HomeMy WebLinkAbout1997-0519 PEC
THIS ITEM MQY AFFECT YOUR PROPERTY
PUBLIC NOTICE
~ NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the Planning and Environmental Commission of the Town of
Vail will hold a public hearing in accordance with Section 18.66.060 of the Municipal Code of the
Town of Vail on May 19,1997, at 2:00 P.M. in the Town of Vail Municipal Building. In
consideration of:
A request for a worksession to discuss a conditional use permit, to allow for the construction of
the Alpine Garden Education Center, located at 620 Vail Valley Drive/Tract A, Vail Village 7th
Filing.
Applicant: Vail Alpine Garden Foundation
Planner: George Ruther
A request to establish a Special Development District #35, the Austria Haus, located at 242 East
Meadow Drive/Part of Tract C, Vail Village 1st Filing.
Applicant: Sonnenalp Properties, Inc. represented by Gordon Pierce
Pianner: George Ruther
A request for a worksession to discuss amending the Town of Vail Zoning Code to create a
new zone district (PA-1).
Applicant: Sonnenalp Properties, Inc. represented by Gordon Pierce
Planner: George Ruther
A request for a worksession to discuss amending the official Town of Vail Zoning Map to
~ rezone the Austria Haus property, located at 242 East Meadow Drive/Part of Tract C, Vail
Village 1 st Filing, to PA-1.
Appiicant: Sonnenalp Properties, Inc. represented by Gordon Pierce
Planner: George Ruther
A request for an interior remodel, utilizin the 250 Ordinance located at 120 Willow
9 , Bridge
Road, Unit 5-K/Lot K, Block 5E, Vail Village 1 st Filing.
Applicant: Stanley and Cecelia Schocket, represented by Kyle Webb !I
Planner: Dirk Mason
A request for the PEC to review and make a recommendation to the Town Council on public
view corridor methodology and criteria for the Lionshead Redevelopment Master Plan Area. i
Applicant: Town af Vaii '
Planner: Susan Connelly
A request for a conditianal use permit to allow for a seasonal structure to be erected for the
purpose of selling seasonal plant products, located at 2154 S. Frontage Road/(Conoco),
generally located at:
THAT PORTION OF THE SE 1/4 OF SE 1/4 OF SECTlON 11, TOWNSHIP 5 SOUTH, RANGE 81 WEST i
OF THE 6TH P.M., EAGLE COUNTY, COLORADO, WHICH BEGINS AT A POINT ON THE SOUTH-
EASTERLY RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE OF INTERSTATE HIGHWAY N0. 70, WHICH POINT OF BEGINNING
LIES S86°14'22"W A DiSTANCE OF 1200.64 FEET AND N48'00'57"E A DISTANGE OF 380.04 FEET OF '
THE SE CORNER OF SA1D SECTION 11, THENCE ALONG SAID RIGHT-OF-WAY N44°01'05"E A
DISTANCE OF 190.0 FT., THENCE S45°58'55"E A DISTANCE OF 229.50 FEET, THENCE N85°36'13"W
~ A QISTANCE OF 297.94 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING. TRACT CONTAINING 0.500 AC.
Applicant: Jane Mack
Nlanner: Tammie Williamson
- T
A request for a conditional use permit to aNow for the summer use (Camp Vaii) of the existing
tent located at the Lionshead Ski School practice area, located at 520 Lionshead Mall/ Tract D,
! Vail Lionshead 1 st filing.
' Applicant: Vail Recreation District / Vail Associates, Inc. i
Planner: Lauren Waterton
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.
Sign language interpretation avai(abfe upon request with 24 hour notification. Please call 479-
2114 voice or 479-2356 TDD for information.
Community Development Department
Published May 2, 1997 in the Vail Trail.
~
~
Agenda last revised 5/14/97 9 am
PLANNING AND ENVIRONMENTAL COMMISSION -
Monday, May 19, 1997
AGENDA
Project Orientation /IVO LUNCH - Cornmunity Development Department 12:45 pm
MEMBERS PRESENT. MEMBERS A S~ ENT
Site Visits : 1:15 pm
1. Austria Haus - 242 East Meadow Drive
2. Vail Recreation District - 520 Lionshead Mall
Driver: George
COR-413i_)11
~ NOTE: If the PEG hearing extends untif 6:00 p.m., the board will break for dinner from 6:00 - 6:30 p.m,
Public Hearin.g - Town Council Chambers 2:00 p.m. '
1. A request for a conditional use permit to allow for the summer use (Camp Vail) of the I
existing tent 4ocated at the Lionshead Ski School practice area, located at 520 Lionshead i
Mall/ Tract D, Vail Lionshead 1 st filing.
Applicant: Vail Recreation District / Vail Associates, Inc.
P(anner: Lauren Waterton
2. A request to esiablish a Special Development District #35, the Austria Haus, located at
242 Easi Meadow Drive/Part of Tract C, Vail Village 1 st Filing.
, Applicant: Sonnenalp Properties, Inc. represented by Gordon Pierce
Pfanner: George Ruther
3. A request to review and recommend to the Town Council the public view corridor
methodology and criteria far the Lionshead Redevelopment Master Plan Area.
Appiicant: Town of Vail and consultant team
Staff: , Dominic Mauriello
4. A request for a conditional use permit to al{ow for a temporary structure to be erected for
the purpose of selling seasonal plant products, located at 2154 S. Frontage
Road/(Conoco), generally located at:
THAT PORTION OF 7HE SE 114 OF SE 1/4 OF SECTION 11, TOWNSHIP 5 SOUTH, RANGE 81 WEST
OF 7HE 6TH P.M., EAGLE COUNTY, COLORADO, WHICH BEGINS AT A POINT ON THE SOUTH-
1 *VAX
T019
Agenda last revised 5/14/97 9 am
EASTERL.Y RIGHT-OF-WAY LtNE OF INTERSTATE HIGHWAY NO. 70, WHICH POINT OF BEGINNING
LIES S86° 14'22"W A DISTANCE OF 1200.64 FEET AND N48°40'57"E A DISTANCE OF 3$0.04 FEET OF
` THE SE CORNER OF SAID SECTION 11, THENCE ALONG SAID RlGHT-OF-WAY N44°01'05"E A
DISTANGE OF 190.0 FT., THENCE S45°58 55"E A DISTANCE OF 229.50 FEET, THENCE N85°36'13"W A
~W ~i'~T-T,&'7F,4, Z= ;1W=8EG1N N1NG. TRACT GOP17'AW#I'G-6.100 *0:~'°°~~~,~~~~.b"'
~ Applicant: Jane Mack:= ,i.
Planner: Tammie Williamson
TABLED UNTIL JUNE 9, 1997
5. A request for a worksession to discuss a conditiohal use permit, to aliow for the "
construction of the Alpine Garden Education Center, located at 620 Vail Valiey
~ Drive/Tract A, Vail Village 7th Filing.
~ _ -
Applicant: Vail Alpine Garden Foundation
I Planner: George Ruther
TABLED UNTIL JUNE 9,1997
6. A request for an interior remodel, utilizing the 250 Ordinance, located at 120 Wiltow
Bridge Road, Unit 5-K/Lot K, Block 5E, Vail Village 1 st Filing.
~ Applicant: Stanley and Cecelia Schocket, represented by Kyle Webb
, Planner: Dirk Mason
STAFF APPROVED
' 7. A request for a worksession to discuss amending the Town of Vail Zoning Code to •
create a new zone district (PA-i
Applicant: Sonnenalp Properties, Inc. represented by Gordon Pierce
Planner: George Ruther
WITHDRAWN
, 8. A request for a worksession to discuss amending the official Town of Vail Zoning Map to
rezone the Austria Haus property, located at 242 East Meadow Drive/Part of Tract C, Vail
Village 1 st Filing, to PA-1. ,
~ Applicant: Sonnenalp Properties, Inc, represented by Gordon Pierce I
Planner: George Ruther
-
WITHDRAWN
9. Information Update
I
10. Approval of May 12, 1997 minutes.
~ The applications and information about the proposa(s are available for public inspection during
re9ular office hours in the ProJ'ect Planner's office located at the Town of Vail Communit
, Y ~
Development Department, 75 South Frontage Road.
' Sign language interpretation available upon request with 24 hour notification. Please call 479-2114 voice or 479-2356 .
TDD for information.
Community Development Department A
Published May 16,1997 in the Vait 7rail.
2
Agenda last revised S/i 9/97 5 pm
~ PLANNING AND ENVlRONMENTAL COMMISSION
Monday, May 19, 1997
FINAL AGENDA
Project Orientation /NO LUNCH - Community Development Deaartment 12:45 pm
MEMBERS PRESENT MEMBERS ABSENT
Greg Moffet Diane Golden
Greg Amsden
Galen Aasland
Gene Useiton
John Schofield
Ann Bishop
Site Visits : 1:15 pm
1. Austria Haus - 242 East Meadow Drive
2. Vail Recreation District - 520 Lionshead Mail
Driver: George
• fL..
NOTE: If the PEC hearing extends until 6:00 p.m., the board will break for dinner from 6:00 - 6:30 p.m.
Pubiic Hearina - Town Council hambers 2:00 p.m.
i
1. A request for a conditional use permit to allow for the summer use (Camp Vai!) of the
existing tent located at the Lionshead Ski School practice area, located at 520 Lionshead
Mall/ Tract D, Vail Lionshead 1 st filing.
Applicant: Vail Recreation District / Vail Associates, Inc.
Planner: Lauren Waterton
MOTION: Ann Bishop SECOND: John Schofield VOTE: 6-0 ~
APPROVED WITH 4 CONDtTONS:
1. That this approval is valid onfy for the summer of 1997. The temporary tent must
be removed when the conditional use permit (for the winter use) expires in April,
1998.
2. That skirting must be added to the bottom of the tent (the entire perimeter) to
prevent children from accessing the area underneath the tent.
• 3. That the applicant submit a building permit application to the Community
Development Department for the temporary tent. The application must be
approved and the tent inspected for all safety issues prior to any further use
or occupation.
1 TO{9N41L
; Agenda last revised 5l19/97 5 pm R 4. That no signs be placed on the property, ar on the tent, until they have been
reviewed and approved by the Town.
2. A request to establish a Speciai Development District #35, the Austria Haus, located at •
I 242 East Meadow Drive/Part of Tract C, Vail Village 1 st Filing.
Applicant: Sonnenalp Properties, Inc. represented by Gordon Pierce
Planner: George Ruther
WORKSESSION - NO VOTE
3. A request to review and recommend to the Town Council the public view corridor
methodology and criteria for the Lionshead Redevelopment Master Plan Area.
Applicant: Town of Vail and consultant team
Staff: Dominic Mauriello
MOTION: Ann Bishop SECOND: Greg Amsden VOTE: 6-0
APPROVED
4. A request for a conditional use permit to allow for a temporary structure to be erected for
the purpose of selling seasonal plant products, located at 2154 S. Frontage
Road/(Conoco), generally located at:
THAT PORTION OF THE SE 1/4 OF SE 1/4 OF SECTION 11, TOWNSHIP 5 SOUTH, RANGE 81 WEST
OF THE 6TH P.M., EAGLE COUNTY, COLORADO, WHICH BEGINS AT A POINT ON THE SOUTH-
EASTERLY RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE OF IN7ERSTATE HIGHWAY N0. 70, WHICH POINT OF BEGINNING .
LIES S86° 14'22"W A DISTANCE OF 1200.64 FEET AND N48'00'57"E A DISTANCE OF 380.04 FEET OF
THE SE CORNER OF SAID SECTION 11, THENCE ALONG SAID RIGNT-OF-WAY N44°01'05"E A
DISTANCE OF 190.0 FT., THENCE S45°58'55"E A DISTANCE OF 229.50 FEET, THENCE N85°36'13"W A
DISTANCE OF 297.94 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING. TRACT CONTAINING 0.500 AC.
Applicant: Jane Mack
Planner: Tammie Williamson
TABLED UNTIL JUNE 9, 1997
5. A request for a worksession to discuss a conditional use permit, to allow for the
construction of the Alpine Garden Education Center, located at 620 Vail Valley
Drive/Tract A, Vail Village 7th Filing.
Applicant: Vail Alpine Garden Foundation
Planner: George Ruther
TABLED UNTlL JUNE 9,1997
6. A request for an interior remodel, utilizing the 250 Ordinance, located at 120 Wi(low
Bridge Road, Unit 5-K/Lot K, Block 5E, Vail Village 1 st Fi(ing.
Applicant: Stanley and Cecelia Schocket, represented by Kyle Webb
Planner: Dirk Mason
STAFF APPROVED •
2
• Agenda last revised 5/19/97 5 pm
• 7. A request for a worksession to discuss amend'+ng the Town of Vaii Zoning Code to
~ create a new zone district (PA-1).
Applicant: Sonnenalp Properties, Inc. represented by Gordon Pierce
Planner: George Ruther
WlTHDRAWN
8. A request for a worksession to discuss amending ihe olficial Town of Vail Zoning Map to
rezone the Austria Haus property, located at 242 East Meadow Drive/Part af Tract C, Vail
Village 1st Fifing, to PA-1.
Applicant: Sonnenalp Properties, Inc. represented by Gordon Pierce
Planner: George Ruther
WITHDRAWN
9. information Update
10. Approval of May 12, 1997 minutes.
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.
S Sign language interpretation available upon request wiih 24 hour notification. Please call 479-2114 voice or 479-2356
TDD for information. ~
Community Development Department
Pubfrshed May 16, 1997 in the Vail 7rail.
I
~
~
~ 3
t ~
I • MEM ANDUM
I
TO: Planning and Environmental Commission
' FROM: Community Development Department
DATE: May 19, 1997
SUBJECT: A request for a conditionai use permit to allow for the summer use (Camp Vail) ofi
the existing tent located at the Lionshead Ski School practice area, located at 520
Lionshead Mall/ Tract D, Vail Lionshead 1 st filing.
Applicant: Vail Recreation District / Vail Associates, Inc.
Planner: Lauren Waterton
f. BACKGROUND AND DESCRIPTION OF THE REGIUEST
The Vai! Recreation District (VRD) has requested a conditional use permit to allow for the
summer use of the existing temporary tent, located on Tract D, Vail Lionshead 1 st filing. The
applicant has indicated that the construction work occurring at the Golden Peak Children's
Center during the summer of 1997 has caused them to temporarily relocate the Camp Vai( and
Pre-Kamp Vail activities to the Lionshead Center Building for this summer.
• In the fall of 1994, Vail Associates received approval to construct a temporary tent at the base of
the Lionshead ski portal in order to facilitate ski school instruction. The PEC granted the
conditional use permit for a period of one ski season only.
In the fall of 1995, Vail Associates requested a new conditional use permit to again use the tent
for ski school activities, in a slightly different location than the previous approval. As a part of the
request, Vail Associates asked that the conditional use permit for the tent be approved for winter
use, in perpetuity. Although the PEC did not approve the request to use the tent every ski
season in perpetuity, they did agree that it could be erected for the next three ski seasons,
expiring at the end of the 1997/98 ski season (April, 1998). The PEC approved this conditional
use permit request with the condition that the tent be in place for no Ionger than a six-month
period, to coincide wiCh the normal ski season, and shall be removed promptly when the
mountain closes each April. '
. On May 20, 1996, the PEC approved a conditional use permit to allow for the VRD to use the
temporary tent for Camp Vail during the summer of 1996. This was necessary due to the
construction at Golden Peak.
The tent is located approximately 7' south of the Lionshead bike path (see attached site plan for
exact location) and is constructed of a tan-colored vinyl material supported by pine logs. The
lower portion of the tent sides is rough sawn logs and the upper portion is vinyl, which can be
rolled up so that the tent functions as an open pavilion. The tent is approximately 18' tall at its
highest point and is 40' long by 24' wide. There is a wooden floor constructed in ihe interior of
the tent. Electric, phone and gas lines have been run to the tent. As the tent is not used at
night, there are no lights, inside or outside.
Although many of the activities associated with Camp Vail will take place within the Lionshead
' Center Building, the VRD would like to utilize the tent to expand their children's programs to
x.
.
tYl~Y(VORVA[6
~ r
inciude an appropriate location for indoor activities such as drama, discovery and art blocks. The '
J:,Jatolip_ytes.thatt. they..•will ut[lize.the.#.ent-at,.leas~~, hour& out=o#.the 10,hours,t-ha#Carrp:.VaiJ-is.in .
.,.:,V
operatior? each day. The requested dates of use are June 9th through August 22nd, Monday
through Friday. The hours of operation of Camp Vaii are 7:30 a.m. to 5:30 p.m.
i
II. COMMERCIAL CORE 11 ZONING CONSIDERATIONS ,
Zoning: Commercial Core II
Area: 1.645 acres or 71,656.2 sq. ft. .
Allowed Proaosed
Height: 45 feet 18 feet
Setbacks: 10' on all sides N: 14'
S: 33"
E: 13"
W : 360'
Site Coverage: 70% or 50,159 sq. h. N/A for seasonal structure
Parking: Parking is not required for temporary structures.
fll. CR{TER{A AND FINDINGS
Upon review of Section 18.60, the Community Development Department recommends approval
of the conditional use permit based upon the following factors: •
A. Consideration of Factors:
1. Relationship and impact of the use on development objectives of the
Town.
The development objectives of the Town of Vail can be found in the purpose
section of the Commercial Core II (CCII) Zone District, as well as the Zoning Title
of the Municipal Code. The purpose section of the CC 44 Zone District calls for a
mixture of uses. Section 18.02.020 (B) 10, the Purpose Section for the Zoning
Title, calls for theprovibion of recreational facilities. Staff believes that this
recreational facility will provide an appropriate temporary location for the Camp
Vail and Pre-Kamp Vail children's programs. We befieve that the use of this tent
r to augment the functions of a summer day care faci{iry, for the summer of 1997, is
appropriate and adds to the mixture of uses in the Lionshead area.
Staff has concerns, however, regarding the continued use of the temporary
structure. The originial approval for the winter use of the temporary tent never
contemplated the permanent use of the facility. We believe that when the
conditional use permit expires for the winter season (April, 1998), either a
permanent building must be considered or the use must be discontinued at this
location. Furthermore, staff would not support another request to extend the
condional use permit past the April, 1998 expiration.
~ .
` 2
t ~
2. The effect of the use on light and air, distribution of population,
transportation #acilities, uttlities;, schools, parks and recreation
facilities, and other pubiic facilities needs.
Staff believes that there will not be ar?y negative impacts to the criteria referenced
above.
3. Effect upon traffic with particular reference to congestion, automotive
and pedestrian safety and convenience, traffic flow and control,
access, maneuverability, and removal of snow from the street and
parking areas.
Staff believes that there will be little impact on traffic, or related issues, if the
conditional use permit is approved. Parents dropping their children off for the
Camp Vail program will park in the Lionshead parking structure and walk to the
Lionshead Center building. Although the majority of arrivals will be through the
Lionshead mall, some parents may arrive via the bike path, located on the south
side of the building. In either case, staff believes that the proposed use of the
tent is not likely to generate additional vehicular trips in Lionshead.
4. Effect upon the character of the area in which the proposed use is to
be located, including the scale and bulk of the proposed use in
° relation to surrounding uses.
• Staff believes that the requested conditional use permit to use the existing tent for
the 1997 summer months will have little effect on the character of the area in
which it is located. Staff does not believe that the additional use of the tent, in
conjunction with outdoor activities, will have a negative effect on the
neighborhood.
B. Fin in
The Planning and Environmental Commission shall make the following findings before
qrantinga conditional use ep rmit:
.
1. That the propos~ed location of the use in accord with the purposes of the
conditional use permit section of the zoning code and the purposes of the
district in which the site is located.
2. That the proposed location of the use and the conditions under which it
would be operated or maintained would not be detrimental to the public
health, safety, or welfare or materially injurious to properties or
improvements in the vicinity.
3. That the proposed use would comply with each of the applicable
' provisions of the conditional use permit section of the zoning code.
~ 3
x.
~
IV. STAFF RECaMMENDATiON
Staff recommends approvaf of the conditional use permit to use the existing temporary ski
school tent for Camp Vail activities for the sumrner of 1997, subject to the following findings:
1. That the proposed location of the use in accord with the purposes of the
conditional use permit section of the zoning code and the purposes of the district
in which the site is located.
2. That the proposed location of the use and the conditions under which it would be
operated or maintained would not be detrimental to the public health, safety, or
welfare or materially injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity.
' 3. That the Proposed use would comply with each of the applicable provisions of the
conditional use permit section of the zoning code.
The recommendation of approval carries with it the following conditions:
1. That this approval is valid only for the summer of 1997. The temporary tent must
be removed when the conditional use permit (for the winter use) expires in April,
1998.
2. That skirting must be added to the bottom of the tent (the entire perimeter) to
prevent children from accessing the area underneath the tent.
3. That the applicant submit a building permit application to the Community •
Development Department for the temporary tent. The application must be
approved and the tent inspected for all safety issues prior to any further use or
occupation.
5. That no signs be placed on the property, or on the tent, until they have been
reviewed and approved by the Town.
I '
,
~ •
t 4
x.
, ,.r•' '.'~::s;:i'+' y,...:,':;,;
: FZ . _f .v.
' z . % : ,~"~~~`~'r, r•± . ~ . . : • . • ,
Aecording to Coiorodo law you must commance any legol ociion based S L O'31 ~ Q 4~~ YY
~ • upon any defect In this aurvey within three yeors ofter you first ~
~ • ~ Ciacover Bueh defact. In no evant, may ony aetion boeed upon ony
defect ln.this suney be eommenced more then ten yeors irom the ~f1,~`t
if ~
dote of the certiffcotion shown hereon: 7
cn 0°'
~ : ° ~
J.G . , .
. . N 85'24 02" E'~
-
. m 275.75
WOOD
FENCE
416.59 444.20'
~
35•24' 02" E . ~ 'f; . ~ , ~ .
~
1 / ~ ~
k•% ~ , i
• ~ ~ , ~ ~ - - " ~ °~a ~ . ' ~
/ - l ~,p,4 N'~ • . _ _ ~ fJ/ / i^Q .
MINIATURE GOIF
ASPHALT •
BUtLDING . PATH /(b ry~~
FENCE " TE1JT- • / Iry
• . . ,
16.5'
~TRACT
. VAIL/LION-SHEAD, FIRST FILING
CHAIRUFT 1.6450 ACRES
_ E GOLF No. 8 r
, ;OURSE
8.7'
. , b -
~ • • ~
1.0' 1 7.3
~ 4.a~.' ° w SEWER MANHOLE
. W ~ - w , / f ~i • - ~O. .
1-11rT SHACK
7.3
~ Y .
i
28.1'
- r~• 9
~ • .
.
~
N~~ * 4 ~ <
~f . .
ar
~ ' s.~ ~ ~ - . 7.? I}
..>e _ . ~ 1~ ..<'°.+~r~ '
A
kG 4 ~ fi ~ c.
~ •
•
4
Aw 1 1!
x• `
"4r
fy>-
~ ~ - . ~ ~ ' • + ;,'z t ,
• ~ - , <
~
.
. .
~n •
v + .
i .
•
/ "
• , . ~ ~ ~ 4 ~ , .
. . ~ ~ , ,
~ - . . . ~ -rw~ ?r~?c~ ~ ,
• I ( . I ~ C-____-?T-___...,.~t' _.l~f' ~ / `......._..1-77~.... •
'1 ' , ~.I , (f, ~ r I~ , ` 1~ ~ ~t~ • ;i~ • . . .
.
: ~ , ~I . • , . • • • ' . ' '
. . i ~
- ~ • . .
' • ' t. • i" r~~~l~ ::99~7.~- ~ ' ' I
' ' . ' • t . „ .t' ~ t , , , ' • ' , , ' • ~ , ) i
. r '
. J . • ~ • . ~ ' ~ ~ • ~ . '
. ~ • . ;
. ~ ~ ~ • ~ ~ ~
• , ~ , • ' . . . ~I
. . ~ .
~
. , r~' ~ • ' , ` - , ~
k• : • ' t . . . '
~ , , . ~ . - -
- • - ~ , ~ • •
. ti f i; ; ; , ~
LL
. . ~ . • ' ji ~ I i • • ' i . •
r1. jw.T,~ N;~.1wWS . . . 1 .
. ~
~~HiTl+
. . GL
• • . . • l ` 'l'~"'-~" . ' . ~ . .
, : ~ ~---G' _o •
. . . . . . . ~
. `
~ . ~ .
. . . ,
. . .
' ~ . ~ . ~
L ..~p..::54Y~%.'~..?,~~~~_.: ~_i • ~ . , '
~ . ' . ~ . ' • i . . . , I
• ~ ; ~ ~ . -
y.•? ~ •l.`~~.~r~:
ah :~:r'r~ .•r':'!</i ~~4.~ :~.,C.r. '~~]',~1~~,: "`,4.~~•• :c.,,r~S.t~~:~`..:;:: i ...i.- ~}.C'~ .r-~ fi; _r !.f r -'l'•~.
;~•~C"~ ~ ~ ..,;~~~e ,p, t~^ ctil~ar:~:~'.i'.- .,U.ti:~.#:t..~ ~'tt~. `'l,^. •t}i~•r: 'i~.. .N.C.ii• L'.~.~!fl` • >
' •`m'~.1~... •i .'F;.:"._ l. ~ 1• '
T;. ~,..:rs:. :4'y.ti.t '2.iM'.~~..'i~.~}`~Y 1. ~st~`~*~ ~ .f .l. ~ '•~i~ 9' .~•CEV .
-ti. j• „{l:' w~~n.. 'I~.i:•' ..i:.nt.t~ . ~ Y. .i..~r'~il`n,,, s.~~ ~.e~j~ •.1 -i':~.';~
. i. ;J ~ •:y;~ 4~~a:~ •~=r;:. )
t•.I'
i.. -~.~t. "~.lr~'t;.. f%'?.~ ~c.b .-Ws ^l~•,r , r~.,.•' :ct+t:.l~.s. 'r.'~•'•~ ~}-.~~L:~ .:i-c .+,'_.~t :n-'~...: :•y. ~''C~.h~'ai~ v:.~t ~
.:t~'f.1 -t. . ti=:<:•3;d'.' ~Gf'~ ~ .
~-Y,'.' ~•~•.1~tT~*~ ;~rwis. 1 ~ .1~J.~+1Y . •L r~•.,+t~~ Yp:~C ~
~..i? :~i ••:r~ ~r :~tk• K'~r, .l a ?.t:.• ~ • i ~ ~s.. ~l:_•~.... . i . •.~y. C. l.,\. o
,.I L : r~ .,.i ~ .?~'r':.. :.f . .f• r~~~i' t g,..~i~ `.t;: :,.";.y f ~.~ir.'.~^ . 1, ~_K,i'"''•~:!" •<'i • ~~5~•t:~1'e~t`~y'~''~ .
-.r~o-~ •i.;,1~e .t(•a.l. 'i .~•+t`~ 1'' n {.::.d~ . .t..``. ' i Y~... !1:. y~i.~i•, ~ r~ ti.. •1: il•~•if:}~. `_~'~'L•~
-t : '~.~•c . T.. `.i• i t':.. . i'~.' :'.h... c.• t • K
.r °..13•~ .J '~.V•; .~i~ +a~t'_ ~•"t'~.. c ?4~ 'X ~A, ~-.~•3J
i.'~:f7t' _44 \i-~.• ;jJye~t ~:if-"- ~•:~^~'i'`7T,. ~~,,J~:~}~a'• •q•r•.i J1:P. ~r: "?t•%~ ~L~.L .
~ ~:~~•~i.• :~~•f:;~~,-. .a _ ~y~.~ ; ~3::;:; .G
•~'4;yt `j I :4•.: ~f.. c~ . , ~ . r; , .i.:• ,t
1~ r~~ .f.~~^ •.1'f~ •i:~ 1: "i.••f.. , a; .1.~•~)wt;~.eil;•iv
~ .,i: i~y1:yfi ~ •~t5 'A. t:~?~Rr.~~EM
1
P - • ' . ~ ' . <
.kM7, ~ ' i' '.1 r't~~ ~•s~' "*'1'. - :r~ ~ ~~Y: .Y .
.a. ^ J•.. .P' .i.• ' 'r. l.' .,j! n:~:'
.A~ •:7 ~ 'f `
;i1~'~'
, : ..ti• • !.i"~. ,r . 5
:t. ,'L~ I ~.~J!~'.
I+a.. ? ~r' ~t# .J• ' .
•S ~ .F ;1' 'r
1 ~1 . ~'Sr~ F~l.=•~ :
.
s;t1, i,~•.
'1%'•
-o'r:
~i .
':i~ ~5~`'~~ F'r~tii• ~i ~ -'+.P::'i.p, .
_•y~ ;v- i ~ 'l.,; .~,~•:F•-
=~::.w ~~y r.~' IT! t- _ . •1
~l,~%r. 't: :N •vf~ ~ . . . 1 `P=::.
'.r, 1 '~..r-:i: ..k., i ~
`i~ Yr' ~•i~ - ~ y ~
~ ~
. :Y `~.~is:;• 'f1r ~ x~r
~~~•:u. ~ ~ ,~1~••,:, i~.
r ?y. ..t:
~ ••f • ~I `
. • i ••1• i1 , t! .
',w ' ,7.:` ti~ '~1r ~ .
..y~i'.:t~ :a': :~~t'• ~_t. ~S_.
ri~ .i.YJ~ '•7%'.' .5° '.t: - ~ ~'7~•:•' ••t~
:•i, ~t• t' ~ •1i .i' .~7 r1+•i...?+~
.i• ' p'~' t.~ _ . c. ~1.' 1 .l. ~4~ ' f • . .fr•
•'4' G)'a j,. a
~,I,~t ~t~' ~~ty i
,•y, •
' J• i1 • ~w~'7.'. ' .
.•-4' . .'1.~ 1
c • y:
.3
. I! .
'
. (r
. ~,j~.v ' j•~'•.
`.1 M1 1 : s ~
•`i:
4. t
'
..F .
••~'~I ..ir •'x i~:..
.1~ Y w _ f ~ ~Y. ~ •.i
:i• r,
;`.•-L; , .r•. 7ti~:
_ ~.a
'
.R~.'
~,•r"+-;. • + J • ' .
1
i•.
? • ` 1
. t'- ` ~.l+' ~t
•.t
Q}+{Q(~/~ :.C~~'
` r~~. .t' C F ^i . r~• ~d Y~~~~ • j..~ r . , tct n, . • ' f i ~ '
s, :';Ei`.,'1•.•1,-,'~ _ .t.:.~
':.7 p., ~rPij.t:: ;~~(.L~ 't ~•n~ . •S~?'
~~'{..,i,.. ei~ ; '•,i . .r= - .T - . i
:f , : • i•~
~i ] 1: 7:i.~~ ..r.. ''G vr ~ 1'• 't"~' ~s.' ~ v.
k',~• .t., f: `.r i~I ..v,
::n; ';i• ~i".. •.t. .a ~r . . ~ 1. .
:I~' y-~:.: :'v.:~ f.~'.•:r•, - r.
rs 1~~'~-~ •1:~,.
L~~ t, f'. .j: •
•i '`•N' . . ' >e ;
.
..1 .P. i
-.i.t , .~C• - ,
~y.~ j•:.~• -
. .
.1 ~ •
.
=r
'%'s ~ .:s :.t :.;r . ~~j
.r:
. ;•,i.' r... ~i~ ~
~J
.r - .
.7
r
:
, 't• . .
. - . _ ~i' . CS - . . . ~~rn•.
•t~, `i%u• . . . . , , . . ' . ~ ~ , ' . . „ 'i
~,t~ . . - • • ~ . ' . ' , • - ' • ~ . :t. ,
..s-'~,~"~'' ~ ' .i '~'Ljd. . . • , ~ _ •e, ~ • •r• . ~ r •t :i. ~ • . ' . ' ' _ ` . ~ : I.. '
~:.'n:•~ .l: ,ar:a:Y• • ' . ~ ( ~ ' ' , , .i.. - :s •'r..
; ~ r .:4[e j A`
. , j.•_.
.•.n•.r .
.
•l. .'1 J-,
• .
• +•1 ~
I^l .f... . 1 ~ ~ . .
r.:
. ~
1~'. . .
.c;
r°
r'
i
~ i
..h. l~ ~.1 ' ~ • .l.
.
.•.,.y~ ~
r.
. •f
. .
~.y W
f?
1
t +A. • .
~f•~-
~ . ~1
i}..
.A' •M ~ .
. ~
'2 . .
i•~ .
i~ ~i'~ •h.
~.ti .i' ' ,•~L" ..K•• V + 'J ~ ~ . . .i~~'~~
y~1'~i'~~~ 'i~'.i y .r•9 ..~~'i~ ~ . t~:~::.
t i ~ .L.•i' : r~' ~ ~ G~ i~"~ 'l•!' ,n f . . . • ~
~y'.,;. ~`4..'•~.; . •.J ~f_~ •f. + . , i~:
• f' ~ 7.,~ _ .
' .'t.
,l. ,l~~• . .
t! . •'1 ~
.i'•:
~
~
':h~~• . ~r1a M~~ .
` J ( • . r.i ^ `4'» ~ ..1~ ~ - 1 y:~ V: .1' . . I L. ~.'v'Y
'~~b~a;!"
{ I 17.. . . 3 .1,.. a ~ ~ . ~ . , • ?c.-
't: `d.. :0.
i'~~: Y.: • i w ' : ~ . . Jti~ f . f :
.k: 't ~ ~
-•T •
7 ~rY ~ ~'C 1•
:~.h :~~6 .fx.:~i?•. ~w. '^Y "1~ i. ' ..t
.S t 'r. a Y. ~r ~ r , 1 • r- 4.r~
r .~t. ei °v' •h'•t.. ~ .1.. i
.I;' f~s, 4' ; t ..1 ~ . .
'M ~ . I
X~~..+~~~,.;. b'+,..c' :.~c• :r:, _r I ~j•.'
~ i• ~:k.'' '4-
l ~ "r ~f • ~ • -r- 'ti' ~.1: '1 t~ .
' . : ~ • S:, :1 v ~ ~ ' ' i . .
~!i'+'i. . . . . ~i.C
? i ~ r• ,~t 1 'i•'
,J:
,r.
i .
I• .
r'
t, . '1
•i
.r'
,
I . .
1
1. .
{ .1
?ti;
{ .
•t••~ .
i !A
i •i
~'1
s :
/ V'~ • f • l'v
I ~a v fr~r•~ ' .
~L .~ti .i~• . ,
' f I a. 4 • ~ r ~.1" • l ' J'~,~ • I , . . , _
Y::
L "i . •:s• ~ . +•z:: - i~ ; r... . s .t ~ ~ - ~ . r - ~
+".ti~~~'%i'!i"~ .1: `.~'~T' ' %'ti it..:'p.i~~: ••.i': .:y~ : . ~7 , . • . . . . . . . .
- r n~ 't 7 • . i1 ~.'.+''_.,f:
.;.^e. 7 7 . .i ~ .~Ifd. ?j, ?~.i,, t.. :y• . - ~ ~ . ~ • . \ - ' -~l5) r
~
i :.~'.'1': •l, 't~."•.~^.1~: - `r ' ,
'~:•t ~1. K:~ e ..A 't~ -s .Iw~ ..t' .
•SS• • 1' .A'k •~.C .ti . ,l' ' ~ i G . • ~J •~i •
4~ .~,yy' s~ ~'S'• ~r.•` +C'~ "i~. ~ r .Y7.'.
+ tid~ -t~' J :y.
ti-:
4~ L~ 6
. ~ • .'t' : i' ',r~.
• ~ •':t' ,
b -1
J'. . t ~ rs
L .r.
x.• .
~ ~v•~ - . . .
'i•~ .i., rt "•^r• .j~`
~ >
f. ~ 14 : F s . ' y..
r•~ ti • •.J ~~f' ' . • ~ ;
y ~y.' ~::u. a r:~' . - . , • , ~r
w. .1 . 4, • 1C _l ~3
'i' .t •i;.- .r, .C~ •t.:i 'i. :i:~r
.4~ ~~}~r:~ : u ~t . •'i .l . ~
~1 ~L 4~y rr~ ,f.`~ I:v. i%' "r •a~ •w'
~7 w~ 'V ~ ~1 .4 ~~11' ~I ~ .•1., hl ~i' :t'.P ^ 1 1~^ `~'S'
-1~y`1 t =.,lw4N ~r '/?:!•i:~;~~ ~ft:~'h"...!. i " .5; V'
•.s. - 4.~(~• q> '(i ~ ~.t•.~ I L"~l. .v,f:~.
1 ~1 ~ i., ,Y' 1~ ' tu'~:`~` ';i 7~y: f Y~- ;
i~~. 's' ~ ~~Ll..i ',1,. 1'~1 ~\rl."~_ .•i'n .M .:1..
r' ~ r.~~ :.1:~, ~i.l• r . 1'~ . • • ~~i. t 1 ~ ~
•r..`'- :r:-~~Y: ~'i-~Ii; 'r• r !i'.
A.i-' 'ic~ n.
r,. .i~ . ~~L .i v. ' ~ r.e, y,i.• .vi i•• C li?-. ~ iC'".1 ~ ' r~`:~•.~. ~l
j ' ~ \,J•~. ; . ~t i ,'T y;' ii.
. . Y• ::Y. .~'Y r.
r
tl, 1 ~'J,4' .tv,•' JC. M. L! ~.'1 ~ ~
. i" ~ C ,1~~`<"`f': w:~i:" '.t
~;H i. . - ~j . ~~.,,',•:t ~ .r• ~ i.F: .
h~ i' ' : ~ : ~ : ' ~ •
r7. ~~•r~.' ..t :q~C.~' :f`~ el. ~r n'~i"r~ •'d n~::• ~~~1'• i:l~~u':`+.: `
•a -r ~r '}e. ~.a•-.:•~F'.~_}.`.r' r~'~ f"'j '~r:t• ~ - .i5
~ a.. i'~ v5. f.. :'x•.r:• ~tl> .j.•' R~t ~yf- ,rrt' }s ~ •
°i~„' ^T;~: 'C~• :i'~ !t ~ 1. .I y .J._ =a
~p ':'~`.'F:b•. `?y. •1ir,. .g.•."J ".i
. e~sQ •ti~ ` 'di-'.~.:'i?:::: ~ .jy:~ y : . ~n,-' • F: i.Sr'; . ,~t- , ec~• . .~:r;•» ' {.N. .y': ~=t' • d-. t • .
..~.k'•~~i:~:~c, ,i~.~~..~" ~.'.~•t-.-r~-.:. ~-YA.. ~.,.r.-,]'6Jrt .k:.'ir:.,• ^,y .l`}c•~i~.-~x:ir...t~~'e:.w~::~.lis'..~f. k~ .
:Yt ~
..j.~.~~~If •~•4;yyc".ry .Fe`.-ta •'~'ar.,~ .i::7' ..j'f, ,.r" . -~.t:w~. ~t;~` .''L. tG)=~.. t 'X~•!~. ~..L"~: o __l. 6. 'n.
l . ~ \ ~.i- ~ .~.IC 4 •1 -Y.~~ , C>`~" C i.: . oi5v.,n i•"`: , t ~ : : ?b ~i• i„ :~t4 C - 4.. ~
l:1 =.2..5'.rc f;: ~ r t? • t .fi' ~i. I! : > .
Ci''1 3 y .9 •3n.;!h ,;,c w.r •.i' ~'i } As_ t•~,
'h :e; ~ °c'7#?/; •l7::~,. ~r.. r s:t?: .rs~ _l. i'~f• D..-~ F .tY,J'~i~r:`x''~' t' ae` ~j,9~ X..~ *~;nrf ~'L:1 'e •+1. ~..1.
h '+SZ r~*.~ u~i~, rtrn.xr ,•.C. -~~:~1~:'.~ •e .a3- t:; .~il. ...;•~''`i^.•..'-'1~ k ~"ti~ci~'a'~ ~i::Y :[;er~' k:~, e " 1'w.#~ .f^:,~+~ ~'t.' ;t~~;;;.1..=`i~`~j,
.~T:~ C'~: ~l:7• .:'G :k a n S: ~ i .7-a. s~.~ ,
i' , '?f: - r q~p ::'~..s:- "~.>~'~c \ i •k~ - ~.~C:f -r!~,Sn 'r .{;x.~ :y.:~'~.~..~.i. cs~ ~ ti
.W.~
t` ..r. h ""??:1~J;.• +V~{f~t~~.. f1 ~r.:~ f.rS•: 77~hLu ,~1~••"••.'2~:.t' r.r ,f~1''a~}~~ S;~••' ~l~ •'`'•a ;•L 'J ~
, ~ ~~~•(l ~ ~ 1 ~7•'t2 ~~w.~. A l.%t F ~:t#..1.• r 'V:?F~': . ~ ~t. ~7'!R`.~ .'Jr~l M} wt~•.•:7,y~ r, •
t .l~j~,:.r.~ rr„ .a x „n q i w .te Y.v~:r a~~ ~`.i`' ~t`°•~'n:- y' r,.~l; w S~'.~y,' ~ d-.. ~ "
J7~ '.M.~.J4~tt i ,~y:~ K:r.s~ i.;M. H~^ ~2^..~"• ~M`' `ii'~~,~i~i~'i...~iYJ~~~, .'1: R~x:•7' 1.M1,;~~i\,~`'i: :T~}` " ~ t"~i'~' +Y.~~~ 4~. :R' . . .
. . ~ • . . ' : • ~ , , . • ' . . ' • ' . ' . . . . - ' .
. . . . { . r . : f . . ; :I . ` , • , ~ • . ~ ' . , . . ' . ~ ' . .
- i • .
' • ~ . t~ . . . ~ ' f' ~ ~ . ~ '
.:~k.: • . . ; ' . , ~
. ~ . ' ~ ' . i ' ' • t ' ~
• ' , . , • • ' , ~ • . . . • ~ ~ . • ~ .
. • ~ . ~ i . i . .
~ •
~•,~.-[+t~~„~^w~ ~~a"~'r;- ~-n -s~'.^r~'. 7-='~;-t'. , =l • : ~;ti ..-"t. , ~"r.~.:~~ti'Y^:It,~~t`,'~%~ '
: t,pcy~\.. :.a':;.;:~ a `i " r:. •+`i1~-` ~ ,I'~r7ly~' .5.- • ~~r~; ..ir.~ . .
ti; ~ i:~,.t ~ V (p` •:iWl,: , ~ '~.:Y..:HR:~l! ~ .•i''•.. rr~ :ir.'~~7r. .ti.n, _.i .~y r. . . `
i' , ~~~,~'~','h-. `Lt.~`~Xr.' ~'J.J~iS~ .•l~~.' F~~`c;l.~.• S~S .S.,i~ ~'r,`~ ~f:;~~ .'1'' l~i.•~~ y:-~~ VIY•CaL M .~;rx:R.~.uf-r-J ;.ri;ti7~.
'r :'~.,:~r+ a"~ ! sd ~tt y:° :ly«.tc~} :;-„a-.~.:i;.<...~~':'-;~•.''--y.' ~ :1w. . ..it~........ ~ ~J...
'a'!'~r.' t.,,-~-R.'r Y~~T:i.1 ~i t,• - dr,',.~ ^^.t'*'•.~ ^:n ,~~~.:.'.'t..~ • ? ,.i. "~"?~y t
~ ,~7y '1' '•i•,.: : ~
, 1• •v^. .r:: •Y, i:Rt ~.4 e s. , ti:,~~.
? 'r.r ~ :'l•,' i.
'ti . ' ~v
•
4' ~
.r
e~ .T.-~ .n~.r . '•l7 °7.:'~ ,
't'' A.... ;3•:
..t' s tF:r~ l;~r. a•.- ~ ~ ' i
Vq _ ..R-; r : • f, _ , :
~ •1c L°
"1 ••~A, r1:
f'S ~ V :L:'..
. J .
•t s:: ..d'' 'i'• •9:-
.r `~s' ~s •K'> . . ~ i
. `1.:
f, .C~'•
r*: ' u
u >r ~`iL 4. .t. kt.• r'. .
'4• =S: 'vt~w •ei~: ~-r s~";t_
_ r~.~~ ~ . ~•s
i~..~
d~
S.
1•~
a ~.Y'',~"' '`l~~rt'•
. 'I
:r •.5:'.
i q , ~•j;i .
rt~7.
}`t'i~ • ~ 11'
~ t . i }.=t
~ . F'.
.'t 1 ' 1 ~ •'4+ ~r' '~A .
;o~ •1-'I ;
ri i'~ 4" ? ~ ~ ' Y '
l~fl~
~I,e' i~' 1.•1`
r ,
s
~ -
r :f~
J.
6:' _ rl•:
F'•Y•
:r' "•i• i ,
Ll~.~S•a..
r~ •~t?•a. ~:i° .:a: ti •i~'
r N~'. .Z ,r ~ 1-- 'y:~•` ~ .'j:.
t *t~
.w .-J.
~ I'•` l ~..r ' L~
'I • e .
.,i+~., •4'~• Y: i~ s;
\y.
ti• ` Y'
w
~ ~f ~ ..~r
Vr '
~
.#r'• ' 2-'~:'' i
t f`'
, .
.M•. .
n.. '.i.:
- '.i.
,i
sj ~ f•1
„1• •O~ '
. r: t:' •a
•'J'
Tl"~ :•lLJ
i
_ ~t. .:~v•
.
:Z: .•J,',~
.i ~
•~I S l(`
r y?
'M ~h•. `a' .i
=C` . i'
~ '
- I
~
~.1 . h •'t .
r z'~.... .
^
J 4r•
I~ i~~`~ , _
":p• 't1 ~
~ t •'~~•~I •1. i
~
~11 • ~'t,~
{
4
!
r . ;i:~ .
j' '7" w'• ~Y~ -
'•C • J' ~
r '4•
! ^ 11'~i
: f .
;.tit , ~ • ~:L" . ;
.,L. :_ri. • ' L.
:a'. r
r
. t'
L~•~
L
's41.~. , ti•'
=t _L.
e•'
''s ~
u~y~`-
=.a . ..C •
t• 4.. - ~
~ _ L•:
S' . N.' •
•M ~ .4Jr
~ ! ,~.1~~~:
a z •
"li • M. l .~1 ~ti t~`:~_ ~
Y +r ' J -
1 ~~1: :1'~'• t-
~ J 't.l .4' : M • ~~T•'~ ,1 ` .
. 7. ~ .
-j~. -t. 'I i•t: ~ '.r'-~..
# ~ • '
.r r: - , • t~a',''i1:'~ - ~ s
~
~S. P~'- ~f'~ L: .f~ .J3 ,i'.'~.. ~.1.~'y•' i~Y ~ . ti
~ l. i i: -1.1... -i+4' ':~A",i. 'Y t. .1". .4
St . T__f+ .x•. :t a .fL. :3~ _ ~ .
i~.
h~ r _`t.
..T `_d l'.=+'. Z %'n.. :4~~ ~ ~ ~•i;[ s~:-- - ; : i ~ `i:,` ~
:1r.~.t. r..+_ :,s~,' ~r" ...ir^ . !a. il d,~,•A~'?~• "`7i' 'Yi.;;t•' ^ c ~ti.'• .
~+'~..v.'t ~3':i. iC: •,Lp ~J~ ;yt' .i` .t: .e. :.i`:~='C.~ ,1.-~:.°.;~'... `S.,t~ .:c'
..~~,,~1•Y. ~;1!.v~:..tf..l ~t{w.l.':~f. _c{~~~.~c.:..A-~4ti>` y^:. ~:.~'',ti: -i:. ~S1t.~'~'*. ~ ~n' •t
1~='.1`.~~•. ~!{S .M:: ~,d~. '.h_ ,,1r_-~_ •'a.~. aY4''
•.:~i.1K ;jr, .v• ~e~' _ "'i. .~:~+~u .i~• .:~t .L~~t~. j.+ .
{ ) ->••~a~ ,~J~' o .C'• :'C''> 1L. :x~>.y~ .:r.~~~~~ i','~'.~~ _r:.
t .Z''^t. 't..~' :f~~ + r~- ~r' l~`'~ -
„j
it . r: "cw ;i` x ?~I~'- ~u. :4. ''r~ `r_.• ~t:"• ~'r
Y 1 ,F:~,. h:i ..i.' 'r y+ •i- {j:'~~'.' . A `
Y•' ~ • ~ -
1 -
.
~ . i,` ^ M. ? ~'Y.-''•
h.. i!n ; ~
.y ~'r•~ ~'t: ~
•i'~ i-
~R.
'L •1 ~
~ a'~~
~ . ~»e , i ,.s.. : .t k
e~,,.~`~4~: .t. .i~ ••S! •trw? - ;j:' s'' ,i'.;y nJ'~.
,1:
"l : t ..f~.•'..
; y.
':t''~ i . t ~ '•:e~ 4. ~ v
. § -k r•
,i>;:•
-z F
- t • i.
•l+' ^li!'~ •'i 1. ~
• s ':i••
tY
: * •%j:
>1 ~
-
,rY- s . ~~j•:
:.:ti ~
i •v .
~
~ Z°:~, •
I. ~PS..~}r~ . u'~'•~b. ~ i~. ..-i; ~ ` . ;i~. ~
4... 'r , ~ C_ : r' t'•~ '~J 'ti`- .
.5~~ +fl !i ) •.l:l.
:~Y+ _ ~~fy
i ~s. 1•
.
; „tS
•o•'.' •.a- :2. :s- '
.
•r ~ v.
-r ~V t - ti •'~i~
C t r
~s r~+
V
.j
'r.• `'t•,
l ~ t~
• _
J~
iY{• •i•
.
~ •t~•-~
~
X 7~.
•r -
,•y•a .
i_
Z'•
~ i"s•. ••+~1~ r.-? .y
.•ti ^'i 1 • i :
~L' ••i• 9'.~.. w:~~! .~~i'. 1~:•
Zr, a • c ~ 1,'? . r-. v~'
~ •~y) t ".1'- -
.1-• J e.~ 1.~ i•
`~d '•ti•~ ' -r~'- - i.
, .i: : . fh'~ , •:5i. °:~''.I - • ' ' r:., ~ -p . !t; : •N,'
'~f! .~~.y"~ ~~1. ~'t, `'r.. ~ . - : ~..:_'-:.b
f • ~ a '
>~a~:~~"~.- _ ;:,._,:4 ~.5°`f,.....:.~r~` : r'~,..:..,;.;:.Sf'',i~
.tEr.~..a.•:~:' '7: Qr.i~..v\'+:~'~. 'r'• ~ .v(1~., ••1'', ::`r' "f`.}.t.~. ~,1h~
~--Yrv:' .i i r C ~r'I . 'i 'i!~ .gZ;:. _ .;T. •M°
:ti?~" ;i- ~S{ - i - •cE~3 :i~~ ~ rrf~. i +esK.-. .:r'~iT;
A:"` ',c`~, . t t ~ t ti g~• y.. - t x'~ . .~7 . 'j^ ti.j'.' , ~•s ~f, , C . ..i . ,
?'~„v'.. ~3.. ~:ia.:r' "+;w r•"'„J•'•'tt: .'.--v.s•+'.z=~ i i 'Il - ~f'~ 1r•.•'i~.%~.~~x:F~ 's`
y.. s.. w+.t'. .1.'.'.~,`..'e~. r. .A' .i~'.••~lclf:-:: ?.r2: :~i..~3j',... ,.K.*~.~ ` . ~•.,!r;Yl~;
:Y~.. -..,~..:A Q. ~'~f~:'~ • Y' F ~~t••~ .r 4• _ :i•.' ~ . i• ` r i .:~~r',~: .
.f:,. ...~`!r~.~.
:~xu~ '~c. F'~Y,. ~ ~ _ 't; -;_.C~ }
~(;~tl' ~'4,• 1 ..l1 .''.SFCq1,i 2~~. 1' .t'e S i,^.i.j~`l\~.' . . . , ',J, r `f•• ~.Y +..1 ' ?l~,.
.~,_h. ~:I ~ ~ .q}.[~1.:.9' r:'i:i~5'; n ,~w- ..~_1' .~i~"r. • - . .t~ ~
. .
~ _ •'t.. ~ ~"`t•~'n Y ' ,F , J+~ ~ ,1 u ~ i
~r~
;},~~„J- ~?r• ..'1
~ .r.'- } •.s_.:: :
y. j
.k j:.iy;;' .r -i ~ '0~y .'j Q~~'
.y'~ t. :t,
,r1 . . ? i J"~ h ,':I~`ir
-:R ^1,'1T" t:.• _ 'f .
~ .r• 'i • : A~ :r~". ~ .
- ztf~ ~Y: + .4:
4 .~~~~I~.l~ ~.i~l .h..~ ~t. •.1., .i,•
. .;I% y. ~ ~1 ` . '~7 ''i~' ~t' ~ ; ti~ ,
5 .r ! ~ ~~!1 :'i'. i` :
ti.~'' ~ '
.9
•
>w=' •N~ C. ir
t
R k ~
y.
.
'.5' .i .•'r' .
w• ~i ~ .r .
~i
:.4
•`f -
-i ~
~
_ ~
::x. •
_ •y~ 1
.
~ti ~ . ~ 1•' 4 t ~t% . J ~
~ ~4 - ~1 1 .
•+t.~~. 'v~•t~ T..: ..1 • ~~~.j.~7 t•
s •Q' iY .'f.• -r •.7
•.1 ~Y'~ ,1 I~ 'I"•" .
'/..t•• 15:, ~1- •J .
~ 1i ` ~ ~''1~.
~:r. .r'•:< •et•.,.i: ~ i:~•• •~4 v` ' i,.
T' .t•' ~ T: •r • '~~•Y~~•t'~~ L'~ 1 + `r~i i~..
~ r:~ 1L:S..:.J~• ..4 ~i~~ ~ ~y:' t 't i'.r ~.ti ~ . ~
t. '.:i ! i:- r; ~ :w. '.':r;-f."' • ;t ~ F: ~ y . f''
~t I~a :f.:.. '~"j•.: : i 1.'
•r?.. ~•y" - ..5r" ~•t_ .W'~•-'•i~i~. .
7' ir'S, ':rt':! ~ . 1.'~.., i,i. , c ' , .
L•+~.,r,~.tt:: j .i.•,~r~• ;H,:2: ~ii'~'~'. .elt::?~^y•~T ,'S• ~ ~:5.,+~.
k~' 'f• S r ~~1 r:
i,,; ~ _ ,•~y.,. . .i~
. .:~w.
. 3:~ • . .'i ~ j S~.
•n:~ i::' ~i ~:S
,:1~... . :4' ,1,. : ~ ~ ::x'~ . 'r..~~••1.~~'. F:.-..:.
:11 . .
i.Nr iti`'-!?r.. ' ~;}:r. ~1: ~ ' ~ .a'.,..i,•1~.~,
~_i4r•
. i. .
} ti.~ , . . , _ _z-.:. .i.;y-a
, 5. -:.:u'.•'~n' , '.i:'n•~~'!'~ '~'.1`' '4.TF
.477-W
••1~ ~t:. .t ' ~J.- ~ ~ • +
:i'ri _ ~.1 i~i'
.i' a ~ . ; ~ . . ~ . . j:' . i j .
~P. y I7.t~ j •li' -i r~~ ~~rr12'.
'S" 'i, iiy~ ..i y•
~
1 'ti' i• t /
7 `V
t X
L' I
.Y' •r~ ~ '~.v.•
,r': ~j~
f o-
.fi ti'' • 'w: . r':
•1'
. r, . ~
4 1 t
`r• v . t:
:
1. .i'iG'"i., a-:~. '~f•I: ••i~~1'•
:'.r ~h ~I.. . t..~: i'Y' ..i".'~1' '~.~i •..f.~=i . l'+r ' .y. ,-i` :1~.~.'
.~~~..f:';n .MaS)';'~ .t ~rsl~~1. ~i'4.• =i l~l,'~ ..i.t• °i.~\~•\~•l;-~~: 'r..l:~ t:• ,t:•'~ f 1'~.
fw ~w r. 'k •~ti~~.e4. •,?t., -~.1,^ a;~~~ e'1~,<. .~.,t.. q•, ~.e' ~ ~ r*l .~K
~ '.1~ ~~.a 7 ~ ~ r~ ~ •C. t~i~' ~n~ 'i/,':: 4' .1. i• y,
l: ~ „i: F dt- 'f.r?PF:• ..S`' t :1 f%~ ti 1
s .c :S =4ir.~"~-:'. : >~~}~•i. :iY r,t= ? J~
i. ~ :i~ t2~ ..4.; r~
.~':''•~~~r~ S r
{a`d:t= r+.° .i• 'c. .i~.~ •v~~ ,.1'~ .c. ^~l• ~f.~o~~ ~~~a ~l'
I~ ~f
~ ~i''i ~7..~.L't'A~~'~.t' .t...'~~~'~ `L.4.:t•'--r r• •i,i' '1' +t. •i+.~ 'r, i? ~_•3., .
'.Ir.1% ?:f ~~.d~• N• ~~N'1,: :f.~~ ~ f'}~ "i:,~ f: ~r_t. `•,.'..'••..+.Y y
.m'Sr,,• d,V~;'.°.~ .~r ~ ~ ~..v,~+.~!,~ -l .i~:`'•' ;~k'r. -Ct"^.:i.•.~1~ :=i' S~'L.~~. yL': .c. l.r• y'i. a" • .
~ • ~ .,.~:i~'{~^,.} ...r'l~ tirC~", :nt:~'i;;~i'' _~yr~ . •i,l~=, c. . y~ . .l; • ~ ~ d.•S'.~~-.C,~ . , ` ~:i. .r ~ `s. ..l..''' ~:f rr~:t
w
~'1"~*~i.•.~ ? F,.~~_i•i.~r.,,,: :'i,:;;• Y ~.;t .--i`~D..` .j'~ ~l~`~' °V.~~' , •
~;cd _ . a.. - ~ { ~ ..s:" ,-t• ^.4..- t•' % ~S. : 1 F>>•'
.•j.
'c:•a.~S~ ~j 't `,y~ `-.i'4'- .ti 1...~ fi r,•
~~Y • 6 .1. `
l' .~i~'~•~' ~ i'
~ i C ` . .iS~~'
.r? ~~~~~~'i~'^ . ~.ti ~ 1_
3 , ~~L..~ ' ~ - : L'~ ` , ~zi
~ } •t. ~ ~i ^I'r 1~ •iI~ .}f. ~y~ ~
a•• t ~:~C' ~c~.' ,;~:~.'i ~•i...K~ - s.~
w .f ~•i t ~~::~~t,r~ !L'/ ~1'J,'*.
~ t •
,~'1l. .~'f.~~ ' Y',y r~~7 ' .C. :Ir,'~' 'i~} ".i.y:i'' °~iwFb..~
,.L . / ~ r,'S%;, •t e , '~.t~': S'~ . ~ ~ . 1 '1:
1; •i1' y~ `~1'~~ ~ni`"c~•.' ..cf.'" -.~.~~t.}, jG~.~.'r,~_r s`' r~.
l• b1~, 'r.l~ .rr .:N: ~~:]..:t_'i~ :4 'L^. _~~.C'- .:~.~r" r.., , 'iry.;`}.:j-•4. ..:.4, .
~la.~. 'u. ~•.+t~' ii. ~x~w~, r.:~ rs: ~"..•,.Y.'.`n:..l:t..x _ .
: G.~_t~~ ~ 3 :i•..~~~ : t,~ ~ ~'.f'~ ~ f ~a= ~.Y'~i`. .t• Y~ ~
.f:' .•'*=r~~. ..v. ~r. 4~;-: ;:ei.:G •'.E ,•f.` "ei,; . • ~s.,t:v.'.t:r~:
~1~:`. , =•j~. ~.it.;S..:r~ ..,i. Lti~
~x.L'~ '~l ~r9'~1a~.rr•~;..1'•~~ t- :5~~}'~ r
~ ~':5.~..?,~.~:: •+~'t,. ~.t... ii'.• ~'i~•` '.J •i•~ .e
r.
r.? E . b.a?' r 1 . ..e . ~',-,r .:~;;r _ .w.. . r.•. < 4 _ ' ~ a.. r .L I - ' t
r~S 5^-~ .t,.. C'.•.r, i~~.., S„i. rkt`- ~~::t.. ~,;~i•::; ~'r. +-r.'e~tip- . .
'•ti.r•.:}i' •`3., '~.w!sT+t_w_. ~ i•~~k'1~ ~•~.t. '?:r'~:'/:i;'~ ~yµi`j,•j`~' ..T ~ :.•SJ•• ~.f"~•' .}f.~'_l. . ~
z~~:r;-:~. ,.s~; ,a,~. , Y. ,;r ,.,r ~c~~ .;;;v'T •t<` .'c.•
r •~•y~,~ M«trtG~'~ tt~rpi7{ S~:i:. 1t 1~ ~•t ~ ir. i ~ .~;r~'•~: ~:~;~;;.~.,.3~~!: ~9' . 1 c,tro , r. f ^i ~ y f 1
.i ~r. ;v' ~'i,•;~k .1l:v~sat?ht~ ~ w'C, f , Xi t,!, » < .ti.^~:.'`' :'i•:<
~ . ~?!R .a: ~.if'~r,'?::~;~: i . ~{:.r ~ 4lri r k. . ' • ,L;,tfl~..~ . ~~",ti3 , , , . } . i F •:a__{ ~1..
~ h.•mi.•'Y~ {e. ~':d~.'a1 'y"S~ ~+,~y. ~j .,~/-~Y;C~:v,i°.q.t; }..?~Y~4f~•:•~..1`,'`i ~~l'C;. t;•4y,' 1:: !..i..~ „••!~t`r~';~~,~;r'+~l~~;itr?t~.~
~~,[~L~~p,~.,t~;~.t~{~i:i~:'~, ~IL~~.s`'r}r~'~~~'!' ~f~ar~'~:~v~ ~,'T4~i(J/~~1f~':r:y~~}{'7. f• ~n~•' ,.?a i~i'1. ~'•:r 't~'• .
• . : . . . ; . ~
~;y'~ . ~ r . . . . , • ~ • . ~n•c' • . .i.~ . . . - . . ' ~ i .
':;r.> • , ~ , i ~ . . - : _ _ . . ~
~ ; i . . } ~ ' ' . ' ' , , • , , ~ ' j . . . .
i•. • .r . r'•.`•i'f:'~
. ~-N 1 .:i. :P_~a. i Y•,- ~•~'S ~ •.r.M. . 4G~' . i «a~~ ~{,~fr.~.
.4: .'y~ '1.'.L." ~I',. ~ n` n , j'. ~'ti'~j.~ ..I.-:,.:`...~•'{'., ' f': t • ~~i~.J~r~~,J~'
.'S'Si ~i,~ ~.-4 . :C:":'1. • r - ~ %.tt,. • .t. 40.
~i. IS.. .r:. ..J., ~..~~}~l. 'F' ~~q':• .fi^.~.
~:z lo U, f'.~~ r.. t 'a•
a. 'i`' "-t..~:••y, ~57....''~ 'f~.~;:.'•7 ..7..,~ ..~.~1~:). 'c t..
-,Y~ ii.. .:,~t~a . F:S.i ~ = t . i... '1 ( ~~.l~:. L:..:J :t:H...
F.
,~aY.fiq :i. .y'~`, '~.:.~i~.•L. "r.:~. _ ~,4:: '~,r~i ,
;
:t.•.~j,'• ~ ~ ,4t.. .r•
t~~ ~f,•,~". ...1.'L''.` »:~•.i.c. Y . Y• • i 1 i: 1 ; ` .
~t_ - ' tr5' '7_ f " ~-1 • i. ~ ''i ~ - '.Fk•
..Ji. F. Y rjr • ~.'t' `..1t ''i~;
~°^1. •r'4 . f5' ~'t~' .
~t~•~ ~•1~~ :1 r't. :N~tiv~~ V~+ .J'
.~'~•'s• ~u 'r - '~i: . 'i: ~
' . ~ . - . . , . . . . . . ~ ~ . . , •'r.. .1
~~~,~,t .r. . . . . . . . ~r:~~i'i'.M1 . 1'~ . . l• ~'`P-~ , r. ~ ,1 i , , t~ , . . ~
9;~.. ' ' , ' . . . i G~ _p ' ~ \ ~
~ . L ,
' . ~ . . • : . . . . • . .
, ~ ' . . . .
~
. ` .
. S .
_r _ . , ~ ~ ~ ' : . . ~
~_l , . . ' t . . . . -
•",t .
. • .
~i . . . .
~i M..° . . • , _ .
• , . . . .
r~!!,•:,` ' . f .
. . r ' . ' ' . .
~~.5' ' , • ;
%-bz`i~; ' • ' ' • • 1
1 ~i .r~„ ~ . - " . . • ' • : •4 '
, , ' . , . . ` , , . . .
. ~
n~,~'i I ` ~ , 1 u • ~ ' (~~p'~~ ~ ' ~ . ~ '
~a , l/"~ . ~f r- ~j`'' .
. . i I 1
. ~ ,
, . ~,c_.-~.,_ ~ , •
. . , ~ ~ , . , ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
~ : . • ` ~ . _ , \ , _ n • J '
I~i l
' ' ' ~I ~~,Ra'Jf`' ' ' ~ . ~~ri`r~~
y'• ' ' ~ ' . ' j • ~ /~?-C~-1 1-+°°~ ~ •
~;t;~Y . , ~ ~ . ~ , . ~ ~1R , . .
':i~~' . ; ' , ~ ~ . ~ 1~-}`~f~ ! ~ .
~~ir ~ • ~ ~ ~ / ~ . ' ~ /
`~~t,. . , ^ i . . ' . .
,r.Tri -
,i1,1~~. y • .
t~'~y` ' . . ' . . - ~ • . ~ ' .
. .+yu~S • . ' ~ ~ ' - I . i .J ~
. ~ : ~ ~ . . . ~ .
~ . ~ ~ ~ ~to~-~ ~ ~ v~, ~ . .
: .s a: . . _ y-- _ . , . . ,
1 4 ~ •
, J ' ~ ~ =v'' . ~ i ' ~
/ I
~ . ` .
'w- ~ ~ . ~ . ! / • . `l. ; , ;
~ •
. . ~ . ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
~
MEMORANDUM -
TO: Planning and Environmental Commission
FROM: Community Development Department
DATE: May 19,1997
i
SUBJECT: A request for a worksession to discuss the establishment of Special Deveiopment -
: District #35, Austria Haus, to allow for the redevelopment of the Austria Haus, •
located at 242 East Meadow Drive/on a part of Tract C, Block 5-D, Vail Village '
First Filing.
Applicant: Sonnenalp Properties, Inc., represented by Gordon Pierce
Planner: George Ruther
1. BACKGROUND
On March 25, 1997, the Vail Town Council held an afternoon worksession and evening public
hearing to discuss the first reading of Ordinance #4, Series of 1997, an ordinance providing for
. the establishment of Special Development District #35, Austria Haus; adopting a development
plan for Special Development District #35; and setting forth details in regard thereto. Upon
review of Ordinance #4, the Town Counci] approved the ordinance on first reading with seven '
conditions. One of the conditions required that the applicant reappear before the Planning and ~I
Environmental Commission with an amended proposai for the Commission's review and '
recornmendation.
On April 14, 1997, the Planning and Environmental Commission held a public hearing to consider ~
an amended progosal for the establishment of Special Development District (SDD) #35, Austria ~
Haus. The amended proposal was in response to changes requested by the Vail Town Council at
the first reading of a proposed ordinance establishing SDD #35. Upon review of t.he amended '
proposal, the Plannutg and Environmental Commission voted 6-1 to recommend approval of the
amended pmposal for the establishment of SDD #35 to the Vail Town Council.
On Aprit 15, 1997, the applicant appeared before the Vail Town Council for the second reading of
Ordinance # 4, Series of 1997. Upon consideration of the Planning and Environmental
Commission's recommendation of approval and review of the amended proposal, the Town
Councit voted (4-3) to deny the ordinance stating that the applicant had not met the intention of
the condirions of approvai placed on the project at frst reading. ~
On April 23, 1997, the Town Sta.ff inet with the Town Council to discuss the future of the Austria
Haus redevelopment and for the Councii to provide specific direction to the Austria Haus
~ developers. The following direction was given by the Council:
l
r
~
Town Council Direction I 1. Reduce the proposed GRFA within the Austria Haus by 5,000 square feet. ~
. 2. The maximum building height for the Austria Haus shall NOT exceed 48'. .
3. Remove the penthouse level to reduce tbe number of building stories from five to
four.
.
4. No less than 10,100 square feet of accommodation unit square footage shall be .
" constructed in the Austria Haus. The 10,100 square feet shall be apportioned into `
' whichever number of units the developers feel are appropriate to successfully
~ operate a hotel.
5. Two 20' foot setbacks on the property shall be maintained. Preference should be
given to the west and south setbacks.
6. The proposed 4,649 square feet of commercial spaces shall be maintained as it
provides the necessary commercial link between the Village and Crossroads.
7. All parking shall be on-site and a land trade is an acceptable means of
accommodating the necessary area of the parking structure.
8. A community room shall be provided within the Austria Haus for meetings, ~
breakfasts and the like.
9. The loa.ding and delivery plan shall be redesigned to reduce the negative impacts
on the streetscape (pedestrians, guest vehicles, etc.)
10. The staff will make brief presentations to the Council during the normal PEC
reports. These presentations will include full size plans and copies of all
. memoranda. . . : 11. The proposed deadlines of Junc 22 and July 22 are extremely aggressive. The
developers should rethink the deadlines and request extensions as necessary.
12. The staff will make a presentation to the Town Council and PEC on May 6th
regarding the pros and cons of both SDDs and the East Village Homeowner's
advocated PA-1 zone district. On May 6th, the Council will decide which
apptication they wilt review. .
13. The Town Council did not feel it was appropriate to express their preference on
the architectural design. Instead, they felt the design of the building should be left
to the architect.
•
2
y
~ On May 6, 1997, at the request of the Town Council, the Town Staff made a presentation to the
• Councit regarding the Special Development District and rezoning processes. The purpose of the
presentation was to inform the Council of the pros and cons of using an SDD vs rezoning in the
redevelopment of the Austria Haus. Upon listening to staff's presentation, the Council
'unanimously (6-0) directed the Austria Haus developers to proceed with a Special Development .
District.
II. DESCWPTION OF THE REOUEST
The applicant, Sonnenalp Properties, Inc., represented by Gordon Pierce, is requesting a .
worksession with the Planning and Environmental Comrnission to discuss the establishment of
Special Development District #35, located at 242 East Meadow Drive/on a part of Tract C, Block
5-D, Vail Village First Filing. The applicant is proposing to establish a new Special
Development District overlay to the underlying zone district of Public Accommodation, to
facilitate the redevelopment of the existing Austria Haus. The applicant is proposing significant improvements to the existing Austria Haus property. The
Austria Haus is intended to become a member-owned resort club/lodge, comprising a mix of hotel
accommodation units and two and three-bedroom club units with associated club
amenities/facilities. The Austria Haus proposal is intended to provide addifional hotel and
"hotel-type" accommodation units in the Town of Vaii. The applicant is proposing to 4
incorporate 18 member-owned clab anits (11 three-bedroom & 7 two-bedroom), with 25 ~ hotel rooms and one on-site manager's residence (Type III Employee I-Iousing Unit). The ~
applicant is proposing 5,582 square feet of new commerciaUretail space on the main level of
the Austria Haus. The Austria Haus proposal includes a front desk reception/registration
area operating 24 ttours a day and seven days a week, a lounge, an exercise room, meeting
roorn facilities, a food service pantry, mernber ski storage, an outdoor pool and other
accessory facitities commonly associated with hotels and lodges. `
Summary of ChonVs
. The following summarizes the changes: • ~
1. The number of club units was reduced fram 22 to 18, the number of hotel rooms was
reduced from 28 to 25, and all lock-off units have been eliminated. ~
2. 7,405 square feet of gross building area has been rernoved (5,189 sq. ft. of GRFA/2,216
sq, ft. of other building area).
3. The buitding height has been reduced to 48 feet maximum. I
4. A meeting roorn, food service pantry and an outdoor pool have been added.
• 5. The parking requirement continues to be met on-site,
3
4
6. The brick paver pedestrian walkway has been reptaced with an asphalt watkway.
7. 933 syuare feet of commercial square footage has been added. ~
8. At least 10,100 square feet of accommodation unit square footage has been maintained.
The applicant has identified what they believe to be the public benefits which witl be realized as a
result of the Austria Haus redevelopment and Special Development District #35.
Public Bene ts , ~ .
1. An increase in the annual occupancy of the Austria Haus.
I
2. The addition of approximately 5,600 square feet of reta.il space (sales tax genera.ting).
3. The partial implementation of the recommended Streetscape Master Plan improvements to
East Meadow Drive.
4. The completion of the commercial loop in the Village, via the eonstruction of a well-lit,
heated pedestrian walkway.
5. The removal of 25 surface parking spaces and the construction of an underground parking
structure designed to accommodate 63 vehicles.
6. Landscape improvements to Slifer Square, East Meadow Drive and the Gore Creek ~ I
streambank.
III. ZONING ANALYSIS
The development standards for a Special Deve}opment District shall be proposed by the applicant.
Developrnent standards including lot area, site dimensions, setbacks, height, density control, site -
coverage, landscaping and parking and loading shall be determined by the Town Council as part
of the approved development plan, with consideration of the recornmendations of the Planning
and Environmental Commission and staff. Before the Town Council approves development
standards that deviate from the underlying zone district, it shall be determined that such deviations
provide benefits to the Town that outweigh the adverse effects of such deviations. This
determination is to be made based upon the evaluation of the proposed Special Development
District's comptiance with the review criteria outlined in the following section.
The Community Devetopment Department staff has prepared a Zoning Analysis for the proposed
Austria Haus redevelopment based on the revised plans. The Zoning Analysis compares the
development standards outlined by the underlying zone district of Public Accommodation, the
April 14, 1997, proposat and the May 19, 1997, proposal.
- 4 •
I
Lot si7e: 24,089 sq. ft. /0.553 acres I~
Buildable area: 24,089 sq. ft. /0.553 acres
Development Undertying Zoning Apri114,1997 May 19,1997
Standard of Public Accommodation SDD proposal SDD proposal
~ or 19,271 sq. ft. 168% or 40,429 sq. ft, 146% or 35,240 sq. ft. .
GRFA: 8 0/o
' Dwelling units: 13.8 DU's 36.5 DU's (22 DU's, 31 DU's (18 DU's, 25 AU's _
28 AU's, 1 Type III EHU) 1 Type III EHU)
Site coverage: 55% or 13,249 sq. ft. 8 1 % or 19,634 sq. ft. 73% or 17,525 sq. ft.
Setbacks:
front: 20' 0' 2-
sides: 20' S' / 20' 4722'
rear: 20' 7' 19' (1-1/2' @ the pool deck)
Height: 48' sloping 56.5' 48' max.
45' flat 52' 45' max.
60' tower n/a n/a
~ Parking: per T.O.V. code Section 18.52 65 spaces required 61 spaces required
66 spaces proposed 63 spaces proposed
in the garage in the garage
Landscaping: 30% or 7,227 sq. ft. 18.2 % or 4,542 sq. ft. 19% or 4,619 sq. ft.
Loading: per T.O.V. code Section 18.52 1 berih at drop-off area 1 berth at drop-off area
Commercial -
' sq. footage: - 10% or 1,927 sq. ft. . 11 % or 4,469 sq. ft. 16% ar 5,582 sq. ft.
Common area: - 35% of allowable GRFA - 35% or 14,004 sq. ft. 36% or 12,810 sq. ft.
Gross sq. ft: n/a 74,302 sq. ft. 66,897 sq. ft.
(inc(udes garage) (includes garage)
•
- 5
AUSTRIA HAUS
SQUARE F40TAGE ANALYSIS
(5/19/97)
Floor Common Area - Commercial Area - Accommodation Dwelling Units - Parking Area - Total - Square
Levels Square Footage Square Footage Units - Square Square Footage 5quare Footage Footage
Footage
Parking 2,755 sq. ft. 13,265 sq. ft. 16,020 sq. ft.
Level
lst Floor 4,566 sq. ft. 5,582 sq. ft. 3,046 sq. ft. 13,194 sq. ft.
2nd Floor 1,556 sq. ft. 3,560 sq. ft. 8,112 sq. ft. 13,228 sq. ft.
3rd Floor 1,653 sq. ft. 4,132 sq. ft. 7,775 sq. ft. 13,560 sq. ft.
4th Fioor 2,280 sq. ft. 2,560 sq. ft. 6,055 sq. ft. 10,895 sq. ft.
TOTAL 12, 810 sq. ft. 5,582 sq. ft. 10,252 sq. ft. 24,988 sq. ft, 13,265 sq. ft, ft
6
~
~ ~ ,
i IV. THE SPECIAL DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT ESTABLISHMNT PROCESS ~ Chapter 18.44 of the Town of Vail Municipal Code provides for the establishment of Special
I Development Districts in the Town of Vail. According to Section 1$.40.010, the purpose of a
Special Development District is,
"To encourage flezibility and creativity in the development of land, in order to
promote its most appropriate use; to improve the design character and qaality of
• the new development within the Town; to facilitate the adeqaate and economical
provision of streets and utilities; to preserve the natural and scenic features of open
space areas; and to further the overall goals of the community as stated in the Vail
Comprehensive Plan. An approved development plan for a Special Development
District, in conjunction with the properties underlying zone district, shall establish
the requirements for guiding development and uses of property included in the
Special Development District:'
The 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 staff 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. ~
Staff believes the applicant has designed a structure which relates well to the site and the
surrounding neighborhood. The mass of the Austria Haus is appropriate for the site and ~
. takes into consideration the massing of the buildings on the adjoining properties. The
building steps down on the east and west ends to insure a smooth transition between
properties and does not create an imposing "canyon" along property Iines. The nort h side
of the Austria Haus was designed with a pedestrian scale in mind. The retaii shops on the
north side of the Austria Hau.s create a commercial connection along East Meadow Drive,
between Slifer Square and the Village Center retail shops. The commercial connection
has been missing along this portion of East Meadow Drive and staff believes that the
Austria Haus will enhance the character of the Village.
The exterior building materials of the Austria Haus are a mixture of stone, stucco and
wood. The mof material is proposed to be a reddish, tile-type roof sirnilar to the material
used on the Sonnenalp Bavaria Haus. The applicant has proposed to incorporate irrigated
flower boxes into the design of the structure. The use of divided light windows all around
the building creates a European-feel and reduces the appearance of too much glass. Staff
believes that the combination of building materials has been well incorporated into the
~
7
I N
~ design of the Austria Haus. The applicant has proposed that the extierior stucco co1or be
. an off-white to yellowish/cream color to blend in with the exteriors of the Mountain Haus
and the Village Center buildings. ~
' The development standards for the underlying zone district indicate that the maximum .
. height for buildings with sloping roofs shall be 48 feet. The applicant is requesting that
the maximum building height for the Austria Haus be approximateiy 48 feet. The
. approximate 48-foot building height is based on existing (1997) topography of the Austria
Haus property, and not the original topography of the site (pre-1963). Original
- topogaphy of the site is not available, since the Austria Haus was constiucted in Vail prior to zoning (and prior to the requirement that a topographic survey be submitted priox to development). Staff believes, based upon the location of the existing retaining walls
and the condition of the streambank, that the site was "cut" when the Austria Haus was
built. While it is difficult to know exactly how much of the site was "cut", staff would
conservatively estimate that approximately 2- 3 feet of soil was removed. Given this
conservative consideration, staff would estimate the actual building height proposed for
the Austria Haus would be 50 - 51 feet. According to the Vail Village Master Plan
Conceptual Building Height Plan, the Austria Haus should be 34 stories in height, with a
building story being approximately nine feet, excluding the roof. The plan further
indicates that one additional floor of residentiaUlodging may also be accommodated on the
Austria Haus site.
B. Uses, activity and density which provide a compatible, efficient and workable
relationship with surrounding uses and acNvity.
The Austria Haus is located immediately adjacent to the Vail Village Comrnercial Core.
The Austria Haus is bound on the east by Slifer Square and the Mountain Haus, on the
west by the Village Center residentiaUcommercial buildings and on the south by Gore
Creek, the Covered Bridge Building, Gasthof Gramshammer and the Creekside Building.
Each of these buildings are a mixed-use development incorporating commerciaUretail
space with residential and/or accomrnodation units.
" The applieant is proposing a mixe.ci-use development that is in compliance with the uses •
allowed in the underlying zone district. The underlying zoning of Public Accommodation
encourages the development of lodges (accommodation units) and accessory eating,
dxinking and retail establishments at a density of twenty-five dwelling units per acre. The
appiicant is proposing to redevelop the Austria Haus at a density of 56 dwelling units per
acre, with 5,582 sq. ft of commerciaUretail space on the main level of the building.
Included in the density figure are eighteen member-owned club units (fractional fee),
twenty-five hotel rooms (accommodation units) and one on-site manager's residence
(Type ITI, Employee Housing Unit).
The applicant's proposal differs greatly from the existing use of the property. Currently,
the Austria Haus inctudes thirty-six accommodation uruts, and one dwelling unit, equaling
nineteen dwelling units, or 34 dwelling units per acre, a restaurant and a limited amount of
commercial/retail space on the east end of the building. Parking at the Austria Haus is ~
8
accommodated by a twenty-five space surface parking Iot. Of the twenty-five spaces,
. fifteen are considered legal, non-conforming parking spaces. The other ten spaces are off-
site and are not considered legal parking spaces for zoning purposes. An informal
loading/delivery/trash area exists on the west end of the building.
Emjllovee Housing Requirements
As indicated in a number of the goals and objectives of the Town's Master Plans,
providing affordable housing for employees is a critical issue which should be addressed
through the planning process for Special Development District proposals. In-reviewing " the Austria Haus proposal for employee housing needs, staff relied on the Town of Vail Employee Housing Report.
Staff Recommended Range Calculations:
The staff believes that the Austria Haus redevelopment wilt create a need for additional
employees. Of the 40 additional employees, at least 12 employees (30%) will need to be
provided deed-restricted housing by the developers of the Austria Haus. The staff
recommended range is based on:
1. the type of retail and office use proposed in the commercial spaces within
the Austnia Haus;
~ 2. the size of the Austria Haus lodging component; and
3. the high-level of services and amenities proposed by the developers for the
guests of the Austria Haus.
a) RetaiUService Commercial = 4,$02 sq. ft. @(6.5/1000 sq. ft.)=31.2 employees
(middle of range) i
b} Office: real estate = 780 sq. ft, @(7.5/1000 sq. ft.) = 5.9 employees
- , (middle of range) . : !
c) Lodging* = 25 units @(1.25/room) =31.2 employees ,
(top of range)
d) Multi-Family (club units) = 18 units @(0.4/unit) = 7.2 emplayees '
(range does not vary)
Total =75.5 employees
(-36 existing employees) =40 employees
(X 030 multiplier) =12 new employees
*Lodging has a particutarly large variation of employees per room, depending upon
~ factors such as size of facility and levei of service/support services and amenities provided.
9
J
Depending upon the size of the employee housing unit provided, it is possible to
have up to two employees per bedroom. For example, a two-bedroom unit in the ~
size range of 450 - 900 square feet, is possible of accommodating three to four
employees. These figures are consistent with the requirements for the Type III
employee housing units outlined in the Municipal Code.
Overall, staff believes that the density and uses proposed by the applicant for the Austria
'Haus do not conflict with the compatibility, efficiency or workability of the surrounding
. , uses and/or activities. In fact, staff feels that the proposed Austria Haus redevelopment
will enhance the existing uses and activities in the Village. , C. Compliance with parking and lo$ding requirements as outlined in Chapter 18.52. of
the Town of Vail Municipal Code.
Parking and loading requirements for development are established in Chapter 1$.52 of the
Municipal Code. The parking and loading requirements are based on the squaxe footage
of the uses proposed within a building. Based on the square footage of the uses proposed
by the applicant, 75.73 parking spaces and one loading/delivery berth are required on-site.
The Municipal Code allows "grandfathering" of the existing legal non-conforming parking
spaces. Currently, fifteen legal, non-conforming parking spaces exist on the property.
Therefore, the parking requirement for the proposed Austria Haus redevelopment is
60.73 new parking spaces. The applicant is proposing an underground parking structure
designed to aecommodate 63 parking spaces, an employee lounge, mechanical space, and ~
an enclosed trash facility.
The applicant is proposing one loading/delivery berth in the front entry drop-off area,
located on the north side of the building, adjacent to East Meadow Drive. Much of the
drop-off area is within Town of Vail right-of-way. Staff recognizes that this area is
conveniently located near the entrances to the front desk and the commerciaUretail shops,
however, we feel that the use of the drop-off area may be compromised by the loading and
delivery of goods. In staff's opinion, the front entry drop-off area should be used by the guests of the Austria Haus. Staff believes that trying to accomrnodate loading and
delivery in this area will result in conflicts between guests, vehicles accessing the parking
structure, and delivery trucks. Staff would recornmend that the applicant revisit the
alternative ofpraviding the loading and dclivery facility in the undergound parking
structure. Staff understands this is not the aesire of the owners of the Village Center
Condominiums, yet we believe the impact can be mitigated with appropriate screening.
D. Conformity with the appticabie elements of the Vaii Comprehensive Plan, Town
. policies and Urban Design Plan.
10 •
Vail Land Use Plan
~ The goals contained in the Vail Land Use Plan are to be used as the Town's policy
guidelines during the review process of establishing a new Special Development District.
Staff has reviewed the Vail Land Use Plan and believes the following policies are relevant
to the review of this proposal:
1. General Growth/DeveloVment
1.1 Vail sbould continue to grow in a controlled environment, maintaining a , balance between residential, commercial and recreational uses to serve both
the visitor and the permanent resident.
1.2 The quality of the environment including air, water, and other natural
resources should be protected as the Town grows.
1.3 The. quality of development should be maintained and upgrade whenever
possible.
1.4 The original theme of the old Village Core should be carried into new
development in the Village Core through continued implementation of the
Urban Design Guide Plan.
1.12 Vail should accomrnodate most of the additional growth in existing
~ developed areas (infill).
1.13 Vail recognizes its stream tract as being a desirable land feature as well as
its potential for public use.
~ Commercial
- 3.1 The hotel bed base should be preserved and used more efficiently.
3.2 The Village and Lionshead are the best location for hotels to serve the
future needs of the destination skier.
3.4 Commercial growth should be concentrated in existing commercial areas
to accommodate both local and visitor needs.
4 Village Core/Lionshead
4.1 Future commercial development should continue to occur primarily in
existing commercial areas. Future commercial devetopment in the Core
areas needs to be carefully controlled to facilitate access and delivery.
~ 11
' 4.2 Increased density in the Core areas is acceptable so long as the existing
character of each area is preserved through the imptementation of the ,
Urban Design Guide Plan and the Vail Viliage Master Plan.
~ Residential
5.1 Quality timeshare units should be accommodated to help keep occupancy
' • _ rates up. -
.
i.
' Staff believes the proposed establishment of the new Special Development Disf.rrict (#35)
is in concert with the goals and policies of the Vail Land Use Plan as outlined above.
Vail Village Master Plan
The Vail Village Master Plan is intended to serve as a guide to the staff, review boards
and Town Council in analyzing future proposals for development in Vail Village and in
legislating effective ordinances to deal with the such development. The staff has identified
the following goals, objectives and policies as being relevant to this proposal:
Goal #1 Encourage high quality redevelopment while preserving the unique
architectural scale of the Village in order to sustain its sense of
community and identity. .
1. 1 Objective: Implement a consistent Development Review Process to
reinforce the character of the Village.
1.1.1 PolicX;. Development and improvement projects approved in
' the Village shall be consistent with the goals,
. objectives, policies and design considerations as
outlined in the Vail Village Master Plan and Urban
Design Guide Plan. 1.2 Objective: Encourage the upgrading and redevelopment of residential
and commercial facilities.
1.2.1 Policy:. Additional development may be allowed as identified
by the action plan as is consistent with the Vail
Village Master Plan and Urban Design Guide Plan.
1.3 Objgctive: Enhance new development and redevelopment through
public improvements done by private developers working in
cooperation with the Town.
i
12
1.3.1 Pohgy: Public unprovements shall be deveioped with the -
~ participation of the private sector working with the
Town.
Goal #2 To foster a strong tourist industry and promate year-round economic
health and viability for the Village and for the community as a whole.
2.1 Ob,Jective: Recognize the variety of Iand uses found in the 10 sub-areas
, throughout the Village and allow for development that is
: compatible with these established Iand use patterns.
2.3 Obj,ective: Increase the number of residential units avaiiable for short-
term, ovemight accommodations.
2.3.1 PcLy: The development of short-term accommodation
units is strongly encouraged. Residential units that
are developed above existing density levels are
required to be designed or managed in a manner that
makes them available for short-term overnight
rental.
2.4 Objective: Encourage the development of a variety of new commercial
~ acrivity where compatible with existing land uses.
2.5 Ob1ective: Encourage the continued upgrading, renovation and
maintenance of existing lodging and commercial facilities to
better serve the needs of our guests.
. 2.5.1 Policy'. Recreation amenities, common areas, meeting
facilities and other amenities shall be preserved and i
enhanced as a part of any redevelopinent of lodging
properties. ~
2.6 Objective: Encourage the development of affordable housing units
I
through the efforts of the private sector.
2.6.1 Policyj Employee housing units may be required as part of ~
any new or redeveloped project requesting density
over that allawed by existing zoning. '
Goal #3 To recognize as a top priority the enhancement of the walking I
experience throughout the Village.
i 13
.
3,,1 Objective: Physically improve the existing pedestrian ways by
. Iandscaping and other improvements.
3,1.1 Poli~ys. Private development projects shall incorporate ~
. streetscape improvements (such as paver treatments,
landscaping,lighting and seating areas), along
adjacent pedestrian ways.
- 3.1.3 Polig,y: Fiowers, trees, water features and other landscaping
shali be encouraged throughout the Town in locations adjacent to, or visible from, public areas. 3.2 Obiective: Minimize the amount of vehicular traffic in the Village to
the greatest extent possible.
3.2.1 Policy: Vehicular traffic will be eliminated or reduced to
absolutely minimal necessary levels in the
pedestrianized areas of the Village.
3.4 Objective: Develop additional sidewalks, pedestrian-only walkways
and accessible green space areas, including pocket parks
and stream access.
3.4.2 Policy: Private development projects shall be required to ~
incorporate new sidewalks along streets adjacent to
the project as designated in the Vail Village Master
Plan and/or Recreation Trails Master Plan. '
Goal #4 To preserve existing open space areas and expand green space
opportunities.
4.1 Objective: Improve existing open space areas and create new plazas
" with green space and pocket parks. Reeognize the different •
roles of each type of open space in forming the overall
fabric of the Viliage.
4.1.4 Policv: Open space improvements, including the addition of
accessible green space as described or graphically
shown in the Vail Village Master Plan and/or Urban
Design Guide Plan, will be required in conjunction
with private infill or redevelopment projects.
14 ~
Goal #5 Increase and improve the capacity, efficiency and aesthetics of the
~ transportation and circulation system throughout the Village.
5.1 Obi ective: Meet parking demands with public and private parking
facilities. 5.1.1 Policv: For new development that is located outside of the
Commercial Core 1 Zone District, on-site parking
- shall be provided (rather than paying into the
. parking fund) to meet any additional parking . 'demand as required by the Zoning Code. _
5.1.5 Policy: Redevelopment projects shall be strongly
encouraged to provide underground or visually
concealed parking. .
Goal #6 To insure the continued improvement of the vital operational elements
of the Village.
6.1 Obiective: Provide service and delivery faciliries for existing and new
development.
vail Village Master Plan and Buildin Height Plan
~ GenerallY sPeaking, it is the goal of the Building Height Plan to maintain the concentration
of low-scale buildings in the Core area, while positioning larger buildings along the
northem periphery. Accarding to the Conceptual Building Height Plan contained within
the Vail Village Master Plan, the Austria Haus is located within an area proposed to have
building heights of a maximum range of three to four stories. A building story is defined
as 9' of height, not including the roof.
Vail-Village Master Pla.n Action Plan
According to the Action Plan, the Austria Haus properiy is an area intended for
residential/lodging infill along the south sidc of the property and commercial infill along
the north side of the property.
According to the Vail Viliage Master Plan, the Austria Haus property is located within
mixed-use sub-area #1-8, Sonnenalp (Austria Haus)/Slifer Square:
"Commercial infill along East Meadow Drive to provide a stronger edge to street
and commercial activity generators to reinforce the pedestrian loop throughout the
Village. Focus of infill is to provide improvements to pedestrian circulation with
i 15
separated wallcway including buffer, along East Meadow Drive. Accommodating
on-site parking and maintaining the bus route along East Meadow Drive are two ~
significant constraints that must be addressed. One additional floor of
residentiaUlodging may also be accommodated on this site. Specific emphasis
should be placed on the following Vail Village Master Plan objectives: 2.3, 2.4,
2.6,3.1,3.2,3.3,3.4,4.1,5,1,6.1."
'Vail Villagg Design Considerations
- The Town of Vail adopted the Vail Village Design Considerations in 1980. The Design
Considerations were revised in 1993. The Design Considerations are considered an.
integral part of the Vail Village Urban Design Plan. The Design Considerations are intended to:
? guide growth and change in ways that will enhance and preserve the essential
qualities of the Village; and
? serve as design guidelines instead of rigid rules of development; and
? help influence the form and design of buildings.
The Vail Village Design Considerations are divided into two categories (urban design
considerations and architectural/landscape considerations):
1. URBAN DFSIGN CONSIDERATIONS ~ i
These considerations relate to general, large-scale land use planning issues, as well as form
considerations which affect more tlaan one property or even whole areas. These considerations
are primarily the purview of the Planning and Environmental Commission.
A. - PEDESTR1ANi7ATION -
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, severa.l levels of pedcstrianization have been identified. The level of
pedestrianization most appropriatc for thc proposed Austria Haus redevelopment is the
joint vehicle/pedestrian use of the roadway.
16 ~
• Staff Responags.
~ The staff has concluded that the improvements recommended for East Meadow Drive in
the 1991 Town of Vail Streetscape Master Plan should be implemented. This includes a
reduction in street width from 30 feet to 26 feet (14 foot bus Iane and 12 foot atta.ched,
paver pedestrian walk). The applicant is proposing to replace the street and reconstruct it
to the desired width. The applicant is NOT proposing to construct the 12-foot wide
pedestrian walk out of pavers.
_ .
.
, The applicant is also proposing to construct a 15 - 20 foot wide, heated pedestrian , . walkway immediately adjacent to the north side of the building. Staff believes that these
improvements reinforce and significantly improve the pedestrian walkways throughout the
Village by providing places for people to walk without forcing them into the bus lane.
The creative use of concrete unit pavers emphasizes the pedestrian character and offers a
clear and attractive pedestrian route. The retail space on the main level of the Austria
Haus closes the commercial loop from Slifer Square to Village Center. Staff would
recommend that the 12-foot pedestrian walk be constructed of pavers (and not asphalt), as
suggested in the Streetscape Master Plan.
B. VEHICLE PENETRATION
To maximize to the extent possible, all non-resident traffic should be routed along,the
Frontage Road to Vail Village/Lionshead Parking Structures.
~ In canjunction with edestrianization ob'eetives ma'or emphasis is focused u on r
P ,1 , ~ p educing
auto penetration into the center of the Village. Vail Road and Vail Valley Drive will
continue to serve as major routes for service and resident access to the Village. '
Road constrictions, traffic circles, signage, and other measures are indicated in the Guide '
Plans to visually and physically discourage all but essential vehicle penetration upon the
Frontage Road. Alternative access-points and private parking relocation, where feasible,
should be considered to further reduce traffic conflicts in the Village. -
. ~
• Staff iteVonse:
The redevelopment of the Austria Haus will increase vehicular traffic on Village Center
Road. According to the Environmental Impact Assessment-Austria Haus Redevelopment,
prepared by Design Workshop, Inc.:
"A slight increase antomobile traffic is expected because of the projected increase
. in the number of visitors generated annually by the project. What is not known,
however, is how many of these additional guests will arrive by car; it is likely the
largest number of guests will continue to arrive in the winter and that most will
amve by van from the airport. Van deliveries will increase somewhat. Those
• guests that arrive in their own car are likely to leave the car in the garage after they
17
arrive, as the center village location of the project eliminates the need for a caz. If there is a potential for congestion anywhere, it is most tikely to be in the small
drop=off parking area in front of the building, where check-ins, deliveries and last ~
drivers may converge. To some extent, this can be mitigated by improved
roadway directional signs, speedy guest valet service, carefui management of
deliveries and incentives to encowage guests to leave their cars at home."
Along with the increase in automobile traffic, there will be an increase in delivery vehicle
' . traffic due to an increase in the commercial squaze footage on the property. The
applicants anticipate that deliveries.to the retail shops will likely amve via UPS or similar .
types of couriers. Deliveries are to be accommodated in the drop-off area in the front of
the building.
Staff agrees with Design Workshop's assessment of the potential traffic impacts. White
i there will likely be an increase in traffic on Village Center Road, there will not be an
increase in traffic on the pedestrian portion of East Meadow Drive. The traffic control
' gate located at the intersection of Village Center Road and East Meadow Drive wili
continue to prohibit all vehicle traffic except Town of Vail buses. Staff feels the applicant
has addressed traffic issues to the extent possible.
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:
~
l. Open space and landscaping, berms, grass, flowers and ttee planting as a ,
soft, colorful framework linkage along pedestrian routes; and plazas and
park greenspaces as open nodes and focal points along those routes.
2. . Infill commercial storefronts, expansion of existing buildings, or new infill
development to create new commercial, activity generators to give streetlife
and visual interest, as attractions at key locations along pedestrian routes.
It is not intended to enclose all Village streets with buildings as in the core areas. Nor is it
desirable to leave pedestrian strcets in the open in somewhat undefined condition evident
in many other areas of Vail. Rathcr, 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 Resnonse:
18 ~
The Austria Haus redevelopment improves the streetscape framework through the -
~ creation of new commercial activity and increases visual interest along East Meadow
Drive. As sta.ted previously, staff believes the proposed redevelopment with 5,582 square
feet of commercial area closes the critical commercial toop in the Village and provides
new street life where very little currently exists.
D. STREET ENCLOSURE
While building facade heights should not be uniform from building to building, they should
provide a"comfortable" enclosure for the street.
Pedestrian streets are outdoor rooms, whose walls are formed by the buildings. The shape
and feel of these "rooms" are created by the variety of heights and massing (3-dimensional
variations), which give much of the visual interest and pedestrian scale unique to Vail.
Very general rules, about the perception of exterior spaces have been developed by
designers, based. on the characteristics of human vision. They suggest that:
"an external enclosure is most comfortable when its walls are approximately 1/2 as
high as the width of the space enclosed; if the ratio falls to 1/4 or less, the spaee
seems unenclosed; and if the height is greater than the width it comes to resemble a
canyon".
In actual application, facades are seldom uniform in height on both sides of the street, nor .
~ is this desired. Thus, some latitude is appropriate in the application of this 1/2 to 1 ratio.
Using the average facade height on both sides will generally still be a guide to the I
comfortableness of the enclosure being created. i
In some instances, the "canyon" effect is acceptable and even desirable. For example, as a
short connecting linkage between larger spaces, to give variety to the walking experience. ~
. For sun/shade reasons it is aften advantageous to orient any longer segments in a
north/south direcrion. Long canyon streets in an east/west direction should generally be ~
discouraged. When exceptions to the general height criteria occur, special considerarion should be given
to create a w 11-defin ~
e ed ground floor pedestr~an emphasis to overcome the «canyon
effect.
Canopies, awnings, arcades and building extensions can all create a pedestrian focus and
divert attention from the upper building heights and "canyon" effect.
~ 19
i
~ • f~f Recponse:
, East Meadow Drive, and the pedestrian walkway adjacent to the Austria Haus, averages ~
~ approximately 43 feet in width. The Austria Haus (eavelme) adjacent to East Meadow
. Drive and the pedestrian walkway is approxirnatety 29 feet in height. Given that East .
Meadow Drive is enclosed onty on one side, and the arcade and landscaping creates an
emPhasis on the ground level of the building, staff believes the proposed Austria Haus
. creates a"comfortable" enclosure of the street and does not create a"canyon" effect.
II - . .
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 buitdings in
f
Vail Village. Consistent wnth the desire for mtunate pedestnan scale, placement o
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
tentls 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, textw-e 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 Res on nse: ,
The original Austria Haus design lacked the irregular street edge of other properties in ~
Vail Village. The applicant, at the request of the staff and PEC, has attempted to !
I introduce a more irregular street edge through the horizontal stepping of the building on ~
the east and west ends. The east end of the building has been stepped back from the ,
property line and the northeast comer has been cutback, opening this end of building up to
Slifer Square. The west-end of the building was stepped towards the street. While it was
~ the PEC's desire to see more stepping in the building, staff believes and recognizes the
' constraints in doing so. Staff believes the irregular configuration of the landscape planters
' in front of the building helps to lessen the rather long, linear and uninterrupted street edge
along the center portion of the Austria Haus.
~
20
i
F. BUILDING HEIGHT • Vail Village is perceived as a mix of two and three story facades, although there are also
four and five story buildings. The mix of building heights gives variety to the street, which
. is desirable. The height criteria are intended to encourage height in massing variety and to .
discourage uniform building heights along the street.
• Staff Rcapon e:
The Austria Haus roof steps down on both ends of the building, reducing the creation of a "canyon" along the west property line and resulting in a building that is less obtrusive (on. Slifer Square) on the east end. The applicant has submitted a scale model of the new
structure in its Village Core context and this model will be available for use by the PEC
during the hearings.
G. VIEWS AND FOGAL POINTS Vail's znountain/valley setting is a fundamental part of its identity. Views of the
mountains, ski slopes, creeks and other natural features are reminders to our visitors of the
mountain environment and, by repeated visibility, are orientation reference points. Certain .
building features also provide important orientation references and visual focal points.
The most significant view corridors in the Village have been adopted as part of Chapter
18.73 of the Vail Municipal Code. The view corridors adopted should not be considered
~ exhausted. When evaluating a development proposal, priority should be given to an
analysis of the impacted project on public views. Views that should be preserved originate
from either major pedestrian areas or public spaces, and include views of the ski mountain,
the Gore Range, the Clock Tower, the Rucksack Tower and other important man-made
and natural elements that contribute to the sense of place associated with Vail. These
views, which have been adopted by ordinance, were chosen due to their significance, not _ r
only from an aesthetic standpoint, but also as orientation reference points for pedestrians.
Development in Vail Village shall not encroach into any adopted view corridor, unless
ap_proved under Chapter 18.73. Adopted conidors :are listed in Chapter 18.73 of the Vail
Municipal Code. Whether affecting adopted view corridors or not, the impact of proposed development on views from public ways and public spaces must be identified
and considered where appropriate.
• S aff Regponse:
Although not directly impacting one of the five adopted view corridors, as listed in
Chapter 18.73 of the Vail Municipal Code, thc height of the building will have impacts
from the Vail Transportation Center (transit termiria,l) and will also impact views from the
west and central stairs. Public views of the Village (roofline of stcvctures) will be blocked
from these areas, however, views of Vail Mauntain will remain. Overall, staff feels that
• 21
the benefits of providing a comfortable enclosure ta the street, and completing the
pedestrian and retail connection from Crossroads to the Covered Bridge is positive. Staff
' feels that the completion of this pedestrian connection is in compliance with Goal #3 of the .
Vail Village Master Plan:
I "To recognize as a top priority the- enhancement of the walking experience
throughout the Village."
. H. SERVICE. AND DELIVERY
i .
Any building expansion should preserve the functions of existing service alleys. The. few service alleys that exist in the Village are extremely important to minimizing vehicle
congestion on pedestrian ways. The use of, and vehicular access to, those alleys shouid
not be eliminated except where functional aitematives are not provided.
In all new and remodeled construction, delivery.which avoids or reduces impacts on
pedestrian ways should be explored; and adopted whenever practical, for immediate or
future use. Rear access, basement and below ground delivery corridors reduce
congestion. Weather protection increases delivery efficiency substantially.
Below gade delivery corridors are found in a few buildings in Vail Village
(Sibmazk/Gore Creek Plaza, Village Center, Vail Village Inn). Consideration should be
given to extending these corridors, where feasible, and the creation of new ones. As
buildings are constructed or remodeled, thc opporiunity may exist to develop segments of •
a future system. I
• Staff Respanse. ~
I
Through the course of the review of the Austria Haus redevelopment proposal, several
loading and delivery options were explored,
The applicant had originally proposed to provide one loading and delivery berth in the -
underground parking structure. However, concerns were expressed by the Village Center
Condominium owners that they would be negatively impacted by the noise generated from
the delivery vehicles, since the access to the underground location was immediately
adjacent to their units.
The applicant had also explored the possibility of gaining underground access to their
structure through the Village Center garage. It was determined that deIivery vehicles
could not enter through Village Center due to height limitations in the garage.
As mentioned previously, the applicant is proposing to provide for loading/delivery in the
front entry drop-off area. The applicant anticipates that deliveries to the retaiUcommercial
` 22 ~
I
shops will arrive via UPS or similar types of courier. Staff continues to believe that this
~ location rnay negatively impact the pedestrian use of this area of East Meadow I3rive and
suggests the applicant continue to explore placing the loading and delivery berth in the
underground structure, as originally contemplated.
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 incrcase the spring and fall shadow
line (iVlarch 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 criteria.
• Staff Resnonse:
Although the proposed height of the building will diminish the amount of sun, and likewise ,
~ increase shading, along East Meadow Drive (north side of the project), the provision of
heated public walkways effectively mitigates this consideration, thus providing iee-free and i
snow-free sidewalks. Additionally, the "opening up" of Slifer Square will insure adequate
light, air and open space to a public gathering space. Overall, staff believes the applicant's
proposai complies with the above-described considerations.
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 tcxture are visibly dominant, and generally
consistent, which tends to unify the building divcrsity 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
aut individually or distract visually from the overall character.
~ 23
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. Free-standing shed roofs, butterfly roofs
and flat roofs, can be found in the Village, but they are generally considered to be out of character
and inappropriate. Hip roofs likewise, are rare and generally inconsistent with the character of the
Core Area. Towers are exceptions, in both form and pitch, to the general criteria, but do have an
established local vernacular-style which should be respected.
: • Staff Res nce The roof form of the Austria Haus has been revised several times from what was originally
. proposed. The original roof design of the Austria Haus had a significant amount of flat
roof area. The majority of flat roof has now been replaced with a sloping roof leading to a
more traditional ridges. The ends of the ridges have been "clipped", resulting in a hip roof
form. While a hip roof is generally considered inconsistent with the character of the
Village, the applicant believes this roof form helps to reduce the mass of the building.
Staff recognizes that the sloping roof form increases the perceived height of the building,
especiatly an the east and west ends. Staff believes it is critical that the roof materials on
each of the three building forms be compatible with one another. Staff will raise this issue
with the Design Review Board.
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.
Staff Resuonse
The.pitch of the proposed Austria Haus roof is 4/12 and is in compliance with this ~
guideline. v rh n '
Generous roof overhangs are also an established arct2itectural feature in the Village - a traditional
expression of shetter in alpine environments. Roof overhangs typically range from 3 to 6 feet on
atl edges. Specific design consideration shoula be given to protectioa of pedestrian ways adjacent
to buildings. Snow slides and runoff hazazds can be reduced by roof orientation, gutters, arcades,
etc.
I
24 ~ I
Overha.ng details are treated with varying degrees of omamentation. Structural elements such as .
~ roof beams are expressed beneath the overhangs, simply or decorarively carved. The roof fascia
is thick and wide, g'iving a substantial edge to the roof.
• taff Resnonse
Staff suggests that the applicant increase the roof overhangs on the building. Currently,
the overhangs vary from two feet to three feet. Staff would like to see all the roof
' • overhangs at least three feet. Again, staff will review this consideration with the
Design Review Board. _
Compositions
The intricate roofscape of the Village as a whole is the result of many individual simple roof
configwations. For any single building a varied, but simple composition of roof planes is
preferred to either a single or a complex arrangement of many roofs. As individual roofs become
more complex, the roof attracts visual attention away from the streetscape and the total roofscape
tends toward "busyness" rather than a backdrop composition.
• Staff Resnonse
The roof form on the Austria Haus would be considered a grouping of a simple
composition of roof planes. Staff believes the roof composition proposed by the applicant
~ is consistent with the intent of this architectural consideration.
Stepped Roofs "
:s
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 funetional, and out of character with the more straight-forward roof design
typical in the Village.
• Staff Res cnse
The Austria Haus site is relatively flat (by Vail standards). While the building does not
need to step to follow the topography, vertical and horizontal steps have been
incorporated into the roof design. The vertical and horizontal steps provide a reduction in
the overall mass of the building and add to the architectural and visual interest of the
building.
• 25
i
I Materials .
Wood shakes, wood shingles, and built-up tar and gravel are almost exclusively used as roof •
~ materials in the Village. For visual consistency, any other materials should have the appearance of
. the above.
I .
i • Staff Resnonse
. Most recently, wood shakes and wood shingles are being discouraged for use as a roofng
material due to fire safety concerns. At the recommendation of the Town of Vail Fire " Department, the staff has been encouraging developers to use gravel, asphalt, tile, metal . and other more fire-resistant roofing materials on new buildings.
I The applicant is proposing to use reddish tiles on the roof of the Austria Haus. The tiles
will be similar in appearance to those used on the Sonnenaip Bavaria Haus. The staff
believes this is an appropriate roof material to use on this project.
S:onstruction
Common roof probiems and design considerations in this climate include:
- snowslides onto pedestrian walks
- gutters freezing
- roof dams and water infiltration
- heavy snow loads ~
Careful attention to these functional details is recommended, as well as familiarity with the local
building code, proven construction details, and Town ordinances.
For built-up roofs, pitches of 4/12 or steeper do not hold gravel well. For shingle roofs, pitches
of 4/12 or shailower often result in ice dams and backflow leakage under the shingles.
Cold-roof construction is strongly preferred, unless warm-roof benefits for a specific application
can be demonstrated. Cold-roofs are double-roofs which insulate and prevent snow melt from intemal building heat. By retaining snow on the roof, many of the problems listed can be reduced.
Periodic snow removal will be required and should be anticipated in the design.
Roof gutters tend to ice-in cornpletely and become ineffective in the Vail climate, especially in
shaded north-side locations. Heating the interior circumference with heat-tape elements or other
devices is generally necessary to assure adequate run-off control in colder months.
• Staff Resnonc :
The applicant is proposing a cold-roof construction atop the Austria Haus. Through the
review of a building permit, staff will ensure the roof construction complies with the
standards prescribed for the Vail ctimate.
~
26
• FACADES
Materials
Stucco, brick, wood (and glass) are the primary building materials found in the Village. While not
wishing to restrict design freedom, existing conditions show that within this small range of
materials much vaxiation and individuality are possible while preserving a basic hazmony. 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 entireiy absent. It is
intended to preserve the dominance of stucco by its use in portions, at least, of aIl new facades,
and by assuring that other materials are not used to the exclusion of stucco in any sub-area within
the Village.
• Staff ResW_nse
The exterior materials proposed by the applicant for the three building forms are a
combination of stone, stucco and wood. No one material is proposed to dominate the
exterior of the Austria Haus. Staff believes the applicant has complied with this particular
architectural consideration.
~ Color
There is greater latitude in the use of color in the Village, but still a discernible consistency within
a general range of colors. '
For wood surfaces, trim or siding, darker color tones are preferred - browns, greys, blue-greys, ~
dark olive, slate-greens, etc. Stucco colors are generally light - white, beige, pale-gold, or other
light pastels. Other light colors could be appropriate, as considered on a case-by-case basis.
Bright colors (red, orange, blues, maroon, etc.) should be avoided for major wall planes, but can
" be used effectively (with restraint) for decorative trim, wall graphics, and other accent elements. i
Generally, to avoid both "busyness," and weak visual interest, the variety of major wall colors
should not exceed four, nor be less than two.
A color/material change between the ground floor and upper floors is a common and effective
reinforcement of the pedestrian scale of the street.
. 27
~ Sta,ff Resnonsg
The applicant has proposed an exterior building color that is compatible with the coior of +
the existing buildings in the vicinity of the Austria Haus. Staff would like to point out that
the applicant is required to obtain Design Review Board (DRB) approval prior to
construcrion and that any concems of the PEC on this topic will be brought to the
attention of the DRB.
Transnarencv
Pedestrian scale is created m many ways, but a major factor is the openness, attractiveness, and
, generally public character of the ground floor facade of adjacent buildings. Transparent store fronts are "people attractors," opaque or solid walls are more private, and imply "do not
approach"
On pedestrian-oriented streets such as in the Village, ground floor commercial facades are
proportionately more transparent than upper floors. Upper floors are typically more residentiai,
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
eonverse, 30%-45% transparent.
Exarnples of transparency (lineal feet of glass to lineal feet of facade) on ground level. ~
- Covered Bridge Building 58%
- Pepi's Sports 71 %
- Gastbof Gramshammcr 486/o
- The Lodge 66%
- Golden Peak House 62% .
- - Casino Building . 30%
- Gorsuch Building 51 % - • Staff ResWnse
The Austria Haus has a ground floor transparency of 50"/o along East Meadow Drive.
While the percentage falls short of the recommended minimum of 55%, staff believes the
intent of the transparency requirement has been met. Staff feels the arcade, large panes of
glass, and streetscape benches will a11 serve as "people attractors" giving life and activity
to the ground level of the building. Staff believes that if there is an opportunity for
additional giass (transparency), it exists on the west-end of the easternmost building form.
Staff woutd suggest, but not require, that the applicant explore the possibility of increasing
the size of the window on the west-end of the easternmost building form.
, 28 ~
in y!s
~ In addition to the general degree of transparency, window details are an important source of
pedestrian scale-giving elements. The size and shape of windows are often a response to the
function of the adjacent street. For close-up, casual, pedestrian viewing windows are typically
sized to human dimensions and characteristics of human vision. (Large giass-wall store-fronts
suggest uninterrupted viewing, as from a moving car. The sense of intimate pedestrian scale is
diminished). Ground floor dispiay windows are typically raised slightly 18 inches t and do not
. extend much over 8 feet above the walkway level. Ground floors, which are noticeably above or
, below grade, are exceptions. '
The articulation of the window itself is still another element in giving pedestrian scale (human-
related dimensions). Glass areas are usually 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 woad have been used successfully and are acccptable. '
• Staff ResWnse
The Austria Haus proposal is in compliance. with the above-described design
consicieration. Staff believes the use of dormers with windows, bay windows and
windows with rriullions adds to the architectural charm and visual integrity of the Austria -
Haus. Staffrecommends that the use of mullions in the windows be a condition of i
approval.
Doors ~
Like windows, doars are important to character and scale-giving architectural elements. They I
should also be somewhat transparent (on retail commercial facades) and consistent in detailing
with windows and other facade elements. ~
Doors with gtass 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
~ 29
i '
retail commerciai facades. Although great variations exist, 25-30% f 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 introdncing door-transparency as a
' complement or substitute for door windows.
;
Articulated doors have the decorative quality desired for Vail. Flush doors, Iight aluminum
' frames, plastic applique elements all are considered inappropriate. As an expression of enhy, and
sheltered welcome, protected entry-ways are encouraged. Doorways may be recessed, extended,
ar covered.
.
i • Staff Resnonse
' Staff believes the applicant's proposal complies with the above-described criteria.
Trim Prominent wood trim is also a unifying feature in the Village. Particularly at ground floor levels,
doors and windows have strong, contrasting framing etements, 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 RMonse: .
Staffbelieves the applicant's proposal complies with the above-described criteria.
~
DECKS AND PATIOS
Dining decks and patios, when properly designed and sited, bring people to the streets, ~
opportunities to look and be looked at, and generally contribute to the liveliness of a busy street- ~
rnaking a richer pedestrian experience than if those streets were empty.
A review of successful decks/patios in Vail reveals several common characteristics: I
- direct sunlight from 11:00 - 3:00 increases use by many days/year and protects from '
wind. i
- etevated to give views "n.i the pedestrian walk (and not the reverse). ,
- physical separation from pedestrian waik.
- overhang gives pedestrian scale/shelter. Decks and patios should be sited and designed with due consideration to:
~
- sun '
I
30 ~
- wind ~ - views
- pedestrian activity
• Staff Response:
The majority of the decks and patios on the Austria Haus are located on the south side of
the building, facing Gore Creek. These decks and patios are for the use of the guests of
' • the Austria Haus and not the general public.
BALCONIES ,
Balconies occur on almost all buildings in the Village which have at least a secand 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.
' S fta f RespQnse , .
• Again, the majority of the balconies on the Austria Haus are located on the south side of the building. Several french balconies have been incorporated into the design of the north
side of the buildmg on the upper floors.
Color
They contrast in color (dark) with the building, typically matching the trim colors. ~
_ • Staff R nse .
Like the exterior color of the building, the DRB will be reviewing this aspect of the ~
proposal.
Size I
I
They extend far enough from the building to cast a prominent shadow pattern. Balconies in Vail
are functional as witt 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 tife.
• Staff Response
~ Staff believes this criteria has been met.
31
i ?
i
i ass F
They are commonly massive, yet semi-transparent, distinctive from the building, yet allowing the •
I building to be somewhat visible behind. Solid balconies are found occasionallY, and tend to be
I too dominant obscuring the building architecture. Light balconies lack the visual impact which .
~ ties the Village together.
I • s apmse
.
The balconies on the Austria Haus aze proposed to be semi-transparent in appearance. M t i
I
Wood balconies aze by far the most common. Vertical structural members aze the most dominant
~ visually, often decoratively sculpted. Decorative wrought iron balconies are also consistent
visnally where the vertical members are close enough to create semi-transparency. Pipe rails, and
plastic, canvas or glass panels should be avoided.
• Staff Resnonse
The material to be used in the construction of the balconies on the Austria Haus is wood,
with vertical structural members. A detail of the railing will be reviewed by the DRB.
ACCENT ELEMENTS ~
i
The life, and fesrive quality of the Viliage is given by judicious use of accent elements which give
cotor, movement and contrast to the Village. ~
I
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, pol's, 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 a11 winter). I
Painted wall graphics - coats of arms, symbols, accent composirions, etc. ~
Fountains - sculptural, with both winter and summer character.
~ Staff Respaase:
Accent ligtrting on the building, annual flowers in containers and in the planting beds, I
potted trees decorated with Christmas lights and irrigated flower boxes are proposed to
32 ~
provide colorful accent elements on the Austria Haus. An additional accent symbol
~ (clock, crest, etc.) is proposed for the area above the front entry. The final design has yet
to be determined.
LANDSCAPE ELEMENTS
Landscape considerations include, but go beyond, the placement of appropriate plant materials.
- plant materials
- paving " _ . retaining walls `
- street furniture (benches, kiosks, trash, etc.)
- lighting
- signage
Plant Materials
Opportunities for planting are not extensive in the Village, which places a premium on the plant
selection and design of the sites that do exist. Framework planting of trees and shrubs should
include both deciduous and evergreen species for year round continuity and interest.
Native plants are somewhat limited in variety, but are clearly best able to withstand the harsh
winter climate, and to tie the Village visually with its mountain setting.
~ Trees s
hrubs
Narrow-leaf cottonwood Willow
Balsam poplar pogwood
Aspen Serviceberry ,
Lodgepale pine Alpine currant
Colorado spruce Chokecherry
Subalpine fir Mugho.pine :
Potentilla - Buffaloberry
• Staff Response I
A landscape plan nas been submitted by the applicant. The landscape plan has been ~
developed with the assistance of Town staff, since a majority of the landscape
improvements are proposed on Town property. The proposed landseape design takes into ~
consideration factors such as tbe location of the plantings (sun/shade), maintenance,
climate, etc. Staff betieves the landscape design for the Austria Haus complies with the
above-described criteria.
~ 33
Paving
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 oFthe adjacent public right-of-way.
The Town uses the following materials for all new construction:
, - aspha.lt: general use pedestrian streets , - brick on concrete: feature areas (plazas, intersections, fountains, etc.) • Staff Res=se
The paving material used in the public areas around the Austria Haus will be the "Vail",
concrete unit paver, laid in the "Vail-pattern" (herringbone). These surfaces will be heated
and will include the access ramp to the parking structure, the front entry drop-off area and
the pedestrian walkway along the store fronts. The applicant has worked with the Town
staff in developing the design of improvements in the public right-of-way.
Retaining Walls
Retaining walls, to raise planting areas, often protects the landscape from pedestrians and
snowplows, and should provide seating opportuniries: ~
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 spacc areas if above type not already I
established nearby. • Staff Resnonse No landscape retaining walls are proposed in the construction of the Austria Haus. The
new landscape retaining walls proposed in Siifer Square will match the existing walls in
terms of both type of materials, and application.
I
Lig tin2
Light standards should be coordinated with those used by the Town in the public right-of-way.
I
34 ~ ~
• Staff Response
~ As part of the streetscape improvements along East Meadow Drive, the applicant will be
installing four new Village light fixtures. The number and locations of the four new lights
was determined through consultation with Town staff.
Si.-izna
. Refer to Town of Vail Signage Ordinance .
• Staff Resnonse:
The staff has requested that the applicant prepare a comprehensive sign program for the
Austria Haus. The comprehensive sign program will be reviewed by the DRB.
SERVICE
Trash handling is extremely sensitive in a pedestrian environment. Tra.sh collection is primarily
made in off-peak hours. It is the building owners responsibility to assure that existing trash =
storage problems are corrected and future ones avoided.
Trash, especially from food service establishments, must be carefully considered; including the
following:
~ - quantities generated
- pick-up frequency/access ~
- container sizes
- enclosure location/design
- visual odor impacts b
Garbage collection boxes or dumpsters must be readily accessible for collection at all times yet
fully screened from public view - pedestrians, as well as upper level windows in the vicinity. Materials
Exterior materials for garbage enclosures should be consistent with that of adjacent buildings.
Construction
Durability of the structure and operability of doors in all weather are prime concerns. Meta1
. frames and posts behind the preferred exterior materials should be considered to withstand the
inevitable abuse these structures suffer.
• 35
~ Staff Reiponse: The applicant has proposed to incorporate a trash dumpster into the design of the ,
underground parking structure. The trash dumpster will be completely enclosed and
accessible from inside the parking structure. Without a restaurant, the building is not
expected to generate an unusual amount of trash. The driveway is designed to
accommodate trash trucks. Staff believes the applicant's proposal complies the above-
described criteria.
: E. Identification and mitigation of natural and/or geologic hazards that affect the .
property on which the special development district is proposed.
. There are no natural and/or geologic hazards, including the Gore Creek floodplain, that
effect the Austria Haus property.
F. Site plan, build-ing design and location and open space provisions designed to
produce a functional development responsive and sensitive to natural features,
vegetation and overall sesthetic qua6ty of the community.
The applicant has revised the site plan in response to comments received from the Town
Council and staff. Most importantly, the applicant has shifted the building 7' on the site to
fiuther buffer the surrounding properties. The applicant has designed the building to
respect the 50' Gore Creek Stream setback along the south side of the properiy and to .
mainta.in the required 20' setback along the west properiy line. ~
G. A circulation system designed for both vehicles and pedestrians addressing on and
off-site traffic circulation.
The Austria Haus redeveloprnent will have major positive impacts on both off-site and on-
. site vehicle and pedestrian traffic systems surrounding the property. Staffbelieves that
- pedestrian circulation will be substantially improved as result of the redevelopment.
Improvements include a.new l4-foot wide bus lane and a dedicated, 12-fo6t wide
pedestrian lane along East Meadow Drive, as well as an irnproved pedestrian streetscape
along the north side of the building adjacent to the retail shops. The pedestrian
streetscape will be heated, thus providing ice-free and snow-free sidewaiks. All new
pedestrian improvements propose the use of concrete unit pavers, with the exception of
the 12-foot wide walkway along East Meadow Drive, and will connect into the existing
improvements to the east (Slifer Square), to the west (Village Center) and to the Vail
Transportation Center to the north.
Staff would recommend that the applicant redesign the pedestrian access through Slifer I
Square. The original design indicated irnprovements to Slifer Square which would
improve pedestrian access to and around the Austria Haus. Staff believes that the
elimination of this access will have negative effects upon the circularion system on and off
the site.
~
36
• Vehicular circulation will also be positively effected by the redevelopment. The current
parking situation will be improved by removing the surface parking tot and replacing it
with an underground parking structure and a front entry drop-off area. Access to the
parking structure shall be via a heated ramp located at the west end of the project.
H. Functional and aesthetic landscaping and open space in order to optimize and
preserve natural features, recreation, views $nd functions.
The proposed landscape plan will have important beneficial impacts on the quality of the
public spaces in the vicinity of the Austria Haus, due to the improvements to East -
Meadow Drive, Slifer Square and the Gore Creek streambank.
The streetscape improvements recommended in the Town of Vail Streetscape Master Plan
will be partially implemented. The partial improvements will enhance the pedestrian
experience along. East Meadow Drive through the construction of a wider and more
attractive heated walkway adjacent to the retail shops. The implementation of the
streetscape irnprovements, however does not include a separate pedestrian walkway from
bus traffic. The applicant is no longer proposing to delineate the pedestrian areas and bus
lane in East Meadow Drive through the use of different paving surfaces.
n,.
The applicant has designed improvements to the western portion of Slifer Square. The ~
improvements have been developed with the help of Town staff. The applicant's design is . .
. sensitive to the numerous mature trees existing in Slifer Square. Only those trees which
impact pedesfian circulation, effect sun exposure to the seating areas, and would
otherwise be damaged due to construction, are being removed. The removal of the trees
will be mitigated by the planting of additional trees elsewhere in Slifer Square.
Staff is concemed with the redesign of the pedestrian area immediatelY west of the new .
. bus shelter. The applicant had originally proposed a landscape planter in this area. The
planter and.the 24-foot, 22-foot, and 18-foot tall spruce trees were to be in the planter to
help frame the northeast corner of tfie building and to reduce the vastness of the paved
area. The new trees were also intended to mitigate the loss of several other inature trees
existing on the site. Staff would recommend that the applicant return the originally
proposed planter design and plantings to the landscape element of the development plan.
Improvements are proposed for the Gore Creek streambank adjacent to the Austria Haus.
The improvements are intended to enhance the visual appearance of the streambank and
stabilize the soil by reducing the grade of the slope and revegetating the bare soils. The
applicant will also be implementing an erosion and sedimentation control plan to prevent
run-off from the construction site from entering Gore Creek.
, 37
~I -
~ I. Phasing plan or subdivision plan that will maintain a workable, functional and
efficient relationship throughout the development of the special develapment
~ district. •
Phasing of development is not proposed. The applicant is required to submit a
construction phasing and staging plan to the Town prior to receiving a building permit.
The plan will be used to enswe an efficient and workable relationship with surrounding
' . uses during the development of the Austria Haus.
i- .
At this time, the applicant is anticipating a minor subdivision to amend the location of the north property line. The applicant is proposing to trade land with the Town in order to , gain an additional one - two feet of land area along the northerly property Iine. In
exchange for this land, the applicant is proposing tA trade a triangular piece of property
adjacent to Slifer Square to the Town. Any proposal to trade land with the Town must be
reviewed and approved by the Council.
V. DISCUSSION ISSUES
l . Streetscape Improvements
The Town of Vail Streetscape Master Plan recommends improvements to the
streetscape of East Meadow Drive adjacent to the Austria Haus. In particular, the
plan suggests the construction of a 12-foot wide, at-grade, concrete paver . I
walkway along the south side of East Meadow Drive. The use of concrete pavers
is intended to beautify the street as well as introduce a different paving material to
designate the pedestrian areas. The applicant proposes to construct the l 2-foot
wide walkway, however, they propose to use asphalt rather than concrete pavers.
The staff believes that pavers should be used for the reasons stated in the
Streetscape Master Plan.
The staff would recommend t4at the PEC and the applicant discuss this issue
- and determine whether the use of concrete unit pavers. •
2. Slifer Square I-mprovements '
The applicant had originally proposed substantial improvements to Slifer Square.
Some of the original irnprovements have been eliminated. The applicant has
removed a large landscape planter located immediately west of the relocated bus ~
shelter. The planter and the plant material has been replaced with a paver surface.
Additionally, a pedestrian walkway through Slifer Square to the applicant's
building is no longer being proposed. The applicant has suggested that if a new
38 ~
walkway is required, the walkway should be constructed by the Towri of Vail as
. part of the improvernents proposed to Siifer Square.
5taff believes the applicant should add the landscape planter and the plant material
back to the plans as originally proposed. Staff feels the planter and plantings are .
critical to the design of the area and necessary to mitigate the loss of some of the
existing vegetation. Staff also believes the pedestrian walkway through Slifer
Square be constructed by the applicant. Staff feels the walkway is a vital link in
the pedestrian circulation system and that the walkway is necessitated by the
desigri of the Austria Haus and the improvements proposed by the applicant. ' Therefore, staff would recommend that the applicant be required to construct these improvements.
Staff would recommend the PEC and the applicant discuss this issue and
determine whether the landscaping and the walkway should be reintroduced.
3. Pool Deck
The applicant has proposed an outdoor swimming pool as a recreational amenity
for the guests of the Austria Haus. The pool deck is proposed at the southwest
corner of the building and encroaches 18-1/2 feet into the required, 20-foot rear
yard setback . According to the regulations prescribed in the Municipal Code of
the Town of Vail, pool decks may encroach up to 10 feet into the required
~ setback.
Staff would recammend that the PEC and the applicant discnss this issue and
determine whether an additional8-1/2 feet of encroachment is acceptable.
4. Architecture
The architect has redesigned the northeast comer of the building. The redesign i
eliminates floor area on the second floor of fhe building in " the turret." The
- elimination of the floor area on thc second floor and the inclusion of floor area on •
the third floor causes the turret to become somewhat awkward looking.
The staff would suggest that the PEC and architect discuss this issue in an ~
attempt to create a less awkward looking turret. '
5. Outsta,nding Submittal Information
The application for the establishment of SDD #35 is currently incomplete. There
are outstanding items which must be submitted prior to final review by the PEC.
These items include:
, 39
I 1. Submit a regrading plan which shows ALL grading to the point where the
~ proposed improvements tie into existing conditions. ' 2. Submit a revised landscaPe plan with a legend, inciuding the quantitY and •
sizes of all proposed plant materials, and specifications for installation.
3. Submit plans, prior to DRB, for the proposed bus shelter design.
j- , 4. Resubmit a snowmelt area plan indicating those areas that will be
. snowmelted by the appticant. , i
5. Submit a letter of intent, indicating how and where the employee housing
i requirement will be met.
6. Submit a roof plan with existing and proposed contours indicated beneath
so building height may be verified
The above-listed items must be submitted to the Town of Vail Community
Development Department by no later than noon, Tuesday, May 27,1997, in
order for the PEC to make a recammendation on this request on Monday,
June 9,1997.
VI. STAFF RECOMMENDATION ~
The sta.ff has identified the following conditions, which we will recommend be included in a PEC
vote on June 9, 1997:
~
1. That the applicant meet with the Town staff, priar to appearing before Town Council for
the first reading of an ordinance establishing Special Development District #35, to
formuYate a construction phasing plan and to determine financial responsibilities for the I
off-site improvements to Slifer Square, East Meadow Drive and the revegetation of the -
Town-owned stream tract, south of the Austria Haus. Staff will then ma,ke a I
recommendation to Council regarding the construetion phasing and financial ~
responsibilities of the off-site improvements.
2. That the applicant prepare a deed restriction or covenant, subject to the Town Attomey's
review and approval, thereby restricting the cunent and future owner(s) ability ta locate a
restaurant, or similar food service operation on the Austria Haus property. Said deed
restriction or covenant shall be recorded with the Eagle County Clerk and Recorder's
. Office prior to the applicant submitting for a building permit. '
~
f:\everyone\pec\memosisonnensd.224 40 ~
i
I
3. That the applicant submit the following plans to the Department of Community
~ Development, for review and approval, as a part of the building permit application for the
Austria Haus:
a. A Tree Preservation Plan;
b. An Erosion Control and Sedimentation Plan;
c. A Construction Staging and Phasing Plan;
d. A Stormwater Management Plan;
. , e. A Site Dewatering Plan; and
. f. A Traffic Control Plan. 4. That the applicant provide deed-restricted housing, which complies with the Town of Vail
Employee Housing requirernents (Chapter 18.57), for a minimum of 12 employees, and
that said deed-restricted housing be made available for occupancy, and the deed
restrictions recorded with the Eagle County Clerk & Recorder, prior to requesting a
Temporary Certificate of Occupancy for the Austria Haus.
5. That the PEC approval of Special Development District #35, the approval of the
conditional use permit to a11ow for the operation of a fractional fee club in the Public
Accommodation Zone District, and the approval of a minor subdivision shall be
conditioned upon the approval of this SDD establishment request by the Vail Town
Council.
• 6. That this approval is conditioned upon the approval of a minor subdivision, as follows:
"A minor subdivision will amend the location of the north property line. The
applicant is proposing to trade land with the Town in order to gain an additional
one - two feet of property along the northerly property line. In exchange for this
land, the applicant is proposing to trade a triangular piece of property, adjacent to
. Slifer Square, to the Town. If a minor subdivision is requested, all costs incurred ~
to complete the subdivision and the exchange of land with the Town shall be the
responsibility of the applicant." -
7. That the following design considerations be carefully reviewed by the Design Review ~
Board (as previously diseussed in Section IV of this memorandum):
A) That the multions on the windows and doors, as depicted on the building elevations,
be a required element of the Austria Haus project. '
B) That the improvements recommended for East Meadow Drive, as depicted in the
approved Town of Vail Streetscape Master Plan, be implemented as a part of the Austria
Haus project. This includes a reduction in street width from 30 feet to 26 feet (14 foot
bus Iane and 12 foot attached, paver pedestrian walk).
, f;\everyonelpeclmemos\sonnensd.224 41
,
C) That the applicant increase the roof overhangs on the building. Currently, the overhangs vary from two feet to three feet. Staff would recommend that all the roof
overhangs be a minimum of three feet. ~
D) That the applicant prepare a comprehensive sign and exterior Iighting program for the
Austria Haus. The comprehensive exterior lighting and sign program will be reviewed by
the DRB.
~ E) That the applicant revisit the originally contemplated design which incorporates the -
loading and delivery facility in the underground parking structure. Staff believes that
trying to accommodate loading and delivery in the porte-cochere azea will result in
' conflicts between pedestrians, vehicles accessing the parking structure, and delivery
trucks. Staff understands the original design option may not be the desire of the owners of
the Village Center Condominiums, yet we believe the impact can be mitigated with
appropriate screening,
~ i
I
I
i
I
I
f:teveryone\peclmemos\sonnensd.224 42 ~
-
6 ~
. _ _ _ . . • - i
I[w~A ~
- - ~
-
~ ~ , _ _ _ - _
-
• - .
~
_ '..o..... 1~ ~•sa
~ ~ .
f - _ ;J - - - - .
- w I I
' r-' a~ ~ ~e_' "_s ..~3-~1.-. , ' ' ~ • ~ ~
,
j . ~00 ~ .y[ " ~ ~`.~j~J~ - ~f' ~.s . , "4'"+:-~'~~ - ` ~
+ • ~ ~p . - -_r _ gjfti r~+. ~ . ' .
~ yF \ •s~ a.~w~ ...~~r--~'~ ' _ ~RM ~ bB N` i/r ~ .~~1: ' ~ ' I ~
~ , , f~ \...~..~.J~^~.. ~ ?k
.:.~4K~ R
~ ~ •mw~.F ~ r. ~ I ~ , y _ , a'~~3 ,
I ~ _ ~ W `--v - _
,
,
.
.
_
-
.
- ~
, r::
. ,
,:3--,.--- _
- _
I - - - _ ~ ~ ~ _ -
I,ANDSGAPfitG 1 GRACI1~lCs ~A~` I n 1.0
_i
~
t~con'uu!!', _
I r _
?
)
I .
- ,
_ . i ~
' _
`w:.___`-`---_""--_.. ' - ----.o..: ----------------w-~-"" ' '
.
-
_
/r
A
i~- . ~ ~ 1 ~ ' S -
( ivh ~ L----•' r ~ _ ~ ~ ~ 1
i ' ' ~
~ l-- ,,,)l _t~'-rt~:l 'v • . ~y l • t-.
_ ~~.r ~ _ , _ .oa~--•~- _ --il. / - - ~ \ 1 ~1 -
, ~ . ,
. '
~
~
~
. ~ • . . : ~ ~ v _ _ e.~- V
~p"•r.s' tt+YM'~M
• ~ _
i ~
I ~
-
- - ''`v°~~J~,.i~ ?J f_~.- 'r 'i ,~1.' I
~ i ~ ~ y l ~ _ ~.,y: ~ ^ ~ ' ~M~"o-' - f~ \ (
- __1_ / ( ? ~ `-""~J,f ~ y~..~- -~.~_r'+;, `
' ~ - ~ ~ ~ ---•a- - - - _ ~ ~ ~ 1 „ r.~ ~ f ~ ~ 1
~f
~ .~+`ti'. , ~ ; ' _r~~ ~ , .w ~J t \
~ ~ Jna~ ~.,.r^'•..~- 1 ~ ~ a ` ' ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
~ , ~ t1 ~ ,~?T" 1~ J ~L _ "K Gr~-' ~
j?tt R ~ ~ ,w: ; y
. ~
1-
; ~ r.' i ~ _..,d, ~ ..1~ e r ~ ti ,,y~ : w ~ ~ ~
.
. _ _ . ~
• ` _ ~ ~~'s~ : -IL ..-`-~i~~a.~s,..
_
, _ , - .
, . ~r
. • ~ •
.i
_
• ..._.._,"_:~+*~+aic •
.
~ -
. , ~ -
.
. ~
'
, .
~
~ _
~
, . ,
. ,
I ~ r
.
,
~ . t '
aVo,
,
~ ua•.,.o• .
`
i
~ -
s " .
i -
'
;t .
- - - ~
- -
_ _ _ - ~ ~
. , ~
I I A INn
A hi~ecd
' ICAIA I
1 1 ~ • 1 I i M~+~u ~
I -
, t
~ I I I 1 ~ _ _ - -
I - - j--- ~
,
. _ ~
.y
0--- - - ~ - ' ~ . ' ~ : . .
-1-- ~ - - -
' - ,
•
,
, ,
. , . , ~
~ ~ ? ~ j--~_ - --'-~"l_--- - ~ l ,
• - ' - -=1---~ - -F-!-'•--J~-~ ~ ---~--J--- ~i-1--._. - -
~ , ~ ' t , ~ ~ , ~ ~ ; - ~ Q
g
- -.L. - , ~ oc
>
,
~
.
. , ,
• ! ~ i
. ; .
~ : - - •
Q-- - r t-- - _ - - - - - ~ - - - I I
- 1 - - - - - - _ _ - - - ,...,.a -i--------~---- -
~ ~ I I i i ' - - - - ~ ~a.. • ; i
- - ~ • ~ ,
-~--i _ _..~~..$I°""°"I~'~"°'~°_""~'°`T" . , ---~_=_._..-,k-\_._._.-~-- ~
~ I I _ I I I . I - ~ . . . _ ~ f i~' ~
Q-- i - - - - - - - - - - - - - ,
I I~ I I~ I I I I i I I .I I ~ ~
I I I I I I I I I ! ( I~~. ! i ~
I ~ I I i i ~ i I 1 I ~ I
I I I I I i I ' ' ~ I y ~
I i I i I I I I I I I I ~
. I I i I I ! I I ! i I I
ii
; -
. ~
. ~ a, 'ti
-
GE LEvEL FLOOR PLAN_
P: 2.0
- - - -'c•~M i
- -
I
~ • ' , • R ~
• _ _ ~ - _ . _ _ . . _ . _ - }
PtMJ
, I Ai.oci.in ~
. /vcneern I
I GAIA
A~
1 ) l ~ ~ • ~ rir.'r
lt I__
I I ' I I I I I I I I I I
I I I I I I I I I I ~ I
I I ~ I I I I I I I I I
i---------
. - - - - - - _ - - - ~ _ ~
fi - - - - _.fi._. = I
- 1-----1- -
- o
- - - ~ ~ - - - - -
0- - . - - 1 - - - - -
j I I !~7 I i i i Q o ~
o---- - - - - _ - - - - _ - . ;
i ~ i[C o,, ~
Y _ + • ~
I I I I I I I L1DR '
,-;a" I I I I i I _ I
, ~ .
•
j~----- -
. ~
r-7 ~ - I
.l I l~ I I I ~ I I I I ~
j~i.• j ('f i I _ I r~~ I° o
.
- -
i ~ - . ~
- ~ - - - - , - -._oq_..- -(~6 '--'r- - - - - - - - _ - i
~ - - ~ ~o~- - - ~ - - ~ - - ~ : - ~ _ _ I ! I
-
i I ~ I I ~ I I I .I~ ' I I I I ,
~ 1 1 1 I I i I I ~ I I
I I ~ I I ! ' I I I I. I ~
I I ~ I I I i I I ! I I ~i
I I I i ~ ' I I I I I
eFIRST LEv'L ~LOOR PLAN
A 2.1
- - -
' _ _ - - - - - -z.«~'
- - - - - - - - - - . - , _
6
NwclNn
M1~Ne~b
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ • , t ~ I
I I I i I i i i I I I I
I I I i I I I I I I I
. ~ .
~ ~ ''~.j.._.._.._.._.._..I_.._.._,._.._.. ~.._.._~._.._..I I I i I I I
. , . . . . i
~ i i i i 1 r ._.._.._i. .
I:~ I i I I I I I i I I , I !
~:'I I I I I I I I I I I 1 ~
~ I I I I I I I I I I ~
~ --I- -I-- ~ - - ~------~----i N I
• - - - - - - i ~
-t,~~---
Q-- - - - - - - - - - - ~ - i ~ '
i I I ; °'~T- " I . i t! I>
i ,a•, . ~i ~~.,i j~,ri.. L~~mJ ~ L-~»i
I
- -t - - t- - f - ---t-•- - ~ -
i ~ 1 I I I I I I 11
/ I'd" I I i ~ I I I I
.~.r„ ,.I_ I I -t---...._.._. ~ .a.~» '
, . ,
I~
~ •
- - ~ - i i - i -i- - - i ! I-.-.--=.~,
' p I _~I
• ~ M-. . t,
~a:..~.. M I~..
.
~ `QSECOND LEvEL FLOOR PLAN
. ~ 1 -,2
2
: .
,
' ~ . . - - . - . . it~co.,.,a; I. _ . , :_-o:
• • f • 4. ft
Adilk
- _ - . -
~
MAi1e~b
f f_AIA
~ ~ ~ ~ • ~ ' w.w
T~
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
: . . . . . . . . . .
. . .
1 ~ ~ ~ ~ - r-.._.._.._. .._..F.._..~.._.._.._. t
~•~I ( ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
- - - -
fi----
Q- - ~ - - - - - - - ~i ~ = o
o - - - - - - - - - ~ ~ ¢ ~
>
~ ~-N (-iinwi ~ L+i..=.I C~~ I~ ' ' I R+ '1' ~ ` I
1
~ - -i - - j-~- t - - ---t -~-t-- ~-j--- - - - - ~ -
~ ' ~ - l r .I ~ ~ ~-r I ~
=T= ~
~
~
o-_. ' ~ -f-"=: _ - - - ~ r- ~
- • • _ _ _ _ ---._._.----j-
• I I - ' I I---~--~--~---'--- ' ~ j iw~
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ I .
I
!
~ i~HrRD LEVEL FLOOR PLAN
P, 2.3 I~
- - - -
~ - - -
;
. - - -i ,
~
I IC.AIA
~ / ~ ? ~ ~ • ~ ~
~-{--II-- t ~ - ---~~t----s-
I
I 1 I I I I I I I I I ' I
I I { i I I I I I i i I
I I I I ! I i I I I 1 I
• ~ - - - - - - ---i------ - -----------t------ ~
~ a I ~~1~ I I I Q~
¦ -i-~----- - - - _ ~
Q ~ { { I i ~ ~ : ~ ' j ' _-r..---•--='~ Q O
Q-- -i. - - - - - ~y--- ~ ~
- _ ~~~r:' ~ ';°••'f,.~. ~ ~ ~`}r'~ ~ ~ V~
if~ ~
{ { . . . • '
i
. .-7 ' ~ r-- -~--q- t~ - - -.j-;
I I I I t - l ------------------M i ;
Q- - ---.-.~--._._r..- - -~-j------ - _._._.j-._._ i I
Q-~ - ~ _ ~ - - ~ _ - - ~
I I { ' 1 I I I I I i I i
I I I I I I i I I I I I i
i I I I 1 I I i I I I I
I I I I I I I I I I { I ~i +
~ I I I I I I I 1 I I 1 I~__
1 ? I I i i ) I I I I l ~
{ 1 I ' 1 1 I I I I I I I
I I { I i I 1 I I I I ~ 1 ~
I
. r
t FOlSR'(H LEvEt FLDOR PLAN
T h•.r.e• '
'f
A..
/l
~ ~ ~ - - - - - - - - - - - - <,::?m9ii:~
i • . • ~
Amkk
- - - - - - - - - .w.~...,: _ _ ~
~ ~ ~ ~ - ~ - , i ~ r~.,
j ~
u u ~a ~i u I~!
N~hivcb
~ ~ I ~ IC.AIA
l~ L__._ V ~ •
~tf_
I w~y~~r
l I I I I I I I I I I I
I i I I l ! f I 1 I I I ~ m
l I I 1 I I I 1 ! I 1 I (
1 I I I 1 I I i
I I I f i~ll ' I
- m 41
' En ; ` a8
- - _ - ~ ~
_ ~ i_ _ _ . _ _ ' . ~ ~ _ ?pre~a_m~. (f)~~ ~I
I_'\NORTIi ELEVAtIpN~ - ~ ~ I
! ~ 1
. _J1f_-•, ~____•t ~J~!__.~__~ F I _ ll 11 H.~~ U '
_-~._`t~~ - - - ~.J~_ - ~ i i
,
i , m m ' , , m -
; - - r_ - ?J!F ~ f.
- ~ - - ~ - - - ~
, - - _ - - - - . I j_..? ,
a .
n I ~ I { ( 7 SpLjTa1 E EVATI N
~ ---~-------T---___~_--~ b- --j---~------T-------~---~-- •Y^• ;A3A~
.
L
.
n • Assocl~tr
Y ~ ~ McAN«n
ILAIA
~
- - ----~~r ~
- - - -i +
- - - - - - -
- ~ - ~ . - - - - - - - ~ - ~ - - - - - - -~..e. ~ Z o
I I I I ! i
I I I I I I ~lo~
i A5T ELEvATIONI
e ?
. ~ o . . ¢i
• i i i ; i ~
---~-i i ,
- - - i - - - ~ i
~ - - .
i ~~i~ _ 0 Ll[v~l 0~ (m]
:
n
~ I I L: ~w~vm)
i__.
• - - - - •!S~'twi'u°`- - _
~
I I I ,
I I ,W4ST ELEVATiON s-
t- ; p 1
, ~ . v u.-.r.c• '
A3.1~
i
,
• • . . • ,
. ~
~•II ~
L
~ ' /11(AINtb
PC AIA
. ~
I J I 1
\ . i
D
( ~ 1 1 1 i
~ ' ' ' t ~ 01'•`' ' ~ ` r ~ J
•~O\. tll 1~ i AI'.~•A 1 ~
~_r~_s•,l ue~-s• ~
- ~ ~ ~
l," ~ T Q
M).,6.
_ _ ~ ~
\ ~ ' I 4 ; I t
I 1 '
~
~
-L._..
- _ . . I ~ +
~I
' ' RQQF PIAH 1 !
Y N•N ' I -
I
I~N ~N
;
, . , 2.
~ . _ - ~ T~..o~ )
. MEMORANDUM
i
i TO: Planning and Environmental Commission
FROM: Community Development Department
DATE: May 19, 1997
RE: A request fo review and make a recornmendation to the Town Council on the
proposed public view corridor methodology and criteria for the Lionshead
Redevelopment Master Plan Study Area.
Applicant: Town of Vail: Community Development, Public Works, and
Community Information
1. BACKGROUND AND DESCRIPTION OF THE REQUEST
Enclosed for your review is the memo presented to the Town Council on May 6 outlining the results
of Stage 2 and introducing Stage 3 of the Lionshead Redevelopment Master Plan Process.
Attached is a copy of the consultant's memo regarding the proposed public view corridor
methodology and criteria for the Lionshead Redevelopment Master Plan. The proposed criteria is ,
. similar to that which was used for the Vail Village public view corridors (Section 18.73 View
Corridors, attached for reference), which establishes criteria for adding view corridors. The criteria
is proposed to be adopted by Town Council at its May 20, 1997 meeting. Following adoption and
application of the criteria by staff and the consultant, there will be several public forums for review
of the potential public view corridors in Lionshead. The following is the schedule adopted by Town ,
Councii on May 6:
. On June 3 and June 8 there will be public walking tours to review potential view corridors.
? June 4- 15, self-guided walking tours to review potential view corridors.
? On June 15, a public forum will be held for the community to indicate their preferences for public view
corridors to be included in fhe tionshead Redevelopment Master Pian.
? On June 23, staff and consultant wi111 return to the PEC to review and make a recommendation to the
Town Council on the preferred public view corridors.
? On June 24, CAUncil will review the proposed view corridors and the PEC recommendations.
Designation of public view corridors in Lionshead, if any, is proposed to occur on July 1.
? Final adoption of public view corridors in Lionshead, if any, is proposed to occur in Stage 5
(Approximately Fall 1997).
II. STAFF RECOMMENDATtON
Staff recommends that the PEC make a recommendation of approval to the Town Council on the
proposed methodology and criteria for evaluating potential public view corridors for the Lionshead
• W Redevelopment Master Plan Area.
File: f:\everyone\peclmemosUionhead.519
,
n1R'*YAIL
c c
Consultant Memorandum
Proposed Criteria and Methodology of View Corridor Selection and Adoption
.
Lionshead Master Plan
May 19, 1997 .
In the MaY 6`h Town of Vail Council meeting, the Stage III schedule and actions of the Lionshead Master
Plan were approved by the Town Council. One segment of the schedule for Stage III is the identification
and adoption of public view corridors. Below is a summary of the issues this memo addresses:
1. Purpose of identifying and adopting public view corridors;
II. The Proposed Criteria for selecting public view corridor candidates;
' III. The Proposed method for prioritizing the field of view corridor candidates;
IV. The Proposed method for selection and designation of public view corridors that do not currently
exist, and could be created by future redevelopment with the Lionshead Study Area.
The Lionshead Master Plan team proposes that the existing Town of Vail View Corridor ordinance be used
in its entirety for the selection and designation of public view corridors in Lionshead.
1. Purpose of identifying and designating public view corridors
In chapter 18.73 "View Corridors", Section 18.73.010, of existing Town of Vail Code, the following
purposes for public view corridors are listed:
A. The protection and perpetuation of certain mountain views and other significant views from various
pedestrian public ways within the Town will foster civic pride and is in the public interest of the Town; ~
B. It is desirable to designate, preserve and perpetuate certain views for the enjoyment and environmental
enrichment for the residents and guests of the town;
C. The preservation of such views will strengthen and preserve the Town's unique environmental heritage
and attributes;
D. The preservation of such views will enhance the aesthetic and economic vitality and values of the Town;
E. The preservation of such views is intended to promote design which is compatible with the surrounding
natural and built environment, and is intended to provide for natural light to buildings and in public
spaces in the vicinity of the view corridors;
F. The preservation of such views witT include certain focal points such as the Clock Tower and the
Rucksack Tower, which serve as prominent landmarks within the Vail Village and contribute to the
community's unique sense of place.
H. Proposed criteria for selecting public view corridor candidates
In chapter 18.73 "View Corridors", Section 18.73.050, paragraph C.l, of existing Town of Vail
Code, the following criteria are listed for the selection of public view corridors:
I y
A. That the proposed view corridor or boundary amendment protects and perpetuates a view or views from
public pedestrian areas, public ways, or public spaces within the town which foster civic pride and are in
the public interest for the Town of Vail;
B. That the proposed view corridor or boundary amendment protects and enhances the town's attraction to •
" residents, guests, and property owners;
C. That the proposed view corridor or boundary amendment protects a view which is commonly recognized
and has inherent qualities which make it more valuable to the town than other more common views.
.
In addition to the above criteria, it is important to consider the potential impact a proposed view
corridor could have on the development potential of surrounding properties. While this will be a
consideration during the Stage.III process of identifying and designating the view corridors,, if any, it will be
very important during the Stage V process of actually adopting the new view corridors into Town code.
This issue is specified in Chapter 18.73 "View Corridors", Section 18.73.050, paragraph A.3.a of existing
Town of Vail Code.
III. Proposed method for prioritizing field of view corridor candidates
In order to provide the public, PEC, and Council with criteria for evaluating the view corridor
candidates, it is proposed that "critical attributes" be described for each potential view corridor. These
attributes will be important in determining which views, or which part of a view, not only fulfills the criteria
set forth in the existing ordinance, but also possesses superior visual quality worthy of protection. The
attributes defined for each view wi11 be classified as follows:
1. Critical- Any portion of a view defined as "critical" is such that without it the view would be
lost. This is the portion of a view that would be recommended for formal adoption into Town
code during stage V of the Master Plan process, and no encroachment into this area of a view
would be allowed without going through the amendment process outlined in existing town code.
2. Contributing- These are areas of the view that while having some importance, are not critical to
the preservation of the view and will not be recommended to be part of the formally adopted
view corridor.
The design attributes that will be classified for each view could include, but are not necessarily
. limited to, the following:
1. Foreground- Elements of the view immediately in front of the view, such as the roof of a
building, the closest tree line, or an open pedestrian area.
2. Middleground- Elements of the view beyond the foreground, but in front of the horizon, such as
the ski runs when looking towards Vail Mountain.
3. Background- The horizon, or farthest elements in the view. A good example of background is
the peaks of the Gore Range when Iooking east up the valley.
4. Edges- Edges are often the most important defining elements of a view, and constitute the
changes between foreground/ iniddleground/ and background, or any other change in color or
texture in the view, such as the edge between the white snow of a ski run and the green of the
adjacent trees. •
' S. Color/ Texture- The variations and types of color and texture in a view has a great impact on the
quality of the view, and are also instrumental in defining edges. A view corridor that was chosen
because of the visual quality of its color and texture could possibly be impacted by a
development projects lighting, color scheme, or location.
6. Landmarks/ Specific Elements- These are specific identifiable elements in a view, either natural
or built, that have special significance to the residents and guests of Lionshead. Examples could
be the gondola lift line, ski runs, the clock tower, or any other element that provides a sense of
location, direction, or identity to Lionshead.
~w.
IV. Proposed method for selecting and designating public view corridors that do not currently exist.
, Due to ihe fact that the existing Town of Vail code does not make prouision fnr the selection of vieuv
corridors where a view does not currently exist (such as being blocked by a structure), and due to the fact ,
that the Lianshead Master Pian deals with issues df potential large scale redevelopment wtiere riew view
corridors could be created, the following is proposed:
1. According to the.public view corridor selection criteria articulated above, any potential future
public view corridor that fulfills these criteria, if any, should be designated by the Town Council,
and with appropriate mapping and visual documentation, be recorded in the Lionshead Master
Plan.
2. Upon adoption of the Lionshead Master Plan by the Town Council, and upon application for
redevelopment by a property affected by the designated future view corridor, the extent to which
the applicant creates the future public view corridor described in the master plan be aconsideration for approval or disapproval of the application by the Town.
3. If the redevelopment application is approved by Council, and upon completion of the
redevelopment project, the new view corridor be surveyed and formally adopted according to
existing Town code.
-
•
.
,
1
Ir
y
w i
MEMORANDUM
TO: Town Council
FROM: Lionshead Redevelopment Master Plan Team
DATE: May 6, 1997
RE: LIONSHEAD REDEVELOPMENT MASTER PLAN
(1) Report on Stage 2 Wish List Submittals and
(2) Introduction of Stage 3: Alternatives Analysis and
Seiection of Preferred Program
PURPOSE OF THE PRESENTATiON: The purpose of the presentation today is two-
fold. First, the staff and consultant team will report to Council on the "Wish List"
submittals and seek Council's direction regarding the list in order to conclude Stage
Two of the Lionshead Redevelopment Master Plan process. Second, the team will
introduce to Council and the community a proposed schedule of events for Stage Three
of the master planning process, which involves analyzing the ideas submitted to date,
preparing a(ternative programs, possible Council designation of public view corridors in
Lionshead, and, ultimately, Council selection of a preferred program for the Lionshead
• Master Plan.
ACTION REQUESTED OF COUNCIL: Two actions will be requested of Council at the
end of the presentation:
1. Approve or modify the list of "Wish List" items to be analyzed in Stage
Three, and
2. Approve or modify the proposed Stage Three process and schedule.
BACKGROUND: See: Exhibit a,- Time line of Actions to Date
Exhibit B- Problem/ Opportuniry Statement, Policy Objectives
and Process Groundrufes
Exhibit C- Urban Qesign Principles
Exhibit D- Public Involvement to Date
WHAT I$ A MASTER PLAN? A master plan is a guide, a flexible framework for
future action. it articula.tes a cammunities' fundamental land use policies, principles,
and gaals in a broad and general way. It plans far the future physical development, or
redevelopment, of an area Af ti-ne community, inGluding its land uses, functions, public
facifities and circtalat+an.
1
A maste'r plan typically includes botFr narrative policies and maps. The maps may be -
very speci#ic-:or: highly geneKalized; some master Ptans eliminatemaps, altagekher an.d.,;
rely entirely on the text to state the development or redevelopment policies.
The master plan's land use policies are actually implemented by zoning ordinances
which may be new enactments or modifications of existing codes. The zoning policies
relate back and conform to the policies of the master plan and carry out the plan's
principles.
A master plan is NOT an approval for any particular development concept
contained therein, and it is not generally implemented in a short time frame. Aspects
of the master plan will be implemented over time as a resutt of market forces. That is,
when there is a market for a particular use and it becomes economically feasible,
someone likely will propose it for development, and it will go through the applicab(e
development review process. After adoption of a master plan for Lionshead, every
specific development proposal will have to go through the applicabfe
development review and approval process, with its attendant public notices and
public hearings. A proposal's adherence to the policies contained in the adopted
master plan will be one of the factors analyzed by staff, PEC, DRB and Town Council
(as applicable) in determining whether to approve or disapprove the specific praposal.
7HE FRAMEWORK FOR THE REDEVELOPMENT MASTER PLANNING EFFORT: • I
As has been discussed previously, the framework for the master planning effort is two-
fold: first, the six policy objectives adopted by the Town Council on November 4, 1996
(please refer to Exhibit B), and second, the urban design principles first presented by
Design Workshop on June 17, 1996 and presented to the public in the initial Lionshead
walking tours in January 1997 (please refer to Exhibit C). All ideas suggested for
inclusion in the Lionshead Redevelopment Master Plan will be evaluated on how
they advance the six policy objectives and the urban design principles. Some
ideas may advance more than one policy objective or design principle; those
suggestions may be worthy of higher priority when selections must be made between
and among ideas at the end of Stage 3 of the five-stage redevelopment master
planning process. Other suggestions may advance only one policy objective but may
' do so in a way that merits significant attention.
RE AP FTA E TW F TiiE LI N HEAD MA TE PLANNING PR CES :
FAllowinq ths identification of opportunities and constraints in Stage i(January and
February), the Gommunity has offered "wish list" ideas for impravements or additions to
Lionshead in the farm of policies, facilities and amenities and has shared
preferences amang the 173 wish list items submitted. Ail of xhis infarmation was
presented to the Planning and Environmental Commission in a joint mseting with Xhe
•
~ 2
Design Review-Board on April 14, and was piaced in the Council packet on Aprii 11 for
~ your advanee information> At the Gounci!'s:April 15 worksession,.Staff requested that
Council review, in particular, the list of 20 items identified as "sensitive", meaning that
there are differing points of view on and potentially significant implications to pursuing
those items.
The "Sensitive Issues" include:
• Public use vs. preservation of fhe south side of Gore Creek and existing open
space
• Designation of public view corridors
• Building height
• Architectural styfe/ guidelines
• Central loading and delivery
• Recycling of construction debris
• Use of east end of the Lionshead parking structure/ additional ice rink
• Vail Resorts core property redevelopment (Gondola Building and Sunbird
Lodge)
• Use of North Day Lot and West Day Lot
• Pedestrian connections and other public uses vs. private property rights
• Parking
• Relocation of South Frontage Road around VA Shops
• Potential use of unplatted tennis court site (currently owned by VA, leased to
• VRD) on south side of Gore Creek
• Possible incentives for redevelopment conformity with the Master Plan
• Desire for increased/more diverse retail
• Employee housing
• Possible use of 1-70 air rights
• Possible use of Lionshead parking structure for public and/or private
development
• Conference/convention/community center/ perfarming arts center/ multi-purpose
center
• Issues/concerns outside of ;the Lionshead study area
,
Please refer to fhe April 14 Staff and consultanf inemorandum to PEC distributed
r to Council on Aprif 11 and attached hereto for your convenience for a description
of the specifics far each "serrsitive" item.
3
h
i
STAGE TfiREE VUHERE DO WE GO FROM HERE? Stage Three vf trre five~stage„ °
F - -redevelapment,master.,planning.proces;,s:involues,anal;ys.is of the "Wlsh„li~t°._.
suggestions submitted in Stage Two and how they might "fit" in Lionshead under
' current zoning as well as under two alternative program concepts to be prepared by the
~ consultant. Stage Three wouid conclude with the Council selecting a preferred
alternative frorrr the conceptual programs presented or creating a preferred program
from various elements presented.
~ Following Council selection or creation of a preferred alternative program, Stage Four
wilf be the development and adoption of the master plan itself, with its specific policy
recommendafions to achieve the preferred program, foiiowed by drafting and adoption
of design guidelines for Lionshead and any other code modifications that may be
required to implement the master plan policies in Stage Five.
HOW WILL STAGE THREE WORK? Stage Three involves three types of analysis,
several decisions by Council, and LOTS of involvement by the community. The three
types of analysis include:
1. Physical feasibility and qualitative analysis of the Wish List items,
2. Market/financial feasibility of the Wish List items, and
3. Identification and Council designation of public view corridors, if any.
The three analyses will proceed on paraNel tracks, essentially simultaneously. The •
results of the three types of analysis will determine the "constraints" and allow the
consultant to proceed to design two alternative program concepts (with possible
additional subarea alternatives) for presentation to the community and, ultimately,
selection of a preferred program by Council.
1. Ph,.ysical feasibility analysis involves determining whether the "Wish List"
items physically fit in Lionshead. It is followed by qualitative analysis to gauge the
impact of the ideas on the poliCy objectives and the urban design principles. Four
types of community involvement are proposed for this stage:
I r (a) A design charette using local design professionals (Saturday, June 14);
(b) A week-lang Open Hause to solicit public input re: the results of the
I desi9n charette (SundaY, June 15 throu9h SundaY, June 22 - Town
Council Chambers);
' (c) A'summer-long display (possibly traveling) of work in progress; and
(d) Ri-weskly updates to Council.
" 4 •
I
.
~
2. Market/financial feasibility anal es will be undertaken by expert
consultants for five areas of wish list submittals;
(a) Hotel with conference center (also known as "hospitality"),
(b) Retail,
(c) Performing arts center,
(d) Community center, and
(e) Additional ice rink
in order to determine whether the Vail "market area" can support such a use and, if so,
what scope of use.
Consistent with the original commitment to collaboration and cost sharing, Vail Resorts
Development Company will cantract with appropriate cansu4tants (with TOV input) for
the haspitality and retail feasibility analyses, the Vail Recreation District (VRD) will
contract (with TOV input) for the ice rink market feasibility study, and the Town of Vail
will contract with such consultants as may be necessary to update feasibility studies
previously undertaken for a performing arts center and a community center. In
addition, the TOV wil4 retain a consultant or consultants as necessary to coniirm the
conclusions contained in the hospitality, retail and additional ice surface feasibility ,
studies.
~ Funds for the TOV's responsibilities were included in the original budget approved for
this project. Afl information derived will be shared and subject to public review except
for proprietary information, consistent with Lionshead Process Ground Rule number
four (please refer to Exhibit B) and will be presented to Council for information as soon
as available.
3. The proposed pubtic view corridors designation process would include:
(a) Canvassing for al1 possibifities (already completed by consuttant and staff
as part of Stage One.);
(b) Staff and consultant preparation and presentation of a proposed
• methodology and criteria for designation (to PEC on May 19 and Town
Councii on May 20);
(c) Staff and consultant application of the approved methodology and criteria
to narrow the alternatives;
(d) Cansultant-quided pubfic walking tours to review alternatives and
possible additions (June 3 and 8);
5
~
° (e) Sel#=guided wa(king touts(June 4 through 15); .
(f) Solicitation of public preferences, using photographs and.maps (June 16);
(g) Staff/consultant recommendation to PEC (June 23);
(h) PEC recommendation to Council (June 24); and
'
I (I) Council designation of public view corridors in Lionshead, if any (July 1).
' The designated public view corridors would become "givens" critical design
constraints in the process of drafting the alternative program concepts. Formal
adoption of code provisions protecting the designated view corridors would occur in
conjunction with other code modifications, if any, in Stage Five.
DEVELOPMENT OF ALTERNATIVE PROGRAM CONCEPTS: Once the physical and
market/financial constraints are known and the critical design constraints posed by the
designated public view corridors are known, Design Workshop will prepare a program
concept using existing zoning and two alternative master plan program concepts
depicting opt+ons for major development/redevelopment, possibly with additional
. options for specific subareas. Starting in August, two public workshops will be held,
followed by presentation to the PEC (probably in joint worksession with the DRB) and
then to Council. Council will be asked to select a preferred master pian program or to •
create a preferred program from the elements presented. A proposed schedule for
Stage Four, "Development and Adoption of the Master Plan", will be presented to
Council for approval at that time, as well.
ACTION REQUESTED OF COUNCIL: Two actions are requested of Council at this
time.
1. Approve or modify the list of "Wish List" items to be analyzed in Stage
Three, and ~ 2. APProve the proPosed Sta9e Three Arocess and schedute.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
1. APPROVE the Wish List as submitted, without deletion or modification. This
would allaw maximum flexibility in the Stage Three analysis and provide the most
information for Council's uss in selecting a preferred program alternative at the
i conGlusian pf Stage Three.
2. APPROVE the propASed Stage Three process and schedule.
- 6 ~
EXHIBIT-A
~ LIQNSHEAQ REDEVELOPMENT MASTER PLAN
TIME LINE OF ACTIONS TO DATE
June 17, 1996 Vail Associated Real Estate Group (VAREG) presented proposal to
I Council to undertake comprehensive analysis and planning for future of
Lionshead and Design Workshop, Inc. presented slide presentation on
urban design principles
Summer and fnterdepartmental staff and Chris Cares of RRC, Inc. drafted, then tested
and early Fall 1996 revised, Problem/Opportunity Statement, Lionshead Policy Objectives and
process groundrules based upon input from approximately 53 focus group
participants. Staff also worked with Design Workshop, Inc. to prepare a
work program and public involvement program
November 4, 1996 Town Council approved the Problem/ Opportunity Statement, Lionshead
Redevelopment Policy Objectives, Process Groundrules, Project Work
Program, Schedule and Budget, a public involvement plan, the hiring of
master planning consultant Design Workshop, Inc., and project cost-
sharing arrangement with VAREG
Jan/Feb. 1997 Stage One "Data Gathering and Site Analysis"
(Identification of Opportunities and Constraints)
- (See Exhibit D for details on the public involvement)
. March 4, 1997 Consultant and staff presentation to Council re: status of Stage 1 data
gathering and introduction of Stage 2"Wish LisY' process
March/April Stage Two "Program Development" ("Wish LisY' Submittals)
(See Exhibit D for details on the public involvement)
April 11, 1997 Raw "wish list" submittals and consultant memo distributed to PEC, DRB
and Town Council in packets
April 14, 1997 Consultant and staff presentation to PEC and DRB re: results of Stage 2
"Wish LisY" submittals and preference process, including identification of
20 "sensitive: areas"
May 6, 1997 Consultant and staff presentatian to Council re: results of Stage 2"Wish
r List" submittal and preference process, including identification of 20
"sensitive areas", and proposed Stage Three process and schedule
• ` 7
EX'HIBIT B "
LIQNSHEAD.REDE1/ELOQ.(UaFNT MASTER PLAN
~ . _
Problem/Opportunity Statement: Lionshead lacks the charm, character, appeal and vibrancy
expected of a world-class resort. It lacks a sense of arrival and sense of place. Pedestrian flow through the
mall can be confusing and disconnected. The architecture lacks a unique identity or reference to Vail's
historical antecedents or its alpine environment. Many of the buildings are physically aging and functionally
under-utilized, resulting in negative impacts to property values, private profits, and public revenues.
Potential hospitality, retail and recreational uses, and community amenities are unmet or unrealized. It
• would be short-sighted to ignore these conditions and do nothing. The opportunity exists for the public and
private sectors to act collaboratively to renew and revitalize this important component of our community.
Lionshead Redevelopment Policy Objectives:
OBJECTIVE 1. RENEWAL AND REDEVELOPMENT
Lionshead can and should be renewed and redeveloped to become a warmer, more vibrant
environment for guests and residents. Lionshead needs an appealing and coherent identity, a
sense of place, a personality, a purpose, and an improved aesthetic character.
OBJECTIVE 2. VITALITY AND AMENITIES
We must seize the opportunity to enhance guest experience and cornmunity interaction through
expanded and additional activities and amenities such as performing arts venues, conference
facilities, ice rinks, streetscape, parks and other recreational improvements.
OBJECTIVE 3. STRONGER ECONOMIC BASE
THROUGH INCREASED "LIVE BEDS"
In order to enhance the vitality and viability of Vail, renewal and redevelopment in Lionshead must
promote improved occupancy rates (i.e., "live beds" or "warm pillows") and the creation of •
additional bed base through new lodging products.
OBJECTIVE 4. IMPROVED ACCESS AND CIRCULATION
The flow of pedestrian, vehicular, bicycle and rnass transit traffic must be improved within and
through Lionshead.
OBJECTIVE 5. IMPROVED INFRASTRUCTURE
The infrastructure of Lionshead, including streets, walkways, transportation systems, parking,
utilities, loading and delivery systems, snow removal and storage, and other public and private
services must be upgraded to meet the capacities and service standards required to support
redevelopment and revitalizatio'n 9fforts and to meet the expectations of our guests and residents.
AsJECTiVE 6. CREATIVE FINANCIlVG FOR ENHANCED
PRIVATE PROFITS AfVD PUBI.IG REVENUES
Redevalapment in Lionshead must be undertaken in a financially creative, but feasible, manner so
that adequate capital may be raised from a!I possible sources to fund desired private and public
improvements.
8
•
° Process Ground Rules: The Town of Vai1 is committed to open, honest and fair processes tha# create - ,
S informed judgment and better decision-making. In order to clarify roles and expectations and ensure that
the Lionshead Master Planning Process is undertaken and completed in a responsible way, the following
ground rules will apply to the master planning process and will be included in all documents and discussed
in all meetings regarding Lionshead Master Planning:
1 The Master Plan to be developed for all public and private lands in Lionshead will serve as
.
the policy framework for all future decision-making on specific development and
redevelopment proposals in Lionshead. The Master Plan will be based on the Lionshead
Policy Objectives adopted by the Town Council to reflect the community's interests.
2. The Master Plan area will be bounded on the north by I-70, on the east by Middle Creek
(west of the Vail Valley Medical Center), on the south by the Town of Vail boundary (south
of Forest Road, and not including single-family lots and on the west by Red Sandstone
Creek (east of the Glen Lyon Office Building).
3. The Town of Vail (TOV) will work collaboratively with Vail Associates (VA) on the master
planning process for Lionshead and will involve all other interested citizens and property
owners in the master planning process. The master plan ultimately recommended may or
may not reflect development approaches currentiy being explored by VA.
4. Proprietary information of any private property owner or developer will remain private and
confidential unless it becomes part of a public record.
5. There will be no net loss to the Vail community of either locals' housing or parking spaces
(public and private) now existing in Lionshead.
~ 6. Collaborative public/private redevelopment and financing ventures, including urban
renewal authorities and downtown development authorities, will be considered.
7. The intent of redevelopment includes minimizing short-term construction-related impacts
of redevelopment on existing businesses and residents and increased cooperation
between the public and private sectors.
8. The Town Council will have final decision-making authority on the Master Plan,
adoption of implementing actions, use of public lands, public improvements, and public
financing mechanisms. The Town Council or its authorized boards (e.g., PEC and DRB)
will make final decisions on subsequent site-specific development proposals consistent
with the Master Plan..
9
EXFiI'BIT C
r LIONSHEAD REDEVELOPMENT MASTER PLAN ~
' URBAN DESIGN PRiNCtPLES
1. Connect Lionshead physically and visually to the mountain tandscape.
I
2. Provide physical and emotional comfort for the users of Lionshead.
3. Provide a sense of arrival to Lionshead.
4. Create landmarks and turning points in Lionshead.
5. Provide gates and portals to define sequential spaces and places.
6. Define appropriate land uses adjacent to outdoor spaces.
~
i
r
.
W ~
A'10
t .
' . ' EXHIBIT D LIONSHEAD REDEVELOPMENT MASTER PLAN
PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT TO DATE
' May 6, 1997
STAGE ONE "identification of Ooportunities and Constraints":
? Newsletter (January 1997)
? Internet web site ? Phone Hotline
? Mailing list (618 by end of Stage 1, 2-17-97) (625 + 132 labels from destination
Resorts)
? 12 futl page newspaper advertisements in The Vail Daily (Jan. & Feb.), Vail Trail
and Vail Valley Times
? Bus/Walking Tours Sunday, Jan. 19 (28 attended) and Tuesday, Jan. 21 (22
attended)
? Self-guided Walking Tour/ Survey 7 boxes at TOV offices, Library and other
locations in LH (surveys received)
? Channel 5 telecasts of Jan. 21 bus/walking tour, including presentation on urban
design principles
? Public forums Sunday, Feb. 16 (19 attended) and Tuesday, Feb. 18 (20
. attended) ,
? Mailing of staff inemo to 40 public forum attendees March 1 '
• ? Consultant and staff presentation to Council March 4 ? Best and Worst of Lionshead entries - 19 received
? Focus Group Members - 53 ~
STAGE TWO "Brainstorm Wish List":
? Newsletter (March 1997)
? Internet web site
? Phone hotline
? Mailing list (825 by end of Stage 2, 3-1-97)
? 4 full page newspaper advertisements in The Vail Daily, Vai! Trail and Vail
Valley Times
? Brainstorming Workshops Sunday, Mar. 16 (10 attended) and Tuesday, Mar.
r 18 (12 attended)
? Channel 5 telecasts of March 18 public workshop
? Open House review of wish list submittals/ preference sharing Wednesday,
April 2 (57 attended)
? 5 full-page newspaper preference forms in The Vail Daily, Vail Trail and Vail
Valley Times
~ ivlailing Af Wish Rist compilation and cQnsultant memo to 90 people-- April 11
? CQnsuptant and staff presentation to PEC and pRB Monday, April 14
b. Consultant and staff presentation to Council Tuesday, May 6
R Wish 1_ist Respanses - 173
. f:\everyon9lsusan\5Q697cou.wpd
t
A,
11
~ Zo~N~G . . . .
. .
arad approved by the Community Development ' Depart-
m.ent. ' .
E. Ulpon receiving the necessary approvals pursuant to this
CRiapter, the applicant sha11 'proceed with the securing of a bimilding permit prior to beginning the construction of .
aelditional GRFA. .
F. Amy decisions of the Community Development Depart- -
_ ment staff pursuant to this Chapter may be appealed by
any applicant in accordance with the provisions of Section
_-18.66.030 of the Vail Municipal Code. (Ord. 6(1995) § 4:
. CXcd. 4(1985) § 1) ' . 18.71.050 Eligibility:
In addition to all other criteria set forth in this Chapter,
any dwellin j unit shall be eli~ible for additional GRFA pursu-
• ant to this Section that is in existence as of November 30, 1995 or a crnrnpleted Design Review Board application 'for the origi-
nal construction of a dwelling has been accepted by the Com-
munity Development Department by November 30, 1995. (Ord.
.6(1995) § 5: Ord. 36(1988) § 5)
Chapter 18.73
. «
VZEW C0RRID ORS
'Sections: 18.73.010' Purpose .
18.73_020 Definitions
18.73_030 Limitations On Construction
18.73_040 Adoption Of View Corridors ' 18.73.050 Amendments. . .
18.73_060 ' Encroachments To Existing View Corridors
18.73.070 Nonconforming Sfructures • . . w 18.73.080 Height Limitations
18.73_090 Fees _
, y .
(vaii 11-9:5) 498-22 . ;
VIEW CORRIDORS ~
. 1$.73.010 Purpose: .
The Town believes that preserving certain vistas is in the
interest of the Town's residents and guests. Specifcally, the
Town believes that:
A. . The protection and perpetuation of_ certain mountain views
and other significant views from various pedestrian public
ways. within the Town wi11: foster civic pride and is in the
public intez-est of the Town;
B. It 'is desirable to designate, preserve and perpetuate cer-
tain views for the enjoyment and environmental enrich-
ment for the residents and guests of the Town;
C. The preservation of such views will strengthen and pre- .
~ • serve the Town's unique environmental heritage and
. attributes; .
~
, . ~ -y
. ,,r~ . .
L
w •
• ~ .
•'\1•• 49$-22a • (vail i i-95)
;
VIEW CORRIDORS
' D. The reservadon of such view will
p s enhance the aesthetic and
economic vitaliry and values of the town;
E. The preservation of such views is intended to promote design
which is compatible with the surrounding natural and built
environment, and is intended, to provide for natural light to
buildings and in public spaces in the vicinity of the view
corridors;
F. The preservation of such views wi.ll include cer[ain focal points
such as the C'lock Tower and Rucksack Tower, which serve as
pnominent landmarks within Vail Village and contribute'to the
community's unique sense of place.
(Ord. 18(1992) § 1 (part).)
18.73.020 Definitions.
For the purposes of this chapter, the following terms shall be
defined as shown below:
~ A. "Structure" means anything permanently constructed or erected
with a fixed location including, but not limited to, new '
. buildings, building expansions, decks, mechanical equipment, ~
vents, ducts, satellite dishes, fences, stop lights, light poles, ~
I
signs, utility poles, sky lights or any similax object.
B, "View point origination" means the svrvey pin, called out as ihe
instrument in each legal description def ning a view corridor ~
boundary, which is the basis for each view corridor. '
(Ord. 18(1992)~ ,1 (part)•)
18.73:030 Limitations on constructions.
No part of a structure shall be permitted to encroach into any
view corridor set fonh in this ordinance unless an encroachment is
approved in accordance with Section 18,73.060 of this chapter.
(Ord. 18(1992) § 1 (part).)
18.73.040 Adoption of view corridors.
Photographs on record with the community development
~.y department and the following legal descriptions are hereby
approved and adopted as official view corridors protecting views
. 498-23
(Vail 9-29-92)
' ZONJNG . ~
, within the town. The photographs taken represent the boundaries
, defined by the legal descriptions. The camera used to take the
' photographs was held 5.4 feet above the instrument, which is
~ approximate eye Ievel for most adults. A 35 millimeter camera was
used for each photograph; however, once developed, some
photographs were cropped or enlarged to improve the graphic
representation of each view corridor. .
A. View Point #1. A view from the south side of the Vail
Transportation Center from the main pedestrian stairway
Iooking toward the Clock Tower, 232 Bridge Street, the
Rucksack Tower, 280 Bridge Street, and beyond to the ski
slopes;
Purpose - To protect the views of Vail Mountain, views of Vail Village and to maintain the prominence and views of the Clock
Tower and Rucksack Tower as seen firom the central staircase of the
Transportation Center.
Instrurrtent - View Point #1 - a 2" diameter brass disc, marked ~
V.P. 1 on stair landing between Levels 2 and 3 of Vail Village
Parking stxucture.
Backsight - CW 1/16 comer of Section 8.
Height of Survey Transit Above View Point #1 - 5.4 feet.
Horizontal Zenith
AnQle Angle Foresight Point on Phow as of 2n/92
. - .
348°S1'10" 77°21'30" A =•intersecdon of the horizon with a ver-
[ical` line defined by the southwest corner
r of the sixth floor deck enclosure on the
Ivgountain Haus, 292 E. Meadow Drive 348°30'10" , 87°11'30" Bl - uppermost railing of the southwest I
corner of the balcony on the fourth floor of
the Mountain Haus, 292 E. Meadow Drive
. ~
355°23'00" 87°37'40" B2 - east end o£ ihe Red Lion roof ridge, ~
304 Bridge Street
. 498-24 ,
(Vail 9-29-92) ~
- vrEw eoxRmoRs
Horizpntal Zenith, • n 1 Angle . F resight Point on Photo as of 2/7/ 2
357°39'04" 87°40'43" 133 - intersection of the Red Lion roof ridge
, with the southeast corner of the 12ucksack
Tawer, 280 Bridge Street
357°57'S9" 88°27'22" 134 - northeast corner of the base of the
Rucksack Tower, 280 Bridge Stree[
004°OS'19" 89°I6'02" .C1 - intersection of the Gallery Building,
225 Gore Creek Drive, with the northeast
corner of the Clock Tower; immediately
• below the balcony
. 004°39'58" 89°16'33" C2 - western end of fascia board on Gallery
B,uilding
~ 004°47'18" 89041'44" ~
C3 - intersection of the sloping roof of the
. Gallery Build.ing with the ridge line of the ~
Clock Tower Building, which extends west
006°59'll" 89°42'12" I7 - iniersection of the Clock Tower '
Building roof and the northwest corner of '
the Clock Tower '
012°2S'56" 87°39`O1" E- peak of the Plaza Lodge vent chase,
~ 232 Bridge Street
r . . .
027°OS'S4" 87°2$43" F- intersection of the northside. of roof,
Gasthof Gramshammer Building,231 East
Coxe Creek Drive, with the east side of
two large trees
,
. 031°53'27" 76°26'35" C- intersection of the horizonline on Vail Mountain with the verticai line defined by
the top of the western, very large pine tree
wmt of Point F
~
.
`498-25
' , (Vail 9-29•92) •
i .
ZONING . •
B. View Point #2. A view from upper Bridge Street looking. .
toward the ski slopes between 228 Bridge Street, the Golden
Peak Building, and 311 Bridge Street, the Hill Build.ing;
.
' Purpose - To protect views of the ski runs and ski base area as ,
seen from upper Bridge Street.
~ Ynstrument - View Point #2 - a#6 rebar with a 2 1/2" diameter
aluminum cap marked V.P. 2(PLS 16827) set in an aluminum monument box in Bridge Stre4t in front of the Red Lion Building,
304 Bridge Street. .
Backsight - View Point #4 - a#6 rebar with a 2 1/2" diameter
aluminum cap marked V.P. 4(PLS 16827) set in an aluminum
. monument box, in the brick pavers, approximately 8 feet from the
entrance to Frivolous Sal's, located near the northeast comer of One
Vail Place Building, 244 Wali Street.
Height of Survey Transit Above View Point #2 - 5.4 feet.
Horizontal Zenith ~
n~ g1e n 1.~ Foresight Point on Photo as of 11115191
2$9°25'48" 74°28'18" A- northwest corner of third floor balcony
roof of Golden Peak Building
290°58'll" 89°58'00" B- PK nail in top of the 24 inch tall
. retaining wall on west side of Golden Peak ,
. House, 1 foot east from west edge of
planter wall, and 10 feet west from the
west'face of the building
r
300032'46" 92°OS'34" C1 - top of south end af ski lockers, which ,
are on railing
' 301°3524" 83°3l.'08" C2 - southeast corner of top de,ck ra.il on
Hill B uilding . . . , ~
303032'24" . 73°38'55" D- southeast corner of brick chimney on Hill Building w C Reserved.
. ,
' 498-26 .
(Vail 9-29-92) •
,
VIEW CORRIDORS
D. View Point #4. A view from the northeast comer of 244 Wall Street, the One Vail Place Building, looking over the roofs of
304 Bridge Street, the Red Lion Building, and 356 Hanson
Ranch Road, the Christiania Lodge, toward the Gore Range.
Purpose - To pmtect views of the Gore Range as seen from the
alley between Founders Plaza and Seibert Circle.
rnstrumenf - View Point #4 - a#6 rebar with a 2 1/2" diameter
aluminum cap marked V.P. 4(PLS 16827) set in an atuminum
monument box, in the brick pavers; approximately 8 feet from the
entrance to Frivolous Sal's, located in the northeast comer of the
One Vail Place Building, 244 Wall Street.
. Backsight - View Point #2 - a#6 rebar with a 2 1/2" diameter
aluminum cap marked V.P. 2(PLS 16$27) set in an alurninum
monument box in Bridge Street in front of the Red Lion Building.
Height of Survey Transit Above VieNv Point #4 - 5.4 feec.
i Horizontal Zenith
nA gle n 1 Foresight PQint on Photo as qf 11115191
,
. ~
343°5b'53" 62024'10" A- south.fascia board of thixd floor roof of i
Plaza Lodge Building, 281 - 293 Bridge i
Street i
348037`05" ?3°05'43" B- intersection of upper and second floor
roof lines of Plaza Lodge Building
. :
352°55'25" 73°34'26" C- south end of peak of second floor gable
r of Piaza Lodge Building
35203I'05" ?9°2444" D- eastern edge of second floor gable roof
of Plaza Lodge Building
352°13'16" 79°24'S5" E- intersection of second itoor roof fascia
. and southeast corner of Plaza Ladge
Building
~•w . 498-27 (Vsil 9-29-92)
ZONTNG ' •
Horizontal Zenith An l~,e An le Foresight Point on Phota as of 11 /15/91
352°I3'14" 84°44'25" - F- intersection of southeast corner of
. building and cop edge of fust floor fascia of . . Plaza Lodge Building .
354°30'20" .$6°13'30" G- top of southeasterly corner af first
floor fascia of Plaza Lodge Building
354°47'22" . 86°07'5$ H- intersection of south edge of Red Lion .
chimney and upper Red Lion roof line
358°21'46" 85°17'48" I- peak of upper Red Lion roof line
3590043 1 85°30'36" 7- intersection of upper Red Lion roof line .
and northerly roof Iine of the Christ'iania
000°16'S5" 84036'56" K- peak of northerly roof line of the .
Chris tiania
001°59'47" 84°36'S6" L- intersection of noztherly roof peak and .
southerly roof line of the Christiania -
003°OS'44" 83°3242" M- northwesterly corner of second floor
balcony on Hill Building
.
0060233 1 83°33'S2" N- intersection of top of second flaor bal-
. cony rail and brick wall on Hi11 Building
005°32'14" 67°54'S8" O- northwest corner of top of fascia on
third floor roof of Hill Building '
E. View Point #5. A view of the Gore Range from Hanson Ranch .
Road just east of the Mill Creek Bridge and south of 302 Gore
Creek Drive, the Mill Cr+eek Court Building;
Purpose - To protect views of the Gore Range as seen from •
~ Hanson Ranch Road and East Gore Creek Drive. . , .
498-28 .
(Vail 9-29-92)
VIEW CORRIDORS
.
Instrument - View Point #5 - a#6 rebar with 2 1/2" diameter
aluminum cap marked V.P. S(PLS 16827) set in an aluminum
mvnument box in Hanson Ranch Road in front of the Mill Creek
Caurt Building. Backsight -#4 rebar with aluminum cap (LS 2568) in iron
"Landmark" monument box marking centerline of Hanson Ranch
Raad - box is just west of Mill Creek in front of the Cyrano's
Building at 29$ Hanson Ranch Road.
Height of Survey Transit Above View Point #5 - 5.4 feet.
Horizontal Zenith .
n~l gle n 1 Foresight Point on Photo as of 11 /15/91
199003'06" 81°2349" A- intersection of southerly utility pole
with ridge line
2(}~006'43" 85°10'40" 131 - intersection of northerly extension of
. Garden of the Gods Building, roofline with
hillside ridge line
?06°00'02" 85°10'40" B2 - northern end of roofline of the Garden
of the Gods Building, 365 Vail Valley
Drive
208012'53" 8501940" C1 - intersection of southerly extension of
the Garden of the Gods building roofline
and the Villa Valhalla roofline, 360
'Hanson R.anch Road
~
- 208°33'36" 84°SS'50" C2 - northwest corner of the Villa Valhalla
a[ roof fascia
210041'41 84°O1'47" 'D - intersection of top of the Villa
Valhalla roof fascia and the upward exten-
, sion of the north edge of the trim on the
window column
210°4141" 82001'51" E- the upward extension of che north edge . of the trim on the window column on the
, Villa Valhalla to a point above the horizon
,
. . 498-29 . (VaiI9-29-92) .
ZONIING .
. ~
F. View Point #6. A view looking east to the Gore Range from
; Gore Creek Drive between retail shops at 174 Gore Creek
Drive, the Lodge at Vai1, and 193,Gore Creek drive, the Gore
' Creek Plaza Building pnojecting east to the Gore Range. .
Purpose - To protect views of the Gore Range as seen from the
Gore Creek Drive Area.
Instrument - View Point #6 - a#6 rebar with 2 1/2" diameter
aluminum cap marked V.P. 6(PLS 16827) set in an aluminum
monument box in Gore Creek Drive in front of the Gore Creek
Plaza Building.
Backsight - a#6 rebar with a 2 1/2" diameter aluminum cap
marked V.P. 6 B.S. (PLS 16827) set in an aluminum monument
box in Gore Creek Drive near the southwest comer of Pepi's deck.
Height of Survey Transit Above View Point #6 - 5.4 feet.
Horizontal Zenith
Angle Ang1~,-_ ECZre,g_ight Point on Photo as of 11115191,
81°02'17" A- int on horizon left of the chimne . •
356 08 35 po y
on Gasthof Gramshammer roof, 231 East
Gore Creek Drive
356°55'02" 83°02'06" B- intersection of southeast edge of chim-
ney and Gasthof Gramshammer's roofline
000°31'36" 82°54'27" ' C'=-~,southern end of gable on Gasthof
. Gramshammer's roof
r 001°48'10" 85°17'34" Dl - intersection of norcherly extension of
Gorsuch Build.ing's roof line and Gasthof
Gramshammer's roof, 231 East Gore Creek , Drive .
003°14'42" `85°I7'40" D2 - north end of Gorsuch Building's roof
0070 5603" 85°11'32" D3 - south end of Gorsuch Building's roof '
. 498-30 (Vail 9-29-92)
. - VIEW CORRIDORS
a ~
Horizontal Zenith Angle Angle Foresi.ght Point on Photo as of 11/15/91
013°30'31" 85°11'32" E- intersection of southerly extension of
Gorsuch Building's roof line and brick
pillar on Lazier Arcade Building/Wall
Street Building, 225 Wall Street
013°3$'14" 78°48'35" F- intersection of face of stucco and eve
line on Lazier Arcade Build.ing/Wall Street
Build.ing
012°S5'17" 78014'5 1" G- top of fascia on northeast corner of
roof on Lazier Arcade Building/'?all 5treet
Building
014°44'21" 73°13'39" H- top of roof on Lazier Arcade Build-
• ing/Wall Street Build.ing
(Ord. 18(1992) § 1 (part)•)
18.73.050 Amendments.
An amendment of the regulations of this chapter, including a
request to add a new view corridor, delete an existing view
corridor, or amend the boundary of an existing view corridor, may
be initiated by the town council on its own motion, by the planning
and environmehCal commission on its own motion, or by
application of any z~sident or progerty owner in the town, or by the
• director of the community development department or his/her
r designee. A. Application informarion for amendments. An application for the
. amendment of the provisions of this chapter including the
addition of a new view corridor, the deletion of an existing .
view corridor or an amendment to the boundary of an existing
' view'comdox`shall- tie'filed- with the' community development
. deparnnent on a form to be prescribed by the director of the
community development department. The application shall
. include the following informadon: .
1, A summary or description of the progosed amendment. h
. 498-31
(Vxi19-29-92)
~G
i
20NING . •
~ 2. A. photograph of the proposed view to be protected if the
. application is to add a new view corridor or amend the
baundary of an existing view corridor. The point used as
the view point origination and the height of the camera
. above existing grade or pavement at the time the .
photograph was taken shall be identified. The photograph
orphotographs shall be marked to show the proposed view
' carridor boundary or shall be marked to show the proposed
improvements in relation to existing improvements and
ex.isting view corridor boundaries.
3. Tbe community development department may require
models, overlays, sketches, or other submittal requirements
to show: .
(a) For a new view corridor, the potential impact the new
view corridor could have on the development potentiat
. of sunrounding properties; or
(b) For a modification to a view corridor boundary, the
. potential impact the change would have upon the •
protected view corri.dor.
4. Names and addresses of the property owners whose
de.velopment potential, as set forth in Chapter 18 of the
Town of Vail Municipal Code on the date the application is
received by the commwuty development department, may
be increased or decreased by the proposed view corridor or
by the proposed modification to the existing view corridor.
5. If the application.is-to-add a new view corridor or amend
thm boundary of an existing view corridor, the applicant
slall submit a legal descriprion of the new view corridor or
the amended boundary prepared in the same format as those
se-t forth in Section 18.13.040 of this chapter and any other
survey information deemed necessary by the community
de-velopment department thirty days prior to the final PEC
pun lic hearing.
6. An application for an amendment may require review by ~
comsultants other than town- staff. Should a determination '
" be: made by the town staff that an outside consultant is
nwded to review an amendment application, the community - dewelopment department shall obtain the approval of the .
to.xwn council for the hiring of such a consultant. Upon '
498-32 (Vail 9-29-92))
,
. .
VTEW CORRIDORS
approval of the town council to hire an outside consultant,
. ihe community development department shall estimate the
amount of money necessary to pay the outside consultant,
and this amount shall be forwarded to the town by the ap- plicant at the time the amendment applicarion is submitted to
the community development department. Upon completion
of the review of the application by the consultant, any of
the funds forwarded by the applicant for payment of the
. consultant which have not been paid to the consultant, shall
be retumed to the applicant. Expenses incurred by the town in excess of the amount forwarded by the applicant shall be
paid to the town by the applicant within thirty days of
nobfication by the town.
B. Notice and hearing procedure.
1. Upon the filing of an application for an amendment to this
chapter, or upon initiation of an amendment by the town
council, plaruling and environmental commission, or com-
• munity development ciirector, the community development
director or his designee shall set a date for a public hearing
before the plannulg and environmental commission. Subse-
quent to the hearing, the planning and environmental com-
mission shall make a recommendation for approval or
denial to the town council. E1fter considering the planning
. and environmenFal commission's recommendation, the
town council shall make a final determination on the
amendment at a public hearing by ordinance.
2. Notice for, the public hearing before the planning and
envinonmental commission shall be given to the property
' owners designated in Section 18.73.050 A,4 or Section
18.73.060 A,2 in accordance with Section 18.66.080 of
this code and the hearing shall be conducted in confomlity
wi[h Section 18.66.090 of this code. .
C. Criteria for amendments. The town council shall only approve
ti an amendment to this chapter adding a new view conridor,
deleting an existing view corridor, or amending the boundary
of an existing view corridor if the amendment complies with the
policies and goals of the applicable elements of the Vail Land
498-33
. (Vai19-29-92) .
. . .
ZONING •
,
~ .
. Use Plan, town policies, and urban design guide plans and
other adopted master plans, and meets all of the following criteria:
I.* If the request is to add a new view corridor or to amend the
boundary of an existing view corridor in such a way which expands an existing view corridor:
(a) That the proposed view corridor or the boundary
amendment pmtects and perpetuates a view or views
. from public pedestrian areas, public ways, or public
~ spaces within the town which foster civic pride and are
. in the public interest for the Town of Vail;
. (b) That the proposed view corridor or boundary
amendment protects and enhances the town's attraction
ta residents, guests and property owners;
(c) That the proposed view corridor or boundary amend-
ment protects a view which is commonly recognize,d
and has inherent qualities w'ch make it more valuable
to the town than other more common views. i
2. Tf the amendment is to amend the boundary of an existing
view corridor in such a way which reduces the existing
view corridor or is to repeal an exisring view corridor: . (a) That the boundary amendment or repeal will not reduce
or eliminate any view or views from public pedestrian
areas, publie ways, or public spaces within the town
which foster civic pride and are in the public interest
for the Town•of Vail;
(b) That the boundary amendznent or repeal will not reduce
'the town's attraction to residents, guests, and property
owners nor be detrimental to the enjoyment of public
pedestrian areas, public ways, public spaces or public -
views.
(c) That the boundary"amendment or repeal will not
diminish the integrity or quality, nor compromise the
. original purpose of the existing view corridor.
' (Ord. -18(1992) § 1 (part).)
~
W ~
498-34 .
(Vai19-29•92) •
.
,
. vIEw coxxmoxs
~
' 18.73.060 Encroactlments into existing view corri-
. dors.
• An application for approval to encroach into an existing view
corridor may be initiated by the town council on its own motion, by
the planning and environmental commission on its own motion, or
by application of any resident or property owner in the town, or by
the directar of community development department or his/her
designee.
A. Application information for encmachments. .An application for
an encroachment shall be filed with the community devel-
opment department on a fonn to be prescribed by the director of
the comniunity development department. The application shall
include the following information:
1. A summary or description of the pmposed encroachment.
2. Names and addresses of property owners located within
` five hundred feet of the proposed encroachment.
• 3. Photographs of the existing view corridor. The photo-
graphs shall be marked with tape to identify the existing
view corridor boundaries, and shall show the proposed
encroachment. The photographs shall be taken from the
view point origination at the same height as identif ed in the ~
legal descriptions in Section 18.73.440. i
4. Tbe community development department may require ,
modeIs, overlays, sketches or other submittal requirements
to show how the proposed encroachment could impact the
protected view corridor.
5. An application for an encroachment may require review by
. cansultants other than town staff. Should a determination
be made by the town staff that an outside consultant is
nee,ded to review an encroachment application, the com-
munity development department shall obtain the approval of
th.e town council for the hiring of such a consultant. Upon .
approval of the town council to hire an outside consuttant,
the community development department shall estimate the
amount of money necessary to pay the outside consultant,
and this amount shall be forwarded to the town by the
applicant at the time the encroachment is submitted to the
cammunity development department. UPon comPIetion of
. the review of the application by the consult,ant, any of the
498-35
' (Vail 9-29-92)
ZONING . . ~
funds forwarded by the applicant for payment of the
cansultant which have not been paid to the consultant, shall
be retumed to the applicant. Expenses incurned by the town
in excess of the amount forwarded by the applicant shall be pa.id to the town by the applicant within thirty days of
' ; . notification by the town.
' B. Notice and hearing procedure. Notice and hearing on an appli-
cation for an encroachment into an existing view corridor shall
be in accordance with Section 18.73.050B of this chapter.
. C. Criteria for encroachment. No encroachment into an existing
view -corridor shall be permitted unless the applicant
demonstrates by clear and convincing evidence that the
encroachment meets all of the following criteria: I . That the literal enforcement of Section 18.73.030 would .
preclude a zeasonable development of a proposed structure
on the applicant's Iand.
2. That the development of the structure proposed by the applicant would not be such as to defeat the purposes of •
this chapter.
3_ That the development proposed by the applicant would not be detrimental to the enjoyment of public pedestrian areas,
public ways, public spaces, or public views.
4. That the development proposed by the applicant complies
with applicable elements of the Vail Land Use P1an, town palicies, urban design guide plans, and other adapted
master plans. .
5. That the proposed stxucture wi.ll not diminish ihe integrity
. or quality nor compromise the original purpose of the
preserved view. ,
(Ord. 18(1992) § 1 (part).)
18.73.070 Nonconforming structures. A. Any structure which presently encroaches into an existing view corridor which was lawfu.lly authorized by ordinances or regulations existing prior to the effective date of ihis ordinance
~ may continue. However, such eneroachments will be
~ encouraged to be removed as part of any remodeling or ~
re€onstcuction of the structure. In the case of certain focal .
, .
.
498-36 .
• (Vail 9-29-92)
~ • . VIEW CORRIDORS
points, such as the Clock Tower and Ruck'sack Tower, the
tawn recognizes their importance to the character of Vail Village .
arld to the quality of the urban design of Vail Village.
Notwithstanding their nonconforming status, the town does not
encourage their removal. . B. Structures lawfully established prior to the effective date of the
chapter codified in this chapter may be modified provided that
such modification does not cause the structure to encroach into
a view corridor to a greater extent in-any dimension or
. ~ configuration, specifically height, width ar mass, than the
existing structure. C.~ -Nonconforming structures may be maintained and repaired as
. necessary for the convenient, safe, or efCcient operation or use
provided that no such maintenance or repair shall cause the
structure to encroach into a view corridor to a greater extent in
any dimension or configuration, specifically height, width, or '
mass, than the structum encroached prior to such maintenance
• and repair. D. Restoration: Whenever a nonconforming struch.ire which does ~
. not confonn with the provisions of this chapter is destroyed by
fire or other calamity, by act of God, or by the public enemy, '
its use may be resumed or the stn.icture may be restored pro- '
vided the restoration is commenced within one year and dili-
gently pursued to completion. The structure after such restora-
tion shall not encrvach into a view corridor to a gitater extent in
any dimensidn or configuration, specifically height, width, or
mass, than the encroachment which existed prior to destruction.
(Ord. 18(1992) § 1 (part).)
18.73.080 Height limitation.
If the maximum height allawed in any zone district within the town differs from the height permitted by a view corridor, the more
restrictive height limitation shall apply. (Ord. 18(1992) § 1(part).)
18.73.090 Fees.
The town council shall by motion establish a view application
fee sufficient to cover the cost of town staff time and other expenses
498-37
. . (Vai1 9-29-92)
AP P R 0 Y:77 7~71v~`i ll ~ I997
• PLANNING AND ENVIRONMENTAL COMMISSION
May 19, 1997
Minutes
MEMBERS PRESENT: MEMBERS ABSENT: STAFF PRESENT:
Greg Moffet Diane Goiden Susan Connelly
Greg Amsden Mike Mollica
Galen Aasland Lauren Waterton
John Schofield George Ruther
Ann Bishop Dominic Maurieilo
Gene Uselton Judy Rodriguez
Public Hearing 2:00 p.m.
The meeting was called to order by Greg Moffet at 2:00 p.m.
Greg Moffet stated that all members were present, except Diane Golden.
1. A request for a conditional use permit to allow for the summer use (Camp Vail) of the
existing tent located at the Lionshead Ski School practice area, located at 520 Lionshead
Mall/ Tract D, Vail Lionshead 1 st filing.
• Applicant: Vail Recreation District / Vail Associates, Inc.
Planner: Lauren Waterton
Lauren Waterton gave an overview of the staff inemo.
Brian McCartney, from Vail Associates Mountain Operations, said he wanted to make sure there
were no misunderstandings regarding the Kid's Camp usage. He said the Kid's Camp was
committed to being over at Golden Peak, but the use of the Children's Center would be
inappropriate for the Kid's Camp this summer. He said from a mountain development point of
view, he was encouraging the camp to move, as there were safety issues with equipment
running around the Children's Center. He also said the parking lot would become an issue for
access with parents dropping off kids, as TOV buses were running an alternate route. He said
there were a series of conditions that didn't lend themselves to running a camp, but he wanted to
preserve the option to move.
John Schofield asked if Brian McCartney and David Corbin were in concurrence with the staff
recammendations.
Brian McCartney said, yes.
Gene Uselton had no comments.
Planning and Environmenta) Commission
• Mintites
May 19, 1997 1
' Greg Amsden asked when it wouid be known if the children would be moving to Golden Peak
and also if the tent would remain.
~ i
Mike Mollica said staff wouid iike the tent to come down, if the camp stays at Golden Peak.
Greg Amsden said he would like the tent to come down as a condition of approval.
Brian McCartney said if the Kid's Camp efects to remain at Golden Peak, VA would like to
preserve the option to keep the tent for the summer.
Greg Amsden said a specified use was needed for the tent, so it doesn't become a storage
iacility.
Brian McCartney said it could be written that it be used for kid's programs. He mentioned that in
' terrns of the Kid's Camp, there was no fee for usage, by Vail Associates, in Lionshead.
Galen Aasland said he agreed wiih the 1 year approval, as stated in the staff inemo. He was
concerned with a temporary tent meeting snow load requirements.
Ann Bishop said it was needed when the weather wasn't very good, but she encouraged skirting
the building and landscaping.
Brian McCartney said asphalt was going down for the redo of the bike path with landscaping to
extend from the Lions Square Lodge to the tent and from the ski school out to the street and
agreed that the whole area needed to be fixed up. He said it would be exclusively used for the
kids.
Greg Moffet had no comments. •
Ann Bishop made a motion for approval in accordance with the staff memo, to include the 4
conditions.
John Schofieid seconded the motion.
The motion passed by a vote of 6-0.
2. A request to establish a Special Development District #35, the Austria Haus, located at
242 East Meadow Drive/Part of Tract C, Vail Village 1st Filing.
Applicant: Sonnenalp Properties, inc. represented by Gordon Pierce
Pfanner: George Ruther
George Ruther gave an overview of the worksession and gave a summary of the changss.
He went over the discussion issues for the PEC and the applicant.
Greg Moffet suggested going over all the discussion issues and said that the PEC would then
address them collectively, as the PEC had all read the staff inemo.
Planning and Environmental Commission
Minutes •
May 19, 1997 2
• George Ruther said, whi{e genera(ly staff doesn't make recommendations at worksessions, a
recommendation was included in the staff inemo with conditions.
Greg Moffei asked if the appiicant had anything to add.
Gordon Pierce, representing the applicant said, regarding streetscape impravements, that the
applicant lost 20% of the project due to Council and so therefore, had to cut down the budget on
off-site improvements. He said that Council said that the City could afford to make the
improvements. Gordon said that they were still rebuilding a bus shelter, doing creekside
landscaping, as well as ihe heated sidewalks. He said paving the other side of the street was
unreasonable. He said that Slifer Square was sti14 on the landscape plan. He stated that the
Town wanted to build the walkway to the Bridge and could have our contractor design it and
prorate it for the Town. He suggested moving the pool, so as not to be so close to the
neighboring building. He said they planned to reshape the bank to drop the grade between the
buildings approximately 5'-7', making the view corridor better. He said they would iike to argue
for an encroachment of 8.5'. He stated that you can't stop people from walking in the setback.
He said the architectural improvement was significant, in terms of the shape.
George Ruther said the northwest corner appeared top heavy, from a preference standpoint, and
staff was throwing it out to the PEC as a discussion issue.
Gordon Pierce explained that the corner was now transparent and that Council said the
architecture should be up to the architect. He said they didn't have contours from which to
measure, regarding the submittal requirements. Gordon Pierce said the definition of grades were
based from the street to the creek. He said they needed an interpretat+on and consideration on
where the grade was.
• Jim Lamont, representing the EVHA, said he sent copies of the staff inemo to adjacent property ~
owners yesterday and so it was premature to have received any comments back. He said since I
pools are noise generators, the pool should be farther east. He said that the streamwalk dealt
with a reconfiguration of the stream and he said if there was anything the property owners wouid
take offense at, they would like to know ahead of time.
Gordon Pierce said the applicant was leaving a parking space for the travel agency, which they
presently enjoyed and they were curving the landscaping to give a better view corridor. He said that trucks could back out into the parking area and then go out facing forward into the street.
He said this would accommodate 99% of trucks they would need and that the frequency of
semi's would be so small, it was not worth it to accommodate them. i
George Ruther said that this was the 6th loading and delivery plan. He said that the northwest
corner of the property was only for small truck access and from a realistic standpoint, the '
applicant had addressed this issue.
Galen Aasland said he liked this proposal a lot better. He said since this was an SDD, the
applicant shauld come up with an appropriate level of streetscape and Slifer Square
improvements and he said that the staff recommendations were very good. He said that paving
the street was less important and he had no problem with the amount of encroachment or
moving the pool farther east. He said the north elevation architecture was an improvement, as it
was flat before. He said he was concerned about the snow coming off the building onta the
pedestrians. Galen then asked about 4 peop(e in a 450 sq. ft. employee housing unit.
~ Planning and Environmental Corumission
Minutes
May 19, 1997 3
I
~ George Ruther said the appiicant was proposing to deed restrict 12 Solar Vaii units ofi 600 sq ft.
' each and he told Galen that, according to the standards, 4 peopie would need a 2-bedroom unit. .
Galen Aasland mentioned as far as the next applicant that came through, that 450 sq. ft. was too
small. He said he agreed with the staff recommendations and again said he would like the
i streetscape improvements, since this was an SDD.
Ann Bishop agreed with what Gordon said, regarding the Town sharing the cost of concrete
~ pavers. She said it would be an improvement over what's there; especially the bus stop in Slifer
Square. She felt that the Town shouid share some of the costs associated with moving the
; trees. She said the Town of Vail encouraged decks and so she was in favor of the pool deck and
the granting of the 8.5' encroachment. She said that the turret was fine. She said she wanted to
; know if Johannes was still involved in the project.
Gordon Pierce said there was an agreement with Johannes Faessier, regarding purchasing the
commercia( space and that he didn't want to be involved in the public process. He said he felt
that he had been unfairly insulted, and people had forgotten what he had brought to the
community. Gordan said that otherwise, nothing had changed.
Ann Bishop said if we looked at the goals, those goals had a much better chance of being
attained, if Mr. Faessler was involved.
John Schofield disagreed with the staff, regarding increasing the distance between the planters.
He said he would encourage people to not walk wiih the wheeled vehicles. He felt that the
northeast corner of the Bridge should be a strong connection. He said he had no problem with
the pool deck and no problem putiing the streamwalk under the pool. He said he liked the
transparency under the Turret which encouraged the connection to the Bridge. He said he would
iike to see the (oading separated from the lobby area. • I
Gene Uselton asked if trash containers were going to be rolled out.
I
Gordon Pierce said, yes.
Gene Uselton was concerned about measuring the building height from contour lines. I
George Ruther said the height would be over the height allowed, if it was measured from the
contour lines, but Council said they would like the building "brought out of the hole," so it could be
up to 51'.
Gene Uselton asked Gordon what was being eliminated from Slifer Square.
Gordon Pierce explained the loss of improvements.
Gene Uselton asked if more improvements were made, would Council then give back another
unit in the SDD.
George Ruther explained that if the building changed an access, then the applicant would have
ta pay for improvements.
Planning and Environmental Cormnission
Minutes ~
May 19, 1997 4
• Gene Uselton suggested negotiating far more GRFA. He stated that the snow falling fram the
roof bothered him.
Gordon Pierce explained that the flat part of the roof went back about 8 feet and would catch
snow in the center of ihe building. He said there were lots of snow guards on the roof and that
they were taking all the precautions that were reasonable.
Greg Amsden said he was shocked that Council requested a reduction in the size of the building,
as it reduced bodies in the TOV. He felt that the Town should be liable for paying for Slifer
Square. He thought by maving the pool deck to the east, it would then be in the view of the
Covered Bridge and he didn't think people should see sunbathers as part of the view corridor.
He thought the pool should be more towards Viilage Center. He said to fill in the 2nd floor for
more GRFA, as architecturally speaking, it looked better.
Greg Moffet agreed with the asphalt on the street and thought it reasonable to expect a decrease
in the scope of 4ff-site improvements when decreasing the size of the building. As a practical
matter, he liked the 2-story atrium, but wanted a good flow of traffic. He said he liked the pool
deck where it was and was a great place for a beverage service aperation. He had no problem
with the 12 deed-restricted units. He agreed with Gordon on the loading, not to plan for an 18-
wheeler that might come through.
George Ruther said that according to the preliminary results from the community survey
regarding the streamwalk, that 80% of the respondents were in favor of a streamwalk from the
Covered Bridge.
Mike Mollica asked the PEC if they wanted 12 employees housed, or 12 employee housing units.
~ Greg Moffei wanted reasonable housing with reasonable square footage for 12 employees.
George Ruther stated, regarding #5, submittal information, that staff would know prior to .lune
9th, what the applicant was proposing.
Gordon Pierce said he was looking for a consensus.
3. A request to review and recommend to the Town Council the public view corridor
rnethodology and criteria for the Lionshead Redevelopment Master Plan Area.
I
Applicant: Town of Vail and consultant team
Staff: Dominic Maurieflo ~
Dominic Mauriello gave an overview of the request. '
Ethan Moare, from Design Workshop, explained the criteria and methodology for the selection of
view corridars. He said that once criteria were applied and public view corridors were narrowed
down, they would go through a public process. He explained the critical part of the view and
visual attributes to identify the most important part of a view. He said a wide space was not
recommended and that public view carridars should be narrowly defined. He said there could be
a specific landmark, or the ability to designate a view that did not currently exist. He then
explained the process through final adoption of view corridors.
• Planning and Environmental Commission
Minules
May 19, 1997 5
Dave Corbtn, from VA, stated thai VA was a cooperating participant in the Lionshead
redevelopment and endorsed and supported the staff inemo. He said the memo was very weli •
done and asked that the PEC approve staff's approach to identifying view corridors. He advised
not to too narrowly define a prospective view corridor. He said that many property owners were
anticipating some changes. He asked the PEC to be fairly cautions in defining the view corridors
and to define them as narrowly as possible.
John Schofield asked if height limits and view corridors conflicted.
Dave Corbin stated there could be a north/south, or width/breadth height iimitation. He said a
view corridor needed to establish a visual connection to the mountain. He strongly advocated
looking south to the mountain from the deck of Bart & Yeti's that there was a tegitimate need to
have some public view. He said there was a possibility that height restrictions could have some
impact, but would be difficult to accurately define. He felt that the view should be conservative
and not too broad because then height at its edge would become an issue. He stated that in a
broader sense, he and Ethan had commented if the southwest corner of the parking structure
with the foreground being the firsi row of buildings at the Lionshead Center, was the bottom of
the view corridor, it might toreclose Lionshead Center from altering their roofline. He mentioned
that the Lionshead Master Plan had come into being for the redesign of the structures. He said
that if view corridors were done too expansively, then they would arbitrarily limit the Lionshead
Master Plan.
John Schofield suggested allowing different rooflines to encourage people to change and also to
look at postcards to see what views were being looked at.
Gene Uselton said it should be an incentive for Lionshead redevelopment. He said regarding the
matter of protecting private property, the underlying code should compensate for that. He •
warned not to injure the property owners economically.
Ethan Moore said there was one requirement in the staff inemo that addressed that concern.
Greg Amsden suggested taking a loose approach at this time. He said the architecture needed !
to be changed in Lionshead and being too sirict would hurt that effort. i
Galen Aasland stated, for the record, that he was working for Bob Lazier, a Lionshead property ~
awner, but it would not affect his comments and he was in agreement with staff.
Ann Bishop said she had received phone calls from people who would not be here during the
summer for the time frame mentioned in the memo. i
~
Susan Connelly stated that information and feedback would be available on the Town Website.
' She asked if those people were on the mailing list.
~
~ Greg Moffet concurred with the staff recommendation. '
~
, Ann Bishop made a motion to approve the recommendation to the Town Council.
' Greg Amsden seconded the motian. i
The motion passed by a vote of 6-0.
Planning and Environmental Commission ~
, Minutes 6 . I
May 19, 1997
I
4. A request for a conditional use permit io ailow for a temporary structure to be erected for
~ the purpose of sefling seasonaf piant products, located at 2154 S. Frontage
Road/(Conoco), generally located at:
THAT PORTION OF THE SE 1/4 OF SE 1/4 OF SECTION 11, TOWNSHtP 5 SOUTH, RANGE 61 WEST
OF THE 6TH P.M., EAGLE COUNTY, COLORADO, WHICH BEGINS AT A POINT ON THE SOUTH-
EASTERLY RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE OF INTERSTATE HIGHWAY NO. 70, WHICH POINT OF BEGINNING
LIES S86°14'22"W A DISTANCE OF 1200.64 FEET AND N48°00'57"E A DISTANCE OF 360.04 FEET OF
THE SE CORNER OF SAIQ SECTlON 11, THENCE ALONG SAlD RIGNT-OF-WAY N44"01'05"E A
QISTANCE OF 190.0 FT., THENCE S45'58'55"E A DISTANCE OF 229.50 FEET, THENCE N85°36'13"W A
DISTANCE OF 297.94 FEET 70 THE POIN7 OF BEGINNING. TRACT CON7AINING 0.500 AC.
Applicant: Jane Mack
Planner: Tammie Williamson
TABLED UNTIL JUNE 9, 1997
5. A request for a worksession to discuss a conditionai use permit, to allow for the
construction of the Alpine Garden Education Center, located at 620 Vai( Valley
Drive/Tract A, Vail Village 7th Filing.
Applicant: Vail Alpine Garden Foundation
Planner: George Ruther
TABLED UNTIL JUNE 9, 1997
~ Greg Amsden made a motion to table items 4 and 5 until June 9, 1997.
John Schofield seconded the motion.
It passed by a vote of 6-0.
6. A request for an interior remodel, utilizing the 250 Ordinance, located at 120 Willow J
Bridge Road, Unit 5 K/Lot K, Block 5E, Vail Village 1 st Filing.
Applicant: Stanley and Cecelia Schocket, represented by Kyle Webb
Planner: Dirk Mason
~
STAFF APPR4VED
7. A request for a worksession to discuss amending the Town af Vail Zoning Code to '
create a new zone district (PA-1).
Applicant: Sannenalp Properties, Inc. represented by Gordon Pierce
Ptanner: Gearge Ruther
W1THpRAWN
~ Planning and Environmenta) Commission
Minutes
May 19, 1997 7
t 8. A request for a worksession to discuss amending the official Town of Vai! Zoning Map to
rezone the Austria Haus property, located at 242 East Meadow Drive/Part of Tract C, Vaii ~
ViHage 1 st Fifing, to PA-1.
Applicant: Sonnena(p Properties, inc. represented by Gordon Pierce
Pianner: George Ruther
WITHDRAWN
9. (nformation Update
~ Susan Connelly thanked the PEC for participating in the ciean-up and gave a Vail Tomorrow
update and said that some of the actions may come before the PEC. She said that the View
Corridors were coming back in June and invited the PEC to participate in the walking tours.
10. Approval of May 12, 1997 minutes.
Greg Amsden and Greg Moffet had changes.
Greg Amsden made a motion tor approval as amended.
Gene Uselton seconded the motion.
The motion passed by a vote of 6-0.
Greg Amsden made a motiorr to adjourn.
Ann Bishop seconded the motion.
The motion passed by a vote of 6-0.
I
The meeting adjourned at 4:10 p.m. '
Ptanning and Environmental Conunission •
Minutes
May 19, 1997 $