Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1999-1213 PEC1 2 Applicant: Daymer Corporation, represented by Jay Peterson Planner: George Ruther MOTION: Galen Aasland SECOND: Brian Doyon VCTE: 7-0 APPROVED WITH 21 CONDITIONS: 1 That the developer submits the following plans to the Department of Community Development, for review and approval, as a part of the building permit application for the hotel: a. An Erosion Control and Sedimentation Plan; b. A Construction Staging and Phasing Plan; C. A Stormwater Management Plan, d. A Site Dewatering Plan; and e. A Traffic Control Plan. 3. That the developer receives a conditional use permit to allow for the operation of a fractional fee club, in accordance with Chapter 12-16, prior to the issuance of a building permit. U That the developer submits a final detailed landscape plan to the Community Development Department for Design Review Board review and approval prior to making an application for a building permit. That the developer submits a complete set of civil engineer drawings of all the off-site improvements, including the improvements to the South Frontage Road, for review and Town approval, prior to application for a building permit. 2 . That the developer submits a complete set of plans to the Colorado Dep -Cent of Transportation for review and approval of a revised access permit, pri( o application for a building permit. 7, That the developer meets with the Town staff to prepare a memorandur J understanding outlining the responsibilities and requirements of the regt: i �d off- site improvements, prior to first reading of an ordinance approving the r or amendment. 8. That the developer increases the proposed "fail Road setback to insure dequate distances are provided to meet the intended needs of the Tom's right a way and the front setback or successfully demonstrates to the satisfaction of tl­ own that BEST adequate areas for landscaping, streetscape improvements and snow -, .)rage are COPY provided. The Town of Vail resign Review Board shall participate in decision- making process. AVAILABLE 9. That the developer submits a complete set of plans responding to e= ' of the design concerns expressed by Greg ball, Director of Public Works Transportation, in his memorandum to George Ruther, dated 12/13/` t , The drawings shall be submitted, reviewed and approved by the Town R Jneer prior to final Design Review Board approval. M That the developer records a public pedestrian easement between t : hotel and the Phase 111 Condominiums and between the phase V Building pr r.arty lines. The easement shall be prepared by the developer and submitted f r review and approval of the Town Attorney. The easement shall be recorded i h the Eagle County Clerk & recorder's Office prior to the issuance of a Temp r iry Certificate of Occupancy. 11. That the developer record a deed - restriction, which the Town is < party to, on the sdd property prohibiting the public use of the spa facility in the h t -:�l. Said restriction shall be revoked if the developer is able to demonstrr ra to the � satisfaction of the Town that adequate provisions for vehicle pp, ng have been made to accommodate the public use of the spa. 12. That the developer submits a final exterior building materials fl atypical wall section and complete color rendering for review and approval the Design Review Board, prior to making an application for a building pe r t. 13. That the developer submits a comprehensive sign program p r: oral for the Mail Plaza Hotel for review and approval of the resign Review Bc.. J, prior to the issuance of A Temporary Certificate of Occupancy, 14. That the developer submits a roof -top mechanical equipmer )lair for review and approval of the Design Review Board prior to the issuance , 'i building permit. All roof -top mechanical equipment shall be incorporated int ,ie overall design of the hotel and enclosed and screened from public view. 15. That the developer posts a bond to provide financial recur' , for the 125% of the total cost of the required off -site public improvements. Thy and shall be in place with the Town prior to the issuance of a bugdiqgy r it. r iporary Certificate of Occupancy. 6. That the developer installs ollard or similar safety d !,Jces at the intersection of the delivery access driveway and the s n awalk along the South Frontage Road to prevent conflicts between e� { strians and vehicles, prior to the issuance of a Temporary ertificate of Oc apancyn 3 G 4 1. That the proposed zone district is compatible with and suitable to adjacent uses, consistent with the Town's Land Use Pian and Zoning Regulations, and appropriate for the area. Ul C 2 • The DRB is responsible for evaluating the DRB proposal for; Architectural compatibility with other structures, the land and surroundings Fitting buildings into landscape Configuration of building and grading of a site, which respects the topography - Removal /Preservation of trees and native vegetation - Adequate provision for snow storage on -site - Acceptability of budding materials and colors - Acceptability of roof elements, eaves, overhangs, and other building forms - Provision of landscape and drainage - Provision of fencing, walls, and accessory structures - Circulation and access to a site, including parking, and site distances - Location and design of satellite dishes - Provision of outdoor lighting V. REZONING REQUEST The request for rezoning is necessary due to the existing non - conformities under the current "Agriculture & Open Space" designation. Ski Club Vail does not have the ability to expand under the current zoning. Additionally, due to the encroachment onto Vail Associates' property, it is necessary to apply a consistent zoning among the parcels. Vail Associates' Golden Peek property (Tracts F & B) is zoned "Ski Base recreation." The PES shall make the following findings before granting approval of a zone change request: 1) Is the existing in suitable with the existing land use on the site and adjacent la uses? Ski Club Vail's property is currently zoned "Agriculture and Open Space" ( "A "'j. Staff believes the existing zoning is inconsistent with the established use of the property. Intended uses within the current "A" zoning designation include agriculture, public parks, recreation areas, and open space. Staff believes Ski Club Vail's operation is more consistent with the intended uses outlined for the S6Ski Base recreation" district. These include ski racing facilities, ski school facilities, and private /quasi - public /public clubs. Adjacent land uses include the Golden Peak Ski Base (Ski Base recreation), Manor Vail (High Density Multiple Family), P °nos del Norte / orthwoo s (Special Development District 2 /HDMF), and Ford Park (General Use). Staff believes the proposed zoning is consistent and suitable with adjacent properties. 4 4 2) Is the amendment presenting a convenient workable relationship it land uses consistent with municipal objectives? Staff believes this proposal furthers municipal land use objectives through the redevelopment of a facility that no longer serves the needs of Ski Club flail. Many of the traffic congestion problems identified in this area of the East Village are attributable to the current facility (among other properties). Staff believes this proposal presents a feasible, workable solution to the re- occurring traffic problems identified in this area and promotes a much- unproved relationship with adjacent properties. ) Does the rezoning provide for the growth of an orderly viable community? Staff believes this rezoning is necessary to facilitate redevelopment of the property in an orderly, viable fashion. Under the current zoning designation, Ski Club flail is "non- conforming" and does not have the ability to expand. Given the fact that the facility now serves about 4 times the number of users it served in 1977, staff believes redevelopment /rezoning is the only fusible option at this time. The redevelopment proposal is consistent with applicable development limitations imposed under the proposed zone district. 4) Is the change consistent with the Land Use Plan.) The Mail Land Use Plan proposes a future land use designation on this property of "Ski Base." This land use category includes "ski trails, facilities related to a ski base and ski- related improvements." Staff believes the proposed zone district is consistent with this designation while the existing zoning is not. Staff believes the proposed Ski Club Vail rezoning /redevelopment plan would further the following goals identified in the Vail Land Use flan; Goal 1.1 Vail should continue to grow in a controlled environment, maintaining a balance between residential, commercial and recreational uses to serve both visitors and permanent residents. Coal 1.3 The quality of development should be maintained and upgraded whenever possible. Goal 2.2 The ski area owner, the business community and the Town leaders should work together closely to make existing facilities and the Town function more efficiently. is 5 V1. CRITERIA FOR SAL TI � The final development plan indicates the following development statistics- Lot Area (Tracts P & B) = 50.095 acres or 2;182,136.2 square feet Allowed /#fie uired Pro used Building Height 60% at 35', 40% at 40' 31' max. Floor Area per PEC approval 24,364 square feet Site Coverage per PEG approval 6,336 square feet Setbacks per PEC approval 33' front / 100'+ others (Tract B) Parking Spaces per PEC approval 22 spaces (7 drop -off) Snow Storage (10%) 1,066 square feet min. 1,205 square feet xistin Propose ' d Total Site Coverage for 63.979 sf or 2.9 °% am 70,365 f or 3.2% Ski Ease recreation District /Golden Peak Ski Base (includes structured parking). * does not include architectural projections Criteria used for development plan evaluation within the Ski Ease recreation zone district are as follows,- A. "Buildings, i rove ents, uses and activities are designed and located to produce a functional development plan responsive to the situ the surrounding neighborhood and uses, and the community as a hole" Thus far, the Town's Planning and Environmental Commission, Design review Board and Town staff have found this proposal to be in compliance with this provision. Staff believes the facilities provided under this plan are adequate to serve the needs of the growing organization during peak user periods. It is anticipated the proposed parking and drop -off facilities will positively impact traffic flow along Mail Valley Drive. Staff believes the site development plan proposed is both functionally and aesthetically responsive to the surrounding neighborhood and uses. B. "Open space and landscaping are both functional and aesthetic, are designed to preserve and enhance the natural features of the site, maximize opportunities for access and use by the publiG, provide adequate ufferin e een the proposed uses and surrounding properties, and when possible, are integrated with existing open space and recreation areas." The proposed site development plan would dramatically increase the amount of landscaping on the property over existing conditions. representatives from adjacent properties have expressed concerns about the existing landscape island along Vail Valley Drive and its necessity for screening purposes. 1-his redevelopment proposal 6 C. "A pedestrian and vehicular circulation system designed to provide safe, efficient and aesthetically pleasing circulation to the site and throughout the development." I 3 Goal 5 Increase and improve the capacity, efficiency, and aesthetics of the transportation and circulation system throughout the Village. .1 Objective: Meet parking demands with public and private parking facilities. 5.1 .5 Policy: Redevelopment projects shall be strongly encouraged to provide underground or visually concealed parking. .4 Objective; Improve the streetscape of circulation corridors throughout the Village. Goal 6 To ensure the continued improvement of the vital operational elements of the Village. .1 Objective; Provide service and delivery facilities for existing and new development. The specific concepts in the Mail Village Master Plan that address the Golden Peak/Ski Club Vail area serve as advisory guidelines for future land use decisions by the Planning and Environmental Commission and the Town Council. The Master Flan recognizes that properties within the sub -area will redevelop and states: "Redevelopment will attract additional traffic and population into this area and may have significant impacts upon portions of Sub -Areas 6 (East Gore Creek) and 7 (East Village)." Staff believes the following concepts for the Golden Peak sub -area are carried out with this proposal; Redevelopment ... shall be low profile to minimize impacts on views to Vail Mountain. Plans indicate a 3 -level structure that is substantially below grade (2 levels on the south side, 1 level on the north side). Although applicable zoning would allow a building height of up to 46', the applicant is proposing a structure that is approximately 1' tall at its highest point. Adjacent structures are significantly higher. Staff believes this new facility would have negligible impacts on public views in the vicinity. Commercial activity at this site should be limited to "ski base/recreational" uses. Although no commercial activity is proposed at this location, the uses identified are consistent with the Ski Base /Recreation designation, Additional parking for any facilities is to be provided on site® Staff believes the on -site parking proposed at the new facility is sufficient to meet peak parking demands for Ski Club Vail. 9 treetseaoe Master Pion W] For a point of reference, Town staff measured existing sidewalks adjacent to Ski Club Vail. Their dimensions are as follows: Sidewalk adjacent to TOV bus shelter: 8-foot wide (concrete pavers) Vail Valley Drive (GPSB Children's)- 8-foot wide (concrete pavers) Vail Valley Drive (CPS B Main): 6-foot wide (concrete pavers)* Internal GPSB walkways min. 8-foot wide (concrete pavers) Pines del Norte no sidewalk** Northwoods no sidewalk' *6-foot sidewalks exist on both sides of Vail Valley Drive at this location **Sidewalk improvements have been planned at this location as part of the GPSB redevelopment plan. Necessary streetscape improvements for Vail Valley Drive adjacent to Ski Club Vail will include the following: , 17 15 TRACT C CHILDRENS PAW, F-2 4 M t 5 FORD PARX �Qwo PME VILLA V�L.PWIA 0 ALL SEAS L i6o CONDO -------------- ------ ------ ------ - T,'VOU 14ORN LODGE 'ONDO � R 39 M4 TRACT F 3a5 10 S5 5G a65 342 i7 GOLDEN PEAK 4-18 MM40R A, 5 FORD 595 ` I A MPITHrATER W FORD PARK MANOR VAJL A, R & C 590 RACE I-My Ski Club Vail MANOR VA;I- A, B & C 596 ----TFAGTA PINGS DEi ------- -- NoRTr ...... ------ NORTHWOODS TRACT C F-2 TRACTF -1 TRArT F (�— 39 M4 TRACT F 3a5 10 S5 5G a65 342 i7 GOLDEN PEAK 4-18 MM40R A, 5 FORD 595 ` I A MPITHrATER W FORD PARK MANOR VAJL A, R & C 590 RACE I-My Ski Club Vail MANOR VA;I- A, B & C 596 ----TFAGTA PINGS DEi ------- -- NoRTr ...... ------ NORTHWOODS September 24, 1999 Bear Mr. Wilson, This letter is to inform the Town of Vail that Vail Resorts Inc, intends to enter into an encroachment agreement with Ski Club Vail. This encroachment is necessary to ensure by% A! L B E A V E R C R E E K '" 9 R E C K r N R 1'I—, v E K E Y S -g 0 N r o $) — EX471ttb T >RNSYARmerL. ^ xFb rA q4c,i Pnu T-r-: 7-;-_ `4 jxAyis GAriF €9 / / \ X x IV�A@ 5bl s t - aA'e Nm L_" 111 O IYts {EN � ,` /. Vnn SFltey .c — `� -- _avm^.reM srsu.oFVr�s / �5:� p'. 0 n r f E b l!:. _ __ •F. —l._ { -. _I � _4Nev✓ SP eF✓,6e �y / tqi, -� _• � KEY. ..g. wpo ear•c EX1Si Ii t FXISI Mi MY CONTI-MRS ^'-- PROPOSE II CoN7oURS t9 . �, a u �- �_._�__,_�- �_� _✓ p- IRU 11111[.0 4'CONTCUftSg fX15'IINC C()NINS:RS i'O RLMI fiIN 4 * ) EXISTING (0I"'iH LR5If' ItF. RGM6Vfit7 IiXIS'flNC r\SII' +' III R };MAIN � FXIS'iiN( ASAI:N T()fliR[Aft)VRp '/ ' x' I i �*h NPtV CONI([:RS Nmty nsreN n�t rnro -�;ea r ae uEVSen1ro 1 :T*i N 7 c 6nrRa m x I UBVEl L ATog >'pA �1 F./• &i$ VAIIPY 4'UR44Y'4b UAT :c o }.'v•q!1 come pa!,p As c'. rY aA Na rty tR /V t 9't Ta,x+ eK VI,L C �i:c ICI CLUB, V IL_ � SCHEMATIC SITE PLAN FAIL, COLORADO nesir r�tivoaY taop ��� IiOVt.A1I74:R Ii. M, boa € }i!IxN lr iU57 .. Uw o a LL 0 0 MOO �r �D �p A Attacbment To: Town of Vail Design Review Board From: Community Development Department Date: December 1, 1999 Re: Mail Plaza Hotel —Preliminary Recommendation to the Fail Town Council v Attar rent L Subject: Vail Plaza Hotel — Review of the November 23, 1999 Plans I have completed my review of the Vail Plaza Hotel and have the following comments and concerns. Some of these are truly comments, which should be corrected as the project progresses through the development process, and others are concerns or conditions, which shall be taken care of at the appropriate times in the process. does not impact the entry into this site. �c���red I �r°o��ern�n�s � �osii�a�ts IL • A final landscape plan showing sight distances, show storage areas, and all existing vegetation impacted. • The entire building will require a guttering system , heat tape and piping to the storm sewer. ® That snow shedding is addressed for the entire building. 0 The pedestrian walks along Vail Road and the other pedestrian mews are established as public pedestrian easements. Ei Complete civil - engineered plans are reviewed and approved by the Town Engineer prior to submitting plans for the building permit. El All one -way cross over lanes shall be 18' in width and all two -way cross over lanes shall be 24' in width. This affects approximately four compact and seven valet spaces. cl The two -way drive aisle at the porte- cochere is only 20' in width between the columns. The valet spaces drawn are only 16' in length. If full -size valet spaces are established as required, the drive lane width is further reduced down to 17'. To resolve the conflict the parking spaces need to be removed. C3 The slopes of the heated and enclosed drive aisle ramps are allowed to be a maximum grade of 16 %. An engineered - stamped design of the drive aisle is required prior to final DRB approval. Gt The three Phase V parking spaces south of the hotel are not practical. To enter the first to requires the driver to use the hotel porte-cochere as a roundabout. The one angled parking space, when drawn to the proper dimensions (9'x 19') reduces the drive aisle to the structure by 1'. This conflict could be resolved by moving the parking space closer to the Phase V building. However, the proposed 4 foot wide walk in this mew is then reduced to three feet in width when adjusted. The reduced width is too narrow next to the building. The parking space design must be revised. Cl The curb returns into and out of the site will need to be revised to allow proper turning and maneuvering. 0 The south return onto the site shall have a 15'radius. ® The north return out of the site shall have an 8' radius. C7 The South Frontage Road exit shall be widened to accommodate the 65' semi tractor trailer. This requires an adiustment to both sides of the drive aisle and to the landscape island. 0 The brick paver sidewalk along Vail Road shall be 8' in width. a INTRODUCTION The applicant, Waidir Prado, represented by Jay Peterson, is proposing to redevelop the mail Village Inn, located at 100 East Meadow Drive. The applicant has submitted two applications to • An increase in the annual occupancy rate through the redevelopment of an elder, existing hotel. • The creation of approximately 30,500 square feet of new conference and meeting room facilities. • The implementation of the,, recommended Town of Vail Streetscae faster Plan improvements along Vail road, the South Frontage Road and a portion of East Meadow [give. • The re- investment and redevelopment of resort property in the Town of Vail. • The implementation of the development goals, objectives and policies adopted by the Town for the Vail Village Inn property. • A significant increase to the Town's supply of short -term, overnight accommodation to serve our guests and visitors. • The construction of a world -class "anchor" hotel providing a high -level of guest services and amenities. potentially sizeable annual contribution to the Town's declining sales tax revenue. 11. DESCRIPTION OF THE REQUESTS Major Amendment Request The applicant, Daymer Corporation, represented by Jay Peterson, has submitted two development review applications to the Town of Vail Community Development. The first application is a request for a final review and recommendation of a proposed a major amendment, pursuant to Chapter 9 of the Town of Vail Zoning Regulation, to Special Development District loo. 6, Vail Village Inn. The purpose of the major amendment is to amend the development approved plan to allow for the construction of the Vail Plaza Hotel in Phase IV of the €district. The applicant is proposing significant improvements to Phase IV of the Vail Village Inn Special Development District. The existing hotel and restaurant are proposed to be demolished to allow for the new construction of the Vail Plaza Hotel. The hotel is intended to be a mixed -use development including residential, commercial and recreation uses. The applicant is proposing to construct 99 new accommodation units (hotel rooms) ranging in size from approximately 350 s. ft. to 370 sq. ft. per unit., 48 part -time fractional fee club units, and 1 free - market condominium. The fractional fee club units are considered part - time, as during the summer months the hotel will retain ownership of the units to rent as short - terra accommodation units, and then during the winter months (approximately 24 weeks) the units will be sold as fractional fee club units. The Vail Plaza. Hotel also includes two restaurants, 4,047 square feet of accessory retail located within the hotel and along the plaza, a 15,333 square foot conference facility, a 24,799 square foot full- service spa and health club facility and approximately 246 new underground parking spaces. The approximate total gross square footage of the new hotel is 323,956 square feet. The following is an approximate breakdown of the various uses within the hotel: �a® 64,094 sq. ft. - fractional fee club units 5;499 sq. ft. — condominium 36,013 s. ft. — accommodation units 4g� 9,322 sq. ft. — restaurant/retail 2 0 An increased amount of public open space, a An improved and updated loading /delivery facility which is relocated from Fail Road. CONS • Increased vehicular traffic on hail Road. • Deviations from the underlying zoning development standards are required. • The bulk and mass of the new hotel is significantly greater than the sizes of buildings presently on the development site. • There are increased impacts of shading on public areas. • The conference and meeting room facilities are potentially under- sized. • Additional views of Vail Mountain from public areas will be negatively impacted. • Only a portion of the dilapidated plaza paver surface is being replaced and improved. • Increased loading /delivery truck traffic on Town streets, • There is only a marginal net increase of true accommodation units over what exists today. • An eighteen to twenty -four month construction process (noise, construction traffic, etc). Should the Planning & Environmental Commission choose to recommend approval of the requested major amendment to the Hail Town Council, staff would recommend that the Commission make the following finding: `°That the proposed major amendment to Special Development District #6, Vail pillage Inn, complies with the nine design criteria outlined in Section 12 -9,A -8 of the Town of Vail Municipal Code. The applicant has demonstrated to the satisfaction of the Commission that any adverse effects of the requested deviations from the development standards of the underlying zoning are outweighed by the benefits public prodded. Further, the Commission finds that the requested conditional use permit to allow for the operation of a fractional fee club complies with the applicable criteria and is consistent with the development goals and objectives of the Town." Should the Planning & Environmental Commission choose to recommend approval of the requested major amendment, .staff would recommend that the approval carry with it the following conditions- 1 . That the developer submits the following plans to the Department of Community Development, for review and approval, as a part of the building permit application for the hotel- a. An Erasion Control and Sedimentation Plan; b. A Construction Staging and Phasing Plan, C. A Stormwater Management Plan, d. A Site Dewatermg Plan, and e. A Traffic Control Plan. 2. That the developer provides deed - restricted housing, which complies with the Town of Mail Employee Housing requirements (Chapter 12-13), for a minimum of 33 employees, and that said deed - restricted housing be made available for occupancy, and that the deed restrictions are recorded with the Eagle County Clerk & Recorder, prior to requesting a Temporary Certificate of Occupancy for the fail Plaza Hotel. 4 3. That the developer receives a conditional use permit to allow for the operation of a fractional fee club, in accordance with Chapter 12 -1, prior to the issuance of a building permit. 4. That the developer submits a final detailed landscape plan to the Community Development Department for Design Review Board review and approval prior to making an application for building permit. 6, That the developer submits a complete set of civil engineer drawings of all the off -site improvements, including the improvements to the South Frontage Road, for review and Town approval, prior to application for a building permit. 6. That the developer submits a complete set of plans to the Colorado Department of Transportation for review and approval of a revised access permit, prior to application for a building permit. 7. That the developer meets with the Town staff to prepare a memorandum of understanding outlining the responsibilities and requirements of the required off -site improvements, prior to first reading of an ordinance approving the major amendment. B. That the developer increases the proposed Fail Road setback to insure adequate distances are provided to meet the intended needs of the Town's right -of -way and the front setback or successfully demonstrates to the satisfaction of the Town that adequate areas for landscaping, streetscape improvements and snow storage are provided. The Town of Vail Design Review Board shall participate in this decision - making process. 9. That the developer submits a complete set of plans responding to each of the design concerns expressed by Greg Nall, Director of Public Works & Transportation, in his memorandum to George Rather, dated 12/13/99. The drawings shall be submitted, reviewed and approved by the Town Engineer prior to final Design Review Board approval. 10. That the developer records a public pedestrian easement between the hotel and the Phase III Condominiums and between the Phase V Building property lines. The easement shall be prepared by the developer and submitted for review and approval of the Town attorney. The easement shall be recorded with the Eagle County Clerk Recorder's Office prior to the issuance of a Temporary Certificate of Occupancy. 11 q That the developer record a deed- restriction, which the Town is a party to, on the sdd property prohibiting the public use of the spa facility in the hotel. Said restriction shall be revoked if the developer is able to demonstrate to the satisfaction of the Town that adequate provisions for vehicle parking have been made to accommodate the public use of the spa. 12. That the developer submits a final exterior building materials list, a typical wall section and complete color rendering for review and approval of the Design Review Board, prior to making an application for a building permit. 13. That the developer submits a comprehensive sign program proposal for the Vail Plaza Hotel for review and approval of the Design review Board, prior to the issuance of a Temporary Certificate of Occupancy. 5 14. That the developer submits a roof -top mechanical equipment plan for review and approval of the Design Review Board prior to the issuance of a building permit. All roof - top mechanical equipment shall be incorporated into the overall design of the hotel and enclosed and screened from public view. 15. That the developer posts a bond to provide financial security for the 125% of the total cost of the required off -site public improvements. The bond shall be in place with the Town prior to the issuance of a building permit. IV. BACKGROUND The development review process for the Vail Plaza Hotel has been a lengthy, labor intensive process that has included numerous meetings with the various Town boards, Town staff, and interested members of the community. The review process began nearly two years ago when the applicant submitted the original redevelopment proposal application to the Community Development. Following a nine month review process including a final review and recommendation of approval from the Planning & Environmental Commission and the Design Review Board, the bail Town Council informed the applicant that a favorable vote could not be made on the application and directed the applicant to revise the proposal. The primary concerns of the Council were building height, compliance with the Town's planning documents, off -site traffic impacts, loading and delivery capabilities and vehicular site access. In response to the Council's concerns the proposal has been revised and resubmitted to the Community Development Department. The revised proposal has been reviewed and evaluated by the Planning & Environmental Commission; the Design Review Board and the Town staff. The Commission has held four meetings while the Board has held five conceptual reviews of the revised plans. Additionally, the applicant held an open house to present the plans to interested members of the community. All the submitted plans, models and related materials have been available for review at the Office of Community Development and on various web sites. The following is a summary of the existing phases and development with the /ail Village inn Special Development District: Phase I — This phase consists of the buildings located at the southeast corner of the District. Phase I includes one residential dwelling unit approximately 3,927 square feet in size and nine commercial /retail spaces. Phase 11— This phase consists of three residential dwelling units totaling approximately 3,492 square feet in size and three commercial /retail spaces. Phase 11 is generally located in the center of the District. Phase III —This Phase consists of twenty -nine residential dwelling units totaling approximately 44,330 square feet in size and six commercial /retail spaces. Phase III is located at the northeast corner of the District. 6 increase in the hotel bed base, An increase in short -term accommodations has been a long - standing objective of our resort community. V. "PUBLIC TI ON ZONE DISTRICT" According to the Official Town of Mail Zoning Map, the applicant's property is zoned Public Accommodation. Pursuant to the Town of Vail Iviunicipal Code, the Public Accommodation Zone district is intended, " to provide sites for lodges and residential accommodations for visitors, together with such public and semi-public facilities and limited professional offices, medical facilities, private recreation, and related visitor oriented uses as may appropriately be located in the same districts The Public Accommodation District is intended to ensure adequate light, air, open s cep and other amenities commensurate with lodge uses, and to maintain the desirable resort qualities of the District by establishing appropriate site development standards. Additional nonresidential uses are permitted as conditional uses which enhance the nature of Vail as a winter an summer recreation and vacation community, and where permitted are intended to function compatibly with the high density lodging character of the District. The Public Accommodation Zone District is intended to provide sites for lodging units with densities not to exceed 25 dwelling units per acre. The Public Accommodation Zone District, prior to January 21, 1997, did not permit interval ownership. On January 21, 1997, the Town Council adopted regulations allowing interval ownership subject to the issuance of a conditional use permit. Previously, interval ownership was only allowed as a conditional use in the High Density Multi- family Zone District. Can October 5, 1999, the Vail Town Council approved Ordinance No. 23, Series of 1999, amending the development standards prescribed in the Public Accommodation Zone District. The amendments included an increase in allowable GRFA up to 150 %, an increase in site coverage, the elimination of AU's and FFU's in the calculation of density, revised setback requirements, and rather various aspects in the development of properties zoned Public Accommodation. The allowable building height, landscape area and limitation on commercial square footage remained unchanged. VII. ZONING ANALYSIS The development standards for a Special Development District shall be proposed by the applicant. Development 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 recommendations of the Planning and Environmental Commission. Before the Town Council approves development standards that deviate from the underlying zone district, it shall be determined that such deviations provide benefits to the Town that outweigh the effects of such deviations. This determination is to be made based upon the evaluation of the proposed Special Development District's compliance with the Review Criteria outlined in the following section of this memorandum. 8 A copy of the Vail Plaza Hotel Proposal CorngaqrLlson has been attached for reference (Exhibit C). The Town Code provides nine design criteria, which shall be used as the principal criteria in evaluating the merits of the proposed major amendment to a Special Development District. It shall be the burden of the applicant to demonstrate that submittal material and the proposed development plan comply with each of the following standards, or demonstrate that one or more of them is not applicable, or that a practical solution consistent with the public interest has been achieved. The applicant has submitted a report outlining a review of the criteria (Exhibit D) The nine SDD review criteria below- NOTE: Staff's analysis is based in part on an analysis by Jeff Winston, an independent design consultant. The exterior building materials of the Vail Plaza Hotel are a mixture of stone, stucco and wood. The roof material is proposed to be a terra cotta colored concrete the with copper flashing. The applicant has proposed to incorporate irrigated flower boxes and copper chimney caps into the design of the hotel to serve as attractive accent elements. A grayish-brown granite stone will be used around the base of the building. The use of non- reflective glazed windows all around the building reduces the potential of unwanted glare. 10 The applicant has proposed that the exterior stucco color be an off -white or cream color to blend in with the exteriors of the buildings on the adjoining properties. Staff believes that the combination of building materials proposed has been well incorporated into the design of the flail Plaza Hotel. The Town of Vail Design Review Board will have the opportunity to review the building exterior prior to final approval of the hotel The height of the Vail Plaza Hotel exceeds the allowable building height of the Public Accommodation Zone District by approximately 26 feet. The building height standards of 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 Mail Plaza Motel be approximately 74 feet. This figure does not include the proposed architectural feature or landmark element atop the elevator tower. The height of the elevator tower is approximately 93 feet. The building height is based on an interpolated topography of the Vail Village Inn property, and not the original topography of the site (pre- development). Original topography of the site is not available, as the site was originally developed prior to zoning (and before the requirement that a topographic survey be submitted prior to development). Staff believes, based upon the topography in the vicinity of the development site, that the interpolated topography is reasonable and appropriate method to determine building height. According to the Vail Village Master Plan Conceptual Building sleight Plan and the Building Height Profile Plan (Exhibit E), the development site of Phase IV of the Vail Village Inn is in an area with conceptual building heights of -4 stories, with a building story being approximately nine feet, excluding the roof. The applicant is proposing to construct a five -story (above grade including roof) hotel. The Building height Plan element of the Vail Village Master Plan, states in part, "Generally speaking, it is the goal of this plan to maintain the concentration of low-scale buildings in the core area while positioning larger buildings along the northern periphery (along the Frontage Road), as depicted in the Building ei t Profile Plan. The Building Height Plan also strives, in some areas, to preserve major views from lic rights-of-way. The building heights expressed on the Illustrative Plan are intended to provide general guidelines. Additional study should be made during specific review rocesses relative to a building's height i act on the streetscape and the relationship to surrounding structures." In response to the general guidelines provided in the Vail Village Master Plan relative to building height, staff has requested that the applicant prepare a view analysis from eight different locations from the public rights -of -way. This Vail Plaza Hotel View Analysis provides a "before & after" depiction of the proposed budding (Exhibit F). In addition, a Vail Plaza Hotel Sun /Shade Analysis was prepared to illustrate the building's height impact on the surrounding streetscape (Exhibit ). The sun /shade analysis compares the height impact of the existing structures to the height impact of the proposed structures. The result of the comparison shows that substantially more of the streetscape along the South Frontage Road east of the roundabout will be shaded. The increase in shading results from the increase in building height, the increased encroachment into the front setback and the additional building mass proposed. To offset the impacts of the increase in shading during the winter months, the applicant has proposed to improve the pedestrian streetscape along the South Frontage Road by 11 12 (Gateway) to the north. The same development standards that apply to the Tail Plaza Hotel development site apply to the Sonnenalp, Holiday Haas and Chateau at flail properties. The Commercial Service Center zoning applicable to the Crossroads property is intended primarily for commercial development together with a limited amount of multiple- family and lodging types of residential use. The Commercial Core 1 underlying zoning of the Gateway Special Development District is intended to provide sites for a mixture of commercial and residential development. The Tail Plaza Hotel is proposed to be a mixed -use type of development. The mixture of uses includes commercial, lodging, recreational and residential. Staff believes the proposed mixture of uses and its proximity to both Tail Tillage and Lionshead is consistent with the intended purpose of the underlying zoning of Public Accommodation. Farther, staff believes that the proposed uses within the Tail Plaza Hotel will compliment those existing uses and activities on surrounding and adjacent properties. The proposed density of the hotel and the presence of the conference facilities will improve and enhance the viability and success of the existing restaurant and retail businesses in the immediate area. Additionally, through the redesign of the redevelopment proposal, staff believes that the applicant has improved the integration of the hotel with the adjacent properties. Examples of improved integration include a pedestrian connection and sidewalk adjacent to the Gateway wilding, an internal service corridor providing loading /delivery access from the centralized loading and delivery facility to the entire District, lowering of roof eaves to relate to the existing conditions of the neighboring properties and more appropriately sized pedestrian walkways throughout the plaza areas to ensure congestion free flow. 13 EMPLOYEE HOUSING GENERATION ANALYSIS Bottom of Range Calculations; a) Retail /Service Commercial = 4,047 sq. ft. @(5/1000 sq. ft.) =20.2 employees b) Health Club = 24,799 sq. ft, @(1/1000 sq. ft.) =24.0 em loyees C) Restaurant /Lounge = 5,775 sq. ft. @(5/1000 sq. ft.) = 2303 employees d) Conference Center = 10,060 sq. ft. @(1/1000 sq. ft.) =10.4 employees e) Lodging =99 units (.25 /unit) = 24.6 employees f) Multi Family (Club units) =43 units (.4 /unit) =19.2 employees Total Employees =126.2 employees ( -74 existing employees) = 54.2 employees (X 0.30 multiplier) =16.3 "new" employees 14 a) Detail /Service Commercial = 4,047 sq. ft. @(5/1000 sq. ft.) = 20.2 employees (bottom of range) ) Health Club = 24,799 sq. ft. (1.5/1000 sq. ft.) =37.2 employees (top of range) c) Restaurant/Lounge =5,775 sq. ft. @(6.5/1000 sq. ft.) =37.5 employees (middle of range) d) Conference Center =1 0,363 sq. ft. @(1/1000 sq. ft.) =10.4 employees (range does not vary) e) Lodging = 99 units (.75 /unit) = 74.3 employees (middle of range) f) Multi Family (Club Units) = 48 units (. /unit) =19.2 employees (range does not vary) _e__________________________________ Total = 193.3 employees ( -74 existing employees) = 124.3 employees (X 0.30 multiplier) = 38 "new" employees *Lodging has a particularly large variation of employees per room, depending upon factors such as size of facility and level of service /support services and amenities provided. 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. The applicant has indicated a potential need to provide the required employee housing for the Vail Plaza Hotel outside of the Town of Vail. The need to look outside of the Town is a direct result of the lack of available private land for developing employee housing in Town. The staff would suggest that the applicant and Planning & Environmental Commission discuss the possibility of building the required employee housing outside the Town. Staff would further suggest that the applicant and the Planning & Environmental Commission discuss providing a portion of the required employee housing on -site in the form of Manager's -types of units. Overall, staff believes that the density and uses proposed by the applicant for the Vail Plaza hotel do not conflict with the compatibility, efficiency or workability of the surrounding uses and activities on adjacent properties. In fact, staff feels that the proposed Vail Plaza Hotel redevelopment will substantially enhance the existing uses and activities in the community. C. Compliance with parking and loading requirements as outlined in Chapter 12-10 of the Vail Town Code. The `,/ail Plaza Hotel proposal has been reviewed for compliance with the parking and loading requirements prescribed in Chapter 12 -10 of the Vail Town Code. Pursuant to the prescribed regulations 337 parking spaces are required for all of Special Development District Flo. 6. The applicant is proposing to provide a total of 366 parking spaces. The difference between what is required by Code and what is being proposed by the applicant is 21 parking spaces. To account for the difference, the applicant is requesting a deviation from the prescribed parking requirement pursuant to the provisions of Chapter 12 -. Is 16 M 1.2 The quality of the environment including air, water, and other natural resources should be protected as the Town grows, 13 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 Flan, 1.12 Vail should accommodate most of the additional growth in existing developed areas (infill ). 3, Commercial 3.1 The hotel bed base should be preserved and used more efficiently. 32 The Village and Lionshead are the best location for hotels to serve the future needs of the destination skier, 3.3 Hotels are important to the continued success of the Town of Vail, therefore conversion to condominiums should be discouraged. .4 Commercial growth should be concentrated in existing commercial areas to accommodate both local and visitor needs, 4m Villa ire /Luna ea 4.1 Future commercial development should continue to occur primarily in existing commercial areas. Future commercial development in the Core areas needs to be carefully controlled to facilitate access and delivery. 4.2 Increased density in the Core areas is acceptable so long as the existing character of each area is preserved through the implementation of the Urban Design Guide Ilan and the Vail Village faster Flan, 5. Residential .1 Quality timeshare units should be accommodated to help keep occupancy rates up. .2 Affordable employee housing should be made available through private efforts, assisted by limited incentives, provided by the Town of Vail, with appropriate restrictions. The Vail Land Use flan projects a need for additional lodging units in the Town of Vail. While the statistical information used to project need is most likely outdated, staff believes there continues to be a need for additional lodging units in the Town of Vail. The Plan projected a need for a total of 305 additional lodging units by the year 2000. The 18 Plan further suggests that increased density for commercial, residential and lodging uses in the VillagelLionshead Core areas would be acceptable so long as the existing character of each area is being preserved. Staff believes the proposed major amendment of Special Development District No. attains the goals and is consistent with the policies of the Vail Land Use Plan as outlined above. Vail Villa_. aster lan The Mail Tillage Master Plan is intended to serve as a guide to the staff, review boards and Town Council in analyzing future proposals for development in Bail Village and in legislating effective ordinances to deal with the such development. The most significant elements of the Master Plan are the goals, objectives, policies and action steps. They are the working tools of the Master Plan. They establish the broad framework and vision, but also layout the specific policies and action steps that will be used to implement the Plan. As rioted on page 35 of the Master Plan, "it is important t note that the likelihood of project approval will be greatest for those proposals that can Lylly comply with the Vail Village Master larva" Staff believes this statement re- emphasizes that the Master Plan is a general document providing advisory guidelines to aid the Town in analyzing development proposals and that full compliance is not required in order for a project to be approved. The staff has identified the following goals, objectives and policies as being relevant to this proposal: Goal #1 Encourage high quality redevelopment while preserving the unique architectural scale of the Village in order to sustain its sense of community and identity. 1.1 Objectiven Implement a consistent Development Review Process to reinforce the character of the Village. 11.1 Policy: 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, Plana 19 13 Obiective., Enhance new development and redevelopment through public improvements done by private developers working in cooperation with the Town. 1.301 Polio: Public improvements shall be developed with the participation of the private sector working with the Town. Goal m2 To foster a strong tourist industry and promote year-round economic health and viability forte Village and for the community as a whole. 2.1 Ob`ective: recognize the variety of land uses found in the 10 sub - areas throughout the Village and allow for development that is compatible with these established land use patterns. 2.3 01jeective. Increase the number of residential units available for short- term, overnight accommodations. 2.3 .1 PolmcL 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 activities where compatible with existing land uses. 2.5 b'ective: Encourage the continued upgrading, renovation and maintenance of existing lodging and commercial facilities to better serve the needs of our guests. 2.5.1 Polio: Recreation amenities, common areas, meeting facilities and other amenities shall be preserved and enhanced as a part of any redevelopment of lodging properties. 2.6 biective: Encourage the development of affordable housing units through the efforts of the private sector. 2.6.1 Policy: E mployee housing units may be required as part of any new or redeveloped project requesting density over that allowed by existing zoning. Goal #3 To recognize as a top priority the enhancement of the walking experience throughout the Village. .1 biective: Physically improve the existing pedestrian ways by landscaping and other improvements, 20 21 The Action Plan graphically expresses a summary of possible development which would be consistent with the elements of the Vail Village Master Plan. It is not an all-inclusive list, nor is it intended to restrict proposals that are not identified on the Action Plan. It is intended to provide suggestions and to act as a guide for implementing the Master Plan. The Vail Plaza Hotel is located in sub-area #1 of the Action Plan. Sub-area #1 is the mixed use activity center for Vail Village. It is distinguished from the Village core by the larger scale buildings, The area is further distinguished by the mixture of reside nti al/lodg i ng and commercial activity. According to the Plan, a significant increase in the Village's overnight bed base will occur within the area. According to the Action Plan, the Vail Plaza Hotel property is located within the mixed-use sub-area concept area #1-1, This concept area is Vail 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: rl serve as design guidelines instead of rigid rules of development; and complete copy of the report has been attached for reference (Exhibit J) 25 2. Infill commercial storefronts, expansion of existing buildings, or new infill development to create new commercial activity generators to give streetfife and visual interest, as attractions at key locations along pedestrian routes. It is not intended to enclose all Tillage streets with buildings as in the core areas. Dior is it desirable to leave pedestrian streets in the open in a somewhat undefined condition evident in many other areas of hail. Rather, it is desired to have a variety of open and enclosed spaces, both built and landscaped, which create a strong framework for pedestrian walks, as well as visual interest and activity. Staff Pes�nse: The Fail Plaza Motel redevelopment improves the streetscape framework through the creation of the new hotel and the resulting enhanced visual interest along Vail road. Through the construction of both the internal and external walkways, staff believes the proposed redevelopment creates the critical commercial connection between flail Gateway Plaza and East Meadow Drive 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 waifs 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, fiery 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 space seems unenclosed; and if the height is greater than the width it comes to resemble a canyon1. In actual application, facades are seldom uniform in height on both sides of the street, nor is this desired. Thus, some latitude is appropriate in the application of this 1/2 to 1 ratio. Using the average facade height on both sides will generally still be a guide to the comfortableness of the enclosure being created. In some instances, the "canyon" effect is acceptable and even desirable. For example, as a short connecting linkage between larger spaces, to give variety to the walking experience. For sun /shade reasons it is often advantageous to orient any longer segments in a north /south direction. Long canyon streets in an east /west direction should generally be discouraged. When exceptions to the general height criteria occur, special consideration should be given to create a well - defined ground floor pedestrian emphasis to overcome the Is"canyon" effect. 25 Canopies, awnings, arcades and building extensions can all create a pedestrian focus and divert attention from the upper building heights and "canyon" effect, 0 ® Staff Response: E. STREET EDGE 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 ad tend 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. Plazas, patios, and green areas are important focal points for gathering, resting, orienting and should be distributed throughout the Village with due consideration to spacing, sun access, opportunities for views and pedestrian activity. Staff Response: The Vail Plaza Hotel has street frontage along Vail Road and the South Frontage Road. The remainder of the building has building fronts internal to the development. The edge of the building has been designed at the street level to be varied and irregular through the use of recessed entries, arched arcades and horizontallvertical steps in the building foot print. Staff believes that at the street level the design of the building conforms with the intent of the street edge design consideration. 26 N F. BUILDING HEIGHT Vail Village is perceived as a mix of two and three sty facades, although there are also g g 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 Rgsoohse. As discussed previously, the flail Plaza Hotel exceeds the allowable building height prescribed for the Public Accommodation Zone District. However, staff does not feel that the proposed height of the Vail Plaza Hotel is excessive, given the location of the building at the northern periphery of the Village core and the height of the buildings on the adjoining properties. The applicant has submitted a .scale model of the Vail Plaza Hotel in its Village context and this model will be available for use by the Planning & Environmental Commission during the final review, process, I--I. SERVICE AND DELIVERY Any building expansion should preserve the functions of existing service alleys. The few service alleys that exist in the Village are extremely important to minimizing vehicle congestion on pedestrian ways. The use of, and vehicular access to, those alleys should not be eliminated except where functional alternatives are not provided. In all new and remodeled constriction, delivery which avoids or reduces impacts on pedestrian ways should be explored; and adopted whenever practical, for immediate or future use. Rear access, basement and below ground delivery corridors reduce congestion. Weather protection increases delivery efficiency substantially. Below grade delivery corridors are found in a few buildings in Mail Village ( itzmark% ore 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, the opportunity may exist to develop segments of a future system. ® staff des onset Through the course of staff's review of the Vail Plaza Hotel redevelopment proposal, several loading and delivery options were explored. The applicant had originally proposed to provide far fewer berths than what the current design proposes. However, the applicant has amended the plans to provide a total of five berths on the property. These five berths will be able to be utilized by the entire mail Village Inn Plaza and are connected via a series of elevators and below grade service areas. The service areas are located away from areas of major pedestrian activity. The main service area is adjacent to the South Frontage road in an enclosed facility. The centralized approach to this facility is unprecedented in Vail. Staff mould recommend that the applicant continue to explore opportunities to improve the truck traffic and passenger car traffic interface in the access way within the enclosed facility. 1. SUN/SHADE Due to Vail's alpine climate, sun is an important comfort factor, especially in winter, fall and spring. Shade areas have ambient temperatures substantially below those of adjacent direct sunlight areas. On all but the warmest of summer days, shade can easily lower temperatures below comfortable levels, and thereby, negatively impact use of those areas. All new or expanded buildings should not substantially increase the spring and fall shadow line (March 21 - September 23) on adjacent properties or the public right -of -way. In all building construction, shade shall be considered in massing and overall height consideration. Notwithstanding, sun /shade considerations are not intended to restrict building height allowances, but rather to influence the massing of buildings. Limited height exceptions may be granted to meet this criteria. is 28 Overhangs Generous roof overhangs are also an established architectural feature g atu e in the Village - a traditional expression of shelter in alpine environments. Roof overhangs typically range from 3 to 6 feet on all edges. Specific design consideration should be given to protection of pedestrian ways adjacent to buildings, Snow slides and runoff hazards can be reduced by roof orientation, gutters, arcades, etc. Overhang details are treated with varying degrees of ornamentation. Structural elements such as roof beams are expressed beneath the overhangs, simply or decoratively carved. The roof fascia is thick and wide, giving a substantial edge to the roof. 0 Staff Response The overhangs on the Vail Plaza Hotel vary, depending on location, and are generally four feet in depth. The overhangs are supported by timber bracing which adds character and visual interest to the overall appearance of the building. Staff believes that the proposal complies with the above- described criteria, Compositions The intricate roofscape of the Village as a whole is the result of many individual simple roof configurations. For any single building a varied, but simple composition of roof planes is preferred to either a single or a complex arrangement of many roofs. As individual roofs become more complex, the roof attracts visual attention away from the streetscape and the total roofscape tends toward "busyness" rather than a backdrop composition. ® Staff Response The roof form on the Vail Plaza Hotel would be considered 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 As buildings are stepped to reflect existing grade changes, resulting roof steps should be made where the height change will be visually significant. Variations which are too subtle appear to be more stylistic than functional, and out of character with the more straight-forward roof design typical in the !tillage. Staff Response The Vail Plaza Hotel site is relatively flat (by Vail's standards). While the building does not need to step to follow the topography, vertical and horizontal steps and dormers have been incorporated into the roof design. The vertical and horizontal steps and dormers provide a reduction in the overall mass of the building and adds to the architectural and visual interest of the building. Staff believes that the stepped roofs of the !fail Plaza Hotel comply with the, intent of the above - described criteria. 0 30 Of the above materials, stucco is the most consistently used material. Most of the buildings in the Village exhibit some stucco, and there are virtually no areas where stucco is entirely absent. It is intended to preserve the dominance of stucco by its use in portions, at least, of all new facades, and by assuring that other materials are not used to the exclusion of stucco in any sub- area within the Village. a Staff Ep,2ponse As a measure of transparency, the most characteristic and successful ground floor facades range from 55% to 70% of the total length of the commercial facade. Upper floors are often the converse, 30%-45% transparent. 37 Doors Like windows doors are important - to character and scale giving architectural elements. They should also be somewhat transparent (on retail commercial facades) and consistent in detailing with windows and ether facade elements. Doors with glass contribute to overall facade transparency. Due to the visibility of people and merchandise inside, windowed doors are somewhat more effective in drawing people inside to retail commercial facades. Although great variations exist, 25 -30% ± transparency is felt to be a minimum transparency objective. Private residences, lodges, restaurants, and other non - retail establishments have different visibility and character needs, and doors should be designed accordingly. Sidelight windows are also a means of introducing door - transparency as a complement or substitute for door windows. Articulated doors have the decorative quality desired for Vail. Flush doors, light aluminum frames, plastic applique elements all are considered inappropriate. As an expression of entry, and sheltered welcome, protected entry -ways are encouraged. Doorways may be recessed, extended, or covered. ,staff es�o�ase 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 elements, which tie the various elements together in one composition. endows and doors are treated as strong visual features. Glass - wall detailing for either is typically avoided. ® ,staff Response; Staff believes the applicant's proposal complies with the above- described criteria. DECKS AND PATIOS Coining decks and patios, when properly designed and sited, bring people to the streets, opportunities to look and be looked at, and generally contribute to the liveliness of a busy street making a richer pedestrian experience than if those streets were empty. review of successful decks /patios in Vail reveals several common characteristics: - direct sunlight from 11:00 - 3:00 increases use by many days /year and protects from wind. - elevated to give views into the pedestrian walk (and not the reverse). - physical separation from pedestrian walk. - overhang gives pedestrian scale/shelter. Checks and patios should be sited and designed with due consideration to: - sun - wind - views - pedestrian activity 3 Materials Wood balconies es a e by far the most common. Vertical structural members are the most dominant visually, often decoratively sculpted. Decorative wrought iron balconies are also consistent visually where the vertical members are close enough to create semi-transparency, Wipe rails, and plastic, canvas or glass panels should be avoided. ® Staff esponse The material to be used in the construction of the balconies on the hotel is wood, with vertical structural members. A detail of the railing will be reviewed by the DRB. ACCENT ELEMENTS The life, and festive quality of the Village is given by judicious use of accent elements which give color, movement and contrast to the Village. Colorful accent elements consistent with existing character are encouraged, such as; Awnings and canopies - canvas, bright color or stripes of two colors. Flags, banners - hanging from buildings, poles, and even across streets for special occasions. Umbrellas - over tables on outdoor patios. Annual color flowers - in beds or in planters. Accent lighting- buildings, plazas, windows, trees (even Christmas lights all winter). Fainted wall graphics - coats of arras, symbols, accent compositions, etc. Fountains - sculptural, with both winter and summer character. 0 Staff Pesonsea Accent lighting on the building, annual flowers in containers and in the planting beds, potted trees decorated with Christmas lights and irrigated flower boxes are proposed to provide colorful accent elements on the Fail Plaza Hotel. Staff would suggest that the applicant provide an additional accent symbol (clock, crest, etc.) on the main elevator tower. The tower is visible from a distance as illustrated in the view analysis and would serve as focal point to guests and visitors. 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. 36 Staff Response Landscape retaining walls are proposed on the north, west and south sides of the building. The retaining walls are needed to provide groper grading and drainage around the building. The surface material of the new landscape retaining will match the stone on the exterior of the building. h! !tin Light standards should be coordinated with those used by the Town.in the public right -of -way. a Staff Response As part of the streetscape improvements along ball Road, East Meadow Drive and the South Frontage Road, the applicant will be installing new Village light fixtures. The number and locations of the new lights was determined through consultation with Town staff i na e Defer to Town of Mail Signage Ordinance a Staff Res onset Given the staging of the application, signage has not yet been considered by the staff or the applicant. The staff has requested that the applicant prepare a comprehensive sign program for the Vail Plaza Hotel for review at a future date. The comprehensive sign program will be reviewed by the DRE. SERVICE Trash handling is extremely sensitive in a pedestrian environment. Trash 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 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. 3 The staff reviewed the technical aspects of the proposal for compliance with the prescribed regulations. Upon review of the proposal staff finds that the applicant will need to be provided relief for the proposed deviations from the building height, setback and multi -use parking credit formula if this proposal is to be approved. As discussed previously, staff believes that the request for additional building height is reasonable and appropriate given the existing circumstances. We also believe that relief should be provided from the parking requirements of the regulations. Staff feels that relief is justified given size of the hotel, the mixture of uses within the hotel and the District as a whole, and recent trends in resort travel, Staff continues, however, to be concerned with regard to the proposed Vail Road setback. We believe that some encroachment of building improvements into the front setback is appropriate given the context of the built environment of the area, the hotel design along the street fagade, and the provision of open plaza space on the interior of the development. While the applicant speaks of average setbacks, staff is more focused on the minimum distances the face of the hotel and the back of the curb along Vail Road. The minimum distance proposed is only 1 feet from the multi -story face of the hotel to the back of the curb. Within this area the applicant is required to provide an eight -foot wide paver sidewalk, landscaping, and room for snow storage. Staff would recommend that the applicant be required to increase the proposed Vail Road setback to insure adequate distances are provided to meet the intended needs of the Town's right -of -way and the front setback. An exact distance can not be determined at this time. A final determination can be made once a final landscape plan and streetscape improvements plan is submitted and reviewed. circulation system designed for both vehicles and pedestrians addressing on are off -site traffic circulation. The on- site /off -site vehicular and pedestrian circulation system design has been discussed in great detail. Much of the discussion with the Board and Commission centered on providing adequate pedestrian and vehicular access to, from and within the development site. In response to the concerns, the applicant has redesigned many areas of the plan, The pedestrian areas include the pedestrian connection through the hotel to the Gateway wilding, the alleyway spaces between the hotel and Phases III & V, the plaza area south of the hotel, and the pedestrian link from the hotel entrances to the new bus stop on East Meadow Drive. The vehicular areas included providing adequate turning and maneuvering area at the porte cochere, the entrance only and exit only driveway locations on Vail Road and the entering and exiting design of the loading/ delivery facility. Pursuant to the submittal requirements for the major amendment request, the applicant was required to submit a Traffic Report. A Traffic Report has been prepared by the traffic consulting firm of Felsburg, Holt & Ullevig. The purpose of the report is to evaluate the impacts of the hotel development and the proposed traffic pattern circulation on the Town's street system. This report has been used by staff to analyze traffic impacts of this project. In summary the transportation engineers find that the proposed vehicular circulation system is reasonable and appropriate. It is believed that through minor mitigation measures such as signage and enter only /exit only design that the traffic impacts and safety concerns of the Town can be resolved. impact on the development objectives of the Community. 42 • U 5. unit GRFA as fractional fee club unit GRFA. The Vail Plaza Hotel proposal is a redevelopment of an existing hotel. The 43 accommodations when not in use by the club members, and thus enhance the overall hotel bed base in Town. C. The ability of the proposed project to create and maintain a high level of occupancy. The fractional fee club component of the Vail Plaza motel proposal is intended to provide additional hotel and "hotel - type" accommodation units in the Town of Vail. The applicant is proposing to incorporate 46 member - owned club units (fractional fee club units with 62 lock -off units), with new accommodation (hotel) rooms. Although not included in the equivalency requirement, the fractional fee club units have been designed to accommodate lock -off units. Staff believes that lock -off units provide an additional community benefit of added "pillows ". If a fractional fee club unit owner purchases an interest in a multiple bedroom unit, and does not desire to utilize all the bedrooms, they can then have the opportunity of returning the unused bedrooms (lock -offs) to a rental program. Staff feels that by providing lock -off units, and managing the availability of the lock -off units in a recital program when not in use, a fractional fee club project can significantly increase the availability of accommodation units in the Town of Vail. Through our research on the fractional fee issue back in 1996, staff then identified some potential positive impacts of fractional fee units in the Town of Vail: A) Activity during the "shoulder seasons" tends to increase due to an increase in year - round occupancy, D) The attraction of revenue - generating tourists, C) The efficient utilization of resources. This is the "warm beds" concept, D) More pride of ownership and community buy -in with fractional fee club units than with accommodation units; ) Increased levels of occupancy; and F) Increased resort exposure due to the extensive number of interval owners. Staff believes these potential positive impacts are still true today. To verify occupancy rates, staff called the operating manager of the Austria Haus. The manager revealed that the annualized occupancy rate for the club component alone was approximately ? ? ? ?? in 1996. d. Employee housing may be required as art of any new or redevelopment fractional fee club project requesting density over that allowed zoning. The number of employee hoc i unity will be consistent it employee impacts that are expected as suit of the project. The staff included the fractional fee club units Into the calculation of the employee generation resulting from the proposed major amendment of the Special Development District. used strictly on the number of club units, the development will generate a need for 125 66new" employees. When the 44 f4... ... ��, �. ., ti ,. •` Z �E H R E N Isloz. US ";c • 0 0 11° , 1 1 � k Atli_ i t LA L j 7 ... ._�._ hit / �� % ' , ['9� - °._— .I t t 1� i•t v� Av� �f` � 1 i h 1 a Z E R I A i t E rJ *1 Plaza Hotel Site Vignettes j� AND A55 Ci ES fNC, I Vail, Colorado � November � y Plan (' _ November 23, 1999 i November 23, 1999 I i isA r 4� i i f r � t i i i ���`yg I i VaH Maza HotL-t� Vail, Colorado NoveipjLr 23, 1999 i' x Z E !1H IR, E N4 AND ASSOCINTES, INC, VaH H Hc1d Vail, Colorado November 23, 1499 _ - y i —H2 N? ` �tid H5�' T r. I'- _ 17 Hi0 H19 H2� H29 F122 M23 H29 ,'fie g� • - 9 - -�. r� , r s -� f% 41 Lave Three Scale: 1 `= 50' -0" '107 �� I CL- I Ia Fro m Fvmc c _ i I �T- v-lo' V-73 V-112 1 V 7� V 40 V-2 "J 75 V-7"" VAI 77 v 7 v I, 7, �7,7 °4 7 11 17 Ij V-19 1'93 771 t'v '29 + v o V-H — — — — — -- — -- — — — — — — — — -- -- — — — — -- — — — — — — — -90 —V v 91 TF II JL v 122, !I —T '7, 25 IF U i i I!_, � \' a. F,3 F 11 1 1 22 F-23 '!F-I� F.3p F-3 is -33 F,I V-211 `i9 T FA2 r-111 F-n 115 31 1-1 r-53 F-13 7 1..._.__._---- a-- - -- — VaIH Haza Hote� Vail, Colofado NOVeMber 23, 1999 Aft 4�Levd Knus Two Scaie: I "= 50'-0" AOL 0 to mutd� ■ a %i w� tit i' iiir t�1t�tP �� `a �v West Elevation Vaal Nana H t l Vail, Colorado AND ASSOCIATES, INC. Nnvernber 23, 1999 A&flfif0.1i1Rf rixwax+e: - INYYA.eIdS P,P..MSX ItrYt AVOtl CCL��MW xt0.;tl hY 9n19 H4M5) tA{bA ^evi08H East Elevation .r µ West Elevation Vaal Nana H t l Vail, Colorado AND ASSOCIATES, INC. Nnvernber 23, 1999 A&flfif0.1i1Rf rixwax+e: - INYYA.eIdS P,P..MSX ItrYt AVOtl CCL��MW xt0.;tl hY 9n19 H4M5) tA{bA ^evi08H East Elevation %1 115 9 �i R" �m iI T3TM° C 6 1 fS.tAl d^` Gt Cil;h -t o m . T _Front11"s North Elevation Courtyard IA �- — f� Hod II 1� Mid i — — t rx t. West Elevation COUrtyard SND ASSOCIATES, fNC. lxantfc.Tl,a . nnlr_<urap - Imeacrz ".L.6pR I9IP hbCXj fYX �,�� ai64d %1 115 9 �i R" �m iI T3TM° C 6 Cil;h -t o m . 7 — tl-- o� 0 Flaza Hutd e x�i•a x�� - x Vail, Colorado vim, vf� . r fi ro l Yt P. d.pOX i9 nVON, i[Yfvtr,L'til 61 sxt November 23, 1999 1�r� 11� a� � � T'+wt 4M ��•f � "� 'ih � i� LIVIA x f� M 9' 407 0 AM w1iJLai,E5} Tfi,, "t�''!'{`1l',ti �•, �.• ;�•_ �- uf��'�ta�- # kg's ,�,' r� �.. � _..a� r � s West Elevation 4 f"""nnyI— . aua lit ! li tzt -3�t East Elevation qw 0 Flaza Hutd AND ASSOCIATES, INC Vail, Colorado vim, vf� . r fi ro l Yt P. d.pOX i9 nVON, i[Yfvtr,L'til 61 sxt November 23, 1999 tF4.��5i5Il257 fAX M'"'V65C9tl East Elevation qw South Elevation Scale: !'= 5W W � '��> � T'+wt 4M ��•f � "� 'ih � i� LIVIA '�asirtfr. South Elevation Scale: !'= 5W W c North Elevation COLIrtyarc (flub _ C -ub ?to:cl Rcsmu,�ani Club 40 L West Elevation Courtyard ZEHIIRE AND ASSOCIA'PE5, INC. .+PC}mzrvac . n.w�affc , I,urralrna P,O B(>R i83f Alx#(; fCaf.F "8fn IY1 PShY 3�41tt5 fNl (flub _ C -ub ?to:cl Rcsmu,�ani Building A Vail Village Inn Phase V Village Road Elevation T P�' 111 ! /ail Village, Inn --I r m -Utg —A.'i 1"';, -- - jjU f fl�= L Phase III Vail Plaza Hotel P Building 8 Gateway Building North Frontage Road Elevation VaH P Q a z a "'Hul ote StreeT Sections 1 Z E 11 v i 1 \411 AND ASSOCIATES, INC. Vail, Colorado November 23, 1999 --- -------- -- Auilding A lilt IL 57 oa iJ I f \'O �- ID E L BUilding, 11 _ _ Ei —7-1 t4 J-D -t - L-1 r2, o- - N � a� S— X711 co) ')4 VaH Nam Hote� 4� BLflUng �6'ght Phan I Z E INI RR E N AND ASSOMATES, INC. Vail, Colorado Absolute Heights Novernber 23, Scale 1999 Intetpolated Cwitours Ill= 50' ------- - — ------ ------ PP'N':4 SO Lj Building 7- J- 3 -1711) =L 01 VP -�A <ell i�Butvldng FMghbt Man 2 1 Maxilywin I leight Abow, Grade Inteipolated Contours Scale: 1 "= 50,4P Pool Section I3 -B Pool Section G -C l Tun YI'J;�r kl3 I _01 {I I d 3 Ii> k3 1111 v I � 4 k F v / Poo] Section C -C Jy� .- i Pool Section E -E Pool Section A -A Z� HRyIE :No� � 'H H � AND ASSOCIATES, iC. Vail, Colorado ° November 23, 1999 1 � i3O.%c,X "I' 1§Yd AKttI. ,Y?IpA!LLXI 9 +.5M tt1. yYM, m +4 -COY] F/vYPmm N9 -i[r� I li�i- 11 Vail Road .1 -1 Va H Naza H t [1 Vail, Colorado Novernber 23, 1999 0 0 • N Gmcling Plan II li I�, 35' St.raigl i tbu dy/5 O'Artic u I ated 19'-6" Sport Utility Vehicle 45' Coach Vail Plaza Hotel Vail, Colorado NaNcmber23, 1999 t Z E IH1 FR, December 21 10:00 aan. Winter Solstice Decernber 2 2:66 p,rn. March 21 /Septernk er 23 March 21 /September 23 16: {)6 a.rn. 2:66 p.m. Spring/ Fall Equinox March 21 /September 23 2:60 p.m. Winter Solstice December 21 12:06 noon s Z:u0 noon ulm-n r Solstice June 21 12:60 noon Average S-etback Three and Four Story Areas I c f ?— I A Street Section 0 c Average S-etback Three and Four Story Areas I c f ?— I A Street Section 0 Devartment of Community Development 5 youth lzrontaQe Roam Vail, Colorado 81657 970- 479 -21 �8 E4X 970-479-24-523 FE N Tor Town of Vail Design Preview Board From: Community Deveiopn7ent Department Date: December 1, 1999 c— Vail Plaza Xic >te: - Preliminary T2ecorriniendation to the Vail Town Council 1n an icipation of appearing before the Vail. Town Council for first reading of an ame- ending ordinance to allow for the redevelopment ok Phase W of the Vail Village Inn Special Development District, the applicant has requested a prelirmmary recommendation from the Desip. Review Board. P ,rsuant to the Town Code, in part `no person shall building construction or demo! ition within the corporate li�nzts of the Tcau n unless dcsi n approval has been granted in accordance with Title i2, Chapter III of the Town Code, Should the Design Review Board choose io make a preliminary recommendation of approval to the Vail Town Council on the redevelopment proposal for the Vail Plaza Hotel, staff would suggest that the following :indin47 ar d conditions be made par of the recommendation. `Upon the )relimi ary review and consideration tit the redevelopment proposal for the Vail Plaza Hotel. the > {lard finds that. the Vail Plaza hotel will be compatible with existing siructrues, the hotel's surroundings and with Vail 's en vironi —ne^t. Eric Board ftifner finds dual the proposal is in compliancc with the applicable provisions of the Desigm C7uidelines prescribed in Title 12, Chapter i.1 of the Town Code and the Vail Vii'la,e Master Plan & Urban Design Considerations. Therefore, herefore, the Board recorurnends approval of the redevelopment proposal for the Vail Plaza Motel. 'flue board's recommendation of approval carries with i± the following conditions: 1. 'l.L1c?t the cipT7iicarjt subrilits a final landscape plan. final off site it ^provements plan, and outdoor ligating plan in accordance with the provisions prescribed in the Zoning 1w;,gula 'ons for review and approval o? ti e Design Review Board. 2. Thai the applicant submIts ' final exterior building materials list and color rendering Ior review and approval of the Design Review Board. 'That the applicant submits a comprehensive sign program proposal for the Vail Plaza 1 -loiel. T at the applicant su'b its a )L told mechanical prior to the 1ssiiance of a bulidln g, pe:'l:'.iI. All roof". top - mechanical eauiprnent shall be enclosed and screened from public view. RE! YC: ED PAPER 0 w0m;A" I lists illy lot 5 1, "'' - - a l �� 2 i -, � 5* i t ­ WANK TWO - ��. r� a 1. 1d colossi AA MAR e a j - \. f ? 1%T �" 1 PSiA5� � y r 3 d;'°�i ` to i. r t r 1 Wall Min ( t i - jvw ny ANY ,I I Y11 JAR fW[k Wjj n. �.. w P Qei ?gSJi 9 •. / a a '!ti sw SKY its>..`) Y \ 1 Y r J ' �' _ g Revised 1999 SDD Major Aendanent Proposal Vail Plaza Hotel 1 117% or 175,666 sq. ft. (Revised 12/13/99) Lot size: 1.467 acres or 63,902.5 sq. ft. (Phase IV & IV -A only) 12.7 du /acre 3.45 acres or 150,282 sq, ft. (All Phases) 6' 5', 0', 2', & 5' 5 1999 SDD Major Development Underlying Zoning Existing Amendment Proposal Standard of Public Accommodation Vail Village Inn 6relected� (42 existing cx Phase 1I1) Lot Area 10,000 sq.ft min. 150,282 sq. ft. 150,282 sq. ft. GRFA: up to 150% or 225,423 sq. ft. 83% or 124,527 sq. ft. 133% or 200,460 sq, ft. (87,889 sq. ft. existing) (129,156 s% ft. proposed) rt (36,638 sq. ft. remaining) Dwelling units per acre: 25 dulacre 24 du /acre 12.7 du /acre (ALI & FFU unlimited) Site coverage: 65% or 97,683 sq. ft. 37% or 56,188 sq. ft. 62% or 92,637 sq. ft. Setbacks: front: 20' N/A 12' sides: 20' N/A 0', 8' & 6' rear: 20' N/A 8' Height: 48' sloping 68' sloping 85.75' sloping (Phase HI) 87.5' (arch, prof.) Parking: per T. 0. V. Code Section 177 spaces 394 parking spaces (373 required at build -out per Ord.) Loading: per T.O.V. Code Section three berths six berths 12 -10 -13 Landscaping 30% N/A N/A Commercial sq. footage: 10% of allowable GRFA 31% of GRFA or 38,961 sq. ft. 23% of GRFA or 47,226 sq. ft. or 22,542 sq. ft. F: \everyone\pec\rnemos \vviza I Revised 1999 SDD Major Aendanent Proposal 150,282 sq. ft. 117% or 175,666 sq. ft. (104,362 sq. ft. proposed) 12.7 du /acre 62% or 92,637 sq. ft. 6' 5', 0', 2', & 5' 5 73' sloping 73.75' (arch. proj,) 288 parking spaces (246 new parking spaces) (42 existing cx Phase 1I1) five berths 25% or 19,171 sq. ft. 26% of GRFA or 46,124 sq. ft. k't rt r3 M 0 rt Attachment C Vail Plaza Hotel Proposal Comparison (revised 12/13/99) The following, table provides a comparison between the 1998 Mail Plaza Hotel proposal and the most recent 1999 Vail Plaza Hotel proposal 1998 SDD Major Development Amendment Proposal 1999 SDD Major Standard/ (rejected Amendment Pre sal Plus/ Minus Let Area: 150,282 sq. ft. 150,282 sq. ft. No Change G FA: 133% or 200,460 sq. ft. 118% or 176,910 sq. ft. 16% or 23,550 sq. ft. (129,156 sq. fit. proposed) (105,606 sq. ft. proposed) { - 23,550 sq. fit.) Dwelling units per acre: 0.29 du /acre 0.29 du/acre No Change (276 au) (99 au) - 177 au (15 ffu) (48 ffu) + 33 ffu (1 du) (1 du) No Change Site coverage: 62% or 92,637 sq. ft. 62% or 92,637 sq. ft. No Change Setbacks: front: 12' 9' -31 sides: 5', 2', & 6' 5', 2', & 0' nc, no, & -6 rear: 8' 5' - 3' Height: 85.75' sloping 74.25' sloping - 11.5' 87.5' (arch.proj.) 93.5' (arch. proj.) + 6' Parking: 394 parking spaces 288 parking spaces - 106 parking spaces (246 new parking spaces) (42 existing parking spaces) Loading: six berths five berths - one berth Gross Building Area: approx. 395,862 sq. ft. approx. 328,958 sq. ft. - 66,904 sq. ft. Conference/ Meeting Facility: approx. 21,009 sq. ft. approx. 15,338 sq. ft. - 5,671 sq. Spa Area: approx. 27,802 sq. ft. approx. 24,799 sq. ft. - 3,003 sq. ft. F:\everyone\pec\memos\vvipc Tuesday, October 19, 1999 -t i- E H R . Re: Vail Plaza Hotel Attachment D Vail Plaza Hotel Zehren and Associates. Inc. 961070.00 10/ 19/99 guardrails, or walls meant to provide for the safety of pedestrians on the sidewalk, and/or drainage systems meant to control surface water runoff. It is assumed that the items specifically excluded will be provided by another entity to be coordinated with the proposed sidewalk. Additionally it is assumed that all improvements along the South Frontage Road will be at the discretion of the Colorado Department of Transportation. L public Transportation Impacts — Fast Meadow Drive. The Vail Plaza Motel is proposing to provide public transportation infrastructure improvements in accordance with the streetscape, master plan for a new bus stop adjacent to the westernmost portion of the Vail Village Inn Phase IA structure to mitigate impacts in this area. The proposed improvements relocation of fixed bus signage and fixtures, and a bus stop similar in size, materials and character to the existing bus stop located on the south side of the roadway. Additional landscape improvements and final configuration will be provided in accordance with design review and other applicable zoning regulations. It is our understanding that the existing surface water runoff from the existing structures and the proposed structures on the site is would be in the same quantities and would drain to the same locations as currently exist. Additionally, we would assume no increase in surface water on our site would occur from the design of proposed drainage structures on the South Frontage Road. Therefore would assume that no major drainage infrastructure improvements would be necessary to accommodate the proposed structures. Please do not hesitate to contact me with any questions or concerns. Sincerely, Tim Losa Project Manager Zehren and Associates, Inc. 2 e Tuesday, October 19, 1999 Re: Vail Plaza Motel E. Natural Hazards. We believe there are no natural hazards that may affect develODment of this site. l i p. I t � ,j ,/ �� \\.. �wv,��� tv ti�� f -- _ f F` ! x � _ I CONCEPTUAL BUILDING r HEIGHT PLAN LEGEND 7. 3,4 MAXIMUM RANGE OF BUILDING HEIGHT IN STORIES '� b VAIL VI PLAN A 6ulidng story is d (n ©d 3s B feet of Wight � (no cool Included) Ezact height restrictions' will be determined by zoning. Varied roof heights within range soecilied is desired for each building ' DENOTES EXISTING OR APPROVED BUILDINGS WHICH DO NOT CONFORM TO THE CONCEPTUAL BUILDING HEIGHT PLAN SHADING DENOTES AREAS OF SIMILAR HEIGHT �� �� �4 e�F � �J� G�ti` ��� \�a4 ® _ � - - -P -- — - - ----� � ® ��rw � ® �� 0 e � > �o _ -. �, Pi R E P Vail Plaza Hotel November 22, r AND ASS 5t En73 �.. IN' November ! is Vail, Plaza Hotel November , H APf d A 1A!F 5 @e C; womw.; Vail, Plaza Hotel November , MEMORANDUM rrr C PERMANENT STAFF PART-TIME 1 L work I hours/ axi® FUNCTIONS a- year work mum I by department nent 40 hours peak or staff. hstweek per days 1 employees x 50 peak per per 2 (no 1) wk/year day year year 3 Lod in (hotel & Club) anager 1 2,000 5 A istant manager 4 61000 j I rGeneral 6 Guest relations 2. 4,0001 16 1,472 7 Front Office ; 1 16,000 241 2 2,206 6 Concierge 2 4,000 6 92 736 9 Bell man j 2 4,000 48 92 4,416 10 PBX 31 6,000 16 92 1,472 11 Reservations 31 6,000 12 Sales & Marketing 4 6,000 13 Accounting 6 12,000 14 Housekeeping supervisor 2 4,000 15 maid service, 15 30,000 40 92 3,680 16 Engineering 9 16,000 24 92 2,208 17 Garage Operations 3 6,000 16 9 1,472 1 in (hotel & Club) 64 128,000 9 Food & Beverage ) many er+host 31 6,000 16 92 1,472 1 aiters+busboy(1:3 waiters) 11 13 269000 40 921 3,660 22 bar 3 6,000 8 92 73 23 kitchen 16 32,000 24 Room Service: 4 6,000 16 92 1,472 5 Food & Beverage ( ) 39, 78,000 7, 26 Conference Center 3 6,000 81 92 1, 27 Health Club/SPA j 26 reception 4 6,000 2 app keeping 4 ,000 16, 92 1,472 0 therapist 10 20,000 161 92 1,472 31 exercise room 2 4,000 j 32 Health Club/SPA , 33 it (3 shops) j 12,0001 161 92 1,472 3 I 1321 264,0001 42,688 35 hours/ year % i 100% % 36 Average part time help work hours /peak day 37 One full time work hears /year 2,0 36 o a pa - ime euiva en o i e 21 E46"4 Grand Total full time equivalent 40 Average hers /part time employee/peak day lNumber 41 of part time names =(avg hse er peak day) /(hs/da ) 7 116 rtes 143 continue 44 rrr r CMjV r- note 6,:, ii�tis a typical phours/peak dmay of a part time p y � ypic ou s mes" on the payroll. Evidently depends on the average part-time hours/peakday O'L it is t tC o —te the total parttime na es 99 equiv VVI increa- 58 58 Employee Tota Employee Totals V VVI equiv.* se 59 59 full time 132 132 42 42 60 60 part time 116 21 —32 7 614 total 248 153 74 49 .�2 * part time at same ratio as VPH 63 64— VPH STAFFING IS BASED ON THE FOLLOLWLINLG��__ 65 uses —Hotel of units quant. 66— units 97 67 Club units-- 46 Hotel + Club 8 units 143 119 Hotel & Club YEAR occupancy —persons 750A 1 5- /occupied unit 1875 71 Hotel + Club population —maid 9 persons 188 7_2 service —walk —dinner o rms/m­aid­_=F= 10 73— in for lunch or 1-0 —customers/function/day 80 74 jRestaurant & bar - - - -- 11 sf 3,613 75 kitchen 11 sf T6_ Conference --------- 11 sf ---3,200 7,004 777 T_ Health Club/SPA 11 sf 79009 18 Retail 1-1 3,550 99 A 1Yw BBYB A FIWL-IL.PM T II r' r, vYC iVu,-> days/ days/peak days wk.end total Veterans -Nov Thanksgiving 25- Nov 3 2-Dec 9-Dec 16-Dec ri s 71 NewYear 7 an Luther K 13—Jan 2-Jan _ —� Linc,al, re 3 s� 3 3 3 3j Staatrick 21 3 3 Good Fri 3 -Apr winter t ®tai 3 1 7 Indepen ce 3' 3 3 3 3 3 summer total 3 1 1 14-Apr 21 -Apr 28-Apr er's 5-May 3 Armed Fore 12-May 19- ay e on 1 26-May 2-Jun ranParen Jun Father's 16—Jun 3 23-Jun 12-Aug 3 19—Aug 26-Aug 2-Sep 9-Sep —I— Yom Kipur 1 3 23- Sep 30-Sep Columbus 7-Oct 3 14-Oct 21 -Oct Halloween 128 -Oct 4-Nov 13 9 27 year t l 5 0 Use Area Factor §IACMS- Dwelling Unit 5,499 sq. ft. >2,000-sq. f.t Town 2.5 Vail Plaza Hotel 2.5 Fractional Fee Club 64,094 sq. ft. 500<2,000 sq. ft./>2,000 sq, ft. Town 96.5 Vail Plaza Hotel 96.5 Accommodation Units 36,013 sq. ft. 0.4 spaces/unit + 0.1 spaces/1 00 sq.ft. Town 75.6 Vail Plaza Hotel 75.6 Restaurant 5,775 sq. ft. 1 space/8 seats Town 48.1 1 space /101.9 sq. ft. Vail Plaza Hotel 56.7 �Retail 4,047 sq. ft. 1 space/300 sq. ft. Town 13.5 Vail Plaza Hotel 13.5 Conference/ Meeting Rooms 10,368 sq. ft. I space/16 seats Town 43.2 Vail Plaza Hotel 43.2 do Table 3: Total Parking Requirement for all Phases of SDD #6 (a + b - existing spaces to remai ) x multiple use credit 'Gran Tot, )wn of Vail Requirement (279.4 61 Plaza Hotel Proposal (28&0 + 1913 - 42) x 0.9 = 393.9 TRAFFIC FACT ANALYSIS Vail Plaza Hotel Prepared for; Zehren & associates, lnc. P.O, Soy 1976 Avon, CO 816X3 Client Contact; Mr. Timothy R. Losa Prepared by; Felsburg Holt & Ullevig Greenwood Corporate Plaza 7951 E. Maplewood Avenue, Suite 2030 Englewood, CO 80111 303/721 -1 440 Engineer; Holly A. Hefner Project Engineer; Chris J. Fascing, P.E. FHU Reference No. 98 -17 September, 1998 ^ ' ` ` / TABLE OF CONTENTS � Paoe � ( INTRODUCTION ` A. Land Use,- Site and Study area Boundaries ` B. Existing Conditions ` U. PROJECTED TRAFFIC CONDITIONS � . . � . . . . ^ . . ` . ^ 7 ` � . . . � . . . . . � . � � .. . A. Trip Generation and Design Hourly Volumes 7 B ' Trip Distribution ^''''' ....8 C. Year 2015 Projected Traffic Vo|uroes . . . . . ' ^ . . . ' � . . ^ . . . ^ . . - ' . . . ,8 Ai YEAR 2015 TRAFFIC OPERATIONS , . . . . . . . . ^ . . , . . 12 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . , , ' A. Background Traffic ' ' ' ''' ' ^ `~ '^^ ' .. � ... 12 B. Total Traffic ' ','' ^ ' ^ ~^' ' ^' '' '^ ' ' ^' ' '^ ' ' ' '^ ' ^ ` ' ' . . . . . ' . . 12 ` ` (V. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS . � . . ' . ' . . . . ^ 14 . . . ' . . . . . . . . . . APPENDIX /\ TRAFFIC COUNTS APPENDIX B- EXISTING CONDITIONS LOS APPENDIX C - YEAR 2015 BACKGROUND CONDITIONS LOS APPENDIX D YEAR 2015 TOTAL CONDITIONS LOS ` , - LIST OF FIGURES Pane 1 Vicinity Map ...... 2 2. Site Plan 3 3, Estimated Existing Winter Conditions 4 4, Trip Distribution . . . . - . . . ...... 6 6. Year 2015 Background Traffic Conditions ... 10 7, Year 2015 Total Traffic Conditions LIST OF TABLES i Existing Trip Generation Estimates ...... ........ 7 2, Proposed Trip Generation Estimates 8 1, INTRODUCTION A. Land Use, Site and Study area Boundaries Zehren and Associates, !no, is proposing the Vail Plaza Nadel development to be located on the southeast corner of Vail Road and the South Frontage Road in Vail, Colorado, This development will be replacing three existing buildings with one building. The site location is shown in =figure 1 , Ttie existing three buildings consist of a total of 41,643 square feet. The proposed oe.relopmert will consist of a total of approximately 156,000 square feet of various uses including accommodation units, a restaurant, a lounge, a spa, and retail space. The proposed development will have one main access onto the South Frontage Road. The main access will serve as the entrance to the four level parking garage. A second access east of the main access, will be used for most deliveries. The site plan is shown in Figure 2. The impacts of the project traffic at the site access points and the roundabout south of 1 -70 are presented in this report. The purpose of this report is to address the projected traffic impacts associated with the Vail Plaza Hotel development proposal, and to identify any roadway or traffic control improvements required as a result of these impacts. B. Existing Conditions The existing conditions in the vicinity of the project site are illustrated in Figure 3. Currently -two there are accesses to Vail Plaza Hotel site, The main access is on the South Frontage Road and the second access is on Vail Road. The South Frontage Road runs east /west through Vail with a posted speed limit of 25 MPH adjacent to the site. Vail Road runs north /south from the roundabout intersection with the Frontage Road providing access to several hotels. Vail Road is primarily used for focal access south of Vail Plaza hotel. The roundabout is located approximately 1 15 feet west of the main entrance to Vail Plaza Hotel. Most of the site traffic currently uses the roundabout as does traffic oriented to /from i-70. Since Vail is a ski resort, winter traffic volumes have typically been higher than summer volumes. Traffic counts were collected during the week of August 17, 1953, and these counts were used to estimate winter numbers based on 1990 data collected during the winter and summer. The estimated existing winter traffic volumes for the steady area are shown in Figure 3 (the raw count data are shown in Appendix A). As indicated, the South Frontage Road east of the roundabout carries approximately :3000 vehicles during the winter PM peak hour. The volumes at the two accesses were calculated by estimating trip generation for the existing buildings. Land Use � AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hoerr Weekday Building 3TE Type Gods Size Unit In Out Total in Os�t Total In Gut Total �crrdoJ Townhouse 230 22 Rooms 3 7 10 7 5 128 12 64 64 ( Hostel 310 58 Rooms 20 � 12 � 32 � 19 � 17 36 239 239 478 Restaurant 831 2 1,000's 1 0 1 5 2 7 43 43 86 Sq, Ft. Drinking 836 1 1,000`s 0 0 0 3 1 4 13 13 26 Scla Ft. Market 852 2 1,000's 16 17 33 18 15 31 1--162 162 324 Sq. Ft' Totals � � 39 I 37 76 50 40 9r, 1 521 521 1042 Daily Drinkino Total from 15% of PM Rates Building iT8 � Type - Code Size Unit 1, Out Total In Out Total In Out Total Condo/ 230 16 Rooms 2 5# 7 5 4 9 47 47 94 Townhouse i i Hotel 310 ----------- 276 � Rooms � 95 60 155 � 89 79 I 168 � 1136 � 1136 2271,000°s 831 � 9 1,000°s 3 1 � 4 22 12 � 34 2011 201 402 Sq. Ft. Drinking * 836 4 1,000's 0 0 0 14 7 21 � 69 69 138 Sq. Ft, Specialty 814 9 1,000`s 5 6 17 74 14 28, 87 87 i74 Retail Sq. rte Center Totals 104 73 176 144 1 7 5 259 1 541 1543 3081 * Daily Drinking Total from 15% of PM Rates 98-174 6126IDS LE X) FN North V�If P!a �1 98-174 6126IDS � pastW F�x Note 7672 To ` c-�� [_/�J /_� < � w � J /) �~ � . L~/ � commenis COUNTER MEASURES, INC. ` PAGE: } N-S�StreW MAIN VAIL ROUND-ABOUT FILE: YAD' �— — --- Direction' Dir 1 DATE: 2V17198 _______________________________________________________________________ TIME TOTAL 170ON 170VH I70 Y8lLN YAILN V0L8 VAlLS BK0K BRON WFR0N WFR8N BEGIN CLASSIFIED SLIP RDW OFF DM OFF ON OFF ON OFF ON OFF ________________________________________________________________________ 140 PM 964 14 62 40 03 133 70 73 117 155 122 57 1:15 995 0 62 33 103 153 QS 84 145 151 82 79 1:30 1009 15 68 38 93 156 103 105 119 116 DJ 63 970 14 69 44 98 157 88 67 139 120 106 68 0:46 0 TOTAL 3928 61 261 163 397 599 346 329 520 542 443 267 2:00 PM 920 5 # 49 89 159 71 72 154 Ill 100 68 3:2 , 88 15 60 40 72 129 65 42 110 116 104 66 ` 2:30 945 8 59 47 02 134 68 68 149 00 92 78 2:41, 959 18 64 40 86 149 89 86 132 113 94 68 HR TOTAL 3651 46 230 176 349 571 293 268 565 480 392 290 ` _________________________________________________________________________________ DAY TOTAL 7579 107 491 339 746' 1170 639 597 1085 1022 876 547 ` ` PERCENT of 7VQ& 1.4 6.9 4.5 9.0 115�4 8.4 7.9 14.3 ` 13.5 11.0 7.2 ' ` ` ' ` ` ` ` _.GJ Nns 1q:,al 4 Led 1--e-Re!ease 2 1g 1�., .'..it er . ,_,� My�.., o.�..ol: _.-,.. ... In _'an Jpor:. ... G. '... '.,fin - uYni V v of Fao_ d . Gainesville, FL 32G-11-2053 P,—, (904) 392 -0378 _ S t_ee-.s. (N -S) Va__ Road -�A) Access 2 M llor S-rve -- --i rec_ .on. . . NS 1 enc, -- of a1Te rna_VZ= .. 15 Imo n) Aaalysc..._..-- ---• --,... ?ice' D 'e c Fn a1ys;s ..... 8/25/98 O�:he_ In,FC- MaLion... ...... Peak Hour Ex' s-, wo -way Stop - controlled Intersection I Nor -- ;bound Southbound j Eastbound ; Westbound L _ R L _ R j L T R t, T R - -__ ____ _- __ - -_- _ -. -- ---- __- _ ---- ____ ____ No. Lams J 0 1 < 0 j 0 > 1 0 0 0 0 j 0 > 0 < 0 Stop /yie d j Nj N� i Volumes ( 653 11 1S 530 PH-- j 93 .951 95 .95 .95 .95 Grade 0 0 j j 0 "QC's ( °) Su /RVIs CV's (o) I PCE's j 11.10 1 -.10 1.10 Adjustment Factors Vehicle Critical Fo!low-un Maneuver Gap (Cg) Time (tt) Le't Turn_ Major Road 5.00 2.10 R ,,ght Turn Minor Road 5.50 2.60 Through araffic Minor Road 6.00 3.30 I,eft Turn Minor road 6.50 3.40 HCS. Unsignalizel intersections Release 2 lg ACC2.HCC Page 2 Wcrksheen for _a ^1S2 intersection Step 1: RT from Minor Street WE EE Conflicting 732 Potential Capacity: (pcph) 589 Movement Capacity: (pcph) 289 Prob. of Queue-Free State. 0.98 Szep 2. LT from Major Street SB I MB Conflict_ng Flows: (vph) 733 Potential Capacity: (pcph) 767 Movement Capacity: (pcph) 767 Prop, Of Queue -Free State: 0.98 TH Saturation Flow Rate: (pcphpl) 1700 RT Saturation Flow Rate: (pcphpl) Major L!" Shared Lane Prot. of Queue -Free State: 0.97 Step 4: LT from Minor Street -------------------------------------------------------- WE EB Conflicting Flows: (vph) 1306 Potential Capacity: (pcph) 186 Major LT, Minor TH impedance Factor: 0.97 Adjusted impedance Factor: 0.97 Capacity Adjustment Factor due to impeding Movements 0.97 Movement Capacity; (pcph) 180 intersection Performance Summary Avg- 95 Flow ?dove Shared Total Queue Approaci? Rate Ca^ Cap Delay Length L Delay .Movement (pcph) (pcph) (pcph) (sec /veh) (v h) (s 'c /ve i) WE L 1 180 > 507 7.3 0.0 B 7.3 WE R 13 589 > SE L 17 757 4.8 0.0 A 0.1 Intersection Delay = 0.1 sec /veh -4CS. Uns znal_zed = ntersect,cns Release 2_' ACC2.H0 image l Cen�er ^Cr I" icrocompuze rs _- _raelsnor-- _i n J iVerSy ti C _C-1 ca 512 W °_ _! 2 ^�(�['� VG1..:eS J- i. � �� 3 b- �-G'JU J' nn: (904) 392 -0373 StreetS. (N -S) Main Access (E - -W) Scut Rronta�-- Road Major Street D--=-c--icn ... 17W Ler:Qth c° Time A-alvzed... 15 (rein) Ana lvs t . ... .. .. .... ...... H:A� i Date of rAalysis.._..o.... 8 /25/98 Other ln= crmation..,......DeaL, ::our Fxisting Two--way Szoc- con- -r lled Tn1t:_ -rSec 4 on astbcund Westbound Northbound ; Southbound j °L T R I L T R L T R L 11' R �-- -- -` -- -------- -- -- --- `-' ---- No_ Lanes j 0 2< 0 1 3 0 1 -- -- -- - -' - - -- - --- ---- 0 1 f 0 0 0 Sr-op /Yield NJ Volumes 1205 251 10 1785 1 20 81 FF .95 .951 .95 .95 j .95 -95i Grade 0 1 0 1 0 Im cIs (=s) i i f CV C ( o ) DCE=s 1 1.10 1l1.10 1.i0j Adjustment-- Factors Vehicle Critical Follow -uu Maneuver Gap (tg) Time (tt) ,e v Turn Major Road 5.50 2.10 Right Turn Minor Road 5.50 2.60 Throu -h Traffic Minor Road 6.50 3.30 A,.. Turn Minor Road 7.00 3.40 ?-iCS. Uns_gnali if ; Intersections Release 2. g ACC2.HCO '_Jags 2 Worksheet for T SC intersection Step 1: r T from Minor Street NR SB - Conflicting Flows: (vph) 647 Potential Capacity: (pcph) 651 Movement Capacity: (pcph) 651 Prcb. of Queue -Free State: 0.99 Step 2: LT from major Street WB EE Conflicting Flows: (vph) 1294 Potential Capacity: (pcph) 346 Movement Capacity: (pcph) 3?5 Prcb. of Queue -Free States 0.97 Step 4: LT from Minor Street NS SR Conflicting Flows: (vph) 3171 Potential Capacity: (pcph) 10 Major LT, Minor Tr impedance Factor: 0-97 Adjusted Impedance Factor: 0.57 Capacity Adjustment Factor due to Impeding Movements 0.97 Movement Capacity: (pcph) 10 intersection Performance Summary .Flow Move Shared Total Queue Approach Rate. Cap Cap Delay Length LOS Delay Movement (pcph) (pcph) (pcpi!) (sec,Ve,h) (Cie!7) (se c/ven) NB L 23 10 2.4 F> 551.2 NS R 9 551 5n6 0.0 n USE L 12 345 io.8 0.0 C 0.1 intersection Delay - 8.8 sec/veh The calculated value was greater than 999.9. .Jail Plaza dote? * ROUND Exist±ng Conditions z.n tersect±cn No.: Roundabout table S.10 - MOVEMENT CA2ACITY AND PERFORMANCE SUMMARY Mov Mov A=v Total Lane Deg. Aver. cE f . 95% Perf. . No Typ Flow Cap. Ut±l Satn Delay .Stop Back of Index (veh (veh Rata Queue /h) /h) 0) x (sec) (veh) qes t : West Approach ?2 L 355 1016 100 0.349 2.9 0.52 2.1 16.93 11 T 304 1280 68 0.237 3.4 0.52 1.2 14.22 13,R 74 312 68 0.237 _________________________________ -_ __--- 3.5 0.56 1.2 3.34 South : South Approach ___- _- __----- ____--- -_ -_ -- 32 L 81 251. 100 0.323 6.2 0.69 1.7 4.10 31 'T 203 629 100 0.323 6.1 0.68 1.7 9.78 33 R 102 316 100 0.323 5.9 0.70 1.7 4.81 East: East Approach 22 L 107 383 43 0.279 4.9 0.66 1.4 5.18 21 T 254 908 43 0080 4.5 0.59 1.4 11.97 23 R 634 966 100 0.656* 6.3 0.98 6.5 31.49 4or to : North Approac ~. 42 L 374 1L34 100 0.362 1,6 0.?_3 1.8 17.17 41 T 91 283 89 0.322 2.0 OZO 1.5 4.04 43 R ------- --- - - - -- 216 - -- 673 - -- 89- ------ - -_ North`rJest: North °Nest. Approach ___2_- _a_-- _____x_- _- __g_ 82 L 146 625 100 0.234 3.6 0..57 1.1 7.17 81 T 121 518 100 0.234 4.0 0.57 1.1 5.73 83 R 72 308 100 0.234 4.1 0.62 1.1 3.32 * Nax .mx:m degree of saturation Vail Plaza Hotel * Rt,'L7ND * x±sting Conditions _ntersection No.: Roundabout Table S.15 - CAPACITY AND LEVEL OF SERVICE (HCM STYLE) Mov Z-ov Total Total Leg. Aver. LOS No, Typ Flow Cap. of Delay (veh (veh Sate th) /h) (vrc) (sew) Rest: West Approach 12 L 355 101E 0.349 2.9 A 11 T 304 1280 0.237 3.4 A 13 R 74 312 0 237 - ---------------------------------- 733 733 26608 0.349 3.2 A Scut h: South r_p proac 32 L 81 251 0.323 6.7 A 31 T 203 629 0.323 6. =;. A 33 R 102 316 0.323'_ 5.9 A 386 1196 0.323 6 0 F `vat East Approach 22 L 107 383 0.279 4.9 A 1 T 254 908 0.280 4.5 A '3 R 634 9666 0.656* 6.3 A 995 ------------ 2257 0.656 5.7 A ------------------- North: North Arnroach ------------ ------- 42 L 374 1034 0.36: 1.6 A 41 T 91 283 0.322 2.0 A 43 R 216 673 0.321 2.0 A ----------------------------------- 681 1990 0.362 1.8 A Nort_hWest: North West Approach 82 L 146 625 0.234 3.6 A 81 T 121 518 0.234 4.0 A 83 R 72 -308 0.234 4.1 A --------------------------------------------------- 339 145- 0.234 3.8 A ALL 'VEHICLES: 3134 9503 0.656 4,i A INTERSECTION: __________________________________________________ 3134 9503 0,656 4.1 A Level of Service calculations are based on average overall delay (HCM criteria), independent of the current delay definition used. For the criteria, refer to the "Level of Service" tonic in the SIDRA Output Guide or the Output section of the on -line help.. Maximum v/c ratio, or critical green. per .Lods --- End of SIDRA Output ___ RUN INFORMATION ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Basic Parameters: Intersection -Type: Roundabout Driving on the right-hand side of the road SIDFA US Fighway Capacity Manual (1994) Version inDut data soecified in US units Default Values File No. 11 Meak flow period (for performance): 30 minutes Unit t-ime (.for volumes) :120 minutes (Total Flow Period) Delay definition: Overall delay, Geometric delav included Delay formula: Highway Capacity Manual Level of Service used on: Delay (HCM) Queue definition: Back of queue, 95th Percentile ----------------------------------------- --------------------------------------- Tail Plaza Hotel BACK ,;'uture Conditions 1--ersection No.: 0 Roundabout f-able S.3 -- INTERSECTION PA-RAMETERS --------------------------------------------------- Degree of saturation (highest) = 1.181 Practical Scare Capacity (lowest) -28 Total vehicle flow (veh/h) = 4391 Total vehicle ca-nacity, all lanes (veh/h) = 7313 Average intersection delay (s) = 45.1 Largest average movement delay (s) 183.1 Largest back of crueue, 95% (ft) = 2630 Performance Index = 366.41 Total fuel (ga/h) = 177.7 Total cost ($) = 2267.37 Intersection Level of Service = D Worst movement Level of Service -------------------------------------------------- F Vail Plaza Hotel BACK Future Conditions Intersection No.: Roundabout fable S.6 - INTERSECTION PE'RFORMANCE -------------------------------------------------- 1 Total Aver. PrOQ. Eff Perf. Aver. Delay Delay Queued Stop index Sneed (veh/h) (veh-h/h)(...) Rate ------------------------------------------------------ (mph) 4.391 55.04 45,1 0.764 3.02 366.41 11.5 ----------------------- Va-41 1-11aza Hotel Future Conditions mtersection No.: Roundabout 'ahle S.10 - MOVE NT CAPACTTY A2v7D PEI ------------------------------------- Mov Mov Ary Total Lane Dea, 'No. Typ Flow Car). Ut--;-I Satre (veh (veh /k' /h) M x ------------------- , -------------------- Test: West An-oroach 12 L 4197 822 100 0.605 11 T 426 1016 69 0.419 13 R 104 248 69 0.419 -------------------------------------- South: South Approach 32 L 114 137, 100 0,832 31 T 284 341 100 0.833 33 R 143 172 100 0.831 ----------------- ----------------------- -,ast: East Apt: ° c 1-1 22 L 307 41 0.489 21 T 729 41 0.488 23 R 888 7-52 100 1.181* -------------------------------------- forth: North A-P-oroach 42 L 524 916 100 0.572 41 T 128 251 89 0.510 43 R 303 594 89 0.510 -------------------------------------- NorthWest: North West Approach 82 L 204 443 100 0,460 81 T 169 367 100 0.460 83 R 101 219 100 0-461 ----------------------------------- Maximum decree of saturation fail -'-_',aza Hotel. I uture Conde tons �ntersection No.,- Roundabout LFOP-MANCE SUM Aver. Eff, Delay Stop Rate (sec) ------------- 7.6 1,04 6.7 0.80 6.8 0.62 ------------ 31.4 1.96 30.1 2.01 29.0 2.05 ------------- 9.4 0.96 9.0 0.92 183.110.95 ------------- 3.3 0.64 3.6 0.61 3.6 0.64 ------------- 8.0 0.90 8.9 0.90 9,3 0.93 V.-LZ. Ry ---------------- 95% pert. Back of index Queue (veh) ---------------- 6.0 26.87 2.7 21.45 2.7 5.06 ---------------- 10.4 8.68 11.6 20.82 11.6 10.27 --------------- 3.3 7.97 3.3 18.50 105.2 175.94 --------------- 3.9 25,es 3.1 6.05 3.1 13.90 ------------- - 2.9 10.99 2.9 e.86 2.8 5.18 --------------- Eerie -le ---------------------------------------------------- 'S - CAPACITY 1 =VEL OF SERVICE (HCY, STYLE) Mov Mov Total Total Deg Aver. LOS No, Typ Flow Cap. 0- J� Delay (veh (veh Satre -------------------------------------------------- /h) /h) (v/c) (sec) West: West Approach 12 L 497 822 0.605 7.6 B 11 T 426 1016 0.419 6.7 P i--- R 104 248 0.419 6.8 B ------------------------------------ 1027 ----------------------------------------- 2086 0.605 7.2 13 South: .-Duth AP-,,)-=ach 32 L 114 137 0.832 31.4 C 31 T 284 341 0.833 30.1 C 0 33 ? 1e43 172 Q,831 29.0 C 541 650 0.833 30.1 C -last: East Approach 22 L 150 307 0.489 9,4 B 1 T 3566 729 0.488 9.0 23 R 888 752 1.181* 183.1 1394 1788 1.13 i 119.9 F -------------------------------------------------- North: North Approach 42 L 524 916 0.572 3.3 A 41 T 123 251 0.510 3.6 A 43 R 303 594 0.510 3,6 A 955 1761 0.572 3.4 A -------------------------------------------------- NorthLves t: North West Approach 82 L 204 443 0.460 8.0 B 81 T 169 367 0.460 8.9 B 83 R 101 .219 0.461 9.3 B 474 1029 0.461 8,6 B -------------------------------------------------- ,.LL VEHICLES: 4391 7313 1.181 45.1 D INTERSECTION: 4391 7313 1.181 45.1 D Level of Service calculations are based on average overall delay (HCM criteria), independent of the current delay definition used. For the criteria, refer to the "Level of Service" topic an the SIDRA Output Guide or the Output section of the on-line help. 14x mum v/c ratio, or critical green periods ----End of SIDRA Output --- nuS: U_nS_J -an �a! z =a Intersections -Release 2.ig H20 Pa, , Center nor M' r.,_omput=_� lr �rans _� tion inivers= v of . l= da 5_2 We__ .._1_ 32G1 -2023 P. 'n: (904) 392 -0378 Stfee7S. (N-S) Ma=n Ac..ess („_y.r) South _'_`cnt -aae Road Major Street_ Direc�_ion.... EW . s.:a;iC,'..°it C� _�.M° Ada�_172eu. _ 1v (T:':.n) zlnalvst ................... �� Date or Analysis.......... 8;25/98 ormatior.........peak Hour Year 201 Two -way Stoc- contrc -i ed intersection- --- - - -- - - -- -- - as tbound Westboun:j Northbound ; Southbound R ( L T R ; T R i. T R No. Lanes 0 2< 0 j 1 3 0; 1 0 1; 0 0 0 Stcn /Yield ; NJ N; ; Volumes ; 1790 100; 44 2570 ; 83 351 Prir ( .95 ,95; .95 .95 1 95 .95j Grade 0 I 0 J 0 } S",/RV, s CPIs (�) PCE'S i ;1.i0 ;i.10 1,10 Adjustment Factors Vehicle Critical Follow -uc Maneuver Gad (tg) Time (tom) Left Turn Major Road. 5.50 2.10 Right y .rn Minor Road 5.50 2.0'0 Through Traffic Minor Road 6.50 u.30 Left Turn Minor Road 7.00 3,40` HCS. Unsi na__zed 1nler:se.. ions Release 2.1a _ *_':_r._. ®.C.0 pace _ :.e _, . "or M>._.roCOMDUZ= S -r. Tra =p- or`ar_c _2 Weil _ Ga__.rsIr_ 326w_ -208 �h. (00') 392 -037 Szr..e-_S . IN-S) Main Access (E -W) South Frcntaae Rcao Major . et D-LreC`_icn. . . . EW Len cf 1 me A 1a yzed . . 15 (min) D%11 = f AC' vim' S 8/25/98 Other 7nformat_ on...... - - _Peak Hour Year 2013 Two -wav Saco- °o ,=c1led _: tersev~ i on { Eastbound Westbounc Nortrbbourid ; Southb=d j L _ R L T R I L T R L R --- - -- -� - --- - - -- - -- -j - - -- - - -- -- -- - - -- - - -- - - -- No. Lanes j C 0 0 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 S":cD /Y1eld NI NI Volumes 2570 1 03 P,; 1 .9J . 9 5 Grade p MC s t'6 ) SU /RVs CV ,S o) j 1.10 Adjustment Factors Vetlicie r1t1Ca1 Follow -uc Maneuver Gap (t ) Time (tf) L iC Turn Ma. o_- Roa 5.50 0.10 Turn Minor Road 5.50 2.60 Through Traffic Mincr Road 6 50 3.30 Left .""urn Minor Road 7.00 3.40 4 ; HCS: Lnsignalized Intersections Release 2.1-- AOC_ZI —HC0 Page 1 Center For Mfcrocomnuters In _ransoorYa_ ion -- -- ____ -- _ -- University of Florida 512 W° ! Hal Ga4nesvi.le, FL 3261_ -2083 Ph: (90-) 392 -0378 Streets. (N -,3) Main Access l----W) Sc'1tn Frontage Rcau major ,Street Direc-_on .... EW Length of Time A.nalyzed... 15 (min) znalvst.__ Date o AnaIvsis.......... 8/25/98 Ot:ner information.. _ ......Peak Hour Year 2015 TWO -wav Stoo- coat- c"Lled 1n!ersec7ien Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound L T R i L T R I L _ R L T R . - - - - ----- - - - - -, _ - _ - - _ - _ _ _ _ No. Lanes 0 2 - 1' 0 0 1 0 1 _ - - - - - - _ _ - - - 0 0 0 Stop /Yield NJ N( Volumes j 1790 1001 44 83 351 P .95 .9-5 .95 j 95 .951 Grade 0 0 1 0 MC' s o) SU, /RV °s (a) I I Cv ' s ( 7 t ( � - P'CE'S { ( . -� C -.10 ........Ci F Adjustment Factors Vehicle Critical Follow -uo, Maneuver Gap (tg) Time (td Left Turn Major Road 5 50 2.10 Rig ~t Turn Minor Road. 5.50 2.60 Through Traffic Minor Road 6.50 3.30 Lest Tur- Minor Road 7.00 3.4Q HCS: Onslgna7ized in;.ersect?ons Release 2.1g AC'CA. CO Page 2 bVorkst7... ez for TWSC 1'nz rsec ioim Step 1. RT from Minor Street NS SE Conflicting Flows: (vph) 942 Potential Capacity: (pcph) 461 Movement Capacity: (pcph) 461 Prob. of Queue -Free State: 0.91 Step 2. LT from Maio_ Street WE EB Conflicting Flows. (vph) 1989 Potential Capacity: (pcph) 147 Movement Capacity: (pcph) 147 Froze. of Queue -Free State: 0.65 Step d : LT from Minor Street NB SB Conflicting plows: (vph) 1930 potential Capacity: (pcph) 62 Major LT, Minor T Impedance Factor.: 0.65 Adjusted impedance Factor.: 0.65 Capacity Adjustment Factor due to impeding Movements 0.65 Movement Capacity: (pcph) 40 intersection Performance Summary Avg. 9 ✓0 Flow Move Shared Total Queue Approach Rate Cap Cap Delay Length LOS Delay Movement (pcph) (pcph) (pcph)(sec /veh) (veh) (sec /veh) NB L 90 40 848.2 8.4 599.2 NS R 41 467 8.6 0.2 B WE h 5_ 147 37.0 1.3 E 37.0 intersection Delay = 35.2 sec /veh HCS . Un_s, gra__zed -n-erse v ions Release 2 . i c ACC. HC0 Paa e 2 i NC e - _ f75r -nt. rsectio Stec _. PT rom M -nor S--re e-- NB SE Confli ding Flows : (-vph) 994 Potential Capacity: (pr-m-) 43 Movemen- Capacity: (,ccoh) 43-_ Prot- . of Queue -Free State, 0.91 S`_ep 2: ...;i from Major S-- Oe- GB. Conflicting Flows: (vph) 1989 Pc:entyal. Capacity: (pcph) 147 Movement Capacity: (pcph) 147 Prob. of Queue -Free State: 0.65 Step 4: LT from Minor Street NE S8 Conflicting Flows: (vph) 46688 Potent -al Capacity: (pcph) 1 Major LT, Minor Ti imcedance .actor; 0.65 Adjusted impedance Factor: 0.65 Capacity Adjustment Factor due to impeding Movements 0.65 Movement Capacit : (pcph) - Y ? intersection Performance Summary Avg. 95 Flow Move Shared Total Queue Approac;^ Rate Cap Cap Delav Length LOS Delay Movement (pcph) (pcph) (pcph)(sec /veh) (veh) {sec /veh) NE :.i 96 i 11.9 rC' NE R 41 434 9.2 0.2 B WB L Ji i4� 3 7.0 1.3 n 0 b intersection Delay = 893.3 sec /veh The calcula::ed value was greater than 999.9 ----------------------------------------------------- .1ail Plaza Hotel Mov Total Total Dec. Aver. LOS --7T- Typ Flow Cap, Conditions Delay (veh (veh Satn .Euture --------------------------------------------------- /h) /h) (v/c) (sec) West: Wes'. A-ooroach :ntersection -No.: 12 I_ 496 806 0.615 8.1 B Roundabout 438 1003 0.437 7.1 B 13 R 104 ----------------- .able 5.10 CAPACITY AND PEFZORH1�NCE SUba-L4,RY B ------------------------------------------------- ----------------------------------------------------------------- Gov Mov A_ry Total Lane Deg. Aver, Eff. 95% Perf. -No. Typ Fl Cap. Util Satn Delay Stop Back of index 31 T 283 (viz.,. (veh 0.879 36.9 D Rate Queu® /h) /h) x (sec) (veh) --------------------------------------------------- hest: West A-,D-Droach --------------- 12 L 496 806 100 0.615 8'1 1.08 6.3 27.08 11 T 438 1003 71 0.437 7.1 0.83 2.9 22.26 13 R _­ ---------------------------------------------------------------- 104 238 71 0.437 7.2 0.85 2.9 5.11 ,mocu-_h; South ko-oroach 32 L 114 130• 100 0.877 38.4 2.25 12.4 9.43 31 T 283 322 100 0.879 36.9 2.31 14.0 22.59 33 R ------------------------------------------------------------------ 148 168 100 0.881 35.6 2.37 14.0 11.59 Vast: East Approach 22 L 153 306 42 0.500 9.5 0.98 3,4 8.16 21 T 366 731 42 0.501 9.1 0.94 3.4 19.08 23 R ------------------------------------------------------------------ 908 753 100 1,206* 205.411.95 116.6 194.20 Zorth: North Approach 42 L 539 906 100 0.595 3.6 0.68 4.3 26.79 41 T 128 246 88 0.520 3.7 0.63 3.2 6.08 43 R ------------------------------------------------------------------ 304 584 88 0.521 3.7 0.66 3.2 14.02 40 NorthWest: North West Approach 82 L 204 422 100 0.483 8.6 0.94 3.2 11.12 81 T 174 360 100 0.483 9.5 0.94 3.2 9.24 83 R ------------------------------------------- 104 215 100 0.484 9.9 ----------------------- 0.97 3,0 5.40 Maximum degree of saturation Vail Plaza Hotel 'utur-- Conditions _'nte-section No.: Roundabout ,f.ahle S.15 - CAPACITY AND LEVEL OF SERVICE (HCMI STYLE-) Mov Mov Total Total Dec. Aver. LOS _To . Typ Flow Cap, of Delay (veh (veh Satn --------------------------------------------------- /h) /h) (v/c) (sec) West: Wes'. A-ooroach 12 I_ 496 806 0.615 8.1 B 11 T 438 1003 0.437 7.1 B 13 R 104 ----------------- 238 O�437 72 B ------------------------------------------------- 1036 2047 ------------------- 0.615 7.6 B .youth: Sout-'- AP-oroach, 32 L 114 130 0-877 38.4 D 31 T 283 322 0.879 36.9 D HCS. U'ns' nal_aed intersections Release 2.1a ACCB.HCQ Page 2 VLcrks ee._ for aV'SC ___terse=iond Step _. _._ from Minor Sore__ NS _ S . Conflicting Flows: (v-ph) 902 Potential Capacity: (pcpW 483 Movement Capacity: (pzph) 483 Prob. of Queue-Free Stater 0.80 intersection Performance Summary Avg 95s Flow Move Shared 'Total Queue Approach Rate Cap Cap Delay Length LOS Delay Movement (pcph) (pcph) (pcph)(sec /veh) (veh) (sec /veh) -------- - - - - -- - - - - -- - - - - -- - - - - - -- - - - - - -- - - - -- --- - - - - -- a 3 SD R 95 483 9.3 0.8 B Intersection Delay = 0.3 sec /veh Vail Plaza Hotel Future Conditions Intersection No.: Roundabout Table S.3 - ;NTERSECTION PARAMETERS Degree of saturation (highest) 1.206 Practical Spare Capacity (lowest) _ -30 Total vehicle flow (veh /h) - 4463 Total vehicle capacity, all lanes (veh /hy = 7189 .Average .intersection delay (s) _ 50.9 Largest average movement delay (s) = 205.4 Largest back of queue, 95% (ft) = 2916 Performance Index = 392.16 Total fuel (ga /h) = 185.3 Total cost (a) = 2379.22 intersection Level of Service = D Worst movement Level of Service = p Vail Plaza Hotel FUT � Future Conditions intersection No.. Roundabout fable S.6 - INTERSECTION PERFORMANCE " �------- �� _ e �Jc=_ _ Total Tonal Aver. Prop. 2Z Flow Delay Delay Queued Stop Index Speed -(vela /h) (veh -ih /h) (sec) Rate (mph) s 4463 63.12 50.9 00772 3.29 392.16 11.1 33•R 148 168 0.881 35.6 D 545 620 0.881 36.8 D .ast: .cast Approach 2 L 153 306 0.500 9:5 S, E T 366 731 0.501 9.i B 23 R 908 753 1.206* 205.4 _. 1427 1790 1.206 134.1 -------------------------------------------------- 'dorth: North Approach 42 L 539 906 0.595 3.6 A 41 T 128 246 0-520 3.7 A 43 R 304 584 0.521 3.7 A ------------------------------------ 971 1736 0.595 3.6 A --------------------------------------------------- NorthWest: North West Av=roach 82 L 204 422 0.483 8.6 81 T 174 360 0.483 9.5' B 83 R 104 215 0.484 9.9 B 482 997 0.484 9.2 B ALL VEHICLES: 4463 7189 1.206 50.9 i? INTERSECTION: 4463 7189 1.206 50.9 I3 Level of Service calculations are based on average overall delay (HCM criteria) , independent of the current delay definition rased. For the criteria, refer to the "Level of Service" topic in the SIDRA Output Guide or the Output section of the on-line help. * x-4mum vfc ratio, or critical green periods - -- End of SIDRA Output - -® a Aw L� C7? C" Wes. RAW V Thursday, November 04, 1999 Z AND ASSOCIATES, INC NOV 0 Lang: I had recently reviewed your report dated September 27, 1999 with the town engineer. In reviewing the report and the associated access points, the engineer would like us to address a few additional items, - - Aar — wed �_- \ � film Vau➢ Plaza Hote - Loading and IDelav - Optim A t Gmding Plan Scale: P-M-01 Noverabcr4,1999 Lobby - 1 a - -- IN� (C V V"ilpl W"�, r- Lomfing and Drh - Option h _ _ 19' -6 "S 11 J Utility r,�a � -� ,� _ ;. , Zak- ad Auedabm lum \ - - -- l / 01 0 2j i Vail Plaza Hotel Loading and Deixeecy - Option A 45` Coach z >,ar -7-- _ _� _ -T _ _ -- �-- �? ] Scala V- 20 °-0" i Novmnbcr4,1999 b ��shgr i guc.: i 7F I _ — — 1 tour a tns n imam` a . � ssaa " - - -._ ° i Mail ]PRaza Hotel Leading and Delivery - Option A = c 35° gh /SSG° AficWtd Scole: V-201-01 xov a, l Lobby Inc. cl i c I • d • d vu \ — fi � � s -- 111 - y Vail Plan Hotei Guest Entxy ILI] Sport rs _ s"tui Vehicle - zr ftaus (_ 1 Nov=bcT4,1999 1% \ L_$� ( -�_.1 � J � � � i PTfT IAffi ]W4' 09C0 -, -J LTI 0 Page I r Vail Plaza Hotel Level 6 Zehren and Associates, Inc. 961070.00 12/13/99 Level 6 Gross Square Footage 8,044.00 wellin l lnit Area Deck Area Keys Bedrooms Studio Pillows Dwelling Unit (upper level) 2,053.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 2.00 Club Units Unit Number Area Deck Area ICs Bedrooms Studio Pillows Club Unit 42 (Upper Level) 814.00 147.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 2.00 Club Unit 43 (Upper Level) 814.00 147.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 2 .00 Club Unit 44 (Upper Level) 814.00 147.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 2.00 Club Unit 45 (Upper Level) 648.00 108.00 1.00 1.00 0 .00 2.00 Club Unit 47 (Upper Level) 814.00 147.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 2.00 Club Unit 48 (Upper Ievei) 814.00 147.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 2.00 Sub -Total Club 4,718.00 843.00 6.00 6.00 0.00 12.00 Corridor (public) 0.00 Core (elevator) 150.00 Maid 0.00 Core (stair) 0.00 Mechanical (rooftop) 222.00 Sub -Total area 372.00 Dwelling Unit Net 2,053.00 Club Unit Net 4,718.00 Other Net 372.00 Total Net 7,143.00 Net/Gross Difference 901.00 89 % Page I Vail Plaza Hotel Level 5 Zehren and Associates, Inc. 961070.00 12/13/99 Level 5 Gross Square Footage 16,146.00 I)wetlin� IJttit Area Deck Area Keys Bedrooms Studio Pillows Dwelling Unit (lower level) 3,446.00 340.00 4.00 3.00 1.00 8.00 Club Units Unit Number Area Deck Area Keys Bedrooms Studio Pillows Club Unit 34 (Upper Level) 814.00 147.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 2.00 Club Unit 35 (Upper Level) 814.00 147.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 2.00 Club Unit 36 (Upper Level) 814.00 147.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 2.00 Club Unit 37 (Upper Level) 814.00 147.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 2.00 Club Unit 39 (Upper Level) 814.00 147.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 2.00 Club Unit 42 (Lower Level) 91100 0.00 2.00 2.00 0.00 4.00 Club Unit 43 (Lower Level) 979.00 0.00 2.00 2.00 0.00 4.00 Club Unit 44 (Lower Level) 486.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 2.00 Club Unit 45 (Lower Level) 51100 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 2.00 Club Unit 46 (Flat) 856.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 2.00 Club Unit 47 (Lower Level) 992.00 0.00 2.00 2.00 0.00 4.00 Club Unit 48 (Lower Level) 992.00 0.00 2.00 2.00 0.00 4.00 Saab -Total Club 9,801.00 735.00 16.00 16.00 0.00 32.00 Other Areas Area Corridor (public) 1,592.00 Core (elevator, mech. shaft) 151.00 Maid 0.00 Core stair 0.00 Saab - "Total Either Areas 1,743.00 Dwelling Unit Net 3,446.00 Club Unit Net 9,801.00 Other Net 1.743.00 Total Net 14,990.00 Net/GrossDifference lJ56.00 93% Page 3 Level 4 Gross Square Footage 26,763.00 Club Units Unit Number Area Deck Area ICeys Bedrooms Studio Pillows Club Unit 20 (Upper Level) 790.00 147.00 1.00 1.00 0 .00 2.00 Club Unit 21 (Upper Level) 790.00 147.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 2.00 Club Unit 22 (Upper Level) 790.00 141.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 2,00 Club Unit 27 (Upper Level) 790.00 147.00 2.00 1.00 0.00 2.00 Club Unit 28 (Upper Level) 790.00 147.00 1 .00 1.00 0.00 2.00 Club Unit 29 (Upper Level) 1,313.00 147.00 2.00 1.00 1.00 4.00 Club Unit 33 (Flat) 1,096.00 147.00 2.00 1.00 1.00 4.00 Club Unit 34 (Lower bevel) 513.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 2.00 Club Unit 35 (Lower Level) 1,034.00 0.00 2.00 2.00 0.00 4.00 Club Unit 36 (Lower Level) 1,034.00 0.00 2.00 2,00 0.00 4.00 Club Unit 37 (Lower Level) 1,034.00 0.00 2.00 2.00 0.00 4.00 Club Unit 38 (Flat) 984.00 0.00 2.00 1.00 1.00 4.00 Club Unit 39 (Lever Level) 980.00 0.00 2.00 2.00 0.00 4.00 Club Unit 40 (Flat) 1,226.00 93.00 2.00 2.00 0.00 4.00 Club Unit 41 (Flat) 1,226.00 93.00 2.00 2.00 0.00 4.00 Sub- Total Club 14,390.00 11215,00 25.00 21.00 3.00 48.00 AccO odation Units Ave. Area Keys Total Area Unit 'Type A 372.11 18.00 6,698.00 Other Areas Area Corridor (public) 2,912.00 Core (elevator) 150.00 Maid 344.00 Core stair 269.00 Sub- Total tither Areas 3,675.00 Club Unit Net 14,390.00 Acco odation Net 6,698.00 Other Net 3,675.00 'Dotal Net 24,763.00 Net/Gross Difference 2,000.00 93 % Page 3 Vail Plaza Hotel bevel 3 Zehren and Associates, Inc. 961070.00 12/13/99 Level 3 Gross Square Footage 32,877.00 Club Units Unit T ype Area Deck Area Revs Bedrooms Studio Pillows Club Unit 17 (Flat) 865.00 93.00 2.00 L00 1.00 4.00 Club Unit 18 (Flat) 1,114.00 164.00 2.00 3.00 1.00 4.00 Club Unit 19 (Flat) 1,209.00 164.00 2.00 1.00 1.00 4.00 Club Unit 20 (Lower Level) 561.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 2.00 Club Unit 21 (Lower Level) 1,088.00 0.00 2.00 2.00 0.00 4.00 Club Unit 22 (Lower Level) 995.00 0.00 2.00 2.00 0.00 4.00 Club Unit 23 (Flat) 991.00 93.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 4.00 Club Unit 24 (Flat) 1,108.00 260.00 2.00 1.00 1.00 4.00 Club Unit 25 (Flat) 975.00 95.00 2.00 1.00 1.00 4.00 Club Unit 26 (Flat) 958.00 93.00 2.00 1.00 1.00 4.00 Club Unit 27 (Lower Level) 979.00 94.00 2.00 2.00 0.00 4.00 Club Unit 28 (Lower Level) 979.00 44.00 2.00 2.00 0.00 4.00 Club Unit 29 (Lower Level) 969.00 0.00 2.00 2.00 0.00 4.00 Club Unit 30 (Flat) 920.00 64.00 100 1.00 1.00 4.00 Club Unit 31 (Flat) 1,226.00 93.00 2.00 2.00 0.00 4.00 Club Unit 32 (Flat) 1,226.00 93.00 2.00 100 0.00 4.00 Sub -Total Club Units 16,163.00 1,400.00 30.00 23.00 7.00 60.00 Acco odation Units Ave. Area Keys 'Total Area Unit Type A 365.54 26.00 9,504.00 Other Areas Maid. 342.00 Corridor (public) 4,359.00 Core (elevator) 150.00 Core (staid 360.00 Sub -Total Other Areas 5,211,00 Totals Club Net 16,163.00 Accommodation Net 9,504.00 Other Net 52-11.00 Total Net 30,878.00 Net/Gross Difference 19999.00 94% Page 5 Vail Plaza Hotel bevel 2 Zehren and Associates, Inc. 961070.00 12/13/99 Level Z Gross Square Footage 37,857.00 Club Units Unit 'Tylae Area Deck Area ICS Bedrooms Studio Pillows Club Unit 4 (Flat) 1,334.00 93.00 3.00 2.00 1.00 6.00 Club Unit 5 (Flat) 920.00 95.00 2.00 1.00 1.00 4.00 Club Unit 6 (Flat) 1,193.00 93.00 2.00 2.00 0.00 4.00 Club Unit 7 (Flat) 1,204.00 93.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 100 Club Unit 8 (Flat) 948.00 95.00 2.00 1.00 1.00 4.00 Club Unit 9 (Fiat) 976.00 60.00 2.00 1.00 1.00 4.00 Club Unit 10 (Flat) 958.00 9100 2.00 1.00 1.00 4.00 Club Unit I i (Flat) 958.00 94.00 2.00 1.00 1.00 4.00 Club Unit 12 (Flat) 958.00 94.00 2.00 1.00 1.00 4.00 Club Unit 13 (Flat) 970.00 146.00 2.00 1.00 1.00 4.00 Club Unit 14 (Fiat) 920.00 199.00 2.00 1.00 1.00 4.00 Club Unit 15 (Flat) 1,405.00 40.00 3.00 2.00 1.00 6.00 Club Unit 16 (Flat) 1,222.00 4000 2.00 2.00 0.00 4.00 Sub -Total Club Units 139966.00 1,235.00 27.00 17.00 10.00 54.00 Arco odation Units Ave. Area Keys Total Area Unit Type A 364.59 34.00 12,396.00 Other Areas Maid 344.00 Corridor (public) 4,342.00 Core (elevator) 150.00 Core (stair) 367.00 Rooftop Beck 4,114.00 Sub- Total Other Areas 9,317,00 Totals Club Net 13,966.00 Accommodation Net 12,396.00 , Other Net 9,317.00 Total Net 35,679.00 Net/Gross Difference 2,178,00 94 ®/0 Page 5 Mail Plaza Hotel bevel 1 Zehren and Associates, Inc. 961070.00 12/13/99 Level 1 Gross Square Footage 44,623.00 Club Units Unit Type Area Deck Area Keys Bedrooms Studio Pillows Club Unit I (Flat) 1,334.00 112,00 3.00 2.00 1.00 6.00 Club Unit 2 (Flat) 1,251.00 112.00 2.00 2.00 0.00 4.00 Club Unit 3 (Flat) 1,237.00 95_00 2.00 2_00 0.00 4.00 Sub -Total Club Units 3,822.00 319,00 7.00 6.00 1.00 14,00 Acco odation Units Ave. Area Keys Total Area Unit Type A 353.10 21.00 7,415.00 Retail Area Retail Three 605.00 Retail Four 0.00 Sub -Total Retail 605.00 Restaurant Area Ocs. Factor Occupants Main Restaurant (Buffet) 2,155.00 18.00 119.72 Specialty Restaurant 1,718.00 25.00 68_72 Sub -Total Restaurant 3,873.00 188.44 Lounge Area Occ. Factor OEL ants Lounge 1,228.00 25.00 49.12 Other Areas Corridor (public) 5,795.00 Kitchen /Service 6,444.00 Truck Dock/Auto Cire. 10,501.00 Restrooms 589.00 Maid 192.00 Core (elevator) 275.00 Core stair} 466.00 Sub -Total Other Areas 24,262.00 Totals Club Net 3,822.00 Accommodation Net 7,415.00 Retail Net 605.00 Restaurant Net 3,87100 Lounge Net 1,228.00 Other Net 24,262.00 Total Net Area 41,205.00 Net/Gross Difference 3,418.00 92 °/® Page 6 ParltiM Pr®vidRd Valet Spaces 5.00 Page 7 Level 4 Gross Square Footage 51,428.00 Retail Retail one 1,702.00 Retail Two 1.740.00 Sub -Total Retail 3,442.00 LObby liar Area ®cc. Fact. ®ccu . Lobby Bar 674.00 25.00 26.96 Lqbbl Area Occ. Fact. ccu . Lobby 2,237.00 30.00 74.57 Administration Front Desk 2,202.00 Acco� 1.570.00 Total Administration 3,772.00 Spa - Men's [Workout Men's Lockers//Facilities 3,019,00 Treatment 2,447.00 Deck 1,392.00 Exercise/Workout 1,686.00 Scab -Total Spa 8,544.00 Conference Area Oce. Factor Occupants Main Ballroom 7,004.00 15.00 466.93 Pre- convene 2.485.00 7.00 355.00 Sub -Total Conference 9,489.00 Service Areas 6,318.00 Exterior Circulation Covered Ramp (North) 1,008.00 Covered Auto Entry (West) 5,772.00 Uncovered Entry (West) 1,696.00 Auto Ramp (South) 978.00 Pedestrian Access (East) 819.00 Total 10,273.00 Other Areas Restrooms 589.04 Core (elevator) 275.04 Core (Stair) 568.00 Corridor(Public) 3,740.04 Total Other Areas 5,172.00 ParltiM Pr®vidRd Valet Spaces 5.00 Page 7 Vail Plaza Hotel Level 0 Zehren and Associates, Inc. 961070.00 12/13/99 Totals Retail Net 3,442.00 Bar Net 674.00 Lobby Net 2,237.00 Administration Net 3,772.00 Spa Net 8,544.00 Conference Net 9,489.00 Service Net 6,318.00 Exterior Circulation Net 10,273.00 Other Net 5.172.00 Total Net 49,921.00 Net/Gross Difference 1,507.00 97 % Page 8 Page 9 Level Minus One Gross Square Footage 57,696.00 a Area Women's Lockers /Facilities 3,116.50 Treatment 2,853.00 Deck Area 6,266.00 Exercise /Workout 1,246.00 Pool Area 2.774.00 Suss -Total Spa 16,255.54 Conference Area ®cc. Factor Occupants Breakout 3,364.00 15.00 224.27 Pre - convene 2.485.00 7.00 355.00 Sub -Total Conference 5,849.04 Service 7,971.00 Other Areas Mechanical 0.00 Corridor(Public) 2,328.00 Core (elevator) 275.00 Core (stair) 568.00 Public Restroorns 589.00 Seib -Total 3,760.00 Parki�� -s -aces Area AEOa mace Valet Spaces 7.00 Parking Spaces (Full Size) 41.00 Parking $Maces (Co - act) 11_00 Sub-Total Parldng 59.00 21,498.00 364 Totals Area Other Areas Net 3,760.00 Spa Net 16255.50 Conference Net 5,849.00 Service Net 7,971.00 Parking and Ramp Net 21,498.0 Q Total Net 55,333.50 Net/Gross Difference 2,362.50 96 ®/® Page 9 Vail Plaza Hotel Level -2 Zehren and Associates, Inc. 961070.00 12/13/99 Level Minus Two Gross Square Footage 53,524.00 Other Areas Mechanical 0.00 Corridor (public) 225.00 Core (elevator) 150.00 Core (stair) 255.00 Sub -Total Other Areas 660.00 Area Valet Spaces 125.00 Parking Spaces (Full Size) 65.00 Parking Spaces (Compact) 2.00 Sub -Total Parldng 192.00 51,462.00 265.03 Totals Area Other Net 660.00 Parking and Ramp Net 51,462.00 Total Net 52,122.00 Net/Gross Difference 1,402.00 97 ®/® Page 10 Page I I I nging ERR s 'Total Area Park. Factor Park. Read Dwelling Unit 1 5,499.00 >2000 2.50 Club Units Total Area Factor - paces Club Unit 1 (Flat) 1,334.00 500 <2000 2.00 Club Unit 2 (Flat) 1,251.00 500 <2000 2.00 Club Unit 3 (Flat) 1,237.00 500 <2000 100 Club Unit 4 (Flat) 1,334.00 500 <2000 2.00 Club Unit 5 (Flat) 920.00 500 <2000 2.00 Club Unit 6 (Flat) 1,193.00 500 <2000 2.00 Club Unit 7 (Flat) 1,204.00 500 <2000 2.00 Club Unit 8 (Flat) 948.00 500 <2000 2.00 Club Unit 9 (Flat) 976.00 500 <2000 2.00 Club Unit 10 (Fiat) 958.00 500 <2000 2.00 Club Unit I i (Flat) 958.00 500 <2000 2.00 Club Unit 12 (Flat) 958.00 500 <2000 2,00 Club Unit 13 (Flat) 970.00 500 <2000 2.00 Club Unit 14 (Flat) 920.00 500 <2000 2.00 Club Unit 15 (Flat) 1,405.00 500 <2000 2.00 Club Unit 16 (Flat) 1,222.00 500 <2000 2.00 Club Unit 17 (Flat) 865.00 500<2000 2.00 Club Unit 18 (Flat) 1,114.00 500<2000 2.00 Club Unit 19 (Flat) 1,209.00 500<2000 2.00 Club Unit 20 (Two Level) 1,351,00 500<2000 2.00 Club Unit 21 (Two Level) 1,878.00 500 <2000 100 Club Unit 22 (Two Level) 1,785.00 500 <2000 2.00 Club Unit 23 (Flat) 1,983.00 500 <2000 2.00 Club Unit 24 (Flat) 1,108.00 500 <2000 2.00 Club Unit 25 (Flat) 975.00 500 <2000 2.00 Club Unit 26 (Flat) 958.00 500 <2000 2.00 Club Unit 27 (Two Level) 1,769.00 500 <2000 2.00 Club Unit 28 (Two Level) 1,769.00 500 <2000 2.00 Club Unit 29 (Two Level) 2,282.00 >2000 2.50 Club Unit 30 (Flat) 920.00 500 <2000 2.00 Club Unit 31 (Flat) 1,226.00 500<2000 2.00 Club Unit 32 (Flat) 1,226.00 500 <2000 2 .00 Club Unit 33 (Flat) 1,096.00 500 <2000 100 Club Unit 34 (Two Level) 1,327.00 500 <2000 2.00 Club Unit 35 (Two Level) 1,848.00 500<2000 2.00 Club Unit 36 (Two Level) 1,848.00 500 <2000 2.00 Club Unit 37 (Two Level) 1,848.00 500 <2000 100 Club Unit 38 (Flat) 1,226.00 500 <2000 ' 2.00 Club Unit 39 (Two Level) 1,794.00 500 <2000 2.00 Club Unit 40 (Flat) 1,226.00 500<2000 2.00 Club Unit 41 (Flat) 1,226.00 500 <2000 2.00 Club Unit 42 (Two Level) 1,727.00 500 <2000 2.00 Club Unit 43 (Two Level) 1,793.00 500 <2000 2.00 Club Unit 44 (Two Level) 1,300.00 500 <2000 2.00 Club Unit 45 (Two Level) 1,161.00 500 <2000 2.00 Club Unit 46 (Flat) 856.00 500 <2000 2.04 Club Unit 47 (Two Level) 814.00 500<2000 2.04 Club Unit 48 Two Level) 814.00 500 <2000 2.00 Total Club Parking 64,094.00 96.54 Page I I Vail Plaza Hotel Parking Summary Zehren and Associates, Inc. 961070.00 12/13/99 Accommodation Units Area Keys Spaces Factor Total Ace. Units 36,013.00 99.00 75.61 0.76 Restaurant Area Seat Fact. Seats Factor -Spaces Total Restaurant 3,873.00 20.55 188.44 1:8 seats 23.56 Lounge Area Seat Fact. Seats Factor -s -aces Total Lounge 1,228.00 25.00 49.12 1:8 seats 6.14 Retail Area Factor Spaces Total Retail 4,047.00 1:300 sq. ft. 13.49 Conference Area Seat Fact, Seats Factor spaces Main Ballroom 7,004.00 15.00 466.93 1:16 seats ** 29.18 Breakout 3,364.00 15.00 224.27 1:16 seats ** 14.02 Total Reetatired Spaces Total Dwelling unit 150 Total Club 96.50 Total Accommodation 75.61 Total Restaurant 23.56 Total Lounge 6.I4 Total Retail 13.49 Conference 43.20 SDD Parking Required (tahases 149.68 Saab- 'total Parking 410.67 Mixed Ilse Reduction (10° /Q) -41.07 Total Parking Required 369.61 Total Parking Provided 366.00 Parldng Difference -3.61 karltitiL Provided Full Size Com aact Valet Total Existing SDD spaces to remain* 112 0 0 112 Level Zero Parking 0 0 5 5 Level Minus One Parking 41 11 7 59 Level Minus Two Parking 65 0 125 190 Total Parking Provided 218 11 137 366 Percentage 60% 3% 37% 100% * SDD Parkin Required (phased 2 3 Si Existing SDD Spaces 112 SDD Park lne Deficit 75 Scab -Total (Current Requirement) 187 Previouly Applied Reduction- (2.5 %) 191.68 Currently Dedicated Phase 4 Spaces -42 Total SDD Parking Required (phases 1,2,3,5) 149.68 * *assume 50% internal/public transportation /pedestrian traffic - breakout use by ballroom occupants Page 12 Page 13 pm��� U 2per Area Lower Area Total Area Deck Are _Keys Bedrooms Studios Pillows Dwelling Unit 1 2,053.00 3,446.00 5,499.00 340.00 4.00 4.00 10.00 Club Units -U pper Are . Lower Area - Total Area Deck Area Keys Bedrooms Studios Pillows Club Unit I (Flat) 1,334.00 0.00 1,334.00 112.00 3.00 2.00 1.00 6.00 Club Unit 2 (Flat) 1,251-00 0.00 1,251.00 112.00 2.00 2.00 0.00 4.00 Club Unit 3 (Flat) 1,237.00 0.00 1,237.00 95.00 2.00 2.00 0.00 4.00 Club Unit 4 (Flat) 1,334-00 0.00 1,334.00 93.00 100 2.00 1.00 6.00 Club Unit 5 (Flat) 920.00 0.00 920.00 95.00 2.00 1.00 1.00 4.00 Club Unit 6 (Flat) 1,193.00 0.00 1,193.00 93.00 2.00 2.00 0.00 4.00 Club Unit 7 (Flat) 1,204.00 0-00 1,204.00 93.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 2.00 Club Unit 8 (Flat) 948.00 0.00 948.00 95.00 2.00 1.00 1.00 4.00 Club Unit 9 (Flat) 976.00 0.00 976.00 60.00 2.00 1.00 1.00 4.00 Club Unit 10 (Flat) 958.00 0.00 958,00 93.00 2,00 1.00 1.00 4.00 Club Unit I I (Flat) 958.00 0.00 958.00 94.00 2.00 1.00 1.00 4.00 Club Unit 12 (Flat) 958.00 0.00 958.00 94.00 2.00 1,00 1.00 4.00 Club Unit 13 (Flat) 970.00 OM 970.00 146.00 2.00 1.00 1.00 4.00 Club Unit 14 (Flat) 920,00 0.00 920.00 199.00 2.00 1.00 1.00 4.00 Club Unit 15 (Flat) 1,405.00 OM 1,405.00 40.00 3.00 2.00 1.00 6.00 Club Unit 16 (Flat) 1,222.00 0.00 1,222.00 40,00 2,00 2.00 0.00 4.00 Club Unit 17 (Mat) 865.00 OM 865.00 93.00 2.00 1,00 1.00 4.00 Club Unit 18 (Flat) 1,114.00 0.00 1,114.00 164.00 2.00 1.00 1.00 4.00 Club Unit 19 (Flat) 1,209.00 0.00 1,209.00 164.00 100 1,00 1.00 4,00 Club Unit 20 (Two Level) 790.00 561.00 1,351.00 147.00 3.00 3.00 0.00 6.00 Club Unit 21 (Two Level) 790.00 1,088.00 1,878.00 147.00 2.00 2.00 0.00 4.00 Club Unit 22 (Two Level) 790.00 995.00 1,785.00 260.00 2.00 1.00 1.00 4.00 Club Unit 23 (Flat) 991.00 0.00 1,983.00 93.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 4.00 Club Unit 24 (Flat) 1,108.00 0.00 1,108.00 260.00 2.00 1.00 1.00 4.00 Club Unit 25 (Flat) 975,00 0.00 975.00 95.00 2.00 1.00 1.00 4.00 Club Unit 26 (Flat) 958.00 0.00 958.00 93.00 2.00 1.00 1.00 4.00 Club Unit 27 (Two Level) 790.00 979,00 1,769.00 241.00 4.00 3.00 0,00 6.00 Club Unit 28 (Two Level) 790.00 979.00 1,769.00 241.00 3.00 3.00 0.00 6.00 Club Unit 29 (Two Level) 1,313.00 969.00 2,282.00 147.00 4.00 3.00 1.00 8.00 Club Unit 30 (Flat) 920.00 0.00 920.00 64.00 2.00 1.00 1.00 4.00 Club Unit 31 (Flat) 1,226.00 0.00 1,226.00 93.00 2.00 2.00 0.00 4.00 Club Unit 32 (Flat) 1,226.00 0.00 1,226.00 93.00 2.00 2.00 0.00 4.00 Club Unit 33 (Flat) 1,096.00 0.00 1,096.00 147.00 2.00 1.00 1.00 4.00 Club Unit 34 (Two Level) 814.00 513,00 1,327.00 147.00 2.00 2.00 0.00 4.00 Club Unit 35 (Two Level) 814.00 1,034.00 1,848.00 147.00 3.00 3.00 0.00 6.00 Club Unit 36 (Two Level) 814.00 1,034.00 1,848.00 147.00 3.00 3.00 0.00 6.00 Club Unit 37 (Two Level) 814.00 1,034.00 1,848.00 147.00 3.00 3.00 0.00 6.00 Club Unit 38 (Flat) 1,226.00 0.00 1,226.00 93.00 2.00 2.00 0.00 4.00 Club Unit 39 (Two Level) 814.00 980.00 1,794.00 147.00 3.00 3.00 0.00 6.00 Club Unit 40 (Flat) 1,226.00 0.00 1,226.00 93.00 2.00 100 0.00 4.00 Club Unit 41 (Flat) 1,226.00 0.00 1,226,00 93.00 100 2.00 0.00 4.00 Club Unit 42 (Two Level) 814.00 913.00 1,727.00 147.00 3.00 3.00 0.00 6.00 Club Unit 43 (Two Level) 814.00 979.00 1,793.00 147.00 3.00 3.00 0.00 6.00 Club Unit 44 (Two Level) 814.00 486.00 1,300.00 147.00 2.00 2.00 0.00 4.00 Club Unit 45 (Two Level) 648.00 513.00 1,161.00 108.00 2,00 1.00 1.00 4.00 Club Unit 46 (Flat) 856.00 0.00 856.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 2.00 Page 13 Mail Plaza Hotel Program Summary t Zehren and (associates, Inc. , 961070.00 12/13/99 Accommodation Units Room area Rooms Total Area Deck Area Revs 0edrooms Studios Pillows Total Ace. Units 363.77 99.00 36,013.00 0.00 99.00 99.00 0.00 198.00 Residential Totals 105,606.00 0.00 213.00 190.00 22.00 426.00 Restaurant Seating Area ®cc. Factor Seats Main Restaurant 2,155.00 18.00 119.72 Specialty Restaurant 1.718.00 25.00 68.72 Total Restaurant 3,873.00 20.55 188.44 Lounge Lounge 1,228.00 25.00 49.12 Lobby Dar 674 25 26.96 Conference Faciiites Seating Area ®ee. Factor Seats Main Ballroom 7,004 15 467 Breakout 3,364 15 224 Pre- Convene 4 970 7 355 Total Convention 15,338 S a Level Zero 8,544.00 Level Minus One 16,255.50 Total 24,799.50 Retail Retail One 1702 Retail Two 1740 Retail Three 605.00 Retail Four 0.00 Total Retail 4,047.00 Adndnstration 3,772.00 Page 14 Vail Plaza Hotel Area Surinnary Zehreo and Associates, Inc. 961070.04 12/13/99 Proer°am area Level -2 Level -1 bevel 0 Level 1 Level 2 bevel 3 bevel 4 Level 5 bevel 6 Total Gross Area 53,524.00 57,696.00 51,428.00 44,623.00 37,857.00 32,877.00 26,76100 16,146.00 8,044.00 328,958.00 Dwelling Unit 3,446.00 2,053.00 5,499.00 Club Unit 3,82100 13,966.00 16,163.00 14,390.00 9,801.00 4,718.00 62,860.00 Accommodation Unit 7,415.00 12,396.00 9,504.00 6,698.00 36,013.00 Retail 3,442.00 605.00 4,047.00 Lobby 2,237.00 2,237.00 Restaurant 3,873.00 3,873.00 Lounge/Bar 674.00 1,228.00 1,902.00 Conference 3,364.00 7,004.00 10,368.06 Pre-Conviene 2,485.00 2,485.00 4,970.00 Kitchen 0.00 Food and Beverage 0.00 Front Office 2,202.00 2,202.00 Sales /Cater. (multi -use) 0.06 .Accounting 1,570.04 1,570.00 .Executive Office 0.00 Receiving/Storage 0.00 Personnel (office) 0.00 Service Areas 7,971.00 6,318:00 6,444.00 20,733.00 Laundry 0.60 Housekeeping 0.06 Engineering 0.00 Mechanical (Plant) Mechanical (Rooftop) 117.00 0.00 222.00 339.00 Spa (Lockers) 3,116.50 3,019.00 6,135.50 e Spa (Treatment) 2,853.00 2,447.00 5,300.00 Pool Deck 6,266.00 1,392.00 7,658.00 Pool Area 2,774.00 2,774.00 Exercise Rooms 1,246.00 1,686.00 2,932.00 Corridor (public) 225.00 2,328.00 3,740.00 5,795.00 4,342.00 4,359.00 2,912.00 1,592.00 0.00 25,293.00 Corridor (service) 0.00 Core (elevator) 150.00 275.00 275.00 275.00 150.00 150.00 150.00 151.00 150.00 1,726.00 Core (stair) 285.00 568.00 568.00 466.00 367.00 360.00 269.00 0.00 0.00 2,883.00 Parking (spaces, ramp) 51,462.00 21,498.00 10,273.00 4,114.00 87,347.00 Club Unit Storage Area 0.00 Restrooms /Coats /Etc. 589.00 589.00 589.00 1,767.00 Loading Dock 10,501.00 10,501.04 ` Service Storage 0,00 Maid (Satellite) 0.00 0.00 0.00 192.00 344.00 342.00 344.00 0.00 0.00 1s222.00 Serb - Total Net Areas 52,122.00 55,450.50 49,921.00 41,205.00 35,679.00 30,878.00 24,763.00 14,990.00 7,143.00 312,151.56 Gross -Net (wall) Area 1,402.00 2,245.50 1,507.00 3,418.00 2,178.00 1,999.00 2,000.00 1,156.00 901.00 16,806.50 Gross -Net Factor 97% 96% 97% 92% 94% 94% 93% 93% 89% 95 % s: Page 15 Ill. STAFF RECOMMENDATION As this is a worksession, staff will be providing no recommendation at this time. IV. PUBLIC PROCESS 2 E 0 The park will have no effect, on the other above-mentioned criteria. Z. Cc a 11 T �- � i � �-- Approved 1/10/00 Jonathon Greene from Vail Resorts, stated that Para Hopkins would be working with Tom Allender, who would sign off for Vail Resorts within the next few weeks. Galen Aasland said that 30% snow storage would be required on the site, if snow melt was not being considered. Pam Hopkins said they were going to snow melt. Galen Aasland said the applicant needed to pay for landscaping in the front, since this would be the same requirement for any other applicant. Doug Cahill said a 6' wide sidewalk was adequate and he said that Ski Club Vail was one of the three entities to contribute to the landscaping, Chas Bernhardt said he had no comments. Diane Golden said Ski Club was an asset to the Town. John Schofield summarized the Commissioner's comments that a 6' wide bike path was adequate, as well as the realignment of the bike path. He suggested the motion to Council the requirement that Ski Club Vail, Vail Resorts and the TOV enter into a meeting to resolve the streetscape improvements. Galen Aasland made a motion for. approval for the rezoning portion, in accordance with the staff memo. Doug Cahill seconded the motion. The motion passed by a vote of 7 -0. Brian Doyon made a motion for approval for the conditional use permit , in accordance with the staff memo, pending the condition that the rezoning be approved by Council. Diane Golden seconded the motion. t The motion passed by a vote of 7 -0. Brian Doyon made a motion for approval of the development plans in accordance with the staff memo with the additional condition that before the 2nd reading by Council , there be an agreement between Ski Club Vail, Vail resorts and Town of Vail regarding off -site improvements. Doug Cahill emended the motion by adding a 3rd condition that the sidewalk be ' wide. Chas Bernhardt seconded the motion. The motion passed by a vote of 7 -0. 2. A request for a final review of a major amendment, to allow for the proposed redevelopment of the Vail Village Inn, Phase IV, within Special Development District Flo. 6, and a conditional use permit, to allow for the operation of a fractional fee club in the Public Accommodation Zone District, located at 100 East Meadow Drive /Lots M, N, G, Block 5 -D, Vail Village First Filing. Applicant: Daymer Corporation, represented by Jay Peterson Planner: George ruther Planning and Environmental Commission 2 Minutes December 13, 1999 Approved 1/10/00 Jay Peterson said they are already documenting the parking, but the applicant would be willing to wait and come back with the request. George Ruther said if and when Council lifted that restriction, they would want the documentation and we could draft a document with the Town Attorney, Jay Peterson said the applicant would count empty parking spaces on a daily basis in the garage. He said the increased traffic on Vail Road would be minimal and a lot of traffic on the Frontage Road would be taken away with this. He said deviations from the underlying zoning have always happened. He said bulk and mass was greater than what was existing, as a larger hotel was being provided and a larger building produces increased shade. He said the conference and meeting rooms were undersized, but generous for the size of the hotel. He said the views have changed, since while in the roundabout you no longer look at the mountain; only left at oncoming traffic. He said the plaza areas are controlled by different associations, so only a portion of the plaza areas will be replaced and we couldn't dictate what those associations do with their project. He said different pavers made sense, but he disagreed with the marginal increase in accommodation units. He said there were 76 keys today on that site and there would be 209 keys in the future, which was a huge increase. He explained that if someone doesn't use their week, they would call and we would rent it, as the owner would get a substantial portion of the proceeds. He said additional noise would happen, but the project was not in Vail Village and since the traffic does not have to flow through the construction, there will be minimal impacts with the construction, John Schofield asked if there was any public comment. John Dunn, an attorney representing John Upcon, said his client objected to the height, as it was twice the height as the Village Master Plan allowed. Jim Lamont asked Jay to address the Td con from the bottom. Jay Peterson said the loading and delivery was a real plus. Jim Lamont mentioned his letter to Council was Attachment K. He said the commercial square footage was below the amount allowed. He asked George home much increase in GRFA was approved in the underlying zoning. George Ruther explained attachment B was from a 1991 analysis. Jim Lamont asked about the 1976 numbers, George Ruther said 151,000 s.ft, and the proposal today was an increase of 1, 400 sq. ft., or less than 10 %. Jim Lamont said the 1976 records prepared by Eldon Beck were not in the files, regarding the view corridor from the 4 -way stop. He said it had to do with openness, rather than the view. He said the integrity of the Town of Vail was at stake and we could recreate the view corridor. He said that Joe Staufer had to adjust his cupola in 1991 because of this and it was up to staff to reconstruct that view corridor. He suggested as a recommendation to Council to establish why the view corridor was adopted. He said the height ridgeline of Gateway should be used and buildings should not be any higher than the Gateway. Galen Aasland asked if this supposed view corridor was a standing ordinance Jim Lamont said no, but it was imposed and enforced on Mr. Staufer. Planning and Environmental Commission 4 Minutes December 1, 1999 Minutes December 13, 1999 Approved 1/10/00 George Ruther explained the consistent corners of the buildings. He said with the C, the applicant could explain the public benefits to get the setback deviation. Brian Doyon asked if there would be any landscaped area left , if a turn lane needed to be put in. Tim Losa said the Town had no way of calculating an average setback and this project averaged about 14 11/2' . Galen Aasland said the height was not excessive, He said 5 delivery berths were addressed. He asked about the height of the Gateway as an CLOD. Jay Peterson said the Gateway was formerly zoned Heavy Service and the only uses allowed were for the underlying zoning. They would have to change the uses for the CC1 Zone District to get other uses . Galen Aasland agreed with Jim regarding files being eliminated from the files, He said Russ would have to ask for more money to get a better system. He agreed with Brian that the cupola was a mass and bulk issue and should be significantly reduced or eliminated. He said he didn't believe that there was a view corridor codified across this property and by making a roundabout, rather than a 4 -way, it has significantly changed the views. He felt the applicant should be required to pay for where the access goes down for trucks. He said an independent analysts should look at a long -term solution for a wider setback. He then asked George to explain the 4" bullet on page 24 of the staff memo. George Ruther said it was addressed on the drawings. He said there was one free-market 'unit on this property and there was not an on -site managers unit. Galen Aasland said it was important to have one manager live on -site. Doug Cahill said the PEC were all in agreement with the pros. He suggested opening the pedestrian walkway around the project with undulations. He said that the bulk and mass worked well. He felt we would have a problem in the future and would need a turning lane. He hated to see encroaching into the 20' setback and would like to see the building behind the 20' setback. He said the deficit in landscaping needed to be brought up to 30% and CIJGT would take care of any concerns with the loading and delivery. He said this might be a good opportunity to put a delivery system into the infrastructure, if the people involved could get together on it. Jay Peterson said 38% was agreed on. Chas Bernhardt said he was ok with moving the time frame for bonding to the TCO. He wants to have the lost documents located. He said the traffic study only goes 15 years out and even if we moved the building back, he didn't see how moving the setback would help. He said he would like to see more landscaping and asked how employee housing was being addressed. Jay Peterson said he would like to keep employee housing in Town, but the fact remains that the Tow n owns most the land in Town. He said Cave Corbin said he would work with the Plaza Hotel to provide some housing, after Vail Resorts needs were taken care of. He said if they could provide housing in Town, they would and they would like to work out something with Vail Resorts. He said that since it was a condition for the TCO, we have to provide housing. George Ruther said we would need clear direction for the Council to decide, prior to the building permit being issued, where the 33 employees were going to be housed. Diane Golden agreed with Jim on the idea of the warehouse and said that it Deserved consideration. She agreed with Brian and said providing some on -site housing was absolutely necessary. Planning and Environmental Commission 6 Minutes December 13, 1999 C C