~ BEga>a, ~~ I I I 4 A 1 EL Qi - _ _ - '{ V I ~J 1 V, V' pEppJCM DRz11 ~ ~~ ~ J, ~ 1 I , ~. DN ~${ ~ i~ J ). W 0 \ ~, ~ ~-~ ~~ o~ N J ON -~~ ~ ~ Evira m 7 ow ~ ~." < . ~o~N T "r I `~~ ~ _ ~ '~ f~ ,yy M MA9I I ~I. / II 7 ~ ~ _ .T -~ aeo _ ~ ~ m e n~arya~' ~~ I~ 1~ - ~ i ~ I LJ j l'f E~ 1 ~_~~ ~~. ~-----J ~ ~ ~ ' ~. ~` ~' ' - ~ ,, J 9LSOEr oLStctt ASSOCIA}LS ARQiIIECIURE, PUNMNG, IMERIGR DESIGN San Razleco OIOq 615 A4ibt50ary1Mgoa S.nfmrbmlaL M31t~ i,e t15]9LM3a Balder0~q tw~ smpsuetto w, ~w5oa 1~: ~a~ ow~ o~~~~ o ~1~- `~~h~~> a H I rV~o~ _" --__ ______ n FOURTH LEVEL FL~OI~OIR ~PL~AN_ m 4~ e' ~t ~~ G J.IdMITiCL' 16Tmun'miq: It DmW~ Titlc FLOOR PLAN N~>, ~,. =99~ Pmpt NO: 7371069 DoxP pr Di, MEF Chded M, MEF ~~~ A3.4 1 - _ ~ . . - r J ~ r - - - ~ 1 '~ ' ~ _ GN ' ° ~~ ~ ~ . ~ Po~ o ~~ y 0 ~ ELF arz . ~ , `~~ j ~ ~J e 1 1 L ~ _ ~ ® L ll ~ - i c °,kDR00."i E i 7 I 1 ~-} ~- _ _ _ _ - ~ EKi Rocs 1 I ~ '~ ~ I I ~ ~ ~ b1KROa'1 FDIWOA arN ' I 1 l ~ Izra sir. ' "' E ~ / ! aTSroe sm ~ ~ / i i s~reacK uu~ 1 / EEOR0091 ~ ~ EEORULM 1 / ~ ~ 1 I I / ~1 ~\\ ~~ I [.~ ELE F ~ E£ORO E oROan ~ ~ r 1i 1 -I l J ~. x LJ ~~ a ~ ~~ ~:. o k \ . " Ent ~ ~ L ~14_y.J oN rt I~cuF / I 1~ ENfRr ow ~ ~ I . F ~~~ I ~1 1 ® I I P p/ _ 1 I ~ ~' ~Zyy~'j 1-~ ~~ ~7f 5 ~A - I III ~i~ ~ /" L J w, lul ~~ % // I L---J ~ ~ ~~ ~ ~ ~` ~ , ," ~ / -'"~ ~~ / /- ~_~_ ' ' ~ rrn raR coNEt~Tia+ r V~D~ - -----____ ________------~"- _„ ~ FOURTN LEVEL FLOOR PLAN - SQ.FT. OUTSIDE 20' SET BACK ~~"•r-m• ~.~ 0 4' d' 16' RESDRTDESI6N ASSOCIATES ARCHRECEURE, %ANNINC, ,s u.Aa srewt mf~v 65mfimixy G 991M i~l: '15J9x.wU F .Ax.H54 ea~IdefoeKN w5p~ sv..,s.utto TvE ;%~~«,~ 9. v5s ^I m..,.,.... y ~~ ~^ q0, ~WO 0b N ~0 O ~ ~ ~U L ~ Yb a I+--i ~ > I Rr+biwe, ?EC SIIEMITTGL E Tramrtnmar ' OCrawiiq Titk p rLOOI~ PLAN one. NovmD,zmmb Proka NO'. 3PTmmm Omwnb ~~ MEF Y__-~ Lhcked by: nEF i~~ ©x~6~A 1 NOT FOR OCN9TR1C11CN ~ EAST ELEVATION I~a~.l,,m~~ i aTSOar orslcN a550tIAt¢5 ARCMITECNRE, PUNNING, INTERIOR DESIGN San Flancllcn O(Ilc 615 WibtSVxi, IM flw SmfmcN,a, U Mlm itl: 11]]9].Wa fur 115l91.MH Bwldar OERce IlNapwAµ1u4110 bMds, m a0m] Ttl ]mN9 HL 1/oOA,IdICfdII.dM xvex.AwlWpmm V/ O y ~ 4~~ ~[ 'W1 YYY R ~~"~~~> H R~wm> Pic weMrcra~ L £L E-Tnmmlxlar. 3 gRR 4p 4 @i Dnwing7illr. ~ ELEY. Dw: Nov. xe,nme ~._- Pm]eG No 93110ID Dnxn EY DT, ME Ockdby~, MF I ~ /15.2 Alma wn ~_~___~ _________~_~_________.~-~___~_~____e______~__~ ~______~_~ ~_____---==_eT_I7 ~ 50UTN ELEVATION I/H I 0 ~~ 0 4' B' i6' Hoi raR rr s]mw=na+ 0 0 RIDE 4 8 pRR 2p 5 '~ ~ .~~ ~~~~~~ ~ ~~ I~ ~~ Ljt~ u uu a ao Eiruwd.]dca: UCewlingiltle. -. ELEV. I Disk NOV, mb, 7096 Profx]NR: 73710,0973]1009 OiRwn by: Di, ME. ChxYedtrY; ME' Shdk A5.1 ©]0R6 RDA ~, ~~ KT eCSURP UP56H i I ii ~I ~ I ~ I~ ~ I AS SOLIAi ES ~i ' i _.A fOJRiN LE'iEL ~ f-' 1 IJ~ ~ ~'' __..--'--- Y - - - ARCHITECTURE, ® ^ - PLANNING, III IN(ERIOR GESIGN _ ._ ~ _ _ ~ iHll~ LEKL h om-m~ Say F~and,RO OfM1Q ^ 6]91AaAmbwt, 11th 1ba snkrdw, G fRiof ire nxnuo] iS.N]MH - OEDGND LEVEL p0~_p, Boulde~Ohitt 4313prue Snµwlu iio t _ Y ~ IPST I~ I~f~,l~ _ _ - ~ ~ -_ ~ _ - - BwNer, Ca W@ fa 3W.M9 ]66 /,~~ ///~ ~ hwx _-_ fl II II II II II II II III y 7T ~________L_15 /~3 VJ WEST ELEVATION ~ W ~ ~° IB°.r.9~~ I ~ o ~~~~> Reri]lo~ 1 r-EC suahrciaL NORTH ELEVATION ~ I~z'~,,~.0~ ~= I 0 d' 8' 16' i ~y d c~ Rive R J~ '~" 1 I I I \7I ~J ~1`1 NOi FOIE GCN6i(dLiIW ~~ i ~ ,,,,1~~,~N n ROOF PLAN ~ 118~~,,~,~~ _ 0 A' B' I6' ©1Ud RDA BcSDR DESIGN ASSOC IAt ES ARCHITECfURE~ PUNNING, INFERIOR DESIGN sRDPIRDaXDafire ~ RuRw~,su.t iuh Bew Sn Nm4o, U 91iN . tel: ~SblMII r..: nsmRw Boulder Ollice tA)1 Stun RRa.6iIM 110 MuIM, CO bbl iv: 3M.RISM)R irc M)M9]361 RI~RIV~PnYI ww.AUUlWpmn VI ow~pD 9 h ~0 ~~a a ~ ~> I~I~PEG SIBnIitALI ICI 6Tren~miobn: ^ ROOF ~ PLAN ~~~mmE Pmbq No: 73270ID0 Onvm bF Dt, MEF Uiedmdl~ y~ ryEF i -_- ~~ A4.1 ~~ .'` ` \ ~ `~ \ ti~ ~~~ Exist.EO:~PIaw>:orwa~r-------------~ILLO~'~ ROAD (40~ RD.WJ N01 FOR GdJETWIOtiON L___,_ I RESDEt DESIGN ASSOCIATES ARCHITECTURE, F t $u 8 t Ei COPPER OHIFME' - " PUNNING, INIEPoOR DESIGN "E0067AR" MAJE I San kmdew OfAa I usywa.a ya rwo, I Ln Fur.Lre, G s•IOl i u v z COPPER GUTTER ~ i s rw u.m Fw Boulder Office Iu+s~.w.,s,E.lia Ike FASCIA OVEfi ewer, co wxz Ea. am.yE.ysn Fm sm.yEaaw LOW "E" GREEN O r wnDaF.~ Ik8 i/G SIDING fS 7X17 BAND BOARI ~/~ 7X6 CEDAR TRIM ~Q o 'qv 0 ~ EIFS 6r6TEM, NAN `~ `o ' °N 3 IRRIGATED WOW ~ > a N METAL RAILIhY WI 7k11 BAND 80ARI RAINBOW BLEND '~ Rxirlyx , PEC 6JeI51tiAL FINISHED GRADE FOUNDATION WALL STR'1C7URAL EH;I FOOTERS PER 6TPolCNRA1 EN'.aINEER --~ _" ~~~-~1 k11T-t~J it _~~ ~! __-_.__ __ =c --_ __ 1d~_-__-L ~-__ _ v__ __ __ ___ __-__ ==~-ty ~ LEVEL L L i~BTRk: I ELEV. I Omr NDV, 06,'1000 Rolm NO: ]all0ID0 Onxm by: Di, NEP CFxcFed a/ NEF NORTF{ ELEVATION ~ 51~ 07'<' 6' A5.1 .1 o~e,~ Attachment D The Willows Redevelopment Comparison Properties Name and Address: Bishop Park, 43 and 63 Willow Place Legal Description: Lots 1 and 2, Block 6, Vail Village 1St Filing Zoning: High Density Multiple Family Land Use Plan Designation: Village Master Plan Current Land Use: High Density Multi-Family Development Site Size: 30,848 square feet (0.71 acres) Total Site Standards Allowed/Required Existin Difference Density, GRFA (max): 18,493 sq.ft. 21,482 sq. ft. 116% Site Coverage (max): 16,966 sq. ft. (55%) 10,766 sq. ft. (34.9%) < 20% Building Setbacks: 20 ft. 5' > 15' Height: 48' 55' > 7' Name and Address: Riverhouse Condominiums, 83 Willow Place Legal Description: Lot 3, Block 6, Vail Village 1St Filing Zoning: High Density Multiple Family Land Use Plan Designation: Village Master Plan Current Land Use:. High Density Multi-Family Development Site Size: 16,523 square feet (0.38 acres) Total Site Standards Allowed/Required Existin Difference Density, GRFA (max): 9,767 sq.ft. 16,190 sq.ft. 165% Site Coverage (max): 9,087 sq. ft. (55%) 7,148 sq. ft. (43%) <12% Building Setbacks: 20 ft. .2' > 19.8' Height: 48' NA NA Name and Address: Edelweiss, 103 Willow Place Legal Description: Lot 4, Block 6, Vail Village 1St Filing Zoning: High Density Multiple Family Land Use Plan Designation: Village Master Plan Current Land Use: High Density Multi-Family Development Site Size: 15,825 square feet (0.36 acres) Total Site Standards Allowed/Required Existing Difference Density, GRFA (max): 9,487 sq.ft. 20,970 sq. ft. 221% Site Coverage (max): 8,703 sq. ft. (55%) 6,963 sq. ft (44%) < 11 Building Setbacks: 20 ft. 0' > 20' Height: 48' NA NA Name and Address: Summer's Lodge, 123 Willow Place Legal Description: Lot 5, Block 6, Vail Village 1St Filing Zoning: High Density Multiple Family Land Use Plan Designation: Village Master Plan Current Land Use: High Density Multi-Family Development Site Size: 14,063 square feet (0.32 acres) Total Site Standards Allowed/Required Existin Difference Density, GRFA (max): 8,438 sq.ft. 11,202 sq.ft. 132% Site Coverage (max): 7,031 sq. ft. (50%) 7,420 sq. ft. (53%) > 3%* Building Setbacks: 20 ft. 1' > 19' Height: 48' 43.5' <4.5' *facts in file regarding site coverage were conflicting Name and Address: Riva Ridge North, 133 Willow Place Legal Description: Lot 6, Block 6, Vail Village 1St Filing Zoning: High Density Multiple Family Land Use Plan Designation: Village Master Plan Current Land Use: High Density Multi-Family Development Site Size: 11,935 square feet (0..274 acres) Total Site Standards Allowed/Required Existin Difference Density, GRFA (max): 7,161 sq.ft. 13,126 sq. ft. 183% Site Coverage (max): ? sq. ft. (55%) ? sq. ft Building Setbacks: 20 ft. 1' > 19' Height: 48' 45' < 3' Name and Address: Riva Ridge South, 114 Willow Road Legal Description: Lot 7, Block 6, Vail Village 1St Filing Zoning: High Density Multiple Family Land Use Plan Designation: Village Master Plan Current Land Use: High Density Multi-Family Development Site Size: 15,333 square feet (0.352 acres) Total Site Standards Allowed/Required Existin Difference Density, GRFA (max): 9,199 sq.ft. 19,824 sq. ft. 215% Site Coverage (max): NA NA NA Building Setbacks: 20' 1' >19' Height: 48' 45' < 3" Name and Address: The Willows Condominiums, 74 Willow Roa d (existing) Legal Description: Lot 8, Block 6, Vail Village 1St Filing Zoning: High Density Multiple Family Land Use Plan Designation: ,Village Master Plan Current Land Use: High Density Multi-family Development Site Size: 21,144 square feet (0.49 acres) Total Site Standards Allowed/Required Existin Difference Density, GRFA (max): 16,069 sq.ft. 18,607 sq.ft. 116% Site Coverage (max): 11,595 sq. ft. (55%) 12,638 sq. ft. (60%) > 5% Building Setbacks: 20 ft. 4' >16' Height: 48' 48' NA Name and Address: 44 Willow Road Legal Description: Lot 9, Block 6, Vail Village 1St Filing Zoning: High Density Multiple Family Land Use Plan Designation: Village Master Plan Current Land Use: High Density Multi-family Development Site Size: 12,630 square feet (0.29 acres) Total Site Standards Allowed/Required Existin Difference Density, GRFA (max): 7,579 sq.ft. 7,531 sq.ft. 1 Site Coverage (max): 6,947 sq. ft. (55%) 4,678 sq. ft. (37%) < 18% Building Setbacks: 20 ft. 10' >10' Height: 48' 44' < 4' ~__~ -i ca+ pwa a IG GUILDMCs N (0-2O-2~W 6m DE61C~1lb-04-20LK) .1 /. ~~. / ~, law 4GE ,- ,,~aoN n DIFFER]=NT DESIGN OUTLINER ~'J ~.,m,.m. Ld'Ld"~~ m e' im~ 2m' ®m.~, i~~ ,wana~va. PLVINING, wnwow o®cN !.n Frdm oTo suldr ann ~s~.oy,~ --+-e.n.y.~ Vl Wp~~ ~ a ~s ~> Fay- N 51TE PLAN o... ~,. n ~~. 1 111 ~~ m m _- --------- uI~LtLW~~~,10'RallU Attachment: F T~~N 0~' YAK Department of Public YYorks & Transportation 1309 Elkhorn Drive Yail, CO 81657 970-479-2158 Fax: 970-479-2166 tivww. vailgov. com MEMO To: Elisabeth Reed From: Tom Kassmel, Town Engineer Re: Willows Redevelopment PEC Review Date: 10/20/06 The Town of Vail Public Works Department has received the Planning and Environmental Commission submittal plan set dated 10/17/06 for the Willows Redevelopment. Based on our review the following comments will be required to be resolved prior to approval. Comments 1. The Porte Cochere area does not meet current town standards. TOV standards requires a minimum entrance angle of 70 degrees for 30'. However due to its location on a one way street and the traffic flows in and out of the Porte Cochere area PW can support this variance. 2. Show driveway slopes on Porte Cochere. 3. Show sight distance triangle on Landscape/Site plan. Sight distance must comply to code or meet AASHTO guidelines for intersection sight distance fora 15 mph road. Existing trees may be limbed to accomplish this. 4. Provide an 8' concrete pan at drive entrances. A 4' pan with a 1" invert maybe used if it has adequate drainage capacity. Please provide drainage analysis. These pans shall not be heated. 5. Show top and bottom of all wall elevations. The walls at sections 3,4,5 should be higher in order to protect patio and building from snowplow "slobber", as discussed with the applicant. 6. All retaining walls must be a minimum of 2' off adjacent property lines. 7. Minimum two way drive access into parking garage is 22'. As discussed with applicant, if a traffic control device is provided (signal inside garage) to dictate directional flow and a minimum of 40' of two way drive width (22') is provided at the driveway entrance, then the drive can be narrowed to 14'. 8. Minimum two way garage door access width is 20'. If an appropriate traffic flow device is installed the entrance maybe narrowed to the 18' shown. 9. Show snow storage on site, it must be on private property not in the ROW. Please show area in square footage. 10. The minimum width of the porte cochere is 12' for one-way access at all points, the center scales at 11.5'. 11. The developer has proposed to reconstruct Willow Rd to provide an 8' paver walk and a 12' travel lane with curb and gutter, similar to Hansen Ranch Rd. and East Gore Creek Drive. Preliminary design plans should be provided prior to approval. This improvement is consistent with the intent of future Streetscape improvements and is supported by Public Works. 12. Coordinate with AIPP for Public Art contribution. 13. The Developer complies with Public Works General Conditions of Approval. (See attached) Town of Vail Public YVorks General Conditions of Approval l . Please add the Town of Vail General Notes to construction plans. (Notes can be e-mailed upon request) 2. Please add Utility Signature block and have all utilities sign acknowledging acceptance of utility design. 3. All construction staging issues. shall be resolved prior to construction including staging, phasing, access, schedules, traffic control, emergency access, etc... 4. A ROW/LTtility permit shall be obtained and approved by the Town. of Vail prior to commencing any construction within public Right of Way. 5. A Town of Vail Revocable ROW permit shall be recorded for all private property improvements located within public ways. 6. Prior to approval of a Building permit all necessary permanent and temporary easements are recorded with Eagle County. 7. Prior to approval of a Building permit a shoring and excavation plan shall be submitted including; excavation phasing, engineered shoring plans with plan, profile and cross sections. Cross Sections and plans shall include all existing conflicts (i.e. utilities). 8. Any excavation shoring methods used that encroach upon adjacent public or private property shall have approval by the appropriate owner and have a recorded easement prior to construction. 9. A CDPHE Permit and all applicable ACOE permits {i.e. Dewatering) shall be submitted prior to construction. 10. Provide full civil construction drawings meeting Town of Vail standards prior to building permit submittal. ,_ - _. ,.. ,.; ; nor ~rt ca~st~I _-.. a Fswn A0.CNITECTURE, . •FLANNING, ' INiERiOR DESIGN. San Francisco ORv Boutdc Oh}cs sa sr+.~ w..c 1+u. na V/ oW~~ ox° ~Ha~ N CH RIVA R' OnrlnF TU4: SITE PLAN - ~ ~ "K°" , ~ L•..^a ~. UaEdl A~eM !~ __.. - - - s.on-s ..c...ce .ter. ® 5' 10' ~0~ / 1 - _ . --- --- -- - - - 'i'i7 ~~. .. z1 PRELIMINARY ~ NOVEMBER 2006 Z ! NdT FOR CONSTRUCTION ~ . w . w z z ~F w 24.5' Q 2' pAN 8' PAVER WALK 6' 12' ASPHALT DRIVE LANE 2' PAN O O JJJ 6'WIDE CONCRETE 6' OF HBP ASPHALT' 2' CONCRETE DRAINAGE PAN OR CURB AND ~~~ 33 2' CONCRETE .PAVERS, SECTION BAND - ' OVER 8' CLASS 6~ABC - GUTTER BE DETERMINED -" DRAINAGE PAN TO .._..,:.. SOX ~^ ~ :i w ~ _ j' ~ r ! ~~ -~.:~ .. .. ... 4 1. r`~ s'~'~ ~ 4~"'0 _, }~,yr ~ t - 3 ~~ ~ ' ~ r Y- \ \ \ ~ U € ~ N /\ /\ / ~ 0 m WILLOW DRIVE TYPICAL SECTION SCALE 1' 2'-0' 3 v O U W (n ,t 3 a - NOTES: U 1. THIS DETAIL IS SCHEMATIC IN NATURE. ~ CENTERl1NE OF XALLOW ROAD TO 2 I 4 T W NED. BE DETERM 7 5 5 `-' .D 3 .+ a ~ r+ °o n ~ 0 ~ O ~ (D a "S .-F j \ ~~. PRELIMINARY ~ - %$j \ ~ Z ~~ NOVEMBER 2006 Z'I NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION l" - 40' s W, NOTES: Z / 1. FlEID TOPOGRAPHY WAS NOT AVAILABLE AT THE (7 nME THAT 1HIS PLAN WAS PREPARED. THE PLAN w \ / i "~~`'~- ~ IS BASED ON AERIAL TOPOGRAPHY, THEREFORE IT \ / i ~ IS CONCEPNAL IN NATURE \ / 2 FlNAL ROADWAY CENTERLINE OF WILLOW ROAD TO BE DETERMINED. J / ~ -~ \ / ~~ \ ! / ~ / ~~` ~ ~ Q /L ', .--1 -,`TRACT H ~'_„~'~`_`~ ~ // ` ~ ?,~ POSSIBLE ALIGNMENT O O - - ~ / ~ `--t T ` u` ~~ FOR PROPOSED.~STREETSCAPE ~ - - ~- -' 1 ,~~ sEE TYPICAL SECnoN ON - 1 - B 15gT- ---~~~ ~-y ~ SHEET ~.°, X ~ 2+00 /. - 3100. /"'" '^~ _"~,_ O+OD .. 1 3 S,.a+DO ' ~~~-+t,~__-^.,,-......--~~ .~..., '""""~ ,_~ ~ /1 y fir",, 12ti r \ (~` -- -- -- ___. ~ - ~ ~~ ~ + ~ ~ ~ 1 3 ~ ~ ~ ~' ~ -,rte---- ~ ,~ ~ ~ ` .~ - ~ ~- `"- ~ ~~~ J - ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ .i ~+ ~ ~ }V, 1. 8 PAYER WAU(WlIY ~ u ~ i ~ n.,;i ~ c q, , I•.,o„rJ -~'p - 1 -~ ~.,` 4X0 \ 3bR f _~:. / a VAI~-ROA m N N ~ `\ o \ , ~~ r~\ ~, ~. ^3 ~`\` „`~ ,.~ t~ ~~~ ~~ i ~ 1~~. I T ~. ~ ~ _,~ ~ ~~~ ; . II ~ I lA f~ a4 wlu.ow ~ ~ Ij ~ J~~ ; . PLACE ,~ II I'H s~s~~ ' 1---~ i ~ ~ , `~ ~~ ~' ~ ' ar.,,,~ r ~ ....~~. V ti`~~---~`'~ ~ ~~ ~ ~ ~f / " 1 ~°~ r ~Y ` ~`~. ~ \\ / RIVA RIDGE / '~-/~' ~ ~'~' s~j`a _ `(~ ~ ~~~~~ ~~ ~ v CHALETS 1 i~ ,d~ ~cl~ ~_ / ~~ \\`~ ~ 12' ASPHALT ~/ (NORTH) ~ ~~ ~ ` ?~ ~ ~ DRIVE LINE ~ w~ows~ j~ I I ~ \~ . ,, ~ _ ~ /~\ ~'a ~/~~_~, Y: RIVA RIDGE ~~ - \\ ~;1.~ j: ~,; ., 11 ~' CHALETS , ~. \~` Ns~ ~,. ' / ' ~~~~~ SOUTH ~\ ~~ ,.+~:..~ ( ) ~ \ ~ ~ ~,, I ~ \ ~ \ - -- '~i~ ~~' ~ ~ . / SHEET Attachment: I _~~N r tiv -.~ ,- ~ _-...._ ._ ,~ ; s Prepart~d Uy: NnV'P.ITk~f?i' j, 2(}C)6 Campucer Terrain Ma~~ng, Inr. P.Q. Box ggflz . ~ ®r,;+. Boulder, CQ 8~o3oG - The ~1~~01NS Revision: ~oaNo: ~s2~a Sheefi No: VAIL, C©LORADC3 Drawn By: RESC:jRT DESIGN ASSDC{AYES INTERNATIONAL 86 Date: 1434 Spruce Street Suite 1t0 Fax: 303-449-33 Boulder, Cokorado 86303 Tel: 343-449-4433 SCale: Shadow Analysis for March a, zoo6 ro:oo AM ..,.~ 1, N ~ ~ 5 k ~A t l .~ ~ ~q F ~ ~r Wj~~ ~`, ° - ' r^ ~ ~ fl ~ - ' '` ~ T+ ' 4 1 ~ /~ n- , ~~ 1 ~ ~ ' t ... ~ ~ . ' ' ,~,~ ~ ~ ,. ~~,~ - ~ - ~~~ dry ~ w,t ~ -~ 1- _Ca ` \ ~ ~ ~' , -___- ~ r ~ ~ ; ~ . 1_egend Shador~+s cast by buildings and terrain ~N Buildings used in shacio~~v model ~ ~~; .y ~ u ~,,.~~, :~ ~ F: ~ ! ~ O'ttter k~ultling footprints ` "~ ~ s Preparrd by . 1'~()VeITEI)er ~, LOOS ~amgutec Terrain Mapping, Inc. . ---- Parcel ine5 ---too feet--~ P.o. Box 498a Boulder CO So~oG '`® , The ~f ~~41NS Revision: ~a~ No: 23270 Sheet No: VAIL, COLORADO Drawn By: RESORT DESIGN ASSC}CIATES INTERNATIONAL Gate: 443-336fi F 303 ax: - 1434 Spruce Street Suite 110 Boulder, Colorado 80302 Tet: 303-449-3433 Scale: Shadayv Analysis for March a7, zao6 Z.ao 1'M ,.. , ' , , ~ ' ~ ~ ,~-' -~ t , ,... -- - ~ ~,. -- r , . ., ,, ...a , ~, ,.~ t c -' ' . ,, ~ ~~ { ~ ( i ~ ~`? t 1 _ - t t ~~ , ~ ,. ` ~// ~.,,` °~ `-- . i ~. -- j ~~ "t J~.r_. _ ~ -r..-~....~ ~~ __ _ `s ~ ~ ,, ~~ ~,~ ~ ~ Legend Shadows cast by buildings and terrain ~~ Buildings used. in shadow modca r e.~~ J tv -«Y..-~+~~- E~ ~h'~.. L I atfter building fc~atprints Y~~ s Prcuared by: 1Vove~Ttl~er ~` 2t)of~ Computer Terrain htappiag, tne: . Pareellines P.t). Box 4g8a --too feet.--{ Boulder, C(3 80306 ~ ~''~ TI E~i V Y ~'~dWt-..,~ ~~VI810C1: Job Na: Z3270 tJhBE'~ ~0: VA1L, COLORADO ' Drawn By: RESORT DESIGN ASSOGIATES INTERNATIONAL 449366 Fa 303 ' Date: x: - 4434 Spence Street Suite 110 Boulder, Colorado 8tS302 Tel: 303-049-4433 ' Scale: 511adow Analysis for September 2I, 2oob >io:oo AM ,. r ~ ~ ; +r ~ }~~ ~ ~ lk _ i _ ~ 4 ~ ~ ' , ~ 'S ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ I ~~ ~ _.. , i wlt/ p ~S ~ ~ ~ y ~...i".H"", ~ ry y\ F .y. .~ +++ _ 3 _.--- _,..-.,.._..ar..l .y,.r o , ~ i . ~, ` lyR ! ~_ ~ `~ .~~~ ~ r f--r~ ~ ~ C F1 / F+ P l ~ tit Ra e' ~ _ ~ ~__ - tegenci Shadows cast by k~ttildings and terrain 1- N Buildings used 9n shadow model ~ '~ ~.., ~ ~~W ~ _ ~, `. ,~% ~ Ogler building footprints `~ . s Prepared Uy: _ lyovP.lTlbP.r ^f, 20o~i Computer Terrain Mapping, Inc. . ------ Parcel tines ` --too feet---I PA. Box 4gB2 Boulder C4 Bo a6 ' ®'~ , 3 ThG V"VIIOWS Revision. JoliNo: 23270 Sheet No: VAIL., COLORADO i?rawn By: RESORT DESIGN ASSOCIATES INTERNATIONAL Date: Fax 30.3-449-3366 43 1 4 Spruce Street Suite 110 Boulder, Cobrado 80302 Teh 303-419-~33 SC3Ie: Shadow.Analysis for December zI; zoo6 io;oo t~M ~ , a 1, u~, ~ } - ,k' ~3 ~~ y 1 t~ Y;,-«' ,,.,,,,.:~ ,; ~ 1~,. -~ ~ 1 . ~..: 1' i" -~~a b~; n~, Inc. . ox ge~8a .. ~ 80;06 .// Sheet N©: Shadow Analysis for December zi, 2006 z.oO l~M r ,~ '' -~ , ~ ...Y 4 ~ r ~ ~ _ , _ _ ,~ S fey ~ , - ~ i ~ _ } 1 1~ ~ ~ s .; ~ ~' r, ~ ~ I ' St f ~ ~ I v;„ r~ '. +.,~ ~~~ ~ Wj!/ ~'w. TIt i .. ~E. ~ ~ ~ ^~..,, `t ~ `t t ~5. 3 ~ I ~ , h: ~ ~4 ~ r' " {{{{{{ ~ t// ~ ! Y ~ T~ ~ I `~~ 6 _ ~ ^r yl ~ r ~ ~~~` '".rr ' ~ G 'j/~~ J ~ ~ r ~h ~l '~ _ F 1~< ~~~ t _ ,_ ~~ ~~' 1 It ..~. I,..,I. _ L i ~ .. i .. ~ i rr1 .,... .. _._ _ 1 - -I ~ , I .Legend S}tadows cast by bt:tildin~s and terrain ~~ ~N Buildings used. in shadow model ~. ~ Fy - Other building footprints L-~I ~ Prepared t5y: 1 1Vovetnber 7, 2t)t)fi Computer Terrain Mapping, tire. ~arCP.l I.ineS PA. Box 4t3£3a - ----~~o feet--~ Beruttler, CO l1v;uG - '°'r TI IPi V V MOWS 'R~VIStOtI: Jab No: 23270 Sh~Et ~Q: VAIL, COLORADO ' Drawn By: RESC3RT DESIGN ASSOCIATES INTERNATIONAL Date. 6 7434 Spruce Street Suite 170 6 Feu: 303~d3-33 $ouicfer, Gafor,~CO 8Q302 Tef: 303.4x4-4433 SCaie: Willows at Vail Redevelopment Traffic Impacts 1 011 2/2 0 0 6 Willows at Vail Existing (Weekday Peak) Description Trip Generation Quantity Units Rate ALPINE ENGINEERING INC AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Enter % Exit Enter Exit Enter Exit Rental Townhouse (ITE 224) 28 Dwellings AM Peak Hour 28 0.73 0.35 0.65 7.15 13.29 PM Peak Hour 28 0.73 0.55 0.45 11.24 9.20 Total 7.15 13.29 11.24 9.20 Willows at Vail Proposed (Weekday Peak) Trip Generation AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Description Quantity Unit Rate % Enter % Exit Enter Exit Enter Exit Rental Townhouse (ITE 224) 9 Dwellings AM Peak Hour 9 0.73 0.35 0.65 2.30 4.27 PM Peak Hour 9 0.73 0.55 0.45 3.61 2.96 Luxury Condominium(Townhouse (ITE 233) 9 Dwellings AM Peak Hour 9 0.65 0.32 0.68 1.87 3.98 PM Peak Hour 9 0.65 0.60 0.40 3.51 .2.34 Total 4.17 8.25 7.12 5.30 Change in Peak Hour Trips Note: All values taken from Institute of Transportation Engineers "Trip Generation" 7th Edition, Volume 2, 2003 AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Enter Exit Enter Exit ~~ -2 98' ~+ 5 04~ -4.12 -3.90-Z;• - ~,._ D sv m~ / / \ / ~ ~/~ ~ ~ , ?.' f '/ ' \ ~ / `ti \ / ~ J _ ~ / /J/ ~ WILLOWS ROAD i ~ (ao• R.o.w.) • J/ PROP SED SIGHT } ~ J DISTANCE X93' >~ r, , .. ,' ; ~ ~ \ \` / -' .ga wlu.ow r ~ ~I! ; ~ a`, ~ PLACE ~~ %~ ~' "~ _ ' ` -`-~ PROPOSE ' /~~ ~ SHRUB B~~~/ t~ ~/ 1LLOWS~AT NOTES: U pC q' `l 1. OBSERVED POSTED SPEED OF 15 MPH. ~ `~. 2. DESIGN STOPPING SIGHT DISTANCE FOR 1 LOCAL ROADS AND STREETS WITH A w , `~.,,, DESIGN SPEED OF 15 MPH DETERMINED w TO BE 80' AS TAKEN FROM EXH/B!T 3-1 ? TRACT H STOPP/NG SIGHT D/STANCE FROM AASHTO z E /''~~~ MANUAL "A POLICY ON GEOMETRIC w ' DESIGN OF HIGHWAYS AND STREETS, ~ FOURTH EDITION, 2001" 1,-~--~~,; a -\ ` ~ ~ - a ~ ~ ~~ ; r~_ `4~i \ f ~ ~ r..~ i 11 DROP ED \ ~ ~ C1 ~•-'.ate ~'~~~lilt~~/f~~ %,ilh~~ ~ ~~ ~~ ~`~`' ~~ '= % , ` RIVA RIDGE ` ~~~~~~--w~ ~ ~ B ~ . i`r'- 33 /~ti -. 1~ CHALETS.. (SOUTH) `t ~ ~ ~~ ~,.v ti~i ,. . a ~ Sf~EET I ice, ~ / ~~ ~ ~ ~ Attachment: K' THE WILLOWS 74 Willow Road' Vail, CO Project #: 23270 October 13, 2006 Gross Square Footage: (Measured to the center of corridor walls and the outside face of structure of exterior walls) , First Floor: ,Unit #101 (F.F. #1)::'1;260_sq. ft. y';. Unit ~1q2 (F.F. ~2): 1,310sq ft.,,~~~ Unit X103 (F.F. #3):-1,3?S sq. ft.~_ Unit #10~ (,W.O ~~)~; ~,?-~,Orsq.~~tt. -.1~ _ _ Unit #10~ (Employee): 670 sq. ft. ~~'' Unit ~106.(W.O. + 6);: ?, 1. O sq. ft.° <~ac/~is ~~- OI~~ First Floor Total: 8,016 sq. ft. - ~ 7a ~ ~~ 34,5 Second Floor: Third Floor: Fourth Floor: Unit #20-1 (F.F: #4}_: 1,310 sq ft. ~~~' Unit#202 (F.F: #5): 1,165~sg ft~; o Uriit #203,(`V.O. #1): 1,9Ei~ sq. ft: i, Unity#204(W:O.#3): 2,70-sq. ft.`~~ Unit #20:5 (W.O #.7): 2,055`sq.' ft: Second Floor Total: 9,235 sq. ft. Unit #301 (F.F: #6): ``1,310'Sq. ft Unit#302 (F.F:#7):,1,16.5 sq. ft. ,~ Unit X303 (W.O. #2): 1,96 sq:~t~ Unit #304 (W.O. #4); 2,740 sq:ft. Unit #3OS (W.O.'#8).` 2,055 sq. ft. Third Floor Total: 9,235 sq. ft. Unrt ##4`0'~.~"(F:F~#8)"~~1;310'sq `"~'~' Unit #402 (F.F: #9}:--1,165 sq. f~: Unit,#4Q3 ~(W.O. #9): 3,90 sq. ft. ° Fourth Floor Total: 6,425 sq. ft. Gross Total: 32,910 sq. ft. ~:3Z ~ Z wl >c ~~~~~ ~ 4~~~H~~ ~1 s~~a~, + - ; Attachment: L ~~~~~ ~ THIS ITEM MAPUBL C NOTIOER PROPERTY NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the Planning and Environmental Commission of the Town of Vail will hold a public hearing in accordance with section 12-3-6, Vail Town Code, on September 25, 2006, at 1:00 pm in the Town of Vail Municipal Building, in consideration of: A request for a recommendation to the Vail Town Council of a proposal to establish Special Development District No. 40, pursuant to Article 12-9(A), .Special Development Districts, Vail Town Code, to allow for the redevelopment of the Willows Condominiums, located at 74 Willow Road/Lot 8 Block 6, Vail Village Filing 1St; Filing, and setting forth details in regard thereto. (PEC06-0061) Applicant:, The Willows Condominium Association, Inc., represented by Triumph Development, LLC Planner: Elisabeth Reed A request for final review of a conditional use permit pursuant to Section 12-6H-3, Conditional Uses, allow for the construction of timeshare estate units, fractional fee units and timeshare license units, located at 74 Willow Road/Lot 8 Block 6, Vail Village Filing 1St Filing, and setting forth details in regard thereto. (PEC06-0062} Applicant: The Willows Condominium Association, Inc., represented by Triumph Development, LLC Planner: Elisabeth Reed A request for a final review of an exemption plat, pursuant to Chapter 13-12, Exemption Plat Review Procedures, Vail Town Code, fora modification to a shared property boundary between Lots 3 and 4, Block 5, Bighorn Fifth Addition, located at 4916 and 4920 Juniper Lane, and setting forth details in regard thereto. (PEC06-0063) Applicant: Slick Asset Management Trust, represented by William and Sally Slick, Co- Trustees Planner: Matt Gennett A request for a recommendation to the Vail Town Council of an amendment to the Lionshead Redevelopment Master Plan, pursuant to Section 2.8, Adoption and Amendment of the Master Plan, Lionshead Redevelopment Master Plan, to amend the Lionshead Study Area Boundaries and Chapter 5, Detailed Plan Recommendations, to include the study "West Lionshead" area, generally located at 646, 862, 890, 923, 934, 953, 1000, and 1031 South Frontage Road West/Lot 54 and Tract K of Glen Lyon Subdivision, Tracts C and D, Vail Village Filing 2, and several unplatted parcels (a more complete .legal description is available at the Community Development Department), and setting forth details in regard thereto. (PEC06-0008) Applicant: Vail Resorts Development Company, Town of Vail, and Glen Lyon Office Building General Partnership Planner: Warren Campbell The applications and information about the proposals are available for public inspection during office hours at the Town of Vail Community Development Department, 75 .South Frontage Road. The public is invited to attend project orientation and the site visits that precede the public hearing in the Town of Vail Community Development Department. Please call 970-479-2138 for additional information. Sign language. interpretation is available upon request, with 24-hour notification. Please call 970-479-2356, Telephone for the Hearing Impaired, for information. Published September 8, 2006, in the Vail Daily. Willows SDD application Adjacent owners mailing list 100 Vail Road William J. Dore C/O Dore Family Office PO Box 67 Sulphur LA 70664 10 Forest Road Ronald J. Byrne 10 Forest Road Vail CO 81657 44 Willow Place Patricia L. McMunn Unit 1 1741 Galleon Drive Naples FL 34109 Helen Miller Kurtz Unit 2 6 Eaton Road Scarsdale NY 10583 Alford, Theodore Bruce & Barbara Lawrence One Chestnut Weston MA Unit 3 02193 Bishop Park Bishop Park Condominium Association C/O Phillips & Associates, Inc. PO Box 1403 Vail CO 81657 Edelweiss Edelweiss HOA 103 Willow Place Vail CO 81657 Attachment: M Riva Ridge South Riva Ridge South Condominium Association C/O Willows Management 74 Willow Road Vail CO 81657 Willow Road Public Park Town Of Vail 75 S. Frontage Road Vail CO 81657 Law Office of Arthur A. Abplanalp, Jr. L.L.C. Telephone: .970.476.0300 970.476.6500 Telecopier: 970.476.4765 E-mail: Art.Abplanalp C~earthlink.net Post Office BoY 2800 Vail, Colorado 81658-2800 14 September 2006 Planning and Environmental Commission of the Town of Vail 75 South Frontage Road West Vail CO Rc: Vv'iliows Condominium Redevelopment Members of the Commission: Attachment: N Physical Address: Suite 301 Vail 21 Building 472 East Lionshead Circle Vail, Colorado 81657 This office represents Riva Ridge South Condominium Association in connection with an application for the demolition and redevelopment of the Willows Condominium, which is adjacent to Riva Ridge South. The application for the redevelopment of the Willows Condominium is scheduled for a work session with the PEC on the 25th of September, and this letter is being directed to the PEC in connection with that work Session. It should first be emphasized that Riva Ridge South supports the redevelopment of the Willows Condominium. On its face, the current Willows redevelopment plan appears to be attractive. Although there is at least one violation of the common property line by a proposed roof line, that arrangement maybe acceptable to Riva Ridge South, recognizing that a similar condition may exist with reference to the roof of Riva Ridge South. There are, however, several considerations which compel Riva Ridge South to point out that the application is not ready for formal consideration by the Town of Vail, although the work session review which is scheduled is a logical and necessary first step toward redevelopment of the Willows project. First, the applicatior< filed :;~it>1, the Te~~~n of Vail. does nit indicate v~~hether or not the current proposal can proceed without the use of the lotto the east, which is the Riva Ridge South Condominium property. By overlaying the Garage Level Floor Plan (which doesn't establish the location of the property lien or Riva Ridge South) on the First Level Floor Plan (which does establish the location of the property line and Riva Ridge South) (see attached), it appears that the garage/foundation wall will be only approximately thirteen feet. from Riva Ridge South (without consideration of the actual area of excavation, although Mr. Pyleman has indicated that the Willows actually is to be moved eighteen inches to the west). Excavation and construction in such close proximity to Riva Ridge South may affect the structural stability of its building. Information regarding the nature and effect of this proximity, which has a direct relationship to the question of whether the Willows project can proceed without the use of Riva Ridge South land, should be provided and available to the Town before formal consideration of the application by the PEC. Recent discussions between the Willows developer and Riva Ridge South indicated that it maybe impossible to construct the east wall of the proposed parking garage/foundation wall without the use of soil nails or similar devices which would extend across the property line onto Riva Ridge South property. If this is the case, the use of soil nails or other construction technique may affect the structural integrity of the improvements on the property. Although representatives of Riva Ridge South have discussed the project and hope to cooperate with the Willows developers, at this point in time no information regarding constntction techniques have been provided. To the best of the knowledge of the representatives of Riva Ridge South, plans have not been developed by the Willows developers which identify the requirement for construction of that garage/foundation wall or the nature, scope, or impact of such construction on Riva Ridge South property. The developer should be required to confirm the type of construction technique which will be employed so close to an existing building. The questions of whether Riva Ridge South property must be used or penetrated in association with the Willows project and whether Riva Ridge South can or will permit the use of its property in association with the Willows project must be resolved prior to formal consideration of the Willows application. Otherwise, the Town may find that it's staff time and effort will have been devoted to a project which cannot proceed because the project is premised on an assumption (use of Riva Ridge South property) which cannot be realized. Riva Ridge South has several other concerns which should be considered early in the consideration of the Willows project. One central concern is the preservation of existing large trees which are located in whole or in part on Riva Ridge property. One of these trees appears to be within ten feet of the proposed Willows garage wall (again without consideration of the actual area of excavation). These trees maybe killed by adjacent excavation and constntction activity. Riva Ridge South is also concerned regarding the demolition of the current Willows strictures. While it is, perhaps, to early to expect definite answers to this concern, it is a concern which will arise during the planning process. Another issue relates to the possible redevelopment of the Riva Ridge South project. Riva Ridge South must obtain assurance, to the extent possible, that the development of the Willows project will not affect or limit the redevelopment of its own property. Further, the effect of the Willows redevelopment project should not affect the enjoyment of the Riva Ridge South property by its owners. Although a commitment has been made to provide visual depictions of the appearance of the Willows project from the Riva Ridge South condominiums, that has not yet occurred. While the fundamental and preliminary questions of (a) whether Riva Ridge South property must be used in association with the Willows development property and (b) whether the Willows redevelopment plan may affect the structural integrity of the Riva Ridge South property should be determined before formal consideration of the Willows project occurs, each of these concerns noted above should be dealt with and resolved during the early review of the project proposal. For each of the reasons noted above, Riva Ridge South Condominium Association cannot, at this time, provide any assurance whatsoever that the Willotivs redevelopment project will be able to use Riva Ridge South property or that support can be given to what generally appears to be an attractive project..In order to determine whether the Willows project can proceed without the use of Riva Ridge South property, the effect of the proposed construction in close proximity to that property must be determined and evaluated, and a decision should be made regarding the terms upon which Riva Ridge South property maybe used, if such use is necessary, before the Willows application receives formal consideration. If the PEC and the Town of Vail. proceed with formal consideration of the Willows redevelopment project, that decision must be premised upon the understanding that no agreement .may ever be reached permitting the use of Riva Ridge property in the redevelopment of the Willows. Approval of a project premised on an erroneous assumption would be an unfortunate and expensive experience for all concerned, and the Riva Ridge South Condominium Association hopes that, to the extent possible, these issues will be resolved before action is taken by the Town on the pending application. If you have any questions regarding the foregoing, you may contact me. On behalf of the Riva Ridge Condominium Association, I thank you for your consideration of the Association's concerns relating to this matter. Enclosure xc: Riva Ridge South Condominium Association Town of Vail Department of Community Development Attention: George Ruther and Elizabeth Reed -- -~~t~-3. ,x - :'~` ,: 5;, ;;~ y . ~,~~,, -. ~/' GuALETS RWA RIDGE l50UTN1 ~~VL ~Z L /~ `1 1 4 SEP 2006 I-~ /1JV' S ~ J ,. . .. J~ !% :~~ i ~~ I f _ ~~0~ ~ ~~ - --------- - ~~----------_ _ s•6• i ~' - _ _ _ ~, -..._.l i ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ,.~• O ., ,, ~~ 1 , S~Ci~ j~ l ~ ~~ UGC 'rl e - r, i • ~a i ----- ~ ^xl~Y*T ~u.4 .tA.ww G wi(.pt OfsrCi+ 4n In Klr. dna~ 1 .. i ~~ .~.~..~.. ~ ~ ~~/~o~n~... -L 1 r1 O 7~ ° x ~ ~U °Na~> N a._., ~. ' FLOOR ____-- 1ud~N PLAN ~.~_ >,~~ '--_. ~ k ro.o~l ARACsE LEv FLCOR PLA ~ °""`' - ° ' ; A3.01 ® .a i t ~ , moo Z ~. r~- ~ ~- ,~- Law Office of Arthur A. Abplanalp, Jr. L.L.C. Telephone: Post Office Box 2800 970.476.0300 Vail Colorado 970.476.6500 , Telecopier: 81658-2800 970.476.4765 E-mail: Art.Abplanalp 09 NOVembeT 206 @earthlink.net Planning and Environmental Commission of the Town of Vail 75 South Frontage Road West Vail CO Re: Willows Condominium Redevelopment Members of the Commission: Physical Address: Suite 301 Vail 21 Building 472 East Lionshead Circle Vail, Colorado 81657 This office represents Riva Ridge South Condominium Association in connection with an application for the demolition and redevelopment of the Willows Condominium, which is adjacent to Riva Ridge South. The application for the redevelopment of the Willows Condominium is scheduled for final consideration by the PEC on the 13th of November, and this letter is being directed to the PEC in connection with that hearing. As was noted in the letter sent to the Town in association with the work session consideration of the Willows proposal in September, it should first be emphasized that Riva Ridge South supports the redevelopment of the Willows Condominium. The current Willows redevelopment plan appears to be attractive and to have been developed in a manner consistent with the concerns of the neighboring property owners. Consistent with the position of Riva Ridge South during the work session, this letter is being provided to the Town in part to confirm the conditional and qualified support of the proposed Willows project. The second purpose of this letter is to confirm that there remain several concerns with the project which, though not yet resolved, appear to be on track toward resolution in a manner which should permit the proposal to advance to the Town Council for consideration on the question of the creation of a Special Development District consistent with and based upon the plans delivered and representations made to Riva Ridge South. Critical to this qualified support is the assumption that, if granted, the set-backs from Riva Ridge South and the courtyard established west of Riva Ridge South will be integral elements of the Willows redevelopment plan. The concerns which have been expressed by the Riva Ridge South Condominium Association were reviewed in my letter to the Town of the 14th of September but should be reiterated and up-dated in connection with the forthcoming formal hearing. The foremost concern of the Association is the proximity of the proposed Willows project to Riva Ridge South. This concern is associated (a) with the possible effect of constriction-and (b) with the interrelationship, with reference to set-backs, between the two structures. The developer of the Willows project has provided a preliminary report from an engineer indicating that the construction techniques to be employed in the project will not affect the Riva Ridge South stricture. The building configuration has been changed somewhat to increase the separation of the two structures at their closest point. Although additional information related to the construction technique analysis maybe necessary, that report and the change in the location of the proposed Willows stricture have given the Association some assurance regarding its principal concerns. A second central concern remains the preservation of existing large trees which are located in whole or in part on Riva Ridge property. The Willows developer has provided a preliminary report regarding the probability and techniques required to preserve those trees, to the extent possible. Again, the developer seems to be on track to satisfy the concerns of the Association with respect to this matter, although additional information is to be provided. Riva Ridge South is also concerned regarding the immediate effect of demolition of the current Willows structures and construction of the new Willows project. The Willows developer has indicated that the company is willing to enter into an agreement to establish a construction program mitigating those impacts and dealing with other concerns, and the Association is willing to work toward creating such an agreement in the near future. While conditioned upon and qualified by the understanding that there will be progress and resolution regarding the concerns of Riva Ridge South as the Willows project progresses, Riva Ridge South Condominium Association is able, at this time, to indicate that it supports the Willows redevelopment project as it is presently configured and upon the condition that the issues with which it is concerned will be resolved prior to final approval of the proposed SDD. If the PEC and the Town of Vail proceed with formal consideration of the Willows redevelopment project, that decision must be premised upon the understanding that the commitment of Riva Ridge South to support the project before the Town Council will be affected by the anticipated progress toward resolution of identified issues. Riva Ridge South has no reason to believe that resohttion of those issues cannot be achieved. If you have any questions regarding the foregoing, you may contact me. On behalf of the Riva Ridge Condominium Association, I thank you for your consideration of the Association's concerns relating to this matter. ~~ Very tnily Arthur A. Abplana , Jr. xc: Riva Ridge South Condominium Association TOWN CODNCIL Attachment C Proposed Willows Redevelopment -New SDD #40 November 2006 Deviations requested: Setbacks, density, GRFA, site coverage Development Standard Allowed/Reg'd Pending Approval Dwelling Units 12 Du's 18 Du's GRFA 16,069 sq. ft. 32,240 sq. ft. EHU Requirement 0 (# req'd by existing policy) 12 employee beds (one onsite EHU of 670 sq. ft. and 11 buy down beds of 500 sq. ft. each/min 2 bed units} Crossroads Redevelopment -New SDD #39 January 2006 Deviations requested: Setbacks, height, density, .GRFA, site coverage Development Standard Allowed/Reg'd Approved Dwelling Units 47.5 Du/Au's 74 Du/Au's GRFA 46,051 sq. ft. 199,830 sq. ft. EHU Requirement 6 (# req'd by existing policy) 12 employee beds (buy down- specifics TBD) Westhaven Condominiums .Major Amendment to SDD #4 April 2005 Deviations requested: Development Standard Allowed/Reg'd Approved Dwelling Units NA 13 Du's GRFA NA 32,000 sq. ft. EHU Requirement 8 (# req'd by existing policy) 4400 square feet (at least two units with at least one employee living in each) Manor Vail Redevelopment -New SDD #38 September 2004 Deviations requested: Height, Density, GRFA Development Standard Allowed/Reg'd Approved Dwelling Units 133 Du's 141 Du's GRFA 139,630 sq. ft. 164,321 sq. ft. EHU Requirement 4 (# req'd by existing policy 4 EHU's onsite (630 sq. ft. each) Tivoli Lodge Redevelopment -New SDD #37 April 2003 Deviations requested: Landscape area, parking, loading, height Development Standard Allowed/Rea'd Approved Dwelling Units 10 Du's 1 Du, 61 Au's GRFA 26,561 sq. ft. 26,560 sq. ft. EHU Requirement 1 (# req'd by existing policy) 1 EHU onsite (450 sq. ft.) i ~, HOT FOR COH15118iGIlON I~I +r~....v I~ r EESOIi DE5T6N ASSOCIATES MPR~ING, MlIBIIOR DBI(~1 Stll ffMICYOD OAIC! tSS1A•Yt~.1.hRv 7nfmtYOe, G tIH6. T8 gSipAtlS IYc ~14,!l1AIS1 B.l~d01~f. 1Ylfpeolt-n1~.b11Q Iodllf OD ~IOI Tei lNANAW Ike 7NAII.Dl16 m E a M (D O O N 3 C O O L r CH RIVA RI .r 6MMM W p ~ a ~3 ~a~> N roc d~rnTrai &Tl~wdblp DIarY~{lYe gltE ~~ orc HOY. 08, 7008 PpoJ~CNx 797,0A0 ~~ GT.M~ ~~. >~ A2.1 ORDINANCE NO. 31 Series of 2006 AN ORDINANCE AMENDING SECTION 2-6-9 OF THE VAIL TOWN CODE, CONCERNING USE OF THE REAL ESTATE TRANSFER TAX FUND, AND SETTING FORTH DETAILS IN REGARD THERETO. WHEREAS, the Town of Vail (the "Town"), in the County of Eagle and State of Colorado. is a home rule municipal corporation duly organized and existing under laws of the State of Colorado and the Town Charter (the "Charter"); and WHEREAS, the members of the Town Council (the "Council") of the Town of Vail have been duly elected and qualified; and WHEREAS, in an effort to be the premier mountain resort community, the Town has committed to provide its citizens and guests with "a superior level of environmentally sensitive services" in addition to "vision, leadership and stewardship in an environmentally responsible manner;" and WHEREAS, to achieve the goals stated above and for the environmental sustainability of the Town and the Vail Valley,. the Council has determined that certain text amendments are necessary to the Vail Town Code as they relate to the use of the Town of Vail Real Estate Transfer Tax Fund; and WHEREAS, The Council finds that this ordinance is necessary and proper for the health, safety and welfare of the Town of Vail and the inhabitants thereof. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE TOWN COUNCIL OF THE TOWN OF VAIL, COLORADO THAT: Section 1. Section 2-6-9 of the Vail Town Code is hereby amended to read as follows: (additions are shown in bold and underline; deletions are shown in s;l~et#r~g~); 2-6-9: REAL ESTATE TRANSFER TAX FUND: A. Creation; Purpose: All funds received by the Town pursuant to this Chapter shall be deposited in the Real Estate Transfer Tax Fund, which Fund is hereby created. The Fund shall be subject to appropriation for only the following purposes within the Town or within one mile of the boundaries of the Town. Ordinance No. 31, Series of 2006 1. Acquiring, improving, maintaining, and repairing real property for parks, recreation, open space and similar purposes. 2. The construction, maintenance, and repair of buildings which are incidental to park, recreation, and open space land. 3. Landscaping parks and open space. 4. The construction, maintenance, repair, and landscaping of recreation paths set forth in the Town of Vail Recreation Trails plan as it may be amended by the Town Council from time to time. 5. Supporting sustainable environmental practices as approved by the Town Council, which may include but shall not be limited to expenditures related to: recycling, forest and ecosystem health, water quality, air quality, noise, wildlife protection, natural resource protection, alternative energy technologies, energy efficiency or any similar purpose as determined necessary for the environmental health and welfare of the Town of Vail, its inhabitants and its environs in the discretion of the Town Council. ~6. Paying incidental costs and principal of and interest on any funds borrowed for the purposes set forth in this subsection. B• Building Defined: For the purposes of this Chapter, building shall mean any structure having a roof supported by columns or walls, or any other enclosed structure for the housing of persons, animals, or property. Section 2. If any part, section, subsection, sentence, clause or phrase of this ordinance is for any reason held to be invalid, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions of this ordinance; and the Town Councif hereby declares- it would have passed this ordinance, and each part, section, subsection, sentence, clause or phrase thereof, regardless of the fact that any one or more parts, sections, subsections, sentences, clauses or phrases be declared invalid. Section 3: The Town Council hereby finds, determines and declares that this ordinance is necessary and proper for the health, safety and welfare of the Town of Vail and the inhabitants thereof. Section 4. The amendment of any provision of the Town Code 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 proceeding as commenced under or by virtue of the provision amended. The amendment of any provision hereby shall not revive any provision or any ordinance previously repealed or superseded Ordinance No. 31, Series of 2006 2 unless expressly stated herein. Section 5. All bylaws, orders, resolutions and ordinances, or parts thereof, inconsistent. herewith are repealed to the extent only of such inconsistency. This repealer shall not be construed to revise any bylaw, order, resolution or ordinance, or part thereof, theretofore repealed. INTRODUCED, READ ON FIRST READING, APPROVED, AND ORDERED PUBLISHED ONCE IN FULL ON FIRST READING this 21St day of November, 2006 and a public hearing for second reading of this Ordinance set for the 5th day of December, 2006, at 6:00 P.M. in the Council Chambers of the Vail Municipal Building, Vail, Colorado. Rodney E. Slifer, Mayor ATTEST: Lorelei Donaldson, Town Clerk Ordinance No. 31, Series of 2006 3 RESOLUTION N0.22 SERIES 2006 A RESOLUTION DECLARING THE INTENT OF THE TOWN OF VAIL TO ACQUIRE A FEE SIMPLE INTEREST IN THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 2399 NORTH FRONTAGE ROAD WEST FOR FIRE PROTECTION FACILITIES, FURTHER CONTINUANCE OF GOOD FAITH NEGOTIATIONS TO ACQUIRE SAID PROPERTY INTEREST, AND AUTHORIZATION TO INITIATE AN ACTION IN EMINENT DOMAIN TO ACQUIRE SAID PROPERTY IN THE EVENT GOOD FAITH NEGOTIATIONS DO NOT RESULT IN AN AGREEMENT TO ACQUIRE SAID PROPERTY INTEREST. WHEREAS, the Town of Vail (the "Town"), in the County of Eagle and State of Colorado, is a home rule municipal corporation duly organized and existing under laws of the State of Colorado and the Town Charter (the "Charter"); and WHEREAS, the members of the Town Council (the "Council") of the Town of Vail have been duly elected and qualified; and WHEREAS, the Council has determined that it is in the public interest to expand its fire protection facilities; and WHEREAS, acquisition of the property interests with a street address of 2399 North Frontage Road West and legally described as Parcel A, a resubdivision of Tract D, a resubdivision of Vail Schone Filing 1, Town of Vail, Eagle County, Colorado (the "Property"), is necessary for the purposes described above; and WHEREAS, the Town has negotiated in good faith with the record owner of the Property and others having a recorded interest in the Property; and WHEREAS, negotiations to purchase the Property have, to this point, been unsuccessful; and WHEREAS, it is necessary for the Town to acquire immediate possession of the property in order to expand facilities for fire protection services; and WHEREAS, the Town Council has determined that it is necessary to acquire a fee simple interest in the Property, and that, in the event that good faith negotiations do not result in voluntary granting of the Property, it is necessary that the Town acquire said interest in the Property through the use of the Town's power of eminent domain as provided for in the Charter. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE TOWN COUNCIL OF THE TOWN OF VAIL THAT: 1. The Council hereby finds that it will serve a public purpose to expand facilities for fire protection facilities. The Town Council further finds that it is necessary to acquire the Property to achieve said public purpose. 2 . The Council hereby declares its intent to acquire the Property from the record owner and all others having an interest therein. 3 . The Council specifically authorizes that negotiations between the Town and the owner of the Property continue in good faith, but in the event such negotiations are unsuccessful, acquisition of the Property from the record owner thereof and all other owners having an interest therein, through use of the Town's powers of eminent domain, is hereby authorized. 4 . Malcolm M. Murray of Murray Dahl Kuechenmeister & Renaud LLP, shall be retained as Special Counsel to the Town for the purpose of representing the Town in the condemnation of the Property and related matters. 5 . A copy of this Resolution Number 22, Series of 2006, shall be forwarded to the record owner of the Property and all other persons having an interest in the Property. INTRODUCED, READ, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 21St day of November, 2006. By: ATTEST: Lorelei Donaldson, Town Clerk Rodney E. Slifer, Mayor MUR\99998\357459.01