Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
2005-0613 PEC
PLANNING AND ENVIRONMENTAL COMMISSION PUBLIC MEETING .~ June 13, 2005 ~f?IVN OF VAiI, . PROJECT ORIENTATION -Community Development Dept. PUBLIC YVELCOME 12:00 pm MEMBERS PRESENT MEMBERS A_ BSENT Chas Bernhardt Doug Cahill Anne Gunion 'Bill Dewitt Rollie Kjesbo George Lamb David Viele Site Visits: 1:04 prn 1. Snowlion Condominiums - 1 a4D-Vail View Drive 2 Public Accommodation zone district - Snowcat Access Route 3. Tracts C, D, G and H -Lionshead -Temporary Skier Services Offices 4. Lionshead Redevelopment Master Plan Area -Vail Civic Center Driver: George Public Hearing -Town Council Chambers 2:04 pm 1. A request for a final review of a text amendment to Section 12-7A-7, Height, Vail Town Gode, pursuant to Chapter 12-3, Amendments, to increase the height limitation for a sloping roof from 48' to 5fi' fn the Public Accommodation zone district, and setting forth details in regard thereto. Applicant: Mauriello Planning Group, LLC Planner: George Ruttier ACTION: Tabled to June 27, 2045 MOTION: Dewitt SECOND: Lamb VOTE: 7-0-4 George Ruttier made a presentation to the Commission pursuant. to the staff memorandum dated today and went aver same additional criteria and conditions related to this text amendment proposal.. Dominic Mauriello of MPG, LLC, gave a presentation of the proposed text amendment and the details of the application. Doug Cahill opened up the hearing for public comment. ~lim Lamont, representing the Vail Village Homeowners Association, presented the concerns of his client and expressed a sentiment that this is not the appropriate time to consider such a request. Doug Cahill closed public comment. Bill Dewitt asked the applicant whether the value of an extra floor-plate would outweigh the liability of having a substandard accommodation product. Dominic Mauriello answered no. Biil Jewitt went on to articulate his disagreement with the sentiments expressed by Mr. Lamont. Rollie Kjesbo asked George Ruther a question related to the requirements of the SDD process. !George Ruther answered the question and Dominic Mauriello elaborated upon the answer Rollie Kjesbo went an with comments: agreed roof heights need to be adjusted and ceiling heights in accommodation units need to be up to industry standards. Rollie Kjesbo alos asked about the definition of a mansard roof versus a flat roof. George Ruther answered. George Lamb stated he is an the same page as Mr. Kjesbo and that we are not quite to the paint ofi amending this yet, the SDD process is still the best way to handle this issue. Anne Gunion stated she has two comments: one is that the stated intent of the amendment is to raise floor to float heights in hotels, but the amendment does not accomplish that goal; and two, that the SDD process is still the best way to ga here. David Viele stated he would like to first address Mr. Lamont°s comments in that he does feel this process is the correct way to address the issue at hand. Mr. Viele went on to state he feels the text amendment is appropriate and 56' 1 11' floor to floor is appropriate. Chas Bernhardt stated there are both pros and cons to the proposal, but a great deal of questions as well before approving this proposal Doug Cahill said there have been many examples of properties zoned PA that have gone through the SDD process successfully and it is the best way to ga through specifc applications an a case by case basis, Mr. Cahill stated further he could not give this approval across the board. Dominic Mauriello stated he will get together with staff to further analyze this proposal and come back with specific examples of haw this will benefit the TaV in the long term as other properties in the PA zone district which have utilized the SDD process to go as high as 96'. George Ruther stated he will gv back into the master plan documents and gather further examples of where and how certain design guidelines are applicable. 2. A request far a final review of a variance from Section 12-6G-7, Height, Vail Town Code, pursuant to Chapter 12-17, Variances, Vail Town Cade, to allow for a sloping roof which exceeds 38' in height, located at 1040 Vail View DrivelLot B2, Lions Ridge Filing 1, and setting faith details in regard thereto. Applicant: Snawlion Condominium Association Planner: Matt Gennett ACTION: Appra~ed MOTION: Kjesbo SECOND: Viete VOTE: 7'-0-0 Matt Gennett introduced the project according to the memorandum. Bill Pierce, the applicant's representative, summarized the request by saying that the only simple solution to the existing roof leak was to build a new roof. Na public comment was offered. 2 The Commissioners had no specific comments, but agreed that overall the request was a reasonable one. 3. A request far final review of a variance from Chapter 14-6, Grading Standards, Vail Town Code, pursuant to Chapter 12-17, Variances, Vail Town Code, to allow for retaining walls in excess of six (~) feet in height, located at Tract K, Glen Lyon Subdivision and Unplatted Parcels, a more complete metes and bounds description is available at the Community Development Department and setting forth details in regard thereto. Applicant: Vail Resorts, represented by Braun Associates, Inc. Planner: Bill Gibson ACTION: Approved, with conditions MOTIUN: K~esbo SECOND: Bernhardt VQTE: 6-Q-1 {Viele recused) CONDITIONS: 1) This variance request approval shall be contingent upon the applicant receiving Town of Vail approval of the associated design review application and the Town Council's final adoption of Ordinance No. 17, Series of 2004, amending Special Development District #4, Cascade Village. 2) The applicant shall properly maintain the limits of disturbance fencing and erosion control methods throughout the construction of this proposal. Any modification to the location or configuration of the limits of disturbance area shall require review and approval by the Planning and Environmental Gommission and the Design Review Board. 3) Prior to the issuance of grading permits, the applicant shall: A. enter into a lease or license agreement with the Town of Vail for the use of Town property; and, B. shall prepare a construction staging plan for review and approval by the Town of Vaiil; and, C. shall survey and then install all limits of disturbance fencing and all erosion control methods for review and approval by the Town of Vail. Bill Gibson introduced the project according to the memorandum, Tom Braun, Braun Associates, further described the proposal. Jay Peterson updated the Commission on the status of the applicant's negotiations with the neighboring property owners concerning private covenant issues There was no public comment. Commissioner Gunion stated concern about reviewing and possibly approving a variance far retaining wall heights prior to the adoption of Ordinance No. 17, Series of 20f}4, amending Special Development District #4. Jay Petersen responded that the ordinance was approved by the Town Council on first reading,. but the second reading had been tabled. He stated the applicant's need far final approval of the snawcat access route design to finalize the private covenant agreements. 3 Commissioner Dewitt noted that the Town Council required the applicant to address the private covenant issues before the second reading of any ordinance amending the SDD. He also complimented the applicants on the work that was done with the neighbors in pursuing their approval. Commissioner Lamb wanted to verify what types of vehicles would use the access route, to which Mr. Pe#erson replied that only snowcats would use of the path. Commissioner Cahili suggested that Vail Resorts pay particular attention to erosion control, especially during the spring run-off. 4. A request for a final review of a conditional use permit, pursuant to Section 12-9C-3, Conditional Uses, Vail Town Code, to allow for a public convention facility and public parking facilities and structures, located at 395 East Lionshead CirclefLot 9, Block 2, Vail Lionshead Flling 1, and setting forth details in regard thereto. Applicant: Town of Vail, represented by Pylman & Associates, Inc. Planner: Bill Gibson ACTION: Tabled to June 27, 2005 MOTION: Lamb SECOND: Bernhardt VOTE: fi-0-1 {Viele recusedy Bill Gibson briefly introduced items four and five according to the memorandum. Rick Pylman, Pylman & Associates, further introduced the project, including the backgroundlhistory of the project and the development review applications that have been submitted. Sherry Dorward, a member of the conference center design team, described the overall character of the proposal and presented an overview of the applicant's project master plan. Scott Durgance, Fentress Bradburn Architects, presented an architectural overview of the project. Jim Lamont, Vail Village Homeowners Association, mentioned that all electronic presentation materials should be on file for further reference. He noted this public project should be reviewed as if a private developer has submitted the applications, He mentioned that many questions were left unanswered regarding a future transportation center, Frontage Road improvements, mechanical ventinglnoise issues, employee housing, building bulk and mass, etc, Commissioner Dewitt stated his concerns about the CD4T approval process, locations for the charter buses, a future transportation center location, and employee housing. 5. A request for a correction to the Vail Land Use Plan to designate the Lionshead Redevelopment Master Plan Area and an amendment to the Lionshead Redevelopment Master Plan to amend, in part, Chapter 5, Vail Civic Center Detailed Plan Recommendations, and setting forth details in regard thereto. Applicant: Town of Vail, represented by Pylman & Associates, Inc. Planner: Bill Gibson ACTION: Tabled to June 27, 2005 MOTION: Lamb SECOND: Bernhardt VOTE: fi-0-1 {Niels reCUSed) See minutes listed under item number four. 4 6. A request for final review of a major exterior alteration, pursuant to Section 12-7H-7, Vail Town Cade, to allow far the construction of a temporary skier ticketing office and loading and delivery facilities, Vail Town Code, located at Tracts C and D, Lionshead Filing 1, and Tracts G and H, Lionshead Filing 3, and setting forth details in regard thereto. Applicant: Vail Resorts, represented by Braun Associates, Inc. Planner. George Ruther ACTION: Approved, with conditions MOTION: Kjesbo SECON©: Lamb VOTE: ?-4-4 George Ruther introduced the project according to the memorandum. Jay Peterson, Vail Resorts Development Company, questioned the first comment detailed in memorandum regarding the fire mitigation required for the building. He commented that two years should allow enough time far the completion of other buildings to compensate for the needs which the temporary facility serves in the meantime. The mast important use within the temporary facility will be the restrooms. George Ruther suggested amending the conditions to define what the temporary facilities included. Bill Jewitt asked what the impact of denying the loading facifity would be to which Jay Peterson answered that 80-100 snawcat tripsfday could be completed 'rn order to ensure that the restaurants stay operational. George Lamb commented that this application seemed appropriate considering the amount of redevelopment occurring within the area. Anne Gunian questioned whether the re-vegetation of the bike path was listed as a condition of approval, It was determined that the bike path was reference in the conditions and that the path would be restored fallowing the removal of the temporary facifity. David Viele wondered why the loadingfdelivery route proposed was superior to another route. Jay Peterson answered that it was the easiest way to keep the run openloperational. Chas Bernhardt had no additional comments. Doug Cahill asked to confirm the re-worded conditions, which George Ruther detailed aloud. ` Fallowing the vats, Daug Cahill asked about where the bin storage would occur near the facility. George Ruther commented that, through the condition, S#aff would not permit the storage of other items in the area adjacent to the temporary loadingldelivery location. 7, A request for a final review of a minor amendment to Special Development District No. 38, Manor Vail Lodge, pursuant to Section 12-9A-10, Amendments, Vail Town Code, to allow for the relocation of an elevator from the front to the rear of a building, located at 595 Vail Valley Drive/Lots A, B, & C, Vail Village Filing 7, and setting forth. details in regard thereto. Applicant: Manor Vail Lodge, represented by Bob McCleary Planner: Warren Campbell ACTION: Tabled to June 27r 2045 MOTION: Bernhardt SECOND: Lamb VOTE: Ci-0-4 {Niels absent) 5 8. A request for final review of a text amendment to Section 12-7H-12, Density (Dwelling Units Per Acre), Vail Town Code, pursuant to Chapter 12-3, Amendments, Vail Town Code, to allow multiple attached accommodation units within a dwelling unit, and setting forth details in regard thereto. Applicant: Vail Resorts, represented by Braun Associates, Inc, Planner: George Ruttier ACTION: Tabled to June 27, 2005 MOTION: Bernhardt SECONn: Lamb VOTE: 6-0-0 (Niels absent) 9. A request for a final review of a variance from Chapter 14-6, Grading Standards, Vail Town Code, pursuant to, Chapter 12-17, Variances, Vail Town Cade, to allow for a retaining wall in excess of 3 feet in height located in the front setback, located at 1837 Alpine DrivelLot 49, Vail Village West Filing 1, and setting forth details in regard thereto. Applicant: Seven Nails, Inc,, represented by David Flinn Planner: Elisabeth Eckel ACTTON: Tabled to June 27, 2005 MOTION: Bernhardt SECOND: Lamb VOTE: 6-0-0 (Niels absent) 10. A request for a final review of a variance from Section 12-6D-6, Setbacks, Vail Town Code, pursuant to Chapter 12-7, Variances, Vail Town Code, to allow for the construction of a garage addition within the front setback, located at 2t?08 Arosa DrivelLot 2, Block D, Vail Ridge Subdivision, and setting forth details in regard thereto. Applicant: Brenda and Steve Herman, represented by Mauriello Planning Group, LLC Planner: Warren Campbell ACTION: Tabled to June 27, 2005 MOTION: Bernhardt SECOND: Lamb VOTE: 6-0-0 (Niels absent) 11. A request for a final review of an amended final plat, pursuant to Chapter 13-12, Exemption Plat. Review Procedures, Vail Town Code, to allow for an amendment to an existing platted building envelope and an increase of plat-restricted site coverage, located at 971 Spraddle Creek Road/Lot 8, Spraddle Creek Subdivision, and setting faith details in regard thereto. Applicant: Franco D'Agostino, represented by Zehren & Associates Planner: Matt Gennett ACTION: Withdrawn 12. A request for a final review of a variance from Section 12-6D-8, Density; Chapter 12-1 Q, 4ff- Street Parking and Loading; and Title 14, Development Standards Handbook, Vail Town Code, pursuant to Chapter 12-17, Variances, to allow for a residential addition, located at 2854 Snowberry DrivelLot 19, DrivelLot 19, Block 9, Vail Intermountain Subdivision, and setting forth details in regard thereto. Applicant: Mike and Marla Haley, represented by RAL Architects, Inc. Planner: Elisabeth Eckel ACTION: Withdrawn 13. Approval of May 23, 2©05 minutes MOTION: Bernhardt SECOND: Lamb VOTE: &0-1 14, Information Update 15 Adjournment MOTION: Bernhardt SECOND: Lamb VOTE: 6-0-1 • The applications and information about the proposals are available for public inspection during regular 6 office hours at the Town of Vail Community Development Department, 75 South Frontage Road. The public is invited to attend the project. orientation and the site visits that precede the public hearing in the Town of Vail Community Development Department. Please call 1970} 479-2138 far additional information. Sign language interpretation is available upon request with 24-hour ratification. Please call (970} 479-2356, Telephone for the Hearing Impaired, far information.. Community Development Department Published June 10, 2005, in the Vaii Daily. • • 7 MEMORANDUM TO: Planning and Environmental Cornmiss'ran FROM: Community Development Department DATE: June 13, 2005 SUBJECT: A request for a final review of a text amendment to Section 12-7'A-7, Height, Vail Town Code, pursuant to Chapter 12-3, Amendments, to increase the height limitation for a sloping roof from 48' to 56' in the Public Accommodation zone district, and setting forth details in regard thereto. {PEC05-0035) Applicant: Mauriello Planning Group, I_LC Planner: George Rather I. SUMMARY The applicant, Mauriello Planning Group, is proposing a text amendment to Section 12-7A-7, Height, Vail Town Code, to increase the height limitation far a sloping roof from 48' to 56' in the Public Accommodation zone district, and setting forth details in regard thereto. '~ Based upon Staff's review of the criteria in Section V of this memorandum and the evidence and testimony presented, the Community Development Department recommends the Planning and Environmental Commission forwards a recommendation of approval to the Vail Town Council far the proposed text amendment, subject to the findings noted in Section VI of this memorandum. II. DESGRIRTION OF THE REQUEST The intent of this application is to amend the building height limitation for, development located within the Public Accommodation zone district. The applicant, Mauriello Planning Group, is proposing a tent amendment to Section 12-7A--7, Height, Vail Tawn Code, to increase the height limitation for a sloping roof from 48' to 5fi° in the Public Accommodation zone district. Currently Section 12-7A-7, Height, Vail Town Cade, limits the maximum allowable height far buildings with sloping roofs to forty eight feet {48'). The proposed text amendments to the Title 12, Zoning Regulations, Vail Tawn Code, are as follows {deletions are shown in st~c thra~+gf~ additions are shown in hold): 12-7A-7: HEIGHT: For a flat roof or mansard roof, the height of buildings shall not exceed forty five feet {45'). For a sloping roof, the height of buildings shall nvt exceed f9~-Ei~i~t f^ fifty six feet X56'). • lli. BACKGR04JND The specifiic building height prouision of Section 12-7A-7, Vail Town Code, was originally adopted by Ordinance No. 8, Series of 1976. According to Town records, at the time of the originally adoption the maximum allowable building height in the Public Accommodation zone district was 45 feet, regardless of roof type. The maximum allowable building height limitation was amended pursuant to Ordinance No. 37, Series of 1980. Pursuant to Ordinance No. 37, among other revisions, the maximum allowable building in the Public Accommodation zone district was increased from 45 feet to 48 feet for sloping roofs and 45 feet for mansard or flat roofs. In 1991, the Vail Town Council adopted the DEVELOPMENT C©DE REVISIQN REPLIRT. Phase I. "An Assessment of the Town of Vaii Zoning Code and Recommendations for Action" The purpose of this report is to analyze the regulations prescribed in the Town of Vail Zoning Regulations and make recommendations for improvements. Upon review of the development standards prescribed for the district, the report recommends amendments to the density control previsions. It makes na reference or recommendations for amendments #o the building height standard. In 1999, the Vail Town Council approved Ordinance No. 23, Series of 1999, which provided for a comprehensive amendment to each of the development standards prescribed for the Public Accommodation Zone District with the exception of building height. Building height was considered and evaluated during the discussions regarding the amendment, however, it was determined at that time that the maximum building height should not be amended. In 2003, Bob Lazier, represented by Jay Peterson, proposed a text amendment to Section 12-7A-7 {Height} of the Vail Town Cade. The amendment was intended to increase the maximum allowable building height of structures built in the Public Accommodation zone district from 48 feet to 56 feet for buildings with sloping roofs and from 45 feet to 53 feet for buildings with flat or mansard roofs. Following a worksession discussion with the applicant, the PEC and the Town Council, the applicant withdrew the text amendment application and submitted a development application #o establish a special development district {SOD). As a result, SDD #37, Tivoli Lodge, was created. According to the Official Zoning Map, there are sixteen properties in the Town of Vail zoned Public Accommodation. These properties are generally located around the periphery of the village commercial core area and include the Austria Haus*, Bavaria Haus, Chateau at Vail (Holiday Inn)*, Christiania Lodge*, First Bank of Vail, Galatyn Lodge"', Mountain Haus, 9 Vail Road (Holiday House), Ramshorn Condominiums*, One Willow Bridge Road*, Roost Lodge, Talisman, Tivoli Lodge*, Vail Athletic Club*, Vail Village Inn*, and Villa Valhalla. Df these sixteen properties, nine have received approvals for special development districts or were granted a height variance and have been identified with an asterisk {*). IV. ROLES OF REVIEWING BO®IES Order of Review: Generally, text amendment applications will be reviewed by the Planning and Environmental Commission and the Commission will forward a recommendation to the Town Council. The Town Council will then review the text amendment application. Planning and Environmental Commission: The Planning and Environmental Commission is responsible for the review of a text amendment application, pursuant to Section 12-3-7, Amendment, Vail Town Code, and forwarding of a recommends#ion to the Town Council. Design Review Board: The Design Review Board has no review authority over a text amendment to the Vail Town Code. Town Council: The Town Council is responsible far final approval, approval with modifications, or denial of a text amendment application, pursuant to Section 12-3-7, Amendment, Vail Town Code. The Town Council has the authority to hear and decide appeals from any decision, determination, or interpretation by the Planning and Environmental Commission and/or Design Review Board. The Town Council may also call up a decision of the Planning and Environmental Commission andlor Design Review Board. Staff:. The Town Staff facilitates the application review process. Staff reviews the submitted application materials far completeness and general compliance with the appropriate requirements of the Town Code. Staff also provides the Planning and Environmental Commission a mernorandurn containing a descrip#ion and background of the application; an evaluation of the application in regard to the criteria and findings outlined by the Town Code; and a recommendation of approval, approval with modifications, or denial. V. REVIEW CRITERIA The review criteria and factors for consideration for a text amendment application are established by the provisions of Section 12-3-7, Amendments, Vail Town Code. According to the Vail Town Code, the following review criteria shall be used to evaluate a text amendment to the Zoning Regulations, 1. The extent to which the text amendment furthers the general and specific purposes of the Zoning Regulations; and, Staff believes this text amendment furthers the general and specific purposes of the zoning regulations. The general and specific purposes of the Zoning Regulations can be found in Chapter 1 of the Title 12 of the Vail Town Code. According to Section 12-1-2, Purpose, Vail Town Code, the general and specific purposes of the Zoning Regulations are, "These regulations are enacted for the purpose of promoting the health, safety, morals, and genera! welfare of the Town, and to promote fhe coordinated and harmonious development of the Town r'n a manner that wilt conserve and enhance its natura! environment and its established character as a resort and residential community of high quality." And, "These regulations are intended to achr'eve the following mare specific ,purposes: t _ Ta provide for adequate light, air, sanitation, drainage, and public facilities. 2. 7a secure safety from fire, panic, flood, avalanche, accumulation of snow, and other dangerous conditions. 3. To promote safe and efficient pedestrian and vehicular traffrc circulation and fo lessen congestion in the streets. 4. To promote adequate and appropriately located off-street parking and loading facilities. 5. To conserve and maintain established community qualities and economic values. 6. To encourage a harm©nious, convenient, workable relationship among land uses, consistent with Municipal development objecfr'ves. 7`. To prevent excessive population densities and overcrowding of the land with structures. 8. To safeguard and enhance fhe appearance of fhe Town. 9. To conserve and protect wildlife, streams, woods, hillsides, and other desirable natural feafures. 9g. To assure adequate open space, recreation opportunities, and other amenitr'es and facilities conducive to desired living quarters. 17. Ta otherwise provide for the growth of an orderly and viable communify. " Upon review of the stated general and' specific purposes of the Zoning Regulations, staff believes that the proposed text amendment complies with the general purpose of the Zoning Regulations and with numbers 1, 5, fi, 8, and 11 of the list outlined above. Staff does not believe that the other six specific purposes are directly related to the proposed text amendment. A review of the Town's records indicates that there are seventeen properties in the Town. of Vail with a zoning designation of the Public Accommodation (PA). Qf the seventeen properties, nearly one-half (S) have recently undergone some farm of redevelopment. For example, Four Seasons (aka Holiday 1nn), Vail Plaza Hotel, Qne Willow Bridge Road (aka Swiss Chalet), Tivoli Lodge, Vail Mountain Lodge, etc., have all recently received approvals far redevelopment which included increases in building height aver 48 feet. 2. The extent to which the text amendment would better implement and better achieve the applicable elements of the adopted goals, 4 objectives, and policies outlined in the Vail Gamprehensive Plan and is compatible with the development objectives of the Town; and, Staff believes this text amendment better implements and achieves the applicable elements of the adopted goals, objectives and policies outlined in the Vail Comprehensive Plan by more realistically acknowledging the development trends within the resort community environment. For example, according to the Vail Village Master Plan, Objective 1.2, the Town shall "encourage the upgrading and redevelopment of residential and commercial facilities" and Policy 2.3.1 states, "the development of short term accommodation units is strongly encouraged." In order to achieve these objectives and policies the Town's regulations must keep pace with changes in the market. Staff believes that in the instance of building height the Town's standards have not kept pace with the changes in the market. For example, a nine foot floor-ta-float section is used in the Vail Village Master Plan to determine the allowable number of stories of buildings within the plan area. As demonstrated by the recent. redevelopment of the Austria Haus, a nine foot floor-to-floor section results in a building containing 7'- 6" ceiling heights in areas such as hallways, bathrooms, and kitchens. These areas contain the lower ceilings due to the need to provide for heating, cooling, and venting. 1n the end, development may meet the technical requirements of the Town's regulations but fails to adequately address the goals, objectives and policies of the Town's master planning documents. 3. The extent to which. the text amendment demonstrates how conditions have substantially changed since the adoption of the subject regulation and how the existing regulation is na longer appropriate ar is inapplicable; and, Staff believes that the existing maximum allowable building height limitation is outdated and in need of amending due to changes in conditions within the resort development industry. The existing height limitation is over 25 years old and may no longer be appropriate ar applicable in today°s resort community environment. A review of the most recent redevelopment approvals granted by the Town of Vail illustrates a need to increase the maximum building height allowance in order to achieve the Town's develapment objectives. With the exception of the Sonnenalp Hotel addition, no develapment or redevelopment project located in the Public Accommodation zone district complies with the 48 foot maximum building height limitation. As was discussed at length during the Lianshead Redevelopment Master Plan process, industry standards and guest expectations far lodging units have increased since the Public Accommodation development standards were adopted. Two-hundred fifty square foot rooms with seven and one- half foot ceilings no longer meet the expectations of our resort guests. In response to these changes in standards and expectations, an increase in floor-to-floor sections was factored into the determination of the maximum allowable building height standard in the Lionshead Mixed Use-1 zane district. A ten foot to eleven foot floor-to-floor building section has become the norm in the hotel development industry. 1+"U'hen four stories of buildings with eleven foot floor-to-floor sections are constructed with a sloping roof of approximately twelve feet in height the resulting building exceeds 48 feet ~4 stories X 7? foot floor section + 72 foot roof height = 56 feet]. An increase in maximum allowable building height to 56 feet better accommodates the needs and expectations of the resort development industry and addresses the change in conditions since the last amendment was adopted in 1980. 4. The extent to which the text amendment provides a harmonious, convenient, workable relationship among land use regulations consistent with municipal development objectives; and, According to the Official Town of Vail Zoning Map, properties zoned Public Accommodation are generally located around the periphery of the village commercial core area. Further, the Vail Land Use Plan designates the village commercial core area as "Vail Master Plan". Pursuant to the Vail Land Use Plan, the Vail Master Plan designation indicates the Village Core Area where development and growth is guided by the goals, objectives and policies as outlined in the Vail Village Master Plan {adopted November 18, 1986). An exception to the general spatial location of the Public Accommodation zone district around the periphery of the village commercial care area is the Roost Lodge. The Roost Lodge is located at 1783 North Frontage Road. According to the Vail Land Use Plan, the Roost Lodge has a land use designation of "Medium Density Residential ". Staff believes this text amendment will ensure a harmonious, convenient, workable relationship among land use regulations consistent with the Town's development objectives. While it is true that the absolute height of buildings located in the Public Accommodation zone district will increase by 8 feet or 16°!°, the increase will likely have minimal impacts on adjoining land uses. Past redevelopment approvals have demonstrated that the increase in height granted as a result of a variance approval ar a special development district approval did not necessarily result either an increase in density or site coverage or a reduction in landscape area or setbacks. The recent approval of the Tivoli Lodge is an example of where an increase in building height to fifty six feet did not result in substantial impacts to the remaining development standards of the zane district. 5. Such other factors and criteria. the Commission andlor Council deems applicable to the proposed text amendment. The Community Development Department has identified a number of issues that we believe need to be addressed during the review and G consideration of this text amendment proposal. The following is a list of issues: i. Impacts on building bulk and mass and the effects that may have on the character of the area. ii. Impacts on the availability of light and air to surrounding uses. iii. Impacts on sun/shade on adjacent properties and public spaces. iv. Impacts on views from public spaces and established view corridors. v. Impacts on the enclosure of streets and spaces between buildings. vi. Impacts on the urban design considerations with respect to the height of roof eaves and overhangs and the presence of flat roofs and parapet walls, vii. Impacts on the development objectives of the Tawn of Vail. viii. Increased height permits the construction of "quality" hotel rooms. ix. Should the maximum allowable height for buildings with flat or mansard roofs be increased proportionately as well (ie, 45 feet to 53 feet)? VI. STAFF RECOMMENDATION The Community Development Department recommends the Planning and Environmental Commission forwards a recommendation of approval to the Vail Town Council of a proposed text amendment, pursuant to Section 12-3-7, Amendment, Vail Town Code, to Section 12-7A-7, Height, Vail Town Code, to increase the height limitation for a sloping roof from 48' to 56' in the Public Accommodation zone district, and setting Earth details in regard thereto. This recommendation is based upon the review of the criteria outlined in Section V of this memorandum and the evidence and testimony presented. Should the Planning and Environmental Commission choose to forward a recommendation of approval to the Vail Town Council for the proposed text amendment, the Community Development Department recommends the Commission pass the following mo#ion: "The Planning and Enviranmenfal Commission forwards a recommendation of approval to the Vail Town Council of a proposed feat amendment, pursuant to Section 12-3-7, Amendnaenf, Vail Town Cade, to Section 12-7A-7, Height, Vail Town Code, to increase the heighf limitation for a sloping roof from 48' to 56' in the Public Accommodation zone district; and setting forth details in regard thereto." Should the Planning and Environmental Commission choose to forward a recommends#ion of approval to the Vail Town Council for the proposed text amendment, the Community Development Department recommends the Commission makes the following findings: "Based upon the review of the criteria outlined in Section V this memorandum, and the evidence and testimony presented, the Planning and Environmental Commission fr'nds: 1. That the amendment is consistent with the applicable elements of fhe adopted goals, objectives and policies outlined in the Wai! Comprehensive Plan and is compatible with the development objecfives of the Town; and 2. That the amendment furthers the genera! and specific purposes of fhe Zoning Regulations outlined in Section 12-1-2, Purpose, Vai! Town Cade; and 3. That the amendment promotes fhe health, safety, morals, and general welfare of fhe Town and promotes the coordinated and harmonious development of the Town in a manner that conserves and enhances its natural environment and its established character as a resort and residential community of fhe highest quality." • MEMORANDUM TO: Planning and Environmental Commission FRCJM: Community Development Department DATE: June 13, 2005 SUBJECT: A request for a final review of a variance from Section 12-6G-7, Height, Vail Town Cade, pursuant to Chapter 12-17, Variances, Vail Town Cade, to allow far a sloping roof which exceeds 38' in height, located at 1040 Vail View DrivelLot B2, Lions Ridge Filing 1, and setting forth details in regard thereto- (PEC05-0037) Applicant: Snowlion at Vail Condominium Association, represented by Fritzlen- Pierce Architects Planner: Matt Gennett I. SUMMARY The applicant, Snowlion at Vail Condominium Association, is requesting a variance from the required maximum allowable roof height in the Medium Density Multiple Family (MDMF) district of thirty-eight feet (38') in order to construct a sloping roof with a single ridge aver the existing double-ridged roof form on the Snowlion Condominiums building, located at1040 Vail View DrivelLot B2, Lions Ridge Filing 1 (Attachment A). The existing roof is presently nonconforming at a maximum ridge height, including the cold roof, of approximately thirty- nine and three-tenths feet (39,3'), and the new roof structure would have a maximum ridge height of approximately forty-two and four-tenths feet (42,4'). The variance requested is for three and one-tenth feet of roof structure in excess of the thirty-eight foot {38') maximum roof height. Based upon the criteria and findings in Section VIlI of this memorandum, staff is recommending approval of the applicant°s variance request. II. DESCRIPTION OF REQUEST The applicant is making a request to further exceed the maximum roof height in the Medium Density Multiple Family residential zone district of thirty-eight feet (38') for a sloping roof by an additional three feet (3'), approximately. The height variance being requested would allow the applicant to construct a new roof structure aver the top of the existing roof forms, which would serve to fix the existing leakage and drainage problems while not creating any additional Gross Residential Floor Area {GRFA) or living space (Attachment B). As stated above, the current roof height of the Snowlion Condominiums structure is in a state of preexisting nonconformity by approximately three-tenths of a foot {0.3'}, with its highest ridge height point being approximatelythirty-nine and three-tenths {39.3')feet in elevation. Twelve inches (12") of the one and three tenths feet (1.3') of roof structure in excess of the roof height maximum do not count against the roof height maximum as the building is presently designed with a cold roof system which can exceed the roof height maximum up to twelve inches {12")above the maximum roof height in any zone district. Likewise, since the new ~. 1 ~~ fi f'044'N 4~ Y,AI,~ ~` proposal will also utilize a cold roof design, just the first twelve inches of the existing and proposed roof structure will be excluded from the maximum raof height of thirEy-eight feet (38'x. The proposed, pitched roof form would have a maximum ridge height of approximately forty-two and four-tenths feet (42.4'), including the twelve inches of call raof. Hence, the request is for three and one-tenth feet of roof structure to be allowed in excess of the maximum roof height in the MDMF zone district of thir#y-eight fee# (38'). The description of the applicant's request, provided by their representatives, Fritzlen-fierce Architects, arkiculates the benefits of the proposed solution and its minimal impacts on neighboring properties (Attachment G). III. BACKGRQUND ©riginal construction of the Snowlion at Vail Condominiums structure was completed in 197Q and predates Town of Vail zoning regulations. !n 1977, the present mining designation of Medium Density Mul#iple Family (MDMF) was adopted. No signii'icant work has been done to the exsting s#ructure since its original construction aside from minor projects necessary far maintenances repair, and general upkeep, IV. REVIEWING B0,4RD RQLES A. The Planning and Environmental Commission is responsible for evaluating a proposal for_ The relationship of the requested variance to other existing or potential uses and structures in the ticinity. 2. The degree to which relief from the strict or literal interpretation and enforcement of a specified regulation is necessary to achieve compatibility and uniformity of treatment among sites in the vicinity, or to attain the objectives of this Title without grant of special privilege. 3. The effect of the requested variance on light and air, distribution of population, transportation and traffic facilities, public facilities and utilities, and public safety. 4. Such other factors and criteria as the Commission deems applicable to the proposed variance. B. The DRB has l~lQ review authority an a variance, but must review any accompanying DRB application, C. Town Council Actions of Design Review Board ar Planning and Environmental Gommission maybe appealed to the Town Gouncil or by the Town Council. Town Gouncil evaluates whether or not the Planning and Environmental Commission or Design Review Board erred with approvals or denials and can uphold, uphold with modifications, or 2 overturn the board's decision. D. Staff The staff is responsible for ensuring that all submittal requirements are provided and plans conform to the technical requirements of the Zoning Regulations. The staff also advises the applicant as to compliance vuith the design guidelines. Staff provides a staff memorandum containing background on the property and provides a staff evaluation of the project with respect to the required criteria and findings, and a recommendation on approval, approval with conditions, or denial. Staff also facilitates the review process. V. APPLICABt_E PLANNING D©CUIVIENTS TITLE 12, ZONING REGULATIONS ARTICLE H. HIGH DENSITY Ml'JLTIPLE-FAMILY (HOME) DISTRICT (excerpted) 72-6G-1: PURPOSE: The medium density multiple-family district is intended to provide sites for multiple-family dwellings at densities to a maximum of eighteen (18) durelfing units per acre, together with such public facilities as may appropriately be located in the same district. The medium density multiple-family district is intended to ensure adequate Light, air, open space, and otheramenities commensurate with multiple-family occupancy, and to maintar'n the desirable residential qualities of the district by establishing appropriate site develapment standards. Certain nonresidential uses are permitted as conditional uses, and where permitted, are intended to blend harmoniously with the residentia! character of the district. 12-6G-7: HEIGHT. Far a flat roof or mansard roof, the height of buildings shall not exceed thirty five feet (35'). For a sloping roof, the height of buildinss shall not exceed thirty eight feet (38'). CHAPTER 77, VARIANCES (in part) 12-17-~; P(IRPOSE: A. Reasons For Seeking Variance; !n order to prevenf or to lessen such practical difficulties and unnecessary physical hardships inconsistent with the objectives of this title as would result from strict or literal interpretation and enforcement, variances from certain regulations may be granted. A practical difficulty or unnecessary ahvsical hardship may result from the size. shame. or dimensions of a site or the location of existing structures thereon: from tooogra~ahic or physical conditions on the site or in the immediate vicinity; or __ from other physical limitations. street locations or conditions in the immediate vicinity. Cost or inconvenience to the applicant of strict or literal compliance with a regulation shall not be a reason far granting a variance. • 3 8. Development Standards Excepted: Variances may be granted only with respect to the '~ development standards prescribed for each district, including lot area and site dimensions, setbacks, distances between buildings, height, density control, building bulk control, site coverage, usable open space, landscaping and site development, and parking and loading requirements; or with respect to the provisions of chapter 7 ? of this title, governing physical development vn a site. C. Use Regulations Not Affected: The power to grant variances does not extend to the use regulations prescribed for each district because the flexibility necessary to avoid results inconsistent with the obfectives of this title is provided by chapter 18, "Conditional Use Permits'; and by section 12-3-7. "Amendment" of this title. VI. VII. SITE ANALYSIS Address: 1840 Vail View Drive Legal Description: Lot B2, Lions Ridge Filing 1 Lot Size: 59,416 square feet / 1.36 acres Hazards: None Standard Alfowed/Required Existing Pror~osed Setbacks: Front: 20 ft. 45' no change Sides: 20 ft. 35' NEf47' NW no change Rear: 20 ft. 105' no change Height: 38' 39.3' 42.4' GRFA: 33,273 sq. ft. 21,343 sq. ft. no change Site Coverage: 45% (26,737 sq. ft.} 13.4 °f° (7,980 sq. ft.) no change Density: 24 DUs 25 DUs no change SURROUNDING LAND USES AND ZONING Land Use Zoning North: Residential Medium & Low Density Multiple-Family (NOME & LDMF} South: Residential & Mixed Use Medium Density Multiple-Family and Special Development District Number 5 (NOME & SDD No. 5} East: Residential Law and Medium Density Multiple Family (COME & MDMF} 1Nest: Residential Medium Density Multiple Family (NOME} 4 1/lll. CFiITER1A AND FIN131NGS A. 1. The relationship of the requested variance to other existing or potential uses and structures in the vicinity. Staff has determined the requested variance will result in a harmonious relationship between the Snowlion structure and its neighboring buildings as the proposed increase in the elevation of the ridge height will be nominal while having a positive impact an the building's design. Additionally, the creation of a single, pitched roof with one linear ridge and a uniform roofing material with one natura9 color wi11 bring the building into closer architectural and aesthetic harmony with the surrounding structures. 2. The degree to which relief from the strict and literal interpretation and enforcement of a specified regulation is necessary to achieve compatibilityand uniformity of treatment among sites in the vicinity or to attain the objectives of this title without a grant of special privilege. Considering the existing condition of the subject building and its inherent structural design traits, relief from the strict and literal interpretation of the subject regulation is necessary to achieve the applicant's goal of creating a sound, waterproof roof form an their building. Part of the Purpose Statement for the Variance chapter (12-6G-1) in Title 12 speaks directly to a "practical difficulty ar unnecessary physical hardship" which results from the "physical conditions on the site". Staff performed numerous site visits and went up onto the existing roof to assess its present condition, as well as its shape and form. After such assessments, staff determined there would not be a reasonable alternative solution without having to demolish a substantial portion of the existing structure and its top floor units, or performing a complete demolition 1 rebuild of the Snowlion Condominiums building. The current proposal employs an over-framed, cold roof design which seeks only the minimum of relief necessary from the subject regulation and which is the direct result of the current ohvsical limitations inherent on the site. The Planning and Environmental Commission has granted similar variances in the past when preexist°rng conditions have created an undue hardship, and this does not constitute a grant of special privilege under such circumstances. 3. The effect of the requested variance on light and air, distribution of population, transportation and traffic facilities, public faciilities and utilities, and public safety. Staff believes the effects upon light, air, and other public interests in comparison to existing conditions would be negligible considering the ridge height will rise by a maximum of approximately three feet ~3'). The existing Snowlion Condominiums building is currentlynancanformingwlth respect to the maximum allowable raof height, far a sloping roof, of thirty-eight feet {38'}, the highest paint presently being an approximate thirty-nine and three- tenths feet (39.3') in elevation. The only building in the area which may be 5 adversely affected by this proposal would be the Womestake Condominiums structure, but considering its placement on the hilt above Snowlion across Vail View Drive, the proposed new roof will not have a discernable impacton views from this building. 4. Such ether factors and criteria as the commission deems applicable to the proposed variance. The strict literal interpretation of the specified regulation would result in practical difficulty and an unnecessary physical hardship for the applicant. The circumstances and conditions of the Snowfian Condominiums building are extraordinaryand do not generally apply to other properties in the MDMF zone district. B. The Planning and Er~virrnmental Commission shall make the following findings before orantina a variance: That the granting of the variance will not constitute a grant of special privilege inconsistent with the limitations on other properties classified in the same district. 2. That the granting of the variance will not be detrimental fo the public health, safety or welfare, or materially injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity. 3. That the variance is warranted for one or more of the following reasons; a. The strict literal interpretation ar enfarcernent of the specified regulation would result in practical difficultyar unnecessary physical hardship inconsistent with the objectives of this title. b. There are exceptions or extraordinary circumstances or conditions applicable to the same site of the variance that do not apply generally to other properties in the same acne. The strict interpretation or enforcement of the specified regulation would deprive the applicant of privileges enjoyed by the owners of other properties in the same district. 1X. STAFF RECOMMENDATION The Community Development Department recommends approval of the requested variance from Section 12-fiG-7, Height, Vail Town Code, pursuant to Chapter 12-7, Variances, to allow for the construction of a new roof, located at 1040 Vail View DrvelLot E3.~, Lions Ridge Filing 1, subject to the criteria outlined in Section VII! of this memorandum. Should the Planning and Environmental Commission choose to approve the requested variance, the Department of Community Development recommends the Commission pass 6 the following motion: "Based upon the review of the criteria outlr'ned in Section Vlll of this memorandum, and the evidence and testimony presenfed, the Planning and Environmental Commission finds: 9. That the granting of the variance wf!! naf constitute a grant of special privilege inconsistent with the limitations on other properties classified in the sam= district. 2. That the granting of the variance will not be detrimental to the public health, safety ar welfare, ar materially injurious to properties or irr~arovements in the vicinity. 3. That the variance is warranted for one or more of the following reasons: a. The strict literal interpretation ar enforcement of the specified regulation would result in practical difficulty or unnecessary physical hardship inconsistent with the objectives of this title. b. There are exceptiaras or extraordinary circumstances ar conditions applicable to the same site of the variance that do not apply generally to other properties in the same zone. c. The strict interpretation or enforcement of the specified regulation would deprive the applicant of privileges enjoyed by the owners ofotherproperties in the same district. X. ATTACHMENTS A. Vicinity Map B_ Reduced Plans C. Applicant's Request • 7 fi. Syr I TSYS f4e'~., :'Le ~-_'.. ~ ;; ^~ .l" Rft ~ ~c'~~ ~ i a+* y~. t ~ ~ ~TI~ / ~ f ,Y ~'34s~'R~ f~ ~ 3 ~ LSD c ,sf ~ .~ t _y~ ~ 1 , p 9 .~, a s~ . ~~'t lr- r: 'bl. :4 ny ~#g~:, ~~3 ~ w,~JiX,.! Pv ~ 1 ax E ~ W r ft i q R ,~l ~99 F "2 E ~ ~" ~ T'y{ ft ' ~ ~ ~ ~ . ~ ~ ' '''}'''~ V {{ _e,',, 1 ,:" ~, ~' "~ ~"''rk ~r~, F.,~sak it ~.!`.. _ ~ ~n4D. N ~ k ~. ~'S"°•~~', a} '~ '' h -~ dk ,~ a 4 ?,~ S t ~, , ~ ~: .~ -"'fi'r ~ e ~~,.. ~ , .~ ~ , .~' r \ ~ ., I F y~ 3yy~y~ "tin, ~ ~ ~ e s~ /• •~ ~~]I ~ h Tai ~T_I 5 - ~ X wO~~ p ~ Ylr ~ ~ e4i~r1` M~ °.. ~. ,p,\. kd~yry ~`,y'~ ~ y i1 ~ ±'J t4 r ~ ~ ~ •e~a~{ ~ 4 v~ ~ ,, ~ , y 3 ; 5~: ! `~ ~r~+ e~~++~ v~ ~.L~ ~ ~ ~~Y £~~'~}'4 .~+'C~'+e c } ~' ~ S 'd ~~ ` ~ kk ` ~ r ~ O . rtT \4! ~, ~ ~,7-, f k * . ~ r ~ ,.,`', /t, T t:. ~~ 1 ~ : ~~ ~ w ; ~ ~ ~ ^^ .:1'=. ~6 ~. l t. g ~i~., 5,7e!\.~ x`3 ~.-.'s'~F' ,o-„ ^§ 5 ~r ~ L • ,• ~ ~ r "'_' ' ~ia t nx ` k ~ ?; + ;~ r ~• e t'` s r ~~ „~ ~ ;~ £ . e.. [ f ky,; ~ fr'yy =L: tX pl. ~ ~ ~~ ~. _$i yy • -~ r'~y.'. ~.3~w. e 1 ~_ t f _, ~~p"E'..8i n ;~I, r ~~w ..' ~_ ~~ ~ :I ~'~.~'+f .....41 351 . _ O ~yy~ y,~ wwW ~~ .~ ~ ~~ . ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ 6 ~ ~ ~~~rw+ut IIjL~~~~~~ ).3A~ SNGI1Vh'313 kY3d ~j ~1~~ ~ M ~~~~ ~t~~ ~a1 t~r~ ~~~~ ,, ~~~ r } ~- J ~~~ l ~ 4R1 :7 • • g ~1 ~~ ~~ fl'~ m ~' $?~ °m~ Q ~ ~I~ men mN ry r~ o'~ L ~~ '~ u Q ~ ^`' 7 D 1 Q I .~ o ~' -S I+.~ i r x ~~ _9 U ~i 4~ M~ ~~ m ~ ~r mlk ~~ • • u ~~ ~~ ~~ -:*~,6 { y C S~ 4 f F d~ O~. m~ m~ ~ £~ ~ pJW JI Q 41~L Ory 9~ ~ ~ 6'n ~~ n~ d~ y , ~ FJ ~ and w~ O R i O Q ~' w z 4 a~ z x~ ~_ ~~ ~d~ ~o r~ $~ ~.~-,~~- '~ '~ ~~ ~ ~~~"- off' X h ~ V W O g ~~ a Q~ ~~ a F ,- ~~ 'ms ~_~ ~ ~LL ~ ~ LL O ~Es Q w n~n LL.. ~', ~, w~ w ~ '? ~` • • fi ~ ~Wf 11NIWU1`1NUJ NEJi 1 ,NkUNS • ~. ~. ~, ~~ ~, ~! m ~~ 4 S I~ ~~~ ~ s ~~ ~ ~ r~~ ~~ 0 0 _~ .~ 1 cl j ' ~ ~n~ ~' i ~ J ''`~ ~ ~.-1 ~ ~ ~ O O r `~"'" {11 Y ~ :o k ,, ~~ ~~ • w ~ ~ LL ~ ~~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ alt alt a~ m~ ~i a ~~~~ ~~ ~~ n~ a alem~ ~,~ ~~ a~ • Q y(} rJ ~_ ~ ? -/ ~ ~ 4 s `~ • • View of South Pnrric~n of the Raaf FRIT2LEN PIERCE i s'rir ? kit~lo-ri, ,`til-t, ;"~rs'Isilo~ti t Lkliili~tx~ i-. #'i~:n:c, ~1r~,'iiilr'v.1 k.alrk~t H~~lirtf;n, Leis:-iinc~ti, h~l.iri,l~t:~r Snow Lian Condotninfums APPLICATIlJN FC7R VARIANCE Description: FRITZLEN PIERCE ARCHITECTS VAII, COL©RADO 5naw~ion Condominiums requests a height variance from the Town of Vail as to allow them to repair and existing hardship created by the original roof design, The original roof has roughly an 18' wide portion, which is relatively flat, running the length of the building, This flat portion of the roof has created one major problem, drainage. The roof has been leaking for some years now and, until recently, has starting showing water damage on the interior walls of some units. This is a severe problem that needs to be addressed immediately. If the existing roof structure is allowed to remain serious structural damage could occur to the building. The proposed solution would build a new roof on top of the existing roof and provide the following benefits, The design of the new roof would eliminate the two peaks by connecting the existing slopes creating one main peak (as shown in the section on the iar right below). The new roof would also provide the following benefits: / Increase the R value of the building, thus reducing the decreasing the amount of energy used to heat the building. *NOTE: The proposed roof would increase the current r-value of the roof from an R1 ~ to an R57. ~ By building on top of the existing roof eliminates any damage that might be caused by exposure to the elements during the construction phase. ~ Allow the tenants that occupy units on the upper Hoar to remain in them throughout the construction phase of the project. Effects the Variance might cause: n/a _ Transportation _n/a Light n/a TrafFic Facilities n/a Air n/a Utilities n a Ciistribution of Population nla Publir. Safety ~ 1 ~_. ll I': '1~t1.3,i~,~:iSd'i (: i~~~t`;-:'~„il,srr lr,tc'~:I:--r, :n; :r~»t ~,. i,:f~ I~dliiar.~'~~rn r: ~4;- s r K,,~ ~ kd " r~' ' ~ - ~ -t.~. ~j ~ ~ ~I, ~r ~- - 1 ~~ ~-~ ( I ~_ .~ >, - 4~ ' °"~i, •~ C ~~cJ c~ - Lam., _ ~ Grey ,Area -- Prs~pased Roaf D n M n MEMORANDtJM TO: Planning and Environmental Commission FROM: Community Development Department DATE: June 13, 2005 SUBJECT: A request for a correction to the Vail Land Use Plan to designate the Lionshead Redevelopment Master Plan Area and an amendment to the Lionshead Redevelopment Master Plan to amend, in part, Chapter 5, Vail Civic Center Detailed Plan 'Recommendations, and setting forth details in regard thereto; and, a request for a final review of a conditional use permit, pursuant to Section 12~9C-3, Conditional Uses, Vail Town Code, to allow for a public convention facility and public parking facilities and structures, located at 395 East Lionshead CirclelLot 1, Block 2, Vai Lionshead Filing 1, and setting forth details in regard thereto. Applicant: Town of Vail, represented by Pylman & Associates, Inc. Planner: Bill Gibson I. SUMMARY ~, The applicant, Town of Vail, represented by Pylman &~ Associates, Inc,, has requested a worksession meeting with the Planning and Environmental Commission to provide an introduction to the Conference Center project located at the "Charter Bus Lot" site adjacent to the Lionshead Parking Structure. The purpose of this worksession is to allow the applicant to present an overview of the project historylbackground and the submitted development review applications. This worksession meeting is the first of many meetings to be held over the next several months intending to facilitate the development review process for the submitted development review applications, The Commission is not being asked to take any formaP actions at this time. II. DESCRII~TION OF THE REQUEST The applicant, Town of Vail, represented by Pylman & Associates, lnc,, is requesting a worksession meeting with the Planning and Environmental Commission to discuss the proposed plans far the Conference Center project, located at the "Charter Bus Lot" site adjacent to the Lionshead Parking Structure. The purpose of this meeting is to allow the applicant an opportunity to present an introduction/overview of the proposed project and to provide a brief description of the development review applications that have been submitted to facilitate the development of the Conference Center project. • The scope of this project will encompass three principle components: +~ New conference center facility Lionshead Parking Structure renovations South Frontage Road and East Lionshead Circle streetscape improvements This project will require the Planning and Environmenta! Commission's review and approval of the following development review applications: • Text Amendments to the Lionshead Redevelopment Master Plan • Conditional Use Permit for a public convention facility • Conditional Use Permit far public parking facilities and structures The proposed Conference Center project fails within the purview of the Lionshead Redevelopment Master Plan. The Lionshead Redevelopment Master Plan is a comprehensive guide that outlines goals, objectives, and recommendations far the development and redevelopment of the Lionshead neighborhood. The proposed Conference Center project's adherence to the policies and recommendations of the master plan should be a significant factor in the Planning and Environmental Commission's evaluation of the submitted development applications. Excerpts from the Lionshead Redevelopment Master Plan relewant to the Conference Center proposal have been identified in Section V of this memorandum. Chapter 2 of the Lionshead Redevelopment 'Master Plan identifies the Tawn of Vail's policy objectives for the redevelopment of the Lionshead neighborhood. Chapter 3 of the Lionshead Redevelopment Master Plan provides an assessment of the existing conditions within Lionshead the Lionshead neighborhood. Chapter 4 and Chapter 5 provide general and specific recommendations for the future developmentlredevelapment of Lionshead. A portion of Chapter 5 specifically addresses the "Vail Civic Center" area which contemplates a future conference center. Chapters 6, 7, and 8 provide site design guidelines, design standards, and architectural design guidelines for Lionshead; and finally Chapter 9 addresses implementation of the master plan. A portion of Chapter 9 specifically addresses the "Vail Civic Center" area and future conference center. The applicant is proposing to amend the Lionshead Redevelopment Master Plan to update the document as it relates to the proposed Conference Center project. The adoption of any such amendments will require Planning and Environmental Commission review and recommendation to the Town Council. The Lionshead Parking Structure and Charter Bus Lot site is zoned General Use (GU) district. Within the General Use District, public convention facilities and' public parking facilities and structures are allowed as conditional uses. Therefore, both the proposed conference center facility and the proposed modifications to the Lionshead Parking Structure require Planning and Environmental Commission review and approval of a Conditional Use Permit. 2 Additionally, within the General Ilse District all development standards are determined by the Planning and Environmental Commission. Therefore, the proposed conference center facility and the proposed modifications to the Lionshead Parking Structure require Planning and Environmental Commission review and approval of a site specific development plan.. This worksession meeting is the first of many meetings to be held over the next several months intending to facilitate the development review process for the submitted development review applications. As this worksession is only intended as an introduction to the Conference Center project, the Commission is not being asked to take any formal actions at this time. Future worksessions will be held to review the individual development applications and details of the proposed Conference Center project. A vicinity map (Attachment A}, a Town Council memorandum date June 7, 2005 (Attachment B}, Lionshead Redevelopment Master Plan excerpts {Attachments C, D, E, F, and G}, the applicant's draft project master plan (Attachment H} have all been attached for reference. ill. BACKGROUND A brief history of the proposed Conference Center project is outlined in an attached memorandum to the Town Council dated June 7, 2005, (Attachment B} and in the Applicant's Draft Project Master Plan (Attachment H}. . 1V. TOLES OF THE REVIEVWING BOARDS The purpose of this section of the memorandum is to clarify the responsibilities of the Design Review Board, Planning and Environmental Commission, Town Council, and staff on the submitted applications: A. Lionshead Redevelopment Master Plan Amendment Order of Review: Generally, master plan amendment applications wil9 be reviewed by the Planning and Environmental CommiSSian and the Commission will forward a recommendation to the Town Council. The Town Council will then review the amendment application. Planning and Environmental Commission: The Planning and Environmental Commission is responsible for the review of a Lionshead Redevelopment Master Plan amendment application, pursuant to Section 2.$, Adoption and Amendment of the Master Plan, and forwarding of a recommendation to the Town Council Design Review Board: The Design Review Board has no review authority over a master plan amendment_ • Town Council: The Town Council is responsible for final approval, approval with modifications, or denial of a Lionshead Redevelopment Master Plan amendment application, pursuant to Section 2.8, Adoption and Amendment of the Master Plan. The Town Council has the authority to hear and decide appeals from any decision, determination, or interpretation by the Planning and Environmental Commission andlor 'Design Review Board. The Town Council may also call up a decision of the Planning and Environmental Gommission andlor Design Review Board. Staff: The Town Staff facilitates the application review process. Staff reviews the submitted application materials for completeness and general compliance with the appropriate requirements of the Town Code. Staff also provides the Planning and Environmental Commission a memorandum containing a description and background of the application; an evaluation of the application in regard to the criteria and findings outlined by the Town Gode; and a recommendation of approval, approval with modifications, or denial. B. Conditional Use Permit (CUPS Order of Review: Generally,. conditional use permit applications will be reviewed by the Planning and Environmental Commission, and then any accompanying design review application will be reviewed by the Design Review Board. Planning and Environmental Commission: The Planning and Environmental Commission is responsible for final approval, approval with modifications, or denial of a conditional use permit application, in accordance with Chapter 12-16, Conditional Llse Permits, Vaif Town Cade. ©esign Review Board: The Design Review Board has no review authority over a conditional use permit or variance application. However, the Design Review Board is responsible for the final approval, approval with modifications, or denial of any accompanying design review application. Town Council: The Town Council has the authority to hear and decide appeals from any decision, determination, or interpretation by the Planning and Environmental Commission andlor Design Review Board. The Town Council may also call up a decision of the Planning and Environmental Commission andlor Design Review Board. Staff: The Town Staff facilitates the application review process. Staff reviews the submitted application materials for completeness and general compliance with the appropriate requirements of the Town Code. Staff also provides the Planning and Environmental Commission a memorandum containing a description and background of the application; 4 an evaluation of the application in regard to the criteria and findings outlined by the Town Code; and a recommendation of approval, approval with modifications, ar denial. V. APPLIGABLE PLANNING DDCUMENTS Title 12, Zoninw Regulations. Vail Tawn Code Article 72-8C: General Use (GU) District (in part) 12-9C-1: PURPOSE: The general use district is intended fo provide sites for public and quasi- publie uses which, because of their special characteristics, cannot be appropriately regulated by the development standards prescribed for ofher zoning districts, and for which development standards especially prescribed for each particular development proposal or project are necessary to achieve the purposes prescribed in section 92-9-2 of this title and to provide for the public welfare. The general use district is intended to ensure that public buildings and grounds and certain types of quasi-public uses permitted in the district are appropriately located and designed to meet the needs of residents and visitors to Vail, fo harmonize with surrounding uses, and, in the case of buildings and other structures, fo ensure adequate light, air, open spaces, and other amenities appropriate to the permitted types of uses. 72-9C-3: CONI3lTlONAL USES: (in part) A. Generally: The following conditional uses shall be permitted in the GU district, subject to issuance of a candr'tianal use permit in accordance with the provisions of chapter 96 of this title: Public parking facilities and structures. Public theaters, meeting rooms and convention facilities. 92-9G5: DEVELOP,M'ENT STANDARDS: A. Prescribed By Planning And Environmental Commission: In the generaf use district, development standards in each of the following categories shall be as prescribed by fhe planning and environmenta! commission: ~'. Lot area and site dimensions.. 2. Setbacks. 3. Building height. 4. Density control. 5. Site coverage. 6. Landscaping and site development. 7. Parking and loading. 8. Reviewed By Planning And Environmental Commission: Development standards shall be proposed by the applicant as a part of a conditional use permit application. Site specific development standards shall then be determined by the planning and environmental commission during the review of the conditional use request in accordance with the provisions of S chapter 76 of this title. ~2-9C-6: ADDITIONAL D~EVELOPMEIVT STANDARDS.• Additional regulations pertaining to site development standards and the development of land in the general use district are found in chapter 14 of this title. Chapter 92-16: Conditional Use Permits (in part) 92-98-9: PURPOSE; LIMIT,4T10NS: In order to provide the flexibility necessary to achieve the objectives of this title, specified uses are permitted in certain districts subject to the granting of a conditional use permit. Because of their unusual or special characteristics, conditional uses require review and evaluation so that they maybe located properly with respect to fhe purposes of this title and with respect to their effects on surrounding properties. The review process prescribed fi this chapter is intended to assure compatibility and harmonious development between conditional uses and surrounding properties and the town at large, Uses listed as conditional uses in fhe various districts may be permitted subject fo such conditions and limitations as the town may prescribe to ensure thaf fhe location and operation of the conditional uses wi116e in accordance wifh development objectives of the town and will not be detrimental fo other uses or properties. Where conditr'ons cannot be devised to achieve these objectives, applications for conditional use permits shall be denied. Lionshead Redevelanment Master Plan CHAPTER 2: 11WTR©DUCTIQN (in part) ~. 7 Purpose of fhe Master Plan This master plan was initiated by the Tawn of Vail to encourage redevelopment and new development initiatives within the Lionshead study area. Both public and private interests have recognised that Lionshead today lacks the economic vitality of Vail Village, its neighboring commercial district, and fails to offer a world class resort experience. Lionshead's economic potential has been inhibited by a number of recurrent themes: lack of growth in accommodation unifs ("hot beds'), poor retail quality, the apparent deterioration of existing buildings, an uninteresting and disconnected pedestrian environment, mediocre architectural character, and the absence of incentives for redevelopment. Redevelopment is critr'cal for Vail and Lionshead if the community is to remain a competitive four-season resort. Other resorts are spending millions of dollars to upgrade their facilities in order to attract more visifors year round. Growth in the number of skiers annually has slowed to one to two percent, intensifying competition for markef share. Skiers are spending less time skiing and more time shoppr'ng, dining out, and enjoying other off-mountain activities. As a result, fhe demand for quality retail shopping and a greater diversify of experiences has dramatically increased. All of these are sorely in need of improvement in Lionshead. Vail, and specifically Lionshead, will fall behind if the community fails to upgrade the quality of its facilities and correct the existing t7aws in its primary commercial nodes. This master plan, developed over a period of two years and with extensive involvement by the community, is a comprehensive guide for property owners proposing to undertake development or redevelopment of their properties and the municipal officials responsible for planning public improvemenfs. -The plan outlines the Town's objectives and goals for the enhancement of Lionshead and proposes recommendations, incentives, and requirements far redevelopment and new development of public and private properties. It also recommends specifrc public improvement projects that are strategicafly important to the future success of Lionshead. The master plan is intended to provide direcfion over the next 15 fa 2a years. 2.2 f7efinition of a Master Plan In the development of the Lionshead Master Plan, the foNawing definition has been used as the basis for this work: A master plan is a guide, a flexible framework far future action. It articulates a community's fundamental land use policies, principles, and goals in a broad and genera! way. It plans for the future physics! development or redevelopment of an area of the community, including ifs functions! and circulation systems and its public facilities. The land use policies in a master plan are generally implemented through zoning ordinances. Existing zoning and land use codes may be modified and new provisions enacted in order to conform to the master plan and carry out the plan's objectives. A master plan does not convey approval for particular development proposals or concepts, nor can if be implemented in a short time frame. After adoption of the Lionshead Master Plan, every development proposal will have to go through the applicable development review and approval process, with its attendant public notices and public hearings. A proposal's adherence fa fhe policies captained in fhe adopted master plan will be ope of the factors analyzed by staff, the Planning and Environmeptal Commission {PEC), the Design Review hoard {DRB), and the Town Council {as applicable) in determining whether to approve ar disapprove the specific proposal. • 2.3 Policy Objectives The Town Council adapted six policy objectives on November 4, 1996 to outline the important issues to be addressed in the master plan and to provide a policy framework for the master planning process. 2.3.1 Renewal and Redevelopment Lionshead can and should be renewed and redeveloped to became a warmer, more vibrant environment for guests and residents. Lionshead needs an appealing and coherent identity, a sense of place, a personaJify, a purpose, and an Improved aesthetic character: 2'.3.2 Vitality and Amenities We must seize the opportunity to enhance guest experience and community interaction through expanded and additional activities and amenities such as performing arts venues, conference facilities, 'ice rinks, streetscape, parks and other recreational improvements. 2.3.3 Stronger Economic Base Through Increased Live Beds In order to enhance the vitality and viability of Vail, renewal and redevelopment in Lionshead must promote improved occupancy rates and the creation of additional bed base ("Jive beds" or "warm beds") through new lodging products.. 2.3.4 Improved Access and Circulation The flow of pedestrian, vehicular, bicycle and mass transit traffic must be improved within and through Lionshead. 2.3, 5 Improved Infrastructure The infrastructure of Lionshead (streets, walkways, transportation systems, parking, utilities, loading and delivery systems, snow removal and storage capacity) and its public and private services must be upgraded to support redevelopment and revitalization efforts and to meet the service expectations of our guests and residents. 2.3.6' Creative Financing for Enhanced Private Profits and Public Revenues Financially creative and fiscally realistic strategies must be identified so that adequate capita! may be raised from a!1 possible sources to fund desired private and public improvements. 2.4 Ground Rules for the Master PJannina Process On November 4, 1996, the Town Council adopted the following ground rules for the master planning process in order to clarify the initial parameters and rules under which the master plan would be developed. 7. The master plan to be developed for all public and private lands in Lionshead will serve as the policy framework for all future decision- making on specific development and redevelopmenf proposals in Lionshead. The master plan will be based on the Lionshead Policy Qbjecfives adopted by the Town Counci! to reflect the community's interests. 2. The Town of Vaif will work collaboratively with Vail Resorts, inc. on the master plan for Lionshead and will involve all other interested citizens, business owners and properhy owners r°n the master planning process. The master plan ultimafely recommended may or may not reflect development approaches currently being explored by VRI. 3. Proprietary information of any private property owner or developer will remain private and confidential unless it becomes part of a public recara! 4. There will be no net loss to the Vail community of either locals' housing or parking spaces {public and private) now existing in Lionshead. 5. Collaborative public/private redevelopment and financing ventures, including urban renewal authorities and downtown development authorities, will be considered. 6. The intent of redevelopment includes minimizing chart-term construction-related impacts of redevelopment an existing businesses and residents and increased cooperation between the public and private sectors. The Town Council wilt have final decision-making authority on fhe Lionshead Master Plan, adoption of implementing actions, use of public lands, public improvements, and publr`c financing mechanisms. The Town Counci! yr its authorized boards {PEC and DRB) will make final decisions on subsequent site-specific development proposals consistent with fhe master plan. 2.5 Urban Design Principles On November 4, 9996, fhe Town Counci! adopted the following set of urban design principles to guide the development of the master plan: 9. Connect Lionshead physically and visually to the mountain landscape. 2. Make people physically and emotionally comfortable in Lionshead. 3. Provide a sense of arrival to demarcate the Lionshead district. 4. Create landmarks and turning points to guide people through the area and make if memorable. 5. Provide gates and portals to help define the sequence of public spaces and places. 6. Define appropriate land uses adjacent to outdoor spaces. 2.8 Adoatian and Amendmenf of The Master Plan The Lionshead Master Plan was adopted by resolution No. 94, Series of 9998, an December 95~', 1998, by the Vail Town Council following a recommendation to approve by the Planning and Environmental Commission. Future amendments to this master plan must be approved 9 by resolution or motion by the Town Council following a formal recommendation by the Planning and Environmental Commission. Implementation activities and ordinances will be approved in accordance with the Town of Val! Municipal Code. CHAPTER 3: EXISTINQ CONDITIQNS ASSESSMENT AND PROBLEM IQENTIFICATION {In part} 3.2 Exlsfincr Land Uses 3'.2.4 Conference/Meeting Facifities The Lionshead study area contains several public and private conference facilities (see Map L}, with the majority of space in private ownership. Aside from Dobson ice arena, which is not suitable for smaller conferences and meetings, the only publicly available conference roam in Lionshead is in the Vail Public Library, a small and heavily utilized facility. !n general, there is a growing need for additional conference space In Lionshead, especially as the local economy seeks to diversify and provide a wider range of destinafion resort activities in addition to skiing. 3.8 Transoortafian and Circulation During President's Day weekend in 1997 the transportation planning f<rm of Felsburg, Holt, and Ullevig conducted an in-depth inventory and analysis of the existing transportation patterns in the Lionshead study area. Their report is contained in appendix A. The following is an overview of the existing franspartatr'on and circulation systems in Lionshead: 3.8.1 Vehicular The vehicular access system in Lionshead is comprised of one primary route (the 1-7© South Frontage Road) and four secondary routes (East Lionshead Circle, Wesf Lionshead Circle, Lionshead Place, and Forest Road}. 3.8.1.1 1-70 South Frontage Raad The 1-70 South Frontage Road (see figure 3-8) borders fhe northern edge of the study area and provides vehicular access far all of Lionshead. General issues associated with fhe frontage road are described below: a. Bicycles and Pedestrians There are na continuous bicycle paths or lanes along the South Franfage Road nor are there adequate shoulders that bicyclists or pedestrians could use instead. The need for a bicycle lane was documented in the 7991 Vail Transportation Master Plan and the 7988 recreation trails masterplan. The pedestrian care of Lionshead is an obstacle to bike traffic through Lionshead to Vall Village, forcing bikes to take the frontage road instead and causing dangerous conflicts between cyclists and motorists. 1Q b. Turning Movements There is one eastbound and no westbound turning lanes from the frontage road into Lionshead, which results in traffic backup during peak Crave! periods. Westbound vehicles often veer onto the gravel shoulder to pass ears waiting to make a Left turn. As Lionshead redevelops and expands its bed base, this problem will intensify. c. Directional Signage Visitors to Lionshead often complain of difficulty finding their destination. Bewildered motorists slow down at each intersection because there is na signage directing them to their lodgings. The cumulative effects are traffic congestion and irritated guests. d. C~verflaw Parking. Each winter during peak ski weekends the westbound shoulder of the frontage road becomes a default overflow parking area, stretching westward from the turn across from the Evergreen Lodge to the entry of the Vail Associates service yard. This situation creates a dangerous conflict between through-traffic and pedestrians, as there are no delineated crossings and no sidewalk on the south side of the frontage road. Safe crassings are made even more difficult by winter road conditions and traffic congestion and because pedestrians are often wearing ski boats and carrying skis. 3.8.9.2 East Lionshead Circle East Lionshead Circle (see figure 3-9) serves four primary purposes: a) providing access to eight !edging facilities; b) serving as the transit route for private shuttles and the public bus system; c) accommodating loading and delivery functions; and dJ providing a place for private skier drop-off. a. Lodging Access East Lionshead Circle accesses four lodge properties west of the main bus drop-off! pedestrian crossing and four others to the east of the bus stop. Vehicular traffic to the four properties to the east poses a signitlcant conflict with the large volume of pedestrian traffic crossing from the western end of the parking structure into the Lionshead care. The southern edge of East Lionshead Circle is fragmented by four separate curb cuts accessing the Lodge at Lionshead, b_ Transit Transit traffic on East Lionshead Circle consists of Town of Vail buses as well as local and regional shuttle bus traffr'c. Town buses have difficulty making a left turn from East Lionshead Circle fo the west-bound lane of the South Frontage 11 Road because of the street gradient and the volume of traffic that competes with the bus for breaks in the frontage road traffic. This backup occasionally causes two westbound buses to stack at the intersection simultaneously and makes it difficult for buses to finish their circuits on schedule. The volume of shuttle van traffic on East Lionshead Circle is greater than it needs to be. !n order for westbound shuttles to reach their queuing area in front of the Subway sandwich shop at the western end of the parking structure, ffaey must drive the entire length of the road, turn around across from Dobson ice arena, and drive back to the queuing area. This movement requires the shuttles to conflicf with the west pedestrian crossing twice each trip. The most significant issue with the transit system along East Lionshead Circle is fhe drop-off area located at fhe wesfern end of the public parking structure. This drop-off area, home to buses, shuffle vans, delivery trucks, and personal vehicles, is poorly organized. As the main pedestrian portal into Lionshead, it is one of the least functional and most congested elements in the study area. The primary problem with fhe drop-off area is the lack of any clear and safe pedestrian crossing from the parking structure into the Lionshead pedestrian mall. Pedestrians often walk through fhe bus lanes and across the small planter islands. Delivery vans obscure sight lines when pedesfrians step into fhe fraffrc lane of East Lionshead Circle. c. Loading and Delivery Delivery vehicles need to access all of the residential and retail properties on East Lionshead Circle, but the vast majority travel only to one of fwo locations. The first is the alley behr'nd Wail 21, Lionshead Pride, and the Lifthouse Lodge. Service vehicles here conflict with a designated fire lane and significantly downgrade fhe pedestrian and vehicular arrival experience to these buildings. The other concentration of service vehicles occurs at the East Lionshead bus drop-off. Vehicles parking here cause major conflicts at the pedestrian crossing from the parking structure and detract from the visual image of the primary pedestrian entry into Lionshead. Because these two areas together cannot adequately accommodate peak delivery volumes, service vehicles will occasionally stage outside the areas, further exacerbating traffic congestion. • 12 d. Pedestrian Traffic The pedestrian systems along East Lionshead Circle are marginal in quality and, in some cases (such as the connection between the public parking structure and the Lionshead mall), hardly functional at all. The section of fhe street from the eastern drop-off area to Dobson arena has a sidewalk but lacks pedestrian crossings to the residential properties. !f also lacks a dedicated pedestrian connection fo the walkway east of Dobson that continues info Vail Village. The lack of a sidewalk on the south side of the street forces pedestrians to cross East Lionshead Circle twice or, more commonly, to walk in the street. e. Skier Drop-Off During the ski season the drop-off area at fhe western end of the parking structure is often used by private moforists as a skier drop-off area although there are na designated skier drop-off locations. Automobiles pose a major conflict with delivery vehicles and further compromise the safety of pedestrians crossing frarn the parking structure. Although it is convenient, skier drop-off at this location is dangerous and should be eliminated or redesigned. 3.3 Parking The ground rules of the Lionshead master plan state that future redevelopment will not cause a net loss of parking. An assessment of existing parking condifr'ons is discussed in this section. For additional parking information on a town-wide basis, please refer to the Town of Vail carrying capacity analysis and the Master Transportation Study. Existing public and private parking facilities in Lionshead are shown on Map 1. 3.9.9 Parking Generation Parking demand and generation in a mixed-use resort environment is difficult to quantify. It is somewhat easier to analyse when broken auf info its three components: parking generated by the lodging bed base, parking generated by retail/ commercial activity, and parking generated by the ski mountain and other destination activities and events. However, the ski mountain, the retail shops, and the lodging facilities do not represent discrete and separate populafions, so the calculation of public parking demand is complicated by the high degree of overlapping between these different parking generators, To understand the relationship between future improvements in Lionshead and the public parking demand fhey will generate, one must first understand how visitors will arrive and what they will be doing during their stay in Vail. Only then can the incremental increase in public parking demand be estimated. 3.9.1.1 Parking Demand Generated by Lodging All private residential and lodging properties in Lionshead provide their own parking, either in surface or structured facilities. None, whether existing or planned, is expected fo increase the demand 13 for public parking facilities. To the contrary, lodgings within easy access of the ski mountain and the resort core may actually reduce the demand for public parking facilities. 3.9~ 1.2 Parking C}emand Generated by F?etail/Commercial Space The retail base in Lionshead, with a few exceptions, utilizes the Town of Vail public parking facilities. Through the Town's parking pay-in-lieu system, retail businesses pay aone-time assessment on a square footage basis for the parking demand they generate. The pay-in-lieu formula does not fully adjust for the probability that the parking for many retail customers is already accommodated in their lodgings, 3.9.9.3 Day Skier and Special Event Parking During the ski season, day skiers are the largest users of the Lionshead public parking structure. While it is generally assumed that skiing, not retail, is the primary desfination for the majority of wintertime users of the parking structure, no survey data confirms this. 3.9.2 Existing Public Parking The Lionshead public parking structure has a capacity of approximately 9, 200 cars. !n addition, a charter bus parking area is located at the eastern end of fhe Lionshead parking structure (see figure 3-74). 3.9.3 Existing Parking Shortfall According fo the Town of Vail Master Transportation Study, the Lionshead parking structure is filled to capacity approximately 20 to 30 times during the winter, or roughly 20 percent of the ski season. louring these times of capacity usage (Christmas, President's Day, Martin Luther lfing holiday), overflow parking occurs on the north side of the South Frontage Road. CHAPTER 4: MASTER KLAN RECOMMENDATIONS -OVERALL STU©Y AREA {in part) This section of the master plan addresses issues that affect Lionshead as a whole. These issues -and recommendations to address them -should be considered in all planning and policy decisions as Lionshead redevelops. 4.7 lJnderlvina Phvsica! Framework of Lionshead The Lionshead resort area (that portion of the study area north of Gore Creek) is a mixed-use urban environment with several discernible land-use sub-areas, or "hubs" (see Map N). Although the hubs overlap somewhat; there is no consisfent and comprehensive pedestrian connection between them. The primary goal of the master plan is to create a visually interesting and functionally efficient pedestrian environment that connects the hubs to create a cohesive and memorable resort environment. 14 4.9.1 Lionshead Master Plan Concept Two primary pedestrian streets form the backbone of Lionshead's physical plan.- an east-west corridor connecting Dobson Ice Arena with the west end of Lionshead and a north-south corridor connecting the proposed north day lot transpor#ation center with the ski yard. The circulation system and new retail and lodging components will follow the underlying pattern set by these corridors (see Map T) and the entry portals associated with them. 4.1, 2 East Lionshead -Civic Hub The civic hub of Lionshead is comprised of Dobson Ice Arena, the Vail public library, the Lionshead public parking structure, and the proposed Vail Civic Center site on the east end of the parking strucfure_ Although this area also contains several lodging properties and may support office or retail development in the future, al! planning and design decisions here should be respectful of and compatible with these civic components. 4.2 Connection to Vai! VilJaae The lack of connection between Lionshead and Vail Village was identified early in the master planning process. Although both West Meadow Drive and East Lionshead Circle connect the village to Lionshead, the pedestrian systems along this corridor are poor and the streetscape has na consistenf visual character. The eastern entry to the Lionshead study area is at Middle Creek (at the Vail public library and Dobson Ice Arena), but the true entrance to the Lionshead retail core is at the western end of the Lionshead parking structure. Pedestrian connections should be sensitive to the residential uses on West Meadow Chive and East Lionshead Circle. It is also important that they be continuous from the intersection of Vail Road and East Meadow Drive in Vail to the west end of the parking structure in Lionshead. The Town of Vail Streetscape Master Plan recommendations for West Meadow Drive should be implemented in a way that is consistent in design and character with the entire Vail Village/ Lionshead connection. 4.3 Connections to the Natural Environment one of the outstanding characteristics of Vail Village is its spectacular visual connection to Vail Mountain, particularly the protected view corridors up Bridge Street from the village parking structure and toward the Gore Range from East Meadow Drive. Caner the years the village has also strengthened ifs physical connections to the natural environment by improving creekside parks and trails and by integrating landscape into the built environment at every opportunity. 15 Lionshead has no similarly strong cannectfon fo the natural environment even though it is situated even closer tv the base of the mountain. Tv remedy this critical deficiency, fhe fallowing recommendations are made: 4.3.1 Visual Connections As development and redevelopment occur in Lionshead, it will be vital to protect visual connections to the ski mountain. These visual relationships strengthen the identity of Lionshead as an alpine resort and provide a visual reference that helps Lionshead visitors to find their way through the core. Visual connections fa the natural environment should be established utilizing the following techniques: 4.3.9.1 View Corridors Creating and establishing view corridors is an effective way fa link the urban core of Lionshead visually tv the nafuraf environment of Gore Creek and the mountain. The master plan is recommending the creation of several dedicated public view corridors. In addition, all private development and redevelopment should endeavor to create visual connections from and through their properties. View corridors do not have tv be expansive to be effective. In many cases, a slender but well targeted view corridor can be just as effective as a broad view. Nor do visual connections have to be continuous; they can reoccur, providing intermittent views from dr`fferent angles. 4.3.1.2 North-South Orientation of Buildings The predominant east-west orientation of buildings in Lionshead acts as a visual and physical barrier, interrupfing the connection to the natural environment. It should be a priority in future development and redevelopment tv orient vertical building masses along anorth-south axis whenever possible. This will help to accomplish the following objectives: a. Sun Access During the winter months, the sun is low in the southern sky, providing the greatest solar exposure to fhe south faces of buildings and to streets and spaces open to the south. A north-south orientation of building masses will increase the amount ofsun reaching the Lionshead pedestrian core and the buildings to the north. b. Views from New Buildings In double loaded buildings oriented on an east-West axis, unr`ts an fhe south side of the building get great views of the mountain, but units on the north side do not. Orienting the building mass vn a earth-south line creates angled southern ]b views far both sides of the building, and units an both sides will get direct sun sometime during the day. c. Views from Existing Buildings Public input Throughout the masfer planning process indicated that existing property owners in Lionshead are concerned That new development will black their private views to the mountain. By orienting new buildings on a north-south axis, the pofenfial visual impact an existing buildings is reduced. d. Creation of Sfreefs A strong view corridor in the Vail Village is Bridge Street. The orientation of the street toward the mountain provides a constant sense of direction and draws people to the destination at the top of the street Likewise, the proposed north-south orientation of buildings in Lionshead will help To create streets oriented to fhe views, something that is almost completely lacking Today. 4.4 Public View Corridors 4.4.2 Public View Corridors Where Redevelopment of the Viewpoint ar the Foreground is Likely It is proposed that fhe following three views be established as critical design parameters, buf not as benchmarked and surveyed corridors. The extent to which an applicant for redevelopment creates or maintains these views will be a consideration for approval or disapproval by the reviewing board. Prior to approval of a redevelopment application by the Town Council fhe new vr'ew corridor should be surveyed and formally adopted in accordance with existing Town cads. 4.4.2.1 View Corridor Three This view is from the east end of the Lionshead parking structure looking south across the Lodge of Lionshead buildings toward the ski mountain (see figure 4-3), This site has been identifred for future development as a civic facility; when that happens, this view may become more important. 4.6 Vehicular and Pedestrian Circulation 4.6.2 South Frontage Road 4.6.2.3 Provisions for Bicycles and Pedestrians A pedestrian/ bicycle path should be created on the south side of the frontage road running the entire length of the Lionshead study area. Providing an unbroken pedestrian) bicycle path to connect the main Vail roundabout fo Cascade Village, this pathway will conform to fhe current Town of Vail standards regarding width and material. 17 4.6.2.4 Visual Improvements !t is essential that improvements for better traffic flow be accompanied with aesthetic lmprovemenfs in order to break up the perceived width of the improved roadway and to give a stronger image to this north edge of Lionshead {see figure 6-5J. Improvements could include landscaped medians and a consistent landscape treafinenf between the South Frontage Road and the eastbound lane of I-70. Fragile undersfory plantings shaufd be avoided in favor of street frees and hardy ground covers that can survive winter snowplowing activities. This corridor should also include new directional signage, described in section 4.70.7.9 4.6.3' Modifications to ,East Lionshead Circle 4.6.3.4 Visual Improvements As an important link in the transit connection between Vail Road and the east Lionshead pedestrian portal, East Lionshead Circle plays an important role in setting the visual tone and character for people arriving from Vai! village. Toward that end, any architectural additions to the south face of the parking structure should comply fully with the architectural design guidelines,. and the pedestrian walkway should create a consistent visual character connecting Dobson Arena with the east Lionshead pedestrian portal. In addition, if is recommended that the Town of Vail coordinate with the adjacent residential properties to provide a visually consistent vegetative screen on the south side of East Lionshead Circle. 4.6.3.5 Pedestrian Sidewalks A new, more intensively devefoped pedestrian walkway is recommended along the south face of the parking structure to cannecf the main Lionshead pedestrian portal with the Dobson/ Civic center pedestrian plaza. This walkway will provide access to the potential new retail face of the parking structure and permif unimpeded pedestrian flow between the two ends of the parking structure (see figure 6-6). Given the long and linear nature of this facade, a covered arcade across the walkway, as suggested during the master plan public input process, may help fo break it up. If covered, the walkway should be wide enough fo accommodate the flow of pedestrian traffic along the retail face and designed as an integral element of the building. • 1~ 4.8 Parking • i Parking is a critical component in a mixed-use resort environment such as Lionshead, and any efforts to enhance this component should adhere to the fallowing goals and guidelines: a. Parking must be sufficient to meet demand. Correctly assessing parking demand in an environment such as Lionshead is difficult but extremely Important. Overestimating parking demand can be as damaging as underestimating demand due to the exfreme expense of parking space especially if structured) in a real estate environment such as the Vail Valley. Likewr`se, parking is a large consumer of ground and should be designed to occupy as little real estate as possible. In tight margin developments such as mid ranee hotels and lacals/employee pausing, the expense of parking can be the deciding factor as fo the economic viability of the project. Due to these attributes of parking, It is important that true demand, or desired' demand, be distinguished from actual usage. For example, the "free after three"program currently in place far the Tawn of Vall parking structures has undoubtedly increased the usage of these structures during the evening hours (the Lionshead sfrueture filled in tpe evening for the tryst time in 1998). However, there has not been a corresponding increase in sales tax revenue, which was fhe original intent of "free after three" (Note- concrete studies regarding the utilization of the "free after three" program pave not been conducted and if is strongly recommended that this occur if the program is to continue,. It is hypothesized that a significant portion of people utilizing the free parking program are in fact employees or people that would have used Transit or other means of access if the parking were not as readily available. In other wards, parking usage often will rise to till the available space, but the profwle of the user may not be who the parking was intended for. To be concise, the parking supply in Lionshead and the lawn of Vail needs fo not only meet the demand, It needs to meet the desired demand and should be structured ar programmed In such as way to do so. Parking is important, but fan expensive and land consuming to be provided without solid reasoning. b. Parking should relate to pedestrian circulation and desired paints of access to the pedestrian core, A primary Baal of redevelopment in Lionshead is to increase the quality of the .pedestrian connections into the retail/ pedestrian care and through it fo the ski yard. Any new public parking must have a strong and convenienf relationship to this primary destination. However, parking should not use prime development sites and does not ' ve to be immediately adjacent. 19 c. Parking is only one part of an overall access strategy. Public parking is very important in bringing guests to Lionshead, but structured parking is expensive. The cost of structured parking today ranges from 2g, D00 to 30, 00(~ dollars per space, so other means of access should be carefully considered first. Possible alternatives include an enhanced transit system, mare convenient drop-off facilities, a reduction in required parking ratios for certain uses (such as employee and locals housing), off-site and remote parking, and parking disincentives that discourage driving. d. Parking should be visually inconspicuous. Parking should be structured below ground whenever possibfe. Surface parking areas should be heavily screened with landscaping, berms, and walls. Expanses of asphalt should be interrupted with islands of landscaping or replaced with pedestrian quality paving materials. Surface parking areas should be avoided in or near the retail pedestrian core area. Although structured parking may be more desirable visually, it must be properly designed so as not to detract from the guest's arrival experience. e. Parking requirements should not constitute an unnecessary disincentive to redevelopment. A thorough review of the current parking pay-in-lieu code and parking ratio requirements is recommended. Given the above discussions it is important that parking requirements accurately meet the true parking demand of new development and redevelopment. For example, a stated goal of the masterplan is to encourage, facilitate, and provide incentives far the expansion of ground level retail in Lionshead. While fhis expanded retail will likely represent some level of incremental increase to public parking demand in Lionshead, this demand needs to be accurately understood so the parking pay-in-lieu fee does not make the retail expansion economically unfeasible. The following recommendations for parking deal with existing parking that may be displaced by development, privafe residential/ lodging parking, public parking supply and demand, and parking for locals! employee housing. 4.8.7 Potential Displacement of Existing Parking The ground rules for the Lionshead master plan mandate no net loss of parking as a result of redevelopment, Properties potentially affected by this policy include: 4.8. ;', 3 Charter Bus Parking Lot The charter bus parking area on the east end of the Lionshead parking structure is the proposed location for a future Vai! civic%ornmunity center. The property is extremely valuable to 2 (} the community, and ifs current utilization as a parking lot is not ifs highest and best use. Alternate locations for charter bus parking include the Ford Park parking lot and adown-valley site. A drop-off palm for the buses will still be necessary and is recommended as a component of the proposed transit center on the north day lot. X1.8.3.3 Potential New Parking Sites Ta respond to the protected parking demand increase discussed in the traffic study, it is strongly recommended that all town-wide parking opportunities be examined or re- examined prior to any final planning ar parking construction. Specific public parking opportunities in Lionshead include: a. Lionshead Parking Structure The existing Lionshead parking structure is a logical location for expanded public parking because it is already owned by the Town of Vail. Also, the structure is conveniently located between the proposed civic center on the east and the main portal to the Lionshead pedestrian mall on the west. No other location offers visitors such ease of access. A self-ventilating split deck structure, the garage has six half decks, each holding approximately 200 vehicles (1200 spaces in fotal,9. The addition of one complete level would increase fhe structure by 400 spaces, two complete new levels by 80D spaces. Snow removal is an issue in the addition of new decks. The top deck of the structure is cleared manually with front-end loaders. Additional decks wiU make it impassible fo continue this method, as the internal dimensions of fhe structure will not accommodate front-end loaders. In addition, the construction of a new delivery staging area on the west end of the structure will remove the snow storage area presently used. Alternatives Include heating the upper deck, providing for an alternate snow removal access road fo the upper deck, and construction of a roof over the entire structure. Public input during the masterplan process has indicated the Importance of fhe eastward view, across the top of the parking structure, toward the Vail Village as motorists travel east along the South Frontage Road and 1-70. Future expansion plans of the Lionshead parking structure should consider the potential impacts expansion could have on this view plane. Also an issue is the necessary structural reinforcement of the existing facility to support fhe wer'ght of additional decks. 21 4.9 Emolovee Housins Recent community surveys and grass-roots planning efforts such as Vail Tomorrow have identified the lack of locals pausing as the mast critical issue facing fhe Vail communify.~ Early in the Lionshead master planning process, west Lionshead was identil=ted as an opparfunify area fo implement some of the community's housing goals, particularly relating to employee housing. These opportunities and associated issues are outlined below. 4.9.1 No Net Loss of Employee Housing Ground rufe number true of fhe master plan states that fhere shall be no net lass of employee housing in Lionshead as redevelopment occurs. 4.9. ~ Visual issues The financial realities of affordable housing often require cost reducing measures, generally involving the qualify of detailing, planning, and architectural design. Given the strong desire to make these housing projects feasible, it is recommended that some latitude be granted to affordable housr`ng developers. However, it is also important that financial realities not be used as an excuse to produce unsightly, poorly designed, substandard products. Employee housing does not need to match fhe architectural sophistication of a five star resod development, but if does need fo be good quality construction and design. Rivers Edge in Avon is a good example of an attractive yet affordable employee housing project 4.9.3 Policy Based Housing ©ppartunities The first means of implementing housing goals in Lionshead is through policy based requirements such as the employee generation ordinance currently being pursued by the Vail Town Council. As required by a future ordinance, al! development and redevelopment projects, as a prerequisite fo project approval, should provide housing for employees generated and to the extent passible this pausing should be located in the Lionshead area. "4.9.4 Potential Housing Sites Following are specific sites that have been identified as suitable for locals and employee housing (see Map W). 4.9.4.7 South Face of the Lionshead Parking Structure The south face of fhe Lionshead parking structure was identified by the Lionshead master planning team, the public input "wisp list" process, and the Vail Tomorrow process as a potential location far housing. Depending on building height, this location could support two to three levels of housing located above a ground floor level of retail and commercial space. ~2 Several planning issues are associated with this site. First, because the structure will front the East Lionshead Circle pedestrian corridor, the architectural quality and relationship to the street and pedestrian environment will be very important. Strict standards of unit upkeep will have to be enforced. Second, any housing units at this location will be required to park in the Lianshead parking structure, but unit size and location should allow the parking ratio to be lower than that of a typical one or two bedroom unit: Third, if is recommended that the height of this potential development be limited sa that mountain views from the tap deck of the parking structure are not blocked. Lastly, the structural issues relating to an additional parking deck should be coordinated with any south face development scenario. 4.9.4.2 Tap Deck of the Lianshead Parking Structure The upper deck of the Lianshead parking structure has also been identified as a potential location for hausing. Although the parking structure does off er a large area, several critical planning considerations must be taken into account. a. Parking Issues The most important future use of the Lionshead parking facility is expanded public parking. 1Vo housing scenarios should be pursued before assuring that public parking needs have been met. In addition, housing an the structure must provide its awn parking; there should be no net loss of existing or future public parking on fhe structure. b_ Sfrucfurallssues Engineering studies conducted during the master planning process indicate that the parking structure can accommodate future expansion above the exr""sting upper deck, but not without structural reinforcement. Any housing an top of the structure must fake into account the structural loading of the new development and the accompanying cosf implications. c. Visuallssues Because housing on top of the structure will be highly visible, it will have to adhere to the Lionshead Architectural Design Guidelines (see chapter 8) and provide for ongoing maintenance. Also, the view of the mountains across the top of fhe parking structure is an important part of the arrival experience for visitors and contribufes signifrcanfly to the Lionshead image and character. Any housing on the parking structure should endeavor not to block this view completely. GJ 4.14 Gateways. Landmarks, and Portals The lack of spatial hierarchy or organizational clarity is a fundamenfal problem in the Lionshead pedestrian and vehicular network today. This section discusses the need to create a series of gateways, portals, landmarks and useful public spaces that will increase and enhance the character and identity of the pedestrian environment. 4. ? ©.2 Landmarks A Jandmark is a significant archifectural element fhat all the visitors to Lionshead can identify and remember. Landmarks signify important points of entry, turning points and critical intersections in the pedestrian network, as well as desfinations and visual reference points. The single landmark in Lionshead today is the Gondola clock tower, which will be replaced with fhe Vail Associates care site redevelopment. Appropriate locafions for new landmarks in Lionshead are the easf pedestrian portal, the central retail mall adjacent to the main pedestrian plaza, and fhe wesf pedestrian portal adjacent to the infersecfion of West Lionshead Circle and Lionshead Place. !n additi©n, the potential civic center complex at the east end of fhe parking structure should function as a significant architecfural landmark for the east end of Lionshead. 4.17 Public Art Through the Art in Public Places board, the Town of Vail has long recognized the importance of public art in pedestrian environments. Future development and redevelopment projects in Lionshead, especially projects impacting the retail mall and primary pedestrian environments, should seek to incorporate public art according to fhe Town of Vail Art in Public Places M'asfer Plan (not adopted as of the writing of this document). Pedestrian circulation systems, portals and gateways, landmarks, pedestrian plazas and architecture all presenf opportunifr`es to incorporate public art. CHAPTER 5: DETAILED PLAN RECCJMMENDATIONS (in part) See Attachment C. CHAPTER 6: SITE DEVELOPMENT GUfDELINES See Attachment D. CHAPTER 7: DESIGN STANDARDS See Attachment E. ~~ CHAPTER 8: ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN GUIaELINES See Attachment F. CHAPTER 9: IMPhEMENTATION The intent of this chapter is to provide guidance to the Town of Vail as It seeks to implement the recommendations of this master plan. The recommendations regarding priorities, phasing, and timing are intended to be flexible, not binding, so that the community can adapt the plan to changing conditions and priorities. The project priorities listed below are divided Into public and private improvements, although many projects will be implemented through joint publr`c and private financing efforts. 9.9 Project Prioritization 9.1.7 Public lmprovemenfs The following list of major public improvements outlined in previous chapters suggests priorities based on the relative importance of projects and the interrelationships among them. (The plan acknowledges, however, that other variables also influence future implementation decisions, including construction costs and funding availability. Far example, the construction of a Gore Creek recreation path bypass is not as critical to the implementation of the master plan as the north day lot transportation center, but it might be built sooner because of its lower cost and access to RETT funds.) 9.7.1.6 Development on the South Face of the Parking Structure and East Lionshead Circle Sfreetscape This project includes two important elernenfs: the creation of a retail/cammercial and housing component and the enhancement of the East Lionshead Circle pedestrian corridor. Although these projecfs can stand alone, or could occur prior to adjacent projects, they are closely related to the East Lionshead pedestrian portal, the Vail Civic Center, the addition of parking decks to the existing parking structure, and the streetscape connection along West IVleadow Drive to Vail Village. The Town of Vail's efforts to promote housing for Locals causes these projects fo take on a higher priority. 9.1.1.7 South Frontage Road Realignment and lmprovements The improvement of South Frontage Road, including widening and accelerationfdeceleration lanes, will become more critical as existing properties redevelop and add density. The timing of roadway improvements depends not only on the pace of redevelopment but also on the ability to frnance the improvements. Decisions about realigning the road are contingent on the development plans for the west 25 day lot and the Vail Assocr"aces service yard- !t is likely that fhe improvements will happen in signitrcant phases. lmpositi©n of impact fees on projects that add density yr traffic volume to Lionshead is one means to secure long- term funding, !t is important fo Hate, however, certain improvements are needed now (acceleration/deceleration lanes, signage), making if more diffrcult to charge those expenses to future projects. 9.9.9.8 Parking Current needs may justify expansion of 500 parking spaces town wide today, but further study of future parking demand maybe needed to verify this. Additional decks on the existing sfructure or a new public structure in west Livnshead may be necessary when the Vail Civic Center is constructed yr development occurs on fhe west day lot and fhe Vai! Associates service yard. In any case, the development of the west day !ot will necessitate replacement of this existing private parking with either structured parking or an adjacent surface lot. !f future parking studies demonstrate a need for significant public parking in the west Lionshead area, a joint venture between Vail Associates, fhe 7"own of Vail, and other potential development interests should be considered. 9.9, 7.9 Vail Civic Center Additional parking must be built (in the existing Lionshead parking structure or nearby) and the charter bus parking lot must be relocated before fhe Vail Givic Center can be built. In addition, this project will be integrally fled to development an fhe south face of the Livnshead parking structure and the scree#scape enhancements along East Livnshead Circle. 7`his will be a huge project and is likely fo occur only offer a longer period of planning and fund raising; other, mare critical elements of fhe master plan should not be made contingent on its implementation. APPENDIX: MAPS See Attachment G. VI. STAFF RECaMMENDATION As this is a worksession for the purpose of allowing the applicant to present an introduction to the Conference Genter project, the Staff is not making. a formal recommendation at this lime. Staff does recommend, however, that the Gommission listen to a presentation of the project proposal and provide any initial direction the Commissioners may have at this time; and then table these items for further discussion at the June 27, 2005, Planning and Environmental Commission public hearing. 2C On June 27, 2005, the Planning and Environmental Commission will be asked to conduct a warksesion to review the L'eanshead Redevelopment Master Plan and to begin evaluating the Conference Center project's adherence to the specific policies, objectives, and recommendatians of the master plan. VII. ATTACHMENTS A. Vicinity Map B. Town Council Memorandum dated June 7, 20x5 C. Chapter 5: Detailed Plan Recommendations (LRMP) D. Chapter 6: Site Design Guidelines (LRMP) E. Chapter 7: Development Standards (LRMP) F. Chapter 8: Architectural Design Guidelines {LRMP} G. Appendix Maps {LRMP) H. Applicant's Draft Project Master Plan. :7 27 0 t-- 0 Attachment B MEMORANDUM TQ: Vail Town Council FROM: Conference Center Advisory Committee & Town Staff DATE: June 7, 2005 SUBJECT: Conference Center Update and decision on Next Steps Staff:. Russell Forrest 7. PURPOSE The Conference Center Advisory Committee (committee} would like to request the following based on the direction received from the Town Council on May 17, 2005: • To authorize the Town Manager to execute an agreement with Mortensen for prede~elopment service as Shawn in attachment A. • Review input from the Committee on ideas to reduce construction costs for the facility, • Approve of additional expenditures to execute the direction provided by the Town Council on May 17~' to move forward with the current design of the facility. 2. BACKGROUND On Aprii 20, 2004, the Vail Town Council authorized a series of next steps which included inten+iewing owner's representative firms for the Conference Center. an April 29, 2004, the Committee met to interview five owner's representative firms. On May 18, 2004, the Vail Town Council authorized the Tvwn Manager to execute a contract with Architectural Resource Consultants, inc. to be the Town's owner's representative and funding for the first phase of this contractor $8,510. The Vail Town Council also authorized the Committee to negotiate with both Piper Jaffray and Kirtpatrick Pettis to be the Town's investment banker on this project. Un June 1, 2004, the Vail Town Council voted to approve the following requests from the Committee: • Authorization to engage Piper Jaffray as the Town's investment banker far the Conference Center; • Authorization to issue a request for qualifications (RFQ} for design team assistance on the Conference Center; • Request to move forward with a negotiated guaranteed maximum price (GMP} process for engaging a design team and a general contractor (as opposed to a design build process). This essentially means that both the architect and general contractor will work for the Town of Vail, Request far the Vail Town Council to approve the next phase of an owner's representative contract. The preconstruction phase of the contract would cast up to $155,774. Howewer, the Committee is only requesting $93,212 (includes fees and reimbursables) to fund this function until a decision is made by the Vai! Town Council to issue bands which is anticipated in the lVovemberlDecember 2904 time frame. On June 15, 2004, the Vail Town Council rewiewed and approved the following next steps: Approval of the proposed process for engaging the public in the design team selection process; • Selection criteria for request for proposals; • Consideration of proposed process givens; • Review of updated project budget and interrelated parking casts; and Consideration. and review of the major points of the proposed scope of service request for proposals for design services (to be given to the top 3-4 teams selected in the qualification competition). Qn July 6, 2404, the Vail Town Gvuncil reviewed and approved the following next Steps: Review the recommendation from the Committee an short-listing the design team candidates and to issue the Request for Proposals (RFP) to the six recommended design teams; Review and approve suggested changes to the design team selection process from the Committee; and Request permission to issue an RFP for a surveyor to survey the Lionshead parking structure site and surrounding area. Qn July 20, 2004, the Vai] Town Council unanimously approved the following; • A contract for design services with Fentress Bradburn; and Approval of next steps for master planning the Lionshead parking structure/Conference Center site. Qn September 21, 2004, the Vail Town Council, the Committee, Design Rewiew Board (DRB) and Planning and Environments! Commission (PEC) reviewed five alternative site plans. In addition, the public reviewed the same alternatives on September 22, 2004. The near unanimous opinion from the various groups that reviewed the site plans was that alternatiwe three is the preferred choice. On October 19, 2004, the Vail Town Council met and reviewed an update on architectural images for the Conference Center and authorized the Committee to move forward with public discussions regarding the alternative styles. The Committee met on October 21, 2004, and reviewed the qualifications submitted by six general contractors. After reviewing the qualifications, the Committee recommended to the Vail Town Council that three general contractors receive requests for proposals (RFP). Those general contractors include: ^ Hansel Phelps Construction • Hunt Construction GrouplHyder Construction - M.A Mortenson Company Cn November 2, 2004, the Vail Town Council approved a motion to forward the above mentioned contractors R1=Ps. The design team of Fentress Bradbum developed three alterna#ive architectural approaches. These images were not the elevations of the proposed Conference Center but rather provided alternative visions or inspirations that could be considered for the Conference Center. The three styles include: 1. BavarianlTraditional Vail style 2. Contemporary 3. NaturallEnvironmentally inspired style The Committee reviewed the public input associated with the three design alternatives on November 18, 2004. After reviewing the public input and the associated costs with each design option, the Committee forwarded a recommendation for the "Architectural Vision Inspired by Nature." The Committee felt that. this would create an outstanding architectural structure. The materials as envisioned by the design team would utilize "mountain" materials such as heavy stone and timbers. The roof element would be more iconic but is intended to reflect the form of the surrounding mountains. It should also be noted that one member of the Committee, although not present on November 18, 2004, preferred the Traditional Vail Vernacular look. C?n December 7, 2004, the Vaii Town Council voted 6-1 to direct the Conference Center design team to move forward with a "naturalfenvironrnentally inspired" design style. The Committee met on December 14, 2004, and voted to recommend that the Town of Vail purchase {using Conference Center funds) the water and sewer taps for the charter bus lot site. On December 21, 2004 the Vail Tawn Council authorized that the Town purchase tap fees with the condition that the Eagle River Water and' Sanitation District (Districts provide a letter confirming that a tap fee could be used on the same site for a different use in the future and that the taps could be moved to another Tawn of Vail awned land. The District did provide a letter confirming this issue referencing the District's policies for doing tap transfers. The fjnal cast of the tap fee was $297,896. an January 18, 2005, the Vail Town Council voted to continue to move in the direction of the °natural" design. The Vail Town Council did express concern about the roof of the facility. They furthermore asked that the design team develop alternative ideas for the roof of the facility. On March 15, 2005, the Vail Town Council received an update on the operational plan, design, and capital budget for the Conference Center. The Committee also forwarded a recommendation to the Vail Town Council to issue an RFP for operations, management, and marketing. In. addition, the Committee recommended forwarding the design to the general contractors for pricing. The Vail Town Council approved both recommendations. On March 17, 2005 the Vail Tawn Council received a comprehensive update on the critical elements of the conference center. In addition, they considered three basis alternatives for the conference center. These alternatives included: Option A: Discontinue all work and expenditures on the project: If the Vaii Town Council is fiundamentally uncomfortable with the risks associated with the project, then discontinuing all work on the project is a viable alternative. A future discussion would then be required regarding the disposition of existing funds collected for the Conference Center and how the dedicated lodging and sales tax for the Gonference Center is addressed. Option B: Implement the existing program and obtain additional revenue to pay for the budget average. The current project design can not be built with the funds available today and budget parameters that limit debt service at $2.7 million per year. Option B involves bringing ballot language forward to the Council in August of 20{)~ and keeping the same basic design Option C: Reduce the Cost of the Facility and worlt within the existing revenue budget for the project. This option involves reducing the cost of the existing facility by cutting the size and scope of the facility. Staff recommends nat. cutting the facility to below 32,000 sq. feet meeting space based on the HVS study. After significant public input and Gouncii deliberation, the Vail Town Council directed staff to: Implement option B which involved moving forward with the existing program while reducing costs to the reasonable extent passible. This step involves moving forward with the existing design and reviewing it with Town Boards. In addition, Council directed staff to develop ballot language that would not only provide additional revenue for the construction of the facility but also an additional $~.5 million per year over and above annual debt service to pay for operational deficits. 4. ACTION REQUESTED OF THE TOWIN COUNCIL Based on the direction from the Vail Town Council an May 17€~`, staff and the Committee would request the following actions: Mortensen Contract Via a motion direct the Town Manager to execute the attached agreement with M. A. Mortensen Company (MAM) for preconstruction services. The Committee is requesting the Tawn Council authorize MAM to proceed with construction cost escalation research, strategies and management, design aSSlSt servlCes, and cost trending monitoring for a monthly fee of $9,OOOlmonth. Staff would recommend that these services be funded for the period between May and November of 2005, and costs be capped at $54,000. Value Enaineerina The Conference Center Advisory Committee and staff met with the project team and after consideration of life cycle cost impacts, quality of the building, and the mission of the project, recommend the following value engineering (numbers approximate}: $1,400,000 Project Team recommendations to Committee & Staff (changes not affecting exteriorlinteriorlinishes, or operating costs of the building) 250,0(}0 Waterfall feafure removed 512,000 Change ceiling in ballroom from. wood to ACT 220,000 Change concrete retaining walls to block walls $2,382,000 Total Proiect Budget Aaoroval The 2005 Budget assumed bonds would be sold in April/May of 20{35; after that decision, funds would be allocated to continue the design process. Based on direction from the Vail Town Council on May 17th to move forward with: + design, + begin the review process by the Town Boards, • ge# more certainty on construction cost escalation, the total potential expenditures in 2005 is projected to be approximately $1.8 million. This would provide for design services, preconstruction services from Mortenson, and Qwners Representative services through the end of the year. By November of 2005, the design would be nearing completion of construction drawings. The Town would be poised to issue a notice to proceed immediately after an election if the result was to move forward with the conference facility and thereby avoid further marketplace risk. Staff w©uld request that an additional $1.8 million be authorized via a motion to be spent in 2005 for the conference center. These expenditures fall within the current soft costs for the project. This appropriation would be reflected in the August supplemental budget. ATTACHMENTS: A. Mortenson Agreement F;lodevlCOUNCILIMEM051d51conference center060705.doc • MEMORANDUM TO: Planning and Environmental Commission FROM: Community Development Department DATE: June 13, 2005 SUBJECT: A request for final review of a variance from Chapter 14-6, Grading Standards, Vail Town Code, pursuant to Chapter 12-17, Variances, Vail Town Code, to allow for retaining walls in excess of six (6} feet in height, located at Tract K, Glen Lyon Subdivision and Unplatted Parcels, a more complete metes and hounds description is available at the Community Development Department and setting forth details in regard thereto. Applicant: Vail Resorts Development, represented by Braun Associates Planner: Bill Gibson SUMMARY The applicant, Vail Resort Development, is requesting a variance from Chapter 14-6, Grading Standards, Vail Town Code, pursuant to Chapter 12-1 , Variances, Vail Town Cade, to allow for retaining walls in excess of six (6}feet in height, located at Tract K, Glen Lyon Subdivision and Unplatted Parcels to facilitate the construction of a new snowcat access road generally located south of the Eagle River Water and Sanitation District (ERWSD} and Vail Amoco sites (846 West Forest Road and 934 South Frontage Road} to the Westin-Ho traillcatwalk. On March 8, 2004, the Planning and Environmental Commission approved a similar retaining wall height variance request for the proposed snowcat access route. Since that date, the applicant has redesigned the alignment of the proposed snowcat access route. The applicant is therefore requesting a new retaining wall height variance to facilitate the construction of this redesigned alignment and its associated retaining walls. Based upon Staff's review of the criteria in Section VIII of this memorandum and the evidence and testimony presented, the Community Development Department recommends approval, with conditions, of a variance to allow the construction of retaining walls in excess of six (6) feet in height subject to the findings and conditions noted in Section IX of this memorandum. II. DESCRIPTION OF REQUEST The applicant is currently proposing to construct a snowcat access road generally located south of the ERWSD and Vail Amoco sites (846 West Forest ' Road and 934 South Frontage Road}. This proposal will facilitate the re-muting of Vail Resorts' winter mountain maintenance traffic from West Forest Road to this new access road. This access route will start from the western driveway of the Vail Resorts maintenance facility, cross South Frontage Road and continue south along the western ERWSD property Gne, bridge across Gore Creek, continue southwest across Town of Vail owned Tract K, and connect to the Westin-Ho traillcatwalk. The proposal was originally reviewed and approved by the Planning and Environmental Commission on March 8, 2044; however, the applicant is requesting approval of a revised alignment for the proposed snowcat access route. The upper most portion of the route has been redesigned to include a switch-back that will relocate the intersection of the snowcat access road and the Westin-Ho traillcatwalk approximately 170 feet to the east of its previously approved location. The proposed access road will be a 25-foot wide gravel road surface. Due to the steepness of slopes on Tract K, the proposed access road will have finished grades as steep as 19.32% and will require the construction of both cut and fill retaining walls. The applicant is proposing to construct both the cut and file retaining walls with a Keystone Retaining Wall System. At their tallest points, the redesigned cut walls will still be approximately 14 feet in height and the fill walls will increase in height from the previously approved 12 feet to 15 feet. These proposed retaining wall heights exceed the fi-foot height maximum allowed by Chapter 14-6, Vail Town Code. This redesign route alignment will create more site disturbance than the previously approved design. A vicinity map (Attachment A), the applicant's statement of request (Attachment B), and architectural plans (Attachment C} have been attached for reference. The attached plan sheet labeled "Forest Road Snowcat Bypass, Snowcat Alignment Alternatives, Option 8, Revised 3123145°' illustrates bath the previously approved route alignment and the redesigned route alignment. III. BACKGROUND On July 15, 2043, the Vail Town Council granted Vail Resorts permission to proceed through the Town's development review process for the proposed snowcat access route across Town of Vail owned property. On December $, 2043, the Planning and Environmental Commission approved a Vail Resorts' applicatian for the Forest Place Subdivision located at 615 West Forest Road. A condition of this approval was that Vail Resorts discontinue the use of West Forest Road for snowcat access between its maintenance facilities located along South Frontage Road and the ski mountain. On March 8, 2004, the Planning and Environmental Commission approved, with conditions, a similar retaining wall height variance request for the proposed snowcat access road. On March 17, 2004, the Clesign Review Board directed staff to approve the design review applicatian associated with the proposed snowcat access route. On July 12, 2004, the Planning and Environmental Commission reviewed a request for an amendment to Special Development District (SDD) #4, Cascade Village, to create a new "development area" for Tract K (i.e. location of the 2 proposed snowcat access route). The purpose of this request was to address ambiguities in the existing SDD #4 regulations to facilitate the construction of the snowcat access route. The Planning and Environmental Commission forwarded a recommendation of approval to the Town Council. On August ~, 2004, the Town Council approved the first reading of the ordinance for the proposed amendments to SDD #4, with the condition that the applicant, Vail Resorts, resolve any outstanding legal issues related to the private Protective Covenants of Glen Lyon Subdivision prior to the second reading of the ordinance. The applicant is now representing that all private protective covenant issues have been resolved; therefore, the second reading of this ordinance has been scheduled for Town Council consideration an June 21, 2005. While addressing these private covenant legal issues, Vail Resorts, in cooperation with neighboring property owners, has redesigned the alignment of the proposed snowcat access route. Therefore, the applicant has submitted a new retaining wall height variance request to facilitate the construction of this new alignment design. IV. ROLES OF REVIEWING BODIES Order of Review: Generally, variance applications will be reviewed by the Planning and Environmental Commission, and then any accompanying design review application will be reviewed by the Design Review Board. Planning and Environmental Commission: The Planning and Environmental Commission is responsible for final approval, approval with modifications, ar denial of a variance application, in accordance with Chapter 12-17, Variances, Vail Tawn Code. Design Review Board; The design Review Board has na review authority over a variance application. However, the Design Review Board is responsible far the final approval, approval with modifications, or denial of any accompanying design review application. Town Council: The Town Council has the authority to hear and decide appeals from any decision, determination, or interpretation by the Planning and Environmental Commission andlor Design Review Board. The Town Council may also call up a decision of the Planning and Environmental Commission andlar Design Review Board. Staff: The Tawn Staff facilitates the application review process. Staff reviews the submitted application materials far completeness and general compliance with the appropriate requirements of the Tawn Cade. Staff also provides the Planning and Environmental Commission a memorandum containing a description and background of the application; an evaluation of the application in regard to the criteria and findings outlined by the Tawn Code; and a recommendation of approval, approval with modifications, ar denial. 3 V. APPLICABLE PLANNING DQCUMENTS Staff believes that the following provisions of the Vail Town Cade are relevant to the review of this proposal: TITLE 1~: ZONING REGULATIONS Chapter 12-17: Variances 72-97-1: Purpose: A. Reasons For Seeking Variance: !n order to prevent or to lessen such practical difficulties acrd unnecessary physical hardships inconsistent with fhe ablectives of this title as would result from strict or literal interpretation and enforcernenf, variances from certain regulations may be granted. A practical difficulty or unnecessary physical hardship may result from the size, shape, or dimensions of a site or the location of existing structures thereon; from topographic or physical conditions an the site ar in the immediate vicinify; or from other physr`caI limitations, street locations ar conditions in the immediate vicinity. Cast ar inconvenience to the applicant of strict or literal compliance with a regulation shall not be a reason far granting a variance. :7 TITLE 14: DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS HANDBOOK Chapter 14-6: Grading Location or 7"ype Maximum Height Additional Review P.E. Stamp or Approval Required g-4' Staff Review car DRB No 4' 6' Staff Review or DRB Yes 4' or % the difference of Staff Review or DRB Yes exposed height 0-3' Staff Review or DRB No 3' fi' 'Staff Review or DRB Yes 6' + Staff Review or DRB Yes PEC NA Staff Review or DRB Yes PEC 0-3' Staff Review ar DRB N© 3'-6' Staff Review or DRB Yes • Regular Walls (Detail 7 ©) Bench of combination walls (Detail 90~ Rr'gh t-of--Way Setback (9a' from ,paved surface ono' 2' from adjacent property lines) ~ In Front Setback On slopes greater than 30! and related to access VI. Vl I 51TE ANALYSIS Legal Description: Zoning: Land Use Plan Designation Current Land Use: Lot K, Glen Lyon Subdivision SDD #4, Cascade Village Open Space Undeveloped SURRQUNDING LAND USES AND Z©NING Land Use Zoning North: Gore Greek Natural Area Preservation South: US Forest Service Eagle County East: Undeveloped Natural Area Preservation & Outdoor Recreation West: Residential Two-Family PrimaryfSecondary Residential • 4 VIII. CRITERIA AND FINDINGS The review criteria for a request of this nature are established by Chapter 12-1 fi, Vail Town Code. Consideration of Factors Reaardino Variances: The relationship of the requested variance to other existing or potential) uses and structures in the vicinity. Staff does not believe the granting of this variance will have significant negative impacts to existing or potential uses and structures in the vicinity. Similar retaining walls have previously been constructed in association with other access projects such as the nearby pedestrian and skier bridges. Due #o the steepness of this site, the proposed additional retaining wall height associated with this snowcat access road design will reduce the amount of site disturbance to the hillside when compared to designs using tiered walls in strict compliance with the wall height requirements. Furthermore, the ERWSD has granted formal easements far permanent access across its property between Vail Resort's main#enance facilities and the proposed snowcat access road. Additionally, Tract K is identified as "TOV awned Lands/open Space Use" by the Town of Vail Comprehensive Open Lands Plan and no future development of the site is anticipated. 2. The degree to which relief from the strict and literal interpretation and enforcement of a specified regulation is necessary to achieve compatibility and uniformity of treatment among sites in the vicinity ar to attain the objectives of this title without a grant of special privilege. Staff believes this proposed variance request involves "exceptions ar extraordinary cr'rcun~stances or conditions applicable to the same site of the variance that do not apply genera!!y to other properties in the same zone" as this proposal is associated with the construction of an access road to the ski mountain and not the construction of a residential or commercial development project. Pursuant to Chapter 14-6, Vail Tawn Code, the proposed retaining walls may not exceed six feet (fi'} in height unless the proposed walls are located within a street right-of-way, Within a street right- of-way, retaining wall heights may exceed six feet (fi'} in height without a variance. Examples of retaining walls greater than six feet (6'} in height can be found throughout the Town of Vail's right- of-ways. The proposed snowcat access road will be located on Town of Vail owned property; however, it wyll not be located within a designated street right-af-way, and will therefore require a retaining wall height variance. 5 The applicant has explored design alternatives with retaining walls not exceeding six feet (~') in height. The applicant has demonstrated that due to the steepness of Tract K, in some locations along the snowcat access road a series of tiered six foot walls may be feasible; however,. the use of a series of walls creates significantly more disturbance to the existing hillside than a single cut and fill wall. The applicant has also demonstrated that. in same locations along the snowcat access route, six foot ~6') tiered retaining walls may require terracing the entire hillside to "catch grade." Therefore, Staff believes the proposed additional retaining wall height associated with this snowcat access road design will reduce the amount of necessary site disturbance when compared to designs using tiered walls in strict compliance with the wall height requirements. 3. The effect of the requested variance on light and air, distribution of population, transportation and traffic facilities, public facilities and utilities, and public safety. Staff believes the proposed retaining wall height variance wiP! not have a significant negative impact on the light and air, distribution of population, public facilities and utilities. Staff believes that the proposed re-routing of Vail Resorts' snowcat access will have a positive affect on transportation, traffic facilities, and public safety; since Vail Resort's maintenance vehicle traffic will be no longer occur on a public street (i.e. West Forest Raad) through a residential neighborhood. 4. Such other factors and criteria as the commission deems applicable tv the proposed variance. Qn March 8, 2404, the Planning and Pnvironmental Commission approved a similar variance request for the proposed snowcat access route. The app{{cant, in cooperation with the neighboring property owners, has since redesigned the alignment of this route; and is therefore requesting a new retaining wall height variance. B. The Planning and E=nvironmental Commission shall make the followinct findings before granting a variance: 1. That the granting of the variance will not constitute a grant of special privilege inconsistent with the limitations on other properties classified in the same district. 2. That the granting of the variance will not be detrimental to the public health, safety or welfare, or materially in}urious to properties ar improvements in the vicinity. 3. That the variance is warranted for one or more of the following reasons: G a. The strict literal interpretation or enforcement of the specified regulation would result in practical difficulty or unnecessary physical hardship inconsistent with the objectives of this title, b. There are exceptions or extraordinary circumstances or conditions applicable to the same site of the variance that do not apply generally to other properties in the same zone. c. The strict interpretation or enforcement of the specified regulation would deprive the applicant of privileges enjoyed by the owners of other properties in the same district. IX. STAFF RECOMMENDATION The Community Development Department recommends approval, with conditions, of a variance from Chapter 94-6, Grading Standards, Vail Town Code, pursuant to Chapter 12-~ 7, Variances, Vail Town Code, to allow for retaining walls in excess of six (C) feet in height, located at Tract K, Glen Lyon Subdivision and Unplatted Parcels. This recommendation is based upon the review of the criteria in Section VIII of this memorandum and the evidence and testimony presented. Should the Planning and Environmental Commission choose to approve this variance request, the Community Development Department recommends the Commission pass the fallowing motion: The Planning and Environmental Commission approves, with conditions, the applicant's request far a variance from Chapter 74-6, Grading Standards, Vail Town Code, pursuant to Chapter 12-fT, Variances, Vail Town Code, to allow for retaining walls in excess of six (&J feet in height, located at Tract K, Glen Lyon Subdivision and Unplatfed Parcels, and setting forth details Jn regard thereto, subject to the fallowing conditions: 1. This variance request approval shall be contingent upon the applicant receiving Town of Vail approval of the associated design review appfication and the Town Council's Etna! adoption of Ordinance IVo. '! ~, Series of 2004, amending Special Development District #4, Cascade Village. 2. The applicant shat! properly maintain the limits of disturbance fencing and erosion control methods throughout the construction of this proposal. Any modification to the location or configuration of the limits of disturbance area shall require review and approval by the Planning and Environmental Commission and the Design Review Soard. 3. Prior to the issuance of grading permits, the applicant shall: A. enter into a lease or license agreement with the Town of Vail far the use of Tawn property; and, 7 S. shalt prepare a construction staging plan for review and approval by the Town of Vail; and, C. shalt survey and then install aI! Iimits of disturbance fencing and all erosion control methods for review and approval by the Town of Vail. Should the F'ianning and Environmental Commission choose to approve this variance request, the Community Development Department recommends the Commission makes the following findings: The Planning and Environmental Commission finds: 7. The granting of this variance will not constitute a granting of special privilege inconsistent with the limitations on other properties classified in the same district. 2. The granting of this variance will not be detrimental to the public health, safety, or welfare, or maferially injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity. 3. This variance is warranted for the following reasons: a. The strict literal interpretation or enforcement of the specified regulation would result in practical difficulty or unnecessary physical hardship inconsistent with the objectives of Title 92, Zoning Regulations, Vail Town Code.. b. There are exceptions or extraordinary circumstances or conditions applicable to the same site of the variance that do not apply generally to other properties in the same district. c. The strict interpretation or enforcement of the specified regulation would deprive the applicant of privileges enjoyed by the owners of other properties in fhe same distrrcf X. ATTACHMENTS A. Vicinity Map B. Applicant's Statement C. Architectural Plans D. Public Nearing Notice r: u~o3'sa~e!~ossaune~q~rr,ntM xe} 9LSL-9Z6-OL6 SLSL-9Z6-OL6 Z£9 L8 O7'sp~ennp3 • Z-~ al!n5 1aa~1~ uie4y SZZ 6ugp!in8 !edp :si1~n^~ pasodoad ati~ pug sttEnn pano~ddE ar~~ o} ant~Eia.r suo~~~:saptsuoa rCa~ ausos sazu~uzLUns ~urmoiio~ aq~ `Ltosl.~Edrxioa ~o ~Cem r{g •pasoda.zd sr ~~ia~{ it~nn ~uru~Exai o; aau~uEn panoiddQ a~isnouaid a~~ o~ ~uauzpuaure scq~ cans s~ 'I~~eaq ui 49 ~o ssa~axa ut Ii~M ~uiuie~ai~o uo~~od a~~ ~utpniaa~ `sll~em ~uiu~E~ai3o ~ua~xa acp pa~uECia sou u~csap-aa st~,7, ~~sea ac~~ ox ~aa~ paapunq mad e off ui~sa~ pus pt~o.~ ssaaa~ nnau auk ,Io ~~rxot~aasia~ut„ a~~ sanouz ganinn p~c~l a~l.~a uot~od iaddn a~{~ ~~ ~a~qua~inns ~ sppE }~xauipuauz~ pasodo.~d a~,~ 'pa~apzsuoa a.~am su~isap ans~~euza~i~ ~© saquinu ~ poo~sogq~iau arp, o~ asuodsai ui •pauflisap aq uEa p~o~ ssaa3~ mau au} nno~~o suua~ ui lua~.~}suoa aueoi~tu~es ~ s~uasard ~C~dEZ~odo~ but}szxg •a[gissod s~ ~sEa ar~~ o~ .red see off ut~sa~ auk o} ~aauuoa o} pEOi ssaaae mau a~} >za~ passaYdxa seem aissap ~ poou.~ogr{~tau au} ci~im su©rssnasrp ~uunQ ~uaazpaaui~ ~o uo~dl.~asaQ u~td ~uauldoiana.p papuauie lob aa3 ~utit,~ sadola~ua pug sit siaumo ,Cuadoid xuaaeCpy uxzo~ uo~~Eattdd~ uES~xraZ ~q~ pa~daid ueid ad~aspu~t pasina~ ~uizaaut~ug auYdp~ ~cI pa~daid suEtd itnta pastaa~ {moiaq) aau~euEn~o uoc~duasap ua~u~ :sapntaui papinoid Ieua~~y~,i 'zEa~C ~~I panozdd~ sErn 1~u1 aau~~~n ~~~~ar~ ti~nn ar~~ puau.~ o~ uo~~eatidde ue putt iiinn no~C pa~oel~y -poi ssaaae acil~o u~;sap a~ o~ a~u~r~a iourut ~ uaacl s~q a.~au~ suozssnasip asau~lo itnsa.z ~ 'p~o~ ssa~a~ ~~eamous pasodosd azp pue s~u~uanoa ~ ~a~~~ ~utpin~a.z uo~sinrpgn~ uo~~ uai~ aqi ui saoc{u~tau snou~n tp~nn ~ut~[zom uaaa~ sEZi s~zosa~ iteC, sgxuo~u ~s~d auk .nano `nnou~ no~i sb .Iitg ~aQ p'eag ssaaay ~~a.rnou~,,~ ~anY1, lsanba~ aauEU~en i~iaH iI~A1. papuaury :~ L59i8 0~ `ttEn pEO~ a~~~uol~ u~noS 5L ItEn.3o umol uosgt~ Iirg SL}OZ `9~ ~~i~i 1N3WdOl3A3O 1,11Nf1WWO7'39NINNtild ^NVl 8 ~U8 W u~2~}d A ~L ~~ ^ the overall amount of retaining wall has been reduced from 12,153 sq_ft. of wall to 9,776 sq. ft. ^ the maximum combined cut and fill retaining wall height has been reduced from 23.4 feet to 23.1 feet. ^ the maximum fill wall height has increased from 11.3 feet to 15.2 feet, and ^ the rnaxirnum height of cut walls has remained unchanged. As these design changes are all located at the uppermost portion of the road there will be very little difference between the approved walls and the proposed walls as viewed from the valley floor. Below is the applicant's response to applicable variance criteria. Given the similarities between the approved design and the proposed amendments, these responses very similar to what was provided with our original application. Variance Criteria Written Statements • A "written description of the nature of the vctric~nce requested and the specific regulation(s) involved, including an explanation of why the variance is required and why the strict or literal interpretation of the speci~c regulatio3z(s) would result in a physical hardship ar praciical difficulty. " Restaonse The specific regulation involved is found on page 19 of the Development Standards I~andbook which limits the height of retaining walls to 6'. The retaining wall is needed in order to construct a new snowcat access road to Vail Mountain. Proposed wall heights vary along the Iengtih of the cut and fill walls and are depicted on the wall elevations plans that have been provided under separate cover. Given the existing grades of the hillside surrounding the access road, if maximum 6' high walls were used it would require three terraced walls on the cut side (upper] of the accessway and huo terraced walls on the fill side (lower) of the accessway. This design would be much more impactive, bath physically and visually on the hillside and present a practical difficulty. Review Criteria Before acting on a variance application, the Planning and Environmental Commission shall consider the following factors with respect to the requested variance: a. The relationship ofthe requested variance to other existing or potential uses grid structures in the vicinity- Anblrcant's Analysis: Given the existing grades of the hillside surrounding the access road, if maximum 6' high walls were used it would require three terraced walls on the cut side (upper) of the accessway and two terraced walls on the fill side (lower} of the accessway. This design would be much more impactive, both physically and visually on the hillside. The proposed amendment will move the intersection of the new road and the Westin Ho a few hundred feet to the east. From the perspective of neighbors in the Glen Lyon subdivision this will provide a more sensitive design solution and an improved relationship with surrounding uses and structures. b. The degree to which relief from the strict or literal interpretation and enforcement of a specified regulation is necessary to achieve compatibility and uniformity of treatment among sites in the vicinity, or to attain the objectives of this title without grant of special privilege. Annlicant's Analysis: The existing grade of the hillside and the ~~~idtli of the proposed snowcat access road are the two factors most directly influencing the height of tlxe proposed retaiiung walls, The width of the road has been minimized to the extent feasible while still allowing for adequate drainage and safe passage. The design of the walls has been done in order to balance the degree of cut and fill slopes. c. The effect of the requested variance on light and air, distribution of population, transportation and traffic facilities, public facilities and utilities, and public safety. Annlicant's Analysis: The proposed variance will have little, if any, affect an any of the above criteria. The wall variance will, however, allow for a land use (the new snowcat access) that will improve public safety by removing snowcat traffic from West Forest Road. d_ How the request complies with adopted Town of Vail planning policies and development objectives. Auvlicant's Analysis Tlie Town has identified a goal of removing snowcat access from West Forest Road (i.e. Lionshead Master Plan). This new access road will result in the removal of snowcats Pram West Forest Road. Y look forward to working with you on this amendment. Let nee know if there is any other submittal information I can provide. Sincerely,( ~ Y ~ ~~~ ~ Thomas A.. Braun, AICP Cc: Bill. Kennedy Jack Huhn Jay Peterson FYI ~~,'~7=NI~'h3 ~t~Nld4"1 I4 j .~+-~ It{ -1~ 141 h 41~ `I 9~ I1`` i.~, ' II 191 IF i1. 11 r l 1 ~ 51 I I 5 . I, I 1• , 1 1 l .: IIl 1 j,1 ~i ~g 1•. Ir..: ~I~ ~ t'.1~~- l L, [5. ~'r 5 y~V 11 t 8 N O u_ d O ,,„ ~, ~ ~„ b. S3/~llb'N~13.1"l'd AN3WN01`lb' 1`dOMC7NS uc ~~ ~~ FSb~dlfl 1t'/~M1ONF C3b'O~J 1S~1~o-~ ~~ IIwYx: x o ~ !B 1 1 SM45ulY IIYq OaS J3' ~'~~~ 1 1 1 1- I Y 11 l /r ~ a R'i \' .1 1 5 t l 1 [~ 1 `y'.'.,', .51 '~'-~11•~, •11111'1' '~ G1] ,, .1 ,1".l 1.511.5 ~. FF ~ ~ 1 I ! • I \ 51' II 5 ~ F 5. . ~• •, I 11 1 1' ~ 5 ,! !, 1111 1 5- ~ 51. 5 ~ l 1! ~ ~ 1 1 5~ I `` ' ` r 1 f 1 1111 P 1 l ` ' I y L ~ I ~ ~ , I y 1 1t k . 'L ~, ; 11 1 l 1 'S j .. l 1 1 1 1 } I 1 ' 1 1 ~ $ ,.~ . ! I 5 1 F\ 1x , 11 55. 1; 1 1 ; Y. ~ ' 1 ~`~ ' \ l0. ((77 N . 1 t 15 1 1 ~, • 11.1 1 1 - i ~y'.' y ~ 111 I l l' 1 1' 1 1554 1'. '. 1 5 '~ . { W f p , 0. • ': 11.-,..:\., ,,\1`.0..411.111.151'11 - + ` ' ' 1 ' e ~ CO I 1\ I ` . , 'S,i : 1 5 , , I', PROPERTY LINE ' 1 1 ~~6 ~' I 1 t1 , ~ ~'~ r; Iit'I.t'111' .~4'..~, 1.151 :1.l~t II''S C I 1 ~ r I ! 1 151 5 1 '' ~~1 4 l 15 1 ~~ t P 4 S "~} 1 1. , :1 11, t' 1 ;1 III 1l \ 1 } I I 11•.1 5 '. a d r `, } 1 15, • - 1 1 L, 1 ~ 5 1'4 11 V 4 4 1 51~~ Jr ~l ~_ 1 ~~ 51 4111 4t, Il 1.. 11 ~~11 ` l r~ a1, t 1.r `~I ". 1 5 1 l1• 15 5 ` 1: 1 ~ ~5V 1~i$", 11 , V~' : It'4',51 I! l L, II~I!I ~ ' ;1''LyV 1114 I li'I ~~~1C ~~r~ ~ -_ 14f ,I,~1444~' -- I I I 4 ` If ~ I tj111t i i it r I ! f I ' ' ~:, 1.. ~I'i.1 _ i / Ily l.. ~j1 ~41 _ ~ -ter !% 1 r~ 11r ~ . , ~ I~'y f fr lr ,~. if ~~ ~ } 11 ` r~lr._rf1 ..:J+ Y 1 1fr I ~ ' 1 1 ,,\ --- ~ J i 1 : 1 1 f 1/ f ~1 ! i 1 ~ P 4 J+ i~ ~ 1 4' ~ j / f 1 !` r\ ~ ~r 1~ r ' - 1 `ti--J \ 1 P \ t lr 5 1 ,~, ~ ~~ ...~-._ 1 ~?k . 1 J ~ f ' S ~ ~ ? \ ~_ ~~~ ~l I *11 ~Y ~' ~l 1 _ 11 ~ .11 ``° C - `-~ 1,, ~; 1 1 1 ~. 1 4'.. 1 ' l t* ~ 71 1. it ~ ~I l~ ~ 41 ~ r ~ g 1 ~,:. 11 1 J, l ~ l 4} `111 1 '.~ ~` li7 Y 1 ~ ~ f ., 11y ~l `-' 1`,1 (~ I ~ r ' ~-•~ ~' , r' ~ I '` . '1 , ~~~ ~` ! `~ (r~ 1 _ ~ 1 uaw aE ~ CL ~ , ~ti ~', ~ ~ ~ ud ~ 15 ~~- _ 1 S 1114 1 {101111, l 111.6111 ~ 1; 114111 1111 11 X111111 1L11411 I 11511 Illyli It I,'.ll' ti9 1:.Y1 t it 1 I ~_~. ~ . .. -- {r I I 11 ' ~ J P --+ T 11 P4UYERl 1NE CU7' I -~..__ I r r . , ~ r , it 4 1 ' •/ ._ ."~I^/-`,r~,l.~}. -•~~~ ._. „' ' ~ 1 f ,•--\ ' 1 1 ~ , 1 1 I 01 '11 1111 1 y +F` ! _'` -•L` f 1 I { Yl `~ 11 1 1 1 1 11 1 ~ I r ` ,. I' ;, 1 1 Iltlt 1, 11j1'IV t~ I }1 1 ~ 1 1 11 1 t I I 1 I I C J I I j 111 ' r1 1 5 1 1 1 1 { 1'','.~5y1 11 51 i 1 , ~ IJI I 11' v1 51 1 1 11 I 111111. 5 5 15 '~1t4 { I4AIf' $ 5 ~ 1,614' I 1 j¢` \ / I I ~ `1 '1 l i1*11 1 1 I ) I I I 1 1 51 j 5 .' .1'}15'151'1, 51 1 15'51 15 • /I Ip0 i/f \ 1 51 ,,1 15 5 ~ 114111 2 '1 111 515'.11 I ', 5 1111 V 1 td , 1 11 11 i1i5` 1 ~ ' 1 11 I ~ I I } i tZ~ f j 1 1 , 1 ~li~ ri~1t51 { ~`, ~1 14F'1 I Z 15 1 '~' ~ I ' ; ~IyJ f 1 1 1n 1 , \ ', 111 1 1 G 1, l O 14 I t I I I I l I '% i 1 ! ?S' j i i. I 1 ~ I / r,' r it q l r I i t I I '1 ~~`~ d5, ,1,15 I I 1 { ~ I 1 I r 1 '~ S I i' I ~ tl II la 4 ` I '~15 15 `\ 5`\5\ \\~`7 ~ 11 5115 ', I 1' `1 55155 ~\y :~~6 ~ ~~ 1 ~ • ~' (0. rl 1 5~ ~ 1 ~ ~ . 1 . . 4 ~2 11 It t L 55\~ 1 1l'111J , ~ Y t I ~ h 1 1 ; ~ 1 1 1 \ 5 . 1 1 , 1~ { ~ ~ `I i I 15/ `1 ~~ 111 ~4r \1 ~ \ 5151 4\ • l j 1 Y 4 1 1 `G I I ~I ~1 'F I 15111; \ ~, •\ ~ } ~d' i1' 111 I i 1 1 t ~ 1 t 1 1 ? S 5 11 1 1 1 ~ 1 7 ,5 551 4S. A 4111t11 19 . I i ~LL~" i i 1 11 55 1 1 111 l 1 1' 1 1 ' 1~i111 v 1 y y r~1 ~¢ d 1 + ~ ~' ~ 1' 151 1 r 4 14 1 u l I. , 1 1 1 ' L+Pi 1 I 4 ~1~ 1 1 1 11 . 1 I 1 5 5Y 1 I ll 5 { ~ 1 l. 1 5 4 v 0. 1 1 5. Y I 651 I 1 6 r 1 1 1, E n J 1 1 y l 1 l.' ~ I ,`I 1. 55 1 / 1 f f 1 1 I 1, ; 11 11 ~I 11,1.~11111e1 1 3 r f 1! 1 •, ~~ 1 A 1 151y I I l~ ~rf' !I! P! it ~~; 11 I 1 { 5111V~11f11 I . 1 5 11 Y i m Y } QZCZ ~~ QpypyyNp ptt QW P~ +R y,t 1 5 1 1 5 1. ' I 1 ~ 1 it t\~ 11 1 1 V. I '15 ~5 ~1 t1 1 .>7 . J... 1 `. 4 ¢1. 17 Y = s I I ~ + i !' r~ ~~/11 1 l o,~ l y l ~ r' r :il r ~'~~ I r I o r i ,1 ~ !5 : ry` f r 1! I I/ 1 ~ ~? Ir F" 1 t P 1 14 ! Y , P I + +P rPr I ; t 11M11}4 i 111115 1 5 111 1 ~ 511111, \ ~ I5 5 5 55 1 1 1' 11 1r ,'S11a,'II 51 .y 55111 1111 i 1 1 1 I I,! e1 \ 515 11 I III 1 f 1 ' P1!r t 11 ' P Jr~J/ i i Y~~'~t f I Ir~111 14 . ' I ' f I ~~l1j~ '+i; ' , IA'~t.11111 '1'111 I pll 11111 41, 1111, 1~~, 11 Itl ~t, 11 1111 ,I 11t~11't 1151 I 1115 15}1 1'1 5 1 1, y 1 ,1.51 ' ,.11:51 1},14511 :151 1 5115 5 ~ 4' l 1 l }ll IZ 11~ 11 ' 1 111 51,11, 5 y 1~ti,r; r4> 1 \\\ ~~~`. `T1 1 i i} 1 1n 111 I v'. 1++t 1 111 1,11 51,1 pl~/~~i ~~ "1 •a• i11r'1', 114 ~ 1~ 61 ~ 5 111 {I{ty 11 11 ~C ~ 5'' 111 2 ~l , I 111.1 III 1 111 1 1 1 1 '1 I II 5 \ '14414111111 Il I I 1 Il 111.11 1 l t 1 1 11 j i 1. ~I 111 I t. v 5 11 4 ; ;, ~ I .4 g l , l ! ~~~0..'iF llr i 1 41 1t 1 j 11 111~ 1 1 1t \\ 1 +4 1 4 111 11 1 1y p11 y~ ,5 1 1 'S rl 1,1161 T11 1 • I ! 1 ,I t 1}.~1 1 i 11 ~~~ h I Jh 1!. 14 1 i 5 ~ '..5 11~ 1l f~5 f" 1 ti/t 1'.11 /1 'I.-Yh"C ~ ~ 1 ~ ~ I - It ~ ; I 1 1 \, rr~~ 5y1'11,1 I` 14111F 15 11 1 11 15 ~ `\ d k~. 1 \ 4 ''` 11111}11\1 t,, 5 15\1 5 I I~'1 5\~~ ~"1 ~ r; IIWI~II 'Y Uy 1,'i ~0. \5 5~ ~ 1 .~ 1 1 _` ~-- ~N4 t 1 1.11 41i~ ~ ~\5 ~ `1 .%'~I \~•`•\ ~ ~ V 1 15 ~IL I 1 ~~7-. I `1 , ~ 1t 'S~'.1. ..7 ~\0.5 ~; `~. ,''S15~11n 1}_s+ F `\,, 51e1 qq~t 5 I 51 . 1 4~ 1,,11'_4_ _ I Y. am OU I { _-- ~ I 1-~ $a I pi z ~~ ~ ---- -' I 1 I - _- I ~, I i~ I I I ~y t 1 q 1.l It I ~ , I y 1f ~~ 1 ~ , 1 ~ Y 1 I' +! ~{ / 0..51 , ~^/\ ~~~ 1 ~ , 1 1 ~ r 1 r r ! Y r ! ! I + 1 y i P YYYr.f 5 l I~_ ~~{~ 5 ` t, ,''{ _ ti ~ 1 1 11 L~1 1 F \ \~ 1 i ~ 1 s 1 ^s 'w: ~~ 1? ~. ~ , ~ ' ~~ ~k u"e kk ' . : ~~\ ~, ~ ~ 4 ~ ~ ~ Y5 ~ ` . _ y*~, > ~ 1 ,'>~~ ~ ~ ~ y:,l ' 51 1 1 ~ 1 5 • t \~. (~ s.. 1 , ,q4,~. a~ ~Y 1 • /~ 1 •w-Y-. ~`x~mc+i~~.`nsi•w~ (*r3.;7 S~QZ ~d~ .x..~ rW FtE ]lv4 I ~NI JfJ t~33NIJN3 a ~ aor ~ ~ p 133H5 ~J3/~Q~ I SN'v',ld 55'ddJ.B lb'3MON5 p~42d 1S3~10.~ ..~~ _ ~.~,:~ =o° ~Nld`1 .JW~ard~ ~~..r 1N~YVd~~ ai~a~,..._.., -~,,~, -~ .~..>o ~, U } Z Q d U F- Z W J W W D 0 W J Q V J Q U 3 0 z 0 Q 0 W 0 J ~~ ~o _~~ ~~ l~ ~~.r ;$A4 ~ ~q d' z s 5 e o 'S ~ $S fi x .~ nL c ° 8~ ~ F 8 ~ 5 a ~- ~ ~ .a.. x ~ e ep 3 ~~& i n .~ _ q ~ e 3a E.5 ? $~ ~s3 ~ ~ L ~~h 3 n Sc~ 3~ 1 g a' ' ~~ 2 4 3x ~ ~ a p b ~c ci .:' ~~eM ? fiy~t8e ~. ~ t ~r. ~ ~y O YS ~ 5 A,Y ';G$3 ~~; S3aA A ~ xs 33 4 5 `n ~S ` ~ E .~ ~pF y= e3 ..x ~ ~;.~ 1e~'S q 50''~n xS 4 5~ $ ~1t ~ ey a #,& -,z E Y ~ a 1' ... ~5 &7 S,a a g~5 a~ ax ~Ls F~F~ S i~~5x~ $~ g ~ iv $ 3r ~' a~ ~ ~i ~~a Rai a~°~ ] ~-0~Sr ~' ~ ~ 6g ] Y~ ~ 5 a ~~ e3. § ~~~ ~ Y +~° 3 .~ A a K ' ~~. y~ ° a s a 4 ~~ ~ ~i 5"a gbs F~ g5{ d3 ,.S E.~ ~ a aP }§ ! dE 5 e? i iB ~ S_, 33_S~ ~1i5 $W sS ~i ~; ge i °s y; a ,3 8 _- ~° ~ y ° s a~e€~~ asp "~ §. '!~S~ Egg 9a~, ~ ;~ $5 a ~ ~3 f "StE s ~ 3~ .r :~ i~3y Sri o- g~ at ~d~ E9 E;~ ~ y a S =a~ ~ n ~ a - ~#~ ~~, Y s - -~ ,•. ~ ~ _. r<8~i' ~o-o-. .. ~. s~~ m, w5~s:i :° ~ .'- _~ .fir .:a ~.. V a~ V a F Y i s ~~ 1 W U ~ * L Z A Y~~ a $1 }~ icy; ~ ~ c'=- H. ~ 6 Y~ V. 3`~ b ~ s ~ W ia<lc i t . ® J d u ~:~ 9 j i ~% 8 ' i~ ~~ 2 ~ ~ a E r ~. ~ ~ ' ~~ ~g~ ~ ~ ~a ' a s i~ g' ! A e e +5 '~~' g s ~ ~ i !$ i~ ::~ g? : 3 s 1i. ~y i. s L ~a ~-Y y 3. -S 'i a- Ji z~ ~ ~ ~ ~jz ~s ~- Sz :F $ ~ ~~ ~! ~a 5 39' s8 e~ s ~e . 3 as' ;~ ~ ;~ f: a3 ~~ ~S. 30 "~ ~ r5 d r`S v sa ~5 9 y( d S ~ ~~ ~ F ~ E5 ~ 7 3 f '_~ ~~~ ij ,~ ~~ ~' f~i ~ .3 ~~ da f 3 F ~ : ~; 3 s' 3 a r j t"$ _ ~ e a ~' is "3e~ ~~ ~ ; ~ ~+ ~~ °~ 5 Ash ~1x ~ ~~ ~~ :~ ~ iY~ ~a - A9 ' ~D 95. y ~~9 ~~$ 1~ ns y'a. 5; t r'_ y.~.`•y ,°e` ~ ~ st ~; : j; ~~ 3e Egg ~y a ~~ ~~ 9 Fed i-.'~.~ !° y9 ~ a° is ii• ~. y 4~= ~~f 1~ 5~ 3 ~y ~[ y `~l S t 3f t,i ~ 31 ~~ aid bra ~ a4 a~ ayes i~ Y~ y s a c'~ 1 3 3 i~ #~ Yy7 w; ~ c~ 7 a ~ ~ '#` i~ a ~F2 ~ ,~~ ~~ 3i #~; ; iii Eg't t# z~ d 3 df s" ~y 5 e;e # €- 8t #~ a .Se .~w.~ .~ ~ _ .o .3. _c. _~ :f .33 i€s e# ~t .4 s F 3 ti~ g ~~ 5~ ~~° s ~~~ .. ~ 8 ~ ;g ,~ j~s d 5~„ .c $ ~` f § a 3~~ ~ S-~- _ ~ .. a ~ % • s 3 ~ . . S x s 2 y S Ua ~ gr35 ~ i;5a 5 _ S ~: . ~ na p a'~ ~~ ~q _c '~ ax-_5 h5 ~t ~ 5 ~ ~ ~ ..~ ~~ S x y~ t5 3 . yy~~ S~ p} 53 }? 5 8i ~ a y Yfi ~~~ $ S ~: 2 ~~ ~ 4 ~ ; 3 ~;3 ~. a a .3 K 5a~ ~' " ' ~ 6g YS }}F C 7 y £ 3 6 .5 ice' 3 $x Y- _~ .~ ~ ~ q' }3 ~ ~ . fig, ~ 3~ . ~m ale' _ x na .,.w ~ r~i;~55 d'~i ~ ?~ U a ~ ~¢a~~ ~3a. ~ ~! -?' e~ aZ i ' ~n qig S- 9~. ai'fa xw %8c i" 'xa I.. a e ~a+ a t ~a3 • ^.~,,w . ~NI tl`JfVP2333NIJN3 ~- ~ `~ _~. ~N ~ d L1. ~~. e1'I'1'y5 'rtl ~•.~iI III r~ ~ ~ 1 ~} 1 .I I 1 1} I } ~i,l:~y } °!;I 1 tll ~It1 I I a; :~ '~ .' NS ~ ~3a03 ``[ ' _'_'_' I n 1~ -~i w' r <j Nt I{ h ~ I ~a ' hJ 1 u NF s _~ I 0 I `~ f - ~.u.Jczr~6 ' n~a ,K-s . as da W»J]S1 ' ra..no S ~- t '1~1~c•A - s I If"N ~11.'O~g j$ ~ I 'I aaK ~ p{ 1S~ K SaM13! 1~4C19 ~3v.3 %~ .I i ~ 8 +I u - ~ ~ EL'~la 35 ~8 A 5.h, @ ~f'MEQ s ~'~ ~ Ire ;s11; r; ~' "~`~ ~ ' I r t ;'j~ I J~ i ~1 tr I ~~"~'' I ° 111 17`•'111 r I 111,11 11'} } 1 1 1 I } , 1111 } 1y1 ti 11 i 1} 1 Ill} 1 I } 1 111,.111151,1'' } }} t 1 1 111111j1I1111rV X11 1111} l 1 11 \l L I 111111 II 111 }111 1' 11 1 11 II 11 1 I I 11 I 1 l i 1 ~ l~~ I I~ 1 1 I 1 11 I II II I 11 Iji 11~; 1111111111}II 1111711111 11 `j[/ v I I I 1~ 1 l 1 Y 11'F'j~l 1 1 1 1 1 ~ 1 1 1 1 1 1 l 11111111 • 1 II I~ 11 I° 11 I~.. ~I~IIi 51 t1 1! 1:, \,•111. ~~ I i 1 1~_ 5~,,, ,~ I 1 142 } ~ 5 1 i ~'6i a+Y~ -• . t 1 5 . ` \ } i 11 5 ~ e t} 4y X71 `ltlr ~".4t~r 51 ;111 Y4 14 1 \.. y `Y 4 ~~} 1 i~~l ti 1.~..,.~~. ` _ 1.1 1 ` _, ~ ,` ` Y`, 1 51x ,t-» - ,.~~-.` ~ Y-~ .ti:y , Y~ - 4 e 1 1" x171 1 _~ -'_ 1 1 ~ x ~."'.11'`11 ..51, ''-''. 1. '~.;"`~, -. ~~ ~ooa ~,aw 3'tI~Q?Jd 78 Nd'ld 11'v'Li1 1b+~M0 SNd'!d SS'ddhS lb'~MONS ~b'02f 1' '0~7 1N~WdC~'"t~/1~a b1kIC3$~ 1111 1 - 1. 1 } ' . III II1111t~' 45111 3 t rl;l 1515 y.1r1 ,~~ ~ a ~Ii'I~llil5l 5111 i}}r 11 ~ '~ ~~ a d h I Ilr IIV itliir°I° . '~ ~ y~ s~~ ~~. ~~ I"If+lr°iiiill`I, ~~Ilil}~ ?}~ 71ag~ ~ $ ~~ r l r11 r I I;' . y 5 a ~~~aaa r+Ie aarf ill ~lyl:ti 51r :8 z~S' ~~ '~'` 515 11111 {teY1 1 1 1 1115751 ~i~ ~Y~y ~~ ~' w~ Q r r~111111111d 14 '~ ~ ~ ,~ ~` N ~ca Ill li;i~iII II }S llil ~~ ~~! ~ - ~PI~} 1a~~ y~ <ai 1111 II' I 11141 k-'a 7'3'~~ .~ c '~Jd/ .T~ To rr I ° II I''f I I Y III 1111! f11 ~~ ~g~i aP t~ PM =f ~ I1 1 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ f 1 -,i "II1~fl ° 5 ~YYSi t 7'7 14 11 1 41 1V t 1 ~ a~ y~~ i ~~ T~ 3 # gl~ GG a ~ }y \ \`~MS}ii}1111111 11111 }i 111 ~ ~~ 3 ~i xns' 5~ 3 }OqS 7` o ~}11 t11'}}}17511111 ~ -y ~~.~~ ~~ ~~ #~ .,~ -.~ Oi ,} 11t,11i1 , ,,, ,~ °11.5} 1 1 1 11 1 l l 1 4} 771 111}1 1 1 1 11, \`\15511}}111 }1 j111u lit\t 1115\1}1111111',111 1.}11}11\\'. rt11711 }11 }~' ~1 7 1'.1511 111. I.•1 }1'41 ,.5•' ~yy 5i }71411111 ~V111171}}1}} ~,3 I ~¢A 1114111111x11111 ~ ~~ } NL. ~ t~~.l I 1 1 t} 171 `' I 6g1~ h g9 u1 1} 115171 J 1.18 114~i 1t . y} 7 11 } l 1111111 t1 qy I i 1'. i' 1 ,."r1 ~C9}14 r~ 1'.11. 1711}1111, Q.~ .19 I~'iA1tl}'t, 11 j1 I } ~~ V i', l 1 1 l 5 1 l I 1 7 (CQ M-,1 1} 1 1 } 1 n " il, ~ i}\ t l Y 5 1 I S 1 1 J m Q ~'.,3~'}5~ . , ; \1~ Y X1111 17 1 11}I I A 1rW~ \ 111 I J ~F~ S~ ~ b ~ 75 •5 5}l III 1 ~ 1 11 i l m 177 1711111 II l ~A"Ai :57 4,1}111h1 ~~yy,51151 h1 1 1{~I 5515 4 ~~ 1}1} i'}15 1e 11 1l l1 I ~~ It 11 t 'I I 4 ~' S~ ~rylli yl7 1115}511551}15}17 4. 1 1 l5 ~~ 1 Y11111~11111~1 I ~ 1 ~ II j1V~y 1•, ~1~ 1 -,I.,11111111 ~~Ilili ljt 5111}II SI1111111 1 411 } I~'_ '~fRll 114}l11 ~1 ll l1 ICY I f1'. 1.I}It v~1111°r ~I 1} 51~'l`~11 A"1~k 7 ~1ll~li ll}1~}11111~~11.i{41111 ~ N wo wo = U N tiVSdi9 u o~o}w g //~~II ~L LYIIi- if >wt I ~. !: =( ~.lil ~a %d?Q I 8 1~Y.e ~~ 8 ,~ a; .~ ,.... , _ ~ soaa ~Vi ~Nf~J]sNfJN] .,~ p, :_ *` SN`d7d SSHd.lB J.t~ON ~N ;•~... ~^ id~ JWtrdYVCYJ 1AI~Y'1d0~ +~ S ' ~' iy ' S~~°~ I~ ~~~3 y p i h ~~~/ _~~ 3' .~~'~ ~r ~ ~a I I I a , ~e a}~ ~ ~ i ~_ ~ _ ~ I ~ I I I Asa f ~'~~ [il J - - 4 ~~ ~ - , L~ ~ 6~ ~~ :, ~~ ~ a ~ Fps";~ ` J ~w Qua ~ ` ~~ ~ a N JU ~ ~~f ~~ ~ I ~ J 1 e ~ ~~ r,: , i fig U a> I ~ ~k f`~ .. x I ~ i, P+ i ~ ~ a~ ~~r,ti - _. }---~~~ i s `~ < t ~ ~~ <~ --~- a --- 8 ~ -F- ~- '4~•~ i ~ ~~ ~ Y _J Q ~~a ,~ ~~~ ~~~- Q {J VI f1 J~ ~y J z~ _~ Qh Hya~ b? ~ x H Q i ~~ I ~ 9~ ~ II~Ij~ ~ ~ i ~evr x v~~r n ~l.V W ~ I .~N.,can ;..c .O NS Q`dO~f 1S3~{O.d "'" "` °~°"O w°o %L~~ ~..b~ OVA ar ~rw ~ U s ~.,~ t n L ~~a ~ ~ ~Zs ail 5ta' 'Ii.j~ ~ ~ ~ a ''Y ~'6.1. y l a [] N ~J ~~ T ~~ ffg~R z ~ !~ ~ ~~$~ w§ ,r« .~~ . ~T ~~ as ~? Yaa" J pia (f/( Ry ~ a. ~~ ~~ ~ ~ y~~ ~~ u ~ ~~~ ~~ ~5. iii _ ~ ~~_ g"g a '~ c~§ 8# - t- / ref R" ~' "c / x ~~ ~$ ~ ' g .. ., y~y Ed x ~= W G.~ J n~ "s U W ia6 ~ y 7 R ~ yy ~ ~ e ~ . ~ ! ~ ~ ~ ${ E~9 f ~ai ~ ~ ~ t , ~ ~ , ' L ~~ ~ I '~ ~ ~~ ~, ~ ~ ~~f yy ~... ! ~ ~Y~ Q R r ~ i Ry Q ~ ~~ 8 ~~~~~ ~ o~~~ ~ f~ ~~ k _.:,;,~J /' Y ~~ / t~ ~: ;.~ y YAK . x i ~~ • ,. I Ei ~. Y Nf ]NI~33NiJN3 5 '~. 3'at _ i '4 ~ 3NId1`i~ l I ~``l , 1 I ~~J I ~\ `. ` ~ i }~ s ~i~`` ~~ !~ S9 0 #:S ~~ ~ 3. d~ w i] if f~ ~s; ~~ Y' ><pa 3si t { ~ .• y ~ i gi a F°.7 F9 yk ~ ~ ~? j~ f`i~z ~ ~P~r }S ! ft~ ~;i ~r L 3~~ 2 S~; F1; 3s, tE ~~~ i?~ si• ~~ ~~P ~! f, pi y' ~ aj 3~9 ~~ ~ e eF pLp i 3~~ ~C lqA it a, ipY~~ is ~~ :~ ~s~ ~, ~. C- 8 a~ ~~ ~~3 1~ a~= ~~ ~ E'~ S~ ~ s 4;~ ff3 f~ 1~ ~J~ ~{ ~3 its y~ ~ g R! ~ L a i ~i N~ f l~s; ~j` ~ i~~ ## ~ a ~~~ ~~ ~ =i ~~° ~ ~f€ %Z F 3~ ~x0 ~QU j ~~~~ 5 1~ li 1l 41 55 soot .~vw IVY"Id ~OLLLNOd 1N3YV103S/NOISOb3 SNd~d SS'dd.l8 1yddMON5 CI'd02i t5~2i0~ I,NWdNIOd 1N3W~0~3A3Q S.L2iOS321 ~IV/i 1`1 11 51 5 yd~-i IYI4'111It t {l\1 \ 1'~ ~ Yi 1411 4111 1~,,,t 4 5 1 ~. 4 5.. ,, 1 V Y I Flt 1 4 1j41,it5t1 y`.z}.~ay,i 1114 It`lt-Y iCa.p~ 1 ~Yt ll11y4 t +i~~.Q r i rrrl i 1.- i .'4 Ff A 1 1 i 3CS ~ r r, I }ly .',. ~o a 1 111 ya 'r "a8~`'.li ,t~Y it" y~~l '~. R 1 5 1 45 ~~~4 ~~,~A 1 .~( 7 A l 1~ 'IY151, F 1:,. 5,' Y ~~, t ~',. T 5'. 4- 'Y145 '. e ~- t ~ ~ 1 \ t 5 i I~ 4 ~ 'h •r\ ~~ l y y I: 1 1 } ~ ~ y~ 4y _ 15 I I I ,5 it t "Y i +`'14{~a 1 t YtF:;. ~ tt5 tl} tl 41 t~` ~~l~ 1 11-`~~~ Y f 1~1 V1. 1'- tl }r 171 tt¢ 11 ~ l ~ y 5 1l l r t' '. t i l 1 1 \~ ,} l 4 5 „'Yi i ~1 4 1 ~ ul ~I Y t 1~,. 511 t i '., r .1 i} ~' t~ ~~r1\4 ~ yltl t51 ~~.101+. e! -~1~e~7{ tllli~l Vim }-11•~ I Icy 1.11. cif ~Y 54i 11 yll )]. I~.° ,I 111 ~~ 1 I -1 P ~y f 1'. I ~tl Q.y i 1 ~ 1 61 ~ 1. 11 C 1 n a ~{. 1 I y1 • I t' ' 11 ` 4t ,!:5 JS.? 111 1 1`.I'+111 y, y i ,y+ 1 '~ ~t 11 I L~ I 1 1 ! I i ~ y Fl~ 1 i;.l A 1 '~1'1 I FA II 19 1 1 ~V5 tllt t{"4 ~ ~'~ '1 ~ 1 111 1y~~ Ill It yll 11111 1 1 I t ~' 1 1 4 1 5 i l k 1 1 Il.l+.' Y 51 5 r71 1L . t '+I I,`r''11 s ' tl +°t' tYy~ 1~ I -. Y 1 1 I t l li t' Iti.IR111~r'~S.II;t~1~}'•C.`~,'I Y11f '3~11117111'•l~,lti5ll jt~y51 51j 111 411 YI *,, +~.I 4'_11 ;Y1 5111 ;1i S14111 •.p'd . I111111T1. ~, I~i\. ', :4l tl li tl lll~~'~li -.~I'.II 111, .rv~ !.~ .5 11 t 1I II t1 1' 1 1 1 I I I I~ J` V 1 1 y 1+ I I V 5 ~ ,. ihl dll II\ fr{ 1'•!. Yll li lli 11 li Y11 11 1111 t x i~ 1~ 1 I I p', ' 1 11 I 6 i \ . r Cp I+11 1} 1~ 1y ; t J 111~j1 5-~- 7' ~yy Cy} I t,' 1 I t y ~ 1 } ~11! 1! ~I 4 I~NG-~C r.I1fG 111 i 1 i - JAI ~~ 1r~. I Y i ~_ ~'l ~~ ~ + ,. L1 r' l y I y~ i nk +J e F" ! I, y 1 1 ~ uQ ., o u?r » d~ oaaast: as rutrxa H ~ ~ O ~ U s+«rgln3a, slro ~ ~mr ~ ~ ~N nnrlsia is ~ _ z b ~ H a { ~ oki~ d~~ ~~ ~a Paz ~ ~ ~ ~ F ~ LL a~ ~~~ alp ~M ~~~ wx~ ~sg :a® a ~~; 7~ 3Fy s ; yl Tee g - ~ p ~rOiT~ 3z~ s t, ~#8 ~~~ ~~ ~ o ~g g '~~~~ ~~~ ~ ~ ~' ~ ~ u''~ ~~N~ ~ ~ ~ ne ~~ ~~~ ~~w ~ ~ did a~~~ ~ ~ X86" a "o ws el's n4iY7 .Sl..z .~c.v nN M1~ is du7.- - ~ .~ I I O I II ! ~oN w ~n~ Y ~4y I a~0 ~~ ~ ]- .. 1 z I 5 I] t\: 1 51'1 \555 1}}! 1 5151' I .~11' }'S~',l trlr \\'. 11Y1 1 ' l1.1V1}} 1 J11 111411 _ ~ ~` ,\, ~ 1711111 t1 !!y ~'1~1 ~.~ 1111111`,1 -~I.i} ~141.1..t~11,5~ r.. ~1i1. .~. ~ 1 ~1 ~ f t`` j r r I l i r 1 1 `~. ~ ~ '4' ' .55'4'-~ Y~ i} l r r l d 11 r' I l f i 11 111,; GI~'`I 51~ ~* ~ ~ rvZ. 1 1 i h l r i // J/ r 111 1 4r 1 ,.5 } a8 ~ @~ E ~ ~ I ti M! I % r,li //r FI11 IAA yy 1.1 y5 tl ii ~f ~ Yffi~ ~'a ,III I L•L ~"I~ ! ;!i /,re rr r`r r! r! If i, ~:. ry1 I-1f{, ~,',Itlll II e} ~ 1 T 1 1 1 ~ r /.E I r 1r i ijrl r f L~1 I I 114, 11}L 1111 ~~ ~~ ~~ ~~ ° i i 1 i'! Mi r ly .r i rr rr'Frrr rl? ~ 1k~F, 1 flrrl ~ j n i~° " 1!! III i t l l i P' r 1 l r1(l y 1i +i L I 11 ~ I ~~ ~~ ~p ~ryy Na +5111\itlly5511155t14f15515i tll lrlrjrl ~~l~A11~1 l,rF~~~~' ills+~' ~'_ ~. °i" ~9 Iy~•S '~55 511{ll yLIIJ I~r T,~ l L, 1i~1 $ °~4 ry 8. \11`•.5\5\ '111111 I III +l '~i 1'11 Zj ~ .~ X3 1.u 5.l"v~ \ 4x11 t1'~11f X1111 1u~s ,~ II ~J' {~ ~j^ y y\1,11 IL rII + li i"Yf 11 k'S~ ~'~ •`~ ~~ $G Y1 ~11~11111 j11141~8}Jll ff'16I ~1 1 d~ ~•i ~I 4~ Ls 4 ° }, 15 *4 gjll irlllilY1Y 1I4~+j 11 C1 1~'~ I S~ ~ ~ ~$y \ e tt 11 II X1'1111 1 ~ 'n'I1 1 n~ "~ w \kll t11c111 tll tl! ~ 14T1~"11 ~Y 71 yi 'g ~,P '3 .i 11 t111f~iy- 1;yltlt4~ 1,1 4 f rV.ll I ~ 1 5i\ t ~i 1 5A5 55 Yy 1 11 ~~ i ~ yY 5.1} 511#i51 54 1 15 L f jr i ~'r4 111 l1 ~~~{ ll\5151' S1 4,~ p C F 5 R ~ i ~ 111 1 54111 155 1 j5 511511j 11 4t1i 1 4~V1 4' ~ Y} ~{((~ 7g ~~:~G 1515y 1y"Ihi y4 ll ttt11111}1111 5llr 'rj 'I1tt~1 ~,' z~ i3 ~~~ ,76~$ iitt1i;111y 11r t1 ll1 1} yti g5 5111111° ~ 41i1 ~~~ u S ~33; '~ye -5~'Y}1\j 5}tt 5ii~t 1515x1 ii~~1 ter 1 ~ B • Y ~ k~ Q~Q R 55 511A5 1~T 1jY11111Y1 YyV it .$ ~x5 $ m 5`i 1Y 1111111 i, ~`4' 'c iS'$ _K i~ Y t 4 1. 5. 5 5 X1:3 3 ~ '1 °r y u( i1 i~99~~. ~ 6/71 .- I 55,1 4 Y e 9.~ rl l l , yi C g 3L~q :as p ~ 5~,111~ tti4 S 3 ~ 3 AE,g-~ 1 ~1 ~, 4 58~'l ~~G ~Y~°.~y sz e;sng 3'~ E a Y 3 ~~ ie_i ~. ~iaJ # Sri Ld '. tl r ~: ~ _„ 4 ~~ has - =~ a ~ z ~~~ ~~a ~~~ ~ ~ ~+a i~ . 3~ 14~E g ~ jyj ' m I {1' S YL r 1. I 1 t I ! 5 'til t X515 1 14 ,, IS ~. 11 ~li I l 1, 1 1y 15 1\ 1 4 411 y 1 S 41 •1 It 55 1 5y 1111~i 1''11 1, 4 1 l l l 1 ~1I1 11 t l 1 I I;~~ 111111 11 1 1. I 1 11j I Y 1 1 1 1 iy 1 1 ~ 1 ~~, }y 1 ill ° 4Y Il ' I iV4~11111i~5111111 iy 14 1 t ~,/~~/y` k" ` fi r tl ~ ~ jY {}j`~ 1111' r ~~~ `+~~~ 4.,,1~;~1 '7 I III r IIl~l1 ,~ li`ht~/Er ~~~)I I ~ If lv~'~~~a ,~ ~ri; ~~~ :': ~.,. ~~ l l :r ~ 4414 5 ~`. _ 1~ 1 `I i~i~ ti. "tq .1111114`,``` s ~` ~ 4 ,~ `r*. 2~t.1~n 51141 '~l'-y_~~ ~~•s~~ , *. ~ .55.441` ,l 1 ~ ~ 11'11 {~ t1. 11\~1\'1~4~i551555~tiy i4`-_^ II Y 1411\1114 i ,'~\511 ,t y5 `°T-d, 1 4~ltillt 5l}54`1`.___,1 p I;~_ i~ ~ ~'~lt 41`1,111 T'~ I ~S -~~~~.{~ 1 111 1 ~ ~ 1 ~~ ~s rr lr 1 ----~- I f f r _ _ _ 151+ i t 1~1\1\\ 44 ~__L 1T .511y1F1 S r ~,.~ ~¢0 9 ~?. E J~o ~~ ~J.I ~ __ i - }_ _ ~ _r Idf.7~ - ~ ":" r f ~ ~ a 'r 1 • • • ., __ S.~VdJ,® 1`d~MONS ~k/OL3 .L53k~0~ =-~ .._-.. 'y [1 i i- ° ~~\ ~~ L ~, \ + e ,. ~ `~ ,: fir, 1 , vC 1, i4' f~~ ~ .~`~. 1 4 { ` ` ` ~ k~\~v 4~ 1 ~ `. ) 111 AI _ _ • \ . t~' .I 4 ~n r ! ~ ~* , ; 'h . f I 1 r 1 f 4f ~ +~~1 14 J/) { t '.~}r ~.5p ~ ~..` ;~ _ I ~ I f 1' ~ti'T 1 r '^~N I 1~ Y' AILyv `n 5,. ,JnL.~y - 1 ~ ~~ \, ~V ; j' I rl f "~ p ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ f I ~h' ~ HIV" fit. µr Y ~ - `~ I I ) I ~~..I `y~~ f I V I il; f ~.. ~..- ~~I~~ 4~ _ I ~~4r.~ ~ r' _ ~ ,~L ~~_ ~- _.'1~1y' ^ ~f I ~ ' _~~ ~ ~ i V ~ -~"~ ~ III' ~ Ijl ly: l ~' ~ `~;~ , + I if ~~ ! t na 111` i f I ~~ C ~ I ,,, . ~~l I rte.=..-' ~ r ` ~ ' ' ~ 't~ ~1 ~~ ~ ~~1 i i'~, :., ''`~ ` ' ' `~ ~~ J. ~ ,~ .I II ~ h `` `,, `-4 , ~, I"i^?t ~ ! ~ I{ ,,('i ~ pt 1 I~1~11 V t y , >' I ~ ` + ~{ I~ .+ 2' 1 I I S I1 11I II ,Sl+~{~14~~ I \ fill I , _.{' 1 `i ~ l fL ,~I 'C t ., .\ `t' I ~, I1,1 ~~ ~ ftf ~ I ' i~~ w I ~' ~1--~ n.1.t~" `It ~yp_YIM+ ~ ` ;v ~ t .tii, - 1., ~ J f 1 ~ f w r~r ,I , I~~ 4 ~ ~I I V \V \ ~I~iVI ,II I ~. r ~r~ Ilfl ~'j '1111 ,~~5 I l t t~V t 1 _ ~I ~ ~ '~ r S}{` 11 tY r V ~, ,~ ' + + fl ~ I }tll ~Y ,,~ '~ ' , ~ V +~t ~~~~~71 ,~ } +~"~,1 ~ ,v v ~y,~1 + ~ i~ 111 ~Y ~I F i"•. ~ '~)f~ ~\ v~ \ +, r 1, , . ~ ~y °m I ~ a~ ; 'r f; ~k (rr~ V_ V ,It 111{51 ,~ '+ ~ V + - .+'~ ~ ~ Vu) .n1. .5t ~V ui.` 3 t ~ N 4 ~ .{yl ~ 'y 1 Y z ~ VV `'.., ,1 ~~ II ` V V 45 V'. ~y U ''' ~ ~. - h..Y. I 1 '. V V [~ 4) 45 11 W Y ~k fl '. J ) J \ \ k` 1 . 4 ! ~ ~~ Er` ~ ~ (] i. u +3 ~.i~ 1 ~.. ~~ (L1 ,. BFI , ~ ;i ~ .G I { u lii IL il. 1- LL ~.'~ ~ a . ~1 4 LL - Y^ ~ i ``.. irk ~ v; X +, lr~`r ~ .. ~~ . . ...'till ~ ~ ` . - ~ ~ ~` i ~, ~ :: . ~ . .. 1 `;, ` ; ~. z j I `' ~ + I~ Attachment D • ~~ .~ TOWN DF YAIL ~ THIS ITEM MAY AFFECT YOUR PRQPERTY PUBLIC NaTICE NOTICE !S HEREBY GIVEN that the Planning and Environmental Commission of the Town of Vail will hold a public hearing in accordance with section 12-3-~, Vail Town Code, an June 13, 2005, at 2:00 prn in the Town of Vail Municipal Building, in consideration of: A request for a final review of a variance from Section 12-6D-6, Setbacks, Vail Town Cade, pursuant to Chapter 12-17, Variances, Vail Town Code, to allow far the construction of a garage addition within the front setback, located at 2608 Arasa DrivelLot 2, Block D, Vail Ridge Subdivision, and setting forth details in regard thereto. Applicant: Brenda and Steve Herman, represented by Mauriello Planning Group, LLC Planner. Warren Campbell A reguest for a final review of a text amendment to Section 12-7A-7, Height, Vail Town Code, pursuant to Chapter 12-3, Amendments, to increase the height limitation for a sloping roof from 4$' to 56' in the Public Accommodation zone district, and setting forth details in regard thereto. Applicant: Mauriello Planning Group, LLC Planner: George Ruttier A request for a final review of a variance from Chapter 14-6, Grading Standards, Vail Town Code, pursuant to, Chapter 12-17, Variances, Vail Tawn Code, to allow for a retaining wall in excess of 3 feet in height located in the front setback, located at 1837 Alpine DrivelLot 49, Vail Village West Filing 1, and sei#ing forth details in regard thereto. Applicant: Seven Vails, Inc., represented by David FI'rnn Rlanner: Elisabeth Eckel A request for a final. review of a .variance from Section 12-6G-7, Height, Vain Tawn Code, pursuant to Chapter 12-17, Variances, Vail Town Code, to allow for a sloping roof which exceeds 38' in height, located at 1040 Vail View DrivelLot B2, Lions Ridge Filing 1, and setting forth details in regard thereto. Applicant: Snow Lion Condominium Association Planner: Matt Gennett A request for final review of a variance from Chapter 14-fi, Grading Standards, Vail Town Cade, pursuant to Chapter 12-17, Variances, Vail Town Code, to allow for ~'0f `~~o~ retaining walls in excess of six (fi}feet in height, located at Tract k, Glen Lyon ,~~~-4e ~,. Subdivision and Unplatted Parcels, a mare complete metes and bounds description is ~~t,C, available at the Community Development Department and setting forth details in regard ~" thereto, Applicant: Vail Resorts, represented by Braun Associates, lnc. Planner: Bill Gibson C A request for final review of a text amendment to Section 12-7F-I-12, Density ~C]weliing Units Per Acre}, Vail Tawn Cade, pursuant to Chapter 12-3, Amendments, Vail Town Cade, to allow multiple attached accommodation units within a dwelling unit, and setting fiorth details in regard thereto. Applicant: Vai! Resorts, represented by Braun Associates, Inc. Planner: George Rather A request far final review of a major exterior alteration, pursuant to Section 12-7H-7, Vai! Town Code, to allow far the construction of a temporary skier ticketing office and loading and delivery facilities, Vail Town Cade, located at Tracts C and D, Lianshead Filing 1, and Tracts G and H, Lionshead 'Piling 3, and setting forth details in regard thereto. Applicant: Vail Resorts, represented by Braun Associates, Inc. Planner: George Rather A request far a final review of a minor amendment to Special Development Qistr'rct No. 38, Manor Vail Lodge, pursuant to Section 12-9A-14, Amendments, Vaif Town Cade, to allow far the relocation of an elevator from the front to the rear of a tauilding, and setting Earth details in regard thereto. Applicant; Manor Vail Lodge, represented by Bob McCleary Planner. Warren Campbell A request far a final review of an amended final plat, pursuant to Chapter 13-12, Exemption Plat Review Procedures, Vail Town Cade, to allow for an amendment to an existing platted building envelope and an increase of plat-restricted site coverage, located at 971 Spraddle Creek RoadlLat S, Spraddle Creek Subdivision, and setting Earth details %n regard thereto. Applicant: Franca D'Agostina, represented by ~ehren i~ Associates Planner: lutatt Gennett The applications and information about the proposals are available for public inspection during office hours at the Town of Vail Community Development Department, 75 South Frontage Road. The public is invited to attend project orientation and the site visits that precede the public hearing in the Town of Vail Community Development Department. Please call 97'0-479-2138 for additional_ information. Sign language interpretation is available upon request, with 24-hour notification. Please call 970-479-2356, Telephone for the Hearing Impaired, for information. Published May 27, 2{}fl5, in the Vai[ Daily. • • J:.C f %' i~,~ P` =~' } ~~., 1~:~ ~,_ ~ ~ ., +~ k, . a^ Attachment G 4~ ~ ~S4~wL ---~e E i i r Ar .,. r ~~ aAf ~J CHAP I ~kC 5 DETAILED PLAN RECOIvIIVIENDATI~ONS CHAPTER 5 Detailed Plan Recommendations This section of the Lionshead Master plan examines individual parcels and groups of parcels within the Lionshead study area, excluding the residential properties on the south side of Gore Creek. The intent of this chapter -and the Master plan as a whole - is to identify important functional relationships and visual objectives within the district and io propose a frareork far the long-term redevelopment of Lionshead. The document does not intend to limit or eliminate ideas relating to specific parcels; any proposals consistent with this framework should be considered even if they are not anticipated in this document. The parcels addressed here are organised generally from east to west, starting with the civic hub on the eastern end of the parking structure. 5.1 Vail Civic Center • The proposed Vail civic center coinpleX is Cornprised of the Vail public library, Dobson Ice Arena, and the existing charter bus parking lot at the eastern end of the Lionshead public parking structure (see figure S-1 }. At this time, municipal priorities for the development program on this site are uncertain, but potential alternatives are described below. 5.1.1 History of Vail Civic Center The Vail Civic Center site was acquired. in the mid 1974's by the Town of Vail, after the Town Council rejected a proposal to build a civic center at Ford Park. It was deterinined that a civic center required a location adjacent to a major parking structure with walking distance of both the Vail Village and Lionshead. Since the acquisition of the property there have been several proposals considered and rejected for the site. There have been three attempts to build a convention center on the charter bus lot site, one including a performing arts center. All three proposals were rejected by the electorate. To date, no proposal has rnet the grand vision for the completion of the Vail Civic Center. 5.1.2 Potential Development Scenarios Uses suggested during the master planning process include a performing arts center, a conference facility, a community recreation and service center (potentially including the town government offices}, a second ice rink connected to Dobson Arena, and ahigh-tech Convention center. Community participants expressed a strong preference for a locally relevant development serving the local community as well as destination visitors. ~~Vith a potential of 50,044 square feet per floor, this site could accommodate a variety of uses, provided they are well designed and integrated. It will be the responsibility of the Town of Vail Council to decide upon the development program for use of the Civic center site. L1C)NSHEAD R1=:DEVELOPMENT MASTER PLAN PAGE S-1 :7 CHAPTER S DETAILED PLAN REGOMMENDATIDNS . ~ R., r r i. r~ (~ i ~" - ~' #.• ~a a' VAIL PiI£3LTC I..IDRARY ~- DOB50N ICE AEtE?~'A * ~: r r ti, ~ { W ~ F ~~3. P __ .. k. A ~ r 4r ,r, ~ - PC}'1~"I J:A~. DE~'E>:<UPME'nTT DN SDL'TH EAG£ DE STRUCTURE ~~1.,'~ r `~'~ ~i 1r- ..`~ ~... .t"'"" PAGES-2 LIONSI-IEAD REDEVELOPMENT MAS"I'ER PLAN • "~ ~;.~" ~,. i ~~': '~ ''~`~ , ,.; .~ ~,F;; . ~:~ .z . ;.~ g. t r '+ .~ .: ~ ' ~ 4* .,t~~ `,~` ~• ,~ -f:, i :. y ~ q ., .......,..,~ ~:~;n E .~ • • ;ry,~ .~ . 'i ~~ ~~~ .:. :' CT~APTER 5 DETAILED PLAN RECOMMENDATIONS ... CHAPTER 5 Detailed Plan Recommendations This section of the Lionshead Master plan examines individual parcels and groups of parcels within the Lionshead study area, excluding the residential properties on the south side of Gore Creek. The intent of this chapter -and the Master plan as a whole - is to identify important functional relationships and visual objectives within the district and to propose a framework for the long-term redevelopment of Lionslead. Tl~e document does not intend to limit or eliminate ideas relating to specific parcels;. any proposals consistent with this framework should be considered even if they are not anticipated in this document. The parcels addressed here are organized generally from east to west, starting with the civic hub on the eastern end of the parking structure, 5.1 Vail Civic Center The proposed Vail civic center complex is comprised of the Vail public library, Dobson Ice Arena, and the existing charter bus parking lot at the eastern end of the Lionshead public parking structure (see figure 5-1}, At this time, municipal priorities for the development program on this site are uncertain, but potential alternatives are described below. 5.1.1. History of Vail Civic Center The Vail Civic Center site was acquired in the mid 197D's by the Town of Vail, after the Town. Council rejected a proposal to build a civic center at Fard Park. It vas determined that a civic center required a location adjacent to a major parking structure with walking distance of both the Vail Village and Lionshead. Since the acquisition of the property there have been several proposals considered and rejected for the site. There have been three attempts to build a convention center on the charter bus lot site, one including a performing arts center. All three proposals were rejected by the electorate. To date, na proposal has met the grand vision for the completion of the Vail Civic Center. S.i.l Potential Development Scenarios Uses suggested during the master planning process include a performing arts center, a conference facility, a community recreation and service center {potentially including the town government offices}, a second ice rink connected to Dobson Arena, and ahigh-tech convention center. Community participants expressed a strong preference for a locally relevant development sere°ing the local community as well as destination visitors. With a potential of ~O,a00 square feet per floor, this site could accommodate a variety of uses, provided they are well designed and integrated. It will be the responsibility of the Tawn of Vail Council to decide upon the development program far use of the civic center site. • LIOiti5HE.4D R.EDEti'ELOPMENT NIASTEIZ PLAN PAGE 5-1 CI-IAPTER S DETAILED PLAN RECOMMENDATI©NS L'.g.LL PU~3LIC I:i~.RARY r-- DCIBSO+I ICE ARENA / PC3TENTIAL DEVELOPMENT #( ON 50L'TH FACE QF STRUCTL Y'~ L. a ~<: ~. ''~~ .fix. .. 1~ ~° ~ is ~,~ ~ „~~_ ~ .. a y'd F -;a _.~ .. ..`r .^. .. _. ~, *, ,,,.~ 1,,~ ~ , .. a _ , , „~- ~, ~+•"~, "~ t_ ,_* ~~. .,. ~ ~.: ~. ~ «,~, ~ ,.-.~ 3,~.• .~ ~ ~ .~.. ,~~~~.~ ~, ~~ ~~~ . _ _f. ~ ~ , ~-•~ I~ LIOhTSHEAD P.A,ItKtI'dG I ~'~ ~ `r~~'- ~ L~ l~ ,,,,.,~ _ ~ _ ..._~ ~_ ...4 ~, , . ,' ~, ~-' P£]T~°I'I~L CIVIC CEI~I 1 Glc CC?hdPC}NENT CiDIv'NECTIC]N F3ET'13~'EEN DflI3i(?N ICE. ARE1tiiA AI~`D f'C}`I'Ehrl`It'~L C:IVTC CIrNTER CO~iPC3i?~r3' VAII. IIV - rttNAT~C)NAL ,EAST LIONaI3EAD PI~DESTRiAN POR?'AI. ~'i~zcre S-1 - Vail Civic C.entet and East I.ionshen~ P,a~c~ES-2 LIUNSHEAD REDEVE~,OPMENT IVIASTER PLAN • •i •i CHAPTERS DETAILED PLAN RECOIvtIvLENDAT101~15 5.1.3 Functional Relationships The general goal for this site is to create a single, cohesive civic center from three disparate component`s (the Library, the arena and the bus parking lot), using coordinated architectural character and linked public spaces. The new concentration of civic uses can help to connect Lionshead and Vail Village and will become the eastern anchor of Lionshead, connected to the Lionshead pedestrian core by the parking structure and the redeveloped East Lionshead Circle, Specific planning considerations are as follows: 5.1.3.1 Access It wi11 be important that the civic facilities complex be connected to all #hree circulation networks in Lionshead: vehicular, pedestrian, and public transit. a. Y'ehicular Acces~~ and Parking The Lionshead parking structure will be the primary means of vehicular access to this facility for those arriving by car. Adrop-off point could also be developed on the frontage road side of the facility (see figure 5-2), but space is constrained here and better limited to special access needs. The southeast corner of the parking structure should be converted into adrop-off and arrival point for people walking to and from their cars. This will be the front door for the majority of people accessing the complex and should be designed to provide convenient vertical access to the interior of the facility and the pedestrian plaza on its southern face. The new facility and Dobson Ice Arena should be connected architecturally, allowing visitors who arrive via the parking structure to have. a safe, enclosed connection to Dobson see figure S-3). This is particularly critical for parents of children attending events at the arena. Although it is possible to create a vehicular drop-off point at the western end of Dobson arena, this is not recotnnaended because it will conflict with service and transit traffic on least Lionshead Circle. If this drop-off is required, it should provide access oriiy for targeted uses. b. Pedestrian Access The primary point of pedestrian access to the new civic center complex should be on the south side,. at the terminus of East Lionshead CircIc. Because pedestrians walking from Vail Village and Lionshead will converge at this point, the facility needs a well designed, highly visible front entry with ample plaza space accessing both the new civic facility and Dobson Ice Arena (see figure S-3). This pedestrian plaza design should pursue incorporating the grade transition do«Tn to the Vail Public Library, creating a cohesive pedestrian plaza linking all I.IC)NSHEAD REDEVEI.aI'h'~NT MASTER PLAN PAGE 5-3 ~ _~;. AIL e~ ~E~~~ • • PAGE 5-4 . . CHAPTER S DE7'AILE~ PLAN RECOMMENDATIONS VAIL Ih ~txlv`A'I'IONAL r-- GRADE TRANSIT~(~N \ (-a,.ty: l.ql L 1.i~Ll.l.\a'l S JV 1 \!lL Flt.~4. iw Vwi SERVIOP. /~?~] I?ELI4rERY BAY ' PC)'I'LNTL";I., PRC}'v"T' DF2©~'-C3FF Fire S-2 -Cfvfc Center vnd i'm`f lnternaiianaf ~crtss 7.IONSIIEAL) REL~E4'ELOPMENT MASTER ALAN • Cl-IAPTER 5 I7ETAILEl7 PLAN R.EC03ViMENDATIC]NS elements of the Vail Civic Center com lex the civic center, Dobson, P ( library, and the parking structure}. A secondary access point should be created on the north side of the new structure, allowing pedestrian access to and through the site from the Vail International condominiums and the pedestrian walkway on the north side of Dabsan Ice Arena (see figure 5-3}. c. Transit Cannectiorrs Currently, the in-town shuttle stop is between Dobson Ice Arena and the Vail public library far both east- and westbound buses. A transit stop is also needed adjacent to the new main pedestrian entry on the west end of Dobson (see figure 5-3}, allowing transit riders to access bath Dobson and the proposed civic center complex from this point. This will allow greater flexibility in the transit system and reduce the potential for conflict between pedestrians, service vehicles and transit vehicles on the south side of Dobson.. cl. Fmergency Access A new emergency vehicle route (see figure S-4} will be needed if the extension of );ast Lionshead Circle into the Vail ]nternational condominiums is closed. It is proposed that this route wrap around the southeast confer of the civic complex to the north lido of Dobson Ice Arena (requiring a structural upgrade to the existing walkway). This access route must be designed so that it is not blocked by delivery vehicle traffic on the eastern end of the arena. e. Y'ehicle Access to Vail International If the East Lionshead Circle extension is closed, a new access point from South Frontage Road will be required (delineated in figure 5-2). f. Service and Delivery Two sert7ice and delivery points are proposed far the proposed civic center complex. The first is located on the southeastern end of Dobson Ice Arena. The second will serve the new civic facility from South Frontage Road (see figure S-2). It is strongly recommended that no delivery paints be constructed that would introduce regular service and delivery traffic onto East Lionshead Circle or West Meadow Drive. Service and delivery traffic that will not he able to access the site from the South Frontage Road should be distributed equally across East Lionshead Circle and West Meada~v Drive. 5.1.3.2 Relatiionship to East Lionshead Circle The proposed new civic center complex should function as the eastern visual terminus to East Lionshead Circle, The arclYitecture connecting LI©NSHLAp REt~EVELOPMEP~iT M.ASTEFL PLAN PAGE 5-S CHAPTER S DETAILED PLAN RECOMMENDATIONS Dobson ice Arena to the civic center should be integrated into the potential development on the south face of the parking structure (see section 5.2). The East Lianshead Circle pedestrian environment should have a strong connection to the pedestrian plaza in front of the civic center complex. 5.1.3.3 Relationship to Dobson Ice Arena Perhaps the most critical functional relationship is the connection of the proposed new structure to Dobson Ice Arena (see figure 5-3). Currently, the main pedestrian entry to Dobson is the doorway on its south face, where there are often conflicts with delivery vehicles and the transit buses during times of peak activity. A common entry point on the western end of Dobson can become the new front door to the arena, thus reducing the potential for conflicts on the south side. It can also be designed to provide common lobby, ticketing, and concession space for both structures. There is an opportunity to make abelow-grade connection from the common entry to the ice Ievel in Dobson. This could make possible a second sheet of ice or large recreation space in the lowest level of the new civic center structure. This would, however, require large structural spans and would be very costly. 5.2 South Face of the Lianshead Parking Structure The linear strip of land an the south face of the Lianshead parking structure (see figure 5- 1) should be considered far the development of retail and offce space an the ground level and housing far locals on the upper levels (see figure 6-6}, The planning objectives of this potential development are threefold. First, it would energize and visually upgrade East Lianshead Circle by enhancing pedestrian activity on the street. Seeand, it creates the potential for a locally accessible retail enviranrnent. The Town of Vail should consider retaining ownership of the ground level retail/office space and making it available to local entrepreneurs and businesses, much in the same way that deed restricted locals housing is provided. in the Vail Commons. Finally, this site presents an opportunity to locate locals/ employee housing conveniently adjacent to the Lianshead pedestrian core. PAGES-6 LiOI~SHEAD REDEVET~OPMENT IWIASTER PLAN CHAPTER J LETAll,ED PLAN RECOIVIIVIENDATIONS . .. . PEDESTRIAN r~v~5TRIAN!'I'It.~TST1' CONNECTT(}N CQN2*IE~ t'IC-h• -f0 T{} FAIL. PI.IBi1C I..I~3RARY WEST ~1DC3W T3OI3SQNlCI'VIC CE?~ A ~ tt SIN LFRIVIJJV'AIL ~'EDESTRIANf ~RA:i+I'~aT' ,"~'Ra'?~.NCE VII,.I:.AGE R.ETAii.lf~{(7'USI~~ ~} SC~IITI~I FACE C)~' ST~'ti~CTI~RE Lt.~131iE A'I' LiI`JNSFIEAD ~I~SQ~r ., ~ . ~ 4^ 4 ~ ~ - R IL E ~'~ '~~i' ~ t c, ~ ' ~' a ~ + .f?A*-7.:.AK+fI~ . 1 ~f .~ ~4~ '\ J' <,;~ w4 ~.-y~,~..~e..ty.y _ .Y z_,..,_ may.. .. -. ~ .L.. ~. '^'w ~ ~ ~ ~ .. _ ,,,.. a.r - . ,~ y a /..-. l _. ~ .. l _ .. ._...........--- L~ r . .~ y ~~ ~ ~ 'm ` C~9ViC ~ e' ~ ~ CIrI~ - ~, ~ P .~ J 'v ~ ~ ~ '. ~ ( .. ' i E PARIkTNG STRL'~CTI_>*RE ARR.NAL AI'vT~ DR{}P C1 P+C~IN`T'~~'ERTICAL GRAAE T:'~~ITIfiN COi4iMD?~i I..DI3I3Y CCINNEC7'1NG DOI3SON PRMAItY PEDESTRIAN ICE ARENA TCI PRC)PC?SED CIVIC CEN 1 rxc CC7NNEC1'IC3;",~ TD EAST NOkTFi PEDESTRIAN ~NT~zANC~E x;~IaNSI~EAD PI:I:}:I:STItItAN ~otzTA~ F'i~*r<rc ~- i - G ~~? ~ i~mrnunity i~rvic Center Cvnnectic~ra.5 LIONSHEAD REDEVEI.DPMENT M.4STEIZ. PLAN PAGE 5-7 CHAPTER S DETAILED PLAN 1tC.CUMMENDATIDNS .. - #. t- ~' ~-, '~ L ;-- ~rAII.. TT~'TERNA'I~IUt1sAL L3C~BSL?I'ti I.E.At2ENA A.I^~!) VAII" I'+dTE73NATIQ7~tAL.FIR,E Lr~I+IE .~ y ~a~xr~e S-~ -I.3nhsr~>9 ~~:~ Arena arrd Y~i! fnte-nririrancrl rrrc~~;.~;,.c~.~ Y~izicPe Acc~.s.~ PAGES-8 LI(]NS}IEAD REllEVELDPMENT MASTER PLAN Lim CwAPTER $ DETAILi<I~ PLAN R.C.CO1V11~/IENDATIQNS Retail back doors and entrances to the residential units in the new develo ment will be p accessed from the parking structure, and any private parking associated with these uses wi11 be in the parking structure. Some of the buildang's service and delivery needs may handled interior to the parking structure, but most will be accommodated in the facility proposed on the west end of the parking structure. East Lionshead Circle would only be used in short-term overflow situations. Because of the narrow depth and small square footage of the commercial space, it is not anticipated that it will generate the need for larger delivery trucks. Because the garage is anon-mechanical self-ventilating structure, any new vertical development must be offset a minimum of ten feet from the face of the existing structure. The effect of adjacent development on the ventilation of the parking structure must be thoroughly evaluated, 5.3 Liortshead Tourist information Center The Lionshead Tourist Information Center is currently located just west of the entry to the Lionshead parking structure and is accessed directly off of the frontage road. If the entrance to tlrc Lionshead parking structure is relocated as shown in figure 5-1 this existing facility will need to be relocated, Potential locations for the center include the Future Vail Civic Center, the parking structure, and the North Day Lat transit center. 5:4 Gore Creek Corridor The master plan goals for the Gore Creek comdor are to protect and enhance its natural beauty and environment., to connect it to the Lionshead care, and to make the Gore Creek recreation path safer and more inviting as a passive recreation amenity. Specific recommendations for this corridor are as follows 5.4.1 Creation of a Recreation Path `Bypass' Around the Ski Yard The existing Gore Creek recreation path is discontinuous and confusing. It should be extended along the creek, under the skier bridge and behind the lift line mazes to form an unbroken streamside trail around the ski yard (see figure 5-5}. Close coordination between the Town of Vail and Vail Associates lift operations will be needed for a safe alignment in this area. LIONSHE~ID REI~EVELCII'MENT I'VId1STER 'F'LAN PF,GI~ 5-9 CHAPTER S DETAILED PLAN RECOMMENDATII~NS PASSIVE R~REATIONJNATiJRE'TR.~I:L, PEDES'TRYAN ACCESS ?O CREEK EDGE EXISTING Wf)dDE?~' ACCESS BRIDGE NEW CARE CREEK RECREATION PATH BY-FASS ~( ! i f ..~ i ""'t , w F i ; ' ~ ~ rat :~L :• t ,. . ~ ~7KI r r• ~~• r ~F p~ .~'t ~. ~ \ .t + r t ~ ., yam.' t A~*~ ~ .. __. _ A a ~1°`+~~ 4tirr w ~ r • ~ a .e x al r ~ ~~~ 1 i.. - '~- ~ _ ~ ~~ ~ ! ~~^ w~~ t ri.~ +d r ~ 1 '~ x~~~{s ~y~.~~ry ~ ~ r ~ x r ,.•~ r t -~ -~ LElip~f.]I'. ~ ~.rk4J 4.4~'S 3 ;Ei~ _ f ' ~ ~ ~~. r EX`IST'ING Gi)RE CREEK RECRE,ATIC?I~ I'ATzI • ,Figure SMS -tirsr~ ~r~e~k €~~tl~ C.'nnnecdic~nx and.]ecreut~a;•a Fat1a -Fr&rs PAGES-I(} LIUNSHEAD REDEVELOPMENT MASTER PLAN CHAPTI~R 5 IIETAILED PLAN RECOMIuIENDATIONS 5.4.2 Picnic and Seatin Areas alon the Recreation Path l; is The existing picnic area on the recreation path behind the Lodge at Lionshead should be significantly improved. Bicycle racks, new benches and picnic tables, and adequate trash bins should be added. At least two other seating and picnic areas, consistent in design and furnishings with improvements at the existing area, are also recommended. Regular upkeep of the existing and proposed amenities will be required. 5.4.3 Safety Issues The existing Gore Creek recreation path is a relatively safe environment, but conflicts between pedestrians and cyclists will increase as the popularity of bicycling grows. A clearly delineated bicycle lane wide enough far a bicycle with a pull-behind child carrier is needed. The path should be wide enough for a cyclist to pass another bicycle without endangering nearby pedestrians. The design of the path should elirriinate blind curves where cyclists riding in opposing directions might collide. The pool deck behind the Antlers presents such a hazard, and all potential measures should be taken to remedy that situation, including removal or modification of the pool. 5.4.4 Lowland Area South of Gore Creek Improvements and restoration activities in this section of the Gore Creek corridor are discussed in chapter four, section 4.3.x. 5,4.5 Revegetatian and Landscaping West of the Ski Yard Slope revegetation and landscaping are needed along the western portion of the Gore Creek recreation path. This section, which traverses a fill bank above Gore Creek, may never have the forested character of the section east of the ski yard, but it can be greatly enhanced by planting mare trees. The focus should be on the mare barren north side, with less intensive landscaping on the south bank framing views to the creek (sec figure 6-4). The added landscaping should be as natural as passible and appropriate for a riparian environment The use of small understory plantings that would increase maintenance requirements should be mininuzed. 5.5 East Lionshead Bus Drap-off Area This area is an essential pedestrian connection between the Lianshead parking structure and the Lionshead retail mall. The master plan recomrriends the removal of service and delivery activities, skier drag-off, and shuttle vans from this area in order to make pedestrian crossing safer, Other improvements include: LIONSHJEAD REDEVELQPMEN`l' MASTER PLAN PAGE 5-11 CHAPTER S DfiTAILED PLAN RECOMMENDATIONS 5.5.1 pedestrian Connections The pedestrian corridor between the parking structure and the Lianshead retail mall should be diurect and unobstructed (see figure 5-C). A small volume of vehicular and transit traffic will continue to cross this area, but the space should be redesigned to make it clear that these vehicles are subordinate to pedestrians. Its design should suggest that cars are intn~ders in a pedestrian s~~ace rather than that pedestrians are crossing a vehicular road (as is the case today}. Techniques to accomplish this goal include the elimination of grade separations at the pedestrian crossing, paving patterns that differentiate the pedestrian crosswalk from the vehicular lanes, and bollards that delineate vehicular crossing lanes (see figure 5- 6). Landscaping may be appropriate in this plaza, but. it must not impede the flow of pedestrian traffic between the parking structure and the core. 5.5.2 Transit Stop The transit arrival and drop-off points should be relocated slightly to the east of their present location to retnave the existing conflict with pedestrians crossing from the parking structure, Figure S-b delineates the proposed east- and westbound bus stops. Ii shows a single bus lane in each direction and a turnaround with a SO-foot radius. In order to maintain the pedestrian's dominance in this area, westbound traffic leaving East Lionshead Circle should share the transit lane and should be required to stop and wait if the bus is picking up or dropping off passengers. 5.5.3 Potential Building Infill Site When the skier drop-off and service and delivery functions are removed from the transit drop-off area, the transit. stop may be reduced in size, yielding a site suitable for infill development. This property, owned by the Town of Vail, pxesents several opportunities. First, it will enable the creation of a strong gateway into the retail core and better definition of the pedestrian corridor that cannects it to the parking structure. Second, it brings the retail edge closer to East Lionshead Circle, reducing the distance between the parking structure and the retail environment. Finally, it is an opportunity to generate revenue for the Town of Vail to help fund the public improvements detailed in the Master plan. S,b West Face of the Parking Structure In order to remove service vehicles from their current location in the pedestrian crosswalk area, a service and delivery facility should be developed at the western end of the Linz~shead parking structure (see figure 4-11}. 5,7 Vai121, Lionshead Arcade, Lifthouse Lodge, Lions >E'ride Cluster This group of adjacent structures is critical to the ability of the Lianshead care to pull people into its core (see figure 5-7~. Because these buildings constitute a significant portion of the existing retail frontage in Lionshead, they greatly influence the overall character and image of Lianshead, especially for those who enter the core from the east_ • PACES-12 LIONSIIEAD REDEVELOPMENT MASTER PLAN Attachment D • ~' 9 :~ _ fi ~~' } ~ + ~ y t _,'..t. .. _ ~ :.6 _,_ ,,~ CHAPTER { SITE DESIGN GUIDELINpS . ... CHAPTER. b Site Design Guidelines Chapters four and five identixied important public spaces and. pedestrian corridors That together define the underlying structure of Lionshead and form essential connections between the district's primary destinations- This chapter an site design guidelines describes the detailed elements that Lend character and quality to the overall fabric of public spaces. The master plan envisions a hierarchy of pedestrian spaces and, as outlined in this chapter, demands increasing attention to detailing in areas where public use will be more intense. Any projects or situations that do not fall within. the framework described below shall conform to the existing Town of Vail regulations.. 61 Primary Pedestrian MaII The primary pedestrian rnQld is a heavily utilized pedestrian street or corridor eharacteriaed by ground level retail frontage on both sides. In Lianshead today, the pedestrianf retail core area meets this definition. Areas within the primary mall (see Map P) shall conform to the Architectural Design Guidelines regarding building setbacks and build-to lines on a primary retaiU pedestrian street. 6,1..3. Spatial Proportions The appropriate dinnerisions of pedestrian nodes, plazas and corridors will vary depending upon the intended function and character of the space, the proportions of buildings at the edge, and exposure to views and sun. C7n double-sided retail streets, it is generally desirable that pedestrians are able to see storefronts on both sides of the street. 6.1.2 Pedestrian Surfaces Pavement in the primary pedestrian mall should be snowmelted. Consistency in paving materials is recor~u~ended, but variations in paving patterns are encouraged to define spaces, transitions, and predominant traffic flow patterns. Refer to the Vail Streetscape Master Plan for recommended materials and design- 6.1..3 Site Furnishings Site furnishings such as benches, seatwalls, trash receptacles and bicycle racks are essential to increase the level of activity in the primary pedestrian mall. Seating areas sh©uld be located where there are interesting view relationships with adjacent activities, people passing by, or special scenery. Seating should be concentrated at the edges of activity areas, slightly set back. from the flow of pedestrian traffic. North facing walls and consistently shady areas are generally less desirable than sunny places for seating, although it is important to give L LIONSHEAD REDE4`ELQPMENT 1VIASTF,R IsLAN pq~E ~,_] CH A.F'TER 6 SITE DESIGN GUIDELINES People places to sit in the shade if they desire. The design and appearance of site furnishings should be consistent tlu-oughout the primary pedestrian enviromnent. 6.1.4 Lighting Site lighting is encouraged in the primary pedestrian environment to make evening use safe and comfortable. Lighting must be shielded so as not to create a nuisance #'or upper level residential units. Where possible, site lighting should be incorporated into the adjacent architecture that defines the space. Variation in the light level to create pools of light is encouraged. Accent lighting (such as bollards, uplights, and tree-mounted lights} is encouraged at seating areas, grade transition areas, and other focal points. The design of fixtures and the color of light they emit (lamp type} should be consistent throughout the pedestrian environment. Fixtures should avoid cold or blue light; warmer ar yellow light, such as from incandescent lamps, is preferred. The standard village fixture specified in the Streetscape Master Flan is recommended. 6.1.5 Signage Creativity is encouraged in individual retail business signage. Ordinary stock or prefabricated signage should be avoided in favor of custom designed and fabricated artisan signage. Consistent directional and identity signage installed by the Town of Vail is recommended at all intersections, portals and gateways in the retail environment and at all pedestrian points of entry to the core. Pedestrian directional signage should be attractive and understated, visually accessible and clear. 6.1.6 Landscaping Because the primary pedestrian/ retail mall is a more urban environment, landscaping will be less intensive than in more open pedestrian areas. Landscape areas should be used to provide accent, shade, and spatial definition around activity areas, decks, and the edges of plazas. Transparent landscape materials such as aspens and other deciduous trees are preferred. Dense screening trees such as spruce should be used only in accent situations; landscape screening should not be necessary in a cohesive, well designed retail environment. Great care must be taken not to create barriers between the pedestrian flow and the retail storefronts. Landscaping also can be used to create niches and quite areas out of the main tlow of pedestrian traffic, as well as to focus views and provide focal points. To the extent passible, development and redevelopment projects should endeavor to relocate existing trees on site that otherwise would be cut down. 6.1..7 Artwork An objective of the community is to enhance the beauty ofour environment by incorporating quality visual art in highly accessible and visible places, both privately and publicly owned, for the enjoyment of residents and guests. The PnGE6-? LIONSHEAD RIDEVELOPivIENT MASTER PLAN ~HAI'TER E) SITE DIrSIGN GUIDELINES master plan encourages art installations as permanent elements integral to the design of exterior spaces, architectural components, site furnishings, and paving. Artistic site furnishings and accessories could include, but are not limited to, benches, railings, bike racks, ski racks, signage, trash receptacles, lighting. and utilities. Art is particularly effective in activity areas, at entrances, at the intersections of pedestrian corridors, and where views temzinate. Art that is interesting and specific to the regional context of the valley is encouraged. Interactive artwork that care be enjoyed by both children and adults, such as found in the Boulder pedestrian retail mall, is highly encouraged. Artwork accessible to the public must be constructed of durable materials and be easy to maintain. The Design Review Board reviews artwork that is integral to structures or is displayed on private property. The Art in Public Places Board reviews proposals for art installations on public rights-of-way. Refer to the Vail Art in Public Places program Policies and Guidelines and the Vail Art Master flan for further information. 6.1.8 Diversification of Activity in the Public Right-of-Way It is a fundamental goal of the master plan to intensify the level of activity in Lionshead's primary pedestrian mall area, Activities such as outdoor eating, childrens' play, and special event merchandising are encouraged to diversify the opparninities for recreation and enjoyment in the mall. Proposals by private businesses to use the public right-of-way for these activities are reviewed by the Town's Planning and Environmental Commission and Design Review Board.. 6.2 Secondat~y Pedestrian Mall The secorrclr~ry~etlestrian mall area, like the primary, occurs adjacent to ground floor retail frontage. Unlike the primary mall, however, these areas are not located where pedestrian flow is most intense; they tend instead to be alcoves and smaller, more intimate spaces slightly removed from the primary pedestrian environment. 6.2.1. Fedestrian Surfaces Snawmelting is optional in secondary areas; the choice depends upon the anticipated intensity of use and the area's solar exposure. A higher degree of flexibility in the choice of paving type, color and design is permitted to allow these more intimate areas to develop their own unicyue character and sense of place. Creativity is encouraged, but quality of materials is as essential here as it is in the primary mall. 6.2.2 Site Furnishings Site furnishings such as benches, seatwalls, trash receptacles and bicycle racks are as important in secondary areas as they are in the primary pedestrian mall. Furnishings can be placed wherever warranted by exposure to views and sun and where they will not obstruct pedestrian traffic or emergency access. North facing walls. and consistently shady areas should generally be avoided as seating areas. LIOI*~'SHEAi) REDF.VE.LOI'MEN"I' MASTER FLAN PAGE 6-3 n CHAPTER 6 SITEv 1,JESIGN GUIDELINES Greater flexibility in design and appearance of site furnishings is permitted in secondary mall areas. 6.2.3 Lighting The lighting of a secondary pedestrian mall area should conform to the same guidelines that apply to the primary pedestrian mall. 6.2.4 Signage The signage in a secondary pedestrian mall area should conform to the same guidelines that apply to the primary pedestrian mall. 6.2.5 Landscaping In the secondary pedestrian mall areas; there is a greater opportunity far landscaping and for mare intricate planting composition. Otherwise, the same guidelines outlined for the primary mall area also apply in secondary areas. 5.3 Primary Pedestrian Walk A primary pedestrian walk is a heavily utilized, linear pedestrian corridor, most often associated with a street edge {see figure 6-2}. Outside the pedestrian/ retail core, the overall east-west pedestrian connection between Dobson Ice Arena and west Lionshead falls into this category. 6.3.1 Pedestrian Surfaces Under most conditions, snowmelting of pavements in these areas should not be necessary. Consistent with the Tpwn of Vail Streetscape 1Vlaster Plan, paverstones are preferred over poured concrete walks for durability and aesthetics. 6.3.2 Width Primary pedestrian walks should be a minimum of eight feet wide, potentially wider at street intersections and extremely high volume pedestrian areas.. 6.3.3 Site Furnishings Site furnishings such as benches, seatwalls, and trash receptacles are encouraged an an intermittent basis clang these corridors, concentrated primarily at intersections,. in view corridors, and other logical gathering or resting areas. Site furnishings should be placed out ofthe flaw of pedestrian traffic, creating comfortable but easily accessible opportunities to sit and rest. Site furnishings shauld be consistent clang primary pedestrian walks. 6.3.4 Lighting Lighting should comply with the parameters of the Vail Streetscape Master Plan, • PAGE ~-4 LiUNSHEAD REDEVEL©PMENT MASTER PLAN CFIAP'FER 6 SI`I`E DESIGN ~rUII]ELINES 6.3.5 Landscaping Street trees and understory plantings are strongly encouraged along primary pedestrian walks. The landscape treatment need not lac homogeneous. A mix of deciduous and evergreen trees is desirable, although deciduous trees are favored to protect views or sun exposure. Ornamentals, perennials, and annual flowers are encouraged to provide a wide variety of textures and seasonal color. Landscaping material should not interfere with the pedestrian walk or snow storage requirements at mature growth. 6.4 Secondary Pedestrian Walk Secondary pedestrian walks (see figure G-3} are similar to primary pedestrian walks except that they are not located on primary pedestrian corridors and thus carry a lower volume of pedestrian traffic. The suggested minimum width for these secondary walks is six feet, although wider walkways may be required where anticipated pedestrian traffic volumes are greater. Poured concrete may be used as a paving material. All other design parameters that apply to primary pedestrian walks also apply here. G.5 Vehicular Pedestrian Retail Street In addition to the Lionshead pedestrian malls and pedestrian walks there is the opportunity to create linear pedestrian retail streets parallel and adjacent to vehicular streets. One such exatnple, as shown in figure 6-6, is the potential addition of retail to the face of the l..ionshead parking stnacture. Future dewelopment in west Lionshead may '~ present the opportunity to add a linear retail component along the pedestrian walks associated with vehicular streets. These linear pedestrian/ retail environments should be characterized by wider walkways, increased lighting, increased site furnishings, and a higher level of detail and visual activity. In addition snowmelt systems may be required depending on the pedestrian environments solar exposure and intensity of use. Where possible landscaping should serve to provide a separation between the vehicular street and the flow of pedestrian traffic, most likely in the form oftree-grates or at-grade planters. As within the pedestrian malls the mass of the building should step back after the ground floor retail level,. conforming to the architectural design. guidelines (see chapter 8) for retail pedestrian streets. 6.C~ Pedestrian Fath Pedestrian paths are located outside of the primary Lionshead pedestrian environment (see figure 6-4). They include stand-alone circulation corridors., such as the Gore Creek recreation path, that are most often built with asphalt surfaces. These pathways generally carry a lower volume of traffic, but their width should reflect both anticipated volume a.rzd anticipated. ty~~e oftraffic, as bicycles, rollerblades, and skateboards also utilize tkaese pathways. Lighting, signage, site furnishinbs and landscaping will be a function of a pathway's intended use, location, and traffic volume. • LIONSHEAD REL7EVEL[~I'MI=NT MASTER PLAN Pp,,~~ (~_$ CHAPTER ~ SITE DESIGN GUIDELINES 6.7 Signage The Town of Vail should implement a consistent, comprehensive directional signage program. Vehicular and pedestrian-sealed directional signage should be incorporated into the design of all primary corridors. 6.8 Fences and Enclosures 6.8.1 Alla~vable C}ccurrences As a general rule, fences, walls, and other screening devices are not desired in a higher density, pedestrian oriented environment such as Lionshead. However, under limited circumstances screening fences and walls will be allowed, subject to approval by the Design Review Board. a. Code requirements. Swimming pools and other potentially hazardous areas must be fenced according to existing codes. b. Service areas. Service docks and loading/ delivery areas should be visually screened from surrounding uses. c. ~'rivate ea~,~rtyard areas. Subject to approval. by the appropriate reviewing boards, outdoor courtyards and other private gathering areas may warrant fencing.. or another form of enclosure. G.8.2 Dumluster Enc1©sure Criteria All dumpster and outdoor trash storage areas should be completely screened and enclosed, according to the following criteria: a. Existing Cnde R'equirernents. Any existing code requirements regarding dumpster and trash enclosures shall not be diminished by this section. b. Extent oJEnclosure. All dumpster and trash storage areas shall be completely screened and enclosed, including latchable doors and a roof. c_ Materials. All dumpster and trash enclosures shall be constructed out of materials matching or complementary to the adjacent architecture. d. Design. All dumpster and trash enclosures shall be built to accommodate trash removal requirements. Enclosures shall be solid and sturdy, designed to visually blend with the surrounding architectural and site environment. e. Landscape. To the extent possible, dumpster and trash enclosures should be screened and. visually softened through the use of landscaping.. 6.8.3 Fence and Screen ~~'all Criteria All fences and screen walls should be constructed according to the following criteria: a. ~'xisting Code ~eq~.~irenae~tts. Any existing code requirements regarding fences and screen walls shall not be diminished by this section. • PAGE6-6 LIONSI-IEAD REDEVELOPMENT MASTER PLAN CHAPTER G SITE DESIGN GUIDELINES b. tYlateriuls, Fences and screen walls shall be of high quality materials that match or complement the adjacent architecture. T-1 11, paneling, chain link, and other non-substantial materials shall not be used. c. Design. Fences and screen walls should be well articulated, utilizing visually strotag posts, corners, and columns (where appropriate). Hprizontal top and bottom railings should be visually strong and heavier than the fence center materials. Screen walls should look lilce extensions ofthe architecture. Fences should be unobtrusive, and neutral and subdued in color. d. Constf-action. Fences and screen walls shall be constructed to withstand all expected wind and snow loads. Design and siting of fences and walls must take snow removal and snow storage into consideration so as to minimize winter damage. e. Landscaping. Where appropriate, fences should be designed to include landscape screening. Landscape material should be located on the outside of enclosed areas so that the fence is screened from the adjacent public areas. The dimensions of landscape beds shall be sufficient to provide adequate area for the dimensions of landscape material. Long, unbroken, and barren stretches of fencing or walls are not acceptable. b.9 Compliance with Town of Vail Streetscape Mauer Plan A goal of the Lionshead master plan is to improve the co~u~ections and relationships between Lionshead and Vail Village. Towards that end, it is recommended that all site design issues not dealt with in this chapter, including but not limited to site furnishings, site lighting, landscape principles, paving types, and signage conform to the intent of the Town. of Vail Streetscape Master Plan. An exception is the opportunity to create a distinct character of site furnishings, lighting, and other site design elements for the Lionshead pedestrian and retail core. Consistent with section 6.1.7 above, artwork, the creative use of otherwise standard site elements (benches, trash receptacles, phones, light standards, grate inlets, etc..} is encouraged to help establish a strong, vibrant, and distinct character and sense of place for the Lionshead core area.. • LIC}NSHEAD REJ?EVELCIPMENT MASTER PLAN P.AGI; 6-7 • ~~ W xQ C!],s ~1 `'' ,~ .~, ~ ~ t ~„~ •~ t ar ~~ 1 n 1 4 `~ 4 • a, ~~ ~' ~' ~ < ~. s ~~ ~~'" ~;~ "4...w .~, t '; 4 w~ .,.,~ 1 ,. W ,. .,~_ _~. _; .. A ~ '~ r• ,f A £': tt~' s. 1 ~. ~~ ~ , ~.. :ti / ,n.~.~, v a ~, ~ w a '., ~„ ~. , ~ s b .. , .; ; h'~-; s ' ~~ ~~ ~`,'' . d' :r. r~ ~~ ~ ~ ~' ' s ~~ ~~ ~a ~ ~~ C3 ~; ~, .~ ~~ T 0 4 3 ~~ ~~ ~, ~. i 1 • } , sM, ny ..f~iFY .I~. i. r-d r ~.~' ~., ~'~ ~ ,, r ~ y ~~~' ~a~ ~~ d -~ ~, r~ '~ ~s' 4.~.., . ~ 1 r '.~ .~''~ yy ( ~+• a j ~ 7 1 A !rj ' f f t f ~, ~ ~~;.. ~ ~ ~ y ~.- d~ I ~~ „.. ~~ `~ i r ~+ a ;, i u: w ~} a ~ i ~~ A a .~ ~~ M ~ a1 L f ~ w~ o~ ~;';.~„ 3' +~ -"° ..s ..w . ,..- ~ ,-y. ~°' ~,.w,_.,; n -.. ~ ~.,~_d ~' r s. v ~~ L~ ~~ r ~V'f L r • • i• 4 '~ .~~` 9 ~ ... ~ 3 ~: F- ~ _ ~ .r ..._... .. .. ~; ~. ~: r. ~ti t i ~. by C .J ~~ ~~i w:+ c? ,~ z ~ ~- r r ` rM' ~ r' !Yq L ~ ~ a ~ ~ t Attachment E • • '~ C:F..d45€~~ ii3~# ~' K ... ti. MY4:n ~y.~ i ~3 ~~ „r°NzL"tt ~Kt4:t~ 3~f3~~':t~ ~. . . $ ~, ~`e. .2 ~~ ~ ,. L r ~, ~" W-q, € ~ C .._ --~=T ~~, •i" ~L F ~..~ t Sk3~' .»,~... ,: ~ wv ~w _... dks~ • CHAPTER 7 DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS CRAFTER 7 Development Standards This section outlines recommended development standards for private property in the Lionshead study area. In some cases, implementation of these standards will require revision of applicable provisions in the Town of Vail zoning regulations. Adoption of special provisions for redevelopment of properties that already violate existing development standards should also be considered. It is critical to note that all of the following recommended standards apply equally as future projects are reviewed for compliance. When one standard is more restrictive than another, that is the standard that shall be the limiting factor. These standards do not represent entitlements in any way. Por example, if the GR FA ratio of a project cannot be met after floe building height, setback, and other architectural guideline standards have been applied, then that project is not entitled to the maximum allowable GRFA. In this case, the quantitative and qualitative standards of the architectural design guidelines would take precedence over the potential GR1r'A allocation. 7.l >~andscape Area The master plan does not recommend modification of this standard for Lionshead. The Town's current standard, which applies to the majority of sites in Lionshead, requires that at least 20% of a parcel be landscaped. This standard should be flexible for properties along=build-to lines and in the pedestrian retail core area so they may be able to decrease planted area and increase hardscape in order to create the functional pedestrian corridors and spaces outlined in the master plan. This potential reduction of landscape area is not a right and should require the approval of the Planning and Environmental Commission. 7.2 Site Coverage The master plan does not recommend changing this standard. The Town's current standard, which applies to the majority of sites in Lionshead, prohibits site coverage by structures in excess of 70% the area of a site. This standard should be flexible for properties alr~ng build-to lines and ira the pedestrian retail core area so they may be able to increase site coverage as required to create the functional pedestrian corridors and spaces outlined in the master plan. This potential increase in site coverage is not a right and should require the approval of the Planning and Environmental Commission. Below grade development is not counted as site coverage. 7.3 Setbacks The master plan does not recommend changing this standard. The current setback requirement on the majority of sites in Lionshead is 10 feet from the property line on all sides. This requirement shall be waived in areas with designated build-to lines, and leeway should be considered in areas of significant hardship that otherwise meet the intent of the master plan and da not negatively impact adjacent properties. LION5HI~AL? REDEVELOPMEI~.'T MASTER PLAN pAGE 7-1 CIiAPTER 7 DEVELOPMENT STANI?ARDS 7.~1 Grass Residential Flaar Area (GR1~A) An important component of the Lionshead Master Plan process was the analysis of GRFA's effectiveness as a tool for insuring the quality of architecture and the built environment within Lionshead. In short, the masterplan team found that GRFA was not effective as a primary means ofpraviding for architectural quality. Based on this finding it is the conclusion of the master plan team that GRFA should not be the primary means of regulating building size. To accomplish this, one of two options must be pursued. First, GRFA could be eliminated. Secondly, the GRFA ratio could be increased so that it functions as a safett~ valve to insure that buildings do not exceed the maximum residential fioorplate area that would otherwise be allowed according to the criteria of the architectural design guidelines. If this second course of action is pursued, the fallowing recommendations are made: a. The ratio of Gross Residential Floor Area (GRFA) to lot area should be increased on all properties within Lionshead, excluding the residential properties south of Gore Creek, so that the site and architectural design guidelines, not GRFA, are the primary building size and mass constraint. b. The method of calculating GRFA should be greatly simplified and changed to include common space so that basic floor plate area calculations wi[1 suf#ice. 7.5 Density (Dwelling Units Per Acre): The allowable density of development in the study area should be increased to provide ample incentive and create the financial mechanism for redevelopment of properties. Additional consideration must be given to existing properties that currently exceed the density limitations. A model developed during the master planning process showed that an increase of at ]east 33% over existing zoning or existing dwelling units on a given site would be needed to make redevelopment an attractive option. In order to encourage the development of live beds or warm beds in Lionshead, the master plan recommends that accommodation units, hotel rooms and fractional ownership units not be taunted. in the calculation of density. Further, because it is a community goal to increase the number of permanent residents in Lionshead, employee housing units that are deed restricted far loco.] employees should not count toward density. 7.6 New Unit Definition The master plan recommends that the zoning regulations be modified to include "lodge unit" as an additional definition of a res identia] unit. This product is defined as a small condominium dwelling unit with limited kitchen and floor area. (The floor area usually averages less than &50 sq. ft.} Units ofthis small size are most likely to be in short-term rcntal pools, with occupancy rates similar to those far hoteE rooms. )3ecause an increase in the short-term bed base in Lionshead is a key objective, the planning team recommends that lodge units count as one-quarter of a narn~al dwelling unit (i.e. 4 lodge units count as one dwelling unit}. Further, it recommends that units of this size in existing properties be treated as lodge units for the purpose of calculating density. 7.7 Building Height This standard is addressed in the Architectural Design Guidelines (see chapter 8}. u PAGE 7-2 LIC.INSHLAD REDEVELC)PM~N'I' MAS'1 LR PLAN Attachment F • DESIGN • • «~ CHAPTER EIGHT CHAPTERS ARCHITECTUAL DESIGNC.xUIDELINES CHASTER S Architectural Design ~uidejines 8.1 Vision Stateme~tt. Tlae Lionshead neighborhood in Vail presents the opportunity to establish a dynamic and exciting camztaunity tivitlain one of the premier resorts in the world. Lionshead's mountain location, proximi#y to the ski slopes, and ample residential base evokes the vision of a truly special place, full of vitality and interest. This vision can be achieved through redevelopment of the community by addressing site and architectural issues, and through consistent and effective transitions from existing to new buildings. The pedestrian experience of the public spaces within Lionshead is the mast critical issue far redevelopment. Many of the existing spaces are static and uninteresting, due to a prevailing grid organization and leak of animation and architectural coherency within the spaces. (7ne of the mast effective ways to intensify this experience is through careful design of the architecture which defines the public spaces. Visually dynamic variation at the pedestrian level can help avoid a monotonous streetscape, and judicious use of ornament, detail, artwork, and color can reflect individuality and establish a variety of experience. The architecture of Lionshead is envisioned as a unified composition of buildings and public spaces based. on the timeless design principles of form, scale, and order, made responsive to their setting and environment. It is not envisioned as a strict dictation of a specific "style" or "theme." Many existing buildings within the community are built of monolithic concrete slabs and lack any sense of order or personality. The new image for Lionshead should move towards the future using historical alpine references and Vail Village as antecedents. This design framework will allow individual property owners freedom of expression within the personalities of their buildings while establishing and maintaining an overall unifying character and image far the entire community. In addition, it is paramount that the redevelopment effort address specific design considerations generated by the location, climate, and surrounding environment, such as addressing views, using indigenous building materials, and reflecting the alpine heritage. Designing in response to our regional heritage, adhering to a consistent architectural order, and enhancing the public experience will enable Lionshead to define its own identity-making it a distinct and special place not just within the context of Vail, but within kindred mountain communities around the world. • LI©NS~IE.P.D ~PDE'VF.l.4PMENT CASTER PLAN Page $-1 CHAPTER $ ARCHITECTUAL DESIGN GUIDELINES • 8~2 ©rganization, Purpose aid Scope The organization of the Lionshead Architectural Design Guidelines is based upon describing the "big picture" of the redevelopment effort first, and then studying the more detailed aspects. Sections 8.1 and 8.2 begin with the "big picture" and offer the "vision" for Lionshead, and provide explanatory info:rrraation regarding organization, purpose, and scope. Section $.3 contains special provisions for existing structures, including redevelopment priorities, triggers, and transition tools. Section 8.4 contains the Guidelines themselves, but begins first with the "big picture" of planning considerations which may overlap with the Lionshead Master Plan. Prospective developers and/or designers should study this portion of Section 8.4 carefully, to see what design criteria must be met if their project occupies a special site relative to building roles, pedestrian streets, ^r transition spaces. The latter portion of Section $.4 deals with the architectural principles of the Design Guidelines, starting first with overall issues such as building form and massing, then moving into more detailed issues such as dimensional criteria for architectural components, materials, and colors, Section 8.5 provides a "quick glimpse" of the quantitative values outlined in the Guidelines. The purpose of the Lionshead Architectural Design Guidelines (ADG} is to work in concert with the Lionshead Master Plan to enhance the existing experience within the Page $-2 LIUNSHEAD REDEVELQFMENT MASTER ,pL.AN r.~.N• J. T#rr irrr.a,~e nj i ra~r,si~eu~IsJrrru!~l ucmrr•rbtt;t ra its ..s~rtsr~ nl;rrlur~c CHAPTER $ ARCHITECTUAL DESIGN GUIDELINES community, improve the quality of life, focus direction for future growth, create visual harmony, and improve property values for businesses and homeowners. This document constitutes a design philosophy for the community, which when integrated with the Lionshead Master Plan, helps to establish Lionshead as a coherent, dynamic village with a true "sense of place." These Guidelines are intended to direct the growth of the community through distinct levels of perception, from views of the neighborhood from the mountain and the highway, to perceptions within its pedestrian streets, to the detail level of artistry and ornamentation on the stractures themselves. • The scope of the Design Guidelines includes all criteria related to the architectural design of new and remodel projects within Lionshead, along with site and planning criteria which relate directly to architecture. C?ther site and planning criteria may be found in the Lionshead Master Plan, and should be reviewed concurrently with these Guidelines. Structures which have been reviewed and approved by regulatory agencies for Lionshead prior to the endorsement date of this document may present special circumstances with respect to the criteria cited within these Guidelines, and will be handled per Section 8.3. LIQNSHEAD REDEVEi.C7PMENT MASTFIt PLAN Page $-3 l°1.~' S_i, F't~rvt 1r.F n1`r~~ , rA ,:~ 1'c y"{r°.rt tlrt(tyrrs (~j tht' c`rtnr~r+tstrir~ tr , F cec;rlr•-r~n,~, CHAPTER $ ARCHITECTLJAL DESIGN ~rUIDELINES $.3 Existing Structures 8.3.1 Special Provisions While these Guidelines offer a roadmap for the redevelopment of Li.onshead, they are not intended to limit the efforts of developers and/or designers involved with existing structures. It is understood that many of the buildings within the community may be unable to comply with some of the criteria described in the ADG. Many existing buildings, for instance, may atready exceed the height criteria identified. Some existing roof pitches within the community may not meet the numerical values described. And many of the existing pedestrian streets. may fail well short of the "ideal" proportions depicted, These and similar issues will be handled on a case-by-case basis, with determination of compliance based. upon whether the building meets the general intent of these Guidelines and the tenets described herein, Proposed renovations or additions which meet the general intent of the ADG will be offered more latitude with respect to specific non-compliant items than those which stray from the overall vision of Lionshoad as described within-variances will be granted frorri the detail of the Guidelines if the overall intent is met. In addition, any meaningful efforts to enhance existing structures will be recognized as positiwe progress, and strict compliance with the "letter" of these Cruideiines is not meant to discourage potential improvements. 8.3.2 development Master Plans Since many ofthe structures within Lionshoad are pre-existing, Developnnent Master Plans are highly encouraged to dehne loner range goals for buildings within individual parcels. These Plans should be presented to the Design Review Board (DRB) for review when applying for initial building design approval, and should include information such as: • Overall architectural "vision" for all buildings within the site • Design strategies for maintaining consistent architectural language behveen renovations and new construction within the site • Proposed phasing plans 8.3.3 Redevelopment Prioritization and "Triggers" Consistent with Section 8.3.1 above, existing properties are encouraged to renovate and rehabilitate, to the greatest extent possible, the exterior of their buildings according to the parameters of the ADG. It is recognized, however, that a single, complete, and comprehensive exterior renovation may not be economically possible far all existing structures, and incremental improvements must be allowed. Having said this,. the following potential exterior improvements Page S-4 L,1C)NSHEAD REDEVELCDPMEN"[' MASTER PLAN CHAPTER $ ARCHITECTUAL DESIGIrI GUIDELINES _. should be considered as priorities by both private property owners and the Town of Vail. All reasonable efforts to encourage, provide incentives, and facilitate these improvements should be made. • Renewed and expanded retail frontage. Far properties fronting the Lionshead retail mall and retail pedestrian streets, the renovation and expansion of the ground floor retail level is perhaps the mast critical element in revitalizing the Lionshead. retail core.. • Roofs. As outlined in the ADG, the raafscape of Lionshead is a critical component in "knitting" together the built environment and providing visual cohesion to the urban fabric: of Lionshead. 1?lanninb considerations. All buildings in Lionshead, both existing and new development, should seek to fulrill the roles of landmarks, portals, turning points, and other roles as outlined in the Master Plan. • l~ orm, massing and height criteria. • Building surface treatment- walls, doors, win€lotivs, signage, etc. • All other components of the architectural design guidelines. A critical question regarding the renovation of existing structures is when compliance with the architectural design guidelines is ``triggered" ar required, Regarding this, the following guidelines should be considered: • To the greatest extent possible, renovating properties should endeavor to make signi£~icant and meaningful improvements to their properties as opposed to small, insigniizeant improvements. This does not discount the importance of any improvement to a properties exterior. Any single incremental improvement to one building element will not necessarily trigger compliance on all remaining building elements. However, any portion of the building being improved should da so according to the parameters of the architectural design guidelines. For example, if a property applies to resurface the walls of their building, this resurfacing should be done according to the ADG, but will not in and of itself also require the replacement of the roof, or another major modification, at the same time. • Any proposal to add significant volume or mass to a property will trigger full and reasonable compliance to the Master Plan and Architectural Design Guidelines. ~ 1 LJ 1...IQNSHEAD REDEVELOPMENT 7VIASTER PLAN Page 8-5 CHAPTER $ ARCHITECTUAL DESIGN GUIDELINES 8.3.4 Transition Taals Transition foals used to revitalize Lionshead ors generally outlined in the specific design criteria within these Guidelines, but are important enough to merit their own subsections. $.3.4.1 Suild-ta Lines Build-to lines can be used to better define the existing public spaces, and to create new ones. Delineation of these build-to lines is illustrated within the Master Plan.. When using these planning paraAneters to define public space, designers should give ~ =--_~--+ careful consideration to the ' ;~ ;"~~,°'(~,~~ '" "ideal" pedestrian street width- ~'"~ _`= ` ?~ T ._ ' ~ .iz' ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ to-height relationships illustrated __ ~ ~ _ s "~ ~,,, ;U,~~g~~ ~'! 5 " u1 Section $.4.1.3. Design of " ~~ '~' ` '~ ' new building edges within ~--' .':.r,""'" ~~ approved build-ta lines should be carefully evaluated to make maximum use of the new retail space, and how the added building mass adds to the overall pedestrian experience. ~~`'"' ~ 8.3.4.2 Roof Replace-ments rt~ ~, F-7.r~s' k_3 !ti` u-1 b, tr~~u r7,rrfi}7rl~s ;:.~rn J,~ t~~utc~tYd 7~rs7J7i Pt:!(; 71-t{•T~.'F s'(t: ~; ~7J?o<:r`: •er ~! ('[]n! !OJ'kFS, r1UF1t' [7Ttil ti"Iif(~Ul: i7": !:: ilJ7 f; Cli ~i'r; ~r :r;£7: l' L1:'F;:;;'I:.. The replacement of flat roofs with pitched roofs can greatly improve the image of Lionshead, and raofuig projects for existing structures which incorporate the criteria described herein should be considered whenever possible (see criteria for existing roof compliance in Section 8.4.2.7). Roofing projects which are part ofplanned building maintenance programs should be used as opportunities to add life and interest. to buildings, through the addition afpitched (ar mansard) roofs which meet the form. pitch, material, and color criteria identified within these r1 ~J CJ page8-~ LIONSHEAI~ REI~1~VELOPMENT MASTER PLAN • C1-1AI~TER $ ARCHITECTUAL DESIGN GUIDELINES Guidelines, These retrofitted roofs will greatly enhance the image of the individual structures, and will also act to tie dissimilar structures together within the community. 8.3.4.3 Doar and Window Enhancements Enhancements to doors and fenestration can also serve to add vitality and interest to otherwise uninspiring buildings. Doors at primary entries and retail frontages should be impxoved whenever possible, to encourage pedestrian interest and add to the vitality of the streetscape. Modifications to overall building fenestration and window detailing (at lintels, trim, jambs and sills) can be used to articulate the notion of base, middle, and top on buildings, and to introduce mountain-friendly windows to the community in terms of energy efficiency and views. 8.3.4.4 Building; Finishes Simple improvements to building finishes, such as covering drab, monolithic precast concrete panels with textured stucco, or applying stone veneer to tie buildings to their sites, can act as successful transition tools, with relatively minimal costs. New finishes add to the aesthetic appeal of buildings but can also be used to provide tangible, value-added improvements to structures, such as installing exterior insulation and finish systems (EIFS) to increase thermal performance of buildings, or stone veneer to protect lower levels from impact damage during snow removal. 8.3.4.5 Detail and ©rnamentation And finally, the addition of ornamentation and other detail appropriate to Lionshead-used in conjunction with one ar more of the previously mentioned strategies--can greatly refine the quality of architecture throughout the community. Well-crafted retail fronts will entice passers-by into snaps and ether commercial areas, while careful detailinb at cave lines on new roofs will interlock roofs with building masses and tie new roofs to the overall building language. C~ostom lintels over doors and windows will also add visual interest, and detail on building finishes--such as articulated bands on stucco or finely- crafted stone caps on stone veneer-will add to the overall quality of structures within Lianshead. • LI©NSI-IEAD R>~I7EVELflPMENT' MA.S"I'ER PLAN Page 8-~ CHAPTIiR 8 ARCHITECTUAL DESIGN GUIDELINES 8.4 Design Guidelines 8.4.1 Planning Considerations $.4.1.1 Introduction As Hated earlier, most criteria governing site issues relative to Lionshead redevelopment may be found in the Master flan. However, same site issues relate directly to the architecture of the community and are therefore described within this section. Issues such as special "roles" buildings may play within the conununity, comfortable proportions for pedestrian streets, and the nation of domain are crucial concepts which rely heavily on the~architectural entities which define them, and are therefore described in detail on the following pages. 8.4.1.2 Building "Raley" Certain building sites within Lionshead occupy special locations tivithin the urban "fabric," or "texture" of the community. To make best use of these special sites and energize the pedestrian experience, buildings on the sites will be required to meet the criteria that immediately follow, in addition to the general criteria described throughout the rest of the document. The locations of the special sites are identified within the Lionshead 1Vlaster Plan, This section outlines specific architectural requirements far buildings which occupy these critical sites, based upon the types of buildings, or building "roles" mast appropriate to the sites, including portals, edge definers, space definers, and landmarks. Portals Portals act as the "front doors" to communities ar urban spaces and therefore often present the fn-st images to pedestrians. Buildings which are located on key sites need to act as inviting and "friendly" portals to or within Lionshead. Stand-alone structures can act as portals through appropriately-scaled, large openings and significant mass, while multiple structures can accomplish this through proper siting and relationship io one another. Human scale can be achieved with portals by introducing horizontal architectural components which relate to the surrounding context, such as retail frontage heights and other critical cave heights. This can also be achieved through careful design of detail which is considerate of the human form; that is, detail which relates to dimensions people are most comfortable with, such as railing heights, head heights, story heights, and similar proportions. Portals within Lionshead can be effective if they present enough mass Page 8°$ LIONSHEAI7 REDE~+'ELQPMENT MASTER PLAN • • 'CHAPTER $ ARCHITECTUAL DESIGN GUIDELINES to enclose the spaces they are defining, with enough open area to present the sense of entry needed for a community of its size and complexity. They may serve additional functions as well, such as living areas, bridges, or enclosed connectors, which can help to further animate the portals and provide additional income- generating space.. ECjb 8 I7ef tt ~YS Whereas portals act as the "front doors" to urlaan communities, edge- defining buildings act as the "exterior walls'" for communities. Where the edges of Lionshead meet areas exterior to the community such as Vail Village, the Gore Creek Corridor, and the highway, buildings must present appropriately-scaled, well-defined edges to contain Lionshead or act as distinct transition zones from one neighborhood to the next. The form, massing, and height guidelines identified in Sections 8.4.2.2 and 8.4.2.3 will direct much of the design of these edges, but additional considerations such as building siting, scale, and architectural image should be taken into account as well. LII7NSHF,AD REDEVELOPIv1ENT MA'ST'ER PLAN Page 8-9 ~ ~~ .ti../, ~ r,{.i',rts~ rrrcu:r tts'ec{ tp :~~ /•r~e ~'.,'~~ CHAPTERS ARCIIITECTUAL DESIGhT GUIDELINES Building siting should allow for openings to occur between structures which make up the community edge, to encourage passers-by to take inviting glimpses inside Lionshead, In addition, buildings along edges should be scaled according to nearby structures. Architectural language should be used to offer a consistent image of Lionshead from the outside-proportions of buildings and the ways in which they are detailed need to reflect the overall image found within the community, and "loud," self promoting buildings which reference only themselves should be avoided. Public ~pucc Defrners To continue the analogy, structures which define public. space act as the "interior walls" of Lionshead. These buildings should address public spaces with their primary facades, and should not "tum their backs" to the spaces, $uildings which define public space should have distinct wall planes, with relatively minor plan and elevation offsets. Building footprints which are based u~'yon rigpidp~~ d la outs Y is .7" Y F'.. ~~ ! r ~ :l; i, .i irT1.) r~#tl i a~%C7l'e' should be avoided; instead, designers are encouraged to develop more inviting, irregular public spaces which offer surprises to travelers as they proceed through Lionshead. Definition of the corners of public spaces is critical to contain those spaces, and can be accomplished through significant massing at the corners, In addition, important heights such as tops of shopfronts and prominent cave lines should be reinforced on buildings which define public space, because they encourage the eye to follow the "walls" of the public space around its perimeter, thereby strengthening the sense of enclosure. Lurt[lnrarks • A landmark provides a sense of orientation for the community, and reinforces its "sense of place" or image, As such, it must be visible from key locations within the community, such as portals and major public spaces, and must offer an image consistent with Lionshead. As Page S-la LICINS~IEAD REDEVEL©PMENT Mr1STER PLAN CHAPTERS ARCHITECTUAL DESIGN GUIDELINES L~ a unique architectural element, a landmark should be designed to clearly stand out from the rest of the community, while still presenting a consistent design language. Care should be taken to provide a clear hierarchy between the village landmark and other, secandary landmarks. Landmarks are most successful when they serve special functions such as bell towers, clock towers, monuments, or public art, rather than being. self-serving. Furthermore, they should be carefully scaled to the buildings adjacent to them, as well as to the overall scale of the urban village. irurs?c ofLinegireC<1 8.4.1.3 Pedestrian Streets Width-to-Height Relationsfsips Ratios of width to height at pedestrian streets and other outdoor spaces are crucial to khe success of those spaces. While ideas of comfortable, inviting scale differ greatly between cultures and individuals, for the purposes of these Guidelines, European mountain antecedents- integrated with our Colorado resort location-have been used as the basis far determining "comfort." With ibis in mind, pedestrian streets shall be designed with cross-sections exhibiting 1:112 to 1:1 '/z width- to-height ratios. Approved cross-sections for pedestrian sta•eets will be calculated using the ner~rert walls which line the streets. Walls which are 16' high or less {to the save) from ground level will not be considered as part of width and height calculations. Walls greater than 16' high {to the cave), however, interrupt pedestrian site lines from street level, and offer a strong sense of enclosure far pedestrians. Therefore, these walls xlll be included as part of street width and height. calculations. The sketches shown in this section illustrate same examples of acceptable ratios, using bath "short" and "tall" walls. L1C}NSHt3AD Rt/DEV'IrLOPMENT MASTER FLAN Pabe $-11 f« A-:~ L,;`u,'nrurls !~Nritftll'i8 rile CHAPTER $ ARCHITECTUAL DESIGN CrUII~1LINES t=~a ~1~#:?' Sw~+: I'd _'1't1i1o1 ~ ~~7;,Qfi }l'i1,~CS'1;~ :~. .`' '.'lL~~7z9C~: ~a.' ~1!r 1,1fwi 'As~4.h~C~: .... }'fifi.~l-~~1: f..'~ f!~~!'Cllfr}r~ f,.;n~i Yta'~I37 The intent of the width-to-height principles is to direct the development of comfortable, human-scaled pedestrian streets. However, all other criteria identified within the Lionshead Master Flan and the rest ofthis document, such as build-to lines, form and massing criteria, and height restrictions, talcs precedence over the ratios identified herein. Within these parameters, exceptions to the listed ratios may be considered if the intent has been met. ~ r~; : , , ! .,~rev;~~lrt:r~7~e' rruusidatall jr~oxrrr 1'rr%~(i~' :.; .1~~nv, pi11]~Lf" (lil(~PYlVllt6 .flOlld[d1'I1 Proper understanding of the nation of public and private domain presents the opportunity to introduce another level of pedestrian movement through Lionshead-one in which traffic flows laterally across outdoor spaces, rather than simply along them. This lateral flow also reinforces the concept of weaving the sides of outdoor spaces • Page 5-12 LIOI`~ISIII;AD REDEVEIsfJI'F~4ENT MASTER PLAN • ., CHAPTER $ ARCI'IITI/CTUAL RESIGN GUIDELINES r;,: -~ 'r ~;'` t :~~, f f' 1 f J +~ ~ll Specific levels of domain ,: ~ ; ~ can range from public, O P . .. ~ ~~ semi-public, senu- r° private, to private. ~~ ~,~'~~ Designed properly, the #~ ;,,,, ,, ~ varying relationships :,~ ~~ ~`'`'~ between these levels can ~' > r ~' act to strengthen the ties r ~ ~` ! ' "` within a village, and add ~'`~°'-' "'~ .. to the spatial interest~or ! )<a~ rY t ~1 i.` l~c~t i', ~r?~,~Ja7.R, rJ~rN~ J rulF? i r ~ -t, r quality leveh---of the r a,.r 19N1(.'1 Fr•C71 E.S~)LTTE'!9~ lr.~ ~~d - 1'"1 r7 r= ?z, outdoor spaces. These additional "layers"" of space along public ways add excitement and vitality by presenting varying strategies of design and. detailing to pedestrians as they travel through the layers from public to private space, or vice-versa. In addition, they provide comfortable transition spaces from public to private, rather than presenting an abrupt experience from one domain to the next. however, poor design of domain and the ways in which the different levels interact can lead to psychological, visual, and physical segregation of the levels, leading in turn to empty and monotonous public spaces rather than active and interesting ones. together, through psychological, visual, and physical ties. The aim of these Guidelines is to reinforce the concept of transparency between public and semi-public, or street and shop. Segregation of these levels of domain shall be avoided whenever possible. To this end, colonnades, arcades, porticos, and other covered ways along shopfronts shall be designed to invite ---rather than repel pedestrian traffc. This may be accomplished through thoughtful design of visual and artistic elements such as signage, window displays, shopfront lighting, and the Iike, and physical elements such as columns, planters, and artwork. As visual and physical barriers are removed, psychological ones will follow suit. Design ofstreet-edge sidewalk cotes, patios, and colonnades are described in Section 8.4.1.4 of this document. LIC)NSHBAD REDEVELOPMENT MASTER PLAN Page $-13 CHAPTER $ ARCHITECTUAL ~'ESIGN GUIDELINES 8.4.1.4 Transition Spaces General For the purposes of these Guidelines, transition spaces are defined as the architectural components which line pedestrian streets and other public spaces. With this in mind, all structures which form transition spaces shall be designed with the transparency and other characteristics described earlier in this document, along with the dimensional criteria to follow. The intent is to create a layer of frontage with interest and life, rather than the typical homogeneous shopping center so common today. To this end, great latitude is permitted for the design of transition spaces. Outt~or Dining/ Sidewalk Cafes Semi-public areas such as outdoor dining }:_~ -_, ' '~.~. ,~~.-- ~~ s and sidewalk w..P," ; ~ w.,t._., s m ~ ,°~-;~~-~' ~," ~ ~~[F ~~? .~ ,~ ~:~",~ r° cafes offer the ~ ~ s~: '~! °' ,~ ~ ,~-~, ~x~, ~~1 s opportunity to ,'.~:~ `= y~~ ~~ _ .~: ,~: ; ~ engage ti '~ .'-~I~ 1 ~ ,,,~ ~ pedestrians with ~~ ~ ~,^ ~~.,~"'~ ,"~::~ ` ;,: ~' ~ ~ `` r d,~ ~`~, dining activities j •~, ~,~~~.~,.. ~, ~~~,~;~, ~ ~ ~ ~~ and serve to - ~r ,~ `" ~, y ~ f r~, ,~~~ :" r«~ ~ -~ anzmate the ,.. i±~r' ,,. ~+~ .r-- ,, ~ public spaces ~.'~.. . ~'' ~ :.~'~_~~~ `'~,~~~ `~ ~ ~~~•- with the presence .. r ofpeople. As 1=r~ ~5- I.} r 3arrcia~r»• r~°x~rrr.s ~~ saPCJt c-;:r ctrrclt7t.+,• :laatPPo.~ ~,,:: "outdoor rooms" themselves these i:'S` i'tilP C'al4~~P}~e.' ?fPi' Pc't7r'~{P'7r Pta ~ types of spaces create a high level of transparency between public and semi-public domains. Minor grade changes can actually be very effective in these areas, and planter walls, guardrails, and the like can act to define the spaces and add another level of detail to the public ways. However, the subtle awareness and interaction of people from the public spaces with people inside the dining areas or cafes is important, and therefore severe physical or visual barriers should be minimized whenever possible. • Page S-]4 LIONSHEAD REDEVELOPMENT MASTER PLAN CHAt'TER S ARCHITECTUAL DESICIP*1 ~irUIDELINES • Streetfror:t Patios, Courtyards, and Gardens As semi-private spaces, patios, courtyards, and gardens which serve hotels, residences, and other private uses must maintain the solitude for which they were designed, while at the same time allowing for some interaction between resident or hotel guest and the pedestrian traveler. In addition, as eonraponents which contribute to the fabric of public spaces, patios, courtyards, and gardens with street frontage must work in concert with the street and add to its dynamic nature, through careful attention to scale, materials, and detailing. These semi-private amenities should be scaled small enough to avoid campeting with significant public spaces, to maintain the hierarchy of the outdoor rooms, and make clear distinction between the public, semi-public, and semi-private domains. Moreover, the materials which define the ground plane (such as pavers or tiles), the walls of the space {such as stucco or wood}, and the ceiling of the ~spaee (such as wood. trellises), must work in harmony with the architectural language of the building itself, and with the materials. used along the street frontage. Details used to articulate these areas can also contribute to the overall image of the public space and reinforce to its "sense of place." Colonnades, Lol;~ias, and.Arcatles Architectural features such as colonzades or loggias-comprised of columns supporting one edge of a roof and often called arcades-offer yet another way to provide successful transitions from public space to semi-public space. To maintain transparency, however, the components which make up these features -such as columns, piers, and planter walls-should be designed to allow unencumbered pedestrian movement around and through them. A minimum clear space of 6' shall be kept between building faces and streetfront columns, piers, and planter walls. This clear space will encourage two-way circulation along retail fronts., and foster comfortable movement. In addition, the ratio of solid mass (expressed by the column or pier width) to open area (expressed by the widths ofthe openings between the columns or piers} should be designed so it does not act as a barrier which prevents pedestrians from traveling along or through the colonnade, Changes in ground plane between public spaces and colonnades, loggias, and atria can also hinder freedom of pedestrian movement, and should therefore be generally limited to 12" or less. The overall intent of this section is to direct the careful design of architeetura! entities so they do not act as barriers between public spaces and the buildings those spaces serve. Vvithin these principles, L1{]NSHEAD REDEUELC?PMENT lVIl1STER PLAIT page 8-15 CHAPTER $ ARCHITECTUAL DESIGN GLnDEL1NES other factors such as elegant proportions, appropriate scale, and accessibility must also be considered. 5.4.2 Architecture 5.4.2.1 I r~trod u cti o n The architectural portion of these Guidelines is intended to provide a unified, conceptual framework using historical alpine references. Tt is imperative that the redevelopment effort address specific architectural design considerations generated by the location, climate, and surrounding enviromnent--such as addressing views, using indigenous building materials, and reflecting the alpine heritage. However, within this framework, the architectural language of buildings within Lionshead should strive to reinterpret its heritage and look to the future, instead of simply mimicking the past. 5.4.2.2 Building Form and Massing Building farm and massing-as design determinants--are especially critical to the success of Lionshead as an interesting, inviting resort. The farms of buildings and the ways in which they are massed offer opportunities to present a comfortable, pedestrian scale to the Lionshead traveler, and to strengthen the continuity of the streetseape throughout. Other vital corridors within Lionshead which are not along primary pedestrian/retail routes-such as the Clare Creek Carridor~an also benefit from well-designed massing which relates to the scale of those corridors. Form and massing act to marry a building to its site, whether the site is part of a paved plaza ar sits within natural topography, and serve to "break down" the scale of the village fabric when viewed from the ski hill. The overall design strategy of building form and massing shall relate to the harizont<~1 organization found within Lionshead (such as shopfront heights, important floor lines, and critical cave lines}, and to the planning considerations outlined in the Lionshead Master Plan (such as build-to lines, sun packets, and view corridors). The intent of this section is to guide the creation of a village which is appropriately scaled through the use of segmented forms and masses. The underlying fabric shall be constructed of structures which rise out of the ground gradually, rather than being vertical blocks set on the ground plane. At the pedestrian scale, the street level should be Pane 8-16 LIONSHEAD REDEVELOPMENT MASTER PLAN • CHAPTER $ AI2CHITECTLT~1,L DESIGI~I' GUIDELINES dynamic and interesting, by varying forms and masses at the bases of buildings. These building "skirts" should not be uniform one- or twa- stary masses, but rather fragmented farms which offer interest and diversity- $.4.2.3 Building Height General The following building height and massing criteria. shall apply to the Lionshead Master Plan study area, excluding all residential properties south of Gore. Creek, 1Drimary Retail ~'edestrlan Frontrzbes • On any property edge fronting a retail pedestrian street ar mall (see site design guidelines for definition and locations), at least SCl°la of a building face shall have a maximum 169 initial eave height, at which point that face must step back a minimum of 12'. The remaining percentage of building face may have a maximum 369 initial eave height, at which point the building face shall step back a minimum of 12°. Eave height is defined as the distance from finished grade to the initial primary eave of the structure. Gable faces ofbuildings are also measured to their eaves, excluding the actual wall area which comprises the gable. The intent of this retail/pedestrian street requirement is to present a dynamic, fragmented streetfront to outdoor spaces, rather than uniform blacks of building mass (see Section 8.4.2.2). E~ect~strr~a=a ,rcr~~a.c. riae rrr~rrr i:s rc~ ~~~rr s~A naetarGd .~r~"a•~#~ .)rraa;xr. rsa,a:~ 1~ crttcr „}~ 77TCf.Tafaaif?3i &'i:F.' !aR?l~.~tr:5 ftYakr r ~ .S£?,a°7 IIClG:fC#, .•_„~ '-~` ~- ~ • LIONSHEAD REDEVELUI'MEN'€' MAS`T'ER PLA1`J Page $-l7 CI~AI?TER $ AItCHITI/CTUAL iDES1GI'~1 G1JII)ELIIVES Ski Yard and Qpen Space Frontages This paragraph applies. to the portion of any property not meeting the criteria of the Primary Retail Pedesb°ian Frontcz~;es section above, and fronting on the ski yard or the Gore Creek corridor. Due to the unique and highly visible nature of these areas, building faces fronting them shall be limited to maximum initial cave heights of 4$', at which point those faces shall step back a minimum of 12'. It is critical. to note that the 4$' maximum initial cave }weight does not allow for an unarticulated, flat building face from grade to 4$'. The horizontal and vertical maximum unbroken building face requirements, as well as all other guidelines contained in this chapter and the Master Plan, shall apply. Remaining Building Frontage Building faces that do not meet the special site criteria of the sections above may have a maximum initial cave height of 6G', at which point those faces must step back a minimum of 12'. To the extent possiblo, all new and redeveloped buildings in Lionshead should avoid "turning their backs" on other buildings or important pedestrian corridors. However, it roust be acknowledged that very few buildings have prime frontage on all sides and almost all buildings will have different programmatic requirements and visual characteristics on their different faces. Toward that end., a building's greatest vertical mass and "back of house" functions should occur on the frontage with the least volume of pedestrian traffic. In addition, components of a building with the greatest vertical mass should be oriented north-south to minimize the blockage of southern views and sunlight. It is critical to note that the 64' maximum initial cave height. does not allow for an unarticulated, flat building face from grade to b0'. The horizontal and vertical maximum unbroken building face requirements, ail other guidelines contained in this chapter and the Master Plan, and DR$ review and approval, shall still apply. Wall Surface Criteria Notwithstanding the previous height and setback requirements, there shall be no vertical wall face greater than 35' on a building without a secondary horizontal step in the building face {the horizontal step may be a cantilever or a setback). This requirement is intended to prevent. large, unbroken planes in the middles of building faces, to further Page $-1$ I..t~JNSHEAD REDEVELQ)'MEN'f MASTER PLAN CHAPTER $ ARCHITECTiJAL DESIGN GUIDI3LINE5 • mitigate the visual impact of building height, and to provide for higher quality and mare interesting articulation of structures. While many instances will necessitate a distance of at least 24" for this movement, it shall be incumbent upon the developer to demonstrate that the intent of this requirement has been met. Absolute Maximum Heights Absolute Maximum Height is defined as the vertical distance from existing, finished ar interpolated grade -whichever is more restrictive -- to the ridge of the nearest primary roof form to that grade. With this in mind, the Average Maximum Height of any building shall not exceed 71 ft. l~lotwithstanding the notion of Average Maximum Height, the Absolute Maximum Height of any building shall not exceed 82.5 ft. Within any building footprint, height shall be measured vertically from the ridgeline of the primary roof form on a proposed or existing roof to the interpolated or existing grade directly below sand point on a proposed or existing roof to the irnagnary plane created by the interpolated grades {see Figure $-15a-c) Cnlculatio~r of Average Maximum Height The intent of implementing an Average Maximum Height for buildings is to create movement and variety in the ridgelines and roof forms in Lionshead. Toward that end, the Average Maximum Height of a building shall be calculated based upon the linear footage of ridgeline along primary roof forms. Any amount ofprimary roof form ridgeline that exceeds 71 ft. must be offset by at least an equal amount ofprimary roof firm r]dgeline falling below 71 ft., with the distance below 7] ft. equivalent to or greater than the distance exceeding 71 ft. The average calculation shall be based on the aggregate linear footage ofprimary roof forms across an entire structure, not separate individual roof forms (see Figure 8-15c) Average Maximum Height Calculation .Average Maximum Height - [Arimary Ridge Length (A) X Average Height of Ridge (A}] + [Primary Ridge Length (B} X Average Height of Ridge (B)] +[Primary Ridge Length (C) }: Average Height ~f Ridge (C}] +[,.,] [Primary Ridge Length (A} + primary Ridge Length (B} + Primary- Ridge Length (C) ~ (......}] • I.IONSHI;AD R,EDEVELDPMENT MASTER PLAN Page 8-19 CHAPTERS ARCIIITECTUAL DESIGN GUIDELINES Additional Requirements/Exceptions AlI buildings, regardless of permitted building heights and massing principles, shall conform to all established Public View Corridors {see Lionshead Redevelopment 1Vlaster FIan}. Special "landmark" building elements,. such as chimneys, towers, or other unique architectural fornls, may exceed the Absolute Maximum Height, subject to approval by the reviewing board. This provision is intended to provide far architectural creativity and quality of building farm, and shall not be used as a means or circumventing the intent of the building height limitations. In addition, regardless of final building height, buildings shall avoid monotonous, unbroken ridge lines, and shall provide visual interest through the use varied peak heights, roof forms, gables, and other appropriate architectural techniques. • Page ~-2C- LIUNSHEAD REDEVELOPMENT MASTER PLAN iZ-s ~~~d t~a~d x=~.I.sdy~ .~r~~~~Iao-Ianaa~~ a~aFlsnlol~ • ~• A I ba ... ~' da 'b K A• Y } R • S~I~II"E~QIfl~ NoIS3Q 'Idfl,~~'3,LIH~2I~' ~ 2I~.LdE~H~ • ~b~d ~r~xsb~ x~I~wan~I~n~cl~~ adallsri©i~ F .~7 C D u ___._ _~ iy __ _ _ . _._.~s .__ Y r= ~,: ~" 1 - ~ ~ ~ ~.~ ~~ ~~ ~ ~~ ~~ ^ `+ ~ +~I I °: ..~~. ~ .r. ~° 1 ~~ _ - L7 F { S y r r U _ ~?t G .~ -. ~ 7 a i ~: ~, .. „ ~J ~ /~ f-~-~ -.~._ _ .____ _]r~.. . _ ~ - - .. _. _.. ~ h r~ i .r C~ b ~ ~ ~ ~ G'v ;ti. n 7? 1 E h ~' N 1 ZZ-g a~Ed '~ ~~~ -~~..e_ ~ .~_ _~ ]~7 y p f~ 1. _ ~~ ." ,, 3~' ~ I ,,, ` -- - ~-- ,. ~` I r a ` r n '.r. -~'. ,, ~~ ~ `L r ~ i~r r r p' _r r7 .y n S'31~II'I~CIIfI~ ,trIJIS~[Q '~'t~'~'I.L3~xIH~2I~7 ~ Ndxd''dH~ z`i 3 £L-8 aQ~d Ka~~ ~[~isay~ .I.rs~v~~IO-I~n~cl~~ Qa~xs~Ir~~~I • i H O 1 v w ~ `~~ s yH+ .~~, H ~• 00 Vl h h a n' fi ~.. +.., +Yq s0 n -, a`' _.._~__ ':~ ,~ ~_ i .AS~,rrt~i~^ R: li ~a ~. ~..,.., .. f: ~f. !!~ - - -~- 4 .. ~ ~ a. n r a :3 m I`^~, F[;:tv~ {1I") ~~ ~r x ~~ .~ 41 Rl f+! 1 .w ai ~G g '. `~ S w". ': Si ~7 i` .~ r f - I i` ,-} ' ~ y _. S: ', I f Y. 'l+ ~ /°~ r n .., • S~Ni'I~Qlfll~ N~IS~Q 'Iad1.L~~.LIH~?I~' g 2i3.I.d~'II~ CHAPTER $ ARCHITECTUAL DESIGN GUIDELINES 8.4.2.4 Exterior Walls General Exterior walls within Lionshead shall be designed with clear defimition of base,. middle. and top. This organizing principle will weave the separate pieces of the community into a cynsistent fabric. The tripartite strategy of base, middle, and top will establish key datums, yr special horizontal layers, within the community which reinforce tine form., massing and height guidelines - described earlier. To ?~ this end, the three-part -~ ~ definition ofbuildings shall relate directly to ~. ~ organizing principles `~,, such as existing datums, architectural elements such as storefront colonnades and awnings (where applicable, and massing strategies such as building setbacks and X1,:3 ,4~ ..., `:'f r..lrrur n{1'Ci~~t ntli?~#1~~. f~~^, maximum heights. This strategy can relate to form and rrrassing principles through the development of street-level setbacks defining the bases yf buildings where appropriate, and minor setbacks relating to the middles and tops. of buildings. The bases of buildings should be visually dynamic tv heighten the pedestrian experience, In addition, their interface with the typography of the site is crucial, as they act as the transition zones between man- made structures and natural grade. Visual dynamics at street level are most effectively accomplished through the introduction of secondary fyrms, materials, colyrs and detailing. • Purge 8-~4 LIONSI-IEAD REDEVEI,©PMENT I1/IASTER PLAN CHAPTER 8 ARCHITECTUAL DESIGN GUIDELINES l ~, ~.isrirr~ 1 w ~e~ !' F,~ ~- r `: 7)~nsrr+vrr IraWrs .r,aeci to ;?rl,,,crtrsr ~;r?~?c~fc•. rc~?trt a•.rf-s?its; .4~,-t~~rreres w However, the use of indigenous materials at the primary elements (see fallowing sections for definitions) iS Critical in tying buildings to their sites. Rhythm and order should be introduced to guide the traveler through the streetscape, and offer an enhanced sense of movement through Lianshead. To reinforce this intent, street-level walls shall not span more than 34 feet horizontally without significantly varying. at least ~ of the following 5 characteristics: • Massing or Height • Material, Fenestration; Qr Color • .. .. ... LIDNSHEAD REDE~?ELC~PMENT MASTF.,R PLAN Page S-2~ ~ ,~ &-J~4` llctsnrti~~,-r .p,~~,p,r s~tr„ '•e• , ... .O ~~Ct1R1hC1 ~ ~77ttliftt'1 ~.?' rfl F~i:"ir _.;li'.v CH,APT'ER $ ARCHITECTUAL DESIGN GUIDELINES When massing or height are varied, buildings with street-level walls may vary material, fenestration, nr color to meet the 3a-foot span requirement; however, if massing or height are not varied within 30 feet, material, fenestration, and color must be varied. au~s laei~tip .iU' max ut iatieht ':4 ' ncti+ hcisiaa •+ '~ y -~~ -r i r~, h-f9 t~r3fr~,arrade nm1 stt~~~ti•t„ar f•rrt~t•~n 7k~ ~e} t' ~Scur Existing buildings may disregard the 3Q'-maximum horizontal wall guideline if their structural bays or other organizing elements exceed 30', provided that the distance over 30' falls within reasonable limits. An existing building with 36' structural bays, for instance, is not required to further divide those bays; however, an existing building with 48' structural bays may be required to divide those bays into 24' sections, depending upon the nature of the pedestrian street frontage. The middles of buildings within Lionshead shall read as "quiet" masses when compared to building bases aid roofs, and should act as a unifying background throughout the community. This should be done through the use of simple materials, such as stucco, and more consistent, repetitive fenestration and detailing (see Sections 8.4.2.5 and 8.4.2.9). Building middles should not be designed as less important, banal elements, but rather as elements which present interest and articulation through subtle detailing through fenestration, shutters, trim, and the like-instead of massing. The taps of walls shall be designed to comfortably engage their pitched roofs, without the abrupt changes in faun and massing so commonly found in structures with primarily flat roofs. Walls should also be used to Page 8-26 LIC3NSHEAD REDEVELOPMENT MASTER PLAN savlti r:a.tt~f ~ }U' naaax at marcrisai R ccill~r "~'~-' ~ nLOt raaas'1 1 CHAPTER $ ARCHI'I'ECTUAL DESIGN GUIDELINES visually reduce roafheights, through the careful design. of lowered plate heights and integrated dormers, which help to merge wall planes with roof forms and interlock building masses with roof masses- The tops of buildings shall be capped with well-proportioned, pitched roofs, acting as the uppermost unifying image within the architectural fabric of Lionshead. Roofs viewed from pedestrian streets should nearly disappear frrom view as travelers approach, due to their pitches relative to ground-level sightlines. However, viewed from a distance, roof forms within Lionshead. should offer a consistent roofscape to the observer within the community or on the mountain adjacent to it. Guidelines which direct the design of the roofseape are described in Section 8.4,2.7. It~aterrals (General) As mentioned earlier, building materials should be carefully selected to recall the heritage of our alpine antecedents, yet look forward to the vision of Lionshead as a modern resort community. The specific requirements and limited palette of major building materials described herein are intended to reinforce the visual harmony envisioned for the community and act as additional unifying thread for the resort. Materials used at primary building elernents~lefined as those which exceed 500 square feet (SF} in wall surface area-shaI] recall and relate to the indigenous materials of the area and enhance the sense of our Colorado mountain resort heritage. They are described below according to their most appropriate locations within the tripartite order of individual structures. Secondary building elements, or those which cover an area of .500 SF or less, may be comprised of varying materials to add design flexibility, encourage individual expression, and enhance visual interest. 1"hey are not specifically listed within these Guidelines, but may include materials such as painted steel, canvas and similar textiles, colored unit masonry, and the like. Within this framework, creative use of materials is encouraged, but "patchwork" designs of inconsistent material locations or patterns should be avoided. All secondary building elements will be approved at the discretion of.~the reviewing body.. ~3ase Materiels Materials selected for the bases of buildings must balance the transparency required at retail shopfronts with the strong, anchoring • LIQNSIiEAD RLUEV'ELQPMEI'1T MASTER FLAN Page 8-27 CHAPTERS ARCHITECTUAL DESIGN GUIDELINES elements needed to tie buildings to their sites. That is, they must successfully integrate the notions of mass wall and. frame wall. In addition, they should offer both large- and small-scale texture at the ground plane, to add varying levels of interest and heighten the pedestrian experience. With this in mind, building bases sha11 be primarily constructed of individual pieces or unit materials such as stone veneer. When using stone, veneers should be selected which lend authenticity to mass walls thin veneers or those which. appear as mere surface applique should be avoided. Battering may be used as an additional-but optional-design tool to visually strengthen the bases of structures. As mentioned earlier, secondary elements within building bases may incorporate accent materials, but these materials should be carefully selected to act in concert with the rest of the architecture. Shapfronts and other special street-level amenities have the most latitude with respect to material selection, but can be very successful if constructed ofhand-crafted, durable materials. These types of znatenials can hold up to the careful scrutiny of the street-level observer, along with the physical abuse common to public ways. Acceptable accent materials include-but are not limited to-wood, wrought iron, forged or formed metals, and etched glass. ~idclle Wall Materials • The middles of buildings shall be constructed of neutral field materials such as true stucco, EIFS, or wood. These types of materials help to establish the "quiet" or "background" vertical surfaces necessary at the major wall planes which typically make up the bulk of structures. In addition, they offer an interesting difference between the dynamic nature of building bases and the more repetitive, subtle patterns of building walls above street level. Materials such as stucco should be designed as an expression of mass, rather than infill between structural members. Where building walls meet roofs, materials which successfully integrate the tops of buildings to their middles, such as ~vaod in the form of brackets, rafter tails, and the like, are most effective. Approved materials for use on building roofs are described in Section 8.42.? of these Guidclincs. Colors Building colors far structures within Lianshead should be chosen to blend structures with the mountain environment, while offering visual and psychological warmth to observers. To this end, earth tines and . Page 8-~8 LIONSHEAD REDEVELOPMENT MASTER I'LA'~ CHAP'I'I;R $ ARCHITECTUAL DESIGN GUIDELINES other law-intensity colars derived directly from the surrounding mountains should be used on primary building elements, defined as those which cover more khan 5©0 SF. Earth tones include hues such as off-whites, beiges, tans, and light grays, introduced in shades slightly darker than their natural counterparts. Colors inherent to the materials used, such as natural stones and naturally-weathering woods, generally offer the hues and textures most desirable within Lionshead, and such materials should not be painted. However, integrally-colored concrete., stucco, and semi-transparent wood stains are acceptable as well. In an effort to limit the palette of colors used on buildings and avoid the "patchwork" effect, no more than three colors should be used on primary building elements. Secondary building elements (S00 SF or less in area} may be clad in accent colors to add visual interest to the overall streetscape. They should act as highlighting elements at storefronts, primary entries, and signage, and are mast appropriate at lower levels to engage pedestrian interest. Upper levels, in an effort to act as the more "quiet" fabric of Lionshead, should. avoid brighter colors and remain true to the earth tones listed shave. When used, accent colors should reflect the natural mountain environment of Lionshead, with gilds, oranges, reds, and shades of green, blue, and purple used most often. Colors foreign to the mountain setting should be avoided. Ti~i nt Trim calory, generally used on elements to express structltire, door and window openings, significant Hoar lines, fascias, and the like, shall act in concert with field and accent colars. This is most effectively accomplished through the selection. of deep or vibrant colars having the same or similar hues, but using different shades or tints. Ai street level, accent colors may be used on trim to express storefronts and reinforce the rhythm of the streetscape. 8.4.2..5 Exterior Doors and Windotivs General In the tradition of mountain antecedents, openings for exterior doors and windows in buildings within the Lionshead community shall be treated as recessed elements in mass walls of stave, concrete, or . stucco, rather than flush surfaces an them. Within frame walls, they shall be expressed as infzll material between structural members, and • LIONSHEAD REDEVELOPMENT MASTER PLAN Page $-29 CHA.I''I'ER 8 ARCHITEC~'UAI. DESIGN GUIDELINES recessed from those members. This treatment lends itself to the image of structures comprised of significant mass or structure, instead of curtain walls clad aver lightweight frames. Given this general approach, however, door and window sizes, shapes, types, materials,. and colors should relate to the tripartite order established through development of base, middle, and top, Exterior Doer Sikes, Shapes, and Types Boor sizes should be appropriate to their materials, with rustic, "heavy" doors generally used in stone or concrete to accentuate mass, and glazed, "light" doors used in field materials such as stucco and wood siding, or at window wall assemblies (see commercial front exceptions to follow in this Section). Entry doors located along retail streets and other public ways offer the f~s~ :s-?tv: J.r,tr'i~ [ln~r,~; zu r•,~:•;:;. first true glimpse of buildings str~~.s strt;,,:': r" ~• . , . ,,,.r.;: r .... when approached from those `"`fr`'""""''";:: spaces, and should therefore be designed with hand-crafted quality and attention to detail. These doors should be oversized when possible, but in proportion to the frontage of which they are a part. Entry doors for large retail centers or hotels should be significantly larger than those found in smaller, more intimate shops. Other doors for structures, regardless of location, should be designed as part of an obvious hieraxchy, with primary entry doors the largest, secondary entry doors somewhat smaller, and private or egress-only doors smaller yet. Shapes of doors should relate directly to their locations on the building, with rectangular shapes being the most prevalent. Speciall}r- shaped doors and double doors are encouraged at primary entries along retail frontages, or as custom portals for private residences, while the middles of buildings should be characterized by more standard shapes. Special shapes should not be overused or used in a random, ad-hoc fashion; shapes such as arched heads or square, overhead doors should relate to the overall building architecture. C7 ~J page 5-30 LIONSHEAD REDEVELOPMENT MA5`1`ER PLAN • CI-IAF'TER $ ARCIIITECTTJAL DESIGN GUIDELINES ~:~ rl.'~~: )~~7ll~cl d7,~'icciiG(tntcer~"Ltd ~t•tjP_ ~~s F~. dfi t7 it7u;"r F3z: .57Tfz d4~"tl~.7~ a~sc~' cacl et_5 rsr~'ii~~t.k' E'~~rlri?s j~3r f7xtelr~+Yrt~:rts Exterior Donr ,'Ifirxterirrls rrnrl Cnlnrs All exterior doors within Lionshead shall be constructed of high- quality, durable materials. such as woad, metal-clad wood, or metal; doors at primary hotel, condominium, ar retail entries may also include large areas of glass to attract pedestrians. Glass doors should relate to building orientation, views, or functions, with large areas of glass generally avoided in locations other than those noted. Maintenance-free materials such as copper, baked aluminum, and naturally-weathering woods are encouraged-painted metals and woods should be avoided whenever possible. Capper cladding and wrought iron doors may be left to patina naturally, while industrial metals such as steel and aluminum should be baked or anodized with finish colors to match. building trim- • Commercial fronts and private entries offer the unique ability to introduce hand-crafted, custom-built portals for businesses and private residences, and must also have the ability to display shop wares. They are therefore permitted more latitude with respect to materials, colors and amounts of glazing, Aluminum storefronts may be used an commercial structures, provided they are finished in factory finish, All-glass doors are permitted as well, with no limits. set on the amount of glass permitted at retail level, Etched glass is encouraged to bring a level of detail to special. storefronts. D~aors which are part of window LIC?NSHEAD REL7EVLL01'MENT MASTER PLAN laage$-31 CHAPTER $ ARCHITECTUAL DESIGN GUIDELINES wall assemblies may also have large glass areas, to take full advantage of mountain views. All exterior door glazing shall be non-reflective, to minimize off-site glare, particularly from the ski mountain. Exterior Door Hardware Variations in designs and materials for exterior door hardware at primary entries are encouraged to bring a level of fine detail and creative expression to buildings within the community. Approved materials include brass, copper, wrought iron, wood, and industrial metals such as aluminum or steel. Industrial metals should be prefinished in colored or clear factory finish systems to reduce maintenance problems. Door hardware in areas other than primary entries should complement the surrounding materials and details. Window Sizes, Shapes and Types As with exterior doors, window sizes should be appropriate to their surrounding wall materials, with narrow, relatively tall windows used in stone or concrete, and larger, more expansive windows used in field materials such as stucco and woad siding, or in window wall assemblies. Fenestration within field materials should be designed with decorative trim and sills, or ~. heavy structural frames, so they do - i! .. • r;.. ~ ~~;m_ ~~ .. s not appear as "punch-outs" within . ~' ~ ~. :s ,y ` ~~ ` ' those materials. Wuxdows located ~ -~ ~ ~ , ~ along retail streets and other ublic p : ~', = f- ~- ,~ ~... ~~ I ~ ~ ' ways offer locations in which to :; , -~ ~ • display goods to pedestrians, and ~" ~"'~ ~ should therefore be designed with particular care, Window walls `' 1 , ' a ,,,~..~ .~:=~ ~~.~ ~ should be designed in proportion to ~. ~ ~'~ their associated frontages, with ~~~:.~ windows at Targe retail centers or ,~ ~ ` ~ ~ hotels significantly larger than chose _ ~ } ~"-~~~'~~~ '.1~~ found in smaller, mare intimate shops. Ctther fenestration, regardless of location, should be designed as part ofan obvious hierarchy, with lower-level, retail street openings the largest, and windows above somewhat smaller. • Shapes of windows should also relate directly to their locations on the building, with rectangular shapes being the most prevalent. Page 8-32 LIONSHEAD REDEVELOPMENT MASTF..R PLAN ,. ; ' ~' ,k"-_ (~ lcur lri/afi)1f' iltc'rnt'C~fir i3~ i~:r.4c~. ntrcfclf~, tr~ii rolj. • CHAPTER ~ ARCHITECTUAL DESIGN GUIDELINES Fenestration located within the middles of buildings should be shaped and organized into fairly regular patterns, to establish rhythm and continuity. Specially-shaped windows are encouraged at walls along retail frontages, or as custom openiangs in distinct areas of private residences. They are also appropriate at dormers and other special roof elements. As with doors, specially-shaped windows should relate to the overall building architecture. And as a general rule, the variety of geometric shapes used should be limited to ~ on any given building- • Acceptable window types include high-quality fixed, double-hung, awning, and casement units. Sliding windows and multiple-opening units such as jalousie are generally lesser-quality units not conducive to the mountain environment. and should be avoided. At retail levels, bay, box and bow windows are encouraged to animate the pedestrian street and integrate public and semi-public domains. All windows should strive to add visual interest through careful design of mullions,. muntins, and divided liter. The intent of the Cxuidelines is to recall the regional heritage through the thoughtful design of fenestration and how it relates in scale, proportion, and materials, to the tripartite order of structures within the community. Window Materials and Colors ,,,,;, Windows within Lionshead shall - ~~~ be painted or stained wood, or r,, :;,;~, -~..-:~,'~, clad in maintenance-free metals • it _- such as copper, or aluminum and steel with baked finishes. Capper cladding may be left to patina naturally, while baked enamel -~ - colors for aluminum and steel cladding should be similar to trim colors, and in similar complementary hues to wall colors ar stained wood colors. Factory finishes should be selected to withstand the intense ultraviolet. radiation found at f~r<~~~'.3 I~'iirtit',usa'krrtrl;j Ert~flttrt rz=f,t±;~r~+. hlgher elevatkOISS, and prolonged ,~ ~ .a ,~~;; ::,r~r,-ar; ~ :: ~,,;~ ~~. .. : <. fade-resistant warranties should ,~.i;ei; str.~~-<..+7atir'h.~„~ be ~onSldered. In addition, glazing shall be non-reflective, to minimize off-site glare, particularly from the ski mountain. Page 8-33 X.,IONSIIEAD REDEVELOPYvIENT MASTER PLAN CHAPTER $ ARCHITECTUAL DESIGN GUIDELINES Decorative shutters are permitted within Lionshead only if they are designed to operate or appear to operate. When used, they should be constructed of wood and finished with durable stains or paints. Their design and placement should be consistent and should not take on a random ar haphazard appearance. Design freedom is encouraged within these parameters, and within the context of the other architectural elements found on the building, including handrail designs, ornamental iron, and similar detailing.. 8.4.2..6 Balconies, Guardrails, and Handrails Locatirrn anrLSi4e Balconies should. be carefully located with respect to their orientation to the sun, involvement with public spaces, and snow and watershed from structures above and onto structures or passers-by below. They should be sized as outdoor rooms, with ample space for outdoor furniture and other amenities, or merely as small,.. private parapets used as "step-outs" to allow fresh air into the adjacent room. False balconies and balconies which straddle these two roles should be 3lcr+•.I~i3ils e3srrt~ee~~~F~33t' r~!::;°ic l ir~~! ~raC r7trr~f<<e~r.] tt`~fi2+x, a7e~s.>(:'r< 17::3T1:7Jn~FY'1"5. avoided, as they tend to lack the benefits of either and are often left unused. Proper location and size will. ensure that balconies become animated spaces, rather than outdoor storage areas. As animated spaces, their placement in public plazas and pedestrian streets- straddling the semi-private and public domains-will infuse those spaces with the vitality needed to dra~~ visitors to Lionshead. Page 5-34 LI(~NSHEAD R,EDEVELOPMEN'T ~IASTI;R PLAN • CHAP`T'ER $ r1.RCHITECTUAL DESIGN GUIDELINES Balconies which face service alleys ar are located within other socially "dead" spaces, or are susceptible to water or snowshed are generally unsuccessful spaces and should be avoided in Lionshead. The intent of this Section is to infuse public spaces with the energy of occupied balconies, and encourage designers to avoid the design of lifeless balconies which remain unoccupied and therefore detract from public spaces. Materials and Designs Custom designs for balconies, guardrails, and handrails offer the opportunity far truly creative ehr,x~ssion within these Guidelines, and unique design solutions are encouraged. Approved materials for prinr~ary elements such as guardrails, handrails, posts, and support brackets include stucco-covered walls (for guardrails only), naturally weather-resistant weeds, wrought iron and other decorative metals, and steel. Materials such as glass, plastic, pige rails, and metal panels are strongly discouraged. Secondary elements such as pickets and ornamental detailing may use other materials not listed above but will be reviewed on a case-by-ease basis, Materials which meet the intent of the Guidelines and work in harmony with the architectural language . of the building can lead to positive solutions, but all secondary building materials will be approved at the discretion of the reviewing body. Drainable balconies---or those which shed water off them via waterproof membranes as apposed to letting water trickle thrc~ztgh them-shall be designed whenever other balconies, pedestrian streets, or other public ways are exposed to waver ar snowshed from those balconies. Placement of the drain systems should be carefully considered to avoid passers-by below. Nan-drainable balconies may be used in all other locations and should be constructed ofweather- resistant woods or ornamental metals. Within these general parameters, balcony, guardrail, and handrail designs should be patterned after a rational order of structure and detail Primary structural ar decorative members should be in proportion io the balconies they are supporting, which in turn should relate to the overall building scale. An honest, straight-forward expression of structure should be sought whenever possible, avoiding design faux~ar such as stucco-covered beams or grossly undersized brackets. • LIONSHEAD REDEVELOPMENT MAS'T'ER PLAN Page 5-35 CHAPTER ~ ARCHITECTUAL DESIGN CrU1DELIN'gS 8.4,2.7 Roofs [;eneral In keeping with the spirit of the area's mountain architecture, primary roofs within Lionshead are to be predominantly gables and hips, with sheds or flat roofs permitted at smaller, secondary roofs. Primary roofs are defined as roofs which cover more than S00 SF of roof area, while secondary roofs are those which cover SOQ SF of 1•oclf area or less. Secondary roofs which occur at logical breaks in building massing may exceed ~(}0 SF if the general intent of fragmented farms and visual harmony is met, Free-standing sheds and butterfly roofs are not permitted. Mansard roofs are permitted on buildings where pitched roofs would be impractical, if the mansards are of similar form, pitch, material, color, and detail to other roofs within the community (and identified within these Guidelines). Ifused, these types of raofs should be considerate not only of views from the pedestrian street, but also those from the ski mountain. To this end, areas of flat roof within the slopes of the mansard shall be xr~ ct.y~ t"=ta~~~ wicr~rr~c~rs•s}i~:~ur"rtSr~;f~rr~f~. limited to the practical cr~ar•,~i'. ,'rarer i~t.'1f7if+'t~ tc)1"~!f1t1i H7 !)r' 7Y`t: i; minimum, and the materials f.''rE" ~'~rrt`,1ts=;;~'s• :.. •.,lrrrr~Ci!arrzf Izirt~>,acz~.r~- forthe flat roof shall be black or in a color to blend with the sloped roof. In addition, rooftop equipment within the flai areas shall be painted. to blend with the roof material {see "Miscellaneous Equipment" Section to fallow). The overall image for Lionshead takes its cue from the simple, fragmented, gabled roof farms of European alpine villages, where views of the roofscapes from the mountains are paramount. • A.11 new construction. shall comply with the following roof criteria. Substantial expansions and renovations shall also adhere to these Guidelines, along with the remaining portions of the building which are not being expanded or renovated {see exceptions above, in Sections 8.3.1, 8.3.4.2, and later in this Section). [hoof framing shall he expressed wherever possible, particularly through exposed ridge beams, outriggers, rafter tails, and fascia boards. Page $-3b L1C?NSI-LEAD REDEVEL©PM1NT IVIASTER PLAN • CIIAPTIR $ ARCHITECTUAL DESIGN GUIDELINES Dimensr'anal Guidelr'rres Roofs should be constructed with 30" minimum eave and rake overhangs, with dimensions dependent upon overall building size. Secondary roofs may have overhangs as small as 18", but should work with the overall scale of the roofscape, Ridge beams and outriggers should be of visually sturdy members (6x or Sx material for wood, anal equivalent sizes for other materials}, sized to support rafters and overhangs; decorative end cuts or patterns are encouraged. Rafter tails shall also appear sturdy (2x or 3x material for wood) and be exposed to express structure. Save and rake fascias shall be wide enough to screen end prafiles at metal roofs, and to offer a consistent image with respect to structural roof members. • • ~{ Fitch `- , •- W , ' Roof pitches for Y r ~,. ~-~ .~'T ' " ,~'~ ,, primary roofs shall bo l~' '~ ~ ° from 6:12 to 12:12, _ ~• _~.. :. ~ ~ , ~~, __~* ' _ inclusive. Fitch breaks ' "`I= _~~' ~ ~' , ; ~ ~~ are permitted when they ~, ~ ~'- ~-. occur at architecturally { ~ ~' ~~~ ~, i ": { appropriate locations - such as plate lines, ~` ,y ~ ~- ''.,,.r,.;•. c-,a.. ier,c! ~~,c~:rrr+ra~" r,:r r!r, changes in plane, etc- ..:~~~r,;~r ,::~„t, :. r;}~~ r'ef l.t~~tt.5ir~'ttcb. ~1'O adCl variety t0 the Lionshead roofscape, secondary sloped roofs may have pitches ranging from 4:12 to 12:12, and flat roofs may have limited use as secondary forms. Existing structures with especially large footprints may deviate from the pitch requirements if they meet the overall intent of the roof guidelines and are responsive to views from both the pedestrian street and the ski mountain. Steep mansard roofs which exceed the 12:12 maximum pitch criteria are not encouraged, but may be necessary in certain instances when excessive building dimensions make the 12: i2 pitch requirement impractical. These buildings will he handled on a case- by-case basis, and evaluated on intent. rather than quantitative criteria. L.IONSHEAD REDEVELOPMENT MASTER PLAN Fage 8-37 CHAPTER $ ARCHITECTUAL DESIGN GUIDELINES Materials and Cnlnrs Primary roofs shall be covered with a limited palette of unit materials to present a coherent image for Lionshead. Approved materials for primary roofs include----but are not limited tom-'metal shingles, cementitious shingles, concrete tiles, wood shakos or shingles, and high-auaiity asphalt shingles which offer acceptable colors and depth. Metal shingles may be of copper (16 oz/SF minimum weight), terns metal, or other materials with natural patina, Secondary roofs may be covered with metal panels, in corrugated, rolled, or standing seam. profiles. Primary roofs shall be in neutral, earth-tone colors, with brown or gray tones-bright colors or reflective materials are not pez-cv~itted. Roofs may incorporate blends to achieve desired colors- on-site mock-ups are required when blends are proposed. At retail levels, accent colors are permitted far secondary roofs to add vitality to the streetscape. Changes in roof materials or colors shall talcs place in logical locations, such as changes in pitch or changes in plane. Dormers Dormers are considered secondary roof elements, and as such are permitted some latitude in terms of form, pitch and material. Dormers may be gables, hips, or sheds, with pitch as identified previously for secondary roofs. When designed as an extension of upper-level walls,. they should be constructed in the more traditional manner, above broken eaves on bath sides of the dormers, as opposed to continuous eaves up and over the dormers. Design freedom is encouraged, and dormers with non-compliant forms or pitches will be considered if the overall roofscape provides the image intended. l r,k :~-.'~ ,1rt~PSti l:ra1•!'1 rl.~1ct11.e s;';n;;l~f r~•.:P;r to %i ~i1'1' .irl ~;, N!'i'i R1'(Pi t1ii: FPlE'1113 rlfi lrlt` ; :~i: (~d ~;( .Snnwgunrds, Gutters and Downspouts Snowguards or snowclips shall be used wherever significant amounts of snow may accumulate over occupied areas, such as pedestrian streets, entries, patios, decks, balconies, or uncovered parking areas. Pitched roofs which. face north are particularly susceptible to snow and • • • Page 5-38 LIONSHEAD REDEVELOPMENT MASTER PLAN CHAPTER $ ARCIIITECTUAL DESIGN GUIDELINES _. .. ice accumulation, as are lower roofs to the north of and therefore in the shadow of-their higher neighbors. In these oases several rows of snowguards or many snowclips may be necessary. Snow and ice accumulation on metal roofs---which heat quickly during sunny winter days-is especially dangerous to unsuspecting persons or equipment. Metal roofs which face south or are located significantly higher than adjacent, lower roofs shall be equipped with snowguards or snowclips to prevent injury to people or damage to lower roofs. C~utdoar gathering areas which face south and are not completely covered may be exposed to water drip from the roofs above them. These locations-which may include heavily-used public spaces such as sun pockets or pocket plazas-are ideal candidates for gutters and downspouts. Where roofs are in constant. shadow or have northern exposures, gutters and downspouts used in conjunction with heat. tape may work well. Gutters used below snowguards should be designed to take the load of the accumulated snow and ice which snowguards frequently release. Approved materials for gutters and downspouts within Lionshead include aluminum or steel with baked finish, and capper orlead-coated copper. Gutter sections may be traditional or half-round. snowguards shall be constructed of painted plate steel vertical supports (painted black, ar to ma#ch roof or building trim color) with horizontal members made of materials which recall the structure of the building, such as timbers, logs,. or tube steel . Large structures, where snowguards are not readily visible from street level, may use the rnore utilitarian expanded metal or mesh. dams, welded to steel horizontal sections and vertical supports. All exposed steel shall be painted. MiscelLarreaus Equipment All rniscellancous rooftop equipment, including roof vents, antennas and satellite dishes, shall be painted to blend with the roofs to which they relate. Major pieces of equipment on commercial buildings shall be strategically located to conceal them from view, or hidden in cupolas or other structures-exposed equipment is not permitted. All fleshings shall be copper or painted metal to match those found on exterior walls. The intent of these provisions is to present awell- blended roofscape tlv-oughout the community, as seen from the public spaces as well. as from the mountain. • LIONSI-IEai~ REI]~vELGI'MENT MasT~R PLAN Page 8-34 CIIAPTEK $ ARCHITECTUAL DESIGN GUIDELINES Skylights/Solar Panels Skylights and solar panels are permitted within Lionshead if they are less than 3 feet higher than the surrounding roof. Both elements must be included in maximum roof height calculations, and shall be well- hidden from street level and tha mountain. 8.4.2.5 Fireplaces and Chimneys Fireplace Requirements Fireplaces shall be designed to meet all applicable Codes, including the restriction on wood-burning units within Lionshead. Exposed flues and vents for gas-operated fireplaces ar other equipment such as furnaces should be hidden from primary views, and painted io blend with the nearest building materials. Chirnrte}~ Si;,es arrd Shapes All flues 6" diameter or greater which penetrate roofs shall be designed with chimneys. The sizes of chimneys should be in scale with the architecture of the building- not small enough to be lost in the massiveness of the structure, but not large enough to overwhelm the structure. Chimneys should be designed with relatively slender / ~~> ~'-'~.~ 1:~~ c ~~r-;rr;~•e ~•l;s'r,~rr~~ t•c'trrs proportions when viewed from at ~~~;~~ ~~.~<<:r' 7- ,: ;~; r1a. K u>Pcc-~.~rr~c~ least one profile, with height greater than width, and in rectangular shapes. Heights of gas-burning chimneys or boiler flues shall be designed to proportionally match their wood-burning counterparts, to lend authenticity and consistency to the overall roofscape. Chimney ti9aterials Chimneys within Lionshead shall be covered in stone veneer Ito match building veneer) or stucco, to express the alpine heritage of the area. Wood or metal-clad chimneys are permitted at small, residentially- scaled buildings only. • Page 5-40 LI©NSHEAD itEAEVELOYMENT MASTER PLAN • CHAPTERS ARCHITECTUAL I}ESICiN GUIDELINES Chimney Caps Chimneys may terminate in decorative caps of stone, stucco, or metal. Creative designs, such as arched openings within caps, barrel or pitched metal roofs, and the like are encouraged to Iend interest to the building roofscape. Chimney caps should act as elegant crowns to nicely-proportioned chimneys, and should not seem bulky or top- heavy. When flat or pitched stone caps are used, they shall have a minimum thickness of 4". All chimney caps shall be designed to screen spark arrestors and other utilitarian equipment as much as possible. 8.4.2.9 Detail Detail should be introduced to the architecture of Lionshead to infuse heritage, culture, and artistry to the Lionshead environment. Well- designed ornamentation can serve to complement and perhaps intensify the other architectural principles discussed in these Guidelines, but should be designed to work in harmony with-and not against the basic architecture. The design of signage, brackets, ]ightposts, and. the like should present ahand-crafted quality, particularly at street level. Detail at the middles of buildings should rely more upon pattern or carefully-designed repetition to visually connect parts of a building together or separate buildings to one another. hiss ,1`•. ft rl;rt, .k- ?_'' l1~ rcrr! ~rr,;l~! r^tJ7ec7 lr~rifar~i a 'r~r,~rr rr::l ~~r~yat~=u • LI(7NSHEAD RIdDEVELnPMENT MASTER PLAN Page $-41 CHAPTER $ ARCHITECTUAL DESIGN GUIDELINES g.5 Summary Table of Quantitative Criteria The following table offers a "quick glimpse" of the quantitative criteria established within these Guidelines, by Section number. However, it is not designed to act in lieu of a thorough review of this document- The values listed in the table should be evaluated in conjunctipn with the actual Sections which they pertain to, particularly in fight of the explanations of design intent, clarifications, possible exceptions, and other notes not identified within. Sect Description Criteria 8.4.1.3 Pedestrian Street Width-to-Height Relationships 1:112 to 1:1 t/z 8.4.2.3 Bldg Eave Height at Rctail/F'edestrian Streets 511% wall face ~ lb' maximum height SO% wall face ~ 36' maximum height 12' minimum step back 8.4.2.3 Bldg Eave Height at Ski Yard/Gore Cr Corridor 48' maximum eave height I2' minimum step back 8.4.2.3 Bldg Eave Height at Remaining Areas 60' maximum eave height 12' minimum step back 8.4.2.3 Wall Surface Criteria 3S' maximum vertical face Horizontal. step required 8.4.2.3 Maximum Ridge Heights 71' average maximum height 82.5' absolute maximum height 8.4.2.4 Exterior Horizontal Wall Spans 30' maximum span at street level 8.4.2.4 Primary/Secondary )31dg Material Definitions Primary: exceed 500 SF area Secondary: 5fl0 SF area or less 8.4.2.4 Primary/Secondary BJdg Colors Primary: exceed 500 SF area Secondary: 500 SF area or less $_4.2.7 Primary/Secondary Roof Definitions Primary: exceed 500 SF roof area Secondary: 500 SF roof area or less Compliance Criteria for Existing Roofs Substantial expansionlrenovation 8.4.2.7 Roof Dimensional Guidelines 30" min eave and rake overhangs 18" overhangs at secondary roofs 8.4.2.7 Raof Pitch Primary: b:12 to 12:12 Secondary: 4:12 to 12:12 (or flat) END OF.4RCHITCCTL:RrtI. D,ESIGNGL~'1I)E/I~'V'.~S Page ~-~? I.IONSHEAD REDEVELOPMENT MASTER PLAN r= ~ Attachment G L7 ~¢ 6~ C7 ? ~~ ~~ O [C eY~ F'~i ~ ~ a ®~ ~~ o ,~ f~ ~T H ~ P t ~~ ~+ C7 W 0 1 _ti 111 +} C. ~ .'P ~ ~ ,~~ SI ~ ~ ''1y t A 5 Y ~ ~l~` _ '~~ ~ M ^S2 1 r f :. ` ,; , i k~ t S f q ~, i ~__ ~~~ ~ ~ ';~y., ~, r~ ~ ~,>,~ ~ „~ ,~ `'.~-; _ ~. _ _ ~~~ ~ ~~t~ ~ t ~ ~ ;, ~~ ~ ~+ - , ~ ~' ~. ~~ t _r,', ~ r l i ~1 ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~, W ~ , ~ ~ '.~ \ \ , , , F-S ~1 ~ ®I ~ ", .i \ ~~+.JJ ~'7 W as ~ ~ \ on G +ti t• C~ ff'~~II ~ p~ ~ y~, n , ''~k ~ n, ~ti~ ~ ~',, ~' ~~;~ '+, .. sew {ri ` ~ r 1 •~ , a + 1 ` ~ }~ t ~~, ~.r, ~ ~ z /,;' '. .` ,~ ~ ~~~ ~ ~ ~ j~,~' ~ - r '~,. ~J ,, .~ , , ~~`u ~ ~~~ - ~~ ,, ,1 _ry ~ -= ~ ' ~, ~ ~~ , i S ,~ \\VV ~1~ , ,,, n ~ 1 ~ i.~ ~ f ` ~ ~ f' ~ ~,` ~~ r° , ~~ t~ I, ~~ ((i! Ij ~~ ~~ r • • 1l '' C .~. ~ ~ ~ Q f 5p L ~ ~ 1, { S~ \y \~ !-° ,_,__..,.._.! I ~ ~ ~ ....-j- ~ `.•4 ~`~ '. 's`l`y \ V _ 1 ~: - 1 x t ~ ~~ r ~ f 4 - .~ ~ 1 1 'b. i' 1~ ~ .~ ~ ~~ ~ 1, r ~~ ~! ~it ~ ~ yy~{ r~. r ~ ~_.'-;~ , ~,l ~ ~ ' 1 ~ ~1 t ~1,~ `'~ ~ ~' ~ ~; ~~., + ., ,~,.t~~,~ss~ ~ ~ t 1~ >, ` { '~I ti y `}? 1, ~^4 ~' f 1--,.-' a ~'~ `:`. ~ ~~ ~. •~ .. .' "MUD ~.~ ) ~ ~_ ~ ~ ~I ~' ~ ~~ ~ ~ ~. ~ ; .t, . ~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ -~....~ ~. f ' ~ ~~ ~ ~.r ~.~ ~ '. r-~ ~i r i . ; ~ : 1 ~ ~ ~ ~ w o •~ Y ~ ~~ ` ~ ~ ~ ~ a~ ~~ Ni ~ ~ ~ ~- ~, ~ ~ ~ ~~ ~ ~, p"~ , v ~ ~,:. ~;, ~ ~ 311 ~ m J 1 -~' ~ `k r ( ~ ^1 a~ 4 .~ as ~ r ,~ ,wy ~ o _ ~ rt . ~? .,` r !u~• ~~~W~ ~ Q I ~a~ ~ 111 ~ ~~ r,, t!~ ~ [1 4 \ r~ =,,_f~ l / ~ ~ ~ r° ~ r ~ ~ ~ ~~ J 1 ~ ~~lJ ~` ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 1 ~ ~~ ~ C~~ ~ ~, ~ 4~ ~j ~ 1 ~~,~,::..,. ~~ m ~j -, ~ ~ . y~. ~ ~ ~ Z ~ti ~, __ ~r,- ~ ~ _~ ~ - ~ ~ ~ ~ .1 ~' ~..~ r V ~ c- ~ , ~ ~~~,w~"~ - ~~~ ~ '~' ' ~ ~ ~ -~, f ~ ~~ rr~ ~ ta4 ~ ~ W Q ~ _,.~-- ~ ,.- ~ -~ ,•~ ~ ~ ~ J ~/~~t,! ' ~ ~' ~~ a ~ ~ ~ Jam` - ~~ ..,: ~ .; ~'.~ ~ °~ .~, . ~¢ .~ ~~ ~ z 1 ~ .1 .. . --_~~ +ti . ";,~ ~ +; ___---- ,~ - r ~ C~c -- .~ 4. `-..-- ~Aj F-.. CXT6 ~_ i ~ ~~ f , 1 _'~r ~~ i ,1 v M `~-t (( ~L~1 ra o *~'/~ w ,,r ~' ~ ~ a Z f. ~` F i ~~~ lid ~~ ,.a .~ ~~ ( ~f [1 F~ \ , P~ ti 4 ',I ~~ F O ~ ~~ 1 ~~ ~ ~,` ~~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ =~,~ 1 ~1 ~ ~' fl ~~~i a ,r ~~~ '1) ~ t 1 ~ ~~ t ._____ _ , ~~~ ~Q~ ~ !:~ _a- - ~ v d~ ~ ~~ ~~~`. :"' ~ _ ",~~~ ~~ _~ ~ y ~ r~, ~ ~~ a ~ ~`~ ~ ~~ r ~~ ~ a5~ ~~ ~~' I~~~ r t ~h ~ ~ ~- "i F ~ ~, ~ ~ (~ ~ t¢- __ __ _ _ ,~ +~~ ~1 1 ~~ _-r ~ , ~°~'~'' ~~ ~~, . ~. i _ ~ •,~~, ~~ - ,i ,~. ~ f ~a C1 ..~ ~ f Y ~1, f .,, a ~ `~ L ~ ~ ,~ ~ r ~ tip, .,~ r oar pw~ C w - ~' u ~ rr ~ ~ ~ p ti ~ ~ _~ ~ ~~ 1' ~ ~ ~ Q ~ - C ~_ `~ I .,. ~ ~,r it ~ ~ ~~ ~. H W Q v~ a ~o t I ~~ ~~ ~,~ ~,~ ~: ~~~, ~~ ~- ~_ ~~ ~~ ti ,A~ ~~ ~~ ~~ a ~~ x ~ s ~ ~~ ~. ~~ ~~ ~~~ ~~ a~ ,~ ~,t Q I I~t~ l- 1 .s-~'~` V ~` ---' ~ff1 ` - l - ` ~~ ` -' `V ~~ ~. _ ~ ~~ ~_ ~~ ~ 1 5 l l 4 ~ ~ ~~ 1 'r 1 { 1 ~ d 1 ~ r Y ' ~~ a ~~ { t 1 ~C ~~~ n ~ ~' °~ ~ w ~ ~, ` ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ _ H~ ~+ 4 ~ ~ p ~` ti W ,1 . ~ ~'~ k 1 ~ ~S ~~ 11 ` ~~y "'1 \ ~~ ~~~ Y s ~ ~ ~~ ~ ~ ti \\ ~ t I1 a ._, . . C-~ ti Y ~I! , i Q 4 ~~ ~~ i \~ . ~+ ~~ j r ~ 1! t ~' ~ ~ ~ f~~ 1,1 ~ ~~~~' oy O L } 1 1 1 " ~ ,;~- r 1---'; ~ r- ,~ ,}~~ ~ ` . r ~ Q ~y __ ~• ~ ~ /~~ I ~Iti M ~ ~ ~ ~ -.:~ ti5 4 -- --~ t 11 I~ x ~,,,~ ~` ~ ~ . -- -- -- _~ 1 ~ 1 , I ~ 4 ~~ 1 .. ,may -- ~ ~' 11 J Y~ y ~ s _~ ~ ~ ~ ..;~i~ ~ ~ ~ r ~``~~ { ,__,r I ~ I ~ IF I? j-: I /~~~' ?~~~ ,~ ~I I ~ 1 r' 1 ~'' ~ o ~ '~(f ` I ~ ~a \ ~ ~ ~~~U~=~o c~ 1 ~ I d 5~ V ~ G r dff 1 r f~' r ~ ~- J~ Cd~~ ' ~~, r rI I ~ ~~' 1 ~+~~ rr i7 ~ r~ I 5 ~ f ~~q ' ~ }~ r1\~af ~ r ~~ ~ r ~`~" . l ~I ° ~ ~ /~10 ~ ~~~ \<. ~~ ~~ ~~ ~ i ~~ ~~ ~ W q~ w~ ~~~ ~~~a ~.a ®~ w m w~r~ °~ ,~~ dt ® ~~ a ~ o ~ LA c i w O ~o~ ~ ~ ~I ~~~~ ~ i ~~~ ~~ ao ~~ U ~~ ~~ ~ ~~~~ ~~~ ~~~ a~ a ,~~ ~~ ~~ ~ I ~,~~ ~x ~ '~ ~ ~ ~; a a e O ~~ ~ ~~ w W ~ 1 1 ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ ~ ti~ 6 I ~ ;~ ~ i ~ ~~;r ~ II r ~ {p~ ~ I a I ~ ~ f. ~ ' ~''~Y c I '. i U~t,r l~ I~'i 11 6 ~~ II~ ~ ~;~~-~1 I JI . i ++~ Iff ~ Q Ir ~ I til ~~ I ,? r rl ~ rf fs / r r ~i / ~'trl ~r • r PARKING FEASIBILTl'Y S 1 UDY ~~,1~ ~1QI1S~ e~,C~ Parking garage • February 7, 2005 Subrnittcd 1Ta: Pre#~ared Bv: -~-~ _ _ _ - ~ ,'art Paricin~ ~~~,~~-r Alsnning Engln+~ering t`iestoration Carl. Walker, ~n.c, Denver, Colorado Atlanta • Charlotte • Chieago • Dallas • Denvcr • Indranap©lis • Kalamazoo • Phaladelphia • Phoenix • Tampa cti 2tnv - c ~j5,t~ al l; e r, c r, m ~ d • TABLE QF CQNTENTS Pace. PARKING ACCESS Ai~1D REVENUE CONTROL OPTIONS ...........................1 1. Exit Cashiering ................................................................................................. l 2. Multi-Space Meters ..........................:...............................................................1 3. Central. Pay Station .......................................................................................... 2 Evaluation Ivlatrix ........................................................................................•,....... 3 • f ,i Recommended Parking Operations .................................................................. 4 LANE AND QUEUING ANALYSIS .......................................................................... 5 STRUCTURAL, CODE AND OPERATIONAL REVIEW ................................... 7 Existing Conditian ............................................................................................... 7 Code Campliance ....................•----_.....,................................_.........,............,.......,, 9 Feasibility of Vertical Expansion .......................................................................12 Feasibility of a Transit Center ............................................................................13 Operational Review .............................................................................................14 Functional System Capacity ................................................................................ lfi PHASE II DEVELOPMEI'~T ........................................................................................17 RECOMMENDATION .................................................................................................. 20 CONFERENCE CEI~~TER PARKING .......................................................................20 Public/Consumer Shows .................................................................................... 21 Special Events .......................................................................................................21 Ski Days .................................... ......................................................................... 22 C.~rf +~q~t /~+ ~ Parking ~~~~r l,tlAll l~ ~ Punnw,Y En, ~ fie~lwalFOwf • ~nvxoe~ Vail Lionshead Parking Garage Parking Feasibility Study PARKING ACCESS AND REVENUE CONTROL OPTIONS The selection of the appropriate parking access and revenue control system for the Vail Lionshead garage is essential to ensure efficient operations and maximize the collection of packing revenues. The revenue control system selected for a parking facility is related to its size, type, location, and function. Following are three primary options for consideration. 1. Exit Cashiering Exit cashiering represents the existing method of operation. Exit cashiering has an average service rate of approximately 135 vehicles per hour per lane. {Data downloaded from the town's parking operating system indicate a higher cashier service rate of approximately 200 vehicles per hour.) It is understood the Lionshead garage experiences long vehicle queues and delays during the peak ski season because of exit cashiering. Twenty- to 25-minute delays aze not uncommon. If this method of operation is continued it will be necessary to provide a suft~cient number of exit lanes to shorten traffic queues and wait tunes. Exit cashiering should not be entirely overlooked, as it has several advantages, including: • Maximizes revenues as transients pay a variable rate based on length of stay. • Is well understood by patrons and is generally convenient. • Requires no enforcement. • Guarantees the presence of people to manually operate equipment in the event of a malfunction. • 2. Multi-Space Meters The parking garage would not have access control equipment with this operating system. Multi-space meters would be used to collect revenues from transient patrons and contract porkers could use cards that work ~z°ith the system, display hangtags, or have a separate "nested" area within the garage that is access controlled. Multi-space meters are similar to a standard parking meter but provide single-paint control far a ~.,ar~ Parking ~f~i~~C~~~ pynninq €nglnMwg iLes~wa~iw~ Page 1 ~owxaeo~ ~ii1 Vail Lionshead Parking Garage Parking Feasibility Study larger number of spaces. Patrons note the parking space number, proceed to the multi-space meter, and insert the appropriate fee and key the parking space number into the machine. (This is also referred to as "Pay-by-Space."} The primary advantage. of multi-space meters is no access control equipment and free flow service rates. upon entering and exiting the parking facility (approximately 600 to 800 vehicles per hour per lane). The principal disadvantages to multiple-space meters include: • Confusion among users who are unfamiliar with this newer form of revenue control, • Extensive signage is required to provide patrons with the information needed to efficiently locate and use multi-space meters. • Meters are essentially "honor" systems, and gated facilities produce more revenue. • Payment. is in advance of parking sa patrons who do not pay for sufficient tune in advance must returrr and add additional time, or risk receiving a parking ticket, • Customer service concerns when users are overcharged for parking. • Numbering all of the parking spaces. • Enforcement is required. There is a separate parking area with approximately 95 parking spaces in the Lionshead ga~eage that is currently controlled with two multi-space meters. The system has worked relatively well for the small number of spaces. 3. Central Pay Station V~/ith this system a patron would insert their parking ticket into a centrally located cashiering station that calculates the parking fee. These systems typically accept cash, credit cards, and validations, and can return change when appropriate. The patron would then pay the parking fee and the machine issues a ticket to exit the garage. The. patron inserts the issued ticket into slag-time exit verifier and the barrier gate opens if marl 1?age ~' Pa~kng ^11lal~cer h.nncny Engln..rYp Rertwan:an < . i` • • Vail Lianshead Parking Garage 1UNl+I~ ~ = Parking Feasibility Study .. . the fee has been paid. This method of operation has a service rate of approximately 3G0 vehicles per hour per lane at the vehicle exit. The primary advantages to this system are the high service rate as compared to exit cashiering, labor savings, and no enforcement requirements. These systems are generally recommended far facilities with very high levels of actiw~iry and significant revenue production.. Disadvantages include: #~ The purchase of an expensive cashiering machine{s}. • Relatively new technology that is not well understood by many patrons. • Extensive signage is required informing patrons to take their parking tickets with them and to pay fax parking in advance of vehicle retrieval. ~ Escape lanes are required for those who do not pay in advance of vehicle retrie~Pal. A manned central cashier station can replace the cashier machine. It is also not uncommon to combine central cashiering {either automated, manned or both} with exit cashiering. Repeat users of the facility would likely utilize central cashiering and take advantage of shorter lines in the lanes with exit. uerifiers. Those unfamiliar with the parking facility and central pay could pay a cashier upon exiting. Escape lanes are not required with this hybrid operating method_ Effective signage is required to direct patrons to the appropriate exit lane. It is also difficult to project the use of the machines with a hybrid system, although at least a 5Q% reduction in cashiering would be expected. Evaluation Matrix The four operating methods {exit cashiering, multi-space meters, central pay station, and central pay/exit cashiering are ranked based an several evaluation criteria presented in the table on the following page. The operating methods are scored 1 .{below average), 2 (average or neutral}, or 3 (above average} iun each of nine categories. The evaluation criteria are not weighted. The operating metllad with the highest total score is deemed the best. As ~~rf Page 3 Parking V1+/~IiCer . P+.n~~ng Enplnw~iap sisawa~ion Vail Lionshead Parking Garage Parking Feasibility Study presented in the table, exit cashiering and central pay/exit cashiering have the highest total scores of 21, Central pay has a score of lb and multi-space meters have a score of 15. Parlang Ogexatian Evaluation Matrix Method of Operation Cashisaing ri-SPa~c Mictcrs ttal Pay txal Pay/Exit Cashierin~y C L '~ ~„ L D ~ ~ B ~ ~ ~, ~ y a. d Q = d ~ y ~..' C Q p y C y V l1 ((~C~~~ G L` V u V C E A ' ~' } V y V C"' id C C E U ~ a y n .C `r ~ u .-I U ~ E y E ~ o. ~ y .~ - u a n o U ~ e e a u ~" cn y~ v+ y 4" ^ L1 u 2 ~ en u _ ~ m ~ ~ G7 iii 'fl d y ~.l c ~+ 3 3 i t 3 1 3 3 3 21 ] 1 3 3 1 1 ] 1 3 15 ] 1 1 2 3 3 l 3 t 16 2 3 ] 2 3 2 ? 3 3 21 Recommended Parking Operations Recommended for the Vail Lianshead parking garage is a combination of central pay and exit cashiering. Central pay offers higher service rates, which would shorten exit queues and wait times; and exit cashiering would eliminate the primary disadvantages associated with central pay. A good example of this hybrid operating system is at the River Park Square 1Vlall parking garage in downtown Spokane, WA. They have combined two automated and manned central pay stations inside the mall with exit cashiering in the parking garage. The mall advertises "Pre-paying far parking allows you to exit. the garage quickly through one of the express lanes." This hybrid operating system has been briefly discussed with the town's Transportation manager who is interested in pursuing this aptian. A central pay station would be located in the southwest comer of the garage on the ground level where there is the heaviest pedestrian traffic. ~! i •I • Page 4 ~~i r~ Parking ~~ ~ ~~~ woe LANE ANTI} QUEUING ANALYSIS Vail Lionshead Parking Garage Parking Feasibility Study As indicated in the table on page G, a minimum of two (2} entry lanes and four (4) exit lanes are required in the Lionshead garage based on the fdlawing assumptions: . 1,050 parking spaces (existing capacity of 1,135 spaces less approximately 8S spaces) ^ 100% Push Burton Ticket Dispenser Inbound (service rate of 400 vehicles per hour per lane). ^ 50% Exit Cashiering Outbound (service rate of 200 vehicles per hour, from download of SCAN data}. ^ 50% Central Pay Outbound (service. rate of 3(~0 vehicles per hour per lane). ^ GO% Peak-Hour Inbound Flow (from download of parking data on a peak day in 2004; anticipates 30-minute arrival period} ^ 77°fo Peak-Hour Outbound Flow (from download of parking data on a peak day in 2004; anticipates 30-minute departure period) ^ 0.85 Peak-Hour Factor (accounts for busiest 15-minute period within the t/~- hour}. I However, recomrended for the Vail Lionshead garage are a minimum of three inbound lanes and five outbound lanes. Two inbound lanes achieve approximately LOS $-, which is not recommended for a ticket dispenser entry. Three inbound lanes are required to attain LOS A. Similarly, four outbound lanes achieve approximately LOS C/C-. Five outbound lanes are required to attain LOS B, which is the minimum LOS recommended, acid six outbound lanes are required to attain LOS A. The analysis assumes there axe no impediments to traffic flow after entering the garage and there is sufficient street capacity after exiting the garage. Currently, the metered parking area with 95 parking spaces has one inbound lane and one outbound lane with no controls, The remaining 1,040 spaces in the garage utilize a total of five lanes. There is one inbound lane and four outbound lanes in the afternoon when there ~l~r~ Page 5 Parking ~,~~~'~r ~IIn11FfJ En~AM~kp RE8t4'a Sb011 1 V r11. W ^LYJ i Vail Lionshead ~'arkitlig Garage Parking Feasibility Study `~s peak outbound traffic flow. This is an insufficient number of outbound lanes for emit cashiering. Our analysis indicates the need f©r severe exit lanes to attain LOS B with. e~C cashiering only. Nine lanes are required to attain LOS A with exit cashiering only. Vail Livnsitead Parking Garage Estimated Ntunber of Lanes Required and The Average length of Vehiclr Queue Entering/E7citing the Garage Average Length of Queue (formula) fl) Lq = cit 1-d ?w~llri: f 11 = t1'Q~ICYA6rRf11J' = If~10 01`/ir4~.'~IOY' Fak to 1Gr tma~t rak. A, Number of Parking 5pact:s in Gauge 1,050 Percent/Number Exit Cas}7ier SD.D% 525 Perecnt/Number Central Pay 50.0°!° 525 AM B. Pca3:-]Maur Fiow Percentages (2f ~ Q11[ Ttcl:et Dispenser Inbatlnd & L-x7t Caslurr Outbound GD% I2'Ya Picket Dispenser Inhovnd & Central Pay Outbound GO°/a 12% C. Number of Pnk-Hour VcI7iclrs {A x B) Ticket Dispenscr Inbound & Exit Caslucr Outbound 315 G3 'T'icket Dispenser Inbound dr Central Pay Outbound 315 G3 Combined 630 126 D. Maximum Service Rate ~er hour per lane) Ticket Dispenscr Inbound & Exit Caslucr Outbound 400 200 T'scket Dispenscr lnbound & Central Pay Outbound 400 360 Combined 400 257 E. Number oFLanrs Rcyuired (C I PHF s D} (3) Peak-}lour Factor {PHF) 0.85 Ticket Dispenser Inbound & Exit Casltier Outbound 0,426 0.375 Ticket Dispenser lnbound & Central Pay Outbound 0.926 0.206 Combined 1.853 O.S76 F. Number of La77es Rrquiretl (rounded up) 2 t Cr. blinimum Number of Lanrs Rrcommendcd 3 5 H. Lane Capariry' (D x G} 1;200 1,286 L Traffic Intensscy (C / H} OS3 O.iD Ave7age Queue Per Lane (4f 0.58 O.Dl t+. Lr~rel of Srrvit;c {I.OS) A A Hates: (7} TIu lrrgtL of iLY gaeMr lau aal earlxrle flx rrGirk ix iLr mare p°nA°n (1) TGr .wau.wxa i°banad and'°xAnuadJPar rater arinwe a 30-nrinair aena~af and d[farrwe' prrrari (~ialP~ Latrfkw adr t' 1~. (}J P{dF = Peak~Hrw Fxisr (anenrt[r far fbr Lnrxaf ]S .vronrr ~.rrisd ardwn tlrr ywrrf, (~~ f~ m (fie m~eM~e gMtif xII N! IY nYtedrd Ca'r/l~ ~ Parking 1f V~.~- 1~Qo~ Manning Enplnairlep RealoratidvY PM In Ott 17%° 77°J° 17% 77;0 t I 89 4{14 89 404 I79 809 400 200 400 360 , 400 257 D.2G3 2.378 0.263 1.321 D.525 3.699 1 4 3 5 1,2D4 186 D,15 O.G3 0.03 1.07 A B • Page G • • ~o~u~~iV Vail Lionshead Parking Garage Parking Feasibility Study S~."RU~.1 JRAL, CODE AND OPERATION~iL. RE~t~w Carl [balker, Inc. (Carl L~alker} performed a cursory review of the existing conditions and the original design of the Vail Lionshead parking structure, including the ariginaT design drawings prepared by Robbins + Ream, Inc./K.KB.N.A. in 1980 and, the Structural Condition Assessment and Feasibility Study of Expansion Options reports prepared by J. R. Harris and Company earlier this year,.. in order to evaluate the current physical condition of the structure, code compliance, and feasibility of vertically expanding the parking structure in Vail, Colorado. On Friday, 10 September 2004, representatives of Carl Walker toured the Lionshead Parking Structure with Mike Rose of Vail Transit and Adam Williams of Architectural Resource Consultants, Inc. to visually review the existing condition of the structure, as well as consider what might be required to bring the existing building into compliance with current building codes. During the tour we discussed the structure's maintenance history, along with the current maintenance and operating practices. Existing Condition Based upon our brief visual obsenzations, the structure appears to be in reasonably goad condition given its age and exposure. There are a variety of relatively minor structural and waterproofing deficiencies throughout the structure. These deficiencies can be categorized into three primary concerns: (1) scale damage, {2) corrosion-induced delarnination, and {3) leaking joints. Scale damage, which is the deterioration of the surface of the concrete caused by freeaing and thawing of water within the concrete, results. in exposed aggregate at the tap surface as shown in the photo to the right. A scaled surface is subject to accelerated deterioration and can also be very slippery when wet. The scale damage evident in the Lionshead structure is concentrated at and near the roof level of the structure.. Scaling is especially severe at the down-bound ramps at the west end of the garage. Scaling can be Page 7 ~_~rr1 Parking ~"'-, ~~~~ M~nabnq EnginMrM~9 laesawa~bn ~aw~aev~ Vail Lionshead. Parking Garage Parking Feasibility Study repaired with a conaete overlay. Froper drainage, air-entrained concrete, and surface waterproofing will help alleviate the problem. Corrosion-induced delamination, or spallir-g, is caused by corrosion of the reinforcing steel embedded in the concrete. The rust creates internal stresses in the concrete that cause it to fracture and delaminate. Chlorides from road salt will substantially accelerate the corrosion. In extreme cases, the corrosion of the reinforcement can result in inadequate structural strength leading to failure. Corrosion damage in the Lionshead garage appears relatively isolated (e.g. at stab; see photo), although we did not perform any soundings. Based on the chloride concentration test results presented in the J. TZ. Harris report, the potential. exists for fairly widespzead topping delamination at the second tier. Vf~e recommend a comprehensive chain drag to determine. if delamination or debonding has occurred. Delamination can. be repaired by patching or overlay; however, chloride contaminated concrete will likely continue to deteriorate after repairs. The leaking evident in the Tr'onshead garage is not particularly undespread. It appears due to isolated failure of the waterproofing systems, induding the joint sealants and expansion joint sealant systems. Snow removal is a major concern at this facility. Large front-end loader snowplows are employed to move the snow to the gated evacuation areas, where it is hauled off site. The snowplows are often responsible far damage to the waterproofing systems. C}ther deterioration exists in the structure, including cracking in the. slab-on-grade exacerbated by hydrostatic pressures in the subgrade, column and beam cracks, and localized cracking at precast connections. At the grade level, hydrostatic pressure periodically causes the slab-ora-grade to rise, reducing the headroom. at the adjacent crossover. In a number of ~ E • ~._atr~ Fage 8 Pa.k:~Q VVa~Icer Pynn4~g ErtginNrtnp reeexwa[ion • • 7i~f~'Y~6d17 Vail Lionshead Parking Garage Parking Feasibility Study locations, the double tee bearing pads have "walked" from under the bearing, anal, in a few cases, have fallen out. Drainage is also very marginal throughout the parking structure. Short of extensive removal and replacement of the topping, which is obviously very expensive, there is not a simple solution that will correct this problem. Without quantification of the specific deterioration present in the garage, it is difficult to attaeh a cost for repairs. An amendment to the condition appraisal report by ]. R Harris to identify specific quantities of repairs would be necessary to develop a reasonable cost estimate. I~levertheless, given our observations and excluding any hidden deterioration such as topping delamination, we would anticipate repair costs in the $100,DOD to $25D,000 range. Cade Compliance The Lionshead garage was likely designed under the 1979 edition of the Uniform Building Code {UBC}, whereas currently, the 2443 edition of the International Building Code (IBC) is the design standard for Calorada. Based on the current building code, the structure is classified as Occupancy 52, The upper two tiers appear to satisfy the requirements for an Open Parking Garage, and the lowest tier has forced air ventilation with CO detectors. The e~cssting overall footprint of the building is approximately 133,1100 square feet, and the actual floor area of each half of the building is approximately 61,444. Under the current building code, the area of the footprint and the configuration of the exterior openings would require Construction Type IA or IB (p'ire Resistance: 3-hour with 2-hour floors or 2-hour throughout, respectively}. Based on the 1979 UBC, open parkitxg garages up to 125,4DD square feet were allowed to be Construction Type Il-F.R., which meets or exceeds the fire resistance requirements of IBC 2043 Construction Type IB, Height restrictions da not come into play. Carl ~:t~9 11'~lal~c~r P-anasnq EnglnMVYg Restos„Fan Page 9 Vail Lionshead Patkirxg Garage li1rP[~(~p` Parking Feasibility Study ~l Based on the floor area and the maximum allowances, the occupant load per floor is approximately G10. With a rninirnum of four stairways per level, not to mention direct access to grade, the egress pathway {i.e. stair width) must be approximately 3'-1d" or greater, which is certainly the case. If the garage is expanded vertically, the ventilation system will need to be modified to accommodate the exhaust. Furthermore, if new construction impacts the openness of the structure {e.g. new residential directly adjacent to the parking structure along the southern facade), additional mechanical ventilation wilt likely be required, Currently, there does not appear to be a fire suppression system in the structure. It is probable that the local fire authority will require current code-compliant fire suppression at the lowest tier or, possibly, on all tiers due to the lack of openness at the lowest tier. The guardrail {i.e. spandrel) height above the floor is shown to be 2'-9" above the finished floor. Current code requires 3'-G", which yields a deficit of 9 inches. If the code authority requires this to be rectified, a metal guardrail can be attached to the top of the spandrels to increase the height without significantly impacting openness. Furthermore, the stair handrail/guardrail configuration does not satisfy the current code. Code requires separate handrails and guardrails. Interior handrails must be continuous between flights. Guardrails must be configured to restrict passage of any object larger than a 4-inch sphere. ADA packing is located at the lowest tier of the southern part of the building, which is the only part that currently has a reasonably accessible pathway to the. I orsshead Village. The minimum floor-to-floor height of 11'-0" and the structural depth of approximately 3~',/2" yield a m;ni~num headroom clearance of approximately 8 feet. This is not sufficient far ADA vans. ADA vans may be located at a convenient location elsewhere in the parking system. However, if vans are to be accommodated within the Lionshead structure, they would have to be located at the roof tier, and an accessible pathway, probably including an elevator, would need to be constructed. Additionally, there are currently l2 designated handicap spaces. Code currently requites 22 accessible stalls, yielding a deficit of 10 stalls. Page 10 ~ar1 Punning 6nplnM.k.y Rewoueioei • • • ~aroeve¢ Vail Lionshead Parking Garage Parking Feasibility Study ~~ However, Mike Rase indicated that during the last ADA audit, the current number of stalls v~~as found to be sufficient. Plumbing systems were not reviewed. Current plumbing code usually requires roof level drainage to the storm sewer and covered level drainage to the sanitary sewer system. Typically, asand-ail separator is required before water is sent to the sewer system. Occasionally, on-site storm water detention is required by local code jurisdictions. Based on visual observations, light levels appear to be sufficient by IEEE/lf~I'A standards. The light fixtures appear to be high-pressure sodium. The light is very yellow in color. Light distribution could be improved by staining the ceiling and walls white. Chapter 34 of IBC 2003 addresses existing structures, and Section 3403 specifically deals with additions, alterations, and repairs. Specifically, paragraph 3403.1 states that while the new construction related to an addition or alteration of an existing structure shall conform to the requireixients of the code, "[portions of the structure not altered and not affected by the alteration are nit required to comply with the code requirements for a new structure." Based upon this, it is our opinion that the deficient components of the existing structure would not require upgrade to be compliant if the overall structure is modified or added to, prati-ided the addition ar modification in itself does not adversely affect the cads compliance of the existing portions of the structure. The notable exception to this is the fire prevention system, which, in our experience, almost always requires upgrade based upon the discretion of the local fire authority. Ultimately, however, like the local fire authority, the local building authority is the final axbiter of the code requirements.. We anticipate that the cost for automatic fire suppression would be $400,000 to $500,000 per covered tier (1 minimum, 3 total). While we do not believe that the other code compliance upgrades should be required, they could total $250,000 for handrails and Car's P~.t:,a V~/a~Icer P4nnjns En~nwrGp aer~o..uo++ Page 11 ~uwxae Vail Lianshead Parking Garage Parking Feasibility Study guardrails, $200,000 for an elevator and related structure, and, possibly, $150,000 for plumbing upgrades. Refer to Table S1 to compare costs, Feasibility of Vertical Expansion. We reviewed the original design Drawings prepared by Robbins + Ream, Inc. / K,K.~.N.A. in 1980 and the Structural Condition Assessment and Feasibility study of Expansion Options reports prepared by,~. R. Harris and Company earlier this year. We also performed a simplified analysis of the vertical and lateral load resisting systems. C-ur analysis showed that the existing structural systems as constructed are not sufficient to support an additional level of vertical expansion, confirming the Harris report. The existing foundations would need to be upgraded to support an additional 50% of their current capacity, or, alternatively, a completely independent vertical support system would need to be constructed for the expansion. The lateral loads appear to be approximately two times the original design, necessitating substantial improvements to the shear walls and foundations. We concur with Harris that adding an additional level is possible; however, based on our initial investigations, we do not believe that a vertical expansion is very practical from a cost, constnactability, or operational standpoint. It is probable that the cost to upgrade the foundations and superstructure to allow for a vertical expansion will be upwards of $2 rnillian. For each 200-stall deck that is constructed as part of a vertical expansion to the existing structure, a construction cost of $4.4 million {$22,000/space) in addition to the cost of upgrades and code compliance should be a reasonable budget assuming the current architectural character is maintained. Alternatively, the structure could likely be completely demolished and replaced with a much more efficient facility on a smaller footprint for approximately $34.5 million {$22,000/space + demolition cost), pausing a total of 1,500 parking spaces. Amore cost effective option would be to construct approximately 195 additional spaces under the new Conference Center to accommodate the new program plus spaces displaced in the existing garage. The cost for this would be in the neighborhood of $5.5 million {$28,000/space average}, and this parking would serve the Conference Center in a more functional manner. I'rvviding 325 spaces Page 12 Card Parkeng 1!~/al~cer P4nnlrq Engln~rarMg fisif0!rAlipl r • ~nwxae~ Vail Lionshead Parking Garage Parking Feasibility Study below the conference center would cost approximately $10.6 million {$32,500/space average), and 455 spaces below the conference center would cost approximately X16.6 million (~3G,500/space average). Refer to the table below to compare costs. Cost Comparison of Ootians l~ 1 J ~ # Stalls ~ Demolition Fire Suppression Llfe Safet}-, Accessihilitq, Plumbing [.'pgrades ~ 5trucmral Upgrades Vertical Expand Lionshead Garage (half tier) Z00 N/A Up to 51.5 millinn Up to SGOO,OOQ $1 millinn New Consrruction I $4.4 million' Total ~ Up to $7.5 million Vertica[ Expand Lionshead Garage (whole aer) 400 NIA Up to $1.5 million Up to SG00,000 $2 million $8.8 millinn' Up to $12.9 miillian New Parking New Parking New Parking Demo/Replace Below Below 13efow Lionshead Conference Conference Conference Garage Center Center Center 1,500 195 325 455 $1.5 million N/A N/A N/A NIA N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A $5.46 510.6 $1G.G $33 millions millionz million3 million' $1Q.6 SIG.G $34.5 million 55.5 nvllion million naillivn Notes: 1. Assumed ~Z2,ggq per stall for construction of new above ground parking (does not include soft costs). 2. Assumed $28,D00 per stall for construction (does not include soft costs). 3. Assumed ~32,5gq per stall for construction (depending upon the extent of dewatesing; does not include soft costs}. 4. Assumed $3G,~gq per stall for constnaction (depending upon the extent of dewatering; does not include soft costs). Feasibility of a Transit Centex We also reviewed accommodating puhliiw transit {i.e. buses) on the top tier of the existing structure. Currently the Vail Village parking structure supports transit traff~.c at the roof fief. However, it is our understanding that the Village structure was designed with that function in mind. As such, we understand that the double tees and topping slab are substantially deeper and stiffer than at the existing Lionshead structure. According to the original drawings, the roof tier of Lionshead is designed to support 125 psf live plus snow load, and LIB( 1979 requires the capacity to support a 20(10-pound concentrated load. Tea accommodate buses on parking structures, Section 1607.6 of IBC 2003 requires a uniform five load-carrying capacity greater than twice the current design load, and a concentrated load-carrying capacity 9 to 13 tunes existing, which correspond to the 1996 AASHT© highway loads_ Current AASHTO design is even more demanding, and it is likely that the ~ar~ larking ~~~-, ~~~r Pr,~n4~ ~ ~ rMw a..~«.,w„ Page 13 Vail Lionshead Parking Garage Parking Feasibility Study ~ ~~~r~~~FYA[L ~; actual bus loads will exceed those Shawn in 'f'able 16fl7.G. Additionally, we reviewed the performance of precast parking structures that have been modified to allow bus traffic. In our experience, the impact stress of bus traffic on the double tee flange connections in such ~ a retrofit will cause rapid deterioration of those connections.. Given this, we defuutely I recommend against bus traffic on the existing parking structure unless extensive i reconstruction is undertaken. To accommodate transit traffic, the structure will require extensive modification, likely including complete removal and replacement of the floor and strengthening of all of the 5 supporting structural members (i.e. foundations, columns, beams, spandrels). It is difficult to estimate a cost for such an extensive retrofit, but it u=auld be reasonable to assume a cost of X150 per square foot or more for a[1 three levels, excluding finished space, (]peratiortai Review i The existing Vail Lionshead garage is a split-level design with flat parking bays stepped at ~ half-level intervals and speed (non-parking) ramps that provide for vertical vehicle ` circulation. Although once a popular design, split-levels have grown out of favor because of poor circulation, traffic conflicts, steep ramps, and functional inefficiency (square feet per space). Split-levels are occasionally designed today for small and rectangular sites, when more efficient and better functioning designs are not practical or possible. Split-levels may have either one-way or two-way traffic flow. 'The design of the Lionshead parking structure, s with one-way ramps on both ends, is meant to have one-way traffic circulation throughout. !l Two-way flow creates traffic conflicts and confusion for users. This is coupled with pedestrian flows that cross the parking bays. Pedestrian travel is safer when parking bays are oriented in the same direction as pedestrian. travel. Howes*er, many of the problems associated with this design could be largely alleviated if the two-way traffic flow is converted to one-way traffic flow. The proposed one-way traffic flow and a new entry/exit on the north side of the garage are graphically illustrated in the isometric on the following page. '~SR'~ Page l4 P.rkng ~/mot ~ k ~ ~"" F~rnaFng Engln~++Mp iteaewa~ion ~a Vail Lionshea,rl Parking Garage Parking Feasibility Study Although there would be a relatively large reduction in the nuzz~ber of spaces with angled parking {100± spaces), the parking facility would function 'better with angled parlring and one-way traffic flaw. The four parking bays allow far separate inbound (indicated in blue) and outbound (indicated in red} threads and very short travel distances from the top level to the bottom level and vice versa. ~~ +~r ~~~~ .~- - ~r ~ -- LEVEL ae ~~ y r} ~ ~~~ ~rv~ 3~ ~` ~-- - "~ ~ ~ LEtiEL 28 i• y _1-~ L£~E1. 2A ~~ ~..~ -~ " ~/ ~ LEti'ELt6 ~~ ~~ 1 ~} `~ LE4F11A 1 y1 . ~~ ISOMETRIC N4 SCAL€ Qne-way traffic flaw has several advantages, including: • Separation of inbound and outbound traffic and improved flow capacity of the circulation system. ~ Easier for packers to enter/exit parking spaces. • Vehicles are mare likely to he centered in angled spaces. marl P,rking ~IaI~C~r R4nn4rg EnglnMrky Re64orlUoll Page I5 Vail Li:anshead Parking Garage ~~~~~ •` Parking Feasibility Study • Less circulation conflict and reduced potential for accidents. • Better visibility when bacldng out of a stall,. • The intended traffic flaw is self-enforcing. • Qne-way traffic allows the angle of parking to be changed to accommodate changes in vehicle sizes. Functional System Capacity We use the folla~ving formula to calculate how long it will tape the last vehicle to exit a parking facility: E~=(pxtP)+(uxt„)~+(sxt~+(ext~} Where, p = number of vehicles parking on the circulation route rF, = mean inhibiting period for these vehicles, which is 1/capacity in u = number of vehicles unparking and departing from the circulation route tv = mean inhibiting period for theses vehicles, which is 1 /capacity out s = number of vehicles seeking a parking space but parking off of the circulation route t, = mean inhibiting period e = number of vehicles that pass through from another area an the way to an exit t~ W mean inhibiting period Based on the formula above, it is estimated that it takes approximately 2G minutes to exit the garage with 9i1° panting and two-way traffic flow. This rates LOS D given a maximum 30- minute departure period, With angled parking and one-way traffic flaw, it is estimated that it would take approximately 2Q minutes to exit the garage, which rates L©S B. If the loss of parking spaces associated with angled parking and one-way traffic throughout the garage is unacceptable, it is strongly recommended to convert the level 3B parking bays to one-way traffic flow, as indicated in Figure 1,3 on the parking plans that follow. Shown on the plan are three entry lanes oriented north-south and four exit lanes oriented east-west on the north side of the facility. The four exit lanes should be supplemented with at least one more exit lane at another location. ~ar~ Page 1.fi a~.ks,g ~/a~~~,r rwnn~.ry 6ngln«Nanp Ret!«.~w,+ t s ~~ •i ~~~~~ . ~ PHASE )rI DEVELQPMENT • Vail Lionshead Parking Garage Parking Feasibility Study It is anticipates that a large portion of the existing L.ionshead parking structu=e will be replaced with amixed-use development including a hotel, condominiums, and retail space in the future. The site will possibly be shared with a transit center and atwo-bay, multi-level parking structure. Town of Vail officials would like to maxintize the number of spaces in the parking garage, up to 2,000 spaces. Carl [~alkerpreviously expressed to town officials that atwo-'bay garage with a parking ramp in asingle-threaded helix configuration., indicated in the isometric below, would not have the ramp capacity to support a large number of spaces. A two-bay single thread has the functional system capacity for a maximum of appro~:imately 750 spaces. Asingle-threaded helix always consists of a two-way traffic pattern with 90° parking and rises ane level with every 3G0 degrees of revolution. Because of this, the number of levels in a single helix should preferably be limited to a maximum of six, otherwise the number of turns required and the spaces passed become inconvenient. Single Thread Isometric ~~\ \ \~ .~-., ~~/~~ `Z~i ~~~\ ~~ / ~~ ~_~R"~ Parking ~`' j~~~ Alaneing Englnwrkp ReeiasAion Page 17 ~~~~~ . Fail lf.ionshead Parking Garage Parking Feasibility Study ~' `i fln the other hand, adouble-threaded helix, which could have either one-way or two-way traffic flow, would provide the functional system capacity for a larger garage. A double- threaded helix rises two levels with every 3G0 degrees of revolution, which allows for two intertwined "threads" and the opportunity to circulate to an available parking space without passing all parking spaces as inbound and outbound traffc can be separated. Because of this, double-threaded helices are often recommended for larger facilities with seven or more levels. A two-bay double thread has the. functional system capacity for up to approximately 2,400 spaces with angled parking and one-way traffic flow. A double thread is represented in the isometric below. I]auhle Thread Isometric As indicated in the isometric on the following page, a transit center could be accommodated ~rithin the footprint of a two-bay double thread with non-parking ramps to the levels directly below and above the transit center. If peak-hour flow rates in Vail, which are based on the user groups served by the garage, ultimately exceed the maximum rates that would allow for the provision of up to 2,040 spaces in a double thread, a garage with express {non-parking) ramps should be considered for this site. •'i Page 1 S P+snnFro E~9in~+eMiq liewo(~~bn • • ~ttr~~~ Vail Lic~nshead Parking Garage Parking Feasibility Study Double Thread with a Transit Center \~~ \ ~~ \~~ \~ ~ Y~.~~~ LEVEL 6 LEV0. 5 LEVEL 4 LEVEL 3 LEVEL 1 ISOMETRIC NO SCALE • ~ar1 Parkin8 ~l~=~CQr PunnYog Eng! ~ Rn+lwalfo~n LEVEL 8t ~"~t LEVEL B2 F2146 page 1 Vail Lionshead Parking Garage ~ ~,~~~~ ! Parking Feasilaility Study RECOMMENDATION ,' Carl '6Palker recommends providing parking below the Conference Center rather than in a vertical expansion of the existing Lionshead garage for the following reasons: • It will cost less to provide the parking below the center (approximately $28,000 per space) than in the vertical expansion of the existing garage with structural and code upgrades (approximately X37,500 per space for 200 spaces). i • The split-level design of the existing garage is operationally deficient, and additional parking spaces would make existing problems worse (unless the garage is converted to one-way traffic flow}. • Parking below the center will be more. convenient for event patrons. • Conference parking below the center could be reserved for event patrons. r • Conference parking could still be opened to the general public on busy ski days 1 when conferences are not scheduled. • The entry and exit lane provided for the conference parking could be used to speed exiting of the existing garage and disperse traffic on busy ski days. • Similarly, at least one more entry lane and one more exit lane would be required for 200 more spaces in a vertical expansion of the garage. f • It will not be possible to add the parking below the conference center once it is ~ . built. I CONFERENCE CENTER PARKING The number of parking space currently being considered under the eanferenee center is 195 to 455. Following is an analysis of the number of entry anal exit lanes required based on the capacity of the garage. The analysis examines three different scenarios for the conference center. Examined are public/consumer shows, special events, and ski parking when the conference center is not in C:~~r'~ Page 20 p+.nn~w engln..w.g tiaao.~lion J ~ Vail Lionshead Parking Garage ~~~ ~ : Parking Feasibility Study use. The estimated number of lanes is detemuned for each of the three scenarios for 195 spaces, 325 space (195+130), and 455 spaces (195+134+130). Public/Consumer Shows Conference Center events that would generate the maximum demand for parking would be public f consumer shows that would be attended by local area residents. These would represent large events that are typically held on weekends, such as home and garden shaves, auto shows, etc, Most of the attendees would drive and park. The average duration of stay would be relatively short and the parking spaces would turnover frequently. Peak-hour flow rates, based on parking generation rates, are estimated to be 40% for both inbound and outbound traffic. The number of lanes required, summarized below, anticipate that conference center patrons would take a ticket from apush-button dispenser inbound and pay a variable fee to a cashier outbound. Number of Lanes Number of Spaces Inbound Outbound 195 1 1 325 1 1 455 1 2 Special Events A good example of a special event at the conference center would be a concert. Mast of the event attendees would arrive within an hour before the show and all would depart immediately after the show. The garage would be expected to empty urithin 30 minutes after an event. The number of lanes required, summarized below, anticipates tkrat patrons would pay a flat rate inbound and would not be required to stop (free flow) outbound. Peak inbound and outbound flow would not occur simultaneously. C~r1 Page 21 p..kna V1/a'~1c~r PYannkg fnpln~a~Mq Re~4otaSkei .~ Vail Lionshead Parking Garage l~~t~(~,~ : T'arking Feasibility Study i ' ~~ Dumber of Lanes Number of Spaces. Inbound Outbound ` 195 1 1 325 2 1 455 2 2 Ski Days The peak-hour flow rates for ski days are 60% inbound and 77% outbound, as presented in our previous parking feasibility study for the Town of Vail. It is assumed that patrons will take a ticket from apush-button dispenser inbound and 50% will pay a variable fee to a cashier and 50% will insert a validated ticket into an exit verifier (central pay} outbound. Feak inbound and outbound flow would nat occur simultaneously. The number of lanes required is summarized below.. Number of Lanes ~urrlber of Spaces Inbound Outbound 195 1 1 325 l 2 t I 455 1 2 Based on tllis analysis, recommended are two lanes for 195 spaces, one dedicated inbound lane and one dedicated outbound lane. For 325 or 455 spaces, three lanes are recommended, one dedicated inbound lane, one dedicated outbound lane, and one reversible lane. Page 22 ~~~~~ Perking ~~~~~ ~~1In11f+p EHpIRMt{Ra iN111rI1WR f 1 e' Gm t~ afl~~~~ j ~ K I' ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ I ~" C~--- -n--- ~, ~ - ~ - - - - -~ ~,, u V U v u ` V ~~ u u ~ V ~__ ~_ J M~\\\\'k \\4\~7 \ \\\'~~7 b4 ~'Q ~ ~ ~ b4 b~ (~__. ___a __._ ..--_ _____ }~ G' l! m # 0 0 0~ o c~ ~ o 0 Q--- -- _ - - - -- v C~--~- ---- --~--- --- ------,~ A 5/,~ ~+^y ny X 1 Y 1 V~ V 1 u ~:J~ "C ~ -~ ~ ~ ~ ~ u u u ~_ ~ u u /~ a ~ y~~ a __.~~ _ _ _"'r _ _ ^' _ u _ T - _ ~.t _ ~ ~ ...~.e. ~ u V 1 u u '~ ~" f P- ~.-I -o ~~ I ~, I _ f_ V----~~ _ ~ a ~ !~ ~ , t~ ~ t± € ; # <;1 i~ ~~ i . lL ~ ~~eixtii] c - --- e=i :,,,.,_ aQQ JxF i!iiTk U~ b ~ `-~ 6iai l~ ~s ~` ~~ • `F a~il~~l ti m ®m ~~ t~ I ~ I ~ I ~.."' _ _ _ ~~ ~' v " u " ~, u u " b4 b4 b4 " b4 " o~A ---- --- --- --- ----- o-- ~ -----~ ~- - --- - - --- --- - - " ~i " ~ i~ " o--- -- ~ -- ~ --- .~ o c~ ~ a ®~ o 0 0 u ~}-- ----Y- - - --- - --- ~}- - - - - b4 ^~ b4 b4 ~ " bQ a---- ----- ---- -- - . -- ----- " " ~l ~ p ---- ---- - -4-- ~ N- - -- ~~~ " " " I ~: I I I ~ .'~~ I ~;~F i;9 ~~~~ ~~~ @~aLL i !~ , l ~~ a w4 ca ~~ ~II~ $ij~ 1 e[ ~~ ~~~~~~ a ~ J 3C7> O i i i ~ ~ '_ - _ ' - ~ I - --- u, ~ u -- Y U V - _ ff~-y __ -.~--..-....~- Y `v ~ u u ~ --- _~- I ~ _ U ~ -- ~- - -4- --_ --.~ ~ -~- V I I LIl I _ I - I -- --- ; - I --- ~ i ~_ - ®-~« ~- ~- ~- a-- ~- :i (~--• - ~- C7-- U--= - O- - O~ - o---- o--- - o--- . ~~ I .. ~ ~ ! ., "~"-- --- - I --- --~-~~f --ti --- ~ i --- ---- I - - 4--- -~ -~ - n - -~ - _ - ~~ _ i u -sill '° y V - -~--~ : - .. - tis-- .. w--.~ - u u I u =- _ - _ _ -~ ~~~~~~- Y ~!~ ~ ~ ~ ~2ti • ~ _~ 9: ~~ 3ij ~~ ~~ Z 3 Wfi ~~ ~~ e FEE'S Conventipn, Spprts & Entertainment DRAFT Pail Conference Center Business Plan Appendrx: Parking Analysis i • Appendix: Parking Analysis HVS analyzed the demand for parking the proposed Vail Conference Center would generate in each of the three seasons identified in the business plan. I+elsburg Halt & Ullevig, the Town parking consultant, provided data an base parking demand by season and time of day in the Lionshead structure. This data provided .the "base" parking demand assumptions, upon which HVS layered in the additional parking demand associated with conference center event activity. • Estimated Conference The analysis looked at two demand scenarios design day and a peak day, Center Parking which are defin~:d below: Demand ^ Design Day-This reflects the 9gth percentile of parking demand in each season. ^ Peak Day-The peak day reflects the lOQth percentile of parking demand. The exception is the exclusion of the 9"' of July, as there would likely be an insufficient number of available lodging rooms to host a major conference that occurs on that date. It is standard practice for parking analysis to look at the 75`" to $5"' percentile as a design day. Rather than providing sufficient parking so that there is never excess demand, typical practice is to plan for a design day so that there are sufficient parking spaces on the majority of days. Providing sufficient spaces for peak day demand is considered to be inefficient because of the larger number of spaces that would sit vacant for most of the year. However, because of the Town of Vail's desire to limit the number of excess cars that end up parked on the frontage road, it instructed HVS to use the 9q``' percentile as a gauge.. In both cases, the parking demand is divided into two segments. The first segment is the base demand from skiers, other visitors, and general demand. The second segment is the demand associated with the conference center and its event attendees and employees. Facilities located in areas that necessitate HVS Canventian, Sports & ~'ntertainment Dh'~1Ff Vail Conference Center Business Pfan Appendix: Parking Analysis 2 r paid parking typically manage their employee parking to minimize the need for on-site spaces. HVS assumes that there would be ten spaces allocated for on-site empiayee parking, T'he analysis addresses the demand for employee parking in detail later in this letter. ~~~ f The analysis estimates demand at four time intervals during the day. HV5 focused an the events that would generate the largest number of attendees in both the daytime-conferences-and the evening hours- entertainmentJcivic or banquet events. A day in which the facility hosts a , conference during the daytime and an entertainmentlcivic event in the evening represents the greatest demand for parking in the ski season. In the summer and shoulder seasons, a day in which the facility hosts a conference i. in the daytime and a banquet in the evening presents the largest demand far parking. By assessing such days for bath design and peak day scenarios, HVS was able to determine the number of additional parking spaces that should be provided to accommodate the conference center demand and the implications of conference center event activity on available parking in the Lionshead parking structure. ' Design Day Table 1 shows the estimated parking demand for the conference center on a Design Day {9{l`h percentile) in each season. The table also shows the base parking demand and the estimated excess (deficit) of parking spaces in the Lionshead parking structure assuming its current capacity, • 1{L'S Convention, 5parts & Entertainment i DRAFT Vail Conference Center Business Plan Appendix. Parkinr; Analysis 3 Tahte 1 Estimated Parking Demand for the Vail Conference Center, Base Demand, and Lionshead Capacity-Design Day' • Oesiyn Day Percent Persons Per Event Total Cars 9:00 AM 12:00 PM 3:80 PM 7:04 PM Drlvinq Cat Attendance Summer Conference 25% 1.50 850 142 124 137 135 71 Banquet 80% 2.00 940 380 0 0 18 360 Additional Ernployee~ TaD TBD YBD TBD Su4 Total -- - -- -- 128 137 153 431. Base Demand _ - -- -- 110 d00 575 475 TotalOemand ~ - - -- - 230 537 728 906 . Excess {Defici!] - -- -- -- 815 508 317 139 Shoulder Conference 30% 1.54 550 110 105 107 94 44 Banquet 70% 2.00 550 193 0 4 6 193 Additional Employee TBO TBD TBO TBD Suh Total - - -- - 105 187 99 23T Base Demand - -- -- -- 60 300 525 290 Tatalilemand - - -- - Yfi5 407 821 627 Excess {Defial) -- -- -_ -- 881 838 421 519 Std Conference 1516 1.75 500 43 42 39 41 21 tsttertaimnent /Civic 8516 2,75 700 216 0 0 11 216 AddAional Emplayee~ TBD TBD 7BD TBD Snh Tatat - - -- -- 42 39 52 238 Base Demand -- -- - -- 440 1,125 980 550 TotalOemand - - -- - 442 1,184 1,032 788 Excess {Deficit) •- - -- - 508 (21d] {82) 162 ~ Rooming currat4 supply trlparMng spaces in tianshead Pariang 5mrcnue a lxremeatal employee parAeng esGmafes Po be @rovlded by FekLurg Nof(8 fNieNg Sources: fehburg HoH d Wkvig d ,klr5 For the design day, conference center parking demand during the ski day reaches its highest point at 3:00 PM with demand for 52 total spaces, The highest parking demand occurs at 7:00 PNl, when there is conference center demand for 238 spaces. Parking in the evening hours, after the ski day has concluded, is plentiful relative to the available supply during the day. Peak Day Planning for parking associated with the conference center should focus on the Design Day. However, it is also prudent to assess the parking dennand that would occur on a peak day. The purpose of looking at a peak day scenario is to identify how intense the demand for parking would be under the very unlikely scenario that base and conference center parking demand reach their highest points on the same day. This peak day reflects the following scenario: ^ Base parking demand is at its highest point during the ski season, F1U5 Conven~~nn, Sports & entertainment DHAF!'Vai1 Canferenre Denier Business Plan Apnendlr. Parkin,~Analysis 4 ^ The largest conference event the facility is likely to hold during the ski season actors on the same day, and ^ The largest entertainmentlcivic event also occurs on this same day. Table ~ sl}ows the parking demand on this unlikely peak day. ~.~ ~~ ~~ Table 2 Estimated Parking Demand for the Vail Conference Center, Base Demand, and Lianshead Capacity-Peak DaY' Peak Oay Parking percent Persona Per Event Total Cars 9:00 AM 12:00 PM 3:00 PM 7:00 PM Drlrina Car Attendance Summer Ganference 25°6 i.50 2,100 350 29fl 340 333 175 Banquet 8096 2.00 2,000 800 0 0 40 800 Additional Employee' TBD TBD TBD TBO Sub Total - -- -- - 298 340 373 975 Base Demand - - - - 125 475 675 575 Tetai Demand - - - - 423 815 1,048 1,550 Excess {>metic0] - - - - 732 340 107 (398) Sheulder Conterenae 3096 1.50 1,800 360 342 349 306 144 Banquet 7096 2.00 1,700 595 0 D 18 595 Additional Emplcyee' TBD TBD TBD TBD Suh Total - -- -- - 342 349 324 739 Base Demand - - -- - 75 350 575 325 Total Demand - - -- - 417 649 899 1,064 Excess (Oeficli] - - - -- 737 455 255 90 Ski Cdrslerance 15% 1.75 1,250 107 104 96 102 54 EntertainmentlGivic 8596 2.T5 2,100 649 0 0 32 649 Additional Emp6ayee' TBD TBD ~ TBD TBD Sub Total 3,350 756 104 96 134 703 Base Demand - - - -° 550 1.,350 1,100 fl00 Tate( Demand - - -- - 854 1.448 1,234 1,503 Excess (DeliedJ - -- - -- 411 (3$1) (169] (438j ' lncremenra! employee parking esLVnafes to b e provided by Fefsburp 1Wlf & UNevip Sawces: Felsburg Rolf d Illfevid d FIVS The estimates Shaw that the peak conference center parking demand during the ski day, when parking spaces are at a premium, is 134 spaces at 3:04 PM. The peak day scenario shows packing deficits in the ski season at noon, 3;40 PM, and 7:04 PM. Deficits occur with or without the conference center demand in the peak scenario at noon and 3:44 PM. Deficits also occur in the peak scenario at 7:44 PM in the summer. Parking deficits in the summer are less problematic than deficits in the ski season because there is more capacity at the Vail Village lot to handle overflow conference demand. However, this f I r • • HU5 Convention, Sports & Entertainment DXAF7' 1/ail Corlference Center Business Flan Appendtx.• Parking Analysis 5 • analysis does need to consider ways to address excess parking demand in the summer for peak day demand.. Conference Center The detailed staff schedule HVS prepared for the facility estimates that there Employee Parking will be 18 permanent full-time employees. In addition, the kitchen would. have two full-time employees, which are not included in the staff schedule far the facility because the model estimates food and beverage revenues and expenses on a net rather than gross basis. The business plan far the facility is designed such that staff levels increase during larger events with temporary staff so that a minimum of permanent staff is required. There should be approximately XO parking spaces on site for facility staff and visitors. The balance of employees would either park remotely and walk ar commute via public transportation. Total staff levels at the facility will vary with the size of events. Events that have plated dinners are the most labor intensive. The typical ratio of guests to serves ranges from 30 to 20 to one, depending upon the specific characteristics of an event, Larger events with 1,000 or more attendees would require trvo captains, eight additional. kitchen personnel, and two restroom attendants. These events can require 70 to 80 part-time personnel, However., the facility would not need to provide on-site parking for all of these employees. For the largest ski-season events, the facility would need to provide remote parking options for attendees, .which could also serve empiayees if necessary. The cost of such service is included in the Town Services line item in the business plan (estimated at $210,000 in year 2003 dollars). During non-ski season periods when parking is free of charge, a higher ratio of facility employees would drive to work and such shuttle service would not. be necessary, as the Vail Village lot could help to handle excess. demand for the largest events. Recommended The number of parking spaces the Tawas should add to the Lionshead Conference Center parking structure is a function of the design day demand in the ski season. Parking Spaces The prior tables demonstrate that the additional demand associated with the conference center would not cause parking demand to exceed design-day supply in the summer and shoulder seasons. The daytime demand is the critical period for the recommended number of additional spaces, since that is the time when bath of the Town's major parking structures are at or near capacity in the ski season. If the combined parking demand at Lionshead exceeds the capacity in the evening, the Vail Village lot could effectively serve FII/S CnnvenGsn, 5,ports & Entertainment DRAFT Yaff Conlerence Center Business Plan Appendix: Parking Analysis 6 the excess demand, as people shuttle to and from the conference center on the Town's bus service. Assuming that ten spaces are allocated for employee parking, the peak scenario suggests that the conference center creates the demand for 62 additional parking spaces (52 peak conference daytime demand plus the ten employee spots). Previous analysis on the number of spaces the conference center would require has recommended 125 additional spaces. Assuming that the intent of adding the parking spaces is to avoid increases in overl~ow parking at the Lionshead structure, this analysis shows that the 125 figure exceeds the number of spaces necessary to accomplish this goal. However, the 125 additional spaces would decrease the number of overflow cars related primarily to base parking demand in the ski season and provide additional capacity to handle peak conference center demand. F t o ~ l ar the purposes of the fallowing demand and capacity analysis, HVS uses the 125 figure to allow for same unanticipated demand and to remain consistent with prier analyses, Table 3 shows the estimated demand and supply of parking assuming that 125 spaces are added to the Lionshead parking structure. ~„ HV'S Convention, Sports & Enter[ainment DRAFT Lail Canferenre CenterAusinrss Plan APpendix_ ParkingAnalpsis T • Table 3 Estimated Parking demand for the Vail Conference Center, Base Demand,. and Lianshead Capacity-Design Day With 125 Additional Spaces {10 for Employees) Estimated Parking Demand far the flail Conference Center, Base Demand, and irsnahead Gapaelty with 125 Additional Spaces [i0 tar Employees)-0esign Day Design Day Parking Percent Persons Per Event 7slal Cars 9:OD AM 12=D0 PM 3:D@ PM 7:D@ PM Driulns Car Attendance Snmmif Confefence 25% 1.50 850 142 Banquet 8D% 2.OD 90D 3B0 Additianal Employee' Suh Total -- -- .. Base Demand -- - _ - Toiel Demand -- - -- - Excess (Deficii~ - - - -- Shouldm Conference 3D% 1.50 550 110 Banquet 7D% 2.D0 550 193 Additional Employee' Sub Total - - ^ Bass Demand - ^ - ^ Total Demand - - - - Eacess [Deficit) - - - -` Stl Conterencs 1596 1.75 500 43 Enleriaimnent 1 Ciric 8596 2.75 7DD 218 Addidional Employee' Suh Total - - - Base Demand -- - °- - iotal0emand - -- - ' krcramenfaf ernpkryee padong estimafrs to be provided dy feisburp Hoff 3 lJHevig Sources: Fefs6wg HoB 8 U1feHg 8 MIS 126 137 135 71 D 0 1 B 380 TBD TBD T8D TBD 120 i37 153 431 11fl 400 575 475 23D 537 728 906 924 617 427 248 105 307 94 44 D D 8 1s3 TBD TBD TBD TB0 1DS 107 99 237 BD 30fl 525 29D 185 40T 624 527 990 748 530 628 42 39 41 21 D 0 11 21fi TBD TBD TBD TBD 42 34 52 238 4itD 1,125 9B0 550 442 1.,184 1,032 768 823 (49) 33 277 Un a design day, the only day and time when estimated demand exceeds capacity is in the ski season at nflon. Figure 1 shows graphically the estimated Lianshead parking demand on a design day in the ski season with the existing and proposed capacities of the Barking structure. HVS ~'onvention, Sports & Entertainmtnt DRAFT Vail Conferenct Centtr business Plan .~ Base parking deficits occur with or without the additional spaces in the ski season, but the additional 115 spaces would reduce excess demand and be mare than sufficient to accommodate the additional demand associated with the conference center at the times when demand exceeds supply. 'I"able 4 sh©ws the amount of excess parking demand at the Lionshead structure with and without the conferer~ee center, its additional attendee demand, and the additiona} 125 spaces (assuming ten are used for employee parking) in the design day scenario. Appendix: Parking AnalYSis 8 a ~~ r i i 1 Z .~ r i ~. a:oa PM 7:w rai 5ouces: hlsnup rro.~ a ~+c, lonv, or Vai, a M'S • HVS Convention, Sports & p'ntertainment Dh'.4F1 Vali Conferenrn Center Business Plan Appendix: Parking Analysis 9 Table 4 (Deficit) of Lionshead Parking Spaces With and Without Conference Canter & 125 New Spaces-Design day Scenario 9:00 AM 12.00 PM 3.00 PM 7:00 PM W/o Conference Center ~ 125 Spaces NIA {i75) (30) NfA W Conference Center & 125 5~aces N/A (g9) NIA NlA Sources: Feisburg Hurt & tlldevig & NVS • • Adding conference center demand and 125 spaces to the parking structure results in a decrease in excess parking demand, from 175 spaces at noon to 99 spaces. This analysis reveals that the addition of 125 parking spaces is mare than sufficient to accommodate the event related demand projected for the conference center at the highest demand periods when spaces are at a premium. The additional parking spaces would create the added benefit of reducing overall excess parking demand at the Lionshead stn.rcture, as the design day demand or less will occur on 90 percent of the days during the ski season. Implications of Qne possible method of addressing conference center parking demand Restricting went pates during the ski season would be to restrict the facility Pram hosting larger in Ski Season events during Fridays, Saturday, and Sundays-the busiest ski days. Conferences present a possible conflict with ski season parking because the demand for parking spaces peaks during the daytime when ski-related demand is also at its peak. HV5 estimates there will be five conferences during the ski season at demand stabilization. These events often prefer to have at least one if not more weekend daces. A frequent event pattern is to conduct move-in activities on a Saturday, hold. an opening session an Sunday evening, and conclude on a Tuesday. ®ther events may run from 1Nednesday through Friday. A prohibition of larger conference events Friday through Sunday would negatively affect the ability of the facility to attract such events. Removing 317 of the potential event days during this period would increase the likelihood of scheduling conflicts. The inability to use weekend dates would deter events that depend upon minimizing the number of days attendees need to miss work. An alternative approach might be to encourage events to use non-peak ski days by providing lower facility rental rates for Monday through Thursday. This could increase the likelihood that events would schedule on non-peak FNS Convention, Sports & Entertainment DRAFT Vail Conference CenterBeasinessPlan Appendix: Parklrr~Analysis 1D _ r i ~; ski days without decreasing the event potential of the facility. Another strategy would be to set an upper limit on the attendance of an event that would occur on a Friday, Saturday, or Sunday during the busiest ski periods. Given HVS' assumptions for attendee parking demand, an event of 1,000 attendees would utilize less than 00 parking spaces. Another option would be to arrange for remote parking and shuttle service during events that occur on weekend days during the ski season. Evening events present less of a potential parking problem because the { demand for ski-related parking decreases after the slopes close for the day. Among the events projected to occur in the facility during the ski season, ~~ entertainmentfcivic events would. generate the largest potential demand for 1. , parking in the evening. The estimated peak parking demand for these events in the ski season is approximately fi50 cars. Since this demand would occur ~ ' primarily in the evening, there should be little need to restrict the size of these events to a point below the maximum occupancy of the facility. The Lionshead structure would be able to accommodate the majority of these cars ~~r in the evening hours and the Vail Village structures could serve overflow demand. Lead times for Town bus service during the ski season are generally short enough to serve as shuttles between the- Vail Village structure and the conference center. A slight increase in peak service could be necessary for the ~ , largest events. Scheduling In order for the analysis of conference center parking demand and capacity to Coordination Between accurately reflect actual conditions, the Town would need to ensure that the Conference Center & event schedules at Dobson Ice Arena and the conference center are Dobson lee Arena coordinated. The conference center parking analysis assumes that the parking demand associated with Dobson in the ski season peak day scenario is minimal, reflecting typical uses such as public skating or a local amateur hockey game. The Town would need to coordinate the scheduling of the two facilities to avoid simultaneous events that would generate parking demand well in excess of capacity. Even so, only the largest of events held simultaneously in the two facilities would approach or exceed the daytime demand associated with skiing. The significantly shorter booking window for Dobson simplifies the coordination of these two facility's schedules.~Most of the larger conference center events-those that exceed 500 attendees•--will have booking windows of six months or more, Conference events are often scheduled years in advance and larger banquets are typically scheduled several months in advance. Management at Dobson indicates that most of their larger concerts I~SCanvention, Sports & 1:'ntertainmem DRAFT Dail Conferenre Center Business Flan Appendix; FarJdn~ Analysis 11 C] y and evening events are scheduled approximately 60 days in advance. The Town would also need to coordinate the scheduling of shorter-term entertainment and civic events in the conference center With Dobson's schedule. The Town could maintain a master event schedule throughout the year that included events in both facilities. The type of event and estimated attendance would indicate a range of parking demand and the Town could preclude the booking of simultaneous events .that. generated an excessive amount. of parking demand at any particular time. Given that Dobson management reports holding i-~ large concerts and/or other evening events per month, there would be suflcient scheduling flexibility to coordinate events in the two facilities. The level of parking demand that the Town should refrain from exceeding will vary with the season and time of day. Conference Center The Telus Conference Center in Whisper, British Columbia is in many ways Parking !n Whistler the most similar facility to the proposed Vail conference center. HV5 interviewed facility operations staff and Resort Municipality of Whistler staff to learn how they address conference center parking demand. Conference center staff indicated that parking is not a major operational issue at the facility, due to the high percentage of event attendees that either stay in nearby lodging units, live in the nearby area, or park remotely in day lots that are afive-minute walk from the facility. The majority of event attendees walk to the center, although some use a municipal parking structure that is adjacent to the facility, According to municipal staff, the parking garage adjacent to the conference center has 217 underground spaces and 75 surface spaces. The surface spaces run on a pay for use system. The underground spots are free, but limited to three hours. It is very rare that an event at the conference center generates sufficient parking demand to cause shortages, even during the ski season. If there is an especially large event that is expected to generate significant parking demand the municipality may restrict entry into the parking lot for a few lours prior to the event so that the lot is largely available for use by attendees.. The municipality maintains approximately 3,100 parking spaces. There are a total of fi,581 spaces, municipal and private, in the Village core. The conference center has seven dedicated employee parking spaces. Municipal staff stressed the need far space for truck parking in the process of loading or unloading and adrop-off area accessible to buses. Also, any surface parking HYS Convention. Sports & Entertainment 1?12AFT Vall Conference Center Business Plan Appendix: Parking Analysis 12 t areas should be covered or located far enough away from the facility to ar,~oid being covered by snow shed. • L~ A Report on the Recommendation of a Preferred Site for the Vail Transit Center Rrepared for: The Tawn of V~ i I Prepared by: Nate Larsan, PE, PTa~ URS Carparativn On Behalf of: Fentress Bradburn Architects February 7, ~Da~ C This brief report has been prepared at the request of Town of Vail staff to evaluate four site ap~ions far regional transit transfer activities. This report. has the following three parts: 1. Evaluation Criteria 2. ProlCon analysis of the four sites ~. Conclusions The current transit center is not considered large enough to accommodate the desired functions, which include but are not limited to the following: • Bays for up to five buses and five hotel shuttle vans at one time Warming enclosure for passengers and drivers • Restroom facilities • Visual display of system route and schedule information The consideration of a new location is driven. by fact that the existing site is not large enough to accommodate these desired functions, which are considered vital to the future success of multimadal transportation to, from, and within the Town of Vail. If a new location is selected, all transit center functions currently occurring at the existing site will be transferred to the new transit center when it opens. CRITERIA FOR EVALUATING TRANSIT OPTIONS The following criteria were developed by the Vail Civic Center consultant team to facilitate the 1?ro/Can analysis of each site, and are presented in no particular order: 1. Capacity to meet pragrarn targets (5 buses, 5 shuttle vans} 2. Adequate space for vehicle circulation and maneuvering within the center 3. Traffic impacts on 1~rontage Road 4. Imgaet on access /egress at Lionshead parking structure ~. Safe pedestrian movement within transit center & from there to Lionshead Mall (proximity to pedestrian destinations) Vail Transit Center Site Selection Report 1 6. Potential for future expansion of transit center 7. Provides space for waiting air~a, restrooms, etc. (+l- 600 sf?) 8. Balances pedestrian flow into Lionshead Mall (east vs_ west) 4. Possibility of combining with Information Center? 10. Convenient access for buses from Town of Vail and regional bus routes {and I-70} 11. Visibility from highway and Frontage Road 12. Ease of rider transfer to in-town shuttles 13. Safe distance between entry to transit center and any roadway intersection (1SO"?) 14. Cost 15. Separation from Village Transit Center These criteria were considered starting paints for discussion, and not. all of them were eventually used in the ProlCon analysis. No scoring or weighting mechanisms were used in this analysis. The ProlCon analysis for the first three sites was conducted in a workshop setting on September 29, 2004 by consultant team members Mike Winters {Fentress Bradburn), Nathan Kibler-Silengo {Fentress Bradburn), Nate Larson {URS), and Sherry Dorward, Landscape ?architect. OPTION 1: CI~NCERT HALL PLAZA The Concert Halt Plaza site is the location of the existing transit transfer facility. It is located on West Lionshead Circle south of Frontage Road {see Figure 1). i III ~i r 1 ' t . Vail Transit Center Site Selection Report 2 • • Figure 1. Cr~ncert 1`IaII Plaza Site PROS • Lust past BEST C~P~ • Existing AvA~~~~-~ CONS • Can't ft full program or any ancillary uses Conflicting. uses (delivery and service, pedestrians, cars) + Inefficient, unworkable shape {circle) • No direct pedestrian route to mountain • Site doesn't energize retail development, most likely pedestrian route is at mall edge {dawn the street) • Brings big buses into Liansl~ead pedestrian zone • Limits potential redevelopment of Concert Hall 'Mail Transit Center Site Selection Report 3 OPTION 2: NORTH DAY LOT T'he North Day Lot site is the located on the southeast corner of the intersection of Frontage Road and West Lionshead Circle see Figure 2}. .} • PROS • Pedestrian overpass makes this transit location more accessible to people coming from north side of 1-7U • Strengthens North-South pedestrian axis into Lionshead core • Biggest site, allows best potential design (functional, expandable) • l3etker vehicle access ~ no conflicts with parking structure, minimal number of Frontage Road curb cuts • Closer to mountain than options 1 or 3 L~ Vail Transit Center Site Selection Report 4 Figure 2. North Day Lot Site • Pedestrians don't have to cross a vehicular street. • Already part of adopted Lionshead master plan • Might integrate better with in-town shuttle CONS • Have to work around pedestrian overpass (site planning constraint, not obstacle) • Proximity to residential condos {opposition. to traffic and diesel buses, noise) • Limits use of site for other needed/desired development, increasing development casts • Not a Town of Vail property {but Town has rights in the Lionshead development agreement) OPTIONS 3a and 3b: ON TOP OF THE LIONSHEAD PARKING STRUCTURE f: The existing Lionshead Parking Structure is located on the southeast comer of the intersection of Frontage Road and East Lionshead Circle. With Option 3a, the new transit center would be located on tap of the Lionshead parking structure (see Figure 3). With option 3b, the transit center would be located an the redeveloped Lionshead Parking Structure (see Figure 4). r: Vail Transit Center Site Selection Report i { i I ~r Option 3a FRGS • No adjacent residential properties Town of Vail property • Direct access from Frontage Road • Close to civiclconference center CONS • Density of the many curb cuts along Frontage Rd. (potential CDOT concern) • Displaces parking spaces • Complicates circulation patterns on Frontage Road -lack of clarity for drivers ~ Requires physical improvements to parking structure if placed on existing structure (i.e. Fhase 1, option 3) Vail Transit Center Site Selection Report Figure 3. Linnshead Parking Structure Site (Existing} • • • + Inconvenient pedestrian connection Longest distance to mountain • TJnpleasan# pedestrian experience (quality concerns) ^ Poor visual quality of Frontage Road (nv space for landscaping) ^ .Space available is minimally adequate for program • No expansion potential If transit center is located on existing structure in Phase I, it will have to be relocated for duration of Phase 2 construction, then rebuilt. Option 3b PRDS ~~~~ Cd~~ • No adjacent residential properties • Town of 'Vail property Direct access from Frontage Road Vail Transit Center Site Selection Report "~ Figure 4. Lianshead Parking Structerre Site (Concept Schematic) } i • Pedestrian connection to Lionshead can be designed appropriately ~ Close to civic/conference center CONS • Density of the many curb cuts along Frontage Rd. (potential CDOT concern.} • Displaces parking spaces ' • Complicates circulation patterns on Frontage Road -lack of clarity for drivers ~ i • Longest distattice to mountain • Foor visual quality of Frontage Road (no space for landscaping) • Timing requires developer involvement ~. • Would require removal of Vail Resorts International covenants ~.: • Space available is minimally adequate for program ' OPTION 4: E. LIONSHEAD CIRCLE TURNAROUND i The E. Lionshead Circle turnaround site is located across E. Lionshead Circle from the southwest corner of the Lionshead parking structure, at the entrance to the Lionshead Mall. This option would include the removal of the Youth Services facility and existing retail space adjacent to the parking structure (currently occupied by Subway} and reconfguration of the parking structure's pedestrian access (see Figure 5}. PROS • Supports efforts to make East Lionshead Circle a more prominent entry into Lionshead (which could include enhanced signing andlor monuments} • Shortest distance to mountain minimizes skier/mountain employee walking distance • Directs pedestrian traffic from parking structure away from bus loading areas • Displaces current unregulated dropoff and delivery area • Does not require route modification for in-town shuttle • Able to accommodate currently-projected transit and hotel shuttle needs easily Vail Transit Center Site Selection Report 8 • l++igure 5. )E. Lianshead Circle Turnaround Site • Does not add new access to Frontage Road (CDCT approval not re~,uired) • Potential for funding synergy between TIF and federal transit sources CONS • If full transit operations capacity is realized, uphill bus movement could result in congestion at the Frontage Road/E. Lionshead Circle intersection, especially in concert with apeak-period "relief' exit from the parking structure • Local traffic inbound on East Lionshead Circle is forced to go through a bus lane + Increased bus traffic could conflict with E. Lionshead Circle residential traffic • Slightly longer and less desirable bus routvng pattern, given grade and low-speed residential character of ~_ Lianshead Circle Vail Transit Center Site Selection. Report ~ r• ~ ~ Proximity to residential condos could translate to opposition to increased traffic and diesel bus noise and emissions • Large retaining wall structure would be required in front of the Lionshead Centre commercial building potential pedestrian/A.DA access challenges • Potentially undesirable entry to Lionshead., with increased pavement and vehicular movement. c • Potential to make parking structure site redevelopment less attractive by r occupying what would otherwise be a connection between the parking structure ~~ site redevelopment and the entry to Lionshead • Limited future transit center expansion potential • Vlrauld require the relocation of existing Youth Services facility s CONCLUSIQNS The Pro/Con analysis documented in this report has led to the following preliminary conclusions: 1. Concert Hall Plaza is an inappropriate site unless cost is the only criterion 2. North Day Lot has the most advantages and least disadvantages 3. Lionshead is hest Town -- controlled property 4. Should not, in any scenario, build transit center on the existing Lionshead structure in Phase 1 (can only be temporary) 5. A Transit Center in the redeveloped Lionshead Parking Structure would be the most cost effective option, but has the leas# certainty 6. The Lionshead Turnaround site has some merit as a potential site 7, North Day Lot is the best overall transit center location As a result of the analysis documented in this report, the consulting team recommends the Town consider the North Day Lot site the preferred site for a new transit center. The )/. Lionshead Circle turnaround site would also have sufficient advantages to warrant consideration, and the Lionshead parking structure options should he considered viable. L Vail Transit Center Site Selection Report 1 Q r PHASE I ENVIR{~NIVIENTAL SITE ASSESSI'VIENT TOWN OF VAIL~S PRC)POSED CONFERENCE FACILITY 395 SOUTH FRONTAGE RC)AD BEST VAIL, COLORADO` WALSH Project Number. 5937-Oi0 Qctober 14, 2004 PHASE I ENVIRONMENTAL SITE ASSESSMENT ' T+O~WN OF VAIL'S PR~PCISED CQNFEREIVCE FACILITY 395 SfJUTH FRONTAGE READ WEST VAIL, CCILQRAD~ October 14, 2004 Prepared far: Mr. Tim Brekel Architectural Resource Consultants, Inc. 4410 Arapahoe Avenue, Suite 22fl Boulder, Colorado 803fl3 Prepared by: Tracy Altrock Industrial Hygienist Reviewed by: Reviewed by:. Lindsay M. Breyer, CIH Manager of Health and Safety Services Hal Stuber, Ph.D. Environmental Chemist Subrnrtled by WALSH ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENTISTS AND ENGINEERS, LLC 4$$$ Pearl East Circle, Suite 10$ Boulder, Colorado $0301 (303) 443-3282 WALSH ProjecE Number; 5937-014 • ~~~~~ Environmental Scientists and Engineers, LLC TABLE OF CONTENTS 1 INTRODUCTION .................................................................................................................1 2 SITE DESCR.IPTI~ON ...........................................................................................................1 2,1 SITE LOCA'T'ION AND DIrSCRIPTIC3N .................................................................................. 1 2.2 PHYSICAL SETTING ............................................................,........,.........,,..........,.............. 3 2.2.1 Topography .............................................................................................................3 2.2.2 Regional and Site Geolow ......................... 2.2,3 Hydrolagy ................................................................................................................... 3 3 HISTORICAL RECORDS REVIEW ................................................................................. 3 3.1 AERIAL PHOTOGRAPH REVIEW ........................................................................................ 3 3.2 H3STORIC UNITED STATES GEOGRAPHICAL SI.)RVEY (USGS} T~QPOGRAPHIC MAPS ....... _ 4 3.3 CITY DII~cTORtES .......................................................................................................... . 5 3.4 SANBORN FIRIr INSt~RANCE RATE MAPS ......................................................................... . 5 4 PUBLIC RECORDS REVIEW ........................................................................................... 5 4.1 FEDERAL RECORDS .......................................................................................................... I7 4.1.1 Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation rind Liability Aet (CERCLA} Sites ..................................................................................................................... . 6 4.1.2 .Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA} Sites ....................................... . b 4.1.3 Emergency Response Not cation System (ER11~'S} .................................................... . 7 4,1.4 Mines Master Index File Sites ............................................................................... . 7 4.2 STATE AND LOCAL RECORDS ........................................................................................... 7 4.2.1 State Equivalent Priorities List (SPL} ................................................................... . 7 4.2.2 Solid Waste Disposal Facilities ............................................................................. . 7 4,2.3 Leaking Underground Storage Tanks (LUST} ....................................................... . 7 4.2.4 Underground Storage Tanks (U$Ts} ..................................................................... . 8 4.2.5 Permit Compliance System (PCS} ......................................................................... . 9 4.2.G AIRS Facility System (AFS} ................................................................................... . 9 5 SITE INSPECTION AND INTERVIEWS ......................................................................... 9 ~.1 SUB]ECT STTE ................................................................................................................... 9 5.2 SIJI%RGUNDING pRiDPERTIES ........................................................................................... 12 5.3 1NTERVIEWS ................................................................................................................... 13 6 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS ............................................................ 14 7 QUALIFICATIONS AND LIMITATIONS ..................................................................... 17 8 REFERENCES .................................................................................................................... I8 • p:\pcgectssarchite~twaleumseer consulaanu.593TS937.0lO~pfsuc_i 6„aLdae.l0.l4.04 1 ~~~~ Environments[ Scientists and Engineers, LLC LIST (7F FIGURES r FIGURE 1 SITE LOC,h~i'ION 11~AP ,~ ................................................................................................. 2 LIST ~F TABLES TABLE. 1 LIST OF AGENCY SOURCES ............................................................................................... 5 LIST OF APPEN~IGES Appendix A BBL Enviranrnental Information, Environmental Records Search Appendix B Photographs from Site Inspection Appendix C AgencyfPersanal Contact List Appendix D Corporate and Personnel Qualifications . p;lprajemitiuirchitecmral resource consul WnL5.59J 7'd937.()I t9lphase_i_final.doc. l G.14.C# Il ~~~L~a1sh Environmental scientists and Engineers, LLC ACRaNYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS AFS AIRS Facility System ARC Architectural Resource Consultants, Inc. AST Above-ground Storage Tank ASTM American Society of Testing and Materials CDPHE Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment CERCLA Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act CERCLIS CERCLA Information System C©RRACTS Resource Conservation and Recovery Act Corrective Actions ERNS Emergency Response Notification System ESA Environmental Site Assessment FEMA Federal Emergency Management Agency LUST Leaking Underground Storage Tank LQCT Large Quantity Generators MINES Mines Master Index File . NFRAP ~ No Further Remedial Action Planned NPDES National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System NPL National Priority List NTIS National Technical Information Service OPS Colorado Department of Lobar and Employment, ©il and Public Safety {formerly QIS) PCBs Polychloriraated Biphenyls PCS Permit Compliance System RCRA Resource Conservation and Recovery Act RCRIS RCRA Inventory System ROD Records of Decision Site 395 South Frontage Road West, Vail, Colorado SPL State Equivalent Priorities List SQGs Small Quantity Generators TRUST LUST Trust Sites TSD Treatment, Storage, and Disposal USDA United States Department of Agriculture USEPA United States Environmental Protection Agency USGS United States Geographical Survey UST Underground Storage Tank VCUP Voluntary Clean-Up VOC Volatile Qrganic Compounds 'WALSH Walsh Environn~zental Scientists and Engineers, LLC • y:iprujet4s~archi[ectvnl fesowrec rnnsunants.593715937.0161plaase_i_Tiaal.doc. I lT.14.64 111 -~~~ Environmental scientists and Engineers, LLB EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ~ . j A Phase I Environmental Site Assessment (ESA) was conducted for 395 South Frontage Road West (the Town of Vail's proposed Conference Facility location}, in Vail, Colorado {the Site}, This ESA. was conducted by Walsh Environmental Scientists and Engineers, LLC {WALSH} on behalf of the Town of Vail in anticipation of construction of a Conference Center on the Site. This assessment includes 1,2 acres located adjacent to the Lionshead parking structure and the Lionshead parking structure. The objective of this assessment is to provide information regarding the environmental condition of the Site, The information obtained from a records review, aerial photograph interpretation, visual Site inspection, and review of a past Phase I ESA prepared for the subject property indicate that the environmental condition of the Site may have been impacted by past or current activities on the Site or surrounding areas. 'The following is a summary of key findings: • The west and center portion of the subject property is currently occupied by a tri-level parking garage. A connected stareloffice area is Ideated on the south side of tke garage. A charter bus parking lot is located on the east side of the Site. • Historical aerial. photographs and topographic maps indicate that the property was vacant 1 _ through 1970. In 1976 a paved parking area was added to the Site. ~~~ * According to the Transportation Manager for the Town of Vail the Site was used.as a i sheep pasture until 1962 when the town was established. From this time forward, until a 4-acre asphalt parking lot was placed on the Site, it had been used as a garbage dump. The Lionshead Parking Garage was constructed in 1979. At that time, the dump was cleaned up. The materials removed from the dump consisted mainly of construction debris and a couple of cars. No fill material had. been brought onto the Site. During ~± construction of the parking structure, the area where the Charter Bus Parking Lot is now ~ located was raised using soil taken from underneath the current parking structure. ~ • Potential environmental concerns exist as a result of tke Site's former use as a dump. These concerns include contamination of sail and groundwater from buried materials, and the generation of methane from the decay of buried organic materials suck as trash and wood. A Phase II ESA is recommended to further evaluate these concerns. Stored paints and solvents were identified in a storage room in the southwest corner of the lower level Tires and miscellaneous materials were identified in a uacant office area in the southeast corner of the lower level. This office was water damaged. Further evaluation would be necessary to determine if mold growth is present as a result of tke water damage. • One Superfund Consent Decree was identified as Carryon Creek Estates Home Owner, located at 605 1`~larth Frontage Road, appraximately'l4 mile west of the subject property. Based on the groundwater flow direction, this site is not expected to present a potential p;~ycpjeruiuchrcecwrat reap,ree conwl~ams.$937'd4J 7.6301phuc_i_final.doe.10.14.64 lv ~~~~ Environmental Scientists and Engineers, LLC envirannnental concern to the Site. However, due to the proximity to the Site, the EPA + Superfund Records Center was contacted for further information regarding the Consent Decree. The records center did not have any information on the site. A Freedom-of Information-Act request. has been submitted to obtain more information, but a response has not yet been received. One open Leaking Underground Storage Tank (LUST) site was identified as Chevron USA, Inc. #7Q499, located at 434 South Frontage Raad, 3/4 mile west of the subject property. Records for the site were reviewed at the Colorado Division of Oil and Public Safety. The site is currently being monitored far total petroleum hydrocarbons and gasoline range organics. The groundwater flow direction for this site is mapped to the southwest. Based on this information, this site is not expected to environmentally impact the subject property. Seven other closed LUST sites were identified within the Site search vicinity. None of these sites are mapped as being located upgradient to the Site. Based on the rriapped locations and current status,. these sites are not expected to present a potential environmental. concern to the Site. One Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) Small Quantity Generators (SQGs) was identified as the Vail Recreation District, located at 292 West Meadow Drive, '/4 mile southeast of the subject property. Based on the groundwater flow direction, this site is not exgeeted to environmentally impact the Site. • Eight Underground Storage Tanks (USTs} were identified as being located within the search radius of the subject property. Properly managed, the USTs at these locations are not considered to present a potential environmental concern to the Site, • Miscellaneous trash and debris was observed around the parking structure. The materials should be removed and properly dispased o£ No visual indications of environmentally significant contamination were observed during the Site inspection. • One pad-mounted electrical transformer was identified on the south end of the Site. In general, any contamination associated with the transformers would be the responsibility of the utility company, unless caused by a third party. Li~rritatians: The store and office area located on the south side of the Site is occupied by a Subway Subs store. The second level is occupied by a game room, and an office area. Access to this area was limited by a wire gate restricting the area during off hours. The kitchen to Subway was not inspected. However, containers of degreaser and soap associated with the dishwashing unit were observed. The men's restraom was not inspected. The child's play school was not accessible for inspection. The Vail Youth Services Administrative Office in this area was also inaccessible. Based on the findings of this Phase I ESA, no other recognized environmental conditions were identified which would warrant additional assessments or evaluation of sail or groundwater at the subject property. p:5prajeerslerchisceturai xcsuurce eonsuhants.3437"5937.OlOlphase_i_Final.doc.l0,14.04 v ~ ~~~~5~1 linvironmental 9cien4ists and Engineers, LLC PHASE I E~1111RONMENTAL SITE ASSESSMEAIT TOWN OF VAIL'S PROPOSED CaNFEREIyCE FACILITY 395 SOUTH FRONTATGE ROAD WEST VAIL, COLORADO INTRODUCTION This report presents the findings of a Phase I Environmental Site Assessment (ESA) conducted at the property located at 39S South Frontage Road West and includes the Lionshead parking structure and 1,2 acres located adjacent to the parking structure in Vail, Colorado (the Site). This ESA was conducted by Walsh Environmental Scientists and Engineers, LLC (WALSH} on behalf of the Town of Vail in anticipation of construction of a Conference Center on the Site. The objective of this assessment is to provide information regarding the environmental condition of the Site. This ESA consisted of a review of available local, county, state, and federal documents, examination of historical aerial photographs, topographic maps, interviews, and a visual inspection ofthe Site. This ESA was conducted in accordance with American Society of Testing and Materials (ASTM)' Standard E1527-00, Standard Practice for Environmental Site Assessments- Phase I Environmental Site Assessment Processes {ASTM 2x00). Any deviations from the ASTM standard are described in the sections whew they occur. Listings of the contacts made for conducting this ESA are included ut Appendix. C. No sampling of soil, water, building materials, or other material was conducted. 2 SITE DESCRIPTION 2.1 Site 'Location arid' Description The Site consists of the Lionshead parking structure (1,200 parking spaces) and the adjacent 1.2 acres located at 395 South Frontage Road West in Vail, Colorado. The site is located in Section 6, Township 5 South, Range 80 West of the 6th Principal Meridian. Figure 1 provides a Site Map. A legal description for the subject property was obtained from the Town of Vail Community Development Office. The Site is divided into two parcels described as: PARCEL I: LOTS 3 AND 5, A RESUBDIVISION OF LOT I, BLOCK 1, VAIL/LIONSHEAD, SECOND FILING, ACCORDING TO THE PLAT RECORDED JANUARY 17, 1975 IN SOON 328, COUNTY OF EAGLE, STATE OF COLORADO. P:1f'RCDJECTS'u4rehitectural Resource Consultants.593T3937.010\Phasc_l_FP,3AL.doc ~~~~~ Environmental Scientists and engineers, LLC Figure 1 Site Location Map z P:iFROJEC'l'S\.4rchitectura8 Resource Consultants.593T15937.tf [01Fhase_I_FINAL.doe C d ~ f3 C? ~ __.! Q~ rr+~J VJ Ib Y m ff/ .N~ LL rV V }N } n N N C7 iii o. ~a Y U W m ~, Ui m 0 a Q naM1 ~o] r 2 aT, ~ ~ F ^ d LL C Y] Y" s ~1~ wl ~ C/~ lS? LY7 C O y:. U d ~~~/y V/ z t~ u~ a .9 00 9 tl .aa u ~; e ~a 1«~~ Environmental Scientists and Engineers, LLC PARCEL 2: LOT 1, BLOCK 2, VAILJLIONSHEAD, FIRST FILING, ACCORDING TO THE PLAT RECORDED MAY 1$, 1979 IN BOOK 217 AT PAGE 676, COUNTY OF EAGLE, STATE OF COLORADO. 2.2 Physical Setting 2.2.1 Topography The Site lies within the Vail West topographic quadrangle at an elevation of approximately 8,200 feet above mean sea level {USGS 1987). The topography of the Site slopes to the south. 2.2.2 Regional and Site Geology The surficial geology in the region of the Site is mapped as Gravels and Alluviums from the Pinedale and Bull Lake Age. This includes Broadway and Louviers Alluvium. The Site also appears to consist of sedimentary rocks from the middle Pennsylvanian Age. This consists of Minturn Formation in the west-central and south-central and other units of middle Pennsylvanian Age consisting of Arkosic sandstone, conglomerate, shale, and limestone (Tweto 1979).. 2.2.3 Hydrology The depth to groundwater and flow direction was not available in the sources consulted. Based on topography, the groundwater flow direction is expected to be southwest (USGS 1987. The major surface water features in the vicinity of the Site are Gore Creek and Middle Greek (USGS 19$7}. Gore Creek runs east to west approximately '/s mile south of the Site. Middle Creek runs northeast. to southwest until it connects with Gore Creek. Middle Creek is located approximately'/~ mile east of the subject property. Spraddle Creek runs northeast to southwest approximately 3!4 mile east of the Site. It also appears to end at Gore Creek (USGS 1987b). 3 HISTORICAL RECQRDS REVIEW 3.9 Aerial Photograph Review Available historical aerial photographs from 1976, 1988, 1991, and 2002 were reviewed at Colorado Aerial Photo Service. The 198$ photograph was not available in stereoscopic pairs for three-dirzlensional viewing. The 197b photograph shows the subject property to consist of a combination of paved parking areas and unpaved grass areas. The Site is bordered on the north by a road that runs east to west (Frontage Road). This road is bordered on the north by a parallel road (Interstate-70[I-70]). On the north of I- 70 is a hillside. An unimproved road runs south. to north up the hillside to houses on the top. A small excavated area is present along the roadside at the base of the hill. The subject property is P:tiPRdJIiCTS1P.rchitectural Resaurt:e Consul€an€s.5937L5937.D101Phase_I_FrffAI..doc ~~~~ Environmental scientists and Engineers, LLC ~, bound on the west, south, and east by a road (Lionshead Circle). A residential development and parking area is located on the adjacent property to the west of the Site. Conr~naercial structures are located to the south of the Site. South of the structures are trees and a gorge with a bridge leading across.. To the eastlnortheast of the Site is a residential development. To the east/sautheast of the Site is an excavated area and heavy equipment. In the 1988 photograph, the subject property appears to be changed. The east side of the property appears to have been repaved. A parking structure has been constructed on the Site. A grassy area is present to the north, west, and south of the structure. Small structures (parking ticket booths) are located on the east side of the Site before the built-up structure. The unimproved road and excavated area are no longer present to the north of the Site, There are na apparent changes to the west of the Site. Additional commercial structures are located to the south of the Site. There are no apparent changes to the eastfnortheast of the Site. The area to the east/southeast of the Site is no longer under construction and the heavy equipment is no longer present. This area is occupied by a large building (ice arena). There are no apparent changes in the 1991 photographs. In the 2002 photograph, a small structure appears to be located on the north side of the Site, along the road. The aerial photographs did not. reveal the presence of any land uses that are thought to have irripacted the environmental condition of the subject property. ~ r 3.2 Historic United States Geographical Survey ~USGS~ Yopographic Maps Available historical topographic maps from 1970 and 1957 were reviewed. The Site is located in the Vail West Quadrangle. The 1970 map shows the subject property to be undeveloped. The Site is bordered on the north by a road {Frontage Road). I-70 is located north of the road. The adjacent property to the north is undeveloped. The subject property is bound by a road (Lionshead Circle) on the west and south, This road extends to the east to connect to the Frontage Road. Undeveloped. land is located on the adjacent property to the east of the Site. Structures are located to the west, southwest, and southeast of the Site. Middle Creek runs from the northeast to the southwest on the adjacent property to the east of the Site and connects with Gore Creek located t/s mile south of the Site. Many small structures are located on the south side of the creek. A bridge and ski lift run north to south, approximately'/e mike to the southwest of the Site. A gauging station is located nr,~saxirnately'/, mile northeast of the Site on the north side of I-70. The 1987 reap shows a large structure located on the subject property. Additional structures are located to the west, south, and east of the Site. Lionshead Circle stops near the southeast corner of the Site instead of continuing east to connect to the Frontage Road. Two structures are now located northwest of the Site on the north side of I-7fl. No other relevant changes were apparent. P:1PRo1ECTS1P.rchitectural Resource Consultants.593715937.~TlQlPhasc~[_F[NAI„doc 4 • • -~~~7~11 Environmental Scientists and Engineers, LLG The review of topographic maps did not reveal the presence of any land uses that are thought t© have impacted the environmental condition of the sub}ect progerty. 3.3 City ©irectaries The City Directories were reviewed by at the Denver Public Library to identify the garcel uses over time. No listings found for this address. 3.4 Sanborn Fire Insurance Rate Maps Sanborn Fire Insurance Maps were researched at the Denver Public Library. There was no coverage for the Site. The lack of coverage indicates that the Site is not located within the historically developed limits of adjacent municipalities, 4 PUBLIC RECORDS REVIEW An environmental record search of pertinent agency records was conducted. The search focused an records pertaining to properties within a 1-mile radius of the Site, Table 1 lists the agency records searched. A copy of the database report is included in Appendix A. Table 1 t_ist of Agency Sources NPL C GERCLIS-NFRAP f CflRRACTS I RCRtS-TSD (~ationa( Priorities List - USEPA Proposeyl Nati©nal Priorities List USEPA Comprehensive Environmental Response, USEPA Compensation and Liability Act {~ERCLA) tnfQ~~1 lion Svstem C~C~IS-No Further Remediation Action USEPA Ptanne~ Corrective Action RgPort Resource Conservalton and Recovery Act .USEPA ~ USEPAI'NTIS Information System Resource Canservalian and ReooveryAct USEPAlNTIS Information System _.. Emerq-na Resaor~s NatifieationSvstern USEPAINTIS Suae and ansent ecrees USEPA R~~~~ords of D~cisi~n I NTIS hfafianal Priort ~ Lisa Deletions I USEPA Mines Master I ndex File Dept. of Labor, Mine Safety and Realth administration rts~rJ~r~J Landfill List I D q of Heath ~ ~ Sold Waste Sites and Facilities I P E C Leaking Underground Storage Tank List Dept. of Lahar and LUST Trust Sites Underground Storage Tank Database EmQQ199yment, OlS CDPHE Dept. of Labor and ~~playment, OlS VCUP Voluntary Cleanup and Redevelopment Act ~ E TRUST UST RCRIS Lg. 8 Sm. Quan. Gen. I ERNS I CONSENT I R{)D I I7i;listed NPL MINES I istori al Landfill C Mate ~andfill { LUST Appli ((tqn Tracking Report PCS Perm~it~Gampliance System far NPDES USEPA AF5 AIRS Facility System I USEPA III CDPHE Colorado Department of Puhlc Health and Environment P:IPROJECTS1Architectural3tesource Consultants,5 93 715 9 3 7.O1O1Phase I F[I~iAL..dnc 1.0 mile 19104 1.0 mile 19104 1.0 mile 9104 1.0 mile 1 9104 1.0 mile 19/D4 1.0 mile 1 9104 0.5 mile 1 9104 0.5 mile ~ NA 0.5 mile NA 1.0 mile 9104 1.0 mite 1 9104 1.0 mile 1.0 mile 1.0 mile 1.0 mile 1.0 mile 0.5 mile 1.0 mile 0.5 mile 0.5 mile zaps 3143 8/04 8104 8104 5104 9104 9104 5 Environmental Scientists and Engineers, LLC CERCLIS CERGLA lnfomiation System CORRACT5 Resource Conservation and Recovery Aci Corrective Action ERNS Emergency Response Notification System MWES MINES Master Index File NPDES Nationale Pollutant Discharge Elimination System NFRAP No Further Rerrtedial Action Planned NFL NationaP Priority List NTIS National Technical Infomraton Service O1S Colorado Depamnent of Labor and Employtnent, Oil Inspection Section, now ail and Pualic Safety {aP5) RCRIS RCRA inventory System RaD Record of Decision TRUST LUST Trust Sites TSD Treatment, storage, and disposal USDA United States. i)epanment of Agriculture USEPA United States Enviro..........a! Protection Agency 4.1 Federal Records 4.1.1 Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act (CERGLA) Sites CERGLA provides a system for prioritizing existing areas of known contamination for remediation. The United States Environmental Protection Agency {USEPA) ranks the CERGLA Information System (CERCLIS) sites according to risk based on the Hazard Ranking System Score. Higher risk sites are placed on the National Priority List (NPLj and are then considered Superfund Sites. The CERCLIS database and NPL listings were reviewed for the Site including Superfund Consent Decrees and Records of Decision {RODj. There are no CERCLIS sites and no Further Remedial Action Planned (NFRAP) sites within 1 mile of the subject property. There are no NPL sites, Proposed NPL, Delisted NPL, or ROD sites within 1 mile of the subject property. One Superfund Consent Decree was. identified as being located within'!4 mile to the west of the subject property. The Consent Decree site is identified as Canyon Creek Estates Hame Owner, located at 605 North Frontage Road. Based an the mapped location of the Consent Decree site it is not expected to he Iocated upgradient to the Site. However, based on proximity to the Site, Ms. Pat White with the EPA 5uperfund Records Center was contacted. According to Ms. White, there is no record of this site as a Consent Decree site. Mr. Martin O'Grady, Colorado State Lead for Superfund Sites, and Mr, Kevin Mackey, Colorado Department of Public Health and the Envirorunent, were also contacted for further informatlan on the site. Mr. Mackey had been involved in a project named Canyon Creek Watershed near Ouray, Colorado, but was not involved in any Vail projects. 4.1.2 Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) Sites The RCRA Hazardous Waste Notifiers List is an inventory of transporters, burnerfblenders, and large, small, and very small quantity generators of hazardous wastes, Large quantity generators {LQG} generate more than 1,000 kilograms {2,205 pounds) of hazardous waste per month. Small quantity generators {SQGs) generate 100 kilograms (22fl pounds) to l,flflfl kilograms per month, and • •; • P:'IPRa.TECTS1Arehitectural Resource Consultants.593715937.O1ff1Phase I FiNAL.doc ~V[~al~h En~ir4nmental 5cienlists and Engineers, LLC conditionally exempt small quantity generators generate less than 100 kilograms of hazardous waste per month. The RCRA Hazardous Waste Notifiers List; Treatment, Storage, and Disposal (TSD) s Sites List; and the RCRA Corrective Action List (CORRACTS) were reviewed.. There were no TSD sites, CORRACTS sites, or LQG sites identified within the search radius of the Site. Tlie RCR~. small quantity generators list was also reviewed for sites within 1/z mile of the Site. ©ne SQG was identified as the Vail Recreation District, located'/~ mile southeast afthe Site at 292 West Meadow Drive_ These sites are not considered to be located upgradient to the Site. used on the groundwater flow direction and the volumes of waste generated, these sites are not expected to environmentally impact the Site. 4.1.3 Emergency Response Notification System {ERNS} Spill reports received by the USEPA regarding hazardous materials incidents are maintained in an on-line database called ERNS. When a reportable quantity of a hazardous substance is released, the National Response Center must be notified within 24 hours, and these reports are also included in ERNS. There have been no incidents reported within'f~ mile of the Site. 4.1.4 Mines Master index File Sites The Mines Master Index Files were reviewed. No mines were located within 1 mile of the sub}ect property. 4.2 State and Local Records 4.2.1 State Equivalent Priorities List (SPL) The State of Colorado Voluntary Clean-Up (VCUP) List was reviewed. There are no VCUP sites located within 1 mile of the Site. 4.2.2 Solid Waste Disposal Facilities State and county databases were reviewed for landfills located within 1 mile of the Site. No landfills were identified in the vicinity of the Site. 4.2.3 Leaking Underground Storage Tanks (LUST) The LUST database and trust fund list compiled by the Colorado Department of Oil and Public Safety (OPS) were searched for LUSTS in the vicinity of the Site. The lists identify locations where releases have been reported; where closures were conducted; where spills, overfills, or upgrades have occurred, and where contamination or tank leaks have been reported. There are seven closed LUST sites identified in the vicinity of the subject property. These sites were identified as: • P:1PRC1.]ECTS1Archi+ec[uml Resource Consulrants.543715437.Oi0U'hase_I_FINAL.dac ~~~~ Environmental Scientists and Engineers, LLC ~ • The Upper Eagle Valley Sanitation, located within'`/z mile southwest of the Site at $46 Forest Road • Vaii Galf Course, located within Ya mile southeast of the subject property at 292 W est Meadow Drive • US West Communications, located within %z mile east of the subject property at 169 North ;~ Frontage Road • Old Town Shop, located on the South Frontage Road (no other information was provided) , • Amoco Oil #7439, located within'/z mile east of the subject property at 12 South Frontage Road. • Amoco Oil X2035, located within'/z mile east of the subject property at 28 South Frontage Road • Vail & Associates Shop Yard, located within 3/4 mile west ofthe subject property at 862 South Frontage Road Based on the status of these LUST sites {closed), no environmental risks to the Site are anticipated. t One open LUST site was identified as Chevron USA, Inc. ##70499, located within ~i'4 mile west of the subject property at 934 South Frontage Road. Based on information reviewed at OFS, this site is currently being monitored for total petroleum hydrocarbons and gasoline range organics. Based on ~ ( mapped groundwater flaw information far this site, the groundwater flow direction is to the ? southwest. This LUST site is not considered to be located upgradient of the subject property and is not environmental impact to the subject property is not expected from this site. 4.2.4 llnclerground Storage Tanlts (USTs) OFS also maintain lists of registered aboveground and underground storage tanks. These lists were searched for registered USTs and Above-ground Storage Tanks (ASTs} in the vicinity of the Site. Eight UST sites were identified within'fz mile of the Site, These sites were identifed as: • The Old Tawn Shop, located on the South Frontage Road (no other information was provided} • The Vail Patrol Headquarters (no other information was provided) • Vail Valley Medical Center, located within'/4 mile east of the Site at 181 West Meadow Drive ^ The Vail Golf Course, located within '/4 mile southeast of the subject property at 292.. West Meadow Drive • Upper Eagle Valley Sanitation and Vail Wastewater Treatment Plant located at 846 Forest Road, located within %z mile southwest of the Site • Vail Associates, located within t/2 mile west of the Site at 762 South Frontage Road • Twa UST sites are identified at 169 North Frontage Road, located within % mile east of the . subject property (no other information was provided} • The Alpine Standard Amoco #2035, located .within'/~ mile east of the subject property at 28 South Frontage Road. P:1PI~o]ECTS1ArehitecteiralResoureeConsu]tants.~93715937.Ok41Phase I F[NA.L.doe "~?[Ta~lsh Environmental Seientists and Engineers, LLC 'Based on the presunned direction of groundwater flow, six of these sites are either downgradient or cross gradient from the Site. The remaining two sites (Old Town Shop and Vail Patrol I-leadquarters) have poor locational information and their position with respeet to the Site and groundwater flow could not be determined. Properly managed, the USTs at these locations are not considered to present a potential environmental. concern to the Site, 4.2.5 Permit Campliel7ce System (PCS) PCS is a database designed to track permits, compliance and enforcement states of National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) facilities. One NPI7ES site was identified as the Upper Eagle Valley Sanitation, located within 'la mile southwest of the Site at 846 Forest Road. No violations were identified with the site. Releases from the site are not expected to impact the subject property based on the groundwater flow and the flow direction of Gore Creek. 4.2.6 AIRS Facility System (AFS) The AFS system contains information on emissions and compliance for air pollution point sources that are tracked by the USEPA, state, and Iocal environmental regulatory agencies. Information is reported to the USEPA regarding emissions of seven "criteria pollutants." The criteria pollutants are PM14 (particulate matter less that 14 microns in size}, carbon monoxide, sulfur dioxide, nitrogen dioxide, lead, reactive volatile organic compounds (VOG}, and ozone.. Two AFS sites were identified within % mile of the subject property. These sites were identified as Amoco Gas Station # 2035, located within % mile east of the Site at 28 South Frontage Road and Vail Valley Medical Center, located within %a mile east of the Site at 181 West Meadow Drive. No violations were identified with these sites. Releases from these sites have the potential to impact the air duality of the subject property, but are not. expected to impact soil or groundwater at the Site. 5 SITE INSPECTION AND INTERVIEWS 5.1 Subject Site The Site inspection was conducted on September 27, 2444 by WALSH personnel. The west and center portion of the subject property consists ofa tri-level parking garage. A connected storeloffice area is located on the south side of the garage. A charter bus parking lot is located on the east side of the Site. A section of lawn is located on the west side of the parking garage. This area is sloped to the west. The land levels out at the top of the slope; a small amount of old asphalt remains. A 2- inch, white, PVC pipe was identified. The top of it had been broken off leaving the pipe open. A drainage grate and an art structure were located at the southwest corner. Lawn sprinklers, i miscellaneous debris and trees were identified on this section of the property. P:IE'ROlECTSIArchitecturaCResourceConsultants.593715937A1U1Phase I FC?3AL.dnc ~. r , ~ ~~ ~~ als~il Environmental scientists and Engineers, LLC ~~ A section of lawn is located on the south side of the stores/offices that are connected to the parking structure. Concrete stairs leading into the parking structure are located at the southwest and southeast ' corners. The stairs at the southeast corner also lead to the Charter Bus .Parking area. A sidewalk runs parallel to the Lionshead Circle. Cane pad-mounted electrical transformer and two manholes were identified on the south end of the lawn. The polychlorinated Biphenyl (1'CB) status of these ~~ transformers is unknown. In general, any contamination associated with the transformers would be the responsibility of the utility company, unless caused by a third party. Benches and newspaper dispensers were located on the south side of the storefront. An art structure was located on the lawn. ,, The store and office area located on the south side of the Site is occupied lay a Subway Subs Store. The second level is occupied by a game room and an office area. Access to this area was limited by a wire gate restricting the area during off hours. The kitchen at Subway was not inspected. However, containers of degreaser and soap associated with the dishwashing unit were observed. A booth area and men's and women's restrooms were associated with Subway, A cabinet containing artwork paint was observed. The artwork supplies belong to the child's play school locate on the west side of the Subway Shap. The child's play school was not accessible far inspection. The Vail Youth Services Administrative Office in this area was also inaccessible. The portion of the Site located to the east of the parking structure is occupied primarily by a charter bus parking lot and a visitor information center. The far east side of the property slopes t east and is steep and rocky at the southeast end. A street light was located along the road. An i associated cable was identified in this area. Miscellaneous items were identif ed an the unpaved area east of the charter bus parking lot. These two areas were separated by a wooden fence. This area was overgrown with trees and thick vegetation. Rocks, gravel, dead tree branches, beverage cans, food wrappers, and a large sheet of plastic were identified. A metal pole protrudes from the ground on the southeast corner on the east side of the fence. The pole is protected by an orange, plastic shield. A small pull-off parking area and a lawn area are located next to the Visitor Center on the northeast side of the subject property. Postcards, books, and visitor reference materials were found inside of the Visitor Center. A small wooden deck was located on the west side of the building. Concrete stairs lead up from the south to the bus parking lat. The parking lot is surrounded on the east and south sides by a wooden fence. Five RVs and three horse carriages were parked on the Iot at the time of the inspection. A couple of full garbage bags, two light ballasts, and acut- open milk jug, half filled with used motor oil were identified along the south side of the fence. Three garbage bags filled with hay were located along the east side of the fence (near the parse carriages). One small cocked wooden storage cabinet was also located in this area. Minor staining from vehicles was observed on the parking lot. One storage shed housing two 4-yard trash dumpsters was located on the west side of the parking lot. A drainage area was located between the shed and the parking structure. It directed the runoff front the top of the bus parking lot towards the parking structure. Two small electrical boxes were identified near the drainage area behind a wooden panel attached to the east side of the parking structure. Four parking attendant booths located in a raw from north to south were located at the north side of the bus parking lat. . P:1PROlBG't'SlArchitecmral Resource Consultants.5J37L5137.01{]1Yhase 1 F1NAL:doc 10 ~~~~T~ Envieonmenta] Scientists and Engineers, LLC A lawn area is located on the north side of the parking garage. It slopes towards the road on the north side and towards the parking structure on the south side. The area was covered with grass, trees, and some rocks. Two 2-inch diameter, white, PVC pipes were located on the north side of the Site. A street sign and protective concrete barrier were located along the roadside on the property. A sidewalk is located at the north edge of the parking structure. A drainage grate was located at the northwest comer of the Site. Buried electrical, high-voltage, TV cables and associated manholes; telecommunications boxes; lawn sprinklers; water control valves; and the tops of three metal water pipes approximately 8-inches in diameter were identified in this area. Spray paint cans, beverage cans and bottles, food wrappers, plastic bags, wood scraps and other miscellaneous items were scattered in this area. Upper Parking Deck Six ventilation units were located in a raw east to west, on the top deck of the parking garage. Wooden skate park structures were located in the center of the upper deck. Light posts, trash and ash cans, vehicles, and firehose hook-ups were identified on the upper deck. Minor staining from vehicles was identified. Center Parking Deck Ducting for ventilation, air intake units, wall mounted electrical panel boxes, parked vehicles, firehose hook-ups, and pipes for floor drains pipes connecting the upper and lower level were observed. The pipes on the south side were insulated (some with a deteriorating material) the ones on the north side were not insulated except for a bumper matting material. Two parking pay station boxes were located on the south half of the building. Lower Parking Deck Ducting for ventilation, air intake units, parked vehicles, firehose hook-ups, and pipes for floor drains pipes connecting the upper and lower level were observed. The pipes on the south side were insulated {some with a deteriorating material) the ones on the north side were not insulated except for a bumper matting material. Two parking pay station boxes were located on the south half of the building. The concrete was stained with oil leaks from. vehicles in the northwest corner of the parking lot next to the stairs. A small room with two bay doors and one regular Boar was located in the northeast corner next to the stairs. This room was locked. It was inspected by WALSH on September 29, 2Q04. This area is occupied by a street sweeper and a bag of salt for ice removal. All of the parking levels were connected by stairs. One set was located in each of the four corners, and two sets in the center of the garage. A gravel area separated the north and south center section of the Lower Level. Partially clogged drain grates, shrubs, and five metal pipe access pointswere located in this area. An electrical control room was located in the center of the south half of this Ievel. It was not accessible, but was visible through a glass wall. Electrical control equipment was observed. • P:1PRa]ECTS1Archstectural Resource Consultants.593715937.4141Phase_I_F1N.AL.doc 1 1 ~~~r~S11 Environments! Scientists and Engineers, LLC t At the southwest corner, outside of the Subway doors were two locked doors. This area was accessed on September 29, 2004 for inspection. Several cans of paint and solvents were stored ~. in this room. A vacant office area was located at the southeast corner. It was not accessible, but four tires, shelves and boxes of items were identified through the window. Outside of the door to the room, the ceiling was dripping with a milky white substance, which is likely a mixture or salts or minerals and water. This area was also inspected on September 29,.2004 and observed to have heavy water damage. The West Mental Health Center Offices were located in the south side of the parking structure. This space consisted of offices and therapy rooms. No recognized environmental conditions were identified during the Site inspection. However, ~ the unwanted chemicals, stored materials, and refuse should be should be removed and properly disposed of prior to development. ~, i ~i.2 Surrounding Properties ,. North -The Vail Visitor Center is located to the north of the charter bus parking area of the subject property. The majority of the Site is bordered by the Frontage Road. I-70 runs parallel ' to the Frontage Road. on the north side. The adjacent property located on the north side of the highway is occupied by a mountainside. ~' East -The subject property is bound on the east by a gravel road that Ieads up to the Vail International Condominiums and associated parking area, which are located on the north half of the adjacent property to the east. Two pad mounted transformers are located at the north end of the gravel road and are considered to be located on the adjacent property. The Vail Recreation Center's Ice Skating Arena is located on the southern half of the adjacent property to the east. Vertical shafts believed to be associated with maintaining the ice rink was located outside of the ice arena. South -The subject property is bound by the Lionshead Circle on the south. The adjacent property is occupied by a bus stop and retail shops. These shops include a sporting goods stare far children; Prudential Real Estate; a T-shirt shop; coffee shop, ice-cream and pastry shop; Breeze Rental; The Flying Burrito; Slifer, Smith, and Frampton Reai Estate; Patagonia; and a ski, snowboard, and bike rental shop. Parking and the Treetop Condominiums are located in this area. Vacant retail store space and the Lodge at Lionshead and an associated parking area are located also located on the south side of the subject property. West Mountain Drive begins at the southeast corner of the property adjacent to the Site. West -The subject property is bound by the Lionshead Circle on the west. The adjacent property located to the west of the Site is occupied by condominiums and associated parking areas. P:IPROJECZ's'varchitecturaf Resource Consultants.593715937.[1J01Phase_I_~'INAt.doc 12 __ (Environmental Scientists and Engineers, LLC The adjoining properties did not appear to present an environmental risk to the Site. ~.3 Interviews Mr. Mike Rose, Transportation Manager far the Town of Vail, was contacted an October $, 2044 regarding the environmental status of the Site. Mr. Rose has been associated with the property since 1979 when the parking structure was constructed. Mr. Rose stated that the Town of Vail was established in 1962. From this time forward until a 4-acre asphalt parking lot was placed on the Site it had been used as a garbage dump. Prior to this time, the Site was used as a sheep pasture. In 1979 construction began on the Lionshead Parking Garage, currently located an the Site. Mr. Rose was involved. in the cleanup of the material that remained an the Site from the farmer dump and the construction of the parking structure, He stated that the materials removed from the dump consisted mainly of construction debris and a couple of cars. Mr. Rose stated that the parking garage was built by Hugh Hyder Construction Company, based out of 1?enver. Contact information for the company could not be found. Other than the construction company, he was unaware of where records would be maintained documenting the removal of materials from the Site. Mr. Rose stated that the dump had occupied an area of approximately 200 feet by 100 feet and that no general refuse was observed in the area. He was unaware of any past or current uses of the Site and adjacent properties for industrial purposes, gas stations, motor repair, commercial printing, dry cleaning, or photo developing. He was unaware of the past or present presence of tanks, drums, sacks, or other containers of chemicals larger than 5 gallons, He was unaware of any spills related to the Charter Bus Parking area or the parking structure. Mr. Rose responded that na fill material had been brought onto the Site, During construction of the parking structure, the area where the Charter Bus Parking is now located was raised using dirt taken Il~~~~ underneath the current parking structure. An electrical control room was located in the center of the south half of this level. According to Mr. Rose, two electrical transformers are located in this room. One is dry; the nature of the other is unknown. Mr. Rose stated that there are na pits, ponds, or lagoons located on the subject property and have not been any in the past, Hie did not know of any previous environmental reports far the property ar any environmental violations, liens, lawsuits, or administrative actions related to the Site.. Mr. Rose believed that-the white PVC pipes protruding from the ground were part of the irrigation system. Mr. Mike Vaughan, Fire Prevention Officer for the Town of Vail, was contacted on October S, 2004 to determine if any hazardous materials spills or incidents had been reported at the Site. Mr. Vaughan has been with the Vaii Fire Department far 24 years. He does not recall any calls regarding incidents of this nature during that time, However, no formal research was conducted. Mr. Vaughan stated that the subject property was at one time used as a garbage dump. Ms. Lanette Mitchell, at the West Mental Health Center, was interviewed at the time of the inspection. She has been with the Health Center for ar,Y~~ximately 1 year. According to Ms. Mitchell, the center is used for therapy and. only general cleaning chemicals are used in this area. To her knowledge, the space was used for storage prior to becoming the Health Center. P:1PRalECTS',Architectural Resource Consultants.5 93 715 9 3 7.0101Phase_I_FINAL.doc ~ ~ =~~[ralsli Ettvironmental Scientists and Engineers, LLC Xcel Energy was contacted to obtain information regarding the presence of PCBs associated with the transformers. At the time of this report, no response had been received. If any information is received, it will be forwarded in an addendum to this report. 6 CQNCLUS~QNS AND RECQMMENDATIONS A Phase I Environmental Site Assessment (ESA) was conducted for 395 South Frontage Road West (the Town of Vail's proposed Conference Facility. location), in Vail, Colorado (the Site}. This ESA was conducted by'VValsh Environmental Scientists and Engineers, LLC (WALSH) on behalf of the Town of Vail in anticipation of construction of a Conference Center on the Site. This assessment includes 1,2 acres located adjacent to the Lionshead parking structure and the Lionshead parking structure. The objective of this assessment is to provide information regarding the environmental condition of the Site. The infornation obtained from a records review, aerial photograph interpretation, visual Site inspection, and review of a past Phase I ESA prepared for the subject property indicate that the environmental condition of the Site may have been impacted by past or current activities on the Site or surrounding areas. The following is a summary of key Endings: • The west and center portion of the subject property is currently occupied by a tri-level parking garage. A connected store/office area is located an the south side of the garage. A charter bus parking lot is located on the east side of the Site. • Historical aerial photographs and topographic maps indicate that the property was vacant through 197[}. In 1976 a paved parking area was added to the Site. According to the Transportation Manager for the Town of Vail the Site was used as a sheep pasture unti1.1962 when the town was established. From this time forward, until a ~#-acre asphalt parking lot was placed on the Site, it had been used as a garbage dump. The Lionshead Parking garage was constructed in 1979. At that time, the dump was cleaned up. The materials removed from the dump consisted mainly of construction debris and a couple of cars. No X11 material had been brought onto the Site. During construction of the parking structure, the area. where the Charter Bus Parking Lot is raw located was raised using soil taken from underneath the current parking structure. • Potential environmental concerns exist as a result of the Site's former use as a dump. These concerns include contamination of soil and groundwater from buried materials, and the generation of methane from the decay of buried organic materials such as trash and woad. A Phase II ESA is recommended to further evaluate these concerns. • Stored paints and solvents were identified in a storage room in the southwest comer of the lower level. Tires and miscellaneous materials were identified in a vacant office area in the southeast corner of the lower level. This office was water damaged. Further P:'+PROJECT'51Architectural Resource Consulrants.5937'S93i.014U'hase~l_FINAL.doc 14 • • • ~~~T Envirgnmental Scientists and Engineers, LLC ,~ evaluation would be necessary to determine ifmold growth is present as a result of the 'i water damage. One Superfuncl Consent Decree was identified as Canyon Creek Estates Home Owner, located at 605 North Frontage Road, approximately'/e mile west of the subject property. Based on the groundwater flow direction,. this site is not expected to present a potential environmental concern to the Site. However, due to the proximity to the Site, the EPA Superfund Records Center was contacted for further information regarding the Consent Decree, The records center did not have any information on the site. A Freedom-of- information-Act request has been submitted to obtain more information, but a response has. not yet been received. • One open Leaking Underground Storage Tank (LUST) site was identified as Chevron USA, Inc. #70499, located at 934 South Frontage Road, 3/4 mile west ofthe subject property. Records for the site were reviewed~at the Colorado Division of Oil and Public Safety. The site is currently being monitored for tokal petroleum hydrocarbons and gasoline range organics. The groundwater flow direction for this site is mapped to the southwest. Based on this information, this site is not expected to environmentally impact the subject property. Seven other caased LUST sites were identified within the Site search vicinity. None of these sites are mapped as being located upgradient to the Site. Based on the mapped locations and current status, these sites are not expected to present a potential environmental concern to the Site.. * One Resource Conservation and Recovery Act ~RCRA} Small Quantity Generators (SIGs) was identified as the 'Fl'ail Recreation District, located at 292 V4jest Meadow Drive,'/a mile southeast of the subject property. Based on the groundwater flow,direction, this site is not expected to environmentally impact the Site. • Eight Underground Storage Tanks (USTs} were identified as being located within the search radius of the subject property. Properly managed, the USTs at these locations are oat considered to present a potential environmental concern to the Site. Miscellaneous trash and debris was observed around the parking strucfiure. The materials should be removed and properly disposed of. No visual indications of environmentally significant contamination were observed during the Site inspection. • One pad-mounted electrical. transforazxer was identified on the south end of the Site, In general, any contamination associated with the transformers would be the responsibility of the utility company, unless caused by a third party. Limitations: The store and office area located on the south side of the Site is occupied by a Subway Subs store. The second level is occupied by a game room and an office area. Access to this area was limited by a wire gate restricting the area during off hours. The kitchen to Subway was not inspected. However, containers of degreaser and soap associated with the dishwashing unit were observed. The men's restroom was not inspected. The child's play school was oat P:1PRC)lECTSIArchitecturalResourccCgnsultants.59371593?.DIDIPhase 1 F'1NALedoc ~5 ,} ~~[Ta~sh Environmental Seicntists and Engineers, LLC for ins ection. The Vail Youth Services Administrative Office in this area was also ~ ' accessible P r inaccessible. ~, Based an the findings of this Phase I ESA, no other recognized environmental cDnditions were identified which would warrant additional assessments or evaluation of sail or groundwater at the subject property. . j { ~. r .~ ~' t i I P:IPRDJEC3'S'~Architectural Resource Consultants.593745937.U1D1Phase_I_FINfAL,doc ~~ z~~ Envieonmental Scientists and Engineers, LLC 7 QUALIFICATIONS AND LIMITATIONS WALSH conducted this Phase I ESA in accordance with tha guidelines set faith by ASTM. The qualifications of the personnel preparing this assessment are included in Appendix E, The sources of information obtained to perform this assessment include documents, oral statements, and other information from parties outside of WALSH's control. WALSH cannot guarantee the accuracy of the information. , WALSH's conclusions for this Phase I ESA are based on information provided by available public records, discussions with selected personnel associated with the Site and government agencies, and the general Site conditions determined by a visual inspection. Environmental legislation passed in the 1970s and I98Ds initiated the current practice of maintaining environmental records and facility inspection reports. Prior to the I97~s, activities may have adversely impacted the area. without being documented by government agencies. However, there is also na guarantee that the current record-keeping requirements are adhered to by all facilities. This assessment was limited and it did not include: Collection, testing, or chemical analysis of any samples of soil, groundwater, surface water, wastewater, building materials, or other material which was or could have been on site, except those specifically mentioned in this report.. • Interviews, except as specifically noted in this report, with past owners, tenants, employees, or neighboring landowners regarding past Site use, waste generation and disposal practices (including disposal at remote sites), or manufacturing processes which may have contributed to environmental contamination at the Site, • Evaluation of the potential risks associated with identified concerns from records searches with incomplete addresses location listings, or sites where no records were available for review. If additional information concerning site environmental conditions becomes available, the conclusions presented in this report will not be considered valid unless this information is reviewed and the conclusions and recommendations of this report are modified and approved in writing by WALSH. It is possible that additional reports or investigations could alter the conclusions of this assessment. This report was prepared for the use of our client and their agents only.. • ~:1FROJECTS\P.rchitectnral Resource Consultants.543715937.O101Fhase ! FnVrlL.dnc t7 _~~[~-T,a1sh Environmental scientists and En~ineen, LtC 8 REFE~iENCES ~ ASTM, 2000. Standard Practice for environmental Site Assessments: Phase 1 Environmental Site Assessment Processes, American Standards for Testing and Materials Standard Designation E-1527-00. Colorado Aerial Photo Service. 10113176. Photograph No. APS 249-1741175. Colorado Aerial Photo Service. 9/19/88. Photograph No. 349-33. Colorado Aerial Photo Service. 10116/91. Photograph No. 55/56. Colorado Aerial Photo Service. 1019/02. Photograph No. 74175, BBL Environmental Information. 2004. Environmental Record Search, Vail Conference Center, 395 S. Frontage Rd. W., Vail,. CO. Job Number.MTST3492. Tweto, Ogden. 1979. Gealvgic Map of Colorado. U.S. Geological Survey, l_T.S. Geological Survey. 1970. Vail West Quadrangle, Colorado. 7.5 Minute Series i {Topographic) Maps. ~~ U.S. Geological Survey. 1970 Photo revised 1987. Vail West Quadrangle, Colorado. 7.5 Minute Series {Topographic) Maps. U.S, Geological Survey. 1970 Photo revised 1987b. Vail East Quadrangle, Colorado. 7.5 Minute Series {Topographic) Maps. P:IPR©JECTS'`.Architecntral Resource Consultants.5937+5937.0101Phase_I_f INAI.,doc 1$ ~~~~~~ Enuieanmental 5cienriscs and Engineers, LLC APPENDIX Q BBL EN1/~RONMENTAL ~NFQR(VIATION ENVIRONMENTAL RECQRDS SEARCH L' p:~raj«rasvachitetrural «souice ctsnsvlunts.5437'3437.O10'~y3use_i_Anal.doe 10.14.64 ENVIRONMENTAL RECORD SEARCH for the site VAIL CONFERENCE CENTER X95 S FRONTAGE RD W, VA1L CO ~~ pert©rmed for WALSH ENV o-07-zoos aaa 5 c~~r~os ,au~, 5UlTE zoo scx,ansa eEaca~ ca a2o7s sea ~s3-os41 www:t~e,TV.c~n E7dVI1?ON~tfE~Tl1'AL 1l1lFORiS~f A TION • INTRODUCTION This document, prepared on the request of WALSH ENV, reports the findings of BBL's investigation of environmental concerns in the vicinity of 395 5 Frontage Rd W, Vail C4. It is divided in the fallowing segments; • Map -showing the IpCatiari a! the identified sites relative to the subject site. A total of 15 separate sites were identified. Topographic Map -showing the surrounding area of the subject site. • Summary -listing the identified sites by street names. • Z=inal Report -describing the sources investigated and the resulting findings: Federal sources fdational Priority List no sites within 1 mile radius. Paged CERCLIS no sites within 1 mile radius. 1 ~ NFRAP no sites within 1 mile radius. 1 Federal Facilihes no sites within 1 mile radius. Emergency Response Notification System no sites within half of a mile. 2 Hazardcus Material Incident Report System no sites at the subject site. 2 Site Enforcement Tracking System no sites within 1 mile radius. 2 Enforcement Docket {DOCKET/CDETS} 1 site within half o[ a mile. 3 C-Docket no sites within half of a mite. 3 RGRA Violators List na sites within 1 mile radius. 3 RGRA - TSD Faclities no sites within 1 mile radius. 3 Colorado State sources ~ Uranium Mill Tailings Remedial Action no sites within 1 mite radius. 4 Voluntary Cleanup Program no sites within 1 mile radius. 4 Historical Landfill List no sites within 4 mile radius. 4 leaking Underground Storage Tanks 8 sites within 1 mile radius. 4 Solid Waste Disposal 8 Processing Facilities no 51tes within 1 mite radius. & Stake Programs no sites within half of a mite. F iDperating permits RCF2A Generators 3 sites within half of a mile. 6 SARA Title Illsection 313 (TRIS} no sites within half of a mile. 7 MILS Mineral Industry Location System no sites within. 1 mile radius. 7 Nuclear Regulatory Commission Licensees no sites within half of a mile. ~ PCB Waste Handlers Database no sites within half of a mile. 7 Permik Compliance System (PCS} 1 site within half o(a mile. 8 AIRS Facility System (AFS} 2 sites within half o!a mile. 8 Section Seven Tracking System na sites within half of a mile. $ FIFRAITSCA tracking system no sites within half of a mile. 9 Federal Facilities Information System {FFIS} na sites within half of a mile. 9 Chemicals in Commerce information System no sites within half of a mile. 9 FINDS EPA Faeiltty Index System no sites withlfi half of a mile. 9 Underground Storage Tanks B sites within half of a mile. 9 Aboveground Storage Tanks no sites within half of a mile. 1 S Gas80il Wells and Facil"sties n4 si#es within 1 mile radius. 11 s ~~ ~~.Fpp[QM~. i-C~ e'a'r-- y ! /~ ~~ ~r"---~ 1 _---~~ `~~ ~! ,,,~ ,,,,, e,nw ~~ ~~~ j.a ~'«' G~ IaNS . HIGH ~' Ftlbfa~ E~yVlRbN~~~ CbNCEaN$ A,Nb F~gTI-tfiR ~~~. ENVIRaNME NTW- GbNGEF~$ _ V~TM EN~~bNME pEPM~s OtJLY bpEAA~N WATE~'1'~.u"s pILl.C,AS ~V'~ ~~'° i"1€$ IN tNE VICINITY 4F E'U6~E4T BITE ~r ~ n~AT14M an ~ uTeF1ER ~ 10-07.206d 2. SHARPSHOOTER SPECTRUM IMAGING 3. CANYON CREEK ESTATES WQME OWNS 4, VAIL GOLF COURSE 5. VAfL VALLEY MEDICAL. CENTER 6. VAIL, -TQWN QF, 8US GARAGE 7. VAIL CO 6. VAkL VALLEY MEDICAL. CTF1 9. ALPINE STANDARD AMOCO#'2(135 1A VAIL WASTEWAER TREATMENT PLANT 11. VAIL ASSOCIATES 12. AMOCO pIL #7433 13. VAIL d ASSOCS SHOP YARD 14. CHEVRON USA ING#70499 UNKNOWN LOCATIONS OLD TOWN SHOP VAIL PATROL HEADQUARTERS 600E LIONSHEAD CIR 605 N FRONTAGE RD 292 W MEADOW DR 187 W MEADOW DR 75 S FRONTAGE RD 169 N FRONTAGE RD 1B1 W MEADOW OR,UNIT 100 2B 5 FRONTAGE RD B46 FOREST RD 762 5 FRONTAGE RD 12 5 FRONTAGE RD 862 S FRONTAGE RD 934 5 FRONTAGE RD S FRONTAGE RD PQ BOX 7 WDEX fli= SITES LISTED BY MAP NUMBERS MT5T3492 r f I t i • • ENVIRONMENTAL RECORDS SEARCH SUMMARY • KNOWN ENV{RONMENTAL CONCERNS FOR Page: 1 VAIL CONFERENCE CENTER Date: 1d-OT-2Qa4 395 S FRONTAGE Rf7 W, VAIL CO Jab: MTST3492 ADDR1eS5 CITY LOCATION SOU• STA• PAGEhAAPD1R RCJ= TUS LOC KNOWN ENVIRONMENTAL CONCERNS, WITHIN 1!4 MILE OF 7HE SUBJECT SITE $45 N FRONTAGE RD VAIL CA(SYON CREEK E57ATES HOME OWNE CDETS 3 3 W 292 W MFI+.flOW OR VAIL VAIL GOLF COURSE LUST CLSD 5 4 SE VAFL GOLF COURSE LUST CLSD 5 VAIL GOLF COURSE UST 10 VASL RECREATION DISTRICT RCRA E 7 KNOWN ENVIRONMENTAL CONCERNS, WITHIN 114 -112 MILE OF THE SUBJECT SITE I 1fi9 N FRONTAGE RD VAIL US WEST COMMUNICATIONS LUST CLSD 4 7 E VAIL CO UST 10 VAIL CO UST 10 2$ 5 FRONTAGE RD VAIL AMOCO OIL #2835 LUST CLSD 5 9 E ALPINE STANDARD AMOCO #203.5 UST 10 AMOCO GAS STA NO 2035 AFS $ 846 FOREST RO VAIL UPPER EAGLE VALLEY SANITATION LUST CLSD 4 1 D SW VAIL WASTEWAERTREATMENT PLANT U57 9 UPPER EAGLE VALLEY SANITATION RCS 8 UPPER EAGLE VALLEY SANITATION UST 70 12 S FRONTAGE RD VAIL ~ AMOCO OIL #7439 LUST CLSD 5 12 E KNOWN ENVIRONMENTAL CONCERNS, WITHIN 112 - 314 MILH OF tliE SUBJECT SITE Bfi2 S FRONTAGE RD VAIL VAIL 5 ASSOCS SHOP YARb LUST CLSD 5 13 W 934 'S FRONTAGE RD VAIL CHEVRON USA INC #76999 LUST OPEN 5 14 W SITES W1TFI UNKNOWN OR NON-SPECIFIC LOCATION ~ S FRONTAGE RD VAIL OLD TOWN SHOP LUST CLSD 5 • OPERATING Pi<FtM1TS ONLY FOR VAiL CQNFERENCE CENTER 395 S FRC3NTAGE RD W, VAIL CO ADDRESS CITY LOCA710h1 r OPERATING PERMITS ONLY, WITHiN 114 MILE OF THE SUBJECT SITE 90U E LIONSHEAO CIR VAIL SHARPSHOOTER SPECTRUM IMAGING 191 W MEADOW OR VAIL VAIL VALLEY MEpICAL CENTER OPERATING PERMITS ONLY, WITHIN i14 -1I2 MILE OF THE SUBJ#TCT SITE 75 5 FRONTAGE RO VA1L VAIL -- TOWN OF, 9U5 GARAGE 191 W MEA,OOW OR,UNIT tqp VA1L VAIL VALLEY MEOIGR3. CTR 7fi2 S FRONTAGERO VAIL VAILASSOCIATE5 SITES WITH UNKNOWN ORNON-SPECIFIC LOCATION S FRONTAGE RP VAIL OIDTOWN SHOP PO 80?(7 VA1L VAIL PATROL HEADQUARTERS I I Page: 1 Date: X0-07-2004 Jab: NITST3492 ~~ sou- sTA- PAGE neap orR RCE 7US LOC RCRA N 6 2 S u5T 1a 5 E RGRA N 6 6 E AFS B $ E UST 19 11 W u5T 1a UST 10 ~, f REF'ERENGED SOURCES FEDERALS©URCES NPL NATIONAL PRIORITY LIST (p9li5104) CERCLA CERCLIS (D9115104) NFRAP NFRAP (09i151D4) FedFac FEDERAL FACILITIES (09!95!04) ERNS EMERGENCY RESPONSE NOTlF1CATION SYSTEM HM HAZARDOUS MATERIAL INCIDENT REPORT SYSTEM (2p03) SETS SITE ENFORCEMENT TRACKING SYSTEM (101i21D3) CDETS ENFORCEMENT DOCKI=T (DOCKET/CDETS) {09!64} CD C-DOCKET (09104) RV RCRA VIOLATORS LIST {09104} TSD RCRA -TSD FACILITIES (09104) I incinerator D Land Disposal C©LORADO STATE SOURCES UM URANIUM MILL7AILINGS REMEDIAL ACTION (03103) VC VOLUNTARY CLEANUP PROGRAM {5ltl4) HL HISTORICAL LANDFILL LIST (2D03) LUST LEAKING UNDERGROUND STORAGE TANKS {B1p4} SW SOLID WASTE 615POSAL & PROCESSING FACILITIES (03105) SF STATE PROGRAMS {091D4) OPEF RCRA SARA MI Nucl PCB PCS AFS PE FIFRA FIFS CICIS FN - UST AT DG ;ATIl3G PERMITS RCRA GENERATORS (D9104} L Large Generator T Transporter SARA TITLE III,SECTION 313 (TRIS) (2003} MILS MINERAL INDUSTRY LOCATION SYSTEM NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION LICENSEES (09104) PCB WASTE HANDLERS DATA8ASE {091p4} PERMIT COMPLIANCE SYSTEM {PGS) (p9/04) AIRS FACILITY SYSTEM {AFS} (091D4) SECTION SEVEN TRACKING SYSTEM {09104} FIFRA/TSCA TRACKING SYSTEM (tl9104) FEDERAL FACILITIES INFORMATION SYSTEM (FFIS} (09!04) CHEMICALS IN COMMERGE INFORMATION SYSTEM {091D4) FINDS EPA FACILITY INDEX SYSTEM (09104} UNDERGROUND STORAGE TANKS (08104} ABOVEGROUND STORAGE TANKS (08!04) GAS&OIL WELLS AND FACILITIES (20D3) i]ate: 10-07-2004 .lab: MT5T34921 I , T Storage/Treatment $ Smalt Genera4or C • ENVIRONMENTAL RECORDS SEARCH LiSTEQ BY SOURCE VAiL t;Ot~fFERENCE CENTER Page: 1 395 S FRONTAGE RD W, VA[L Date. 10-07-2004 II I 1 L. Jab: MTST3492 } INTRODUCTION BBL has used its best effort but makes no claims as to the completeness or accuracy of the referenced government sources or the completeness of the search. Our records are frequently updated but only as current as their publishing date and may net represent the entire field of known or potential hazardous waste or contaminated sites. To ensure complete coverage of the subject property and surrounding area, sites may be included in the list if there is any doubt as to the location because of discrepancies in map location, zip Code, address, or other information in our sources. For additional information call 858 793-0641. In accordance with ASTM E-1527-00, the following government sources have been searched for sites at the street. address, unless othenrvise stated, of the subject location. FEQERAI_ SOURCES NPL National Priority List EPA has prioritized sites with significant risk to human health and the environment. These sites receive remedial funding under the Comprehensive Environmental Response Conservation and Liability Act {CERCLA). No listings within i mile radius of the subject site. CERCLISComprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Information System CERCLtS is a database used by the EPA to track activities conducted under the Comprehensive Environmental Response and Liability Act CERCLA {1980) and the amendment the Superfund Amendments and Reauthorization Act SARA {1986. Sites to be included are identifed primarily by the reporting requiremen#s of hazardous substances Treatment, Storage and Disposal {TSD) facilities and releases larger than specific Reportable Quantities {RQ), established by EPA. Using the National Oi! and hazardous Substance Pollution Contingency Plan{National Contingency flan) the EPA set priorities for cleanup. The EPA rates National Contingency Plan sites according to a quantitative Wazard Ranking System {HRS} based on the potential health .risk via any one or more pathways: groundwater, surface water, air, direct contact, and firelexplosion. The EPA and state agencies seek to identify potentially responsible parties{PRP) and ultimately Responsible Parties {RP) who can be required to finance cleanup activities, either directly or through reimbursement of federal Superfund expenditures. Na tistir:gs within 1 mile radius oi'the subject site. NFRAP No Further Remedial Action Planned sites {CERCLIS) VAIL CONFERENCiE CENTEt~ 395 S FR©NTAGE RD W, VAIL Page: 2 Date: 10-07-20[}4 Job: MTST3492 As of February 1995, CERCLIS sites designated 'No Further Remedial Action Planned' NFRAP have been removed from CERCLIS. NFRAP sites may be sites where, fallowing an initial investigation, no contamination was found, contamination was removed quickly without the site being placed on the NPL, ar the con#arnination was not serious enough to require Federal Superfund action or NPL consideration. EPA has removed these NFRAP sites from CIoRCLIS to lift unintended barriers to the redevelopment of these properties. This policy change is part of EPA's Brownfields Redevelopment program to help cities, states, private investors and affected citizens promote economic redevelopment of unproductive urban sites. 1Vo listings within 1 mile radius of the subject site. FEDFAC Federal Facilities As part of the CERCLA program, federal facilities with known or suspected environmental problems, the Federal Facilities Hazardous Waste Compliance Docket is tracked separately to comply with a Federal Court order. No Jistings within f mile radius of the subject site. ERNS Emergency Response Notification System The ERNS is a national computer database used to store information on unauthorized releases of oiC and hazardous substances. The program is a cooperative effort of the Environmental Protection Agency, the Department of Transportation Research and Special Program Administration's John Volpe National Transportation System Center and the National Response Center. I There are primarily five Federal statutes that require release reporting the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act (CERCLA} section 103; the Superfund Amendments and Reauthorization Act (SARA) Title III Section 304; the Glean Water Act of i 972(CWA) section 311(b)(3); and the Hazardous Material Transpor#ation Act of 1974i;HMTA section 1130t3(b}. , Na Jistings within half of a mile radius of the subject site. HMIRS Hazardous Material Incident Report System The Hazardous Material Report Incident Report Subsystem HMIRS of the Research and Special Programs Administration (RSPA) Hazardous Material Information System was established in 1971 to fulfill the requirements of the Federal hazardous material transportation law. Part 171 of Title 49, Code of Federal Regulations (49 CPR) contains the incident reporting requirements of carriers of hazardous materials. An unintentional release of hazardous materials meeting the criteria set forth in Section 171.18, 49 CFR, must be reported nn DOT Form 5800.1. The data from the reports received are subsequently entered in the HAZMAT database. No listings within the street address of the subject srfe. SETS Sike Enforcement Tracking System (SETS} When expanding 5uperfund monies at a CERCLA (Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act) Site, EPA must conduct a search to identify parties with potential financial responsibility fof remediation of uncontrolled hazardous waste sites. EPA regional Superfund Waste Management Staff issue a notice letter to the potentially responsible party (PRP). The status field contains the EPA ID number and name of the site where the actual pollution occurred. VAIL CONFERENCE CENTER 395 S FRONTAGE RD W, VAIL No listings within 1 mile radius of the subject site. Page: 3 Date: 7 0-07-2004 Jab: MTST3492 DG Enforcement Docket System {DaGKET}!Consent Decree Tracking System (CDETS} DOCKET tracks civil judicial cases against environmental polluters, while CDETS processes court settlements, called consent decrees. This list has been researched within half of a mile radius of the subjee# site. Site: Address: Gity: Map Loci. Status:. CD {Criminal [ The Criminal Docket System is a comprehensive automated system far tracking criminal enforcemenf actions. GDocket handles data for all environmental statues and tracks enforcement actions from the initial stages of investigations through conclusion, No listings withr'n half of a mile radius of the subject site. RCRA RCRA Violators List [CORRACTS) The Resource Conservation and Recovery Act of 197fi provides for "cradle to grave" regulation of hazardous wastes. RCRA requires regulation of hazardous waste generators, transporters, and storageJtreatmentfdisposal sites. Evaluation to potential violations, ranging from manifest requirements to hazardous waste discharges, is typically conducted by the US I:PA. This database is also known as Corrective Action Report {CORRACTS} If enforcement is required, it is typically delegated to a state agency. No listings within i mile radius of the subject si#e. RCRA-D Resource Conservation and Recovery Information System -Treatment, Storage & Disposal CANYON CREEK ESTATES HOME OWNE 605 N J=RONTAGE RD VAIL 3 -within 'I J4 mile W of the subject F'ermtt id#: OpDQt}9677548 Jacket System (C-0OCKET} The Environmental Protection Agency regulates the treatment, storage and disposal of hazardous material through the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act {RCRA}. All hazardous waste TSD facilities are required to notify EPA of their existence by submitting the Federal Notification of Regulated Waste Activity Form {EPA Form 8700-12} or a state equivalent form as well as park A {EPA farm 8700-23} and Part B of their Hazardous Waste Permit Applicatlan. Status Codes: I Incinerator T StoragelTreatment Faolity other than Incinerator D Land Disposal Facility • No listings within ~ mite radius of the subject site. CflL(aRADO STATE SOURCES z VAIL CONFERENCE CENTER 395 S FRONTAGE RD W, VAIL Page: 4 Date: 70-07-2004 ` ' i Job: MTST3492 ~ i .• UM Uranium Mill Tailings Remedial Action Program UMTRAP The UAATRAP Program, established by Congress in 1978, and endorsed by the General Assembly and the Governer, is intended to isolate uranium mill tailings from human and environmental contacts. No listings within i mile radius of the subject site. VCP Voluntary Cleanup Program The Colorado Department of Health, Hazardous Materials & Waste Management Division maintains a list of sites in accordance with the Voluntary Cleanup and Redevelopment Act. No listings within T mile radius of the subject site. HL Historical Landfill List ' The Colorado Department of Health, Hazardous Materials ~ Waste Management Division collected information about abandoned and inactive landfills in Colorado. This database is currently not updated by the agency. in many instances the sites are a name only and current agency staff has no first hand knowledge of the sites. ~ ~ . 9 i No listings within T mile radius of the subject site. LT Leaking Underground Storage Tanks The Colorado []apartment of Labor and Employment, Oil $ Public Safety tracks suspected and confirmed releases from storage tanks, primarily from tanks regulated by Title 40 of the Code of Federal Regulations ~ ° {CFR) Part260. This fist has been researched within 1 mile radius of the subject site. Site: UPPER EAGLE VALLEY SANITATIQN Address: 846 FORE57 RD City: VAIL Map Loc: 10 -within 1I4 - 112 mike SW of the subject Status: GL9iJ - id: 4144 1L1l13I95 Site: US WEST COMMUNICATIONS Address: 169 N FRONTAGE, RD City: VAIL Map Loc: 7 -within 114 - 112 mile E of the subject Status: ca<so - id: 319 1170194 • i VAIL CONFERENCE CENTER 395 S FRONTAGE RD W, VAIL Site: OLD TOWN SHOP Address: S FRONTAGE RD City: VAIL Status: CLSi3 - id: 5243 10115/94 Site: Address: City: Map Loc: Status: AMOCO OIL #7439 12 S FRONTAGE RD VAIL 12 -within 1!4 -112 mile E of the subject cLS^ - id: 4513 61'!3!$9 Site: AMOCO OIL#2035 Address: 28 S FRONTAGE RD City: VAIL Map Lac: 9 -within 1!4 - i12 mile E of the sutaject Status: GLSD - id: 2[]11 g12/9i3 Site: Address: City: Map L©c: Status: VAIL & ASSOCS SHOP YAR1~ 862 S FRONTAGE RD VAIL 13 -within 112 - 314 mile W of the subject GLSS] - id: 2736 5121192 Site: CHEVRON USA INC #70499 Address: 934 S FRONTAGE RD City: VAIL Map Lac: 14 -within 112 - 314 mile W of the subject Status: OPEN - id: $$$ 6i19l90 Site: Address: city: Map Lac: Status: VAIL GOLF COURSE 292 W MEADOW DR VAIL 4 -within 114 mile 5E of the subject cLSD - id:43iD 818186 Site: VAIL G©LF COURSE Address: 292 W MEADOW DR City: VAIL Map Loc: 4 -within 114 mile SE of the subject Status: CLS~ - Page: 5 Date: 1 fl-fl7-2fl04 Jobi MTST3492 VAIf_ CONFERENCE CENTER 395 S FRC7NTAGE RD W, VAIL id: 1 1!1!t 940 Page: 6 Date: 10-07-2004 Job: MTST3492 ~ t r SW Solid Waste Disposal and Processing Facilities The Colorado Departmen# of Health, in accordance with article 20 of tit{e 30, Colorado Revised Statues, 1986 Repl. Vol, and as amended by Senate Bills J1-168, 91-i74 8 92-130 requires that all solid waste disposal and processing facilities in Colorado receive a permit from the Colorado Department of Health prior to operation. No Astings within 'f mile radius of fhe subject site. SF State Programs The U.S. EPA maintains, as part of the Facility Reporting System (1=R5), records an behalf of the sta#e of Colorado of selected sites with environmental concerns ar operating permits. No tistings within haff of a mile radius of the subject site. OPERrAT~NG PERMITS I ~' ~ i Various agencies issue operating permits or regulate the handling, movements, storage and disposal of ` hazardous materials and require mandatory reporting. The inclusion in this section does not imply that an environmental Problem exists presently or has in the pas#. i e.. RCRA-G Resource Canservation and Recovery Information System -Generators The Environmental Protection Agency regulates generators of hazardous material through the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA). All hazardous waste generators are required to notify EPA of their existence by submitting the Federal Notification of Regulated Waste Ac#ivity Form (EPA Form 8700-12) or a state equivalent form. The notification form provides basic identification information and speciftc waste activities. Status Codes: L -Generators who generate at least 1404 kglma oFvon-acutely hazardous waste (or 1 kg/mo of acutely hazardous waste). S -Generators who generate 1 DD kglmc but less than 1404 kglmo of non-acutely hazardous waste. T - TransparEer. This list has been researched within half of a mite radius of the subject sate. Site: VAIL,. -- T©WN OF, BU5 GARAGE Address.: 75 S FRONTAGE RD City: VAIL Map Loc. 6 -within 114 - 112 mile E of the subject Status: N - Not a RCRA Generator Permit id#: COt3981544752 Site: SHARPSHOOTER SPECTRUM IMAGfNG • VAIL CQNFERENGI= CENTER 395 S FRONTAGE RD W, VAIL Address: 800 E LIONSHEAD CIR City: VAIL Map Lac: 2 -within 114 mils S of the subject Status: N - Nat a RCRA Generator Permit id#: GCYRt70o0'iB972 Site: VAIL RECREATION DISTRICT Address: 292 W MEAI]i3W DR City: VAfL Map Lac: 4 -within 114 mile SE of the subject Statu$. E -Conditionally Exempt SSG Permit id#: CQfl003f}77o37 SARA SAiRFt Title lll,section 313 jTRIS} Page: 7 Date: 10-07-2004 Job: MTST3492 } Title III of the Superfund Amendments and Reauthorization Act,Section 313, also knovrrt as Emergency Planning and Community Right-to-Itnow Act of 1986 reQuires owners or operators of facilities with more than 10 employees and are listed under Standard Industrial Classifcationt'S1C} Codes 20 through 3J to report the manufacturing, processing or use of more than a threshold of certain chemical or chemical categories listed under section 313. This data base is also known as Toxic Release Information System (TRISJ. Below summary information for the last t"ive year period is reported grauping the releases into air, water, underground injection, land, public offsite treatment (potty) and transportation offste. No listings within half of a mile radius of the subject site. MILS Mineral Industry Location System The U.S. Bureau of Mines maintains the Minerals Availability SysternlMineral Industry Location System (MASIMILS) database. The MILS part covers more over 200,000 mineral occurrences, deposits, mines and processing plants in the United States. The information is used to support government agencies which have land-use planning responsibilities. These agencies look to the Bureau of Mines both for mineral resource assessments and for help identifying and remedating inactive and abandoned mine hazards. No listings within i mile radius of the subject site. NC Nuclear Regulatory.Commission Licensees The Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Office of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards has been mandated (10 CFR Ch 1.42) to protect the public health and safety, the common defense and security, and the environment by licensing, inspection, and environmental impact assessment for all nuclear facilities and activities, and for the import and export of special nuclear material. No listings within half of a mile radius of the subject site. PCe PC8 Waste Handlers Database VAIL CONFERENCE CENTER Page: 8 395 5 FRONTAGE RD VW, VAIL Date: 10-07-2004 Jab: MTST3492 ~ ~ f The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency tracks generators, transporters, commercial stares andfar brokers and disposers of PCB's in accordance with the Toxic Substance Control Act. No listings within half of a mile radius of the subject site. PGS Permit Compliance System PCS is a database which contains data. on National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit holding facilities. PCS was developed by The U.S. Environmental Prakection Agenoy to meat the information needs of the NPDES program under the Glean Water Act_ PCS tracks permit, compliance, and enforcement states of NPDES facilities. This list has been researched within half of a mile radius of the subject site. Site: UPPER EAGLE VALLEY SANITATION Address: 846 FOREST RD City: VAIL Map Lac: 10 -within 114 - i!2 mile SW of the subject Stratus: Permii id#: COD075755571 SIC Codes: 4552 AFS AIRS Facility System AFS contains emissions and compliance data an air pollution point sources tracked by the U.S. EPA and state and local environmental regulatory agencies. There are seven "criteria pollutants" far which data must b~' reported to EPA and stored in AIRS: PM1n (particulate matters less than 10 microns in size}, carbon monoxide, sulfur dioxide, nitrogen dioxide, lead, reactive volatile organic compounds (VOC), and ozone. AFS replaces the farmer Compliance Data System (COS), the Nat'ranal Emission Data System {NEDS), and the Storage and Retrieva9 of Aeramatic Data (SARdAD). This list has been researched within half of a mile radius of the subject site. Site: AM4CQ GAS STA NQ 2035 Address: 28 S FRONTAGE RD City: VAIL Map Loc: 9 -within 1f4 -1f2 mile E of the subject Status: Permit id#: 000011933994 Site: Address: Gity: Map Loc: Status: PE Section S VAIL VALLEY MEDICAL CTR 181 W MEADC]W DR,UNIT 100 VAIL 8 -within 114 - 1!2 mile E of the subjec# Permit id#: Co0001251156 even Tracking System (SSTs) SSTS evolved from the FIFRA and TSGA Enforcement System {FATES). SSTS tracks the registration of all pesticide producing establishments and tracks annually the types and amounts of pesticides, active ingredients, and devices that are produced, Bald ar distributed each year. No listings within half of a mile radius of fhe su6jecf site. • VAIL GOt~tFERENGE CENTER 395 S FRCINTAGE RD W, VAIL FIFRA FIFRA/TSCA Tracking System! National Compliance Database (FTTSINCDS} Page: 9 Date: 10-07-2004 Job: MT5T3492 NCDB supports implementation of the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide and Rodentieide Control Act (FIFRAj and the Toxic Substance Control Act (TSCA). No listings within half of a mile radius of the sub}ecf slte. FFIS Federal Facilities Information System (FFIS} Federal Facilities Information System (FFIS} contains a list of all Treatment Storage and Disposal Facilities (TSDs) owned and operated by federal agencies. No listings within half of a mile radius of fire subject site. CICIS Chemicals in Commerce Infarrnation System (GIGIS} Chemieals in Commerce Information System contains an inventory of chemicals menu#actured in commerce ar imported for Toxic Substances Control Act regulated commercial purposes. CICIS allows ERA to maintain a comprehensive Listing of over 70,OOD chemical substances that are manufactured or imparted and are regulated under TSGA, No listings within half of a mile radius of the subject site. FINDS FINDS EPA Facility Index System The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency maintains an index system of all facilities which are regulated or have been assigned an identification number far other purposes. Facilities that have been reported elsewhere in this report will not be included in the listing below. No listings within half of a mile radius of the subject site. UT Underground Storage Tanks The Coforada Department of Labor and Employment Oil & Public Safety regulates (Colorado Underground Storage Tank Statue Titre 2D Article 8 and Title 25 Article i8 of Golorado Revised Statues and. Regulations fi GCR 1007-5, Subpart 280 storage tanks containing petroleum or other regulated substances, with excep#ions for farm and residential tanks of 1,100 gallons or less; heating oil storage tanks for oonsump#ive use on the premises; septic tanks; above ground tanks; flow throgh process tanks and surface impound, pal, pond, lagoon or landfill. This fist has been researched. within half of a mile radius of the subject site. Site: VAIL WASTEWAER TREATMENT PLANT Address: 846 FOREST RD City: VAIL Map Loc: 10 -within 114 - 112 mile SW of the subject Status: Permit #: 0009091 Tanks: 1500 gallon tank. 2000 gallon tank. 560 gallon tank. 560 gallon tank. 999999999 gallon tank. 999999999 gallon tank. ,~~i VAlL CONFERENCE CENTER Page: 10 395 S FRONTAGE Rd W, VAIL Date: 10-07-2004 Job: MTST3492 r• 1 999999949 gallon tank. Site: UPPER EAGLE VALLEY SANITATION Address: 846 FOREST RD City: VAI>_ l Map LDC: 10 -within 114 - 112 mile SW Of the subject Status: Permit #: 0013534 Site: VAIL CO Address: 169 N FRONTAGE RD i City: VAIL Map Loe: 7 -within 1J4 - 1J2 mile E of the subject Status: Permit#: 0007081 r Tanks: ` 12000 gallon tank. Site: VAIL CO , Address: 169 N FRONTAGE RD j City: VAIL , Map Lac: 7 -within '614 - 112 mile E of the subject StattJS: Permit #: DD09527 Tanks: 1000 gallon tank, painted exterior. l 3000 gallon tank, painted exterior. Site: OLD TDWN SHOP Address: 5 FRONTAGE RD City: VAIL t Status: Permit #: 0011747 Site; ALPINE STANDARD AMOCO #2035 Address: 28 S FRONTAGE RD City: VA1L Map LpC: 9 -within 114 - 112 mile E of the subject StatUS: Permit #: 0006023 Tanks: i ". 500 gallon tank. Site: VAIL ASSOCIATES ~ " Address: 762 S FRONTAGE RD City: VAIL Map Loc: 11 -within '114 - 112 mile W of the subject Status: Permit #: 0006404 ~ ; Site: VAIL VALLEY MEDICAL CENTER Address: 181 W MEADOW DR City: VAiL Map Loc: 5 -within 114 mile E of the subject Status: Permit #: 0008225 Tanks: 56D gallon tank, painted exterior, containing {waste oil}. bD00 galfon tank. 6000 gallon tank. 6000 gallon tank. Site: VAIL GOLF COURSE Address: 292 W MEADOW DR City: VAIL Map Loc: 4 -within i14 mile SE of the subject Status: Permit#: oD13aa4 Site: VAIL PATROL HEADQUARTERS Address: P© B07€ 7 City: VAlL r VAIL CONFERENCE CENTER Page: 11 395 S FRONTAGE RD W, VAIL [}ate: 90-47-24b4 Jab: MTST3492 Status: Permit #: onaesss Tanks: 10000 gallon tank. 10000 gallon tank. 120x0 gallon tank. 550 gallon tank, painted exterior, containing {waste of#). 6000 ga[Ivn tank, painted exterior. 9000 gallon tank, painted exterior. AT Aboveground Storage Tanks The Colorado Departement of Health, Hazardous Materials and 'Waske Management division, State Inspector of Oil regulates (Colorado Underground Storage Tank Statue Title 20 Article $ and Title 25 Article 18 of Colorado Revised Statues and Regulations 6 CCR 9447-5, Subpart 280 storage tanks containing petroleum or other regulated substances, with exceptions for farm and residential tanks of 1,900 gallons or less; heating oil storage tanks for consumptive use on the premises; septic tanks; above ground tanks; flow throgh process tanks and surface impound, pit, pond, lagoon or IandfilL Na listings within half of a mile radius of the subject site. • aG Gas$~©il Wells and Facilities The Colorado Oil ~ Gas Conservation Commission (COGCC} maintain a database of OllGas wells and and earthen pit facilities in Colorado. No listings within 7 mile radius of the subject life. • ti ~~~[rals~a. Environmental Scientists and Engineers, ~.LC APPENQIX B PHOTOGRAPF~S FROM SITE INSPECTION ~~ p~,lpmlects'tiarchitectural resource ~ronsultan~.5937\5937.Ol Qiphasc i fittal.doc.10.4d.(14 • • • room Entrance to Subway and green doors to Center level of parking garage Inside of storage roam Paints and solvents stored in storage r 1 ~ .. i Staining in northwest corner, lower level of parking garage Lower level of parking garage, north side Transfornner in mechanical room, lower. level, south 1/z of parking structure Parking attendant booths facing north Visitor Center facing west • Electrical panel on north side of Site East side of the Site, facing southwest Entryway to parking garage on left and rapper level ofparking garage to right, facing south West side of Site, facing eastlsoutheast Southwest carver of Site t ~ ~o. i a r~ ~~ f r ¢. ~' s: • South side of Site South side of Site Transformer and manholes located on south side of Site Southeast side of Site [Jpper level of parking garabe Near southeast corner of Site • lot Adjacent property to the east, facing northeast Charter bus parking area facing south Garbage bags, light ballasts, and used at the south end of the charter bus parking Adjacent property to the west of the Site Adjacent property to the northlnorthwest of the Site Pad-mounted transformers located on the adjacent property east of the Site ~~~~1~ Environmental Scientists and Enbinet:es, LLC • APPENDIX C AGENCYIPERSO-NAL CONTACT LIST • p,lpraiectsL~rchitecturai resource consultan[s.597T5937ALQ1phasc_i_final.dce.18.14.04 ~~~T~ _ Environmental scientists and Engineers, LLC AGENCYIPERSC}NAL CONTACT LIST The following agencies/people have been contacted for this Phase I ESA: Colorado Aerial Photo Service Denver Public Library Mr. Kevin Mackey, CDPHE Ms. Lanette Mitchell, West Mental 1°lealth Center Mr. Martin O'Grady, Colorado State Lead Mr. Mike Vaughan, Fire Prevention Officer, Town of Vail Fire Department Mr. Mike Rose, Transportation Manager, Town of Vail Ms. Pat White, EPA Superfund Records Center Town of Vail Community Development Office U.S. Geological Survey Xce1 Energy • p:lprmject5larchitecrau ul resourw wnsulWntt.S437t5937.Ok4',phasc i_finaLdoc.l8.14.04 =~~i~a]~h Bnuironmantal Scientists and engineers, LLC • APPENDIX D CORPORATE AND PERSONNEL QUALIFICATIONS • • p:Vprpjeerslarchrte<tural rrsource consultants.4937~5437.Q10',p~hase i final.dme.1Q..14.04 '-'~~~alsh Environmental ScienlisCS and Engineers, LLC • } C©RPORATE CREDENTIALS WALSH Enviranmental Scientists and Engineers, LLC (WALSH) is afull-service, multi- disciplinary environmental consulting ftrvn providing environmental and analytical services nationwide. Founded in 1979 by James P. Walsh, the firm presently employs more than 70 scientists and engineers, including 23 professionals with master's degrees and three Ph.D. graduates. With four offices in Colorado, WALSH has established a reputation for quality and innovation by successfully completing complex environmental projects. WALSH consists of a diverse group ofhighly-qualified and experienced professional personnel with advanced expertise in environmental engineering, geology, geochemistry, analytical chemistry, hydrology, soil science, water science, industrial hygiene and safety, and computer technology. With more than I50 satisfied clients in 2I states, from small business owners to major oil c~«,t,anies, WALSH emphasizes personalized service provided by highly motivated senior professional staff: • ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCE AND ENGINEERING WALSH is dedicated to accurately assessing and resolving complex environmental problems in an efficient and cost-effective manner. Our practical approach to managing the application of remediation technologies maximizes the company's ability to accomplish the goals of its clients. The company's environmental services include: • Phase I and Phase II Enviranmental Site Assessments • "Superfund" and Hazardous Waste Site Investigations • Underground Storage Tank Removal and Remediation + Soil Boring, Lagging, and Sampling • Installation of Groundwater Monitoring Systems • Groundwater and Surface Water Sampling • Laboratory Testing of Soil and Groundwater Samples • Contaminant Characterization • Solid Waste Landfill Permitting and Closure • Computer Modeling of Environmental Systems • Environmental Impact AssessmentslStatements + Expert Witness and Litigation Support p~.lproaecrs;archisanual rewwce cosuultanLS.5A371S937.D l Otiphnse i_fusal doc.10.14.U4 HAL'STUBI=R, PFI.Q. ~~`-T~~ Prirrcipai Chemist Ki;Y EXPERTISE ~ Project Management / Site Assessment and Investigation ~ Environmental Chemistry ~ Mobility and Fate of Contaminants ~ Analytical Methods ECIUGATION Ph.D., Analytical Chemistry, University of Colorado, 19$0 M.S., Organic Chemistry, University of Colorado, 1976 B.A., Chemistry, Macalester College, 1971 EXPERIENCE SUMMARY Dr. Stuber is an Environmental Chemist with over 18 years of professional environmental experience specializing in the fate of chemical species in the environment and in the analysis of ground water, surface water, and soil contaminants. He has consulted on major hazardous waste and Superfund sites, predicting mobility, partitioning, and degradation rates of contaminants and their response to remediation. He has developed both mobile and fxed environmental laboratories that perform U.S. EPA methods as well as other methods for determining organic contaminants in soils, water, and air. Dr, Stuber has also served as an expert witness for litigation an environmen#al contamination, environmental liability, analytical methods for environmental contamination, and the fate of chemical species. Dr. Stuber is Vice President, and as Principal Chemist oversees both WAI,SH's analytical laboratory and Chemical Quality Assurance and Quality Control at WALSH. Dr. Stuber manages and oversees projects involving site assessment and other investigations of soil, air and water contamination. He provides expert technical services in environmental chemistry, and provides. senior technical review, evaluation and quality assurance on a wide range of'UVALSH investigations and remrediation projects. KEY PROJECTS SfT~ iNV~S77GATIONS, COLORADO,COLORADO QFPARTMENT DF TRANSF'OR7`ATrON As program manager for large scale site investigations for the Colorado Department of Transportation (COOT} since 19$9, Dr, Stuber has conducted numerous soil gas investigations, extensive soil baring and monitor well installation programs, and surficial soil. sampling and radiation surveys to identify and delineate contamination. His work has involved development of sampling and. analysis plans, evaluation of data quality objectives for the programs, assessment of environmental and health risks,. and evaluation of applicable standards (including CERCLA applicable or relevant and appropriate requirements}, and introduction of image processing and geographic information system into large site assessment projects. Site assessments of hundreds of former industrial properties and landfills for the COOT have involved development and execution of remediation plans; negotiation with regulatory agencies and property owners, and resolution of financial, environmental, and health risks for large-scale COOT acquisitions and construction projects. Two typical projects are described below. ^ Project Manager for Environmental Assessment, Transportation Corridor. Dr. Stuber was responsible for determining the environmental risk for acquisition of over St1 industrial and eomxr-ercial properties including a portion of an uncharacterized former wood treatment plant, numerous UST sites, industrial drainage ditches, and a portion of a major cadmium smelter site. m:'scsumes~2D04 resumcs'S[ubec.doc 1 Hal Stuber, Ph.D. Page 2 _ ;` ~i Feasibility, remedial options, regulatory coordination and cost estimation were involved. Management plans and health and safety plans for hazardous wastes and toxic contaminants in `` soils and ground waters were also completed. i ^ Project Manager for Site Assessment and Corrective Action Plan (CAP) for former waste solvent handling facility and above-ground storage tanks. Contaminants included TCE, PCE, MEK, ~` fuels, and metals. Soil, ground-water sampling, and mobile laboratory soil-gas analysis was ~ involved. Dr. Stuber directed CAP and waste management negotiations with regulatory agencies. lVlO$IL~ LABORATORY PF~'OJECTS I Dr. Stuber has managed numerous mobile laboratory projects far federal, state, and private clients including numerous soil gas surveys and on-site soil and ground-water analysis projects under the EPA's Underground Storage Tank Trust Program, administered by the Colorado Department of Public Health i and the Environment. He has directed successful on-site laboratory projects which include the following: ^ On-site gas chromatography/mass. spectrometry (GC/MS) analyses far remediation monitoring at a Superfund location in California • Projects at the U.S. Department of Energy's Rocky Flats site in Denver, CaIorado, including soil gas surveys by both GC and GC(MS methods, and monitoring of polychlorinated biphenyl remediation ^ Numerous soil gas surveys and on-site soil and groundwater analysis projects under the EPA's Underground Storage Tank Trust Program, administered by the Colorado Department of Labor, Oil Inspection Section FATE AND TRANSPORT STUDIES Dr. Stuber has extensive experience with sail and ground-water contamination by pesticides, organic ~ solvents, metals, and fuels. At the Rocky Mountain Arsenal in Denver, Colorado, he evaluated the fate and transport of organic contaminants in soils and ground water, used contaminant vertical profiles in soils to quantify pollutant mobility and evaluate transport models,. and evaluated new immunoassay methods for pesticide detection. ADVANCED ENVrRONMENTAL TECHNOLOGY INVESTIGATIONS Dr. Stuber has served as technical and project director for investigations of advanced technologies including immunoassay methods for pesticide determination and assessment of biosensor technologies for { enviroiunental applications. t' ~RCiANIC CONTAMINANT STUDIES J At the U.S. Geological Survey, Dr. Stuber studied the fate of organic contaminants from synthetic fuels processing in soils, ground water and surface waters, and developed new methods for isolating organic species from water. He discovered the reduced sulfur species in ail shale wastewaters. ENVIRONMENTAL GNEMISTRY STUDIES As a consulting chemist, Dr. Stuber analyzed natural organic compounds in soils and water and performed elemental analysis of hunnic substances. EMPLOYMENT FEISTORY Principal Chemist and Vice President, Walsh Environmental Scientists and Engineers, Inc. (WALSH), Boulder, Colorado, I987 to Present Analytical Chemist, Sievers Research, Inc., Boulder, Colorado, 1985 to 1987 Analytical Chemist, Independent Consultant, Boulder, Colorado, 1983 to 1984 Research Chemist, U.S. Geological Survey, Water Resources Division, Denver, Colorado, 1977 to 198'? m:4csumaLIXH resumesls[u.brr.doc Hal Stuber, Ph.D. Page 3 Graduate Student, University of Colorado, Boulder, Colorado, 1'974 to 1976. Chemist, U.S. Geological Survey, Isotope Geochemistry Group, Den~+er, Colorado, 1973. PUBLICATIONS, PRESENTATIONS Stuber, H.A., et. al. "Soil Gas Analysis Using On-Site GCIMS and Sorbent Traps",Environmental Restoratian 1995, Proceedings, U.S, Department of lwnergy, 1995. Huffman, E.W.D., Jr. and H.A. Stuber. "Analytical Methodology for Elemental Analysis of Humic Substances," in Humic Substances in Sail, Sediment, and Water. G. Aiken et. al., Editors. John Wiley, New York. 1985. Stuber, H.A. and J.A.. Leenheer. "Selective Concentration of Aromatic Bases from Water with a Resin Adsorbent," in Analytical Chemistry. 55, i 11. 1983. Leenheer, J.A. and H.A. Stuber. "Migration Through Soil of Organic Solutes in an dil Shale Process Water," in Envirorrmenral Science and Technology. 12, 14b7. 1981. Stuber, H.A.. "Selective Concentration and Isolation of Aromatic Ansnes from Water." Ph.D. Thesis, University of Colorado. 19$4.. Stuber, H.A. and J.A. Leenheer. "Inorganic Sulfur Species in Wastewaters from In-Situ. Oil Shale Processing,: in Environmental Science and Health. A13, b63. 1978. Stuber, PI.A. and J.A. Leenhecr, "Fractionation of Oil Shale Re-tort Water for Sorption Studies on Processing Shale," in Proceedings Fuel ,Science Division, American Chemical Society, 23, 168. 1978. Stuber, H.A. and J.A. Leenheer. "Evaluation of a Resin-Based Procedure for Monitoring Aqueous Wastes from OiI Shale Processing," in Establishment of Water Quality ,2~Ionitaring Programs. L.G. Everett and K.D. Schmidt, Editors. American Water Re-sources Association, Minneapolis. 1978. Stuber, H.A. and B.M. Tolbert, "A New Synthesis of 5accharo-ascorbic Acid: A Method for the Protection of the Enediol of Ascorbic Acid," in Carbohydrate 12esearch. 64, 251. 1978. PROFESSIONAL ASSOCIATIONS American Chemical Society, Analytical Division, Environmental Division, 1974 -Present • m:kesumrs7?004 Irsu~mes;srubcc.doc LINDSAY IUI. BREYER CIH ~~~~~~ Manager, Heal#h and Safety Services KEY EXPERTISE / Qver 28Years Experience in Environmental Health and Safety / Comprehensive Regulatory Compliance Consulting / Phase I and II Environmental Site Assessments / Analytical and Environmental Chemistry / Industrial Hygiene and Safety Programs / indoor Air Quality Investigations EDUCATION AND CI=RTIFICATIONS M.S., Environmental Science and Engineering, Colorado School of Mines, 1993 B.A., Chemistry, University of Colorado, Boulder, 1975 C.I.H., ABIH Certified Industrial Hygienist, Chemical Aspects, 1984 40-Hour OSHA HAZWOPER EXPERIENCE SUMMARY Lindsay Breyer is a Certified Industrial Hygienist with over 28 years ofprofessionaI experience in the fields of employee health and safety, industrial hygiene, indoor air quality, regulatory compliance, hazardous waste, and environmental chemistry. At WALSH, Mr. Breyer performs a number ofEH&S related services including assisting clients with compliance duties under CERCLA, R.CI~.A, CAA, CWA, OSHA, and other regulations. He perfotrxis health, safety, and environmental management services related to the construction, electronics, medical, pharmaceutical, and other industries. Mr. Breyer has also performed hundreds of Phase I and II environmental site assessments for a diverse list of clients including state, county, and municipal governments, as well as private industry and development interests. KEY PROJECTS INDUSTRIAL HYGIENE SURVEYS Mr. Breyer has performed numerous industrial hygiene investigations to measure and evaluate employee exposure to physical and chemical agents such as solvents, heavy metals, acid fumes, toxic gases, asbestos, noise, EMF, and other agents. Mr. Breyer has assisted a number of employers to resolve OSHA complaints and other exposure concerns, including the evaluation of appropriate administrative controls, engineering controls, and personal protective equipment. Representative projects include: ^ Evaluation of exposures to toxic gases, endotaxins, and noise in wastewater treatment plants; ^ Lead monitoring and compliance plans for indoor firing ranges; ^ Development of monitoring methods for boron compounds, phosphorus compounds, propriety pharmaceutical compounds, and dye intermediates; ^ Noise rnonrtoring and modeling far employee exposure assessments, community noise studies, evaluation of engineering controls,. and environmental impact studies; ^ Measurement of dust and crystalline silica exposures for manufacturing and. construction; ^ Measurement of solvent exposures in laboratories. and production facilities; and, ^ Development of new product testing protocols far product stewardship programs. ^ Litigation support for employee and community exposure complaints m: vesumesl2Wd rcsumcsti6rcpcr.Joc Lindsay itilf. Breyer, G1H . Page 2 NOlS~ MONlTORlNG AND ASSESSMENT Mr. Breyer has supervised and conducted dozens,of projects to assess noise impacts. These projects have f included evaluation of employee noise exposures for OSHA compliance, comrnuniry raise impacts of t industrial facilities, and raise modeling, Representative projects include; ^ Characterization of equipment noise and employee noise exposures at coil coating facility r ^ Evaluation of noise levels associated with waste treatment plant operations ^ Assessment of community noise impacts from testing of high pressure valves at industrial facility ^ Modeling of community noise impacts associated with a planned highway interchange ^ Review and auditing of hearing conservation program for a synthetic fuel manufacturing plant INDOOR A!R QUALITY lNV~STlGATlONS Mr, Breyer has investigated a variety of indoor environmental quality complaints in schools, office buildings, heath care facilities, casinos, and industrial buildings. He is experienced in the diagnosis of ' IAQ complaints using techniques such as airflow measurements, contaminant mozitoring, continuous air monitoring, bioaerosol sampling, and characterization of dusts. Typical projects include: ^ Baseline IAQ survey for new federal courthouse under the LJ.S. Green. Building Council's LEED i program; ^ Evaluation of indoor air impacts of underground diesel spill on commercial and residential buildings; f ^ Evaluation of indoor air impacts of chlorinated solvent plume at day care center; ^ QA officer for large vapor intrusion projects; ^ Evaluation oftobacco smoke and other contaminants in a casino; ~ ^ Identified causative agent for rashes in middle school; ~. ^ Evaluation of sewer gas odors in several commercial buildings; and, ^ Ventilation surveys and IAQ studies in municipal and commercial office buildings. ~ MOLD AND BlOAEROSOLS Mr. Breyer has completed dozens of projects involving mold, bacteria, and other microorganisms. These projects have ranged from simple inspections and sampling, to development and implementation of complex remediation projects: ^ Clean-up and disinfection of a document storage facility with suspected hantavirus contamination; ^ Inspections and sampling for mold and bacteria in homes, schools, hospitals, and commercial buildings; ^ Mold screening evaluations for property acquisitions ^ Development of remediation plans for mold-contaminated buildings; ^ Sampling at industrial and commercial facilities for mycobacteria, legionella, and other organisms. HEALTN AND 5AF1=TY PROGRAM DEVELOPMEN7"AND IMF'LFMENTATION Mr, Breyer has developed and implemented numerous health and safety programs in the manufacturing, construction, and laboratory industries. These programs have addressed a diverse array of concerns including hazard communication, hazardous. materials handling, confined space entry, lockaut/tagaut, respiratory protection, hearing conservation, emergency response, chemical exposure assessment, and other areas. His health and safety experience includes facility audits, investigation of accidents and incidents, and implementing corrective measures to achieve compliance with program requirements, As part of the implementation process fvr these programs, Mr. Breyer has conducted training sessions far employees and managers to inform them of their respective rights and responsibilities, proper work procedures to be followed, and the use of protective equipment. m:4csvmes`s0f14 resunscs~brrycr.dc~c Lindsay M. Breyer, CIH Page 3 HAZARDOUS WASTE MANAGEMENT AND EMERGENCY RESPONSE Mr. Breyer is experienced with the management of industrial wastes, including RCRA hazardous waste, biohazardous waste, radioactive waste, and non-hazardous chemical wastes. His experience includes compliance with RCRA requirements far both large and small-quantity generators, waste characterization and profiling, identification of unknowns, Iab packing of waste materials, preparation of bienrtiai reports, developing contingency plans, and selection and auditing of TSD facilities. Mr. Breyer has also organized emergency response teams for several facilities; provided the required OSHA HAZWOPER training; and participated in responses to releases of petroleum products, pesticides, flammable gases, toxic gases, and other materials. Ii HEMrCAL PROCESS SAFETY AND RlSx ANALYSIS Mr. Breyer has experience in the development of chemical process safety and risk management plans for industrial facilities. He has successfully integrated OSHA and EPA requirements into existuag plant programs, and has participated in the process safety review of a number of systems at chemical and pharmaceutical manufacturing plants. ENVlf?ONMENTAL 5lTEASSESSMENTSAND COMPLIANCE CONSULTING Mr. greyer has performed more than 300 ASTM transaction screens, Phase I, and Phase II Environmental Site Assessments at a variety of commercial sites including vacant land, agricultural properties, multi- family housing, office complexes, restaurants, retail, warehouse, mining, milling, and industrial facilities. Major projects have included: ^ Phase I ESA and liability estimate far a rocket testing site and commercial irradiation facility ^ Phase I and Phase II ESAs far properties impacted by historic training and milling activities ^ Environmental due diligence audit far rocket manufacturing facilities; ^ Phase I ESA for former nuclear missile silos; ^ Environmental assessments for the proposed Northwest Parkway corridor from I25 to U536; ^ ESA for 9-mile pipeline corridor in northern Colorado; ^ ESAs for large tracts of property for Brownfields programs in Fort Collins, Denver, and Aurora; and ^ Phase I L-',SAs far abandoned mine sites. ENVlRONMENTA.L MANAGEMENT AND COMPLIANCE Mr. Breyer has been involved with a bread range of environmental, health, and safety issues associated with industrial activities. This includes emergency planning and EPCRA reporting, SARA Title III reporting (Toxic Release Inventory), stormwater discharge permitting, air emissions, and wastewater issues. Mr. Breyer has assisted with the preparation of regulatory reports, permit applications, and documenting compliance activities to meet OSHA and EPA requirements. Mr. Breyer has audited waste disposal facilities for compliance with RCRA. He has successfully unplemented solutions to problems such as reducing elevated cyanide levels and identifying unknown pollutants in industrial wastewater. ENVIRONMENTAL SAMPLING AND ANALYSIS Mr. Breyer has extensive experience with environmental monitoring projects performed for government and industrial clients. His experience includes the sampling of ambient air, groundwater, surface water, wastewater, sail, sail gas, and solid wastes. He also has expertise in the laboratory analysis of enviroarrtental media using chromatographic, spectrometric, and wet chemical techniques. Mr. Breyer has also assisted with laboratory data interpretation and the preparation of environmental reports. He has been involved with the development, review, and implementation of Quality Assurance Plans and other project documents for approximately 30 different projects and has managed laboratory service contracts involving air, water, soil, and waste samples from over 200 projects. These projects have been performed for real estate transactions, RCRA and CERCLA facility investigations,. feasibility studies for remedial actions, CAA and CWA compliance monitoring, and waste characterization. m:vewn~sl0ht res4._~, ~_._,...doc L.inds~y M. Breyer, CIH Paga 4 ~ . i EMPLQYMENT HISTORY Senior Environmental Scientist, WALSH, Boulder, Colorado, 1999 to Present Senior Consulting Scientist, EPI Inc., Conifer, Colorado, 1998-1999 Program Manager, Quanterra, Inc., Arvada, Colorado, 1994-199$ F Industrial Hygienist, Synergen Inc., Boulder, Colorado, 1992-1994 ~ EH&S CoordinatarlSetiior Scientist, Enseco Inc., Arvada, Colorado, 1986-1992 Senior Environmental Chemist, Ciba-Geigy Corp., Glens I~aIls, NY, 1480-19$6 Chemist, OSHA, Salt Lake City, Utah, 1976-1980 i PUBLICATIONS ANa PRESENTATIONS Lindsay M. Breyer and ]erry L. Parr. "Illustration of Laboratory Quality Control Concepts Using a Simulated Analysis," Presented at 39`'` Rocky Mountain Conference an Analytical Chemistry, August 1997. A Barnard, CIH, CSP, L Breyer, CIH, and ]Cowart, FE. "Risks to Indoor Air Quality from Volatile Organic Compounds in Groundwater." Proceedings of the 9`~ International Conference an Indoor Air Quality and Climate, Monterey, California, ]une 30 -July S, 2002. L. Breyer. "Disinfection of a Facility With 5uspeeted Hantavirus Contamiaation." Presented at the Arr~erican Industrial Hygiene Conference and Exhibition, May 10-15, 2003. Lindsay Breyer, CIH and lames B. Cowart, PE. "Attenuation Eactars far Hydrocarbons Associated With a Diesel Spill," To be presented at the Vapor Intrusion Attenuation Workshop, 14th Annual West Coast Conference on Soils, Sediments and Water, March 15-1$, 2004, San Diego, California PR(~FESSIQNAL ASSOCIATIONS American Industrial Hygiene Association American Academy of Industrial Hygiene Society of American Military Engineers C7 m:Vrswna~;2405 rssumes~6reyer~doe TRACY AL.TRO~CK "1~ `~rll ~rrdusfrial Hygienist ~, KEY EXPERTISE / Indoor Air Quality lnvestigations / Lead Monitoring Mold Investigations / Phase I Environmental Site Assessments EpUCATION AND 4ERTIFICATIONS B.S., Environmental Management and Technology, Rochester Institute of Technology, 1995 State of Colorado Approved Lead-Based Paint Inspector & Risk Assessor Course OSHA 4t7-Hour HAZWOPER OSHA 501, General Industry, Train-the-Trainer Certified CPR Certified EDR Due Diligence at Dawn. Workshop EXPERIENCE SUMMARY Ms. Altrock is an Industrial Hygienist with over 4 years ofexperienee. Her specialties include conducting indoor air quality investigations, lead monitoring, development and implementation of health and safety programs, and conducting Phase I Environmental Site Assessments. She has conducted these services for a wide variety of clients at industrial, manufacturing, eornmercial and residential sites. At WALSH, Ms. Altrock conducts indoor air quality investigations that assess contaminants such as volatile organic compounds, carbon monoxide, carbon dioxide, and rnolds. Additional responsibilities for indoor air quality projects include providing mitigation oversight and duality control, interfacing with residents and tenants, scheduling sampling activities, notifying residents of results, and providing weekly statistical updates to the client and public relations subcontractors. She also conducts air monitoring for lead and other heavy metals, and other hazardous chemicals associated with remediation projects. Ms. Altrock provides a variety of safety consulting services, including develpping on-line safety training programs, implementing training programs, and assuring regulatory compliance. She has conducted daily tailgate safety meetings to ensure that workers wear required personal protective equipment and follow the site"s safety rules for sampling and monitoring projects. While with a previous employer, Ms. Altrock contributed to a toolbox safety program designed to provide information on various safety topics to personnel on a monthly basis. As a Safety and Health Officer far a consulting firan she was responsible for the tracking of training and medical files, managing employee cases, maintaining OSHA 2Q© Log, and providing updates to the Office Manager. Ms. Altrock conducts Phase I Environmental Site Assessments (FBAs) for various projects including vacant land, agricultural, residential, gas stations, and auto service facilities, These assessments have often required research using non-traditional information sources. She performs regulatory file review, historical research, reviews aerial photographs, conducts owner and occupant interviews, site inspections and evaluates findings. PROJECT EXPERIENCE J4EG!(3NAL 7RANSI~dRTATI4N L7ISTRICT (f?TD} Ms. Altrock has performed services including noise monitoring, hydrogen sulfide monitoring, and an industrial hygiene worker evaluation for RTD. mi'•sesumes',20o4 resumes'altroek .doe _ i Tracy Altroek Page 2 _ i Woor~wAl~a IN!]USrRIAL C®NrROLS +~' ! Ms. Altrock has performed a variety of industrial hygiene services including community noise monitoring, noise surveys, and worker exposure monitoring. RK MECHANICAL Ms. Altrock coordinated and conducted air sampling for a baseline indoor air quality investigation for formaldehyde, ozone, sulfur dioxide, nitrogen oxide, carbon dioxide, carbon monoxide, ~S-phenyl cyelohcxene, mall, total particulates, and total volatile organic compounds. A report of the sampling results was provided. MYR GROUP (SrURGEDN~ Ms. Altrock conducted the sampling of employee exposure monitoring in response to an OSHA complaint. Exposures to total dust, respirable dust, calcium oxide and crystalline silica were monitored, and Ms. Altrock provided a report on the results. RxKINErres Ms. Altrock reviewed the existing chemical hygiene plan with current regulations and provided recommendations far updating the plan. SPECIALTY Rls,~ SER vlcEs Ms. Altrock conducted the sampling of the fish aquarium water and the fish for mycobacterium marinum and provided a report an the results, XL ENVIRONMENTAL Ms, Altrock advised the insurance company on the progress of cleaning up a building that had a water leak of treated water. Based an the visual inspection of the facility and the sampling of nitrite, endatoxins, mold, viable mold and bacteria, Ms. Altrock provided guidance on the removal of the materials. AVON AND r=DwARDS WASrFwarr=R TR~arM~NrPr~aNrs Ms. Altrock coordinated and conducted air sampling for an industrial hygiene assessment far the Eagle River and Edwards Wastewater Treatment Plants. Ms. Altrock provided a report of the sampling results of mold, viable mold, bacteria, endatoxins, thiols, mercaptans, hydrogen sulfide, carbon disulfide, ammonia, carbon monoxide, and carbon dioxide. MOLD SCREENING INVESTIGATIONS Ms. AItrack has performed various mold screening investigations for clients including the Lorimer County hood Bank, Asphalt Paving Company, Vail Valley Medical Center, Resort Builders, a local detention center, and others. Investigations are performed for reasons including property transactions, as response to leaks and in response to employeeloceupant complaints. As part of the mold screening investigations Ms. Altrock conducted interviews, visual inspections of accessible areas of the building, the heating, ventilation, and air conditioning system, collection of air samples, carpet dust samples, bulls samples, samples from within the wall cavity, bulk samples, and tape lift samples. Investigations also include the use of a moisture meter when applicable and report preparation. PNASE 1 ENVII~~ONMENTAL SITE ASSESSMENT (ESAS) Ms. Altrock has conducted research and site visits for various properties throughout the Denver metropolitan area and beyond. This has included projec#s for Boulder County, the City and County of Denver, City of Edgewater, City of Longmont, City of Blacl:hawk, Tri-Area Ambulance District, and a variety of private entities. m:lresumes'~?004 resumcs'altrock .dos Tracy Aitrock . ~ Page 3 EMPLOYMENT HISTOE~Y ~) Industrial Hygienist, WAI.SI~i, Boulder, Colorado, 10102 to Present. Senior Staff Safety and Industrial Hygiene Specialist, Harding ESE, Golden, Colorado, 9100-9lD2. Enviran~nental Health and Safety Assistant, Mobile Tool International, Inc,, EnviroStaff, 1'Vestzninster, Colorado, 7100-9l00. Field Technician and Sample Analyst, Morrison Knudsen Corporation, EnviraStaff, Denver, Colorado, 4100-7100. Technical Writer, Resource Technologies Group, EnviroStaff, Golden., Colorado, 1100-4/DD. Safety and Health Compliance Assistant, Coors Brewing Company, CDI Corporation, Golden, Colorado, 3199-I/00. SafetyJHum~tn Resources Assistant, Ralston Purina, EnviraStaff, Denver, Colorado, 1199-3/99_ Sample Preparation Technician, Colorado Minerals Research Institute, EnviroStaff, Golden, Coloeado, 12198-1199_ Waste Reduction Analyst, Eastman Kodak Company, Riteways Co-op, Rochester, New York, b197-12197, Summer Intern, Oneida-Herkimer Solid Waste Authority, Utica, New York, 6/96-9196. • • [nilresumes120D4 resurneslaluouk .doc ~I ~ .} PRELIMWARY GE©TECHNICAL ItJVE=STIGATiQty PARKING STRUCTURE VAIL, CQLC]RAQfl •i Prepared Far: TOWN flF VAIL 75 South Frontage Road Vail, C4 81657 Attention: Nlr. Greg Nat! Job Na. GS-3361 July iJ, 2D01 CTLfTHC~MPS©N, f1VG. CONSULTING ENGINEi=RS 234 CENTER ORtVE ^ ~'a~.ENWOOD SPR1hiGS, COI.ORAC}Q 81601 ^ d970) 945.2Sfl9 ~ ~I~ TABLE 01= CONTENTS ti SCOPE ~ SUMMARY QF CC}NCLUSIONS 1 SITE CQNDITIONS 2 PRQPQSED CONSTRUCTI(3N 2 SUBSURFACE CONDITS+JNS 3 SITE EARTHWQRK 4 Site Grading 4 Utility Construction b Foundation Excava#ions 6 Construction Dewatering 7 BUILDING CONSIDERATIONS 7 Foundations $ Slab-on-Grade Construction 8 Earth Retention Systems 8 Dewatering Systems and Subsurface Drainage 9 Surface Drainage 9 LIMITATI©N5 10 FIGURE 1 - APPROXIMATE LQCATIUNS OF EXPLORATORY BORINGS AND PITS FIGURES 27HROUGH 4-SUMMARY LOGS QI= EXPLORATORY BORINGS AND PITS F]GURE 5 - GRA[?ATIDN TEST RESULTS TABLE I -SUMMARY OF LABORA7QRY TEST RESULTS • TdWN pF VAIL PARKING STRUCTURE CTLlT J49 H6. GS-33fii SCOPE ' This report presents the results of our preliminary geotechnicai investigation for a proposed parking structure in Vail, Col©rado. We conducted the investigation to evaluate the subsurface conditions at the site and provide geotechnical recommendations for the proposed construction, Our investigation was conducted in general accordance with our proposal GS-00-241{revised), dated May 21, 20x1. Our report was based on our field and laboratory data, engineering analysis and experience with similar conditions. This report includes a description of the subsurface conditions found in our exploratory borings and pits, and our opinions and recommendations regarding excavation retention systems, dewatering systems, foundations and slab-on-wade construction. Building plans were not developed at the time of this investigation. When plans are available, a design level geotechnical investigation should be performed to develop design recommendations and criteria. i A summary of our conclusions is presented below. SUINMAFtY OF CONCLUSIONS 1. Subsurface conditions encountered in our exploratory bari`ngs at the site consisted of dense, silty gravel with cobbles and occasional boulders to the lowest explored elevation of about 8093 feet. The subsoil found in our exploratory pits in the existing RV parking area was fill consisting of medium dense, clayey gravel with cobbles boulders and occasional debris to the deepest excavated elevation of approximately 8153 feet. Bedrock was not encountered in our exploratory borings or pits during this investigation. Ground waterway measured in our exploratory borings during drilling operations between approximate elevations 8124 and 815fi feet. Free ground water level measurements made art June 28, 2001 ranged fr©rn elevation 812E to 81511 feet. Ground water was nt~t found in our exploratory pits during excavation operations. Construction and permanent dewatering systems would liikely be required to build a parking structure that extended below elevation 8150 feet.. • TOWN OF VAIL PARKING STRilC4l1RE CTLIf JOB N4. Gs-3361 I_ ` 1 3. Excavatic~ to construct the parking structure would require atop- down retention system to limit deflection of excavation faces. The most appropriate retainage method wouid likely be installation of sail nails. 4. The parking structure can be constructed an footing faundatiions supported by the undisturbed, native gravel. Specific foundation design criteria should tae developed during adesign-level geotechnical investigation when. construction plans are available. 5. Slab-on-grade construction can be supported by the native gravel at this site with low risk of differential movement. Additional discussion is in the report. SITE CONDITIONS The parking structure is planned at the location of the existing Lionshead Parking Structure and RV parking area in Vail, Colorado. The site is southeast of the ~ intersection of S©uth Frontage Raad and E, Lionshead Circle. The existing parking structure is a three level, reinforced concrete structure with mostly open sides. The I Lower parking level is constructed below-grade on the north side. The lower level parking floor is a slab-on-grade near elevation 8154 feet. The parking structure ~ entrance and exit are at the east side, adjacent to the RV parking area. The RV ` ~.. parking area is an asphalt paved lot constructed an a fill embankment approximately 2t} feet thick with steep slopes at the` south and east. The southeast park of the lot i was being. used for storage of construction equipment. Ground surface at the I perimeter of the site was landscaped with irrigated grass and pine and aspen trees. PR~dPUSED CONSTRUCTION Construction plans were not developed at the time of this investigation, We t understand the most likely alternative would be to expand the existing Lionshead Parking structure to the east. This alternative could involve adding a level to the tap of the parking structure. A second alternative that has been considered wouid be to demolish the Lionshead Parking structure and build a new parking structure with a r~ r~ TowN of va~~ PARKING sTRUCTURE Z CTL1T JC3~ NO. GS•39fi1 i~ ., largerfootprintond several levels of below-grade parking. The type of construction and building foundation loads are unknown at this time. SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS Subsurface conditions at the site were investigated by drilling six exploratory borings and excavating three exploratory pits at the approximate locations shown on the Site Plan {Figure 1). The ODEX drilling method, which uses a downhoie, pneumatic hammer, was used to advance the borings. The pits were excavated with a trackhoe to provide better estimates of the existing fill composi#ion, ©rilling and excavation operations were directed l,y our engineer and field representative who logged the soils encountered in the borings and pits and obtained samples. Samples obtained in the field were returned to our laboratory where field classifications were checked and typical samples selected for testing: Graphic logs of 4he soils ! ~ encountered in our exploratory borings and pits are shown on Figures 2 through 4. Subsurface conditions encountered in our exploratory borings at the site consisted of dense, silty gravel with cobbles and occasional boulders to the lowest explored elevation of about 8093 feet. The subsoil found in our exploratory pits in. the existing RV parking area was fill consisting of medium dense, clayey gravel with cobbles boulders and occasional debris to the deepest excavated elevation of approximately 8153 feet.. Bedrock was not encountered in our exploratory borings or pits during this investigation. Observations during drilling and excavation indicated the fill was medium dense and the native grave! was dense. Gradation test results on samples o#the soils are shown on Figure 5 and laboratory test results are summarized on Table I. Ground water was measured in our exploratory borings during drilling operations between approximate elevations 8'#24 and 8158 feet.. Free ground water level measurements made on ,lone 28, 2Q09 ranged from elevation 8926 to 815Q feet. Ground water was not found in our exploratory pits during excavation operations. • T6WN OF VA4L PARKING STRUCTURE 3 CTUT JOB NO. GS•3361 ~` We anticipate ground water measured in our borings is near seasonal high elevations. Construction and permanent dewatering systems would likely be required to build a parking structure that extended below elevation 8150 feet. Construction of an interceptor drain uphill of the proposed buildings is discussed in the CONSTRUCTION DEWATERING section. Recommendations for permanen#dewatering ofthe buildings are included in the SUBSURFACE DRAINAGE section. SITE EARTHWORK ~' Site Grading trading plans were not available at this writing. Areas which will receive fill or support construction should be stripped of vegetation and ~arganic snits. Existing foundations, floor stabs, utilities and debris should be completely removed. The resulting surface should be scarified t©a depth of at least 8 inches, moisture conditioned and compacted. Based on subsoils exposed in our exploratory pits, existing fill east of the existing Lionshead Parking structure appears suitable for reuse as structural fil! and backfill. The native gravel and existing fill soil free of organics, debris and rocks and bedrock pieces larger than 4 inches in diameter are suitable far use as fill for site grading, Fill should be placed in loose lifts of 10 inches thick or less and moisture conditioned to within 2 percent of optimum moisture content. Fill placed deeper than 5 feet below final grades should be compacted to at least i!]Q percent of standard Proctor (ASTM D 698) maximum dry density. Fill placed at 5 feet or less below final grades should be compacted to at least J5 percent of ASTM D 6913 maximum dry density. Placement and compaction of fill should be checked by a representative of our frm during construction. . TpWN DF VpIL BARKING STRUCTURE CTLJT .1~6 NQ. GS•3361 Utility Construction Large cobbles and boulders will likely be encountered in the native gravel and existing fill. We anticipate Utility excavations can be accomplished with large trackhaes, The effectiveness of trenching machines would be hindered by cobbles and boulders. We believe it would be advantageous to pass the excavated soils and broken down bedrock through a 4 inch opening "grizzly" screen to manufacture material far reuse as trench backfill at the site. Utility trench excavations should be sloped or braced to meet Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) standards. bracing or "trench box" construction will be necessary where sloping excavations is not practical. The native grave! and fll encountered in our borings and pits appear to classify as Type C based an C3SHA's criteria. Excavation sides in Type C soils deeper than 5 feet and . above the water table should be sloped no steeper than '1 to 1 (horizontal to vertical) according to OSHA standards. Excavations below ground water will likely slough to 2 to 9 ar flatter. The contractor should employ a competent person to classify sails and plan excauation slopes as part of the contractor's safety program. Soils should be stockpiled downhill from utility trenches at a horizontal distance from the top of the trench slope at least equal to the depth of the trench. Surface drainage surrounding trench excavations should be sloped to divert runoff away from open excavations in order to reduce erosional stability failures. USHA regulations require bracing andlor excavated slopes for trenches greater than 20 feet deep be designed by a Registered Professional Engineer. We assume the native gravel and existing fiill will be used to backfill required trench excavations. Flacks larger than A inches should be removed from the backfill. Ali trench backfill should be placed in thin fifes and compacted. Where heavy machinery provides the compactive effort, loose lifts of 10 inches thick are appropriate in confined trenches. Where small hand contr4Jied equipmen# provides the compactive effort, the lift thickness should be limited to 6 inches. The backfill TOWN C3F VIAL PARKING STRUCTURE CTL1T JOB NO- GS-336t 1 ~I in any case should be compacted to 95 percent of standard Proctor ASTf+II D 69$ maximum dry density. Foundation Excavations Excavation to construct the parking structure would require a taprdown retention system to limit deflection of excavation faces. 9n our opinion, soil nailing is the mast appropriate method to retain the foundation excavations at this site. Two alternatives exist far a soil nail wall at this site: 'i) A permanent soil nail retention system which is a structural part ofi the foundation wall, or 2) A temporary soil nail retention system to allow construction of the foundation wall. A permanent sal! retention system would require minimal excavation Qutside the perimeter of the foundation wall, but is difficult to construct and requires aone-way concrete pour of the foundation wall, The temporary sail nail retention system would be easier to construct, however, the excavation would be required to extend laterally about $ feet outside the building footprint. The basementwall ad~acentto the retained excavation is then constructed with a normal two-way concrete pour. Maximum foundation excavation depths were not determEned at this writing. Normal excavation retainage methods would be difficult to instal( in the gravel and cobbles below the ground water IeveL A~ specialty designlbuild contractor will need to assist in design of the excavation retention system. Based an our experience in the Vail area,. we expect the excavation of the native gravel can be performed using large trackhoes, dozers and (rant end loaders. We recommend the excavated soils be stackpiled at a distance from the tap of the excavation equal to at least the depth of the excavation. We believe it would be advantageous to pass the excavated soils through a 4 inch opening "grizzly" screen to manufacture material far reuse as structural fill and backfill. . ~. T©WM OF VA1L PARKING STRUGTUR~ CTtJT JOB NO. G3-3361 6 • ~I .~ Construction Dewatering used an our subsurface infarma#ion, ground water below the north part of the site is generally located between elevations 8148 and 8154 feet. The ground water surface below the south part of the site ranges from approximately elevations 8'{25 to 8130 feet. The free ground water elevations in our exploratory borings were measured during fate spring and early summer when ground water is normally. near seasonal highs. We recommend periodic measurements of ground water levels be made on a monthly basis for as long possible. Construction and permanent dewatering systems would likely be required to build a parking structure that extended below elevation 8150 feet, Dewatering excavations for foundations and utilities would require considerable effort. In our opinion, methods such as interceptor drains or pumping firom temporary sumps may not result in a dry excavation frsr construction, depending an the depth of dewatering necessary. Dewatering methods such as pumping from well points may be required. The quantity of seepage into the excavation is a function of soil profile, hydraulic conductivity, ground water elevation, excavation geometry, and time. Seepage quantities will be greatest immediately after excava#ion and gradually decrease to steady state conditions after construction. Aground water study should be considered to estimate seepage quantities at this site. BUILDING CONSIDERATIONS • Building plans, foundation and floor elevations, and other specific construction details were not established at this writing. The following discussions are preliminary and not intended far design and construction. A detained, design level geoteehnical investigation should be performed when plans are available to develop final recommendations and design criteria. Subsurface information from this investigation can be used far the design level investigation. rawN ae= WAII. PARKING STRUCTURE CTUT JOB NO. GS-3361 7 Foundations + Iii ~ ~'he parking structure can be construc#ed an footing foundations supported by the undisturbed, native gravel. The gravel and cobbles are Judged to possess tow potential for consolidation. Due to the granular nature of the sails at this site, settlement of ~,ui{ding fcur;dations should occur as deadlaads are applied during construction, We anticipate footings can be designed for maximum allowable bearing pressure in the range of 5,000 to 6,000 psf. Specific foundation design criteria far foundations cart be developed when construction plans are available. Slab-on-Grade Construction Lower level parking slabs would Likely beconstructed asslabs-on-grade, The gravel is an excel{ent soil to support slabs. Slab-on-grade construction can be supported by the native gravel at this site with low risk of differential movement. A washed rock anti PVC drain pipe network will be required be[aw the garage float slabs to minimize potential problems resulting from ground water, ' Earth Retention Systems Below-gratis walls and earth retaining walls should be designed far lateral earth pressures, Many factors affect the values of the design lateral earth pressure. These factors include, but are not limited to, the kype, compaction, slope anti drainage of the backfill, and the rigidity of the wall against rotation and deflection. Far a very rigid wall where negligible or very little deflection will occur, an "at-rest" lateral earth pressure should be used in design. Forwalls which can deflect or rotate 0.5 to 7 percent of wall height {depending upon the backfill types), lower "active"' lateral earth pressures are aplaropriate. Design of earth retention systems such as sail nailed walls or mechanically stabilized earth (MSE) walls depends on soil parameters such as unit weight, ~' • TOWN OF VAIL PARKING STRUCTURE CTVTJOB ht0. GS-3361 cohesion and interns! angle of friction. These systems also require proper drainage to prevent buildup of hydrostatic pressure behind the wall. These retention systems should be analyzed on a case-by-case basis. Global stability show}d be checked when the walls are sized. Dewatering Systems and Subsurface Drainage Lower level parking level elevations were net determined at the time of this investigation. A permanent dewaterng systems would likely be required to build a parking structure that extended below elevation 8150 feet. V11e anticipate methods such as pumping from well points would be necessary. An alternative to dewatering might be designing parts of the parking structure below ground water to be water proof and resist buoyancy forces. Design wauid need to be by a specialistforwhorn design of construction below ground water is a comrrman practice. If the parking Structure will not extend below ground water, an exterior foundation drain and a washed' rack and RVC drain pipe network installed below the lower lave! parking slabs will still be required, The foundation drains should. consist of 4 inch diameter, open joint or slotted, schedule 40 PVC pipe encased in free draining gravel. The drains should lead to sumps where water can be removed by pumping. The drain system below parking slabs can likely consist of 2 ar 4 inch diameter, slotted, schedule 40 PVC pipe installed on 6 foot centers and imbedded in at least t'S inches of washed gravel. The pipes should convey water tv perimeter drain collector pipes which consist of 4 or 6 inch diameter schedule 40 PVC pipe. The collector pipes should be sloped to sumps where water can f,e removed by pumping. Surface Drainage Surface drainage is critical to the performance of foundations, floor slabs and concrete flatwork. The ground surface surrounding the exterior of the parking structure buildings should be sloped t© drain away from the structure in all r4WN OF VAIL PAt2KtNG STRUCTURE crur soa M4, cs•assr ~~ directions, We recommend providing a slope of at least'12 inches in the first 4©feet ! around the parking structure. Backfill around the exterior of foundation wails should be moisture conditioned and compacted. 1JVater collection systems and drains should dischargewell beyond the limits of all backfill. Splash blocks and downspout I extensions should be provided stall discharge points. Proper contra) of surface run- off is also important t4 prevent the erasion of surface sons. Permanent slopes should be re-vegetated to reduce erasion. LIMITATIONS i ©ur exploratory borings and pits were located to obtain a reasonably accurate F picture of subsurface conditions at the site to provide preliminary geotechnical criteria fora parking structure. Variations in the subsurface conditions not indicated by our borings and pits will occur. The recommendations contained in the report are preliminary and not intended for design and construe#ion. When building plans are available, a design level geotechnical investigation should be performed to develop design recommendations and criteria. This investigation was conducted in a manner consistent w'sth that Level of care and skill ordinarily exercised by geotechnical engineers currently practicing under similar conditions in the locality of this project. Na other warranty, express ~ or implied, is made. If we can be of further service in discussing the contents of this t r ~. report. or in the analysis of the influence of the subsoil conditions an the design of the structure, please call. ~ _ ;"` ,~' CTL/T9~OMPSON, INC. Ja a ®. Kellogg Sta Geotechnica! Engineer JDK,JM:cd (5 copies sent) row«,I of vaa~ PARKING STRIfCTURE CTkdT JOB NO. GS-3361 Jo ~~: ~ ~ ~ ` :_= ,~ . 1 l~ r J////1 /f 1fl i -~~~~ r- ~, cs ~ ~ 4 ~~ F- rJ (!} ~ (7 d ~ ~ ~ - Cal. ? J \\ ~~ r h ~x Y ~I q is v O ^ C O I W P L4 F" d ~_ Q a ~- 4 J tl.. X W ~.~.. ~_ ~"' U C7 ~,1 }- d J[ a a a a. ,~ n 1 (7 e z n `r 5449 oztB saga as~B sf 4s Qr-s StLB C G ~S4B tl s • w. SS48 09L8 ss4e ot4s 5L48 094E slid QN~' S~Nia09 k?lOl~'a0~dX3 ~0 5~0~ ~121bYVNif1S s..n d OBt8=l3 €-Hl SL Re-"C~ Z-H1 SLlB=73 4°N1 s~wB oz 4B sz4B o~ to arts or 4s Sf 4B m t O OSIB 7 T • SS48 4948 S91B otte st4s 0818 I ~s fr , I ~. F t e ~„ I ~~. ~.. ~~ t {t .., 1 E • F ,~ ~ a9££ -S~ '~N q~f s~.~d ar~b s~r~iz~aa ~~a~.~~a~dx3 ~o saa~ ~.adv~wns Haas osoa ~~ Q: ssoe ~~ Q~ p' ooas ~}: ~: S)= Q° ~: ~. S4aB ~' ~' ~; (?' ~; Q~ ~: DaaB ° ~ Q: o~ a; °' a~ Baas ,~. ~,: ~' a~ ~= ~. ozae 9~ Q; ~~ ~:. E d ~~ Q: 7 ;~: _ ~ ~: szas ~ a; s A ~' Q' t7~ _ - ataB ~~ ; ~: n a ~~ ~: ssas ~: a~ ~~ Q; ~` a~ ~. 4. oral ~~ ~: ~' 9a~ q' ~~ stiae ~` Q: S3° ~: ~' ~: ~: asae Q° 0~ S?~ ~, ssas ~= osaa ZS1B=l3 09aB=13 S-H.t f--H1 ~' Elavailon Fn F~t~ t ` ' ~ 1 ~ I 8 ~ ' ~ ' 4 {n Y w ~ ~ ~ 4 ~ ~ r m ~x r+o :_ ~ ~ ['1 a ° ~ w D d ~M ~.`'w rG ~. t d .~-~~- a } } r d~ f O O O A p ~' rt X~ 'fl x'17 2 *% ~ 6~ V FYr' % t r ~ w w ~ ~.-~ wCQ 0 .. p ~ . ~ ~r dp #.~. xP ~~~,o • d C q O4 nt° ". 1, !++ a^ Q~w9a.~- C ~~ v d u i w ~'iw G • 7 Q ~ °~ ~ OL 3 O C f S3 C p ~ 3 A CY n ° ~C QI ~ ~D O~ O ~ "Q' O Mi O + Q~ V C ~ ~ N 3 ~ ~ 3 3 .t ~+-' ri U9 !Y ri ~ in ~ Z x a c~ i ~ z o i ~ M ~ m ~ f-Q G ! ~ ~ ~ ~ # 'Or ~po {~ G L Q a f 7 • ' ° ' ~ ~ a o° a-'a OG C7 ~° Y ~ c„c, i a +. u ~ '+- ~ 0. ?G t 4 7 n v t ~ i D ~ c c~ro cE ~ +~ ?' ~' 4 L7 ~fl ~ ~ ~ m ~ A l~R 1 1 ~ ` ~o~~ Ul l1Q]}DA~~ ~ e ~ ~ w 4 ~ Y ° P = ~ {~ -a a .~.~ ~ C' p C O ~ O :: O ` •y Y w ° ~ ~ p'~ ~ O O ' ~ ~ r ~ ~ d ° ° p+ ~E t ~ V C i 4~ ® ~ Q ~ ~ ~ t ~ ~ A C ~ ~ ~ ° * Q ~~ 47 a ~ U Gn ~ s a °'vLw y57E -~ ° `° v .,off ~ o~ t + ~ ~pv~ va lon v ii W R7 J eC M M 1 0 Y p 0 -, ~' • TH-~ 7H-5 TH-6 EL=816D EL=8152 EL=8152 8160 8164 :~ :CS °~ 8i55 8155 :~ :~ ~~ ~ 8150 8154 :~ © : . `~ '~ ei45 8145 :Q 3 :1 ~~ :Q D ~~ . B14a Bs44 ;t~ o '~ :a °~ :~ ~ 8135 8i3S :~ ' :CS ~~ v .o :D ~~ Bi34 8130 - :~ t5 O :0 ~, - ~ sf ,., ~ ~ T - 8125 c 8125 1 Q ;C 7 ~ O v ~ :0 ++ :V 3 ~~ '~ 8124 8120 ~ ' :C5 ;~i :b :(S ;p 8115 E115 :o ' :~ :° :cs :a o :~ . Biia etto :D :~ :~ :~ =~ :4 .C~ 81 d5 Bids ~ . _p :D .~ =~ 814a Biaa :l3 ~ : :(] 8095 8095 :C~ • B09d 8d9D S~1MI~ARY LOGS OE EXPLORATORY BORINGS AND PETS X61 Ftg. 3 iii 1 HYDROMETER ANALYSIS ~ SIEVE ANALYSIS f TIME READINGS --- U.5.. STANDARD SERIES CLEAR SQUARE OPENINGS 25 HR. ~ HR. d5 MIN. i5 MlN. 60 M1N.19 MIN. 4 MIN, 1 MIN, '200 '100 '50'40'70 '16 'tfl'8 '4 3/6' '~~~ 1 ~~ ~ 5'6' ~0 10a _ _ -- - - ~__~,...._ , --- -~- --'-" -- .. _ .... _.--.- .:- - 0 7- ------. -- .-.--- -- - - - ...__ .._ _. ~ ~ _::~:__~: f .. . W Ll ~ .._ _____••_ .._ __ .. e...+y _ _____ L .._-__ ___~•- _...--1.. - ~ __. •____•_ 111111 - ...-__ .... -_•_ __ 6 ___ _ _____ _ ___ ___ ._ __. _ - ;-- _ _ _ r ~ 0. t _• - 3yf _ -- _•____ __ ___ _ __ ._ ___ . fl.00i 0.002 .005 .009 .019 .077 -.~74 .1~9 297042590 1.19 2.036 d..$ 4.52 49.1 3fi.1 782 121g~ DLMIETER #'RARTICLf W M4.L~AET'ER3 I - S GRRVEL CLAY gpLASTiC~ TO SILT (NON-AL./tS71G1 f~lE I MEDIUM ~ COARSE FRJE COARSE Cnom cer I 5c~fnpl8 C3# GRAVEL, SiL'~'Y (Gft~l GRAVEL -0.6 °lo SA,ND 40 Fforn TP-1 AT 9-1'0 FEET ~ SILT' d CLAY 14 °lo L9QUGd LIMIT - °/a PLASTICITY INDEX _ °l° HYDROMETER ANALYSIS SIEVE ANALYSIS aIME READINGS U.S. AN L) S. 1E5 SOSIARE OPENHJGS HR. T HR. 45 MM.15 MIN. 60 MIN..19 MIN. 4 MIN. 1 MRd. '200 '100 'S0 -49'70 '16 '10'b '~ ~' 374' 1iS' 3' S£ ~ 100 ~ - _, _ ... 0 ~ I ~ ~ =_ - 0 711 __ - - - _ - - -_ _ --- '' '-- •-'°- ~c z -- - .-- ._. __ ' kr _ ... ~' - ___. _. .. ._. ... _. __ - ... ___ _.. _ _._ ..- .. _.. , - 90 10 _:: :: -~-----~i:._._._ _,. ._ ..__' :::' ...._~...__. _.: `- -- . " '3-.---•~__..~ -~ '-~ 100 0.001 0.002 .Ot15 .009 .019 .037 ,OT4 .1+49 .297045 1,49 2.02.78 4.76 9.52 19,1 36.1 36.2 12152 DIAMETER OF PARTICLE {N FAIWMETERS 1 SANDS GRAVE! CLAY (PLASTID) TQ SILT (NON-PLA571C1 I FlNE ~ MEDIUM ~ COARSE I FINE 0 COARSE I C468LES i 5arnple of GRAVEL, SILTI (GM) __ ~~__ GRAVEL 35 °I° SANG d8 From ~TP-2 A7 3-$ FEET _ ~ SILT a CLAY 17 % LlLlulb LIMIT - °In - ._ PLASTICITY INDEX - °l0 Gradafii~n soe rvo. ~s-~s6~ TeSfi RCS U (fis FGA. ~ l l~, • • m t1 O Q. i] ti t`t) U ~? [7 N d J ~ ~~~~ a OC Q F„ a ~ r ~ w o p w ~~ O~ L3. ~ r J ~ .d[ Z W o ~ d ~ a~ ~ Q ~~~ ~'- ~' ~ ~ o 4 }mz a ~~ ~„ ,,, ~- ,~ ~ o ,- ~. ~~~~ OG ``~~ '`L ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~~ . ~ ~ 9 ~o z~ z r ~. z 0 m 4 W _L -a -v 0 m r 0 'al f*1 .Q aQ a 0 m 0 q' Q '[7 -=~ {f1 c. r 9 8 • 1 ~ { -ia 7? ~ r~ ~ Z c.~ ~ v ~' o~ ~~ a Q R li o+ n 0 ~~ 11' V• TH-1 1 EL=8175 -8175 9iT0 9165 916(1 8155 _c c SiSd 0 W 81,5 Bill e13s 8130 8125 812Q 8115 • T11-2 E4=8173 SUMMARY LOGS OF EXPL©RATORY BORINGS AN13 PITS Job Ma. CS-3361 8iso 8175 9178 8165 9154 9155 m w' a 8150 i 8145 61437 8135 8134 8125 9120 8115 Flg, ? TM-3 EL=8380 m i+p r C . p - ~ Ci p, ~ G 7 O A ~r~'~ o a i E ~T~ a .!. n.- c L fl ~ 6 d ~ K 4 p' C L~ t e C O .- ~ .Y o n. r o .E ~o wa ~' o I~-o.a3~ FQ tFn rT 'tntl G L A Q w v~ ~SIi! = p O 64 L P` 6 M 7 ~~~ O ~~ ~ O %~ G in F..i ( _ ~ . ~ €l.mifon 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 o t o g= ri ° i+ . h e x I t f l l+ I l~ 1 L I ~ ~ o `x n y c u Q r~ o i ~ r as °0 ci wi 1-,_ ~ n,~. P a o ~ x Z d h '~r`-Lr~ X Ta h /1 ~ O ~_ .~ '' Q ~' W C o : C N }" Y G ~ a ~ C ~ tl c "~ F 7 O O ~ ~ O A'~ w o . ~ J G C ! 4 (L ~ a ~ $ic o" ty. r ~ o coo ~~ O C (/) R' pl ` 1 sI ~ ~ o 1 r O ~ ~ V ~ Q ~ O ~ C n D 'a ,~ . ~ ~ i c~ en 'O {~ ~ ~ • s oC IfF n b ~ p [ k j D j 9 f= a o 1 1 1.~1 1 ° ° y,d o• ~ ~ ~ v9 7 p Cr, 1 1 I j ul txolye`~r13 ~ i a p$~ 3 ~'~ r#a .. e a E'~x >~~ a,o ° L u -~ i ° c`~n°~ ca ~ ~ ~avE N 'a ® ~ ~ ~ ItA+ l1 4L l ~,. Y m M { ifJ t3 O 2 D C • • • TH-4 TH-5 TH-fi ~~=ets4 ~,.=3152 ~~=81sa aisa 318o :~ 6153 t5 :~ :~ 8i55 8154 :~ :~ ;c~ :D ais4 :2] z(~ :(~ :U 8145 •G :b 8145 :Ci :0 .~ 6140 :~ ;{5 8140 CS °~ ;[5 ~~ :~' Etas 8135 ;~ :~ o :o T :c~ ~~ eCS v .{~ 8134 - ~ :CS rQ 8134 :0 ~~ D 'a rh ~ :CS °~ 8125 ~ 3125 :~ ~ c a :~ ,{~ ~ i ~ :~ .d ~ '" :CS :~ e12o . 61 z4 :Q C~ '~ :(~ :O :~ 8iis 8115 ;(y °~ ;~ :(1 °~ °Q :Q 6114 6110 ;p ~~ :~ :{5 :D ad 6105 :t~ 8i 4s _0 .l) :~ _~ :~ ~ . 8104 Bi44 :a ,c :~ 8495 8495 :~ 3494 649D SUt~l~ARY LOGS OF EXPLORATORY BORINGS AND PITS Fl e• 3 ra13 Hm. ss- 33~i1 Design Style Comments o8 DEC tld i Question 1 Comment •i i~ Stak Would like additional development on the roof structure and covering ideas and options for the 'natural" design style Goncem with the natural style not eileclively tying the villages together Need to engage mare public ~mment and input Prefer the traditional and natural styles la the modem style Need to confirm the proposed options can be built within the current budget The natural design is spectacular and will promote marketing of the fatality Vail is an icon in and of itself 9t would be great to rxeate our awn Sydney Qpera House - an iconic image for the town, ii we can afford 'tC It would be easy to tallow the tradibonal style, but A would be a mistake Prefer the modern or natural styles Need something spectacular Prefer the rTatural, modem, then traditional The design team was chosen to develop a style along the lines o' the natural style The natural style is oat a Vail statement Prefer the irad'stional style, but prefer the sketches to the rendering DanY compromise the twilding to meet the budget-wait HIP we have enough money to build without skimping Be sure to incorporate comments from holiday crowd The natural option has potential, but is scary The traditional option works best with the core site and ties the villages logettier The natural option is fascinating but risky TEIAM1YOHI[ O1VlOE5 THE EFFpgT aNp MU1TPLtES THE EFPECT„, piaw~ni pmNtlat...VaVYIwNM Map, Sgb Gena~Ha.Ns T Cor hold G7 O ro I- Dwr fere :r M~ E m of V ice C :eti nt: amn m T `m z x ~x 'ail enter i Camm+ tt:nt CBti W U L ®. E a ~ U m t~ X x x x x x X x x i~ x x X X x X ants :gory E E c] ua x os DEC as Brought Up 9y m ~ m +~ ~~ _ E m U W ~ C1 v a o u a 0. P ~ z a ~ X X x .O 0. m m C C7 X x X x X X f % x X Page 1 0125 X 7 x X X e tow ,u F:Iglaa Fue.~n ey IudYndrr Fiaaaa Canawanu, Mx x X X X X X X X Dasign Style Comments 06 DEC t34 5takel Question I Comment 21 Don't mimic the'mostly roai° aspect of Dobson Arena 22 Needs to feel elegant and maintain the feel of Vail 23 The natural option has wild potential 24 Concerned with the longevity of the natural option 25 Lean toward the traditional option 26 The design needs to be 4imetess 27 Concerned with the natural design fitting into the center of town 2t3 Concerned with the scale of the traditional ap6on The natural option may aeoommodate khe scale of the building 28 better ~ Goncemed that the options may impose architectural restrictions an future development 3t Ensure all options allow for daylighting Whatever is done wilt t}e a'statemeM" sq i don'C really understand how a desire tc make a statement militates toward 32 one concept qr the other; the issue is whether the statement that wiW be made is harmonious wish other elements of the lawn or not A building that introduces a dramatically new arChitedure is likely to he a mistake. The natural environment o(the fawn includes and in large part is dominated by the prevailing architectural Theme which is 33 overwhelmingly Aipinelt3avarian and vritl be more so once the Ggre Area project is comRleted. ~ The natural drawing was sufficiently endear that a variety of designs can fit wishin the general description. The "Conkem~rary' approach was cleverly eliminated fay a 35 design tttak harmonized with the one part of the parking structure that evoryone agreed had to goY The last variable is topogrephy so R looks like your challenge is tc provide elevations that track the mountains but in a structure that 36 has AtpinefBavartan features so taxpayers litre me don`3 have too marry problems. 37 Please register my vote in favor of the Bavarian mountain style Town of Vait Conference Center colder Meeting Comments Comment Category 9 ~, ° A c E m ~' E E C o p o y ~ ¢ E U U v o m W U m c w g Z c ~ zr t° ~ . f7 p X x x x X X X X X X X X X X x x x x x X i X X ~I m "u U w ~ o_ F 45 bEG 04 Brought tJp By r I ` m E ~ a ~ U m o, 2 ~ y 4 x x X X X U a d U a c t7 Pays 2 of 25 a zo°' a raye "°""° nr T£IAMYORI( OMO£5 THE £FrDRT Atd~ 1llind+UE97HE E~ECT_ ! . ~ . ~ . ~ wauus _.. .. . K pituiw pAraA. ~. ~ ~ , .~ ~. Duy~ 9gie t .. ... ~ • • Resign Style Comments O6 aEC 04 Stake .~ Question ! Commt:nt Please remember that the 7D's contemporary architecture in 88 Lionshead did not age well. This is and will always be a skt resort. Your designs should reflect this without getting silly. Please do not go fcr the Contemporary styling. Most of Lionshead 39 design was done in what was "contemporary" in the 70's; nave it just looks dated. As an owner in the Lodge a9 Lionshead, I'd love to see the 4D Bavarian, but the "topography-inspired' squnds interesting ] very much like the BavarialMountain style best out of the 9 41 styles presented. This style has been used so effectively in many ski areas. Il looks elegant and beautiful In the mountain surroundings. 42 I really dislike the contemporary style. 1 believe ii would be an eye sore and be very much out of plar~ Tha only design of the three that stays in keeping with the Feel of 43 the Vail community is the Bavarian design. The others, while creative, would eventually, and, in the riot too distant future take a decidedly dated appearance and become a blight an the communiry. ~ Ensure to incorporate daylighting as it has been shaven to enhance learning If the stacking epGcn C is chosen, the height of the structure 45 should not be a concern as that scale is not continuous along that road 46 Account for the possitsility of expansion 47 The Conference Cerder shoukf kx~k Gke a torrFerence center - it doesn't need to Ft into the Ristorical precedent ~ Consider moving the additional meeting rooms batlc to the S. to some exten4 in stacking diagram C 49 The amount pf mass ai the frontage road in stacking diagram C ' a Riffle concerning 56 Confirm the "natural' design option works with the budget The thinking prpcess behind the "natural' design is correct but the 54 design needs to Ue refined, though it should be noted there is no lack of confidence that the design team will come up with "appropriate arohitecture,` 52 Thera is no honesty in making the convention canter lank Pike another row of shops in town 7E4Mw91+N DMS7E5 TiIE EiFDRT AIM MS.ITIR.lES TFE EFf ECT_ p''on+ni wq«w-urvat.ce,rr D"wq~ &yh Ca~"n.rn.w Town of Vail Conference Center holder Meeting Comments Comment Category ® T rj) ~ T m 7, ~p ? V ~ m ~ C N C O 1` m v frl m U7 L° L ~ ~ ~ E c ~ 0 is ~ ~ m w ~j m c ~ Z ~ V7 'w (7 - m ^ - ` f x x~ x X I D7 m m 0 D_ x x x x X X x x x x Page 3 ar 25 U 3 n F- U w a Ofi CEC t)4 Brought Up By M m w c7 .~ ~ W ? ~ ~ m ~ w rl a ~ m x° d ~ '~ X X X X X X X X X X X x x x x a 1aa ~+ ryn arw-ea er AIG~/V Mmuo r....,+~+~ k Design Styie Cammerats g6 DEC 04 Stale ~~ Question !Comment The modem option does not Tit in this area A roof similar to DIA may work with the natural ppfipn-Nis proven tp wprk and is budgelable Conferences are supposed to be tun and need an exciting building like the "natural" design to enhance the experience Goncem with limited expansion opportunities with the roof of the "natural` design Snow cornices are only in Vail a few months each year - consider additional `greener' roof options Qe sure tp study relfedivity, etc if a roof as proposed in the 'natural" option is deeded upon i Any option chosen needs to be grounded in native materials The natural design is the most excising and stimulating, but i clarification an the roof structure, especially during the summer months, is needed. Don't fat the Donavan Park history make us timid in appraaching this design fi is okay if the building doesn't ire in exactly to l_ionshead , The 'natural` design needs to be refined, but is the closet to the desired iconic image. What is the cast difference between the different aptans? i believe meeting planners will desire the 'traditional Vail' look ! i i Design options should be ranked as follows: natural, traditional, i modem. The nakura9 design will get people talking and make the building marketable If need be, we can live with the traditional option, but it is not moving. TEAM,~Wdb( dNflES 711E EFf[YFiT A: D MULTIfVES iNE EFRECT.., p~hmnlpoNCn\..Wdikce va19~tlT ~'M •. sL Town of Vail Conference Center holder Meeting Comments Comment Category .-®a. g' m s, ~o Y m o ~ ~ a ~ ~ ° ._ w ~ o ~ iv o ~ ~ U y A ~ ~ ~ C m ~ 47 x X x X X X X I Brougl' m d ~' ~~ E m v w ~ ij ~ a 4 Z, . a $ ~ 's a` x x ~ x x x X i X X x x x x x x Page 4 of 25 I' os n~c oa r i tJp By o t m _m r = a ,~ 3 ~ n "m_ p ;~ a .~ a ~ m 0 o a 2 d u ¢ a ~ i 4 X ~ I X xl X X X X x x x X x x X X X O3@w M FdPm Aaw".a 6y J Ae~,w CwJlr4 k Design Style Comments d6 DEC Q4 l Question l Comment • fiouki consider tying into the new Lionshead arctsitecture Deed to ensur® natural light is brought io ~e ballrooms 5takel Nindows in tsanquets are typically a benefit, while windows in neeting rooms can be a distraction. =nsure flexibility with natural tighC in tfie building the option pf using the raof as an outdoor gathering area is a large benefit of stacking diagram C The modem design is not what people picture when they came to the mountains Need a design that want became dated Curious as tc haw any of the designs tie into the existing Lionshead parking structure. Concemod with how the natural design will look in the middle o! town Don't see how the natural design will ever work with the feel of Vail The Vaditionat design is Veil's sense of place and what people come here tor. The traditional design will be easier to market in Vail. The modem, design is great, but has the possibility to :,;._..,..e dated Is there a difference in usablelwasted space with any of the proposed optiwrrs? The maximization a6 the amount of glass. in the modem design will help make the lacility more marketable TEAUwO~+K DrNDES THE EFFdtT AND MylfiP61E5 THE EFFECT... p~arnnl pgkyt..Wtl~bcMM 0.my1 ~ Cu+ngnbAa Town of Vail Conference tenter Colder Meeting Comments Comment Gatego~ry @ ~ @ ~ vs l ~' in ~ 7 U ^ c ~ ~ C E m ~ O '~ v - ~ m ~ ~ ~ m d ~ @ ~, D t 'CA ~ q ~ U ~ U m ~ U C .~ r U' p x x X i:i I X x x X xI X X X X I x X ~ I Pape 5 or 25 x X X X I X m m IA w m a Br G ~° w ~ ~ rL Q 0 F- aught Up By m m E @ o ~ a U a a O I? O T C,L X X X X x X X x x X X x~ X X x o xa,u ~ r .. ... w.awo 06 QEC {}4 w m c~ a a' ~~ t~~r u A a m C @ Design Styie Gomments Il6 DEG Od Question 1 Gommeitt i The views frown the conference center should be sold, not I views of the conference center. ptslike designing to maicfo everything else -rank the optaor ? 6ollows_ madam, natural, traditignal_ Like the possibility of the naiural option, but need to see iui ~ developmeni r Extensive amount oP glass gives an urban feel and doesn't in Vail. S A large expanse of glass provides operational challenges. S Tha space and function of t:se interior is more important the image, Need to ensure the ktichen is at the same level as the ballr ~ I love the nakural took and the idea of a focal pain! with the illuminated Bane If people want an alpine look from the highway than have a ! alpine look on the north side and a more contemporary type on the south side? t Concerned with heat lass issues associated with the exien amounts aiglass in the modem option I Would prefer a departure from 'traditional Vail' i We need to use this opportunity 6a make a 5ta::. :,,~ Like Che concept behind the naiural design, but the design i ~ further development ' Casi difference between the design styles should be consiC If a signature building can be created within budget, that de shoud ba pursued TEIM~Y~RII pIV10€5 THE EFFORT AN[S Ml1LTIPL,5E5 THE EFFKT.,. p:wrnM.Prr~N6sL.VuCYbceusi BYgP STM Conw,an.sds Stall Town of Vail Conference Center eholder Meeting Comments Commenk Category w ~, m m u ~ c rf5 ~, ~ a m o 9 m in ~ E ~ E ~ ~ o ro 9 ~ U F ~ ~ ~ C.? ~ rWJ X x x x I x X X x x X x X x X x X x x x ~Bot25 v m' e~ 00 a xl V O w 6rougt m m .~ 0 U r m a tUp~ d 0 2 X x x X X x x ox ~. A d6 DEG 04 ~ r ~ - t~ , 7 o H a o _ ~° q ~ ~ _ y K ~ ~ , a w Rqx arcs G x x x X x X x x 6Y Fc. i 1 I assign Style Comments 06 DEC 04 • r .• •i Stale Question ! Commen# It is time to start looking at spmething other than the tradi6anal Vail style ~ Anew building style will creafa diversity and increase Vail's identity l Traditional alpine architecture is what. puts Vail on the map Windows at ground level are inviting 3 dislike the modem image t Consider incorporating new elements into the traditional architedure i Keep in mind the traditional lank that people expect from Vail i Focus on the function of the facility first and foremost r Concerned with possibility of wasted space in the natural design 3 Focus an quality to ensure a timeless building The building needs to be able to adapt to the ever-changing 3 desires of the resort business and doesn't necessarily need to be timeless ~ Like the fact that the modern rendering looks Ifke a conFerence venter Concern with the construdionlappearance of the roof element of I the natural design Samething'differeni' Can work an this site i Alpine Feel is a part of Vail -consider the traditional approach with some modern elements TE0.NWOPIC dNpES T1ff EFFORT 14NO MLLTIRIE3 THE EFFECT.. p.b~rnaP'oFas ,.v.~p.encww a~ Sryh C n ~~ Town of Vain Gonference Center ettalder Meeting Comments Comment Category '~ fn m i ~ m ~ ~', m c c N~ E fY1 t a t E E E E o :~ ~ y '~ ~ m a ~ z a E ~ U U m ~ ~ B) ~n c7 - x ~ x x x x x x; x x I X x~ { t rf 25 ml v m NI a+ ~ 4 Q. c a Dfi DEC d4 Brought Up Fay ) m m _m ~ - E ~ ~ i~ir ~ ~ m O m i d ^ Z, o 0 0 o x d_ ~ N V Q ~ I a a' ONBI N WpML~ RssnvW By ANitrtlual ftnwrw '.. Mc Design Style Comments [16 DEC p4 Stak Question 1 Gomment _ _ ,. . _ }Should focus the design more on traditional elements and less an modem ones i The building should work to connect the vipages . i Believe the natural design can be 6uitt cosE-effeciivety ~ Should focus design efiorls an the interior space When trroken up, interior space should be mare square tether 3 than bng and narrow 3 Consider the context of the ad}ecent structures such es the parking structure ~ Concerned with how any of the designs tie into the parking siructure 1 Ensure natural light is Incorporeted in the inser'ror spaces 2 AcO~nl for sufficient Moor bads. frocks, etc. 3 Ceiling height of baArooms should be 25 - 3l7' Prefer option with meeting rooms on the roof with views and S daylight incorporated i Still need to consider amulti-use non hat floor option i Stacking diagrams C 8 0 are tine only Feasible aptiens t Concerned with passibility of putting meeting rooms at the eutsid face of the building at E. Lionshead cirda - noiseldistractions 3 Ensure designs allow for dayiighGng TEAM'l'CNU' (OMfIES TY1E EFFQRf ANO MUI.TIP7JE4 THE EFf ECT... p:k :mil prc{eaaL.,MaJliecwai oes en SryM Camm~nb.xls 1'vwn of Vail Conference Center :holder Meeting Comments Comment Category to ~' rn m "~ ~ ~ N ~ m IA C E u i ' a E E U v H ~ ~ Z D C ~ ~ t~ x x x x x x x x X x ~or25 x X x X X x x x X x yr ~ ~ ~ c ~ ~ w m a N G ~ a x x x 06 DEC Od Brough t Up B y ~ ~ i m E 4 B m ~ '~ ~ ~ m r ~ a o ~ tl r J U a `m z° a a '~ 0 ~ m R Q V o. r x x x l x x I i x x i I~I l .: x I i X I x x o xw rw wpne ae,...w sT /4`LNE~C6XM fie~IOe C/nWtlrWS, Irc, i~ 7 •! Qesign Style Comments {16 DEC 04 Stale Quest9on !Comment Public spaces should be arranged at the exterior face of the 128 building 130 If ai all possible, the kitchen should tx placed on the same CEn+el as the tk~llrooms 131 I am a very strong supporter df the 'Traditianal Vait vernacular style" (ArchRectural Vision #1 } The Taaditlonal Vail vernacular style represents Vail in ways the 132 other choices do not. The Vail community is squandering a great opportunity to tie the Village Co Lienshead by choosing anything other than option #1. The popular choice of option #3 ("inspired by Nature"} would be a great choice if VaiE was a natronal park. But we are not a park; 133 we are a resort community and this conference center as a great opportunity for us to serve bath of mere niches -resort & community. Please keep in mind me needs of visitors, meeting planners and meeting attendees (the ultimate end-uses and customer) of the conference canter when choosing the design. The conference center must be able to stand the test of time. While 'Dption 3' 134 may seem like a novel acrd new idea, the same Could have peen said about Lionshead Village when It was built. Thirty years lacer, Lionshead is badly outdated and scheduled for a complete face lift, I'm afraid the same would happen to this conference centerrf you select Option 3. The new conference center needs to be a par of Vail, end that 135 mdudes the need to ensure that the center feels tike Vail and fits en the Vail architecture and design style. Option 1 is the bell choice) 136 Prefer the traditional design (same form latter from 131 - 135} 137 Prefer the traditional design (same form letter From 131 - 135) Town ofi Vail Conference Center ehalder Meeting Comments Gamrr}ent Category a j, Ul W ~ di _N A ° `m ~ U .w.. ~ m a C N g ` E v m `° ~ t ¢ ~ E o U m o ~ . a Z e ` U ~ °--' r y C7 X X X 7C X X X 1136 Prefer the Vaditional design (same form letter from 131 - 135) ~ X TEPUwPRK RMrpS THE EFFpRT AN4 MUr.T WdE9 THE EFFECT... pYVrenl pmjRfat..UUCd1MC6nN bn~pn SPTr CortFnrn'u xn Page B cf 25 m N m w 6 V O rJ 3 H 0.. i3rought Up By m m .4 U m a w T v 4 t)6 DEC U4 w m ~ YA ~i O li I a tl U a' l` E C7 X x X X X X X o xcM lu Rynu R~.+a ay F i., .... Petro Cmvtlaih. h~G Design Style C®rnments D6 DEC 04 Question 1 Comment Town of Vail Conference Center 5takettolder Meeting Comments Comment Categr~ty ~ c O m 0 9] ~ u1 ti ~ m E c m .4 m t.. ~ ~ ~ Z ~ c a`> V ~ U m y CJ oa ~ m a 139 Prefer the traditional design (same form letter from 131 - 135J 'refer the traditional design (same form fetter lrom 131 - 135) arefer the traditional design (Same form 1etler tram 131 - 135J Prefer the lraditianal design (same Conn letter from 131 - 1351 prefer the traditional design (same Form letter from 131 • 135) The natural design blends with the environment The t7uiltling shouk? not be intrusive l~latural, atone materials stNOUld Eye ptCOrporated tt would be nice is blend the two villages The modem image looks too much like old l.ionshead The traditional design looks tae much like the Viler Center ~ The natural design is beautiFul yet unique and is preferred Natural, Slane, woad materials should be incorporated 7Ex.M'rYCC [3MOE31ME EtFONY ANO M,.LYIRYES ltrt EFFE ;r... pianw pgw~.lMV~aYd OasT SM -. , yb .i x x x x X x x x x x x x x X Page 7tl d 25 ~U C 4 OF 4 U6 aE,C 44 . j Brought Llp By ' I m m r , ~ ~ 'r-° U w L ~ ~ ~ ~. m d d O ~ o i? o m 0 2 0. ~ ~ $ alp ;,. 0 Hanbd/ ZWI N P i se.wm ~~ Design Style Cornmenis t}6 DEC Od 4utsfian N Comment e i ~I Town of Vail Conference Center ehvlder Meeting Comments Comment Category m in ~ ui ~ zn 7 ~ ~ c 'r` y m 4 ~ 3 ~ ~ Q E o U ~ ~ z ;~ o cU ~ m c~ x X 'I X II X X X X x X X X X X x X 2 Modem or natural images are preferred 3 Ro we really need more traditional buildings? 1 Copper panels, steel, glass should Ue used 5 Nead additional detail on the natural design Stak 5 Like the traditional design -should blend with the theme af'Jail ~ Stone & wood should be incorporated ~ TraditionaB mountain style should be used which many people come to Vail and the mountains to experience 3 Like the traditional design. in that i! is timeless and is mare consistent wikh the New Lionshead Dislike the glass in the modem design - we don't need an 'icon' ~ that will look as dated as Lionshead does now. DanY like the'snowcane` -unlike the sandstone museum, This t building is in town., not on the mountain 2 The lighted free is ludirfous and will create light polluGOn 3 Natural materials -stone, wood,. stucco should be used 'Icons' are dramatio statements or memorable ones. Vail is too small far "drama" and should go !or "memorable" -tike the clock t tower,lhe 1 [31h mountain division statue,. the covered bridge. "Drama" can get very dated. The site can not connect the villages. Ai best d can extend = Lionshead and the the library in to the Lionshead area ~r~wpafc a+npgs TH[ ~FfORT lVio rqu47ro~s THE EFrECT... p~Wn.nrpp~nY 0"M4~ ~ Cenr~nu-rn X I OB DEC 44 $rought 4p BY ~ m S3 ~C' ~ M E ~ o U m ~ U to ~ U m a 4 o. p ~ © 0 0 o s a ~ a. ~ ~ ~ a a ,~ ~' I fl a' C7 x x X X X X x X X X X X x X Page i 1 of 25 o:owr,u wpw w."..+a er .. lwow [~,.wnn we Design Style Comments OS DEC 04 gtaestion ! Comment Stale Town of Vail Conference Center ehoEder Meeting Comments Comment Category a n ~ ~ a c .~ m rlr m ~` m A ~, m H ~ ® ~ ~ o, ~ rrr VS L m ~' y ' m iCti p m ' ~ ~ ~ , ^ uT va ~ w ~ ~ ~ ~ a i ti The traditional stye doesn't fee right • despite ttte krok bf the X village ~ The modem is a good combination of "modem' with a good use of lines 8 The natural design would fit if it were nestled in Iha mountains 9 Stone ,metal, and glass should be used 0 Prefer the idea of keeping the villages separale with two disGnci and appealing architectural styles I rust saw the three versions of The convention center and would like to comment as a 12 year employee on the mountain and Vail resident for many years. Version 3 "Inspired by Nature' is the 1 clear choice to set Vail apart the cookie Guttef villages of Beaver Creek, Copper, Whistler, and Keystone. We shouldn't require architectural Gues for people to rea{ize we're in the mountains. It's time for Vail' to step away from its ersatz euro alpine Teel and make a statement.. We must display pride in our alpine Rocky M1Atn_ roots and devetop our own identity derived Irom the beauty 2 around us. 'The house on the sketcfres had been designed net by Roark, true by the cliff an which it stood. dt was as iF the cliff had grown and competed itself and proclaimed the purpose for which it had been waiting.' Ayn Rand, The Fountainhead. I really pike the V~Sion 3 inspired by Nature. This fits our 3 environmen! and makes a powerful statement for the spirit of Vail Please do something with the t.H parking structure IO match. 4 Energy efficienq is important 5 Prefer the natural design 6 Prefer file traditional design X 7 Prefer the natural, different look as compared to the tradiiGonal 3 Like the natural design but dislike the cone structure TEMrwOgt oM0E3 THE EFFOpT Mb MILTIRrE.S THE EFFECT. p'roarwM 7N"Cri.,.YMSltiie~+ral fdr~ SryY ~.. ~ x X x x x X X )C X x Page X X +z ar zs i v O CJ t- U a Bmughl Up By m m E 6 m U m H = .~ om o~ DEC oa I m ~ ~ ~ ; , m -- c j ~ 9 ? N x n a' H IY~ nuura C ~ parry Y4r/IYfa, a W c C7 X x x x X X X I • • ii• Design Style Comments O6 DEG 04 TOW ft t]f 1laEl Confer ence Center Sta keholder M eeting Comments Comment Category 4uestion 1 Comment m m ~ N ~ o ~ , N U ~ I t m E :q 'g ~ ~ O ~ C3 Ip C ~ ~ QI C7 ~ 78 The traditional option is the safest X 80 Like floe possibility of the natural design but the' roof is concerning. Need ka ensure it looks good in iha summer X 81 Prefer the natural design hui it must ~pk good year round X 82 Prefer to keep the traditional lock X 83 Like the glass of the pcontemporary design X 3si Prefer the natural design X 35 Prefer the traditional design X l6 Prefer a more contemporary feel X S7 Want more info on the natural design -tan it be pulled pff7 X i$ Need !p ensure "green" consiructien X 9 Need ip Incorporate "green" 6uitding techniques X 0 Any image phosen must De genuine X t The traditienal image is safe X 2 It seems hard tp relate the natural design to the adjacent properties X X 3 Prefer the natural design X ~nvarnc OMOES n~ eccorn nrv "lunaurs nE €~.~. p'unaN prvpml..1' _ _. loam Csn.~wiu.~af Page 1 3 8r 25 o~ - a ~~ a ~ 00 U W N ~ ~ V 4 ~ fl 06 DEC 04 t3rough4 tJp Byi m E m Cs o m ~ U ~m N Q O fttl4l i _ Ma[ c O d Q Q FAA m 0. ~ ~ 3O ~ ? C u X01 a ~ a' X x X X X X X X X X x x X X x uY~ 1 B/ I. eft Design Style Comments 06 DEC 04 Stz Question f Comment 194 Prater fhe natural design 195 The natural design needs further develapmeht 196 Like the organic form of natural option 197 Conference center should stantl out 198 Prefer the incorporation of a bt of glass 199 Prefer the traditonal ~rxuse it blends with the existing architecture of Vait 200 Mast ad Vail is traditional • so why not this? 201 The natural design is so much different than what we have - concerned ii might not fit in 202 Keeping in line with the rest of the traditional village makes sense .. i 20~ Too much glass has been incorporated into the front of the tradi6onaf - se[:rurity issue x04 pislike the modern image 205 Like the natural design anp uamice but does it fit the site? 206 Like the concept of the natural design lxrt the image is too vague to fully appreciate it 207 Gan we afford the natural design? 208 Be careful to npt bog down the process getting the natural image lust right" 1FIWMOIO( ufYloES THE fF~ORr tpp 4gltiRtE4 T1E EFFECr, ~e.mx p~q+ar....wo.~r.l o.++m syr. ca."~.w~s Town of Vail Conference Center kehalder Meeting Comments Comment Category Brought Up riy ~, O6 ,DEC Od c ~ ~ ~ o ~ ~ ~ ~ C ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ y C ~' A ~ w O f.} m p W ~ H d :° °` _ `C E cj, ~ m ~ a Q ~ o o° o I° 0 i ~ 2 ~ [) _m ~ u a S d O ¢ ~ fl X X X x X x x X x X X X X x X iX1 i11X Page f4 vt 25 x X x x x X x' x x x x x x x x e amp w pa,u w..y.e er n . w,o~.v .,.. ,...c. • Design Styie Comments 06 DEC 04 Question I Comment e i •I Stak .~ J The ,faclsson design fits will into the hillside, but does the 3 conference center site have enough topography to pull off something like this? Make the cone element larger than the Wsl-Mart flagpole. Will it 7 be of 24-77 Who will clean the glass? The natural option is appealing -reaches hack to heritage of I Cobrado -way back - Anasaa, etc. ? Make it look like old casino building -traditional 3 The modem design looks too much like downtown Seattle -stay away from d -too urban i The natural design could look cool or t>e a disaster i 'Nature gone wrong' cane The natural design is original and interesting r The modern design looks like an enclosed parking structure - yuckl 3 The lraditiona! complements tho village architecture -elegant and sophisticated ~ The natural design is too far out -will tum ofl attendees -too cutesy 3 The modern is too modern -looks like the parking structure The Lradilkonal is ok • should stay wilh the alpine thern+~ to e,~eatE sy~, L~ ~w ? Tha natural is +ncons'istanl with the existing Tci/ areh;Yeci°.~re. Iii i Stick with the theme of Vail - no need to do anything different TEIJ,NItliK OMpES T1E EFFORT AWl MIATfrtlJES THE EFFECT._. p~4 AA~~~. I ~ 8yti Cortlna~Mf J13 Tawrl of Yaii Conference Center hol der Meeting Comm ents Comment Category m m r!7 m rn 3 {f ~ v y c °- 's E m m ~ ~ E Q ~ ~ U f° r ~ ~ ~a Z a Cj c m 67 e i x x x X x X ~ X x x i ,~ , ix xi x Page 15 of 25 x x x 4f b m O a 'u C f1 3 F U ua a os Disc oa [irought Up By m m m . ~ m - ~ ~ ~ ~ O U .~ m z l n 0. N '~ 0 w u a I o xo tr[L~1 N I I i I i I Y N Itlyn nwaC .~ ~i ~i ~ Rrrv~ rW WR. Design Style Comments 06 DEC 04 Stak Question !Comment 4 The natural design has a potential to be a symbol for Vail and is origina3 and interesting S Be careful wilts the traditional design -Could become dated and looks like fhe shopping district ti Tha traditional is a good fit -consistent with the existing architecture 7 The natural design could be an eyesore if not done rights 8 Like the proposed use a( natural fomss 9 Like the amount o f glass in the modem option 6 Should stand out fmm Wall architecture 1 Should have fun with the design ~ Should flaw with the immediate surroundings but oat match the traditional Vail architecture 3 People come tc Vail expecting the traditional lock 0. Should be an arehitectural icon 5 Needs to work with adjacent buildings i structures i Moderfa does oat work in Vail T Seamless experience - ge with what's proven 3 ©ne vision of Vail TEAWMdifbC dVI~ES T1}E EFFdF!`rAN01NATIPLIFS TME. EFFECT,-. p5on~a pryWri..G_.. ~, _., Jeay~Sryb ~. ~ Town of Vail Conference Center ett©lder fdceting Comments Comment Category ,_ w ~p C ® 7 m ~ ~d ~j ~~?~". T!. ~ ~ Qa m ~ rn ~ $ m E :? m' S w ~ ~ ,~ U ~ m ~ e 8 ~ Z c CJ ~ c F ~ .Q ~ (~ n X x x x X X x X X X x xl X ' X I X I X X Page S6o12S X U C 0 U U W m t7 1 08 DEC Q4 Brought Up By I[ N m N a cq m ~ Y . ~ z° a ~ m ~ a I As OM .,. F k N Rlpn •aown C design Style Comments 06 DEC l)4 1 Question 1 Comment S#ak+ 239 Continue to consider multiuse space and opfrpns far sloped naors 240 Otf 4o separate Lionshead and Vail village 241 Qk to consider the modem design 1 elements 242 Need windows in ballrooms with operable shades 243 Good to blend forms 1 materials with the natural environment 244 Doesn't need to match the existing Vail architecture 245 Should stand out from Vail architecture 24fi Nat another Beaver Creek 247 t+Apdem design already appears dated 248 Need Curther development a€ the natural option 249 Prefer the traditional look 250 The natural design needs further development 251 Like the glass of the modem option but nai the overa6t style 252 Prefer the nature[ design 253 Prefer a huiSding that fits the environment as apposed to the existing Vail style TFMhNllP1C OIYIaES TFE EFF]N'.NC MfIRTiFiPc3 PFIE EFFECT... p:tvnnl p.pjpai.'.+renMCVd Pa9g~^ Cama~eomLLa Town of Vail Conference Center attalder Meeting Comments Comment Category m j i. -~~, m '3 m r a in m in ~ m ~ ~ E b r Z ~ m U ~ y m t7 x x X X X X X X x X 7 at 25 9 'u C m U W a a ~ 06 DEC 04 Brought Up By m m m w M - .E H ~ ~ o ?' O ~ V `m p~ 0 x° a ~ V ~ Q n ~ a Q IOM M Riyeb ~~ Mdi1~CWM Wl4~n C9MlW`4 L C ~ aT Design Style Comments 05 DEC 04 Stale -Question f Comment 4 Prefer natural, traditional, then modem Doesn'i need to tie into the existing architecture due to its isolate location 6 Prefer the lraditonal look 7 tNodem doesn't work here 3 Prater the natural design 3 Modem is too Far out there 7 Traditional is a little loo bland 1 Prefer the natural style 2 Prefer the natural design ~ Concerned with the balconies at the &. elevation -noise etc effecting adjacent properties t Like the potential pf the natural style i Shoufd stand out i Like the unique modem structure I tike the use of glass proposed in the modem option 3 Like materials proposed for the natural TGJ.fJlOFO( ~MOES THE EFFORT ANO Yi1L711{IES THE EFFELY. pkun.ni p~apn..UrtlY~ecouti Da~l7i 30~• Cu,wiwnbxs Town of Vail Conference Center ehoider Meeting Comments Comment Category ~, ~ .~ i >- ~, ~, m ~ Q n m urs ~ G m '~ E E lq C cy t... ~ ~ ~ ~ m i7 x x x X X X X I i X ~ i X X X X X X x Pa9~ to or 2s m U tS. 3 O F U 6~ I D6 DEC 04 f .: Sraught tJp By m m , m v ~ O U ~ m d n ~, O = 4 .~ 'q Q U ,P a a' C7l Wpt1u~N I YI IVI N9r xaw~ce C I i a Rrtevr 61iLIMb. o' m m t7 x x x x X X x X x X X X x X X ar let. • design Style Comments Ofi t]EC Oa Stak Question !Comment 269 Prefer the traditional but intrigued by the Natural 270 Traditional Teals like Vail 271 Modern is too angular 272 Natural needs more development 273 Make it "acoustically good" 274 Allow tt to Wald 2000 (concert crowd} 275 We Ilve in the middle of nature -the natcrral design fits The [radltionat design is, lay far, the Crest cho€ce for the 276 conference censer. li embodies the look and feet of Vail (albeit, an updated Vail} and would be a place that would attract people to Veil and the center, The modem design is not appropriate for a Vail conference center. Its modem architecture seems to contradict our Rocky Mountain surroundings end the design seems very cold in 277 appearance. Considering Vail endures a cold alpine dimaie for a good portion of the year, a place that looks more warm and inviting seems more logical trorn a draw standpoint (a place that brings pecpte in} and an aesltretic standpoint. Tttie natural design is okay but seems a little over the top with the illuminated cane and snow-capped ridge, The surrounding snow 278 capped mountains speak volumes over any'snow capped` ridge that may be incorporated in Veil's architecture. li seems like this design tries a IiHle too hard to blend in. I am writing in regards to the Vail Conference Center. I would like to express my opinion on the traditional design being the best for 279 the valley. I know that there are a tat of people interested in the natural design so I wanted io voice my opinion and support the traditional option, 260 A choice of the irad'ttional design, will serve to match iha vision of other buildings in the i_ionshead area. TEANwDPx DrNOfS THE EFFORT ~ ~1U11LT11l1ES T!¢ EFf€ET_ z+a~pa.a~,..won.m,.r w.y, 5Me [~.+s~. Town of Vai! Conference Center :holder Meeting Comm ents Comment CaEegory m 6~ ~ 7 h a ~ B m rn ~° t m ~ E E o ... ~ ro 6 ~ U ~ ~ Z ~ x x x x x x xi X x x x xi X Page 7 9 of 25 a al n m 0 G c a U 1 Brought Up By a `~ ,E w 3 r~ m © m d O U m a 06 ©EC Od ', M I -Y j I U A a' U r1. m X x X x X x x x x X x OMM N Wglw Mnunve ey AI~00V R~iwMw C~i~. k Design Style Comments t76 D@C 04 Stak ®uestion 1 Comment The modem design looks like a Ray Bradbury building, nothing to ~ do with Vail. r The natural design will look sd funny in the summ®r with a fake ' snow covered road. Like the windows in the modem design -they can be used for a # renewable energy source to hetp create a'green bufldirsg' t I like the glass and windows in the modem design i The natural design will blend in too much. Need somelhing chat screams modern r.Oflvenllpn centeP like ~ 1he modem design. r Need to let people see put and in Need to do something that will be featured in 'ArchlteGurat 3 Digest" like the natural option. f Need to consider the context of the area. Needs to be unique and say Vail it 7EA~T+YORH OI'~IOE9 TkE EFFORT AHD MtiCTIFlIES THE EFFECT.., p:lonmlP~f~~I~~~Vid'IMmual a~F~ StyN ti,"h Town of Vail Conference Center eholder iUleeting Comments Ctammeni Category ~, ~ y x ~ V m ~ ~ a a` ~ a m ~ w ¢ ~ S7 ~ ~ i0 ~ tj m FL.' ~ ~ C V: t7 x x x x x x x x xl a CT m U rs. r a U W U w 0. I I i E m bough ~E E U a I i ~I I I l9p t3 a Qm 2 D5I a 3 O n O a a x x x X x X x X x )EC t U a' Page 20 of 25 o mw Aa Rlgnb Re~~ BT AedYa~al l4aouisC nuYlxW.bx. Design Style Comments OS E}EC t14 Town of Vail D6 DEC 44 ConferencQ Center Stakeholder Meeting Comments ~~ ~ Comment Category w Questlan ! Gamment ~ ~s a ~ m ~ 'ro ~ ~ ~ ~_ ~ m ~ ~ ~ r ~ a a ~ Q~ ~ o - ra a °m m ° m U F ~ 2 G ~ ~ rn ~ O 29o Consider SocaGng not-For-profit offices within the conference censer to create year-raund vibrancy x 291 Reduce the amount of break out area and crease spore raked seating lecture halls X 292 If the information censer is incorporated, it needs to be world cla - something I would bring my mom to see 1o get oriented Io Vail. x 293 Incorporate some retest space x 29d The alpine look is too far away from the village to tie in X The modem look is very attractive, but not functional -glass 299 needs a Ict of maintenance and requires shading. Sun=head=bright glare. Think about exhibitors needs with wisuaE presentations. 295 The natural lock is my favorite. It might require some modstication -maybe combine a little alpine with Helots. X97 As much natural material as possib8s should be used. Needs to tae low maintenance. Maybe stonework 8 ariifrcial woods !98 Need a building to be proud of. TEeuxipaK arumES xrE ~FFQIIT wm r/~A?1WE5 rrrE eFrecr... v~'~.rn raoi.~u...v+rt:~.s~.r p.vge ~r*a ea~na m X x X m U C c 3 H a X I xI Page 21 of 25 Brought Llp By I ~ I I N d d U m n q = Q d ~ X x X 3 y ~. s a` r e ~ a I X X x X x~ e z3a w nqa Rw.r..n e~ Mo•wwai wawa Cmsua~rs, Ys Design Style Gomments Dti ^EC 04 Question F Gomment Stak i i Needs fo be quiet - traffic pattern needs to be carefully Chought through. For the currant capacity one needs to tae prepared inr 2gg groups of 20D0 - 3DD0 persons. Loading pattern s require IimAs of 15 minutes for all. I miss a boding dock area. Should be able to handle 2 - t8 wheelers at a lime, Do not underestimate waste management 1 handling 3D0 Ease of access is of utmost importance = inlrastruclure. Vail can not handle 4he lodging need this will bring, thus transportation is needed -buses, vans, taxis, confierence cars. 30t Transportation pattern and flow are very important [or meeting planners, as notaady wants to start a conference with complaints atrout logistics. Also ii will keep people in town longer If possible a successful ~nterenee facility should he an 302 archiieciural icon that the community would be proud of. It also needs t4 have an element of design that. allows d to age gracefully. The challenge is that in many rases icons d4 not age gracefully (the what were they chinking when they built this syndrome}. It takes a unique and careful design to fulTill this requirement. In the ease of the three renderings cunentky being discussed 1 am not sure that any of them meet this cdteria. tf you are unab#e io achieve the Hearty impossible (an icon that ages well, i.e. the 303 Sydney opera house as an example) due to budges cansiraints, no compelling design, ate, then you tall back into the camp of building something that fits within iha community (particularly the vision of the community we will enjay post Lionshead redevelopment, post Front door redevelopment, post Four Season development, post Crass Roads redevelopment}. I am `nok sure we have had that option fully explored (multiple renderings} for the CDmmunity t4 consider this as an altemalive. I will repeat my concern that a design that is not in line wish the Bavarian theme 4f the'New Dawn' of Vail tooth in the Village and 304 in Lionshead will seem out of place and in a few years wilt be out of date as well. h seems that Tor some reason the marketing of this process is slacJced in favor of the "Natural' design.; even the terms 'traditional' and "contemporary' seem lame compared to the ter _ 'Natural" as if the first two are sort of "unnatural". At least the a initial word for traditional was'Bavarian' so someone was thinking (even it the initial drawing was just a box) and of Course the 'Contemporary" looks like the Subway building which everyone hales. Town of Vail Conference Center :holder Meeting Gomments Comment Category m ~ m A ua ~ N ~ ~, 01 ~: ~ m w ~ E w o W v 4 m ~ Q E 4 V 0 v ~ ~ io Z 4 ~ U F ~ ~ 'a ~ o X I xi x~ x x x X as DEG as srougn t up B y ~ N m d - 'n m ~ E c o ~ a o () ~ W m n o t) m ~~ p, ;~ O ~ ~ a o i a ~ ~ o a ~ ¢ ~ ~ ~ d X x X X X x l X I TEM~ONK pVIpE$ THE EFFQRT 6Hp wexTINE$ TFPE EFFECT.,. PW]0 22 Or 7J O2Wi K Hpiffi N"s~r„ d By pVOnrR R4`~+'-..W,dfls~ni aap, Stye _. ., ah /vdi,sCN'M fa•9w~0I CP~u1un¢, Vr.- Design Style Comments d6 pEC 44 Question !Comment • 5kak My suggestion is that someone sit with the architects of the Sannenalp property and of the Lionshead Cvre and see if something can be designed that is both harmonious with the new i improvements and is also dramatic and distinctive, which seems to be what undedieS the Natural concept. As it stands, the 'Natural' looks more appropriate for €}isneyland than for a skiing destination w"sth a predpminalely alpinei9avarian design. 1 The traditional style is dated and would be the 6asi design in the Beaver Creek dev. Style 3 The modem design is smart, modem, different, striking, very attractive and very twildable ~ The natural design looks like a cave ar tomb, uninspired, depressing } Materials should be green like Aspen fl we can afford it Function should come first - "architectural icons' wuld be too I carstom and costty -rather build green & practical. Can"! we be tasteful and practical? 2 Heuer felt a beidge between the villages was necessary -its all one village in my view. 3 All three current "designs" are uery unispired: I The Traditional design is flat antl plain, does not gracefully interact with the siree4 yr the mountain. TFt~4)P C dVIDES THE EFFOH'ANp IAl1lTIR1ES 1NE EFFECT.., p.4.inBN plopCSS,.,UnWlxevY Deng, Sryb GOMw,llls4 Town of Vai! Conference Center eholder Meeting Comments Comment Cakegory N j 3, 5, R ~ ~ ~ N `m r o E ea ¢ ~ o ~ ~ E o U 'e E- o ~ is Z m d U N C7 X X X. X x x X X Pege 23 cf 25 X ~ m ~ a m w m O a .' i] c k- n~ d6 DEC 04 Brought Up By ra m m w _ E ~' ~ ? ' o m Q w r U m a x . O o 2 p_ a Q fl ( ~ a' X I x X X X X X X o zao~ lu ngnn rs"..,..a ey I!llg14CA/4 HISPV!@~ Lan~,ll/nm. MIG t)esign Style Comments ©6 DEC Od Stak+ Question 1 Comment 375 The Contemporary design is any tsut that, does not incorporate ingenuity, complexity, depth, interest and locks like the Minnesota airport from the 197i3's. The'f~taturaP looks like little Nobbiis should come running out A 316 Ronchamp gone had. (Re; Le Corbusier} 377 My first choice would be #3 Inspired lay f~tature 378 My second choice would be #1 Traditional Vail Vamacular My uote is for design #3 as firs! choice, I really like the way the design imitates our natural environment, It is also a very strong 379 plus to have the glass cane that will be easily seen tram the highway-it helps people to find their way and creates some exdtemen! as they get closer to it My second choioe is #7-the Bauarian look that already dominates 320 our architecture in Vail. I do not care for #2 Modem. Doesn't at all fit with what we have 327 architectur-alfy and seems not to have any meaningful raison d'etre. 322 I am in favor of the traditional Vail design 323 I like the tst option-thetrad"iiional style Tavern of Vail Conl,:,:,,.ce Center yholder Meeting Comments Comment Category Q1 ~ ~ m ~ m ~ m ~ T v m C ~ ~ Q ~ ~ .~ ` m ~ ~ ~ _ p tj r C m C7 GS x x x X X X X x X N m 4 m N Uhh C o, ~U O U d ~ Brought Up B, m E ,~ Q m U m O = L <[ X d6 I r ~q C flL 6 IEG Ud ~ ~, m N ~ yY W C 3 ~ V ~ a ~ a X i i C , X i X ~: X ~ is ~. 1 f X ~ T~MxeOiac oeviviES rHE EF30RT ~a snxnvues Twe Er~cr._ RCQ@ 24 of 25 c mw !a Rye Nsw,..C e~ w+~~ wcf.~t-~ .. O.a~pn i yt. rn..n+.nu.as ,vvwm..r nru,xo. r,......~.., tic • !Design Style Comments 06 DEC 04 Question !Comment My vote is for design #3 as fast choice. f really like the way the design irnitaies our natural environment. It is also a very strong 324 plus to have the glass cone the! will 8e easily seen from the highway-it helps people to find their way and creates same excitement as they get dosar to it 325 My second Choice is #1-the Bavarian look that already dominates our architecture in Vail I do not rare for #2 Modern. Doesn't at all fit with what we have 326 architecturally and seems not to have any meaningful. raison d`etre The natural plan for the conference center is stunning. The 327 workd will recognize the building as uniqueEy Vail, much like the covered bridge dr the Back Bawls The decision tsf the "committee" is remarkably consistent with the original recammendaGOns made to the Council regarding the Donovan Park Pavilion. I suggest the same results wi31 take 328 place {hopefully) with the Council ignoring the foolish adviee and going with 'lwhai brung us (and them) here to begin with" and that is the Bavarian Experience. tMrere is Pepi and riffs ICongress Hall I am puzzled by the recommendation oT the advisory committee 324 since owner comments seemed about even perhaps Favoring traditional and hotelier comments favoring tredit~nal. The 'Nature Inspired" version would be the most impaCtful not only from a design standpoint, but also as a compeiltive 330 advantage the! would actually be a demand generator for the destinakion. The press, buzz and the test pf time this type of iconic design would provide, makes this the obvious choice. TFANIM1'~FS[ ~MC1E5 T1+E EFFpRS ~Np VaTIPl,IgS TNr EFF~4'T., p1[VranP~InK..lhap, Styr .. ,ab Town of Vail Conference Center Skakeholcier Meeting Comments Comment Categ¢ry m ~ ~ - m ~ in in ~ m E .~ m ~ ~ m ~ o B V U ar tJ ~ m a r ~ ~ ~ d x x~ X x x x Pege 25 of 25 c v M w ~I 0. Breaugh r m E E U ~L' tUpBy m Z X I X os DEC as m ~_ s a' u C t7 x x O HW N P.gPb waaM 6y yy~pgl Raoe,us Ca"auW,h, Ye Design Style Cammerrts a6 DEC 04 .~ Question ! Commeni • i ~i Stalt~ Would like additional development on the roof structure and covering ideas and options for Rhe `naturaP design style Conrem , r+c !n~ n ,n .i _'r<sc, r i~,'irn III ~~•_ togetht:•;; Nees i~ r ~ n ~.uu'r~ , _rr;: i i I Prefer ttre traditional and natural styles to the modem sty'.~_ ~ Need to confirm the proposed options ran he built within t ~~~ ~ current budget The natural design is spectacular and will promote marketing o the facility Vailrs an icon in and o[ itself 1t would be great to create our own Sydney •" r,:r ~i~,:.:w c iconic image far the town, if we can afford rt tt would tie easy to follow the traditional st . b:_~t ~ ~Id >~. . mistake PreTer the modem or natural styles Need something spectacular I Prefer [he natural, modem, then tradition.! The design team was chosen to develop . - r,: ~ '~ : c° i zhe natural style i The natural style is not a Vaii statemr Prefer the traditional style, brit prefer the sitekctses to the rendering ^on't compromise the building to meet the budget -waillill ws have enough money to build without skimping ~ i 8e sure to Incorporate comments from holiday trowd She natural option has potential, bui is scary The traditional option works bast with the core site and ties tt+e villages together The natura3 option is fascinating but risky TFJ1AlINaa19C P141ClES TFIE EFFORT ANr! 4RAnP.K$ TNb EFFE~-- p:bmnl wnM~s\.4w+hceu.~ [Arv9~ SNV ~`.~'k.Na Town of Vail Cartference Center ~halder du'leeting Corrtments Comment Category d a. ®, m 7 m ~ N a~ m in t m M E b °' O ? i4 ¢ ~ R U ~ Z V ~ m N t7 X X x x x x x x x X as aEe oa Brought Up By m ~ d °7 l? . ~ - I v m ~ E ~ 3 a a j I e} m ~ O t 1 ~ ~ N m C fL {~ y0 b 2 fl O a .~ ~ ~ ¢ ~ I n - ~ - _ a' ~ I X X I I X ~ x x x X X X x x x % X X x X X x x x x x x x x x x Ixl pace t ar zs u a' R m to X X x x x x X X x x a3~Mr,~~ 1uy,dmv~1 fLaemn Cwult~ls, ke Design Style Comments 06 DEC D4 T own of Vaif Co nference Center Stak ehold er Meeting Comments j Comment Categ©ry Question 1 Comment m ri. ~ 47 N U C T ~ ID ~ m E ¢ E a c -- B a ~ e U ~° 6- ~ z c U vl m t? 21 Don't mimic 1he'moslly root' aspect of Dobson Arena x 22 Needs to feel elegant and maintain the Feel of Vail X X 23 The natural option has wild potential % 24 Concerned with the longevity of the natural op[ion X 25 Loan toward the traditional option X 26 The design needs to be iimefess X 27 Concerned with the natural design filling Into the center ai town X X 28 Concerned with the Scale of the iradltional option X X 25 The natural option may accommodate the scale of the bu'riddng better X X 30 Concerned that the options may impose architectural restrictions x on future deuelapmont 31 Ensure all options allow for daylighting X Whatever is done will be a'statement" so I don't really nndersiantl how a desire to make a siaterrrent militates toward one concept or the other; the issue is wtlelher the statement that 32 X will be made is harmonious with other elements of the town or not. A building that introduces a dramatically new architecture is likely to be a mistake. The natural environment of the town includes and in large part is ~ domina[ed by the prevailing architectural theme which is x overv+helmingly AlpinelRavarian and will be more so once the Core Area project is completed. ~ The natural drawing was sufricienpy unGear Vrat a variety of X designs can fit within the general description. The "Contemporary" approach was cleverly eliminated by a 3S design that harmonized with the one pail of the parking stnreture X that everyone agreed had to got The last variable is topography so it looks like your challenge is to provide elevations chat crack the mountains but in a structure that 36 X has AlpinelBavarian features so taxpayers like me donY have too many problems, 37 Please register my vote in favor of the Bavarian mountain style X TEMMMIOHM d+n DES THE ErFORi AND MLITIPLIEi TILE EFaECT.. PB~E Z Ot °~f] pbanN po~wYal: VN"I~cYwiY ~wgM1 SryV Ca~/'w~u.ttli x~ m 0. C EJ 3 U 1Sd 0. 6rougF m E G U 4 S tUpBy m .~ ,~ . ~ . ~ i O6 DEC D4 i~ i E I m m a a a b m c i~ x X X X X x I x x x x X X I O 20P~ M Rgnp RwMV4 9y ~eaVle JvY Rs~ourw Cu~3trW, Yee • i• Design Style Comments 06 DEC D4 Question 1 Comrneni Stakt Town of Vail Conference Center :holder Meeting Comments Comment Category m }. m ~^ @ T ~p a U ® ~ ~ C m N C .s W W to . . [n . . W .~ w ~ v .4 ~ ~ ~ Z ¢ E ~ U ° U w o ~ m ~ ~ ' F- ju ~ m ~ _.._ -~__..___ ... .._. ._., __ ._,T _. Please remember that the 70's contemporary architecture in 38 Licnshead did not age well. This is and will always be a ski ~ X resort. Your designs should reflect this without getking silly. Please do not go far the Contemporary styling, Moss of Licnshead 3g design was done in what was "eontempprary' in the 70's; now it just looks dated. 40 As an owner in the Lodge at Licnshead, I'd lowe Co see the ' X Bavarian, but the 'topography-inspired sounds interesting I very much like the BavarialMountatn style best out of the 3 41 styles presented. This style bas been used sc effectively in many x ski areas. It looks elegant and beautiful in the mountain surroundings. 42 I reality dislike the contemporary styrle. 1 believe it would be an eye sore and be very much out of place The only design of the three that stays in keeping with the teal of the Vail community is the Bawarian design. The others, while ~ X creative, would eventually, and, in the not loo distant future take a decidedly dated appearance and L.:,,..~..e a blight on the community. ~ Ensure to incorporate daylighting as it has been shown to ' enhance learn sng If the stacking option C is ehasen, the height of the structure 45 should not be a concern as that scale is not continuous along that road 4fi Account for the possibility of expansion .17 The Conference Center should look like a eenference canter - it i th hi t i l d t ' X nto e s or ca prece en t need to fit doesn Consider moving the additional meeting rooms back to the S. to 48 some extent in stacking diagram C The amount of mass at the frontage nand in stacking diagram C i 49 a little concerning 50 Confirm the "natural" design option works with the budget The thinking process behind the "naturaF design is cored but the St design needs to be refined, though it should tae noted ttaere is no lack. of confidence that the design team will Dome up with "appropriate architecture; b2 There is no honesty in making the comvention center look like x another row of shops in town TE~CMK QfNOES THE EfFIXYT NA MSILT6LIE$ Ttf Ef RECT._ p"cs~RP Fd3L!AA~1Ktur~ rMlT `~W CD'mwVS ih xi X I X I m m N Q X X X x x X x x X U 0 U r W a D6 DEC 04 6 reught Up By m .E ~' 'm N m 3 d `" > U > d CSt !r O to m n N Y ~ ~ N z° a ~ m '? v ~ 4 ~ a C9 Q f1 X x x X i X X x X x x x X x X x page 3 d 25 exor.~ N ~ n...rro ar. , ~ _., . ~ FM3wua C..M-~ Fem. Design Style Comments O6 DEC 04 Stale .~ Y Quesfoon f Comment The modem option does not fii in this area A roof similar to DIA may work with the natural option- it is proven to work and is budgetable Conferences are supposed to be fun and need an exciting building like the 'natural' design to enhance the experience Concern with limited expansion oppariunities with the roof of the "naturat" design Snow camices are only in Vail a few months each year -consider additicnal "greener' roof options Se sure to study reflectivity, etc ii a roof as proposed in the 'natural" option is decdded upan ~ Any option Chosen needs to be grounded in native materials The naturet design is the most excising and stimulating, but clarification on the roof structure, especially during the summer months, is needed. Don't lei the Donovan Park history make us timid in approaching this design It is okay if the building doesnY tie in exactly to L.ionshead The "naiural' design needs to be refined, but is the cbset to the desired iconic image, Whet is the cost difference between the different optionsT Believe meeting planners will desire the "tradltional Vail° took Design options should 6e ranked as follows: natural, traditional, modem. The natural design will get people talking and make the building marketable IT Head be, we can live with the lradisianal option, but it is not moving. Tawn of Vail Conference Center holder Meeting Comments Comment Category m W ~ ~ d Y ,~ m V7 r!') r!1 W C Qt ~ g 4 -- 'G N ~ O 3 -N Q E ro ~ o C3 ~ ~ Z C 01 ~ to _. ... X ~ X X x X X xi Brought leap By m m cn _ 7 3 ~ ~ m 4 L } C1 p m ~ U , W tr U m w D. O o ~ ~ ~} a ~ X X X x x X X X 'x ~ X X X X X i .~ 46 DEC d4 I r yG } .~ .Q a' rl. iv X X X X X X X X X X X X x X X x resr,~rtivgac omoes me eFFORr us wunvues tNC rfF4C7._ Page 4 Cf 25 e3aw w wpw n.u,we ar p~ p pq.an..u~a+eea,r.~ oa.sn sM. ~+s~w tiewa.r e~m,au ~e~r.,4. nc Design Style Comments 06 DEC D4 Question !Comment Stak 69 Should consider tying into flea now Lionshead architecture 70 Need to ensure natural light is brought io the ballrooms 7t Windows in banquets are typically a benefit, while windows in meeting roams ran be a disiractian. 72 Ensure flexibility with natural light in the building The option of acing the rooT as an outdoor gathering area is a 73 large benefit of stacking diagram t~ 74 The modem design is not what people picture when they come to! the mountains 75 Need a design that wont become dated Curious as 4o how any of the designs lie into the exisking 7& Lionsdsead parking structure. 77 Concerned with how the natural design will look in the middle of town Don't see how the natural design will ever work with the feel o! 78 Vail 78 The traditional design is Veil's sense of place and what people come here far. 80 The traditional design will be easier to marked in Vail. 81 The modem design is great, but has the possibility to become dated 82 Is there a difference in usable(wasted space with any of the proposed options? t33 The maximization oT the amount of glass in the modern design wilt help make the facility more marketable TEM~sMOrM. DIVIf)ES THE €FFOgT AIa NLLiIVJES THE EFECT. p'lonrt P~I~dsL..W WbcWN arT aY~ CO,YRMnllnl~ Town pt Vai! Ganference Genter eholder iJleeting Comments Comment Catigory m ~ ~ o T ~ r17 01 UY U t m t= E m E a o ._ v La a~ ~ ~ ~ A Z ¢ E ° ~ [3 U a' o r,~ Qi r C~ N p x x x x x x x x X X x x x x x X x Ix x Page 5 of 25 45 DEC 04 Brought Up By m _ ~ ~ -- v ~~ E e j 3 m O U Im O m O m D_ U r1 ^ ~ o 0 0 ?a u ~ ~ 2 d ~ ~ O ~ ~~ ~ ,V ~ d b Q L Q a x x x x x x x x x x X x X x X e sa ibciutF F N Al a+~ .so~mce C i err Mc i3esign Style Comments D6 L)EC D4 Stake Question 1 Comment ! The views from the conference center should be sold, not the views of the conference center. pislike tlesigning to match everything else -rank the options as ' follows: modem, natural, traditional. Like the possibility of the natural option, but need Lo see further ' development Extensive amount of glass gives an urban feet and dawn i belon in Vaii. f A large expanse of glass provides operational chaltenges. i The space and function of the interior is more important than the image. 1 Need to ensure the kitchen is at the same revel as the ballrooms ~ I love the natural look and the Idea of a focal paint with the illuminated cone li people want an alpine look from the highway then have an alpine took on the north side and a more contemporary type look an the south side? I Concerned with heat loss issues associated with the extensive amounts oT glass in the modem option '. Would prefer a departure from `Traditional Vail' i We need to use this opportunity to make a statement Like the concept behind the natural design, but the design needs ~ further development ' Cost difference between the design slyrtes should bs considered li s signature building can be created within budget, that design should be pursued TEAMWOP% OiV10E5 THE EFFORT eN0 MULTIPLIES TFfE ErFECr.,. p:kv,~K Wefldai...W tlnl~aral Gagq, SISM GanIMb.N1 Town of Vaal Conference Center !holder Meeting Comments Comment Category ,. i ® ~ ~ m ~ m T [] N 41 ~, ~ G1 ~ m ~ M in va ~ m ~ E ~ n N ~ m a d `$ ~ a E ~ a o U y t° H d 2 U U y ~ ~ ~fA 9 ii 47 G X x x x X X X x x x X X X X Pe4a 6 of 2S X G U U w I r ~ I I. 06 DEC D4 r ' Brought Up By I 1 m d °" ' N d = '- a ~ ~ m o ~ U ~, m o Y q, o ti $ ~ m m C ~ vy Q U n ~ i ~ ~ li x (~ x f. X X X `' x R f X c as .. 'N dµQ~14 nouns Cs 8y hx, •i Design Style Comments O6 DEC p4 Town o$ Vail Conference Center Stakeholder Meeting Comments 1 Comment Category Question !Comment ~ m v~ ~ ~ ~_= m trs ',~ r~ ~ E o O °m ~ ~ y F ~ Z ~ ~ t~ •i •i It is time to start looking at something other than the traditional Vail style ~ Anew building Style will create diversity and increase Vail's identity I Traditional alpine architecture is what puts Vail on the map ? Windows at ground level are inviting l pislika the modem image t Gnnsider incorporating new elements into the traditional architecture S Keep in mind [he traditional look that people expect from Vail Fc~vrs on the function of She fac:i rj first and foremost I ' Concerned with possibil`,ty of wasted sp~~ce :n lhu natural desigr3 3 Faci.is on Guai~ity to ensure a timeless buildir,~ The building needs to be able to adapt to the ever~hangong i desires o! the resort business and doesn't necessarily need to be timeless } Like the fact that the modern rendering looks like a conference center Concern with the consiructionlappearance of the roof element of ~ the natural dusign ! Something'ditferent' can work on this Site I Alpine feel is a part of Vail -consider the traditional approach k,' i, some modem elements Tf.MIWOIIX OMOES ThE EFFORT AfID Ml1LTIPLES THE EFFECT,.. Illl F.'kW+Mlpegfq N...Wd.I.ra~N WY,g Sryrramn.n®~. x X X X x x X X x x x x X X i X i x X X Pag®T d 25 m ~o m m a c i~ 06 DEC i Drought t1p By w w .~ 3~ 7 U m c .~ fl m 0. d ~ m Q `a N S ~ a a i ~i i I I I l e xo .., . f i M M Pgh .,Y.R. e 1 1 i I i I i s geurh. .arm, Design Style Comments 06 bEC 04 5#ak~ } Question I Comment 314 Should focus the design more on traditional elements and less on modem ones 315 The building should work to connect the villages 116 Believa the natural design can be built Est-alfectively 317 Should focus design efforts on the interior space When broken up, interior space shoudd be more square rather 11® than bng and narrow 1 ~ g Consider the context of She adjacent structures such as the parking structure 12d Goncemed wish how any of the designs tie info the parking StNCtUre 127 Ensure natural ligfii is incorporated in the interior spaces 122 A,ccovnt for sufficient fbor ksads: trucks, etc. 123 Ceiling height of ballrooms should be 25 - 3D' 124 PTePer option with meeting rooms on the roof with views and dayiight incorporated 125 Stitt need to consider a muNi-use non flat llaor option t26 StacYdng diagrams G 8 O are the only feasible options C...,..,.,,,ed with possibility od putting meeting rooms at the outsid 127 faca at the building at E. Lionshead circle - noiseldisirarxions 128 Ensure designs allow for daylighting i TEAMwOR% pPNgES THE EFFbRT ANp LILlT1pLIE5 TkE EFFECT,. p:~IwvNci~.~.WwMMeNnI [MrVl Sfyk CaRmMpJJI Town of Vail Conference Center :holder Meeting Comments Comment Category m ~. ~ m Ci ?. irr ® }~ rn m U N ~ t ~ C ~ E ~ ~ E m O ~ U ~ C m f7 X X X I X x x x x~ I I x~ Xmas X x x x x X x X x x x w m a os m a ll .~ U !- X xl X tVst o_ 06 DEC 04 13rougnt up By A ~ ® d 'E Eo N ?' IA c _ D m - j ~ v, i~ 4 U Z m a n o ~ o m m a v x a Q ~ a r ~ 4 X X x x x X x x xl X I X X 02W~ AT FIgCB 0.ur.W Ey N(i1,I~4ttYlI rjippyRal CpHW Wlb, K. • • Design StyEe Comments 06 DEC 04 8tak+ Question !Comment Public spaces should t7e arranged at the exterior face of the 129 building 130 If at ell possible, the kitchen should tae placed an the same level as the ballrooms 131 I am a very strong supporter of the "Traditional Vail vernacular style" (Archdectural Vision #t ) The Traditional Vait vernacular style represents Vail in ways the 132 other cttaices do not.. The Vail community is squandering a great opportunity to tie the Village to Lionshead by choosing anything other than opUOn #1. The'papular^ choicx? of option #3 ('Inspired by Nature') would be a greaC choice €f Vail was a nalbnal park But we ase not a park; 133 we are a resort community and this aanference certier is a great opportunity for us to serve troth of these niches -resort & community. Please keep in mind irie needs of visitors, meeting planners and meeting attendees (the ultimate end-user and customer) of the conference center when choosing the design. The conference center must be able to stand the tes9 of lime. Whiie "Option 3" 134 may seem like a novel and new idea, the same could have been said about Lionshead Viilage when it was buifl. Thirty years lacer, Lionshead is badly outdated and scheduled for a compieie facelift. I'm afraid 4he same would happen to ih'ss conference center if you select OpGan 3. The new conference center needs W be a pare of Vait, and that 135 includes the need to ensure that the center feels like Vaii and fits m the Vail architecture and design style. Option 1 is the besi choicef 136 Prefer the traditional design (same fonn letter from 131 - 135) 137 Prefer the Vaditiorsal design (same form letter from 137 - 135) Town of Vail Conference Center :holder Meeting Comments Comment Category fr m ~+ m ?. _ W J U ~ y ~ m N C d ~ m d `- ~ ~ Q ~ 0 U p b ~ ~ R ~ m t..7 m c ~ ~ 91 r 7 ~ ~N ~ . X x x x X x X x xl 1138 Prefer the iradiiianal rtesign (same form letter frarn 13i - 135) ~ x TENM1YOfOf Dw~0E5 TAE EFFORT •Im MULTIPLIES TAE EFFECT ~5p,rtiml pgeYr,L..wdTr+yaal ~ Sryk Cdnma'tl..*J Page 9 of 25 06 DEC 04 Brought Up By i LI ~ ~ q m = V ~ m U a rt] )_ a r d C t] _ ~ tL m ® U rT ~ U W a_ fX ~ U ~. d o T n o d '~ a _S m m ~ ~ m 4 ~ 4 .® ~ , x I x' x x x' X X C POM N RgMI A Wn"a &y I . .. I Ra~wq ..... .. FC Design Style Comments Q6 DEC ~4 5tak~ } Question !Commend 9 Prefer the lraditianal design (same form letter from 131 -135} ~ Prefer the traditional design (same form letter from 931 - 135) t Prefer the traditional design (same form letter from 731 - 135) t Prefer the tratlitional design (same form letter from 131 - 135) 3 Prefer the traditional design (same form letter from 731 - 135) 4 The natural design blends with the environment 5 The !wilding should nai be Intrusive i Ne[ural, stone materials snould be incorporated 7 It would be nice to blend the two villages 9 The modem image looks too much like old Lionshead 3 The traditional design Looks Loa much like the viler Csnier ] The natural design is beautiful yet unique and is p~e~~..~.d I Natural, stone, wood materials should be incorporated TEAMNOrU( OMUES TF£ EFFORYANU MULTIPLIES 7M EfrECY.,. plonrY WNjtlri..WO~laaral QWp. ~~ C b.iN Town of Vail Conference Center sh©Ider Meeting Comments Comment Category m if] S' T ~ l1 '~ ,~ y o y ~ L4 r cm ¢ E € :o ~ ~ ~ z m o ~~ ~ m t7 x X x x X X x x x x x x i X X ~. ~ ~ x Page 10 of 25 Brougt m m °-' _ ~~ m U W ~ V ~ ~ a ~ d v . j i as Dec a4 r i lJp t3y I m i N `m_ w T om YM~r~I 1 m m D c d rL d k N Fbyi ~aawo [ m n d v 7 a A m X x x X x x x X I By k Design Style Comments 06 DEC 04 Question !Comment ~i ~i Stake _> Modem or natural images are p..:.... , J 3 Do we really need more iraditiona! 6uiktings? I Copper panels, steel, glass should be used i Need additional detail on the nature] design t Like the lradiGonal design - shook blend with the theme of Vail r Stene & wood shoukt be incorporated Traditional mountain style should 6e used which many people come to Vail and the mountains to experience 3 Like the traditional design in that it is timeless and is more consistent with the New Lionshoad Dislike the glass in the modem design - we don't need an "icon" ~ that will bok as dated as Lionshead does now. Don`C like the •snowrane" -unlike the sandstone museum, this I budding rs in town, not an kite mountain The lighted tree is ludicrous and will create light pollution 3 Natural materials • stone, wand, stucco should be used 'leans' are dramatic statements cr memorebie ones. Vail is too t small for "drama' and should go for "memorable° -like the clock tower, the iDkh mountain division statue, the covered bridge. 'Drama" can get very dated. The site can not connect the villages.. At hest it can extend ~ Lianshead and file the library in ro the Lionshead area TE.kNY/ORx OrviOE9 THE EFFORT AMO ulLTtP~,ES THE EFFE6T... pxvwun ra+ua.. ... ww, ~ Oo,.,wnnxs Town of Vaii Conference Center :hol der Meeting Comments Comment Cakegoryi W 'rry. ~ ® ~. .~ U m N C W r1} m a ~ m ~ ~ ,U ~ Q ~ U ~ ~ ~ Z ~i~ c m U r m L7 ) X X X x X X X x x X X X x x X I X Q6 DEC 04 Brought Up By v ~" a~ m E c m - j ~ ~ o C3 c U W 0_ m ~ d o U a , .~ ~' o O ~ O ~ x o o ~ te N x a a v ¢ .ia a' V c m X x x x X X x X X X X x X x Page 11 of 25 a xcw re Ryn R.eawa ey _. R~am"a r~aLLlrvls, bx Design Style Comments 06 DEC 64 Question !Comment Stak Town of (Jail Conference Center ahotder Meeting Comments Comment Category, ~` ~ ~ ~ m ~' a to rn r m E O +~ ~ ~ Z Q ~ ~ ~ U m ' F G m ~ ~ i 3 The traditional style doesn't fee right -despite the look of the X village r The modem is a good combinatian of'mvdem' with a good use ^f lines 3 The naiural design would Tit If it were nestled in the mountains i Stone ,metal, and glass should be used Prefer the idea of keeping the villages separate with two distinct and appealing architectural styles t just saw the tfiree versions of the wnvention center and would like to comment as a 12 year employee on the mountain and Vail t resident for many years. Version 3 'Inspired by Nature' is the clear choice to set Vail apart the cookie cutter villages of Beaver Creek, Copper, Whistler, and Keystone. We shauldn'i require architectural Dues far people io realize we're in the mountains. It's time for Vail to slap away from its ersate euro alpine feel and make a statement. We musk display peide in our alpine Rocky t'Atn. mats and dewelap our own identity dertued from the beauty ? around us. 'fhe house an the sketches had been designed not by Roark, but by the cliff on which h! skood. tt was as if the ctilf had Brawn and completed iiseH and proclaimed the purpose for which ii hatl tveen waiiirg.' Ayn Rand, The Fountainhead. I really like the Vrsion 3 Inspired by Nature. This frts our 3 environment and makes a powerful statement for the spirit of Vail Please do something witty the LH parking structure to match. 1 Energy efficiency is important 5 Prefer the natural design 3 Prefer the traditional design X Prefer the naiural, different Wok as compared to the traditional f Like the natural design but dislike the cone structure 1E+a11vOfac OmUE87HE EErONT ~ u,Anp~iES THE EFFECT... y~~cmnl p,ohGri..WtlYl~ati C~dp, $tlM CmrnnC.W x x x x x x X X X X PapF X x tz a zs Braugnt up By v a a •~ m a U m p m ~ t3 W ~ U ~ 4Qm ~ Q 0. O N o 4 a_ f c o xa ... .fir , l16 REC t14 ~ j 6 ~ r i Y ' a' M.yN C I a R~scva rw+tures, V 0. m t~ x x x x x xt X I X x x X X ~ ~r Design Style Comments 06 DEC Od •. } tauestion I Comment i• Stakt The tradiGanal option is the safest Like the possibility of the natural design but the roci is concerning. Need tc ensure "rt looks good in the summer Prefer the natural design but it must leak good year round Prefer to keep the trad'rtianal look tike the glass of the contemporary design Prefer the natural design Prefer the traditional design Prefer a more contemporary Feel ' Wanl more info on the natural design -can ii be pulled otf? i Nesd 14 ensure "green' construction l Need to incoryoraie "green" buiiding techniques i Any image chosen must be genuine I The traditional image is safe o It seems hard to relate the natural design to Che adjacent properties 3 Prefer the natural design 1FJ.IA1'lOli9l DMDES TY2 E!FOflT hMD FAULTIPLIF_u TF+E EFFELT... p:lpvrprt p~pNq{I., VrrWbWral~SryN -. ..~~Ja Town of Vail Conference Center holder Meeting Comments Comment Category a d ~ N N c Sa G9 3. cr7 N r~ c w m E p, Q v ~ o ~ ~ is Z ~ ;<+ U U m U c I^ ~ ~ w C~ ~ x x x x X x x x X l x l Page x x x ~,aorxs x X [A v m m a i i ~U c U uUF ~ ~ a H O6 DEC 04 brought Up By m W N ~ m 0 U v a o Q x a Q i I I+ Or ifYYn"w I i !DI M Fig ie""- N 01 x ' 3 u a' ip Rwwrr :mxrF~nl V a c t9 X x x X X X I i x x x X x X X X x bar . FK. Design Sty9e Comments Ofi DEC ~4 Questipn !Comment town of van Conference Center Stakeholder Meeting Comments Cornmeni Category ~+ ~ ~ ~ .~ ~ N ~ C ~ G4 ~ ~ ~ o ~ a z ~ ~ ~' U r ~ ~ m > Prefer the natural design X i The natural design needs further development X i Like the crganie Form os natural option X t Conference center should stand out 3 Prefer the incorporation of a l01 of glass 3 Prefer the traditional Decease it blends with the existing architecture al Vail Mast of Vall is traditional - so why not this? I The nature! design is so much diRerent Shan what we have - caneemed Rmight not. fit in Z Keeping in line with the rest of the traditional village makes sense ~ Too much glass has been incorporated Into the front of the traditional -security issue t Dislike the modem image i Like the natural design and camice buf does fl fit the site? i Like the cancepi of the natural design but the image is too vague I' ~ to fully appreciate it Can we afford the natural design? 8e careful to not hag down the process getting the natural image 3 'just right" TEAAhVORK ON1aES THE EFFOtiT ANO MULTIRIES THE EFFERT_. p.1v I.wC~odA...WN11KnPwU1 PeY9~ ghS° v. ~.~ XIS x X X x X X Iii X x X X x X X 4af25 FSI 7 m X .~ C G U a w a_ 4 06 DEC 84 Brought Up 8y ~ t m d ~ m ~.. u r .O m ~ h PZ ~ ® ° ~ x o` m I a a d ~ m ~ a ' ~ exi IvumrM w a wyi t~uuiv f i~ Howe auW~b Qesign Style Comments U6 SEC D4 • Question /Comment The Jackson design fits will into the Hillside, but does the l conference center site have enough topography to pull a something like this? Make the cone element Larger than the Wal-Man tlagpof ? be lit 24-7? Who will Gean the glass? The natural option is appeasing -reaches back to barites I Colorado -way back - Anasaai, etc. ? Make it look like old casino building -traditional 3 The modem design looks too much like downtown Seatt away from it -too urban > The natural design could bok cool or be a disaster i "t~tature gone wrong' cone i The natural design is original and interesting ~ The modem design looks [ike an .:..,,:,,.,ed partdng strut yuckl 3 The traditional complements the village architeclura - els sophisticated ~ The natural design is too far out -will turn off attendees cutesy 7 The modern is too modem -looks Pike fhe parking strutt l Tha traditional is ok -should stay with the alpine theme 1 synergy 'c The natural ss inconsistent wish the existing ToV archilec 3 Slick with the theme of Vai# - no need to do anything diffi 1FAMWgG[ gVlpp$TF¢ EfFOWr A310 KlLTIPgJfS n1E EF~gcr_. RLLWMIM AL}Y~M1I. WtlVl~eimf ~aiQf Slyly rMn~IW.A Stak Hill rt f Town of Vail Conference Center ehalder Meeting Comments Comment Category OS m J (!1 s. m ~ m ~ u ~ o a ~ L m Q fl ~ ~ 2 m U m ~_ ~ (7 X X X X X X I X X X ~x x x Page 75 of 25 x x x N N as V 0. u C3 46 17~C [74 Brought Up By m m m N .~ E a c ~ U m o m O us aW. ~ U ~ a o iC1L~~ V d A d a H 01961 N RpF p1Mlpyi~l R~NUT~ C i i 5 R~ Tf/t~14 C I i IBy YC ., Design Style Comments O6 DEC 04 Stale Questjon 1 Comment i The natural design has a potential to tae a symbol for Vail and is priginad and interesting Be careful with the traditional design - could become dated end Y boles like the shopping district The traditional is a goad did • Consistent with the existing y architecture ' The natural design could be sn eyespre ff not done rights ! Like fire praposed use aF natured forms 3 Like the amount o f glass do the modem option I I I f Should stand ouE from Vaii arehtteclure I Should have Fun with the design > Should flow with the immediate surroundings but not match the traditional Vail architecture S People come 1o Vail expelling the traditional Ippk I Should be an architectural icon S Needs to work with adjacent buildings 1 structures i fJlodem does not work 'sn Vail ' Seamiess experience - go with what"s proven I One vision of Vaol TEAMN09l OMOES TFIE EFCONT ~lP7) Nr,LT1PlJE3 THE EFFECT p~WVwu v^4•~ . wwr,.~.r a~ SM. ro+rrrrn we Town of Vail Conference Center .holder Meeting Comments Comment Categpry m ]~.. N .~ }, le ~ ~ U y ® ~, C d O v'-i m rn ~ r ® Q ~ E ~ °1~ s` 9 O ~ 14 Z R ~ = U ~ m x X x x X X X x x x x x x x x x x Page 16 of 25 x ~ I rn T7 3 m h I O a, i I O6 DEC d4 • ~ . t $rought Up By r i ~ m ~, _ = :c e ' m E o ,, d e C) ~ m v ~ a a q U t~sl 6C U ~ m h ~ ~ ~ S _ ~ ~ © rL ~ ~ ~ 7 ~ C I ¢ a E I O31 NudYal MNPo~ Naeuw f i 4 Rewrn mYtltrY X x x x X X x X x X x x X X x r err k. DesPgn Style Comments D6 DEC 44 Question 1 Comment Stak~ I 239 C°ntinue to consider multi-use space and options for sloped floors 240 l7K to separate Lionshead and Vaii village 241 t]k to consider the modem design !elements 242 Need windows in ballrooms with operable shades 243 Good to blend fomrs !materials wish khe natural enhronmen! 244 Qoesn't need to match the existing Vail architecture 249 Should stand out from Vail achitedure 246 Not another Beaver Greek 247 Modern design already appears dated 248 Need further development of the natural oplicn 249 Prefer the lredi6onal look 250 The natural design needs further development 251 Like the glass of the modern option but not the overall style 252 Prefer the natural design 253 Prefer a building Drat fits She environment as opposed to the existing Vail style TEi011Y4Oltlf DI+lOE3 THE EFFtA@C ~1H[} MVLAWVES THE EFFECT... p'b~vrt pO~M V. 5 ~ . ~, O~tlp~ SryM GamminKtli Town of Vail Conference Center ahoider Meeting Comments Comment Category m jy rn E1 ?' m ~ m ~ U ~ u, C m a rr~ m ~ ~ U m ~ E U . 4 m ~ j 6 r ~ Z r ~ m m ~ c9 x x x x X x X x x x Pew r~ or 2s m ~ ~U ~ C m U W w ~ ~ v ~ o F a os Dec as Brought Up By w L" _ E ,~ C _ m ~ Q yy 2 U m rz ''C p Q O N ~ d ' t~ U - o bC .n ' a i I I III li ox }I M f8y ~BdYa~< ~I b Rwn pnsuW~O, i Design Style Comments Of DEC 04 Question / Commen# 254 Prefer natural, traditional, then modem 255 Doesn't need t0 tie into the existing architecture due to its IOCation 256 Prater the traditional IOOk 257 Mudern doesn't work here ?5@ Prefer the natural design '.59 Modem is loo farout there 'fi0 Tradikional is a little too viand 61 Prefer the natural sryte 62 Prefer the natural design 33 COnGerned with the hatconies at the S. etevation -noise etc affecting adjacent properties 34 Like tf+e pofentiat of the natural style i5 Should stand out ~6 Like the unique modem structure 7 Like tMe use Of g{ass propOSad in the modem Option 8 Like materials proposed far the natural TEwArPr'pgN q'NOES THE EFFORT i5Y~0 Ny~T1P1.1E5 TV& ErF6CT_, F~amnlAq f+t..WC1~~.cJU/M Pra9~ 5HM Carr~nh.rd Town of Vail Conference Center keholder Meeting comments . Comment Category ' m _a (ry m ?• ~ m ~ m ~ M ~¢ w a - m m ~ C R in (!~ ~ ¢j y O ~ (y S] a ~ H O C W ~ Z m U ~ ® b7 r j ~ .m p ~ I x l Sta ' x x X x X X X x 7C X X X X X Page 18 0125 os o~c o4 Brought Up 9y m m ~ N ~_ m U .m ~, o ~ c w ~ a ~ ~ a ~ ~ ~' } Design Style Comments DB C1EC D4 I ~) Que9tion l Comment • • Stake Town of Vail Conference Center ahplder Meeting Comments Comment Category ~ ~ ~ a, en S1 S. in U ~ ~ ~ m C m 4 m ~ ~ 4 ~ o E o U ZT ` o ~ m Z ~ U m H C m N C7 x x 269 Prefer the traditiana[ tru1 intrigued by the Natural 27fl Traditional feels like Vail 271 Modem is too angular 272 Natural needs more development 273 Make it'acoustically goad" 274 Allow it to hold 20170 (concert crowd} 275 We live in the middle pf nature -the natural design fits The traditional design is, by far, the best choice for the conference ..~..:~.. tt embodies the look and Gael of Vaii (albeit, 276 an updated Vail} and would be a place that vroukd attract people to Vail grad the center. The modem design is not appropriate for a Vaid conference eentes. Its modem architecture seems to contradict our Rocky Mountain surroundings and the design seems very cold in 277 appearance. Considering Vail endures a cold alpine climate for a goad portion of the year, a piece that looks more warm and inviting seems more logical from a draw standpoint {a place that brings people in} and an aesthetic standpoint. The natural design is okay but seems a little over the top with the illuminated cone and snow-capped ridge. The surtounding snow 278 capped mountains spook volumes over any "snow eapped' ridge that may be incorporated in Vait'S archi[ecture. It seems tike this design tries a lithe too hard to blend in. lam writing to regards io khe Vail Conference Center. I would like to express my opinion an the traditional design being the best far 279 the valley. I knew khal there are a lot of people interested in the natural design so I wanted to voice my ppinion and support the Vadktional option. A choice of the traditional design, will serve to match the vision of 2$0 other buildings in the Lionshead area. TEtM,NOaK 4NDES TXE ErfpiT A'+O ~TpVES TF¢ 6EfECT,. R~mnnl popti~l.,.5Art11u~rY M~ `ttM ~..~ ~ .. sla xI x~ xi x xi x X O6 DEC Q+t- drought Up ay ;, _ ~' ~° a ~ ~ ~+ 3 ~ ~ a U m o ?~ p ~ U tit ~ U .~ a c d ^ ~, p o 0 ~ ~ ~ x a ~ a ~ ~' ¢ a Ix U n j a ~ m i7 i X X x x x X X X f x ~ x ~ x Page 1 B d 25 caow ,v wQ•a anrvsa ar lJPM~c1in10.aTa.o r...an..w yK„ Design Styfe Comments 46 DEC Od T own of Vall 46 DEC 4d Co nference Center 5takehaid er Meeting Comments ~~ Comment Category Brought up B y Question f Comment m ~ `_ ~ "= •s ~ - v _" m N ~ ?^ ~ ~ V? Vi y E i ° ~ ~ o ~ a ~ m a U U ~ eP m © m U ~~ ~ 0 ~ ~ [ o ~ a r ~ ~ 7 o t] '^ d m d ~ o 0 ~ t m Z m U ` m ~ q, o ~ ~~ a v ~' S - m ~ a © a ~ ¢ ¢ n a~ t The modem design looks Pike a Ray Bradbury building, nothing to X X do with Vail. ~ The natural design wR leak so funny in the summer with a Pake X X snow covered roof. 3 Like the windows in the modem design -lhey can be used fora X X renewable energy source to help create a "green building' ~ I like the glass and windows in the modern design X X 5 The natural design will blend in too much. X X i Need something that screams `modem conventipn center" like X X the modem design. ~ Need to let people see ou[ and in X X 9 Need ko do something that will. be featured in "Architectural ' X X Digest" like the natural option. 3 Need to consider the context of the area. Needs to be unique X X and say Vaii TEARM1V 7ltlf OWlOE5 T1# fiFFOi1T AMP MIJ4TIPtl£5 TFIE EFfECr... P8~ 2a O= z5 C 77 W N RlaRb Rmae+9 BT ~[tureK pra~vof5.-. WaNwiA~1 Rtip~ SpM Cvnnvm~m .. I P ~aam f Jl~b, Yx Design Style Comments OB DEG 04 1 Question 1 Camrnent • •i Stak 290 Consider kx~ting not-for-profit offces within the conference center to create year-round vibrancy 291 Reduce the amount of tweak out area and create some raked seating lecture halls 292 If the information center is incorporated, it needs to De warkl class - something I would bring my mom. is see to get oriented to Vail. 293 Incorporate some retail space 294 The alpine look is too far away from the village to tie in The modem look is very attractive, but not functional -glass 295 needs a tat ai mainlonance and requiros shading. Sun=head=bright glare. Think about exhibitars needs with visual presentations. 296 The rsatural look is my favorite. I! might require some modification -maybe combine a IAtle alpine with nature. 297 As much natural material. as possible should be used. Needs to be law maintenance. Maybe stonework & artificial woods 298 Need a building to be proud of. Co eholc N c ~ I OWf ifere er M _~ rn m l taf ~ nee ?etin Comp m 47 a I ~ i I i I i /ai I :enter ~ Comm Went Ca! V .~-. U m d ~ O `~ U m c 4h ents egory 1= E U y X x CT m w ~' a` .? U 0 F- 4] Q6 DEC 04 Brought Up By 47 '~ e y ~ ~ u d '~ ~ O N x° a 3 ~ ~ Q u A ' a X x X x x x xl SSAM+tDRK. r3MQE$ THE EFfONr nK/ M1LfIPVE5TYE EFFECT... F~eJC 2T Ot 25 Oxoor N qqa rtnw~a BY p'inmV P~M~..W WYelr~l Os~IT +°h~ Cvmra~ds MdMed+r Ibaouv Cau1bW. Ft Design StyEe Comments p6 DEC 04 Question /Comment Stak lawn of Vail Conference Center aholder Meeting Comments Comment Category m _T ~ ® N ~ S, m ~ FJ m ~ G v o ~ m a m to ~ ~ m Q ~ E ~ o ~ Z ~ U U h ~ ~ N bo L? p Needs to be quiet -traffic pattern needs to be carefully thought through. For the current capacity one needs to he prepared for 299 groups of 20DD - 3000 persons. t.oading pattem s require omits of 15 minutes far all. I miss a boding dock area. Should be able io handle 2 - 18 wheelers ai a time, Do not underestimate waste management! handling 306 Ease of access is of utmosk importance = infraskructure. Vail can not handle the lodging need this will bring, thus transportadion is needed -buses, vans, taxis, conference cats. 361 Transportation pattem and 1Ww are very important Far meeting planners, as nobody wants to start. a conference with camplainks about logistic,. Also it will keep people in town longer If possible a successful conference facility sheuid be an- 302 arohilectu2l icon that the community would be proud oi. It also needs to have an element of design that allows it to age gracefully. The challenge is that in many cases icons da not age gracefully (the what were they thinking when they built this syndrome}. ll takes a unique and careful design do fulfill this requirement. In the case of the three renderings currently being discussed f am rat sure that any of them meet this criteria. IF you are unable to achieve the nearly impossible (an icon that ages. well, i.e. the 3D3 Sydney opera house as an example) due to budget constraints, no compelling design, ate. then you fall back into the camp of building something that fill within the community (particularly the vision of the community we will enjoy post Lionshead redavekapment, post front door redevelopment, post Four Season development, post Cross Reads redevelopment}. I am not sure we have had that oplidn lolly explored (multiple renderings) far the community to consider khts as an altema6ve. I will repeat my concern that a design that is not in Tine witty the Bavarian Fheme of the "New Dawn" of Vaii both th the Village and 304 in Lionshead will seem out of place and in a taw years will be out of date es well. N seems that for some reason the marketing of this process is slacked'rn favor oflhe'Natural" design; even the terms 'traditional' and "wntemparary" seem lama compared to the ter "Natural" a& if the first two are sort of `unnatural". At leasF the $ initial word for traditional was "8avarian" so someone was thinking (even if the initial drawing was just a box) and of course the "Contemporary" looks like the Subway building which everyone hates. X x x x x X m _ ~ ~U ~ e m o U ~ U W ,~ ~ a m a ~ 46 DEC 44 m m o 3 LL V ti m m c X I X I X I ix x xi X I1 TE~1~wORx OI4IOE5 THE EFfORT AaO WII,TIR: DES THE EFFECT... QaQ4 ~+' 9f 25 exooi N R~gw Rnwd {y p:5on~,1 MmM~CK..WGH1aRwM 0.fy~ S4yte Comrnn4m ~ . i R"sa"u G+s' IY101YW. InC. Ix Brouglot Up By m m ~, N m o m ~ p ~ U m a 0 0 $ _ a v 4_ ~ Q i t ~i ~. . E I ~ 1 Design Style Comments O6 DEC d4 Question f Comment ~~ Stake" Ay suggestion is tfoat someone sit wish the architects of the Sonnenalp property and of the lionshead Core and see if something tan be designed that is troth I,n.,,.,,,,iaus with ttte new mprovements and is also dramatic and distinctive, which seems o be what underlies the Natural concept. As R Stands, the 'Natural" looks more appropriate for Disneyland than for a skiing fesGnatian with a predominately alpineBavarian design. 1'he traditional style is dated and would be the fast design in the Seaver Creek dev. Style Tire modem design is smart, modern, different. striking, very aKractive and very buildable The natural design looks like a cave or tomb, uninspired, depressing Ntaterials should be green like Aspen if we can afford it Function should corns first -"'architectural icons" could be toc custom and cosily -rasher build green & praditat. Can't we be tasteful and practicai7 Never felt a bridge beMreen the villages was necessary -its ail one village in my viow. i All three. current "designs" are very unispired: = The Traditional design is flat and plain, does not gracefully interatl with the street or the mountain. ~,MllgpY. OtWOFS TFE EFFORT ANO 4NATIRIES Tiff EFFER. p;M1MMe pryea"1".MIPYMwA' 0.lpl ~Yy ~~.~! Town of Vail Conference Center to{der Meeting Comments Comment Category m 'S, m ~ m ~ v ~ IIf ~+ ~ C o ~ e~ ~ ~ ~ m ¢ E m ~, U ~ l- z ~ r" X I xl X ~ X I X I X R X I Page 23 at 25 ~X m m m m 0 a C t- 06 DEC 04 Brought l!D By m >n -_ t= ~ ~ ~ m o ~ o Y d ~ ~ o ~ ~ o x a ~ ~ ~ a G i 70a~ N fl iaa.o,.n xt I it yo nn" C~ X X X X x } J ".e »r as ec design Style Comments OS DEC 04 (]uestian /Comment Town a# Vail Conference Center Stakehoic9er Meeting Comments Comment Categorj l0 u7 S. S. m ~ ~ in m ~ ~ € ~ E m o v ~ m ®L3 m H ~ 2 ® y 315 The Conkemporary design is any but that, does not lncorparale X ingenuity, complexity, depth, interest and Woks tike the Minneso;a airport from the 1970'5. The'Natural" looks Ifke little Hobbits should come running out. A 316 Ronchamp gone bad'. (Re; La Corbvsier~ 31T My Tirst choice would ba #3 Inspired by Nature 318 My second choice would be rR1 Traditional Vail Vernacular X My vote is for design #3 as frst choice. I really Cike the way the design imitates our natural environment. li is else a very strong 319 plus to have the glass cone that wilt be easily seen from the highway-iY helps people to find their way and creates some excitement as khey get closer to it. 320 My second choice is #1-the Bavarian Wok that already dominates X our architecture in Vail.. I do rrot care too it2 Modern. Doesn't at aft fit with what we have archltectvrallyend seems not to have any meaningful raison 321 d'etre. 322 1 am in favor of the traditional Vail design X 323 I like the 1sf option-Ihetraditianal style X T[yJl~yi¢feS pNVfOES TIE EFFpiT YIMD M111LTIPLKS TiE ffFECT.,. X x X ~ X Page 24 of 7S m m a` 3 a 06 DEG 04 (' - l $rovght Up $y N N m .~ E ` m C 3 '= j U ? a W 0.' U ~ a '~ m Z Q ~ ~ C7 a e X OIUW N ItlgPb fWw~O aM r . wr.oun ca...r.~a..~ ~. Design Style Comments Q6 DEC 04 Town of Vail Conference Center 5takehalder Meeting Comments Comment Category ~ ~ ~ w ~ w C c a . . us ~ m w ~ y r m E o `ti ~ ~ '~° w E A ° V ~ V o U !^ ~ ~ ~ ~ C7 p } C~uestion f Comment •i • My vote is [or design #3 as frrst choice. I really like the way the design imitates our natural environment. His also a very strong 32A plus to have the glass cane that wilt be easily seen from the highwayit helps people to find their way and creases some exutement as they get Loser to iC 325 My srcond chr~ice is #1-the Bavarian look That already laminates our architecture in Vail 1 do net care far #2 Modern. Doesn't at all fit with what we have 326 architecturaEly and seems not io have any meaningful raison d'etre The "natural plan far the conference tenter is stunning. She 327 world wily recognize the building as uniquely Vaii, much like the covered bridge or dhe Back Bowls The decision of the "committee" is remarkably consistent with the original recommendations made to the Council regarding the Donovan Park Pavilion, I suggest the same results will take 328 place [hopefully} with the Council ignoring the Fr3olish advice and going with 'what brung us (ant them} here to begin with" and that is the Bavarian Bxporience. Where is Pepi and his Kongress Hall? I am puzzled by the recommendation of the advisory committee 329 since owner comments seemed about even perhaps favoring iraditiona! and hotelier comments favoring traditional. The'hlature Inspired" version would be the most impactful not only from a design standpoint, but also as a eompetiiive 33Q advantage that wools actually txe a demand generator for the destinatipn. The press., buzz and the test of time this type of iconic design would provide, makes this the obvious choirx. X I X I Ix X I X m 'O m m O a U h U w a Brought Up By m m E' m 3 m o °' O o U ~ o T O. a a X X 46 DEC 04 m U a a' U a' m C t7 X X X hwwaorac rnnces T>re EcFORT x91 uunn~rts r*ar: EFFEC... Page 25 of 25 ~e caw w 7e~ye n.sa".aa ar y;rra..ma ~ml-.t ~ -~ ~~. p.vpn Srro [on.,,..aya ~ . p.sauu Cam. r,c APPENDIX I Conferertce Center Batlat Initiative 2002 "SHALL THE TOWN OF VAIL DEBT BE INCREASED $50,060,000 WITH A REPAYMENT COST OF 595,x10,0{}0 AND SHALL TOWN TAXES BE 1NGREASED $3,830,000 ANNUALLY AND BY WHATEVER ADDITIONAL AMOUNTS AS ARE RAISED ANNUALLY THEREAFTER FRAM THE LEVY OF THE TAXES DESCRIBED HEREIN FOR THE PURPOSE OF FINANCING THE CONSTRUCTION AND OPERATION OF A CONFERENCE CENTER SUB,lEGT TO THE FOLLOWING LIMITS: --THE TAX INCREASE SHALL BE ACCOMPLISHED BY THE LEVY OF A TOWN LODGING TAX. AT THE RATE OF 1.50% AND AN INCREASE IN THE TOWN SALES TAX RATE FROM 4.00% TO 4.50%; --THE LODGING TAX SHALL BE LEVIED ON THE PRICE PAID FOR THE RENTING OR LEASING OF LODGING FOR LESS THAN THIRTY C+aNSECUTIVE DAYS; --THE INCREASED SALES TAX SHALL APPLY TO ALL TRANSACTIONS THAT THE TOWN'S EXISTING SALES TAX APPLIES TO EXCEPT FOR THE SALES OF FOOD FOR HOME CONSUMPTION; --THE INCREASE 1N THE SALES TAX AND THE LODGING TAX SHALL TERMINATE WHEN THE DEBT IS PAI^ iN FULL; --SUCH DEBT SHALL BE EVIDENCED BY THE ISSUANCE OF REVENUE BONDS PAYABLE FROM THE TAXES AUTHORIZED BY THIS QUEST'10N AND OTHER TOWN REVENUES AS THE COUNCIL MAY DETERMINE; SUCH BONDS TO BE SOLD IN ONE OR MARE SERIES ON TERMS AND CONDITIONS AND WITH SUCH MATURITIES AS PERMITTED BY LAW AND AS THE TOWN COUNCIL MAY DETERMINE, INCLUDING PROVISIONS FOR REDEMPTION OF THE BONDS PRIOR TO MATURITY WITH OR WITHOUT PAYMENT OF A PREMIUM; AND SHALL THE PROCEEDS OF SUCH DEBT AND TAXES AND ANY EARNINGS FROM THE INVESTMENT OF SUCH PROCEEDS AND REVENUES BE COLLECTED AND SPENT AS A VOTER APPROVED REVENUE CHANGE UNDER ARTICLE X, SECTION 20 OF 7HE COLORADO CONSTITUTION?" • • • w. '- .:, :~ / ~~ t ~„ 4~ u ..~. C{1l1MEC.TION . j} s ~!-} vNcW 51SIEf? Bf?fGG1= ,.. 4J1 ~``~ ~ ~ ~Sr- Via. ~"~T ~ ~ ~ ~ - 1 - ll t_ y~ x; ~.. Y ~ ~ ` •.. L a.I ~ r ~ L r Y -ail` s. ,4 r.'f. ~ l~~ ~ ~.~ Y ~+~ y i+°{ 43t { , 1- ~.~, .. -(f ~' 1 ~ ~ '1~~Q9 E: l !.. ~~ ~~~ A`c:. ~ ~ ~ i~` ~~ + ~ ~ ~L v ti ~. f- L' ~. ~ k _ / ). ` t' a' ~_ ~ ~, r~. LT ~ G L ~ _ 1. + _ ~ F"~~~" ~4-~ i c 1 ~ ~ L i , 5 ~~l C' .~ f ~ ~,1 !` ~ ~ L s L CHAPTER 1 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY • ~~ CHAPTER 1 Executive Summary This chapter outlines the general structure of the Lionshead Redevelopment Master Pian and summarizes the broad goals, objectives, and recommendations contained in the document. It is intended as a general policy guide; a thorough review of the entire document is encouraged for anyone considering development or redevelopment of properties in Lionshead. I.1 Structure of tt-e Master Plan Document The analysis and recommendations in this document are contained in nine chapters organized in the general headings described below. • Chapter 2:.lntroduction The opening chapter summarizes the purpose, policy objectives, design principles, and methodology for the two-year process that has culminated with this plan document. • Chapter 3: Existing Conditions Assessment This chapter identif es and describes the existing conditions, problems, and issues that are addressed in the master plan. Reflecting the purpose and intent of the master plan, this information provides the rationale for the improvements that are recommended in the plan. • Chapter 4: Master Flarr Recommendations for the 4verarl study Area This chapter discusses recommendations that apply to the study area as a whole,. as well as several site-specific recommendations that deal with issues of concern in the entire study area. • Chapter S: I~etaired Flan .Recommendations This chapter addresses individual parcels ar significant clusters of parcels within the Lionshead study area, providing both general and specific planning and design recommendations for each area. • Chapter- S.• Site Design Guidelines This chapter addresses the Lionshead pedestrian environment and proposes a hierarchy of five specific pedestrian areas: 1. Primary Pedestrian Mall 2. Secondary Pedestrian Mall 3. Primary Pedestrian Walk 4. Secondary Pedestrian Walk LIOI*1SHEAD REDEVEL{3Pfv1ENT MASTER PLAN PAGE 1-1 CRAFTER 1 EXECUTIVE '~LJMMAR4' - 5. Vehicular Pedestrian Retail Street i 6. Pedestrian Path Specific planning and design recommendations are proposed for each of these five sub-environments. • Chapter T: Development Standards This chapter contains recommended development standards to set parameters for development and redevelopment, including gross residential floor area ~GRFA), building heights, density, setbacks, landscape areas, and site coverage, and proposes a new definition of a unit -the "lodge unit." + Chapter 8: Architectural Design Guidelines This chapter outlines new guidelines specific to Lionshead that are intended to encourage a higher quality of architecture in new development as well as renovation projects. The guidelines address issues of character, building height and massing, roofs, doors and windows, detailing and materials, and the relationships between buildings and the adjacent pedestrian environment. Chapter 9: Implementation This chapter addresses timing, phasing, project priorities, financing mechanisms, order of magnitude costs, and implementation strategies to achieve the public improvements recormended by the master plan. 1.2 Master Plan Framework The Lionshead Master Plan is based on a set of fundamental design objectives that relate to the entire study area: The Pedestrian Environment The defining characteristic of Lionshead is its pedestrian environment, and the emphasis of the master plan is to improve its quality as a generator of activity. Pedestrian connections are intended to be the underlying framewark of the physical plan. Two primary pedestrian comdors are proposed to provide for a cohesive, consistent, well defined pedestrian and retail environment serving both the destination guest and the local community. The first of these two corridors. is an east-west connection between the west end of Dobson Ice Arena and the western edge of Lionshead. The second is a north-south connection between the gondola ski yard and the north day lot. Connections t© the Natural Environment The master plan recommends ways to enhance and strengthen the physical and visual connections to the natural environment of Gore Creek and Vail Mountain. PAGE 1-2 LIQNSHEAD REDEVELOPMENT IV~ASTER PLAN CHAPTER 1 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY • Vehicular !Circulation The master plan anticipates a network of streets and driveways that provides efficient access to public and private destinations but minimizes the negative impact ofvehicles on the pedestrian environrnent and residential areas. • Transit The master plan considers that an efficient azad flexible public transit system sewing the entire Lionshead study area, including potential new development in the west end of the district, is essential to its future success. • Service and Delivery The master plan describes a consolidated, efficient service and delivery system that reduces izzterference with pedestrian areas, emergency vehicle routes, and traffic in general. The proposed facilities satisfy the currezxt and projected service and delivery needs of the Lionshead study area. + Parking The master plan provides for adequate public parking in Lionshead and the community as a whole but acknowledges that parking private vehicles is only one part of the overall Lionshead public access strategy. 1.3 Recommended Actions The following list sunizx~arizes the recommended actions, both public and private, that are contained in the master plan. Please refer to individual chapters for more detail on specific topics and individual properties. 11.3.1; Development/ Redevelopment • Encourage, facilitate, and provide incentives fore the redevelopment and renovation of existing structures in Lionshead. • Create a Vail Civic Center comprised of the Dobson Ice Arena, the Vail Public Library, and new development on the existing charter bus lot. • Develop the south face of the Lionshead parking structure with ground floor retail/ commercial space and locals/ seasonal housing above. • Develop the Towzz of Vail infill parcel at the east portal to the Lionshead pedestrian and retail mall; make it an active entry landmark. • Encourage fzrst floor retail expansions in the retail core improving the spatial proportions of public spaces by extending into the pedestrian street. • Encourage, facilitate and provide incentives for the creation of a five star resort hotel in the Lionshead core. • Encourage, facilitate, anal provide incentives for the creation of seasonal housing irz the western end of Lionshead. f.IONSHEAQ REDEVELOPMENT MASTER PLAN PA~t l-3 CxAPrER 1 ExECUTIVE SUivlMARY 1.3.2 Pedestrian Circulation • Implement the Vail Streetscape Masterplan for the Vail Village-Lionshead connection clang West Meadow Drive. • Redevelop the existing east Lionshead pedestrian portal. • develop, with public-private cooperation, two continuous pedestrian axes {north-south and east-west} through Lionshead. Create new walkways and plazas and replace deteriorated pavements. • Install a snawrnelt system in the Lionshead pedestrian mall, • Require pedestrian walks and paths along all streets. • Connect the Gore Creek recreation path below the Gondola lift line. • Provide far pedestrian and bicycle traffic clang the South Frontage Road. • Encourage, facilitate, and provide incentives for the creation of one or more new west Lionshead pedestrian portals through redevelopment of Concert Hall Plaza, the Montaneros Condominiums, and the Vail Associates care site. • Create a new north Lionshead pedestrian portal in conjunction with development of a public transportation facility on the earth day lvt. • Replace the existing skier bridge. • Implement a comprehensive directional signage program. 1.3.3 Connections with the Natural Enviranrnent • Create a passive recreation trail system on the south side of Gore Creek, • Establish public view corridors to preserve the visual connections to Lianshead's natural environment. • Encourage, facilitate, and provide incentives far the creation of green landscape corridors penetrating into the Lionshead environment, • Enhance the western end of the Gore Creek recreation path through landscape and envirc~r~d~lea~tal remediation. 1.3.4 Vehicular Circulation • Restrict the vehicular traffic an East Lionshead Circle to town of Vail "in- town" transit, emergency vehicles, and adjacent local property owners. • Provide all necessary improvements to the South Frontage Road including widening, accelerationldeceleration lanes, landscaped medians, and other appropriate measures to facilitate and clarify traffic flows. • Realign the South Frontage Road at the western end of Lionshead. • Realign the West Lionshead Circle and Lionshead Place intersection. • Encourage, facilitate, and provides incentives for the removal of snowcats and winter mountain service vehicles from Forest Road. • Create a central skier drop-off point on the north day lot. • Implement a comprehensive directional signage program far vehicles. i' Y j ~9 PACE 1-4 LIQNSHEAI7 REDEVELOPMENT MASTER PLAN CHAPTER I EXECUTIVE SUMMARY e 1.3.5 Transit . • Create a transportation center on the north day lot to accommodate local and ~~ regional transit, local shuttles, and charter buses. • Remove the existing Concert Hall Plaza bus drop-off. • Relocate the existing Lionshead Place regional bus stop to the north day lot. • Improve the now difFcult left turn from East Lionshead Circle onto the South Frontage Road. • Connect the future development in west Lionshead to the Town of Vail in- town transit route. • Investigate alternative clean transit technologies.. • Investigate potential intermodal connections to future nvn-vehicular regional transit systems. 1.3.d Service and Delivery + Eliminate existing usage of the east Lionshead pedestrian portal as a service and delivery area. • Create a service vehicle parking facility at the western end of the Lionshead parking structure. • Create a central service and delivery facility in conjunction with the proposed transit facility on the north day lot. • Enforce the prohibition against illegal parking of service and delivery vehicles in fire lanes. 1.3.7 Parking • Add at least one more deck to the Lionshead parking structure. + Conduct studies to establish the user profile of people accessing Lionshead from the parking structure; use this to determine the desired user profile and true parking demand. • Investigate the possibility of a secondary parking structure in the western end of Lionshead. • LTONSt-IEAD REDEVELOPIviEP~1T 1W'IASTER PLAN PAGE 1-5 Attachment: H • ,~ MASTER PLAN FOR THE 1lAIL CONFERENCE CENTER AND THE LIONSHEA!D PARKING STRUCTURE Prepared By Fentr~:ss Bradburn Architects LTD • • Draft far Final Review February 10, 20Qa • MASTER PLAN FOR THE VAIL CONFERENCE CENTER AND THE LIONSHEAD PARKING STRUCTURE TABLE OF CONTENTS CHAPTER PAGE ~ EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 1 2 INTRODUCTION: THE PROJECT, THE SITE, AND THE PROCESS A. Purpose of the Master Plan 7 B. Urban Design Goals for the Project C. Organization of the Master Plan Document 8 D. Conference Center Project Description 8 1. Project History 2. Background on the LionsHead Parking Structure 3. Summary of the Preferred Development Concept 4. Anticipated Building Program E. Description of the Site 1 ~ 1. Background an Selection of a Site for the Conference Center 2. Site Location and Physical Characteristics 3. Current Zoning ~. Existing Adjacent Uses ~. Preliminary Identification of Environmental issues F. Applicable Community Plans and Goals 13 ~ . Town of Vail Comprehensive Land Use Plan 2. Town of Vail Streetscape Master Plan 3. Vail Transportation Master Plan 4. LionsHead Redevelopment Master Plan G. Pu iblic Process 16 1. The Public Input Process 2. Summary of Primary Themes from Pu131ic Input 3. The Development Review Process 3 TOWN-WIDE CONCERNS: FUNCTIONAL ISSUES A. Ve hicular Circulation 21 1. Frontage Road Improvements 2. Reduction of Congestion and Conflicts an East LionsHead Circle B. Pa rking ~ 2T ~. Parking-Related Objectives in the LionsHead Redevelopment Master Plan 2. Engineering Analysis of the Existing LionsHead Parking Structure 3. Projected Parking Demand Associated with the Conference Center 4. Parking and Service under the Conference Center !)RAFT FOR Fit~IAL REVIr`4V, 2110!05 CHAPTER PAGE 3 (FUNCTIONAL ISSUES, CQNTINUED} 5. Relacation of the Entry t© the LiansHead Parking Structure 6. New Exit at the West End of the LionsHead Parking Structure C. Public Transit 34 1. Transit-Related O17jectives in the LionsHead Redevelopment Master Plan 2. Alternative Locations for a Transit Center 3. Criteria far l~valuating Alternative Transit Center Sites 4. The North Day Lat 5. Transit Center an the Existing or Redeveloped LiansHead Parking Structure 6. Transit Center in the East LiansHead Circle Turnaround 7. Conclusions and Recommended Direction D. Service and Delivery 40 1. Relevant Objectives in the LionsHead Redevelopment Master Plan 2. The Conference Center Solution 4 THE LIQNSHEAD CONTEXT; QUALITATIVE ISSUES A. The Pedestrian Environment 41 1. Adopted Town Objectives for East LionsHead Circle 2 The Conference Center as a Connective Element and Catalyst far Activity 3, Pedestrian Improvements at the East Portal to the LiansHead MaII 4, New Pedestrian Connection from Frontage Road to LionsHead East Portal 5. Retail Space along East LionsHead Circle 6. Responses to Neighborhood Concerns 44 1. General Concerns of Neighborhood Residents and Property Owners ' 2. Responses in the Conference Center Master Plan C. Connections to the Natural Environment 4fi D. Relacation of Existing Uses an the Project Site 47 E. Relationship to Vail Resorts' Core Site Development Plans 48 F. Applicable Development Standards 49 G. Architectural Design Guidelines 50 i}-I. Compliance with the LionsHead Redevelopment Master Plan 53 5 IMPLEMENTATION 55 A. Phasing I3. Cost Estimates c C. Next Steps r I +' f' ~, C li DRAFT FOR FINAL R~V1kW, 211C}fC15 6 APPE~JQICES 59 . A. Parking Feasibility Study, LiansHead Parking Garage; Car{ Walker Parking, Ir~c. {final report dated February 4, 2005): Recommendations on parking access; revenue control options; structural and cadre review; feasibility of vertical expansion; feasibility of a transit center within the structure; operational review. B. Parking Analysis Appendix, HVS International (January 18, 2005) C. Vail Transit Center Site Selection Report, URS Corp. (February 7, 2005; D. Phase ~ Environmental Site Assessment, Walsh Environmental Scientists and Engineers, LLC (October 12, 2004) E. Preliminary Geotechnical Investigation of the Charter Bus Lot Site, CTIJThornpsan, Inc. Consulting Engineers (July 19, 2001) F. Detailed Record of Pukrlic Carnments, August-December 2004 G. Conference Center Ballot Initiative, November 2002 H. Excerpt from the 1998 LiansHead Redevelopment Master Plan: Chapter 1, Executive Summary I. Excerpt from the i 991 Town of Vail Streetscape Master Pian: East LionsHead Circle (Ta Be Provided Later) r ~` DRAF'i' FOR FINAL REVIE~"4', 211x105 AC~CNOWLEDGEMENTS ~ This master plan and the concepts it describes for the Vail Conference Center would not have been possible without the active involvement of many Vail citizens and the concerted efforts of the Town staff, officials and consultants listed here. Vail Tawn Council Members Rodney Slifer, Mayor Kent Logan Dick Cleveland, Mayor pro-tam Greg Moffat Diana Donovan Kim Ruotolo Farrow Hitt Conference Center Advisory Committee Rodney Slifer, Mayor and committee chairman Kent Logan, 'own Council representative David Pease and Stan Cope, lodging community representatives Merv Lapin and Frank Johnson, retaillbusiness community representatives Scott Proper and Rick Scalpello, community-at-large representatives Bill Jensen, Vail Resorts representative Town of Vail Staff Stan Zemler, Town Manager Russell Forrest, Director of Communi#y Development Greg Hall, Public Works and Transportation Director Mike Rase, Transportation Manager Town of Vail Owner's Representative and Project Manager Architectural Resource Consultants, inc. Chris Squads Tim Brekel Adam Williams Fen#ress Bradburn Architects, Ltd., Lead Consultant Curt Fentress Scott Durgance Michael Winters Nathan Kibler-Silengo John Kudryckl UR5 Corporation, Nathan Larson, traffc and transit center analysis Carl Walker, lnc. (Denver), Scot Martin and Paul Mack, parking structure analysis Rick Pylman ~ Associates, zoning, permits and development review facilitator Sherry Don+vard & Associates, community liaison, master planning and landscape architecture r I i ~. • Iv DRAFT FOR FINAL RE\fiEW, 2!10105 CHAPTER1 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY A. PURPOSE OF THE MASTER PLAN The purpose of The Master Plan for the Vail Conference Center and the LionsHead Parking Struc#ure is to assure that the development of the charter bus lot site and any future modification or redevelopment of the parking structure are in harmony with the objectives of the LionsHead Redevelopment Master Plan. Town staff initiated this master planning process in order to facilitate a successful design for the conference center and to take advantage of the opportunity to meet other municipal goals at the same time, including the improvement of public roadways, parking and. transit facilities and the enhancement of the pedestrian environment. The master plan is not intended to evaluate the need for or financial feasibility of a conference center in Vail; these questions continue to be part of the public dialogue. Nor is it the purpose of this document to present for review and approval specifics of the architectural design for the facility. . B. PROJECT SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDED CONCEPT In November 2002, Town of Vail voters approved a ballot initiative for a dedicated lodging and sales tax to pay fora 100,000-sq. ft. conference center an an unspecified site. A budget of $46.2 million was estimated, of which approximately $8 million was earmarked for 350 additional parking spaces. Gallection of the lodging tax began in January 2003. In May 2003, the Vail Town Council approved a matron to locate the conference center on the Town's charter bus lot east of the LionsHead parking structure and directed staff to form. a conference center advisory committee. In July 2004, Fentress Bradburn Arehifects in Denver was selected by the committee and Council members to lead the design team. After a number of intensive public input sessions throughout the fall of 2004, a preferred scenario evolved in which the conference center functions are arranged as follows: the main ballroom, junior ballroom and kitchen are adjacent to one another on the main {frontage road) level, meeting rooms and internal loading docks are one level below, and parking spaces are on two levels underneath the building. An engineering evaluation has revealed that the existing LionsHead parking struc#ure cannot support an additional deck without major structural moditleations, and significant problems with interior circulation and egress at peak periods were noted. Therefore, in the initial development phase, the preferred scenario invests comparatively little money in modifying the LionsHead parking structure, leaving open the possibility of redeveloping it in the future. Amore efficient garage could be designed to use a smaller portion of the site now occupied by the existing parking structure, increasing. the parking capacity while at the same time making available an additional development site for desired future public ar private uses. The current program for the conference center includes a 21,000-sq ft main ballroom; an adjacent 9,000-sq ft junior ballroom {both divisible); 10,000 sq ft of meeting space; 28,300 ', sq ft for registration, pre-function, and guest support facili#ies; a 4,60fl-sq ft kitchen; and 39,200 sq ft for administration, service, storage and internal loading docks. A 2,500-sq ft outdoor terrace adjoins the main level, facing south ioward the ski mountain, All arrivals 6y vehicle (taxis, buses, cars) will use the drop-off area at the building"s main entry on Sou#h DRAFT FOR FIiVAL REVIEW, 2f10105 Frontage Road. Parking and service entries will also access the building from the frontage road. A second major entry to the building, one level down on the south side, will serve those arriving by foot or in-town shuttle bus. There will be, 3201 parking spaces on two levels under the structure. C, THE SITE The Town-owned charter bus lot, approximately 50,000 sq. feet in size, and the LionsHead parking structure fall within the General Use Zone District, in which all proposed uses must be approved by the Planning and Environmental Commission (PEC) as conditional uses and all development standards are determined by PEC during the conditional use permit review. The property is also within the study area for the LionsHead Redevelopment IVlaster Plan and the area designated for the LionsHead Public Facilities Investment Plan. The charter bus lot is undeveloped and is currently being used to park out-of-tpwn ski buses, RVs and horse carriages. The entrylexit lanes for the parking structure cut across the charter bus lot and will have to be relocated in any scenario for development of the bus parking lot. The most practical vehicular access to the charter bus lot is from the frontage road, as i neighbors oppose any increase in traffic volume on East LionsHead Circle. A Phase I Environmental Site Assessment completed in October 20x4 Walsh Environmental) found ' no significant environmental conditions that warrant additional evaluation of soil or groundwater at the site, although a Phase II investigation will be conducted in any case. j Town staff has identified increased traffic volume and parking demand, seasonally high I groundwater, and noise from construction and deliveries as potential environmental issues that may require further study and mitigation. ~. Q. ASSC?CIATEID F'IJBILIC IMPROVEMENTS The Frontage Road. Design team engineers and Tawn Public Works staff have reviewed the traffic volumes and turning movements projected for the frontage road after construction of a conference center and, consistent with the LionsHead master plan; have recommended the widening of the roadway to allow for increased traffc loads and the addition of a bike path and a median. An additional west-bound lane, combined with dedicated left-turn lanes into the parking structure, will clarify turning movemen#s into the conference center and the parking structure and will allow for maximum stacking ability during peak arrival times. An additional east-bound lane will serve traffic back to the main roundabout. Fast LionsHead Circle 1, A new dedicated right-turn lane onto the frontage road is proposed to alleviate congestion at an intersection where left-turning vehicles currently cause back-ups and consequent delays in bus cycle times. 2. The east portal area, where vehicles congregate to unload, will be reconfigured to remedy serious safety hazards for pedestrians trying to cross from the parking structure to the mall. Delivery vehicles, hotel shuttles, and skier drop-off will be relocated to Vail Square and the North aay Lot to reduce traffic volume in the area. Stairs from. the ~, parking structure and the in-town bus stops will be shifted slightly and new heated crosswalks added to redirect pedestrians away from bus loading areas. In addition, the master plan has proposed consideration of this area as one option for future development of a transit center. fSee Chapter .3, 5ectior~ C for an expanded description.) DRAFT FOR PENAL REVIEW, 2116105 • 3. New streetscape treatments, coordinated with other in"rtiatives by the Town in the Village core and by Vaii Resorts in LionsHead, are anticipated along the north side of the street to improve the walking experience from the east portal to the conference center and to strengthen the connection between LionsHead and Vail Village. ~. A proposed civic plaza at the south entry of the conference center will create a new public space that connects to Dobson Arena, Public Parkins. The conceptual plan includes 320 spaces under the conference center: 125 spaces to be reserved for use by conference center attendees when needed; 70 spaces to replace those lost when a new north entrance is created far the existing parking structure; and 125 new spaces for the general public. This results in a total of 250 net new public parking spaces that can be operated as an integral part of the LionsHead parking structure. Vail Resorts is willing to apply the $4,3 million it has committed far the development of additional public parking to the cost of the 320 parking spaces underneath the conference center as long as the 125 parking spaces associated with the conference center are made available on most peak ski days, when the probability of a lame day-time conference event is small. Public Transit. The LionsHead Redevelopment Master Plan recommended development of a municipal transit center on the North Day Lot to accommodate regional buses, charter buses, skier drop-off, hotel vans, and service vehicles. Engineers at URS, commissioned in 2004 to revisit the site selection issue, agreed that the North Day Lot is the best location if judged only on functional criteria_ However, funding and politics! issues present obstacles to the use of that site for afull-service transit facility. Consequently,. this master plan recommends that Vail Resorts' plans for development of the North Day Lot incorporate a transit facility to accommodate skier shuttles (hotel and lodge vans) and skier drop-off (private cars); that the regional (ECO) and west Vail bus stops be maintained for now at Concert Hall Plaza; and that charter bus loading and unloading be accommodated in the service areas under Vail Resorts' proposed Vail Square and Front Door projects. These actions will reduce congestion at the East LionsHead Circle and permit consideration of a smaller transit facility. The master plan further recommends tha# within the next few years the Town solicit proposals for the redevelopment of the LionsHead parking structure to gauge the financial feasibility and degree of developer interest in a concept that combines mixed uses, more efficient parking, and possibly a transit facility for regional and' Town buses. if an interested and qualified developer is not found, then the Town would move forward with construction of a transit facility either on the existing LionsHead parking structure or adjacent to it in East LionsHead Circle. E. RELATIONSHIP TO VAIL RESORTS' CORE SITE QEVELOPMENT PLANS The underlying inten# of both Vail Resorts' core site redevelopment (Vail Square) and the conference center project is to increase the intensity of activity and economic output in LionsHead. In that sense, the proposed uses are both compatible and interdependent. Interesting public spaces and continuous pedestrian corridors will be important to assure interconnectedness and mutual benefit. Thus, the east portal to LionsHead is a crucial linchpin between the two projects, and its redesign should be coordinated with Vail Resorts' streetscape design team. V1lhile both projects will use regionally appropriate materials, it is deemed more important that the conference center have unique, identifiable character than that it be similar in architectural character to the European traditional style of the core site development, DRAFT FC1R FINAL REVIEW, 2i1Dl05 F. PROJECT COMPLIANCE WITH ADOPTED COMMUNITY PLANS The ,Town of Vail Comprehensive Land Use Plan (1986j, in addition to setting general development objectives, analyzed the LionsHead parking structure !charter bus let site and recognized its potential, in conjunction with Dobson Ice Arena and the Vail Library, to form a civic center complex. The current propose! is consis#ent with that goal. The Town of Vail Streefscape Master Plan (1991) recommended improvements on East LionsHead Gircle, with which the conference center master plan is consistent. The Vai! Transportation Master Plan ('6993} identified a number of action steps relevant to this project, including: 9, Designated skier drop-off areas; 2. Better entry feature monuments and directional signage; 3. Retention of the existing public parking supply and its expansion where possible; 4, Evaluation of replacement sites suitable for parking oversized vehicles; 5. Possible relocation of the west turnaround for the in-town shuttle buses from Concert Hall Plaza to East LionsHead Circle; 6. Phased improvements to the frontage road, including a continuous bike lane, left-turn lanes, and landscaping, 7. Evaluation of possibilities far improving loading and delivery functions. The LionsHead Redevelopment Master Plan (1998) is the most directly relevant community planning document. It recommended the creation of a civic "node" with construction of a civic center adjacent to Dobson Arena and the Vail Public Library and set goals for improvements in vehicular and transit systems, parking supply, public spaces and pedestrian corridors. It described a qualitative vision for architectural aesthetics but did not prescribe a specific architectural style. The design team feels confident that the architectural concept for the conference center responds in a satisfactory manner to the intent of the architectural design guidelines in the LionsHead master plan. The LionsHead master plan also recommended the addition of a protected view corridor looking south from the charter bus lot. A photo simulation of potential development on the Lodge at LionsHead property was done which illustrates that a new structure, even at a maximum allowable average height of 72 feet, does not appear to interrupt panoramic views to the mountain from the main level of the conference center. The issue will be revisited during schematic design, after the basic ;plan of the conference center is better defined. The design team has concluded that the conference center master plan complies in all significant respects with the goals and objectives stated in the LionsHead Redevelopment Master Plan. However, certain components of this master plan represent changes from the specifics, though not the intent, of the LionsHead master plan. These changes include; • Cer#ain recommended roadway modifications reflecting updated analyses of traffic movements and volume; Anew strategy for developing a transit center, reflecting the curren# planning context; • The decision to supply parking under the conference center rather than on top of the LionsHead parking structure and to explore phased redevelopment afi the parking structure; • The recognition that design guidelines governing mixed-use commercial/residential buildings may not be entirely relevant for a large, iconic civic building. 4 DRAFT FOR FlrtilAL REVfFW, 2f1of05 A. NEXT STEPS In accordance with procedures specified in the Town of Vail Municipal Code, Town Council may decide to amend the LionsHead Redevelopment Master Plan by passing a Council resolution to adapt this master plan as an extension and refinement of the earlier plan. The development review process for the Vail Conference Center will entail an application to the Town of Vail Planning and Environmental Commission for review of a Conditional Use Permit to allow convention facilities. This process will include a review of the project's compliance with the LionsHead Redevelopment Master Plan. The development review process will also include an application to the Town of Vail design Review 13aard for review and approval of the architectural design and site treatment. Town Council will make the final decision to approve the plans. Hearings of all town boards- are open for public comment. A CDOT access permit will be required for changes proposed to the frontage road. A process to select a general contractor is underway. Based on the chosen contractor's guaranteed maximum pcice and with a recommendation from the Conference Center Advisory Committee, Town Council will make the final decision on whether on not to proceed with the issuance of bonds. Construction of the conference center is expected to take 20 to ~4 months. ]3efore it can begin, the entrance #o the LionsHead parking structuee must be reconstructed in another location at a time that wil[ not interfere with ski season usage. • ,~~~~ C~~~'~ ~~ ~~~~.~ c DRAFT F®R FINAL REVIEW, 2I10IQ5 Fig. 1-T. View from East Lionshead Circle looking east toward the Vai! Conference Center Site. ~~C~PY ~~~~~~ E ~. ~' L .~ ~r, ~. ~~. • Fig. 1-2. Aerial photo in~fuding the Vait Conference Center site. B DRAFT FOR FINAL REVIEW, 21i0l45 GHf~PTER INTRODUCTION: THE PROJECT, THE SITE AND THE PROCESS A. PURPOSE OF THE MASTER PLAN The purpose of The Master Plan for the Vail Conference Center and fhe tiorrsHead Parking Structure is to assure tha# the development of the charter bus lot site and any future modification or redevelopment of the parking structure are in harmony with the objectives of the LionsHead Redevelopment Master Plan. Town staff initiated this master planning process in order to: • Facilitate the development of a highly successful conference center and. to take advantage of the opportunity to meet other municipal goals at the same time, including the improvement of public roadways, parking and transit facilities and the enhancement of the pedestrian environment. • Anticipate and recommend mitigating measures for any potentially negative impacts associated with the conference center. • Describe the rationale far site planning and design decisions made during the conference center design process and, in so doing, create a framework far decision- making by Town officials charged with review of the conference center plans and other future development applications in the LionsHead area. • Solicit and document community input to assure that it is reflected in the evolution of the conference center plans. The master plan is not intended to evaluate the need for or financial feasibility of a conference center in Vail; these questions continue to be part. of the public dialogue. Nor is it the purpose of this document to present architectural drawings for review and approval, as formal design review is a later step in the public process. B. URi3AN DESIGN GOALS FOR THE PROJECT The Master Plan for the Vail Conference Center acknowledges that a facility of its size and with its potential to generate concentrated activity can have significant impacts on the community and the neighborhood in which it will be located. Through the master planning process, the design team and Town staff have endeavored to use the project to further broader civic goals,. such as enhanced aesthetic quality of buildings and public spaces in LionsHead, improved economic vitality of the LionsHead commercial core area, and a more functional network of landmarks, streets and pedestrian pathways. The conference center project is an opportunity to create a strong and visible landmark as a welcoming point of arrival for guests coming into LionsHead, The project is also intended to be the catalyst for improved pedestrian connections to and from the LionsHead parking structure and along East LionsHead Circle and the frontage road. As part of a strong civic node, the conference cen#er will help to draw together the Vail Village and LionsHead Dore areas. C~ J DRAFT FOR FINAL REVIEW, 2?1D105 7 C. ©RGANIZATION OF THIS D~C7Cl1MENT The Masfer Plan for the 1/ai! Conference Center and the Li©nsHead Parking Sfructr~re presents the rationale for the proposed use and future development of the site and addresses a variety of functional and qualitative issues of importance to a resort community. Chapter '{ -Executive Summary Chapter 2 - Introduction. This chapter explains the purpose of the master plan document and describes the project objet#ives and program, the site conditions, the regulatory context of applicable Town plans and policies, and the process that has been followed to encourage public involvement in the evolution of the plan. Chapter 3 -Town-wide Concerns: t unctianal Issues. This chapter presents concepts developed in conjunction with the conference center site plan to address municipal goals far improved vehicular circulation, public parking, public transit, anal service and delivery. Chapter 4 -- The LionsHead Context: Qualitative Issues. This chapter details how the proposed conceptual si#e plan for the Vail Conference Center responds to objectives for the character and vitality of LionsHead that were set forth in the LionsHead Redevelopment Master Plan. Those objectives emphasize the need for an increased level of activi#y in LionsHead, a stronger pedestrian corridor between Vail Village and LionsHead, and enhanced aesthetic quality of the LionsHead built environment. The project's conformance with applicable development standards and guidelines is evaluated, and other contextual issues, including neighbors' concems and the project's relationship to Vail Resorts' proposed Vail Square development, are addressed. Chapter 5 -Implementation. This chapter outlines a general phasing strategy, estimated development casts, and recommended next steps. D. C4NF'ERENCE CENTER PRUJECT DESCRIPTION 4. Pro}ect History In November 2002, Town of Vail voters approved a ballot initiative for a dedicated lodging and sales tax to pay for a conference center (Appendix G). The ballot was not specific as to location of the conference center. The conference center oversight committee that proposed the ballot initiative also outlined a preliminary building program of approximately 100,000 square feet in total, including a 40,000 square-foo# ballroom and 8,300 square feet of smaller meeting rooms. The committee estimated a budget for the conference center of $46.2 million,. of which approximately $8 mil{ion was budgeted to pay for 380 additional parking spaces. This budget assumed use of the Vail Resorts maintenance site west of LionsHead and the construction of an additional parking structure to serve the conference center. Golleetion of the tax began in January 2003. • At its May 20, 2003 meeting, the Vail Town Council approved a motion to locate the ~ conference center on the Town's charter bus lot at the east end of the LionsHead parking structure- Council agreed to initiate negotiations with Vail Resorts in response to the resort company's offer to contribute financially to the construction of an additional plate of parking on the LionsHead parking structure. The Town Council also directed staff to move forward with selection of a conference center advisory committee. $ DRAFT FOR FINAL REVt1=W, 211~1Q5 In 2004 a business plan was completed by HVS International. Based on that plan, the `~ annual debt service has been limited to $2.7 million so that the annual operating deficit projected for the facility can be paid without any subsidy from the Town of Vail. In late July 2004, after an intensive selection process that attracted 11 teams from around the country, the Denver-based firm of Fentress Bradburn Architects Ltd. was engaged to Bead the design team far the conference facility. 7. Background on the LionsHead Parking Structure The LionsHead parking structure, which contains 11 SO parking spaces on three split levels, was constructed in 1979. It was intended primarily to meet the need for day-skier parking to serve the increasingly active LionsHead portal to the ski mountain. Since Vail Resorts constructed the new high-speed detachable gondola in the LionsHead base area in 1990, usage of that portal has grown and the LionsHead parking structure is filled on. most winter weekends. The need for more parking somewhere in the LionsHead area was recognized in the 1998 LionsHead Redevelopment Master Plan, which assumed that one viable option was the construction of an additional deck of parking on top of the existing structure. An engineering evaluation has revealed that the structure cannot support the additional deck without major structural modifications. [n addition, significant problems with interior circulation and egress at peak periods were Hated. (Please refer to Chapter 3, Section B for a more detailed discussion of parking.) • 8. Summary of the Preferred Development Concept The conference center design team generated three alternatives for the arrangement of conference center facilities and associated parking. After review of the three concepts in public meetings and by Town officials, a preferred scheme has evolved which calls far the conference center to be built on the charter bus site with dedicated parking spaces underneath the new structure. In the initial phase, this option invests comparatively little money in modification of the LionsHead parking structure, leaving open the option of future redevelopment of the structure. It may be possible in the future to construct a new, mare eftlcient garage on a smaller portion of the site occupied by the existing parking structure in order to increase the parking capacity while at the same time making available an additional development site for desired future public or private uses. 9. Anticipated Building Program The development program far the conference center anticipates the following general uses and targeted square footages (subject to change as the architectural plans are refined}: • Main Ballroom Junior BaliroAm Meeting Rooms Break-out Areas and Guest Support Facilities Vestibule, Registration and Pre-Function Administrative Offices Service and Storage Areas Interior Loading hocks kitchen and Food Staging Area Outdoor Terrace (upper level) DRAFT FQR FINAL REVIEW, 2110105 21,x00 sf 9,000 sf two ballrooms can be combined) 10,000 sf (divisible info 10 separate rooms) 12,000 sf (includes restroomsJ 16,300 sf 3, 500 sf 20,500 sf (includes corridors & partition storage) 15, 200 sf 4, 600 sf 2, 500 sf 9 f In addition, the program currently includes a vehicle drop-off area an the frontage road {north] side of the structure and up to 320 parking spaces under the structure. f E. DESCRIPTION OF THE SITE ']. Background on Selection of a Site for the Conference Center ,4,t its May 20, 2003 meeting, the Vail Town Council considered two different sites for the conference center: the Vail Resorts maintenance facility on the South Frontage Road just wes# of the LionsHead care area and the charter bus lot at the eastern end of the LionsHead parking structure. The VRI Maintenance Facility 5ife. At the time of the sales tax election in 2002, the proposed site was the 5.1-acre Vail Resorts maintenance facility on South Frontage Road west of the LionsHead care. Vail Resorts intended to continue to use .5 acre of the site far mountain operations, and a .7-acre portion of the site is wetlands, leaving 3.9 acres of the site available for the conference center. The building would have required approximately two acres of the 3.9-acre site, plus one acre for the parking structure and .9 acres for site circulation and landscaping. (The Town of Vail owns an adjacent .31- acre "rand parcel" and CDgT owns an adjacent .3-acre parcel.] Further design work would have been required to refine the program and determine the optimum location far the building and parking structure on the site. The Charter .Bus 1_af, This site is approximately 50,000 square feet, about one-third the ~ i size of the three-acre LionsHead parking structure. The site was acquired in the mid- 1970's by the Town of Vail after the Town Council rejected a proposal to build a civic center at Ford Park. Council members determined that a civic center required a location adjacent to a major parking structure and within walking distance of bath Vail Village and LionsHead. Since the acquisition of the property, there have been several more attempts to win approval of a convention center, including a proposal in the mid-1980°s to build a Congress Hall on the lot at the east end of the Village parking structure, before r the garage expansion, and a proposal in 1992-93 to build a combined conference/ ~ performing arts center an the charter bus lot. Bond issue initiatives to support #hese proposals were rejected by the Vail electorate. In 2002, an inquiry was made to determine if three municipal uses - a conference center, performing arts facility, and a second sheet of ice -could be accommodated an the site, It concluded that the three functions and their associated parking would require not only the charter bus lot but also the entire area now occupied by the LionsHead parking structure. The following factors influenced Council`s decision to select the charter bus lot for the conference center site: • Both sites are large enough, and the cost to build the conference center (excluding parking] would be approximately the same on either site. • Locating the conference center at the VR maintenance site would entail a significant additional cost for parkingrVail Resorts employees, estimated at up to $7 million for spaces to accommodate 3x30 VR employees during the ski season. • The most problematic issue with the development of the charter bus lot has been. the community's desire to locate multiple uses (conference center, ice skating, 10 CRAFT FOR FINAL REVIEW, 2110145 performing arts, youth center) on the site. The 2QQ2 inquiry made it clear that the site can effectively accommodate only one major use. • The central location of the charter bus lot on the in-town shuttle bus route was viewed as a significant plus. After reviewing the pros and cons of the two sites, and after Vail Resorts offered $4.3 million far public parking on a site other than the maintenance facili#y lot, the Town Council voted to locate the conference center on the charter bus Iot. 2. Site Location and Physical Characteristics The 50,000 square-foot charter bus lot is located at the eastern end of the LionsHead parking structure. Until 1962, when the ski area opened, the site was a sheep pasture. It was acquired by the Town of Vail in the early 70's and occasionally used as a dumping ground for construction material. In 1976, it was cleared of debris and paved for parking. During construction of the LionsHead parking structure in 1979, material excavated from underneath the new structure was disposed of as till on the charter bus lot. The charter bus lot drops some thirty feet from the frontage road elevation (8180'} to East LionsHead Circle t;at 8150'); most of this grade change is taken up by a steep slope along the southern edge of the site. Today, the flat portion of the site is used to park charter ski buses, RVs and horse carriages. The lot also provides the point of access to and egress from the public parking structure, so construction of the conference center will necessitate modification of khe garage's entrylexit point somewhere else along the frontage read. The site is bounded on the north by the I-7Q right-of-way and South Frontage Road and on the south by East LionsHead Circle, which for private vehicles dead-ends in a turnaround at the south edge of the site. Vehicular access to the site and service and delivery operations for the conference center will be most practical from the north (frontage road) side, although pedestrians and passengers using the in-town shuttle buses will most likely €~nter from the south side. At the southwest corner of the lot, there is a two-story stairway providing a pedestrian link from the existing parking structure to the library and Dobson Arena; this, too, will have to be modified in the conference center plan in order to preserve the connection. CTL1Thompsari's initial geotechnical investigation of the sife in 2001 see Appendix E) made recommendations for excavation and construction based on analysis of subsurface conditions. Test borings found dense, silty gravel subsoils with cobbles and boulders typical of an alluvial landform and capable of supporting foundations and slabs on grade. In some test holes, groundwater was close to the elevation of East LionsHead Circle. CTLIThompson is now completing additional borings on the conference center site to update their analysis and finalize their geotechnical recommendations. 3. Current Zoning The conference center site is currently designated as Genera[ Use Zone District by the Official Zoning Map of the Town of Vail Public buildings, theaters, meting rooms, convention facilities, and public parking are conditional uses in this zone. All development standards within the General Use District are prescribed toy the Planning ^l3AFT FOR FINAL REVIEW, 7J10fi15 ~ ~ 1 r 1 I and Environmental Commission. The following paragraph is excerpted from the Town of Vail Zoning and Subdivision Regulations: r The genera! use district is intended to provide sites for public and quasi-public uses which, because of their special characteristics, cannot be appropriately regulated by the development standards prescribed for other zoning distrr'cfs, and for which development standards especially prescribed far each particular development proposal or pro,~ect are necessary to achieve the purposes prescribed in section f2-7-2 of this title and to provide far the public welfare. The genera! use district is intended to ensure that public buildings and grounds and certain types of quasi- public Uses permitted in the district are appropriately located and designed to meet the needs of residents and visitors to Vail, to harmonize with surrounding uses, and, in the case of buildings and other structures, to ensure adequate light, air, open spaces, and other amenities appropriate to the permitted types of uses. 1n addition, the site is part afi both the LionsHead Master Redevelopment Plan area and the LionsHead Public Facilities Investment Plan area. Phase 2 of the conference center master plan provides the option of redeveloping the LionsHead parking structure. If condominiums or guest accommodations are proposed as part of that redevelopment, it may be necessary to rezone the site to the LionsHead i Mixed Use Zone Dis#rict, which can accommodate a variety of private as well as public uses but which has development standards that may be more difficult for a large public facility #a satisfy. In addition, Vail Resorts has covenants on the parking structure site that may affect future private redevelopment options; these covenants would have to be addressed in the development of a Phase 2 program. ~ r 4. Existing Uses Adjacent to the Parking Structure and the Charter Bus Lot Residential multi-family condominium buildings of three to five stories are located around the site to the east, west and south. Together, these buildings contain 246 residential condos of various sizes. Many of these units are used as guest accommodations and managed in rental pools. Vail International (with 56 residentia! condominiums) is immediately adjacent to the east and the Lodge at LionsHead (57 condominium units in three buildings} is located to the south; access to both buildings is via East LionsHead Circle from the west. Neither building has commercial space. Both are contemplating additional development on their properties. To the west of the parking structure are four condominium buildings built in the 197Q's: Vantage Point (65 units., some 80% of which are available for short-term rental), Vail 21 (i2 rental units and 2non-rental units), LionsHead Centre (21a residential units, about half of which are short-term rentals, plus 11 commercial condominiums that house eight retail businesses, including Vail Resorks ski school), and Tree Taps (28 units). AU of these buildings have ground-floor commercial/retaik space; The Tree Tops development includes a detached one-story commercial building that is currently vacant. All these buildings use East LionsHead Circle for vehicular access. 5. Preliminary Identification of Environmental Issues A Phase l Environmental Site Assessment (ESA), completed by Walsh Environmental Scientists and Engineers in October 20Q4 {see Appendix D), was based on a records review, aerial photograph interpretation, visual site inspection, and review of a past Phase !ESA for the property. The report concluded that: 12 DRAFT FOR FINAL REVIEW, 21~©If35 The environmenta! condition of the Site may have been impacted by pasf or current activities on the Sife or surrounding areas.... Potential environmental concerns exist as a result of they Site's former use as a dump. These concerns include coniamfiation of soil and groundwater from buried materials, and the generation of methane from the decay of buried organic materials such as trash and wand. A Phase I! ESA is recommended to further evaluate these concerns. Walsh's initial review identified no other recognized environmental conditions that would . warrant additional assessments or evaluation of soil or groundwater at the site. Walsh has completed the feldwork for the Phase II environmental investigation, which confirms that no hazardous or harmful materials are present on the site. Town staff has identified seueral other potential environmental issues that may be encountered in development of the site. An Environmental Impact Report (E1R} will be done by the Town to analyze these issues and identify mitigation measures: • Seasonally high groundwater levels and the probability that permanent dewatering systems will be required for any building levels below elevation 8150 feet; • The need to control storm drainage to minimize the potential far erosion and to install ail and grease separators in parking areas to prevent water pollution (water quality may arguably be better by covering the existing charter bus parking lot}; • Increased volume of vehicular traffic, increased congestion on South Frontage Road, and increased potential for conflicts between vehicles and pedestrians; • Air quality impacts from increased traffic and diesel fumes (impacts are negligible compared to re-suspended solids coming from I-70}; • 'Increased parking demand and, on the other hand, opportunities for shared use of public parking. • Impacts on neighboring properties because of loading and delivery facilities at the conference center; • Noise from construction, conference center operations, and special events; • Views of and from the conference center and a uiew corridor from the charter bus site proposed in the LionsHead Redevelopment Master Plan (this issue is still being discussed}. F. APPLICABLE COMMUNITY PLANS AND GQALS Four adopted planning documents include policies and objectives relevant to the proposed conference center on the charter bus site: 1. Town of Vail Comprehensive Land Use Plan (1986} The Town of Vail Comprehensive Land Use Plan was adopted in November 1986 after extensive community input and detailed review and analysis by the Comprehensive Plan Task Farce, the Planning and Environmental Commission, and the Vail Town Council. The primary purpose of the plan was to provide a basis for future land use decisions. The secondary purpose was to analyze a number of properties awned by the Town of DRAFT FQR FINAL REVIEW, 2l1t7l05 t3 Vail to determine their suitability for various types of community facilities. As outlined in a chapter of general, goals and policies, the following goals are relevant to the Vail conference center project: 1.3 The quality of development should be maintained and upgraded wherever i possible. ' 7.70 Development by the Town of Vai! of Town-averted lands (other than parks and open space) may be permitted where no high hazards exist, if such development is for public use. 2.1 The community should emphasize its role as a destination res©rt while commodatin da visitors. ac g y 2.4' The community should improve summer recreational and cultural opportunities tp encourage summer tourism. ~~ 3.9 The total bed base should be preserved and used more efficiently. 4.4 The connection between the Village Gore and LionsHead should be enhanced through: a) lnstallatian of a new type of people maven; b) Improving the pedestrian system with a creatively designed connection, oriented toward a nature walk, alpine garden, andlor sculpture plaza; c) N'ew development should be controlled to limit commercial uses. i The Comprehensive Land Use Plan also includes an analysis of the LionsHead parking structure lcharter bus lot site and recognizes its potential, in conjunction with Dobson Ice i Arena and the Vai] L'sbrary, to form a civic center complex. The proposed Vail Conference Center has the potential to be a positive influence in the furtherance of these goals, 3. The Town of Vaii 5treetscape Master Plan (199'S) The Streetscape Master Plan includes a chapter with recommendations for improving. East LionsHead Circle and its connecting segment (the "Chute"} to the Libraryl Dobson ice Arena Plaza (pages 7~2d -see Appendix f}. The primary goals of the plan in this area are: • To "extend the streetscape character of the Libraryllce Arena Plaza to East LionsHead Circle and West Meadow Drive" (page 1 a); • To "bring back the feel of walking along the nearby Gore Creek corridor" page 13}; • To "s#rengthen the desired pedestrian-oriented character" of )*ast LionsHead Circle by adding a 6' to 1 D'-wide paver walkway along the south andlor north side of the street (page 14} in front. of the LionsHead parking struc#ure. The Streetscape Master Plan also suggests that the control gate at the tap of the library chute be relocated westward to the east side of the Treetops commercial building and that the vehicular access to Vail International and the Lodge at LionsHead buildings be improved at the carne time- Finally, it makes several recommendations for reconfiguring the congested area at the southwest corner of the LionsHead parking structure and making it more visible as the entry into the LionsHead mall. 14 DRAFT FOR FINAL RivVIEW, 2/'{0105 3. Uail Transportation Master Plan (1993 and subsequent updates) The Vail Transportation Master Plan identified a number of action steps relevant to this project, including: • Designation of skier drop-off areas; • Better entry feature monuments and directional signage; • .Retention of the existing public parking supply and its expansion where possible; • Evaluation of replacement sites suitable for parking oversized vehicles; Possible relocation of the wes# turnaround for the in-town shuttle buses from Concert HaII Plaza to East LionsHead Circle; • Phased improvements to the frontage road, including a continuous bike lane, left-tum lanes, and landscaping. • Evaluation of possibilities for improving loading and delivery functions, . 4. The LionsHead Redevelopment Master Plan (1998) The LionsHead Redevelopment Master Plan was the result of more than two and a half years of effort to devise appropriate strategies and incentives for the redevelopment of LionsHead. The plan was initiated in 199fi by the Town of Vail Council, who recognized that LionsHead lacked the economic vitality of Vail Village and was likely to fall even further behind as competing resort communities pursued new development and upgraded their own facilities. It was formally adopted by the Town Council in December 1998, (Refer to the executive summary of the master plan in Appendr`x H.) The boundaries of the LionsHead master plan study area were detiried as: • 1-70 on the north • Middle Creek an the east (the drainage just west of the Vai6 Valley Medical Center) • The Town of Vail ! US Forest Senaice boundary to the south south of f=orest Road, not including single-family lots) • Red Sandstone Greek to the west just east of the Glen Lyon office building} The LionsHead master plan recommends a number of policy objectives and specific action steps to improve the LionsHead study area, with par#icular emphasis on the quality of public spaces and the pedestrian environment, the control of vehicular circulation, revitalization of the retail sector, and incentives for private property owners to pursue improvements to the architectural and aesthetic character of their buildings. The proposed Vail Conference Center is a direct outgrowth. of initiatives recommended in the LionsHead plan. overall objectives of the LionsHead Redevelopment Master Plan include the following: • Improve the quality of the pedestrian environment as a generator of activity, especially the east-west connection extending from the west entrance of Dobson Arena to the west end of the LionsHead mall. • Enhance the visual and physical connections to the natural environment (i.e. Gore Creek and Vail Mountain.) • Provide efficient vehicular access but minimize the negative impact of vehicles on the pedestrian environment and on adjacent residential areas. • Connect new facilities and developments to the public transit system. DRAFT F©R FONAL REVIEW, 2110/05 ~~ • Develop a consolidated, efficient service and delivery system and reduce its interference with existing traffc patterns and pedestrian areas. • Provide enough incremental parking to serve the needs created by new facilities. In addition, two specitRC redevelopment objectives of the LionsHead master plan are especially relevant to this project: Create a "Val! Givic Center" to tie together existing civic facilities (the arena, the library) with the development of additional public conference space on the charter bus lot. • ©evelop the south face of the LionsHead parking structure as a mixed-use project with ground-floor retaillcommercial and local-oriented housing above with the goal of activating this segment of the pedestrian corridor from Vail Village to LionsHead. The specific objectives in the LionsHead Redevelopment Master Plan that relate to vehicular circulation and parking are addressed in Chapter 3; objectives relating to aesthetic character, the quality of the pedestrian environment, and overall consistency of the conference center project with the LionsHead master plan are discussed in Chapter 4 of this document. G. PUBLIC PROCE55 1. The Public Process to Date The Fentress Bradburn design team, in conjunction with Town of Vail staff and the Vail Town Council, determined that an essential component of the design process was the organization and implementation of a comprehensive public process. The goal has been to encourage a broad spectrum of public input and create an open, two-way communication link between the design team and the citizens of the Vail community. This comprehensive communication plan included a series of public outreach meetings designed as community open house forums, a regular series of Town Council updates, and several joint gatherings of all three town boards (Council, PEC and DR5). The plan also entailed the accumulation of an extensive email database to allow the regular dissemination of project information and pasting of information on the Town of Vail website. The local newspapers have been very comprehensive in their coverage and good publicity has been generated for all public input sessions. On August 18, 24p4, the project kicked off with a full day of interactive sessions with a number of stakeholder groups, including lodge and hotel operators, adjacent property owners and residents,. utility service providers, transportation planners, Town of Vail offcials and staff members, and the conference center advisory committee. The design team personally contacted these stakeholder groups and invited them to express issues, concerns and goals for the Conference Center. An evening meeting open to the general public was similarly organized and was well publicized and attended, A record of all of the comments that were received was generated to guide the design team. On September 2, 2004, follow-up public meetings and site tours with the same stakeholder groups were organized and a second community open house was held to • f ~, • 1f DRAFT FOR FINAL REVIEW, 21~Of05 review the initial comments and to allow for additional input.. The purpose of these meetings was to ensure that the design team understood important areas of community concern and allowed a further exploration of certain key issues that had been raised in the earlier sessions.. in particular, the design team met on site with representatives of the adjacent Lodge at LionsHead management team and some owners to address view corridor issues. They also met with the adjacent Vail International Condominiums management team and some owners to address access and view issues. The design team also toured the LionsHead parking structure with Town staff to review operational issues related to parking and circulation in an effort to determine the feasibility of modifying the existing structure. A comprehensive set. of comments, concerns, issues and goals generated in these sessions was developed and organized, without prioritization, into Like categories. These categories include vision and goals, image, functional considerations, transportation issues, parking, services and utilities.. On September 13-70, 2004, the design team gathered in Denver to begin generating master plan concepts to respond to the larger contextual issues that affect the design of the facility, in particular: parking, Frontage Road circulation, public transit, pedestrian connections, and future redevelopment opportunities on and around the site. Many ideas were generated, then winnowed down to five sketch diagrams showing haw program elements, parking, circulation and infrastructure might be arranged on the site. The pros and cons of each were identified by the design team, Town staff and adjacent property owners who were invited to come to some of the work sessions to react to the team"s initial diagrams On September 21, 2004, a presentation of the five conceptual site plan options was made to the Vail Town Council in a public hearing that was well attended by the members of the Planning and Environmental Commission, the Design Review Board, the conference center advisory committee and members of the public. The next day, September 22, the design team hosted an additional community open house at the Vail library to present the site pkan options and solicit additional citizen comment. Based on the comments and public input received at these sessions, a preference for the site plan concept described in this master plan was evident. There was general consensus that this alternative addresses community objectives most effectively and allows the greatest flexibility far future expansion of the conference facility and possible future redevelopment of the LionsHead parking s#ructure, On October S, 2004, a public joint meeting of the Vail Town Council, Planning and Environmental Commission, Design Review Board and the conference center advisory committee was held to review a refined version of the preferred site plan and to review several building stacking and massing options. On October 19, 2004, a weA attended Town Council meeting was held to present and ask for input on three alternative architecture! style concepts (traditional, contemporary, and nature-inspired). A community open house was held the next evening at the Vaii library, f On October 26, 2004, another series of stakeholder meetings was scheduled to ensure a broad spectrum of the community had an opportunity to review and comment on three alternative approaches to the architectural s#yle: one that evoked Bavarian traditional DRAFT FDR FINAL REV[~W, 2f14105 1l j archi#ecture, the second following a more contemporary style, and the third inspired by ~ ~ natural forms, materials and processes. Stakeholder groups who participated included LionsHead merchants, a group of local Vail architects, adjacent owners and the lodging 'y community. Public input and comments were carefully recorded and tabulated. In early December, with a recommendation from the Conference Center Advisory Committee, the Town Council voted to move forward with the "naturally inspired" approach. Since then, meetings focusing on the architectural direction have been ongoing with the advisory committee, comrrzunity stakeholder groups, Town staff, and Council, Presentations on the status of the project have been given to the Vail International Homeowners' Association meeting on November 25, 2DD4 {focusing an their access}, the Vail Valley Homeowners' Association annual meeting on December 29, 2004, and the Vail. town meeting at Donovan Pavilion on December 30, 2004. A group of meeting planners from the Denver and Vail Valley areas met on January 5, 2005 to review the design and provide feedback. HVS International presented its updated business plan #o the advisory committee and local hoteliers on January 10, 2003, and work sessions with HVS, independent operators, event planners and consultants regarding operational issues are ongoing. Tentative dates have been scheduled in March for more public meetings to review the evolving building plans and the master plan. in the meantime, a regularly updated project webste encourages public comments. f 2. Summary of Primary Themes from Public Input { ' The following list summarizes the most substantive comments from community ~~. stakeholders who participated in public meetings and open houses listed above. A complete record of public comments is included as Appendix F. (An asterisk "' indicates that the comment was made by more than one stakeholder group.} :. i-IOTFLIERS • "Create ayear-round economic engine that will bring snore people to town.. • 'Provide a dedicated drop-off area and easy access from al] forms of transportation. • Provide dedicated parking far the conference center under the structure. • 'Provide for future expansion of the facility, • Create a sense of connection to the outdoors andJor provide an outdoor space. ADJACENT PROPERTY O WNERS • Preserve private development opportunities and rental prospects. • Reduce vehicle traffic on East LionsHead Circle. • Minimize noise, traffic, impacts of construction. • Preserve views. • `Create a timeless landmark building that works wi#h the surrounding buildings {existing and future} and is also noteworthy when seen from above. • Screen the loading and service area; access it from Frontage Road, not from East LionsHead Circle. • Concerned about proposals to add retail on the parking structure facade, though other stakeholder groups thought it could help to animate?the street as a pedestrian connection to the village. • Concerned about building bulk and mass. • Preserve existing vehicular access {Vail International}. 1 S DRAFT FOR FINAL REVIEW, 211 OIQS GENERAL PUBLIC • Assure an energy efficient, environmentally c~anscious design -something the community can be proud of. • Focus on conference space as the primary function. PUBLIC WORKS • Satisfy traffic safety concerns on Frontage Road by widening the roadway and other improvements. • Doubt. the wisdom of spending money to expand or retrofit the existing parking structure. 3. The development Review Process The development review process for the Vail Conference Center will entail an application to the Town of Vail Planning and Environmental Commission for review of a Conditional Use Permit and development plan to allow convention facilities. This process will include a review of the project's compliance with the LionsHead Redevelopment Master Alan. The development review process will also include an application to the Town of Vail Design Review -Board for review and approval of the architectural design and site treatment as outlined in the Town of Vail Zoning and Subdivision Regulations. Town Council will make the final decision to approve the plans and proceed with issuance of bonds. Hearings of all town boards are open to the public for comment.. A CDOT access permit will be required for changes proposed to the frontage road. c -~_ ~ , DRAFT FOR FINAL REVIEW, 2l1Ql05 19 CHAPTER 3 TOWN-WIDE CONCERNS: FUNCTIONAL ISSUES This chapter addresses areas in which the conference center project will affect functiona! issues of concern to the community as a whole, specifically: vehicular circulation and traffic flow on the frontage road; public transit; public parking; and service and delivery functions, In each of these areas, decisions have been made in the programming and site planning of the conference center/ parking structure site with the intent to reduce the potential for negative impacts in these areas and #ake advantage of opportunities to contribute needed public faciiities. A. VEHICULAR CIRCULATION 1. Frontage Raad improvements The LionsHead Redevelopment Master Plan called for improvements to South Frontage Road to facilitate and clarify traffic flows and to improve its aesthetic appearance, break up its perceived width, and create a better overall image for LionsHead. The conference center design team, URS traffic engineers and the Town of Vail Public Works staff have used that plan's recommendations as a point of departure and have updated the projected traffic volumes and turning movements on the frontage road after completion of a conference center. Both the 1998 plan and the recent update agree that the roadway must be widened to handle the increased traffic loads, and both suggest the addition of a bike path and a median. The primary difference is that the new projections have prompted the addition of another 'l2-foot west-bound traffic lane (as shown in Fig. 3-1 below and the roadway section, Fig. 3-2, on the next page). The addition of west- and east-bound lanes is considered essential to handle increased traffic loads along the frontage road as LionsHead continues to develop. The west- bound lane will extend from the main Vail roundabout to the relocated entry of the LionsHead parking structure, allowing traffic to continue west unobstructed by cars waiting to turn into the parking structure. This additional west-bound lane, combined with a dedicated left-turn lane into the parking structure, will allow far maximum stacking ability during peak arrival times. The additional east-bound lane will also extend to the main Vail roundabout. DRAFT FOR FfNAL REVIEW, 211o1f}5 21 Fig, 3-7, Modifications to South Frontage Road recommended as part of the conference center protect. _ ~~ ~ l ~z {~ I 0. Y~ IlI ~~+ ~K 6 t J ill ~~ .-~ ~ Y ~ r ~ d/1 ~ 1 1+e~- -__~. _ ... .~ a n. t~ ~a r;~~~ _~ r =~ f .- i'- J 1 ~ ~ O l! ~ { W _... " ~j1 ~~ _ _ .~ ~a } w ~ a ~_ -~ ~. 1-'- .. W n J= v .. ~w ~~ S. :] d -- - •J '~ , ~s O G ~ h I ~ ~ 'n a# ,m n rx .W ~~m ~ R' a Cv ~ ._ > ~ ~ ~o b v ~ +A V JP- ~ x V~_. LI s ~ ~ O W ~ F- Y V U ~~~ • Figure 3-2. Diagrammatic section of madifreations recommended to South Froralage F.,oad (URS~. 22 L}F~A.FT FOR FINAL REVIEW, 2f10105 The addition of a six-foot shoulder along the north side of the frontage road will provide space for overflow parking during peak ski days. A fen-foot pedestrian/ bike path will be ~~ constructed along the south side of the road to complete a continuous pedestrian! bike path from Cascade Village to Vail Village. A landscaped median will help to screen I-7Q and will define left-turn movements into the parking structure, the conference center, and East LionsHead Circle. The parking structure's relocated exi# will have two dedicated turn lanes out of the structure and onto South Frontage Road: one lane for cars turning left into the west-bound lane and the other for cars taming right into the east-bound lane. Visually, these modifbcations to the frontage read, when completed, will create a "rand Boulevard," providing an aesthetic entrance to the Town's commercial core areas while improving vehicular traffic flaw. 2. Reduction of Congestion and Conflicts on East LionsHead Circle a. Improvements at the Intersection with the Frontage Road The LionsHead Redevelopment Master Plan identified the need to alleviate congestion at the intersection of East LionsHead Circle and South Frontage Road and to reduce traffic volume an 1 ~ East LionsHead Circle_ Because East LionsHead Circle is currently only one lane each way, right-turning traffc at the intersection with the frontage read tends to back up and block in-town. shuttle buses turning left at that point. Anew dedicated-right-turn lane onto the frontage road is recommended to separate these two flaws, alleviating some congestion from the problematic intersection (Fig. 3-3), b. Improvements at the East Portal to the LionsHead Mall One area of acute conflict is the intersection at the southwest corner of the LionsHead parking structure, where skiers walking across East LionsHead Circle from their cars to the LionsHead mall and ski lifts converge with traffic of various kinds. In a previous redesign of the intersection (1980's), a ,pedestrian crossing was defined with pavers to differentiate it from areas where delivery trucks and buses load and unlaad, but it does not provide adequate control, and pedestrians persist in walking through the already crowded service area. The LionsHead Redevelopment Master Plan identified the need to reduce congestion in this area by restricting access to all vehicles other than in-town shuttle buses, emergency vehicles, and private cars belonging to residents in neighboring buildings. The current plan far the Vail Resorts' core site in LionsHead ~Arrabelle) includes an eight-bay underground loading area which will accommodate most of the service and DRAFT FOR FINAL REVIEW, 2,`10105 23 Fig. 3-3. L7edicated right-tam lane at ,Frontage Rd. delivery functions that now park in the east portal turnaround area. Additionally, the relocation of hotel vans and skier drop-off to the North Day Lot will leave only the in- town shuttle buses, ernergency vehicles, and local residents as the primary traffic on East LionsHead Circle. Better directional signage would also contribute by reducing the number of lost drivers on the street. Relocation of service and delivery functions, hotel vans and skier drop-off to other sites will also help to reduce trafl"ic volume on East LionsHead Circle east of the congested portal. The conference center design team has considered the option of constructing a bridge over East LionsHead Circle in order to separate pedestrian traffic from cars, service trucks and buses at the troublesome confluence, An ADA-accessible elevator and escalators would be required. The pedestrian bridge would force pedestrians and skiers Pram all levels of the parking garage to go up an elevator or escalator to cross the street, then down to ground level an the other side via another set of escalators and elevators. This complex crossing would be confusing and very expensive due to al9 the vertical circulation pieces, the heated bridge, and the enlarged, snowmelted transition areas an bath sides of the bridge. Therefore, the team has concluded that this is not a realistic option. The construction of a tunnel was also studied, but it suffers from the same convoluted circulation and the expense of vertical circulation elements. This too was discarded as a possible solution to the problem. ~i Fig, 3-4. Qne concept for reconfiguring the east portat intersection to make the an-grade pedestrian crossing safer in this opfion, the Subway Annex building is retained, and the stairs from the parking structure are unchanged. With the reduction in the number of vehicles stopping in or moving through the east mall portal that will be achieved when Vail Resorts completes its LionsHead projects, an at-grade pedestrian Grassing becomes a viable and safe solution, At a minimum, the conference center master plan suggests moving the town shuttle bus turnaround ~, slightly eastward to separate pedestrian crossings from vehicular zones (Fig, 3-4}, Neva pedestrian crosswalks should be heated and defined by special paving to create a safer connection between the parking structure and the LionsHead walk. Decorative handrails and planters could be added as pedestrian barriers to direct 24 DRAFT FUR FINAL REVIEW, 2110/05 pedestrians into the crosswalks. Town shuttle bus stops will be provided to the north and the south of the relocated turnaround and, in this option, lost drivers would use the turnaround south. of the conference center.. Consistent with the LionsHead Redevelopment Master Plan, a piece of public art or other iconic element in the mall entry plaza is recommended #o provide a visible landmark at the portal to the LionsHead mall. A more ambitious reconfiguration of the east portal intersection could be undertaken in conjunction with an alternative to develop a transit facility at that location, which would necessitate removal of the Subway Annex building and relocation of the public restrooms and Youth Services function now housed there. See Fig. 3-73, Section C, Pu61ic Transit, for a diagram.) This option would reconfigure the street as well, providing a new place for lost drivers to tum around and go back to the frontage road without driving all the way to the turnaround at Dobson Arena. c. Relocation of Hotel Vans and Skier Drag-off The Lions lead Redevelopmen# Master Plan anticipated that hotel vans and skier drop-off would be relocated from the east LionsHead portal, where they cause considerable congestion, to Vail Resorts' North Day Lot, where they could be integrated into a redevelopment plan for the property. Vail Resorts continues to support this concept. d, Access to the Vaii International Condominium Building Currently, the access #o Vail International is a driveway from fast LionsHead Circle that runs be#ween the conference center site and Dobson Arena, interrupting a desired link between the #wo public facilities. The conference center design team dRAFT FOR FINAL REVIEW, 2l1ai05 25 ,wig. 3-5. Although the conference center can be 6uitt without moving Vari lnternattona!'s access drive, ideas for relocating the access point to the frontage marl ware studied. agrees with the LionsHead Redevelopment Master Plan that the optimum solution to this potential conflict would be to relocate Vail International's access to the frontage road, side of their property. This concept is physically feasible, bath at'nhe east side of the Vail Iraternatianal property, via a new driveway (possibly in cooperation with the Evergreen Lodge), andlor at the west side, via a driveway shared with the conference center's service and parking entry (Fig. 3-5}. Although the Vail International condominium owners also feel that access from the frontage road would be to their benefit, it does not appear realistic that the owners will be able to reach agreement an a relocation scheme within a timeframe consistent with the conference center design process and the timing of critical design decisions. Consequently, conference center planners are moving forward with a plan that does not depend upon relocating the current access. Town staff has noted, however, that the number of pedestrians using East LionsHead Circle will increase after the charter bus lot is developed and if additional residential ar retail uses are developed on the parking structure sits (as recommended in the LionsHead Redevelopment Master Plan). Safety of pedestrians crossing from the conference center to the arena is of foremost concern and will likely limit the continued abili#y of charter buses delivering guests to Vail International to use the existing driveway far backing maneuvers. Because of the Town's (and the residents') desire to avoid any increases in traffic volume on East LionsHead Circle, it is also likely that any future development of additional residential units on the Vail International property will trigger a requirement that access to the condominium complex be relocated to the frontage road. e. brop-off Area for Conference Center Attendees •i i • 26 DRAFY FQR FINAL RE11lE1N, 2/9p/~5 Fig. 3-6. Proposed drop-off area for the conference center To avoid increasing the traffic volume on East LionsHead Circle, a prerequisite far conference center planning has been that ail vehicles entering the new facility will access it from South Frontage Road. A drop-off lane large enough for three charterfevent buses will be accessible from the east-bound lane of the frontage road and will be wide enough that both buses and cars can pass vehicles that are unloading passengers (Fig. 3-S, previous page). The drop-off area will be covered to protect unloading passengers from the weather as they gather in the north entry plaza and prepare to enter the conference canter. The proximity of the drop-off to the conference center parking entry will facilitate valet parking during events. Taxis and private vehicles will also use the drop-off lane to deliver eventlcanference attendees. A modifcation to the diagram in Fig. 3-6 that would provide for U-turns from the west-bound frontage road into the conference center drop-off area is being studied; project traffic consultants are unsure if GDOT will deem that option acceptable. ©nce charter buses have unloaded passengers at the conference center, they will be directed to park in West Vail on North Frontage Raad ar possibly in Ford Park {see Relocation of Existing Uses, Chapter 4, Section E). B. PUBLIC PARKING 1. Parking-Related Objectives in the LionsHead Redevelopment Master Plan The LionsHead master plan recommended undertaking further study to determine a more exact projection of parking demand in the LionsHead area but, in the absence of such a study, estimated that another 4001 to 500 parking spaces would be needed to meet the increasing demand for skier parking.in the Tawn of Vail. Since the adoption of that plan, Tawn staff and Vail Resorts have generally agreed that another 4g0 public parking spaces would help reduce to fewer than tlfteen the number of days during the ski season that cars must be parked an the frontage road. This number is irrespective of any additional demand created by development on the charter bus lot. The LionsHead plan also recommended that: • The Town consider adding another parking deck to the LionsHead parking structure and/ar constructing a secondary parking structure in west LionsHead, on or near Vail Resorts' maintenance yard, or on the West 'Day Lot {an option Iskely precluded by Vail Resorts' development objectives far the site); The Town should not permit any net foss of public parking as a result of future development on any property in LionsHead, including the conference center site. 2, Engineering Analysis of the Existing LionsHead Parking Structure Carl Walker Parking, Cnc. has evaluated the existing LionsHead parking structure to determine the condition of the structure, its suitability for expansion, its compliance with current building codes, and the effect of its design configuration on efficiency of circulation and operation. the consultant's report also includes recommendations on relocation of the parking entryJexit point, alternative revenue control options, and the feasibility of a transit center within the structure. (See Apperadfx A far the complete final report.) DRAFT FOR FINAL REVIEW, 2/10!05 27 Code Issues. The LionsHead arking structure was designed in conformance with the P 1979 Uniform Building Gode in effec# at the time. However, under the 20103 International Building Code IBC), which is Haw the design standard for Colorado, the parking structure fails to satisfy many code regulations pertaining to ventilation, fire suppression, ADA-accessible parking spaces, and guardrail Heights. Significant modifications to the parking structure may require improvements to bring the modified portions of the structure into compliance with IBC code provisions, although "portions of the. structure na# altered and not affected by the alteration are not required to comply with the code requirements far a new structure." The Walker report Hates that an upgrade to the fire prevention system would probably be required in any case, at a cost of X400,000 to $500,000 per covered tier of parking. And, should other code compliance upgrades tae required, "they could total X250,000 for handrails and guardrails, $200,000 for an elevator, and, possibly, $150,000 for plumbing upgrades." If the garage were to 'be expanded vertically or if the openness of the existing structure were affected, additional mechanical ven#ilation would likely be required to meet code. Structural Issues. Walker's review of the structure found it "to be in reasonably good condition given its age and exposure," However, after performing an analysis of the vertical and lateral load resisting systems, the parking consultants concluded that the ~ existing s#ructural systems are not sufficient to support an additional level of vertical expansion. In order to expand the structure upward, the existing foundations would need to be upgraded or an independent support system would need to be constructed. ~ The sheer walls and foundations would also have to be upgraded to handle the ~ increased lateral loads. Operational Issues. Working with the Town's transportation manager, Carl Walker Parking also analyzed the operations of the existing parking structure. They concluded that the structure's split level design., two-way internal flow, and one-way interna9 ; ramping system cause significant circulation conflicts, long waiting times to exit during peak peeiods, and an unsafe pedestrian environment. ` To reduce exiting times and improve the existing structure's operations until it can be redeveloped, Carl Walker Parking has recommended adoption of a combined central pay and exit cashiering system. Central pay stations would be conveniently located inside the parking structure to allow people to pre-pay and exit though express lanes. The exit cashiering system would function in the same manner as the current operation but will be improved by the addition of the central pay express lanes, a new relief exit to the west (see relief exit diagrammed in Fig. 3-i1), and the ability to use the exit through the conference center during times when no events are being held there. (See. conference center parking access and circulation diagram, Fig. 3-9,) The Walker report also advocates converting the two-way circulation system within the , garage to a one-way system with angled parking, as the two-way flow pattern causes traffic conflicts, confusion for users, and safety hazards for pedestrians. Although the conversion could reduce the capacity of the garage by an estimated 100 parking spaces, Walker lists a number of advantages, including improved circulation flow, shorter exiting , times, greater ease cal parking, better visibility for drivers and pedestrians, and reduced r potential for accidents. If the loss of parking spaces is unacceptable, Walker strongly recommends converting at least the northern half of the tap deck to a one-way flow in conjunction with the relocation of the garage entry/exi# point. ~$ DRAFT FOR FINAL REVIEW, 2101{15 f~ecorrrmendafion Aaainsf Verfical Expansion. Carl Walker Parking was asked to evaluate the pros and cons of adding parking on top of the existing structure versus constructing parking underneath the conference center. The consultants determined that parking below the conference center is preferable because, among other reasons, the operationaE deficiencies of the existing garage will be made far worse if the capacity of the structure is increased. The Walker report concludes that, °we do not believe that a vertical expansion tof the existing structure] is very practical from a cost, constructability, or operational standpoint."' Considering the high costs associated with the structural and code upgrades, as well as the operational deficiencies identified by Carl Walker Parking, the design team and Town staff have recommended against adding a deck to the existing parking structure, at least in the initial phase of conference center development. The Conference Center Advisory C©mmittee and Tawn Council are in agreement and have expressed a preference for the development scenario that, by putting parking under the conference center, preserves the option to demolish and replace the existing LionsHead structure in the future instead of investing money in retrofitting it. 3. Projected Parking demand Associated with the Conference Genter Projections by the Town's transportation consultan#, Felsburg Holt & Ullewig ~FHU}, and by HVS, the consulting firm that prepared the business plan for the conference center, estimated that event activity at the conference center would create additional demand for 125 parking spaces. With this number, i# was expected that the facility could host a • conference for 700 people even during a peak ski day. The 125-space target was incorporated into the program requirements given to the conference center design team. In addition, to avoid any net 9oss of public parking, the building program requires replacement of any spaces lost in the existing structure due to relocation of the entrylexit point; this number is currently estimated at 70 spaces, for a total parking requirement of 195 spaces associated with the conference center. Subsequent work by HVS was requested to revisit and verify the conference center parking demand projection of 125 spaces. In January 2005, HVS issued a revised parking analysis appendix to its conference center business plan. 4See Appendix B for the complete report and the~assumpiions an which the parking projections are based.) The HVS analysis explains that it is typical to plan fora "design day" (i.e. the majority of days, when there are sufficient parking spaces to satisfy demand) rather than a "peak day°' (i.e. the busiest days of the year, when parking demand is at its maximum} to avoid the cost of building spaces that sit vacant most of the year. In calculating parking demand, it is standard practice to consider 75% to 85°/° of peak day demand as the design day; however, at the Town's request, HVS used 90% as the design day percentile in its report. In its design day projections, HVS considered bath the "base demand" (skiers and other visitors} and the incremental demand associated with use of the conference center for meetings and evening events (attendees and employees}. Significant conclusions from the HVS analysis include: • The number of parking spaces the Town will need to add because of the conference center is a function of the design day demand rr1 fhe ski season; the facility will not cause demand to exceed design day supply in summer and shoulder seasons. pRAFT FOR FWAL REVIEW, 211o1a5 29 i • In the peak day demand scenarios, parking deficits wile occur with or without the conference center at noon and 3:00 PNI during the ski season. Deficits also occur in the peak scenario at 7:OD RM in the summer,. although this is less problematic than ski season deficits because there is more capacity in the Village structure. ` • The HVS business plan estimated that the conference center will need 18 permanent full-time employees. Larger events may require as many as 70 to 80 part-time pers©nnel. HVS recommends providing only 10 parking spaces for facility s#aff and visitors, it suggests that other employees be given incentives to park remotely and use Town and County public transit. 1 The peak day scenario indicates that the conference center will create an estimated demand for 62 additional parking spaces {52 plus 10 spaces for employees). This suggests that the 125-space target "exceeds the number of spaces necessary" to satisfy demand generated by activity at the conference center. However, if the goat is to avoid increasing the overflow parking at the LionsHead structure, "The 125 addi#ional spaces would decrease the number of overflow cars [related to skier demand] and provide additional capacity to handle peak conference center demand." • After construction of 125 net new parking spaces with the conference center, the only time when estimated demand will exceed capacity on a design day is during the ski season at noon {a deficit of 99 spaces, versus a deficit of 175 spaces at that time of day without the new conference center parking). The HVS analysis concludes that "the addition of 125 parking spaces is mare than sufficient to accommodate the event-related demand projected for the conference center at the highest demand periods when spaces are at a premium. The additional parking spaces would create the added benefit of reducing overall excess parking demand at the LionsHead structure, as the design day demand or less will occur on 90 percent of the days during the ski season." 4. Parking and Service under the Conference Center Following on the recommendation of project engineers against verkical expansion of the existing parking structure, the project architects have determined that 320 parking spaces could be developed on three levels underneath the conference center (Fig. 3-7), A fourth underground level, bringing the total to 455 spaces, may be physically passible but. would add significantly to the cost per space and is not being actively pursued. • 30 DRAFT FOR FINAL REVIEW, 2110f05 Figure 3-7. diagrammatic north-south section through the conference center showing parking le~eis and the lcaading area underneath the ballrooms. The 320 proposed spaces under the conference center would satisfy the following .~ needs: • 125 spaces to be reserved for conference center use when needed; 70 spaces to replace those lost when a new north entrance is created for the existing parking structure; • 125 new spaces for the general. public. Minus the 70 spaces intended to replace those lost to the new entry, this plan yields a total of 254 net new public parking spaces. These spaces can be operated as an integral park of the LionsHead parking structure when not needed for conference center activities. Vail Resorts has committed $4.3 million to be used for the development of additional public parking., The company is willing to apply this amount to the cast of the 320 parking spaces underneath the new conference center as long as the 125 parking spaces associated with the conference center are made available on most peak ski days, when the probability of a large day-time conference event is small. The protect transportation consultants and cost estimators anticipate that the cost per spade of putting parking below the conference center is similar to the cost of putting it over the existing parking structure. According #o estimates in the Carl Walker Parking report, the cost per space under the conference center could range from $2.8,000 to $32,500, depending on haw many levels are built and without including soft costs and dewatering systems. The cost per space for vertical expansion of the existing structure could range from, $32,250 to $37,500, without including soft costs, new mechanical system, or demolition but assuming that all code-related and structural upgrades are included. (ln contrast, new construction of above-ground parking is estimated at $22,000 per space.) As a second phase in the effort to address the public parking challenge, Vail Resorts has recommended that the Town and the resort company work together to develop a funding source for a new parking structure on the Vail ResartslHoly Cross maintenance facility site in west LionsHead. Preliminary design work by Vail Resorts has indicated that a four-level above-grade parking structure with 400 spaces could be created on the site, which currently provides surface parking for Vail Resorts employees. If this plan were to be pursued, it would be understood that half of the 400 spaces would be reserved far Vail Resorts employees; the other 200 spaces would be available for others employed in the Tawn of Vail. With the 250 net new parking spaces underneath the conference center and 200 new employee parking spaces at the Holy Cross site, Town staff is confident that current skier parking on the frontage road could be reduced to fewer than fifteen days a season. This strategy does not preclude the redevelopment of the LionsHead parking structure. Because the conference center parking can be operated independently from the LionsHead parking structure, the existing structure could be replaced in' phases. The northern half of the existing structure co~rld be demolished first and replaced with a new and more efficient garage of equal or greater capacity. During that phase, temporary access ramps and temporary relocation of entry/exit gates to Fast LoonsHead Circle will DRAFT FQR FINAL REVIEW, 21ifllo5 31 permit operation of the southern half of the existing structure until construction of the new parking structure is carnpleted. At that time, the south half of the structure can be tom down, leaving an open site for redevelgpment of more active uses along East LionsHead Circle. A separate entryfexit for bath parking and loading under the conference center will be located on the building's east side, accessible and highly visible from both west- and east-bound lanes of South Frontage Road (Fig. 3-8). This entrylexit will also serve as a much needed relief exit for the LionsHead parking structure during peak exiting times when parking under the center is not needed for conference participants. Trucks going to the loading area wi11 share the same drive. Cars will tum into the parking structure after the first ramp, while service vehicles will continue another level down. to the enclosed loading docks (Fig. 3-9; see also the section in Fig. 3-7). Vail International could access the frontage road by sharing this ramped driveway if the Vail international Condominium Association elects tv seize the opportunity. The new conference center parking will include at least one connection back to the LionsHead parking structure, allowing the conference center's parking to function as part of the LionsHead parking structure on peak ski days. This connection can be closed off when necessary, allowing the two parking structures to operate independently of one another sa that the conference center parking supply can be reserved for exclusive use by meeting and event participants. ~I . ~. • 32 KRAFT F(JR FINAL F2F1/iI=W, 211t7i{l5 Fig_ 3-8. East-side service ramp_ Frg. 3-9. Conference Center parking access and connections to the existing LionsHead parking levels (level below ballrQOmsJ. 5. Relocation of the Entry to the LiansHead Parking Structure i The current entry/exit of the LiansHead parking structure crosses the charter bus !ot and will be displaced with the construction of the new conference center. Carl Walker Parking has determined that the best location far a new entry is in the middle of the north side of the existing structure, where there is maximum distance between the numerous curb cuts along the frontage road and adequate distance from the intersection with East LiansHead Circle. This location also provides the longest stacking lanes inside the structure to accommoda#e the volume of cars exiting during peak periods. The new entrylexit will displace 70 existing parking spaces, which will be replaced in the new parking supply underneath the conference center. The existing access point to the parking structure consists of five gates that change between entry and exit lanes depending on the need. Based an parking projections, the feasibility study by Cori Walker Parking (Appendix A) identifies an expanded need for three entry lanes and. five exit booths in order to attain an acceptable level of service (LOS A or B). The new entry design (Fig. 3-Zt]) will have two entry lanes from the frontage road that will feed three entry ticket gates. The exit will have four cashier booths that will feed two exit lanes onto the frontage road; one of the lanes will be a dedicated right turn and the other will be a dedicated left turn. This new entrylexit is operationally equivalent to the entrylexit gates in place today; if and when the LiansHead parking structure is redeveloped, it can be redesigned. I]RAF-f FOR FINAL REVIEW, 2I10io5 ~3 Fig. 3-?0. ,4elocated entry and reconfigured ticket and cashier 6aoths, t.ionsNeadparking strucfure, i ~( 6. New Exit at the West End of the LionsHead Parking Structure C, PUBLIC TRANSIT ~~ To improve the efficiency of the existing LionsHead parking structure, Carl Walker Parking has identified the option of an additional exit to East LionsHead Circle from the second level of the structure. This exit would be used only to provide relief during peals periods. To make it funetian efficiently will require an additional turn lane onto East LionsHead Circle, which will feed into a dedicated right turn lane onto South Frontage Load (Fig. 3-T 1}. The addition of this lane will separate the majority of the traffic turning right from the in-town shuttle buses turning left, alleviating some congestion from the problematic intersection. (These improvements are not included in the conference center project budget -see Estimated Costs far lmpiementation, Chapter 5, Secfion B. ) Fig. 3_q't. Relief ex+t from west end of t..ronsHead parking structure ~If 't. Transit-Related Objectives in the LionsHead Redevelopment Master Plan The LiansHead Redevelopment Master Plan identifies two specific actions to maintain and improve the level of service of the Town's transit system. The first is the addition of a right-turn Rabe from East LionsHead Circle onto South Fronfage Road that would reduce delays for town buses attempting to turn ~ left onto the frontage road. (This recommendation has been incorporated into this master plan -see Section A.2.a. and Fig, 3-3 in this chapter.) The second recommendation in the LionsHead plan was the development of a municipal transit center in LionsHead to accommodate regional buses, charter buses, skier drop- vff, hotel vans, and service vehicles. This action was recommended for several reasons: First, it was deemed necessary to handle the growing number of regional buses serving Vail, a growth trend that is expected to overload the capacity of the existing Vail Village transit facility. Second, it was seen as an essentiaC step in the effort to alleviate circulation conflicts between buses, pedestrians, cars and service vehicles in the congested area between the LionsHead parking structure and the east portal to the LiansHead mall. Except for Eagle County's ECQ buses and the Town's West Vail buses, all of these modes of traffic a delivery vehicles, in-town buses, hotel vans, and private cars -use that turnaround on East LiansHead Circle. By diverting at least same of these 34 Df~AF7 FC3R FINAI. REVIEW, 21'lD/D5 modes to other sites, a new transit center in LionsHead would reduce con cation 9 and hazards to pedestrians. .y • Third, a new transit facility was seen as the best option for relocating charter bus foading and unloading after development of the existing charter bus lot. The LionsHead plan identified the North Qay Lot as a site ideally located fora multi- purpose facility for regional and Town buses., charter buses, delivery vehicles, hotel shuttles, and skier drop-off. one of the advantages of this location is that it would funnel pedestrian traffic into the LionsHead mall at its center point, changing the distribution ofi pedestrian circulation through the Dore area and helping to energize the western portion of the mail that currently suffers from underutilization. The plan also recommended that potential regional transit systems, both vehicular and non-vehicular {i.e, trains, monorails, etc.}, be investigated so as not to preclude opportunities for future intermodal connections. 2. Alternative Locations for a ~'ransit Center As part of the master planning process for the conference center, URS was engaged to evaluate and compare four options for development of a new transit center that could accommodate all the modes of transportation mentioned above and that could handle a minimum of five buses atone time. The four options included; • A multi-use development by Vail f~esorts that incorporates a transit facility an the company-owned North Day Lot, consistent with the recommendation in the LionsHead master plan; • Anew transit center on the tap deck of the existing LionsHead parking structure, assessed from the frontage road {Fig. 3-y2); • Anew transit center as part of a redevelopment of the LionsHead parking structure site; • A transit facility in the East LionsHead Circle turnaround site, at the southwest corner of the LionsHead parking structure {Fig. 3-13). There is a fifth option: the no-action alternative to leave the regional bus stop at Concert Hall Plaza. Although the least costly alternative, this site is too small and oddly shaped to be considered for a full transit program ar any ancillary uses. Also, it does not offer a very direct pedestrian route to the mountain, and its continued use as a bus and delivery stop limits the redevelopment potential of a property that could be more effective as the western portal to the LionsHead core. It is likely, however, to remain the designated stop for ECQ and regional buses until another transit center option can be developed. 3. Criteria for Evaluating Alternative Transit Center Sites Factors that were considered in the evaluation process included: • Adequate physical space for the desired transit program (~ buses, 5 Shuttle Wans) and the requirements for safe vehicle circulation and maneuvering; • Convenient access far buses an Town of Vail and regional bus routes {and i-70); • Safe distance between transit center entry and any roadway intersection {+/- 15Q'); DRAFT FOR Fft~1A~ t~EVIEw, 2/10!05 35 r ~l • Separation from the Village transit center; • Space for a sheltered waiting area and public restrooms (~+/- 600 sq. ft.); • Potential to combine space with the information center; ,3 ~ • Structural capacity of the existing LionsHead parking garage; • Cost of development; f • Potential for future expansion of the transi# center; • Projected impacts on frontage road traffic; • Impact on pedestrian circulation patterns, parkicularly between the LionsHead parking structure and the retail core, as well as between the #ransit center and the I retail core; also, safe movement within the transit center and proximity to pedestrian destinations; ~ • Visibility of the facility from 1-70 and the frontage road; i • Ease of rider transfer from regional to in-town shuttle buses; • More even distribution in the pedestrian flow into the LionsHead core area from transit stops and parking; • Ability to assemble a partnership with Vail Resorts and Federal agencies; i • Availability and timing of Federal mass transit funding; • Community input. These criteria were considered starting points for discussion; not all of them proved significant in the initial evaluation of alternatives. 4. The North Day Lot Based only on functional criteria, URS agreed with the LionsHead Redevelopment Master Plan and concluded that the best location for a transit facility is the North Day Lot (Appendix C, Vail Transit Center Site Selection Report). The largest of the alternative sites, this location provides more space for a full transit program and potential future expansion, has better vehicle access from the frontage road, is accessible far pedestrians coming from the north side of 1-70, and strengthens the north-south .pedestrian axis into the LionsHead core. Despite the preference for the North Day Lot, however, a number of difficulties and challenges exist: • The Town of Vail does not have adequate funding now to commit to a $9-$10 million transit facility, but Vail Resorts is prepared to move forward now with the redevelopment of the property. • Federal grant dollars may be available in 2007 for a transit facility; however, the Town's funding request far $7 million could be reduced or eliminated. • There is significant opposition from adjacent property owners to a transit facility an the North Day Lot that will serve dieseE buses. • Vail Resorts will mane forward with a ~ 50-bed affordable housing project on the North Day Lot if the Town elects to locate a transit facility with buses an the site. However, if large buses are not located on the North Day Lot, Vail Resorts is willing to entertain the idea of a cooperative redevelopment of Timber Ridge in exchange for being allowed to develop an accommoda#ions project on the North Day Lot.• 36 [3 RAFT FOR F11~3AL REVIEW, 2/1DlD5 5. Transit Center an the Existing or Redeveloped LionsHead Parking Structure Whether a transit center is built on the tap deck of the existing parking structure or is part of a future redevelopment on the parking structure site, many of the pros and cons of the location are similar in bath alternatives. Advantages they have in common are the absence of adjacent residential properties, the fact that the site is already Town-owned., the direct vehicular access from the frontage road, and the proximity to the conference center. A major disadvantage of both alternatives is the proliferation of curb cuts along the frontage road, which could be confusing far drivers and may be unacceptable to CDOT. ~Qther disadvantages are that the site is minimally adequate in size for the desired program, displaces existing parking spaces, and offers no expansion potential. Further, the pedestrian connection to the retail core and the mountain is the longest of any alternative, and the walking route from the existing structure does not offer ahigh-quality experience. (ln a redevelopment project, it could be redesigned.) Neither alternative leaves space for landscaping to improve the visual quality of the frontage road. If the transit facility were built on the existing garage in phase 1, with the conference center, it would have to be relocated for the duration of phase 2 redevelopment, then later rebuilt. As part of a redevelopment of the site, the timing of the transit center project would be complicated by the need to involve an outside developer. • In addition to the functional evaluation by URS, the engineers at Carl Walker Parking were asked to evaluate the structural capacity of the existing parking garage to support bus traffic. They found that the IBC-required live-load carrying capacity is greater than twice the design load of the existing structure, and the. concentrated live-load capacity of the structure would have to be nearly ten times greater, or more, to meet code. Further, in evaluating similar precast parking structures that have been retrofitted for bus traffic, they found that the impact of buses had caused rapid deterioration of the double tee DRAFT FOR FENAL REVIEW, X114145 37 Fig. 3-i2. C©nceptuat layout of a transit center on the top deck of the existing LionsNead parking structure ~f flange connections in the structure. The Waiker report concluded that they would "strongly recommend against bus traffic on the existing structure unless extensive reconstruction is undertake'n." 6. Transit Center in the East LionsHead Circle fiurnaround Fig. 3-19. Concaptua! diagram of a The portion of East LionsHead Circle at the southwest comer of the existing parking structure and the eastern entry to the LionsHead mail is large enough in size to accommodate currently projected transit functions. The development of a transit center here is workable with certain caveats: 1} the Annex building (where Subway and Youth Services are located) will need to be removed and Youth Services relocated; 2} the stairs from the parking structure will need to be relocated; 3} the new leading facility under Vail Resorts' Arrabelle will have to be constructed so that service and delivery functions can be removed from this area; and 4} the North Day Lot redevelopment wilt have to be completed so that hotel vans and skier drop-off functions can be relocated. All driveways into neighboring condominium buildings can be maintained in their current locations under this scenario. Among the advantages of this option are that it offers the shortest walking distance from parking and buses to the mountain and it will not require that routes far the in-town 38 QRAFT FoR FINAL ~EV1~VV, 211Q1(~5 shuttle be modifed. Signifiicantly, it does not add new access points to the frontage road ~; ttherefore CDOT approval is not required), and it has the potential for funding synergies between Federal transit sources and local TIF monies. This option also solves some difftcuit circulation issues: By redirecting pedestrian traffic from the parking structure away from bus loading areas and by relocating same vehicular functions #o other sites, it simplifies vehicular circulation patterns through the area and eliminates. most of the conflicts presently experienced at the site. By providing a place for last drivers to tum around, it reduces traffic volume on the street. With better signage, new entry monuments, creative landscaping and a visible landmark of same kind in the arrival plaza, this alternative also supparks efforts to make East Lionshead Circle a more prominent entry into LiansHead. There are of course same disadvantages of this option apart from the necessity to relocate Youth Services and the public restrooms. From a circulation standpoint, uphill bus movement on East LiansHead Circle, combined with a proposed new relief exit from the parking structure, could cause congestion at the frontage road intersection. Vehicles coming in from the frontage road would be forced to go through a bus lane in order to drive to neighboring condos and could at times conflict with bus movements. There is ICmited potential for future expansion of the facility. Unless very well designed, a transit center at this location would not constitute ahigh-quality entry to LiansHead or an asset to redevelopment plans for the parking structure. 7. Conclusions and Recommended Direction The tJRS report concludes that, while the North Day Lot is their preferred site, the East LiansHead Circle turnaround site also warrants serious consideration. The option of including a transit center in a redevelopment on the parking structure site could be the most cost-effective solution but, because it requires deve{oper involvement, is the least certain option. Bath URS and Carl Walker Parking discourage a transit facility an the existing parking structure, at least not in phase 1 with the conference center and not without significant modifications to the structure. After meetings between Town staff, Vail Resorts, Town Council and advisory committee members, the following direction is proposed: • Lora#e an eight-bay central loading and delivery facility under the LionsHead core site development, to be built by Vail Resorts (Arrabelle). Plans for this development were approved by the Planning and Environmental Commission in 2Q04. This facility will allow delivery vehicles serving LionsHead stores and res#aurants to be removed from the east portaC area, During specified times of the day, allow charter buses to utilize the service/delivery facility under Arrabelle for loading and unloading passengers. Vail Resorts is agreeable, as this will improve skier operations by bringing guests from their buses directly up an elevator to obtain lift passes and meet ski instruc#ors within the same building- Dff-site parking for charter buses could be provided along North Frontage Road and/or at Ford Park. • Integrated with Vail Resorts' plans for development orr the North Day Lot, design a facility to accommodate hotel skier shuttles (gas vans) and skier drop-off (private cars). pRAFT FOR FINAL REVIEW, 211fl145 39 ~~ Maintain the regronal (ECO~ and west Vail bus stops at Concert Hall Plaza for the next twa,years. ~ Develop 'an RFP in 2fl06 or 2fl07 far the redevelopment of the LionsHead parking structure. The development program would include a transit facility far regional and Town of Vail buses within the project. At the same time, Tawn staff will continue to { evaluate the viability of the transit facility option in the East LionsHead Circle turnaround area. • if an interested and qualified developer is not found within the next few years, wave forward with the design and cans#ruction of a bus stop) transit center on East LionsHead Circle after the core site and North Day Lat redevelopment projects by Vail Resorts are completed. D. SERVICE AND DELIVERY 9. Relevant Objectives in the LionsHead Redevelopment Master F'ian The LionsHead plan reiterated a desire for a centralized service and delivery facility I somewhere in LionsHead -possibly the care site or the North Day Lvt - sa that use of the East LionsHead Circle area by service vehicles could be eliminated, if the transit ~> strategy outlined above is implemented, this objective will be accomplished. ~. The LionsHead plan also suggested that a service veh'rele parking area a# the west end of the LionsHead parking structure be considered if businesses in the eastern portion of ~r the LionsHead mall find that the central service facility in the Vail Square development is too far away for convenient deliveries. With the recommendations made in this plan, it would not be possible to accommodate service vehicle parking at that location. , Finally, the plan mandates that all site-specific service and delivery facilities be screened from adjacent uses. ~. The Conference Center Solution Service access to the conference center wil! share the parking entrylexit ak the east side of the new building (see Figs. 3-8 and 3-9). Anew left-turn lane will be added from South Frontage Raad into the ramped driveway that accesses the service area and parking. The entrance to the parking will immediately break off to the right and into the conference center's parking garage, while the service ramp will continue down to the next lower level. The servicelparking ramp wilt be screened from adjacent Vail International residents by heavy landscaping on a berm along the driveway. The east wall facing Vail International will be designed as an attractive elevation. The service area and loading decks will be completely enclosed, with interior space large enough for four trucks plus trash handling equipment. Because of its proximity to,Dabsan Arena, the conference center's loading area could be , scheduled far shared use by both buildings if events are coordinated in advance. 4Il DRAFT FOR FINAL REVIEW, 2+'10105 • CHJ~PTER 4 THE LIQNSHEAD CQNTEXT. +CQNNECTIONS AND C(~14'IPATIBILITY This chapter focuses on contextual and regulatory issues that have arisen with the proposal to locate a barge civic facility in LionsHead. The contextual issues examined here relate to several high-priority objectives identified in the LionsHead Redevelopment Master Pian, specifically: the quality of the pedestrian environment (Section A}; compatibility with neighboring uses and building character (Section B};and the enhancement of connections., bath visual and physical, to the natural environment (Section C)_ Other important contextual issues include the relocation of existing uses on or adjacent to the project site that will be displaced by the conference center (Section D} and the relationship of the project to Vail Resorts' plans for redevelopment of the LionsHead core site (Section E}. Fram a regulatory standpoint, there are tvuo primary considerations: compatibility with the Town's adapted development standards (Section F} and design guidelines (Section G} and an assessment of the project's overall consistency with. the LionsHead Redevelopment Master Plan (Section H}. A. THE PEDESTRIAN ENVIRONIWEENT 1. Adopted Town Objectives for East LionsHead Circle Key among a number of recommendations for pedestrian improvements in the LionsHead Redevelopment Master Plan was the enhancement of l=ast LionsHead Circle as an essential part of a stronger east-west pedestrian corridor linking Vail Village to the LionsHead commercial core. For the redesign of East LionsHead Circle and the addition of pedestrian amenities, the LionsHead master plan simply called for implemen#ation of relevant provisions of the earlier Town of Vail Streetscape Master Plan in a style consistent with the design improvements that have subsequently been proposed for West Meadow Drive and the Village. To make the street more hospitable to pedestrians, the Streetscape Master Plan (pages 13-20} identifed these specific streetscape improvements for East LionsHead Circle 4Fig. 4-~) and the plaza at the eastern portal to the LionsHead. maCl: • Reconfiguration of the existing east portal to LionsHead mall to reduce conflicts between vehicles and pedestrians coming to and from the parking structure see Section 3 below and Chapter 3, Section C.fi), • Separation of the pedestrian walkways from the vehicular roadway on East LionsHead Circle and reduction of the width of the roadway to 24'. Addition of benches and other site amenities along the north side of East LionsHead Circle. • Selection of new street lighting fixtures with a consistent design theme. • Addition of pedestrian crosswalks. • Consolidation of the driveway entries into the Lodge at LionsHead. CIRAF~' FDR F,NAL REVIEW, 2110105 41 AY 6- `- ~-b' PWUG ANT h5 FLK%,^(NNT ~-' FOf1 SEk7111G A1iE-4 r-ArTr mux- coNCEan p(]+~AY 2 SI~C'I'I0~ A f;,~.~r Lip:~s~~w cu~ci~; Fig. 4-1. Diagrammatic section Through East LionsHead Circle showing irnprovernents recommended in the Town of Vail Streetscape Master Plan (7991, page 2t)), Most pedesfrian improvements were proposed on the north side of the street, adjacent to the parking structure (the right side of this drawing). it is intended that these basic improvements -paver walkways oi~ both sides of the street, benches, new street lights and new pedestrian-scale lighting -will be part of the initial phase of conference center deveiopment, thaugh not included in the conference center budget or basic design scope of services. More intensive improvements in public spaces along the street could happen in conjunction with subsequent redeve{opment of the parking structure. 2, The Conference Center as a Connective Element and Catalyst for ,Activity A fundamental goal of the LionsHead Redevelopment Master Plan was to increase the vitality of the resortfretail sector in LionsHead by improving the aesthetic appeal, intensity and variety of .pedestrian activities at the ground floor level of care-area buildings., In Chapter 8, the plan states: Mf~1Cl1{ PL µ WALNIMAT ~fvEV wrrri ~/~ r~ urri F.a~Er7 The pedestrian experience of the public spaces within LionsHead is the most cn"tical issue for redevelopment....One of the most effective ways fo intensify this experience is through careful design of the architecture which deFnes the public spaces. Visually dynamic variation at the pedestrian level can help to avoid a monvtanous streetscape, and judicious use of ornament, detail, artwvark, and color can reflecf individuality and establish a variety of experience. The introduction of another civic building in the node that currently includes Dobson Arena, Vail public Library and the Vail Va11ey Medical Center was a deliberate choice meant to strengthen not only the concentration of community-based activities but aiso the pedestrian connection between Vail Village and LionsHead by adding another destination to the elements that punctuate the mile-long walking route. It is hoped that 42 pRAFT FQR FINAL RFVlEW, 2110!05 events held in the conference center as well as a proposed new civic plaza at the center`s south entrance will create new energy at street level and help to reduce the perceived walking distance between the Town's two commercial cores. Visually, too, the conference center will be a landmark that draws pedestrians through the civic node from both directions. The usefulness of the civic plaza proposed at the south side of the conference center will be enhanced by the proposal to move the existing vehicle turnaround that terminates the publicly accessible part of l=ast Lionsl~ead Gircle at Dobson Arena, The turnaround will shift either slightly to the west, as illustrated in Fig. 4-2, or farther to the west in conjunction with the transit center option at the southwest corner of the parking structure (see Chapter 3, Section C.B and Fig. 3-13). Either solution will help to strengthen the pedestrian connections among the various civic buildings and create a mare dynamic, multi-purpose public space at the pedestrian entry to the conference center. In addition, a physical on-grade connection between the conference center and Dobson Arena, possibly heated and covered, can fine achieved without blocking the driveway to Vail International or the pedestrian path to the Evergreen Lodge. (A covered connection is not included in the conference center construction budget.} • Direct pedestrian access from the LionsHead parking structure into the conference center will be provided via an elevator and new stairs that replace the existing steps at the southeast corner of the parking garage. Pedestrians going from the garage to the arena or the library will be able to circulate from the elevator to the walkway that connects to Dobson. t DRAFT Ft~R FINAL REVIEW, 2!10!05 43 Fag. 4-2. Goncepfual site ,plan diagram showing connections between the conference center, t]obson arena and the library, the relocation of the turnaround slightly fo the west, and space for a new public plaza at the south side entry to the conference eenter. 3. Pedestrian Improvements at the East Portal to the LionsHead Mall Section A,2.b of Chapter 3 discussed proposed traffic modifications at the east portal plaza to increase pedestrian safety by clarifying traffic movements and reducing the variety of vehicles using the area. Both alternative site plan concepts for the east portal turnaround area (one with a transit center, Fig. 3-13, and one without, Fig. 3-4) shift the bus stop and crosswalk locations in order to funnel pedestrians more directly from their point of origin (bus stops, parking garage levels} to their destinations in the mall. And both reserve a place for an architectural or public art landmark to anchor an improved public arrival plaza. The plaza itself would be redesigned in collaboration with the streetscape plans that are part of Vail Resorts' proposed'. Vail Square project. 4. New Pedestrian Gannectian frown Frontage Road to East Portal of LionsHead Mall Another needed improvement in the network of pedestrian connections, identified in the LiansHead Redevelopment Waster Plan, is a sidewalk along the north-south section of East LionsHead Circle up to the frontage road. This link would greatly improve the ' safety of skiers who have to park on the frontage road and walk to the LionsHead gondola. It would also serve as a secondary walkway to the LionsHead mall if transit f ~' facilities are developed on the LionsHead parking structure in the future. Further, it t would be the only connection. without stairs linking the i-7Q pedestrian overpass and recreation path to the LionsHead mall. When the Tawn proceeds with the design of streetscape improvements on East LionsHead Circle, this component is recommended ; for inclusion in the plan. 5. Retail Space along East LionsHead Circle The LionsHead Redevelopment Master Plan suggests that the Tawn consider wrapping the south fagade of the parking structure with a retail or mixed-use development in order to create an even stronger pedestrian corridor between Vail Village and LionsHead. The phasing plan for the conference center provides far this possibility, either as an addition to the existing structure or through redevelopment of the parking structure site. B. RESPONSES TO NEIGH6ORH(]4D CONCERNS 'l. General Concerns ofi Neighborhood Residents and Property Owners In initial planning sessions during September 2(}a4, the design team, Town staff and community participants identified a number of issues affecting the area immediately adjacent to the conference center site that residents wished to see addressed during the master planning phase far the new facility. The following key objectives of adjacent property owners were gathered from community work sessions:. • To assure that the new facility will not increase vehicular traffcc on East LionsHead Circle, and, if possible, to reduce traffc volume on the street. To access the Civic Center's service area from Frontage Road and screen it. r To maintain driveway access to condominiums currently served from East LiansHead Circle. 4~ DRAFT FQR FINAL REVIEW, 21'101475 • Ta create a facility generally compatible with the scale and character of adjacent ' civic and residential condo developments. To maintain existing pedestrian cannections to the LionsHead care from residential properties. • Ta discourage concepts for the conference center and its site plan that might preclude future redevelopment opportunities on adjacent properties. 2. Responses in the Gonference Center Master Plan Traffic Volume on Fast LionsHead Circle: All vehicular access to the conference center will be from Sau#h Frontage Road. In addition, the conference center master plan recommends relocating certain other vehicular traffic that currently uses East LionsHead Circle to other locations -hots[ shuttle vans and skier drop-off #o the North Day Lot and delivery vehicles to a new central facility under Vail Resorts' core site redevelopment. These master plan provisions should assure that traffic volume on the street is not increased by the conference center development and, on the contrary, should accomplish a reduction in traffic. • Service Access to the Gonference Center: Both service vehicles and parking for the conference center will access the facility via a ramped driveway from the frontage road on the east side of the new building. Because this is the only workable alternative for service access, there are concerns for its visibility from Vail International, so the driveway will be wail screened with vegetation, attractive retaining wails, and grading, Existing Driveways on East LionsHead Circle: The master plan does not obstruct any existing driveways to condominiums accessed from East LionsHead Circle. AI#ernatives for relocating the existing driveway to Vail international, which cuts across the potential pedestrian connection between .the conference center and Dobson Arena, were discussed with condominium owners but Wane seemed compatible with the project.scheduie (see Chapter, Seetion A.2.d}. • Compatibility in Scale and Character: With a facility of the size proposed far the conference center, it is difficult to mimic the scale or architectural character of adjacent residential condominiums and, in any case, it is the objective of the LionsHead Redevelopment Master Man to encourage significant upgrading of the area's existing residential buildings and to create a civic landmark with the conference center. The proposed building will be compatible in scale and use with other nearby civic facilities and, aver time, may be the catalyst for improvement in the exterior appearance of the adjacent parking structure. Although the footprint of the building will be considerably larger than that of neighboring buildings, the height of the building, at two oversized stories, will still be compatible with the neighborhood. Architects are proposing to use high-quality materials evocative of a mountain setting, which are consistent with LionsHead master plan objectives and should help to integrate the structure with existing and future buildings in LionsHead. c (See also the discussion of development standards and architectural guidelines in Sections F and G of this chapter.} • Pedestrian cannections: Existing pathway connections to the LionsHead mall and ski lifts from Vail international and the Evergreen Lodge will. be retained. The DRAFT F(}R FINAL. REVIEW, 2f1o/(}5 ~~ i walkway north of C3obson should be enhanced if the Evergreen Lodge becomes a ~I primary conference center hotel {Fig.4-3). Fig, 4-3. Diagram showing the pedestrian walkway north of Dobscan Rrena. This essential connection to the ski lifts for residents and guests in Vast lnternatipna! and the Evergreen Lodge to the east Witt be maintained, Options far 1=uture Development: Bafh Vail International and the Lodge at LionsHead have entertained the possibility of additional development on their properties. In the case of Vail International, this considers#ion is a factor in evaluating alternatives far reloca#ing their driveway access to South Frontage Road, as the owners do not want a new driveway to preclude future development over their current parking area. In the case of the Lodge at LionsHead, condominium owners were concerned that the designation of a protected view corridor from the conference center might limit the height of any new building on their property, but this does not appear to be a problem (see next section). C. CONNECTIONS T4 7HE NATURAL ENVIRONMENT The LionsHead Redevelopment Master flan recommended two strategies to assure that the increasingly intensive development encouraged in LionsHead would not cause the loss of visual and physical connections to what is ultimately the town's most important drawing card: the natural environment, primarily in the form of mountain. views and Gore Creek. The first strategy was to create as many green corridors as possible that penetrate into the developed areas of LionsHead. This has implications for the design character of public spaces and suggests that the pedestrian connection from the conference center to the Gore Creek recreational path be made more visible through signage, landscaping, and pathway impravements- The second strategy was to establish several key public view corridors to preserve and protect the visual connection to the natural environment. With particular relevance to this project, the LionsHead master plan recommended that the Town consider designating a pratec#ed view corridor from the charter bus lot (the conference center site) toward the ski ~ - mountain to the south. It is certainly true that views from inside the conference center to the 46 DRAFT FflR FItJA~ REVIEW, 21~101dS surrounding mountain landscape are a crucial design element that can set the facility apart from its competition and make it a special destination for meetings and events. ~> After a site visit with Lodge at LionsHead owners to discuss the potential view corridor, a photo simulation of potential development on the condominium property was done to show the impact on views of a new condominium building at the full allowable height (Figs. 4-4}. A new structure, even at a maximum allowable average height of 72 feet as indicated by the dashed line on the photo, does not appear to interrupt panoramic views to the mountain from the main level of the conference center. It was agreed by ail to review the view corridor issue again during schematic design, after the basic plan of the conference center is better defined and a specific view point from an important activity area in the new building can be identified. • D. RELOCATION OF EXISTING USES 1. Charter Buses Most charter buses are bringing skiers during the winter season, Vail Resorts has agreed that charter buses will be able to load and unload at the new loading and delivery areas under both the LionsHead core site hotel (Arrabelle} and the Front Doar. During the ski day, buses could park along North Frontage Road or at the east end of Ford Park. After construction of the conference center begins and until the completion of Vail Resorts' developments, it is recommended that the charter buses load and unload at the North Day Lot and park at Ford Fark, 2. Visitor information Center Town staff and the design team agree that it would be possible to house the visitor information center in the conference center if Town Council elects to add this use to the DRAFT FQR FINAL REVIEW, 2llalt?5 47 Fig. 4-4. View simulation from the main ballroom level of the conference center, looking over the Lodge ai LionsHead toward the ski slopes. The dashed line indicates a futr~re addition to fhe condominium property that rises to an average of 7P feet. development program and budget. However, spatial requirements for the information function, budgetary and operational implications, and other alternative sites have not yet been identified. 3. Youth Services The Youth Services Center shares space with Subway and the public restrooms in the small annex building attached to the southwest corner of the LionsHead parking structure. Although the facility, operated by the Vail Recreation District, is widely regarded as inadequate in quality and capacity, it will not be displaced by the conference center project. However, the portion of East LionsHead Circle in front of the annex has emerged as one of the preferred sites for a transit facility, in which case the annex building would have to be removed and Youth Services relocated to another site. As the planning process for the transit center moves forward and if this site is selected, a location and funding sources fora new Youth Services facility would have to be identified. 4. Skate Park The current skate park is a temporary summer season facility on the top deck of the LionsHead parking structure. It is considered to be worn-out and in unsafe condition, and it will not be reopened at the current location. Anew skate park is needed, but a site in town has not taeen found. 5. Horse Carriages The horse carriages will be relocated to the waste water treatment plant's parking lat. fi. Snow Storage Area far the LionsHead Parking Structure Construction of the con#erence center will reduce the snow storage area on the east end of the exis#ing parking structure and force maintenance crews to push more of the snow on the tap deck toward the west end. Proposals to add a right turn lane onto the frontage road from East LionsHead Circle and to open a secondary relief exit at the west side of the parking structure, both described in Chapter 3, may slightly reduce the width of the area available for snow storage along the structure's western edge (Fr`g. 4-5), More detailed analysis is needed to understand whether these changes will be acceptable and what might be done to offset the reduction in snow storage space. . Frg. 4-5. The snow storage area along fhe west srde of the LionsHead parking structure could 6e reduced by fhe new right-turn lane and auxiliary parking structure ~xrf proposed for East LionsHead Circle. ~, ~i 46 DRAFT FOR FINAL REVIEW, 2l10/D5 E. RELATIONSHIP TO VA1L RESORTS' CORI= SITE DEVELOPMENT PLANS The important relationships of this project to the major redevelopment proposed by Vaii Resorts in the LionsHead core are bath functional and aesthetic. They concern the design character of the connecting pedestrian streets, the continuity of essential pedestrian corridors, the relocation of certain service functions, the synergy of uses, and the aggregate impact of new development an parking supply and demand. Consistent with the LionsHead Redevelopment Master Plan, the underlying intent of both Vail Resorts' redevelopment and the conference center project is to increase the intensity of activity in LionsHead, making the area a more effective attraction for visitors and a much stronger factor in the Town's economy. In that sense, the proposed uses are both compatible and interdependent. The increased bed base and variety of activities that will result from Vail Resorts' core site development will inevitably contribute fa the success of the conference center, and vice versa. Continuous pedestrian corridors and a sequence of interesting public spaces will be important to assure. the full measure of interconnectedness and mutual benefit. The east portal to LionsHead thus becomes a crucial linchpin between the two projects, and improvements recommended there should be designed in coordination with Vail Resorts' design team and planned to coincide with completion of the core site redevelopment. To enhance pedestrian wayfinding, the signage, lighting and streetscape materials along East LionsHead Circle should harmonize with those proposed by Vail Resorts within the LionsHead core area. It is not necessary that the streetscape design be exactly the same in both areas; however, some continuity of materials and design elements should be worked out in consultations between Town staff and the respective design #eams. Distinctive and identifiable streetscape elements that express qualities unique to each area and that are located at key decision points along the pedestrian corridor will help to increase the level of visual interest and provide a.series of landmarks that assist in wayfinding. Regarding service and delivery functions, the inclusion of a central service facility in Vail Resorts' core site development will be of enormous help in improving the pedestrian experience between the eastern portal to LionsHead and the conference center. In terms of parking, both developments have proposed to provide enough dedicated parking spaces to meet the projected incremental demand attributable to the activities they contain. The question of architectura! design compatibility between the two developments is more difficult to answer definitively. The LionsHead Redevelopment Master Plan offers detailed guidelines that are specifECaliy targeted for the kind of mixed-use development proposed by Vail Resorts at the core site, but the relevance of the design guidelines for an iconic stand- alone conference center is less clear (see Section G below). While both projects are expected to make use of regionally appropriate materials and design idioms, it may be more important that the conference center have unique, identifiable character than that it be similar in architectural character to the care site development. F. APPLICABLE DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS 'The majority of the properties that fiali within the study area of the LionsHead Redevelopment Master Plan. are designated as the Commercial Core 7, LionsHead Mixed Use 1, or LionsHead Mixed Use 2 Zone Districts. The land use code provisions that govern __ I3RAFT F4R FINAL REVIEW, 2110105 49 ]]f 4 each of these zone districts contain development parameters, such as building setbacks, site coverage, and building height limits, which are intended to control certain aspects of design and development within these zone districts. The conference center site, however, is designated as part of a General Use Zone District. The Town of Vail zone district regulations recognize that a typical set of development s#andards may not be appropriate in the General Use zone District because of the special characteristics of public and quasi-public uses likely to be developed in that zone district. In accordance with the zoning code, all development standards for proposed building developments within the General Use Zone District are to be determined by the Planning and Environmental Commission (PEC) during the required conditional use permit review. Chapter 7 of the LionsHead Redevelopment Master Plan discusses development standards for private properties within the LionsHead study area #hat may vary from the development standards #hat apply to the zone districts identified above. However, Chapter ? is not specifically applicable to the Vail conference center site's General Use Zone District designation, and master plan standards relating #a density and gross residential floor area are not relevant to the proposed conference center use. While the LionsHead master plan does not recommend modification of pre-existing standards relating to site coverage, landscape area. ar setbacks, it recognizes the need foe flexibility in the application of development standards for those unique properties that are located in the pedestrian retail core ar that can contribute to the enhanced function and appeal of high-priority pedestrian corridors and spaces. In lieu of specitlc standards far building setbacks, step backs, massing, and woof forms, the ~, ." Vail conference center project is being designed to allow the building to meet the overall ~ ~ objectives of the LionsHead Redevelopment Master Plan, to accomplish the specific ~ ' development objectives for this centrally located site, and to satisfy the spatial and ~ programmatic requirements of a unique civic facility, ~ ' i. Development standards relating to employee housing may be applicable to the conference center project, Based on an estimate of new jobs that will be created by the facility, there may be a requirement to provide seven new employee beds. The possibility of a pay-in-lieu arrangement has been mentioned, but the issue has not yet been resolved. G. I~RCHITECTURAL DESIGN GUIDELINES The conference center site is surrounded by an eclectic mix of existing condominium and civic buildings, some of which are architecturally undistinguished and none of which conforms to any consistent style ar theme. The site is not part of the LionsHead care area, where greater consistency in architectural theme is a desirable objective. Pt adjoins a 26- year-old precast concrete parking structure that no one wishes to emulate but that requires an effort to respond with respect., to provide functional connections between the buildings, and to make their juxtaposition tolerable in the event that redevelopment of the parking structure proves unfeasible in the foreseeable future. In this eclectic context, the most important architectural qualities of the conference center and any future modification of the parking structure may be their contribution to the creation of memorable landmarks, a more dynamic street edge and a stronger connection to LionsHead. The architectural guidelines contained in the LionsHead Redevelopment Master Plan generally relate to the development and redevelopment of mixed-use commercial and 5D DRAFT FOR FINAL RE.v3EW, 211DID5 +~ residential projects and are not particularly applicable to an iconic special-purpose civic building. The Town Council's desire far a civic icon and the specific single use of this } building as a conference center suggest that its architec#ural design, while respectful of the design guidelines in the LionsHead master plan, should aim to create a landmark building with a unique architectural identity. The vision statement that introduces Chapter 8 of the LionsHead Redevelopment Master Plan, "Architectural Design Guidelines," states this general vision for the character of LionsHead: The architecture of LionsHead is envisioned as a unftied compQSition of buildings and public spaces based on the timeless design principles of form, scale, and order, made responsive to their setting and environment. !f is not envisioned as a strict dictation of a specific °style" or °theme".... The new image for LionsHead should move towards the future -using historical alpine references and Vail Village as antecedents. This design framework will alfow individual property owners freedom of expression...whife establishing and mar'ntaining an overall unifying character and image for the entire community. !n addition, it fs paramount that the redevelopment effort address specific design considerations generated by fhe location, climate, and surrounding environment, such as addressing views, using indigenous building materials, and reflecting the alpine herffage....However, wifhin this framework, the architectural language of 6uffdings in LionsHead should strive to reinterpret its heritage and look to the future instead of simply mimicking the past. A number of specific design principles and design elements are mentioned in the architectural design guidelines as toms by which individual buildings can contribute to the vision for a renovated LionsHead. Many of these, described below, are also relevant to the conference center design and have been successfully incorporated into the initial architectural concept far the facility.. The design team feels confident that the architectural concept for the conference center will respond in a satisfactory manner to the intent of the architectural design guidelines in the LionsHead master plan. • Portals: Certain buildings influence the initia! impression of a community as a welcoming and intriguing place. "Stand-alone structures [such as the conference center] can act as portals through appropriately scaled, large openings and significant mass 4Pa9e ~~~)•„ Edge definers: Through their mass and scale, edge-defining buildings help to establish the transition zones between neighborhoods or different uses. In this ease, the conference center also functions like an exterior wall against the interstate highway. Further, as the guidelines encourage, the building's eastern facade will not appear to Vail international as the back side; rather, through the use of textural materials and interesting window configurations, this elevation will also be attractive, Public Space Definers: Building siting and massing should be designed to defne exterior public spaces as versatile containers for pedestrian activity. The conference center plan responds to this guideline with the creation of new public spaces on the north and south sides of the structure that relate well functionally to the building's interior activity areas. • Landmarks: Certain buildings, such as the conference center, should stand out as t landmarks, helping to orient visitors and projecting an image of LionsHead as seen from outside the neighborhood (especially from the highway). I]RAFT FOR FINAL REVIEW, 21101Q5 61 Transition from ©utdoor Public to Indoor "Private" S ace• reativ { ) { ) p C e design of building .facades along key pedestrian corridors influences the sense of vitality and excitement. The design of windows, lighting, colonnades, porticos, artwork and other visually stimulating elemen#s invite pedestrians to linger and explore. • Ground Floor Diversity: "At the pedestrian scale, the street level should be dynamic and interesting, by varying forms and masses at the bases of buildings (page 8-17)." Building Height: The t_ionsHead master plan sets 82.5 feet as the absolute maximum height and 71 feet as the maximum average height for all structures in the study area. (See the LionsHead plan, page 8-20 for the manner of calcuiation_} Puddings that do not front on primary pedestrian retail streets, the ski yard, or important open spaces (this includes the conference center} may have a maximum initial eave height of EO feet, at which point they must step back a# least 12 feet. This does not mean that the building fagade can be unarticulated and flat; to the contrary, the horizontal and vertical planes should be broken up according to other guidelines in the master plan. Vertical Segmentation: The guidelines describe a concept that divides building elevations into base, middle and top levels, each of which displays subtle differences from the others. The intricacy and visual dynamism of the ground-level base are intended as a stimulating contrast with the less obtrusive design and "quiet" massing of the middle level. The tops of walls should be designed to "comfortably engage the roof" to avoid an abrupt transition in building form and to reduce the apparent height of the building. Materials: The design guidelines strongly encourage the use of indigenous materials for primary architectural elements. Particularly at the base level, materials of varying textures should Canvey strength and appear to anchor a building to its site. Stone veneers should appear substantial and structural. Hand-crafted and durable materials should be used for accent elements. Earth-tone colors derived from the natural landscape are encouraged. Roofs: The guidelines suggest a preference for pitched roofs in the Alpine tradition and a desire for a consistent roofscape as a unifying image of t_ionsHead when viewed from ski slopes above town. Large areas of flat roof hidden by a mansard roof are discouraged. Although the necessarily large footprint of the conference center makes a pitched roof across the entire structure impractical, the design team agrees that the roof form will be an extremely important and image-making component of the building's character. The LionsHead master plan allows unique buildings to be evaluated on a case-by-case basis according to design intent rather than quantitative criteria (page 8- 38). Doors and Windows: These elements should be recessed, not flush with the building facade in order to express solidi#y of structure at the base. Size of doorways and attention tv detailing should clearly differentiate the most important entries from secondary ones. Window shapes should be consistent with variations in building form, • Architectural Qetailing: The guidelines encourage the use of interesting details such as brackets, lighting fixtures, signs, and other ornamentation with hand-crafted quality "to infuse heritage, culture and artistry into the LionsHead envirarlment." 52 DRAFT FC7R FE~IAL RFWIEW, 2110f05 H. COMPLIANCE WITH THE LIONSHEAD RELEVELOPMENT MASTER PLAN The design team has concluded that the conference center master plan complies in all significant respects with the goals and objectives stated in the LiansHead Redevelopment Master Plan. However, certain components of this master plan represent changes from the specii•ICS, though nat the intent, of the LiansHead master plan. These changes include: • Certain. recommended roadway modifications reflecting updated analyses of traffic movements and volurr~e; • Anew strategy for developing a transit center, reflecting the current planning context; • The decision to supply parking under the conference center rather than on top of the LiansHead parking structure and to explore phased redevelopment of the parking structure; • The recognition that an iconic building may require some variance from design guidelines governing mixed-use buildings, particularly far the roof. In accordance with procedures specified in the Town of Vail Municipal Code, Town Council may decide to amend the LionsHead Redevelopment Master Plan by passing a resolution to adopt this master plan as an extension and refinement of the earlier plan. L~ DRAFT FoR FINAL REVIEW, 211©ID5 ~~ CHAPTER ~ ,' IMPLEMENTATION A. DEVELOPMENT PHASING Phase Clue -Year One • Confirm a temporary location that can be used to load and unload charter buses until Vail Square is completed. Determine a location far charter bus parking. • Find a temporary location far the Visitor Information Genter (or a new permanent location, if the decision is made not to include those functions in the conference center). • Remove the existing entryJexit lanes at the east end of the LionsHead parking structure and construct a new garage entrylexit point on the north side of the structure. Gate: constructian schedule must not coincide with ski season.) • Relocate existing utilities as determined by project engineers. • Finalize the plan far modifications to South Frontage Road and secure a permit from CDOT. Phase Twt~ -Years Two and Three • Locate and construct a temporary turnaround on East LionsHead Circle to facilitate vehicular circulation during construction of the conference center. • Construct the conference center building (20 to 24 months). • Complete the civic plaza and streetscape improvements on the portions of South Frontage Road and fast LionsHead Gircle that- are within the conference center project limits, • Complete streetscape improvements along East LionsHead Circle from the conference center project limits westward to the edge of Vail Resorts' project limits (ta be paid from TIF funds generated by the LionsHead Public Facilities Investment Plan). • Complete the roadway improvements an South Frontage Raad. Canstruc# a new right-turn only lane an J=ast LionsHead Circle at the intersection with South Frontage Raad (not in the conference center project budget).. • Construct a new secondary relief exit from the LionsHead parking structure. • Issue a request for development proposals to replace the LionsHead .parking structure with a new garage, a transit facility, and other development,. public or private, yet to be determined. • Make a decision on how and where to praceed with a transit center in LionsHead; request Federal funding. DRAFT FOR FINAL RDVIEW, 2,110105 ~~ • Modify or eliminate covenants on the LionsHead parking structure and determine i# a zoning change is needed.. Phase Three -Future Years • Redevelop the LionsHead parking structure site in one ar mare phases, ar • Add a transit center to the top deck of the existing parking structure. • Improve the arrival plaza at the turnaround area on East LionsHead Circle. • Make application to the Planning and Environmental Commission for a zoning change if needed for redevelopment of the parking structure site. B. CASTS Preliminary estimates of construction costs for the fallowing items were done in early January by cost estimators on the design team. They were based an schematic drawings and are subject to change as the architectural and engineering plans are re fined. • Conference Center -tats! project construction budget: $37,613,0[}0 • Frontage Road improvements in addition to basic project budget $752,400 • East LionsHead Circle, right-turn lane at South Frontage Road $113,400 • East LionsHead Circle, streetscape improvements $495,700 • East LionsHead Circle redesign of east portal turnaround area $521,600 (without transit center} • Transit Center {on top of the Lionshead Parking Structure} $3,404,000 • LionsHead parking structure relief exit $93,000 • C7n-grade, heated connection to E7obsan $103,730 Demolition and redevelopment of LionsHead parking structure $34,50(],000 • Addition of half deck an tap of LionsHead parking structure $7,500,000 (200 spaces} • Addition of whale deck (400 spaces) on LionsHead structure $10,900,000 r ~~ 56 DRAFT FOR FINAL REVIEW, 2I14f05 C. NE~CT STEPS In accordance with procedures specified in the Town of Vail Municipal Code, Town Council may decide to amend the LionsNead Redevelopment Master Plan by passing a resolution. to adopt this master pion as an extension grad refinement of the earlier plan. The development review process for the Vail Conference Center will entail an application to the Town of Vail Planning and Environments! Commission for review of a Conditional Use Permit to aliow convention facilities. This process will include a review of the project's compliance with the LionsNead Redevelopment Master Plan. The development review process will also include an application to the Town of Vail Design Review Board for review and approval of the architectural design and site treatment, Town Council will make the final decision to approve the plans. Hearings of all town boards are open for public comment. A CDOT access permi# will be required for changes proposed to the frontage road. An Environmental Impact Report will be necessary. A process to select a general contractor is underway. Based on the chosen contractor`s guaranteed maximum price and with a recommendation from the Conference Center Advisory Committee, Town Council will make the final decision on whether on not to proceed with the issuance of bonds, Construction of the conference center is expeoted to take 20 to 24 months, Before it can begin, the entrance to the LionsNead parking structure must be reconstructed in another location without interfering with ski season usage. DRAFT FAR FIM1IAL REVIEW, 2110!05 ST ~~£58~ N ~.~ c~ m.5 ~~ ~ Q. ~b IIF ~~~~m V mm 0 FQ Z O ~~_~ Z {.12 Wg~3G ~ ~~ ca~_m m dm } ~ ~7j ~ `~ ~Em~° ¢c~L ~ w_ S x~~~o F ~m~`0me f!J we ~~~.~ Oc~~e ~~ zw N F. • • r~ ~..~ W a w ~ ~ ~ O ~ p ~ z ,E` °~ E~m a$° ~ ~ aappp $ ?~ ~~ 43 E~ U ~-u _ Ti~~Ec ~ ?vij3~oy~ odo ~ a,aa~ mH ~rn"'mC7 `era l+c,.. a 4 ro ~c n.~c_~ °mcv m~~~ `~ m 07 E7i'OpCy m~~~C~~ ~ m ~~ };}~~`zm°E mm~ ~~~m ~p~ ~ C~{.~+YN~~ CC~O N~aC ~ ~~ ~ m~ q m ~ m m m ._ rev ~-E ,gp~C7 oy`~ ~~~m{ w mn r.~ L ~yO N ~ ~o~mL ~m ~m °'t3~401t oNCm Qa ~~~®wynm Ec$3c+sm~~a~~ ¢~n mrin w¢a ac>c5~o~3ga°oa d~ to ev "C 'a ~ `~ ° ~ p. ru, ~ b .~ L ~` '~ .~ ~ o ~ ~ ~ ~U ~~ m a E" o ..~ a c 3 ~+ vi '~~T~~ o ~~-~~ >~aV~ ~ ~~[:~ = ~,o°a~ ~, a ~.ti 3 ~ 4c ~ ~ b G ~ ~ .'~~' a~v'w ~ ~ '~ ~ tom. Z3 ,C p % ~ "O ~ ~ ~ ~ ? ~ 'y ~ '~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ Q+ ~' cC . a 67 ~ .. e~ ~ ~ ~•O ~ q~ ¢'y C ~ RS ~ ~ G e~ N v Ta cd '~ '.. vi '~ ~ Gp t.. ~'~ ~ ~ .C '{~ iE U b 3o~~a~,o sA .~ , ~ ~ t+ s~ yj y .~+ ctl ~" iZe ~? ~ O ~ ~ ~ fl. 'O C U O ~ ~ 30.~?~~~.~o o ~L-a ~~px ~3~~~~~Q ~~~~~~~ ~. .~.c^~ 7 u 0 v v c~ b oq a~ a~ .C .b .C O. ci? .~ ~3 O GJ .Q G cd GA b a~ X P rJ F~ u., a O .~ c~ m. a~ y b ~~ c 0 N Q n tV LC "Cy b 4. G. w v 'C7 ed 4-. O a~ .~ ~C C ~a 3 U .~ b .~ ~rC ~.~~m~Em` a ~. B ~ ~ ~ U m ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ t~ c cvc ~ m- m m ~~y G~ O my .. ID ~~°'w v Ewa~i a c' ~O~ ~ ~~m~m m.`o.ao~ 3L O mN~3~-m`~Ly _ and ~~~ m ~ ~~n~a EYE > ~°~ c ~ ~y ~~NN JO y~N910 Q=CL~~ N 'm ~~ U' v5 ~--~a~E~ d ~ p~ ~~ `gym r~a~o ~~~O:c_ (7 mow.. .2 ~LU,Lmr~E~ c '~r ~' ~ m A iL mm°a NmE 'c ~ o~~ ~ mSEarma9`m .~?1 °~~ _ ~c~mm~~UoU~i~ .Q m m ~ ^a ,,, ~ o.~QS c ~~~OC~~ d?~u~i USO trj ~y~~Q (a h '~ ~-, Q? Vy Q W .C ~. 0 a~ 3 ~, 0 ro W ~. g °a ti rn U a a z r- °o cV q~i z° .~ 0 .~ J~~,~G...,..r. • • i ~~ i ~i i • ~ Q, ~~ •~ .~ • w ~O 7 c {7 O m ~ t7 O O ca • • ~ -c fi x?{ .,~ ch `~ ~- ~ ac m ~ a ~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ m m~ ~+ ~ o o E t v ° m m e~ r~ >?my romcm m c °~mm E ~ ~ m~ ~=•anm cam m ~ m ~~~ m°~ ~ a~ ~ m U ~, E n -° .. 2 c °~ E c~ o a m O~ m~ m ui ~, d m u c~ ~ ~. E ~ ai U.I c = v ~? rli c+ ,- _ `~ °~ c ~' of ` 'o > 3 m n^ -- ~ ~ w 3 cs c d ~ ~ m w.E '~ m a ,o m ~ F- m ~ o ... '6`atirnpam.u v°1 m'~~~.~ n>' O apc~;Ug 2' 'O um~'mm~rt ~ O pwa"-o>^~ ' ~n°iiQ o~wU~~~ d a c ~ v, 7 -a 3 ~ 'a - ~ 4 ~' - _ , ~ 'c m'° ~.c 3oro~y~- ccroiro~-m __ oJ-odN° m p'-o U ar. ~~ac c_ ~E`v ~xnni~V ~,~a©..°.= c mcoa4~ ~ 4r~=m - m~'"'"tlm^p ~' 5 ~i ~'mm}°° roEti mmu~b°-m C Sm ~- oho Qq ~ ~~ YUao [~ cmo?~'~ ~ e O 'S ~io~omC ° ¢ O 5, mt"°,~.. _ 7 Uc~ aU'~Y°,`roua ,°•e ~~ mm •_.ce~~'m.m I4 Z u7 .~~tnmm~ 2 ~°mEu3? ° '~ ~ mtn u-c-~,Q '~ ~ EE°`.~71` e'Z niU-oL m' ~p a.°a~ U ~ t7 O -o°cai.r°iiNVm O _'°caiYv =,; c3 O °~cma pa ¢ ~ Q ~g °v~o~y °e ~od ec"c7Eo ~ °10 ; =mom m a®c= - U c..,U c~a U ~imQ U 'uY a c - U r~~ mm m ~ 2 c` - CSU3L=~~..~} m` V1 m~c~ro~a~ [~h m~c~mv°~cm U1 ~co-`Umt >. ~ 6D m~ °Uo~-m~ ~~N c~oyow ? ~m ° g._m~~~ ~ m~ma-z mmp~Em w m~ ~' ° L"c m~~ ~ ${~_`-"® ~' y l1.' ~°`~ _ ~`m ~'u~irL~'moi'~e .QivamUEm o o~ o}gym c o~ ~.o?amD m _m~'~ m 7~ tic p"`4 p.. ro~ m~ c = ~ aL:.. ra - ~°Y'c~ m H°'O>`m :jm ~ ncja~m ..~ F' c ~~n~ELC °~ Z Na__=m °.. y to a`+ zm_ u.. ~- a° ~ m.- °' ~~ ~ > -ELm'"' ZZ maro oNCa mZZ m' mmm"a cm O,.ZZ of a.m~~Sm ~ .ZZ ma~;~ ~~~'~ "z ~ j°^~~~ c~mZ m ~a~p°a°~~~'00 a }`~mYmc ~p0 a"'ma[[m~wcb0 'a © '°ri °mo~QO 'u ~.p~m ~~'a- a`i'm°c~m ~~ ed ~~yw a---.n EU~g~ U~ ~'Ea~'ioEam °c0~O ~°~"''Emma`Lm~O ~o..m7mm a. `8'~hQ m1f~~ ~°~mcai~~U~ ~~¢4ie'j ~'~~~ QL aU~uJmi ~°¢~A 4E C ~'~~mmH m¢~ qc--ova a°~'aa~ 4"mo~;~vi gin= ¢'~'26~ 40_ea m-Q~a Q~ Ga C dd m-~ ~i ~.o~ a a romp e @ smc._ m°cv ~ a`+"°-' ¢ U ~ o a -- m c > ~ .c m a E m m m m U ,,~ ° u. o c 7 E o- d m c~ l~ ~. E H.~1E`°m a mbcm r..:m Qm EB-" E m - -mam ~ =~~~d~mv ii m _ c o~-a em~ E me ° ooc~-t Ica m~~~ ~, e~`' m E~ ~ccm`~'ro`ar E~~ °~ `~ ...Um,~cu~m tb ~o ua J'~m~ m° v a 3 mOmv m E _ r m , mm-' ~ ~-~~viUNC 7 0'" O°~ cr -om ac~E d ttl dC7 me m u `~- c amcc~r a ~+~~~,c ca n y~¢`~°~~ m v~~ a~ +~ ri .~-~~c°iiaYEa'oE ~ o~n ~-' ma¢m ~~mm~i ~?E?U.g~rn rmv~i°mm~~ ~ mm~U~~~ aai m ~~U ~r. U.mEotl n. v, QE0.?~.2 ~ tC °- ~ ~m c cr J a r ~o Q. ~ [L (!~ ~,r . ~ ~ ~ E w ~Z~ E m ut ~ ~~~ ~ w ~ W ~ SC' W ~ ~ Z O~~? ~w ~Om ¢~ S3Ua w~ ro 8 0~ ~T-~ N H Q .Q.7 r u~ ~ •~ ^ ~ = U ~ °i a E y ~ O O 'L3 O 63 ~ ~ ~ O ~ ~ O O •~ S-. '«+ ~O ~.' dq C3 ~ ~ b O y ~ w+ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~a ~ ~ v ~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ Qrs ~ p v~ ~ °~ ~ ~ ~ ~ i ~~°' ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ .,c W ~ ° ~ ~ ~ y .~ 3 ~o a, 0 0 W v ~ ~ a~i ~ ° '~ ' a~ s ~. ti v ~ ~ o p,G ~ ~'~ ~~ ~ ~~ ~ a ~ --9 ~~~~~~~ ~ ~ a,'~ o a 3 ,~ ~ k. ~~3~a~d ~ o a. °.~w~v~ ~ a" -~ F ~ ~~ C e~0i ~ y ~ v ` ~Q 4, a~ Q O © ° ~ ~ ~ n..y A ~ ~ W [b Q ~ R! ~ ' ~ .. ~ .L~ O r ~ b p•i cI~ U ,...; 1Q .~ ~ ° rte, E-+ V E~ ~ ~ c~ .~_ 0 O O a~ 3 3 ~ ~ i;~; ~ Q ~ b n q ~y E ~ H m a ~~ ro m N a ria p N c { N _ ~ E a¢ S C m p ®~ T~ c p m V E =E C7~¢w ~~md~+p~ 0 6 o U~ U Q u~ V ~?mNVS°U u7a hm~= U ` ?~ m ~NQMt/JV7 .^ O O O 4. cry., a~ ~ ~ a' ro ~' w °' ~',' O U a~ a a cs cti v L w w .© O 0 b U E ~ i~ 0 9 a ~ ~~ m 4 a rn m 4 °mN°i» ~c C o m!-~mEm ~ ~ m~3 w~LLL E am c_ a om b r4n i~~.ip~m `y ~ 3~~g-gym a oir o¢~ S ~~r mv+CC~ c U .c~nE~ ~ °' U c~o.~c°°1' q~ ~ ~ "'q.c-mom ~~ ° w - t~ ~~ a ~ ror. U'crn~ ~' g C7 ~ `0OL?~~imv Vi O ~ r ~ L.~ ~ Q~ O O Z N_'-" Q = moCL_Np ~ ~® ~G?~ ~C3 C a~' a~,~m T. ~Q~ m~ EU O ~ ~U1~mao~ [i m~ ac, ¢ o a~~'~= ¢ a¢~ Qr17 acv `c Gov U E F°m>oi E ~~ c ~ ~ ,~ ai 16 ~ m G~j p aN'V~a a' ~mUE~OS f~ cJ mCJ~3~m° O 0 '~ N U s o a ti~ C C ca r-I a a~ a .~ x a~ a .~ 0 u .... y,~~~.. ''•.. o~: -~ '~ a ~ ~ ~ ~~ y,~, ~" • ~ • CL , cA . ,~4 o. w cn o ~a ~~ a W '~ Q5 w2 ~ in ~.roc~~- m mm a m"°'mca~z m ~ ~vv c ~_!' x >»my c ~ ~o>°' ~ 20 W+~ ~ ~s"-~®~ro7~~ _ K ` m `°u~ji~.~~ ~ ~~ m~~~~ ~ m~ ~iQn~ o^U a~ c Q. mro°~°NCn.p 2 oar C~>m c ~c.i0 aj~°pci° p mcS"i0 m°",3~0~~~ ~ `o u~o~~m~m~s 2 c_ as ai 'm 3 ~;~N mL~L ~ wN S-1€w°~.s CC ~' ac E~wy ~°~'~aU'ra`n Q m mU ~~mmmrn ~ x m~ mcJ~ 7 c0 m~7 ~~mrm m2 UeLl em3 ~°'oa~S p c~ W~ma~moic a W rtem`° 'Za Si~Z ~.~i r~~ ~`° m c-~7 r_ c°~a mm C,en °{~ m me c~ ~'» 'O c umi ao m ~ ~U~nmm~ao ~~U ^- ~~~an o°~ ~ ; ,~ac~'o ~'cc d ~©U u7 cWO p~ toU gmnma~., ~ ~~ pr ~+ W °cs;'- ~U ~6 W 16 .~.jr Ci l/1~~'Nmw~ ~a~~N=WC ~in~a °'U' U~,~~y a7 5u am rn mm nLpao m~ ~~t/J cmccr:w~~~f3 mm.oi,-~~m g~wS p~c+dmE ~,-o ~ p`m'~5 mm °° B ~~~n.-m g~a m oocy~apG ~ y.~_o.~~m F ~moLny ..~ H La"a`'pCE °'~V,cQn,~:.4 yy i°ma~ma~ ep~ j~R~~A ~CNQ _O ~~U3CON V~ mo,~ =O'~i 4'C U"O C~°a `mZ j^~pU~p.~ UJ ICJ ~c~~ ~S o3~.~ c~- mmEm-a=Y~~O cYC a c ~'~~ c Q++-ct-~- m_ma a°m c ~ ~"°mo`~m_ tU- ~om~om~a dcr ds ~a~m~ii a5a4~ d~RO3~~ ¢~ Q4~ d~¢mo°-Off`-"$.madU ¢dam T-''>t~5~~~a¢ Gd m m N rom c ~ U~oM~~o d etinmc `~ ,5'mv~o~~m >, mum p-Es a F 5 E m a. a ,£ m a tr 5,- ,. p ~~~~ `~~m` ~-+' ang~~'un ~i e°~c me oc ~ avi ~ai°=~~ E UU~u~@Y.Q,« @ ~mdSo a4oca~ "~ -moo a$ m VUm'~ c ~ mm~?~ cU. ~amt'~a° ~i ~U ~~.,.3~ pi b~°c~,m~>~ .°n °W~~m~r.~^. .~~. E~ rim°an~~ ~ ~m°Q~j ~~cc a iii Fin~mcmmn i Q ~~Cg `.c E m u © 'E 7 tt ~~ C] arc m a v a~'. ~ ~~7Ers~~®~ ° E c. n'~~ ,n O Z o D a oUu`_ a~.~d~ i Z ~~~._ v m'-rti ri Q ~ ~ UQ a>'~t. gaa ad' C ° ~, L 61 fJ7 ~ ~ W C O~ ~i ~ E ~ {/1 ~ ~ ~ 91 4 ®p; ~`-~onm~U,` c o m2 ? y ¢ i EZ ca~~°L~u p cp 3 ~Q Cr j~ ~ ~.~ ~ ~ y.w '41