The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About2005-1114 PEC i ~ PLANNING 11 ENVIRONMENTAL CIMMISSlIW PUBLIC AIIEETING ~ Navember 14, 2005 PRa.fECT QRIENTATION - Community Development Qept. PUBE.IC VIIELCOME 12:00 pm NIEMBERS PRESENT MEIVIBEFiS ABSENT Doug Cahill ~ RoElie Kjesbo Ann Gunian Chas Bemhardt aaWia viele Biif Jewi# George Lamb Site Visits: 1. Roost Lodge - 1783 North Frontage Road 2, Buffehr Greek Partners - 9701 A-F Buffehr Greek Rvad 3. Cascade Vcllage Theatres - 1310 Westhaven Drive Driver: George Public Headng Tawn Gouncil Chambers 2:00 pm ~ 1. A request for a final review of a conditional use perrnit, pursuant to Section 12-1H-4, Permitted and CandifionaE Uses, Second Floor and Above, VaiC Town Code, ta allaw for the operatEOn of a kitchen faciEity, located at 710 Laoroshead Circle, Units A and B(Vail Spa)fLot 1, Block 2, Vaif L.ionshead Filing 3, and setting forth cietails in regard thereto. Appl'scant: Kyle and Lorraine Webb Planner: Matt Gennett ACTIC]N: Approval MOT14N: Kjesbo SECOh1D: Jewitt VQTE: 7-0-0 Matt Genneft gave a presentation pursuant to the staff memorandum. Daug +Cahill opened up the heanng for pubfic cotnment and there was none. PEG deGberation: no comments fram any of the FEC cQmrroissioners, 2. A request for a final recammendation to the Vail 7own Counc91 of azone district boundary amendment, pursuant to Sectian 12-3-7, Amendment, Vail Tawn Code, to rezone Lot 2, Bfock 3, Vail Lionshead 2"d Filing, Evergreen LQdge at Vail, frvm High Density Mul#ipie Family (HaMF) zane district to Lionshead Mixed Use 'I (LMU1) zane district, lacated at 250 South Frantage Raad WestlLat 2, Block 3, Vai! Lionshead 2"d Filing, and setting farth details in regard thereto. App[icant: Evergreen Locige a# Vail, Ltd., M.B. Develapment Co., represented by Thomas J. Brink Planner: Gearge Ruther ACTIQN: Forwarded a recommendatian of approva[ MfOTION: Kjesbo SECOND: Viele VOTE: 7-4-0 I ~ ~ Page 1 George Ruther gave a presentativn per the stafF memorandum. Jim Lamont representing the Vail Village Homeouvners Assaciation rnade several comrnents ~ regarding boundaries of the Master Plan, traffic impacts, and unspecific larrguage surrounding this proposal when it was befare Touvn Council. Lamont daes nat find any factual praof supporting the reznnang. This is a critical piece of property and the Tawn needs to know how changing the zoning will impact infrastructure. Gwen ScalpeliQ, stated that over the next 3 or 4 years the Fron#age Road will becDme a wall af 80- foo# tall buildings. Concemed about preserving open space. The 'i 0-foot setback in LIVIU-1 js much too small, 20 feet would be much more appropriate. The Carnmissian supporEs the rezoning as the rnemorandum adequately addresses the criteria and to have a zone district applied to the property will be mare favarable than an SDD. Seueral members expressed cancern that traffic impacts wili need to be understood upon submittal o# a development applieation. The apportunity to work with the hospitai shauld be explored in earnest. The Commission felt that bringing one more parcel into the Master Plan area was beneficial as it applied criteria for revieuv of a development plan. The Commission believed that a11 the issues Jim had raised have been addressed over the course af several meetings regarding the rezoning proposal. In addition, Resvlution 15, Series of 2005, addressed many of the concerns raised by Mr. Lamont. 3. A request for a final review of a major exterior alteration, pursuant to Section 12-7A-12, Majar Exterior Alterations or Modi#ications, Vail Yown Cade, to allaw far #he construction of #he Tirnberline Lodge, iocated at 17$3 North Frontage RaadlLots 9-12, Buffehr CreEk Subdivision, and setting forth tietails an regard thereto, App7icant: Timberfine Roost Lodge, LLC, represented by Mauriello Plann7ng Group, LLC ~ Planner, Gearge Ruther ACT1QN: Tabled to NQvember 28, 2005 MOTION: Bernhardt SEC()ND: Kjesbo VaTE: 7-0-0 George Ruther gave a presentation per the staff memorandum. ' There was no public comment. The Commission agreed this was a request which deserved further exploration and directed staff to return to the Novernber 28th pubiic hearing with op#9ons inctuding pros and cons for thCS text amendmenf. ~ 4. A request for #inal review af a text amendment to Sectian 12-7A-3, Canditional Uses, pursuant to Section 12-3-7, Amendment, Vail Town Code, to add "accommodafion unifs wifh kitchen facilities as a new canditional use in the PubEic Accommodation zone district, and setting forth details in detaifs in regard thereto. Applicant: Timberline Roast Ladge, LLC, represented by Mauriello Planning Group, LLC Planner. George Ruther ACTION; Tafaled to Nor?emher 28, 2005 MOTION: Viele SEGOND: Kjesbo VOTE: 7-0-0 George RuthFr gave a presentatian per the staff memorandurn. The applicant, represented by the Mauriella Planning Group, LLC, gave a power point ~ presentation. Page 2 4 ~ Jirn Lamont, representing the Vail Ullage Homecawners, stated that his group's issue is that there is no master plan for this area. He beiieves that the property shcruid be Ivoked at a in alarger picture, perhaps in conjunction with the Timber Ftidge redevelopmen#. ConcErned about future ~ CDC7T improvernents to increase the width of 1-70 and the impacts on the Frontage Road. These ehanges could affect the number of curb-cut allowing acCess to the site. Suggested that rezoning the property may be more appropriate in order to give #he develvper greater fiexibility. Keuin Dieghan, principle of Timberline Rovst Lodge, stated that the Roost is the most heaaily used hotel in Town. This is a telling sign that there is a need fnr a lower priced lodging option. This is a pErfect site f4r a select service hofel which currerrtiy does no# exist in this market. The Marriott firtds that tewer than 10% of guests use the kitchen in the unit. Pat Dauphinais, neighboring property owner, wanted to address traffic concerns. He pointed out the possible need a# a left turn sane at the Buf#ehr Creek Road intersec#ion. He does not believe that a left hand turn lane would be needed for a hotel with three curb-cuts. Mr. DauphiRais asked George Ruther for clarification vn the EHU provisivns requirements, Mr. Dauphinais believed the EHU requirement is awFully light. Mr. Dauphinais infarmed the applicant that they +nrould be paying , for any construction easement that may be rteeded. Mr. Dauphinais has concerns abaut the architectural elevatians, but does not see any reason for denying the project. Bill Jev?ritt agrees with mas# af what Jim Lamont stated. Commissfoner Jewitt would like to see architecturaf styles match in the West Vaif area; need to break up ridge, concemed about canstructability of project Physical model woufd be very helpful and maybe a digital model as well. Rollie Kjesbo agrees property needs to be redevelapment. The design wauld be befter suited for a flat lot. The design riaes not respond to site. The unbraken ridgeline is a concern. Three aceess ~ paints prabably excessive and turn lane likely necessary. Commissioner Kjesbo agrees texk amendment affecting entire town would be prQblematic regarding icitchens in accommociatian uroits. ~ George Lamb believes the applicant's schedule is tao aggressive. Model is imperative. Commissioner Lamb is in favar of the concept of redevelopment and a lovuer price point hotel, thaugh is concerned that the plan does reot respand to the site apprapriately in terrns af grading and drainage. Commissioner Larnb feels it is worth the effort to work with #he applicant but thinks there is a iot of work ahead in terms of bulk, mass, arod height. Anne Gunion agrees that the project does meet most af the development standards, hawever, there are criteria for reuiew which the project doe5 not meet. She feels design (bulk, rnass, and height) is not apprapriate fQr site; is cancerned with how retaining wa11s will worlc in terms of landscaping. . Commissioner Gunion like sorne site sections subm'stted. Woukd wait to da a rnodel unti! DRB comrnents are obtained. David Viele sees #he praject as a use by right and the projeck was designed that way. He believes doing a master plan naw would be inappropriate; thinks the building has a Eong way #o ga in terms of architecture and design. This site is different than thase found in the Village (property values). Chas Bernhardt 9ikes the cancept and under graund parking. He does not Eike the steep cuts and thinks the retaining waEl is a concern. Praject does not com,pky with Criteria 4. Maybe establish a Public Accommodation 2 zone district to address the kitchen desire. ~ Page 3 i Daug Cahill stated that he agreed with all the previous comments. He believes a model is necsssary. Believes the architecture is °stale". Three access points in terms of function will probably work. Goncemed abaut how EHU requiremen#s are calculated. ~ Tom Kassmel addressed several trafFic issues and corecerns in regards to CDrJT designation. Frontage Raads are arterials uvithin Town. This project is doubling in size and a#urn lane would be required. Bill Fox, the applicant's traffic engineer, stated that #he requirements for a frantage road or an arterial are the same in terms of warranting turn lanes. Does nat beiieve this project requires a tum lane. 5. A request for a final revieuv of an amendment to an Approwed Development Plan, to allavu for madificatians to the existing platted building envefope (Lot 1), site access (Lcat 1), an increase in Gross Residential Floor Area (Lots 1-6); and a request for a final review of an amended fnal plat, pursuant to Chapter 13-12, Exemption Plat Review Pracedures, Vaif Town Code, ta amend the allowable Gross Residentiai Floor Area, within the Eleni Zneimer Subdivisian located at 1701A-F Buffehr Creek RoadlLats 1-6, Eleni Zneimer Subdivision, and se#ting forth detaiEs in regard thereto. Applicant: Buffehr Creek Partners, represented by Fritzeen Pierce Architects Planner. Warren Campbell - Amendrnent to the A rorred Develo ment Plan AGTION: 4proval NfOT10N: Kjesbo SECOND: Jewitt 1JOTE: 5-0-2 (Gunian and Lamb recused) Amended Fina1 Rlat ACTI4N: Approrral MQTIflN: Kjesbo SECOND: Jewitt V07E: 5-0-2 (Gunion and Lamb recused) ~ Warren Campbell gave a presentation per the stafF memorandum. Attention was braught to the concerns of the neighbors who had submitted Ietters. Bill Pierce, representing the applican# gave a presentafion supparting the relocation nf the access to Lot 1. The"retaining walls would have a potenfiially negatMVe visual irnpact. There was no public comment The Cammissian felt that the requested amendments to the development plan and the associated amended final plat maintained the intent of the approved develapment plan and resulted in a befter sa[ution. 6. A request for a final reuiew of a major exterior alteration, pursuant to Sec#9on 12-71-1-7, Exferior Alteratians or Modificatians, Vail Town Cade, and a final review af a conditional use permit, pursuant ta ~ection 12-71-1-2, Permitted and Conditional Uses; Basement or Garden Levef, and 12-7H-3, Permitted and Canditional Uses; First F1oar on Street Level, Vail Town Code; and final review of architectural deviations, pursuant to Section 8.3.3.A, Review Criteria for Deviations to the Architeetural Design Guidefnes for New C3evelopment, Lianshead Redevelapment Mas#er PEan, to allow for the development of 107 multi-farriily residentiaE dwelling units, located at 728 West Lianshead Circle/Lot 2, West Day Subdivision, and setting forth details in regard thereto. Applicant: Vail Corp., represented by Braun Associates, Enc. Pfanner: VIlarren Campbell ~ ACTIdN: Tabled to November 2$, 2005 MOTION: Jewitt SECOND: Viele VOTE: 7-0-0 ~ 'r Page 4 , Warren Campbell gave a presentation pursuant to the staff memorandum. ~ Jay Petersan and 8ab Fitzgerald, representing the applicant, gave a presentation on the changes made to the Ritz-Carlton project since the last meeting. Mr. Peterson stated that the changes represent tho applicant"s rESpanse to each of the PEC members' camments. hllr. Petersen concluded by stating that the applicant wauld be remaving two of the condominiurn spaces from the requested Conditional Use Permit request and woufd be reserving a comman space for potential retail area once the West Lionshead Master Plan including a possible lift was explored further. The Commission was positive and praised the changes made by the applicant. Commissioner BiIC Jewitt stated that he felt that retaiUcommerc€al in this praject was not apprapriate and felt that the Master Plan anticipated this high density candominium prQject. Other members of the Commission felt that the flexibility of not requesting Condi#ional Use Permits for condos on all the unots at this time was good until more was known about the potential development in the Vllest Lionshead area. 7. A request fiar afinal recommendation to the Vail Town Council of a majar amendment ta Special Development District No. 4, Casc.ade Village, pursuant to Sectian 12-9A-1(}, Amendment Procedures, Vail Town Code, to allaw for additional dwelling units and ofFice uses in SDD Na. 4, located at 1310 Westhaven Drive/Cascade Village, and se#ting farth details in regard thereto. Applicant: Cascade I/illage Theatres, Inc., represented by Maufiello Rlanning Group, LLC Planner. Maft Gennett ACTION: Appraval MQT10N. Kjesbo SECdND: Viele VOTE; 7-0-0 Matt Genneft~gave apresentation pursuant to the staff mernorandum. ~ ~ Dominic Mauriello, representing the appEicant, gave a presentation. Doug Cahill opened up the hearing tti public comment and there was none. PEC deliberation: Anne Gunion asked for clarification on criterion number one and Matt Gennett explained the rationale behind that particular criterion. f David Viele voiced his support for the project and stated no condition related to parking is needed. Chas Semhardt agreed with David Viele and had no additional comment. Biil Jewit# voiced his suppart for the amendment but added he daes not like the architecture. Rallie ICjesba agreed with David Viele and had no additional comment, George Lamb agreed with the rest of the commissioners and had no additional camment. Doug Gahill tiriefly summarized the clear benefits of the praject and had no additional comment. ~ Page 5 ~ 1 8. A request for a final recarnmentiation ta the Vail Town Gouncil of a zone district boundary amendment, pursuant to 5ectian 12-3-7, Amendrrrerrt, Vail Town Code, to rezane Lots 1-3, Vail das Schone Filing 1, Lot 1; and Vail das Schone Filing 3 from the Commercial Gore 3(CC3) zone distric# to the Public Accommadatian (PA) zane district, lacated at 2211 North Frontage ~ RoadlLots 1-3, Vail das Schone fling 1 and 3, and setting forth details in r+egard thereto. Applicant: Vanquish Vail I LLC, represented by Bharat Bhaicta Planner: Matt Gennett ACTION: Tabled to January 9, 2006 MOTI(lhl: Viole SECOND: Bernhardt VQTE: 7-0-0 9. A request for final review vf a final plat, pursuant to Chap#er 13-4, Minor Subdivisions, Vail Town Code, to a11ow for the Subdivisian of the Conference Center devefopment site; final reviEw of a conditionaC use permit, pursuant to Section 12-9C-3, Canditiona! Uses, Vai! 7own Code, to allav+r for a public convention facility and pubEic parking facifities and structures; and final review of architecfural deviatians, pursuant to Section 8.3.3.A, Review Criteria for deviations to the Arehitectural Design Guidelines for New Development, Lionshead Redevelopment Master Plan, to allow for a public conventivn facality and public parking facilities and structures, focated at 395 East Lionshead Girclel Lot 1, Block 2, Vail Lionshead Filing 1, Lot 3 and 5, Block 1, Vail Lionshead Filing 2, and setting forth details in regard thereto. Appiicant: 7own af Vail, represented by Pylman & Assaciates, Inc. Planner: Biil Gibson ACTIOM: WITHQRAWN 10. A request for a carrection ta the Vail Land Use Plan to designate the Lionshead Redevelopment Master Plan Area, and setting forth details in regard #hereto. Applicant: Town of Vail Planner: Bi@I Gibson ACTION; VIIITHDRAUV'N ~ 11. Appraval of C3ctober 24, 2005 minutes MOTION: Kjesho SECOh1D: Vie{e VOTE; 7-0-0 12. Information Update 13. Adjournrnent MOTION: Viele SECOND: Gunian VQTE: 7-0-4 7he applications and inforrnation about the proposals are available for public inspectian during regular office haurs at the Town of Vail Community Development Departmen#, 75 South Frantage Raad. The public is invited to attend the project orientation and the site visits that precede the pubiic hearing in the Tawn af Vail Cari.''~munity De+relopment Qepartmen#. Pleass calf (970) 479-2138 for additaonal informatian. Sign language interpretation is available upon request with 24-hour notification. Please call (970) 479-2356, 7elephone for the Hearing Impaired, for infarmatian. Cammunity Development Department Published 6Vovemb€:r 11, 2045, in the Vail aaiky. s r ~ Page 6 MEMORANDUM ~ TO: Planning and Environmental Gommission (PEC) FROM: Department of Community Development DA7E: November 14, 2005 SUBJECT: A raquest far a final review of a conditional use perrnit, pursuant to Section 12-7H-4, Permitted and Conditionai Uses, Second Floar and Abave, Vaif Tawn Code, to allow for a kitchen facility, located at 710 Lianshead Gircle, Units A and B(Vail Spa)1Lot 1, Block 2, Vail Livnshead Filing 3, and setting forth details in regard thereto. (PEC05-0073) Appfieant: Kyle and Lorraine Webb PEanner: Matt Gennett 1. SUMMARY The applicants, Kyle and Lorraine Webb, are requesting a conditional use permit as prescribed in Section 12-71-1-4: Permitted and Condi#ional lJses; Second Floor and Above, Vail Town Code, to allaw for a kitchen facility for private, off site catering to operate in the Vail Spa Condominiums Buiiding, Iocated at located at 710 Lionshead Circle, Units A and B(Vaii Spa)/Lot 1, Block 2, Vail Lionshead Filing 3. A conditional use permit is required in the Lionshead Mixed Use I (LMU-1) zane district for this type of ~ use. Based upan Staff's review of the criteria autlined in Section VIII of khis memorandum and the evidence and testimony presented, the Cammunity Development Department reGomrnends approval of #his reqvest subject to the fndings and conditians noted in Section IX of this memorandum. II. DESCRIPTION OF THE REQUEST The applicants are requesting a conditional use permit ta allow #or the operation of kitchen facility in the kitchen portion of what is naw a vacant restaurant space, iocated an the second floor of the Vail Spa Condominiums Bui{ding, focated at 710 Lionshead Circle, Units A and B(Vail Spa)/Lot 1, Block 2, Vail Lionshead Filing 3. The existing restaurant space has been vacant since 1998 and tne appficants are praposing to remodel the interior to better suit the ofFice use approved by the REC on October 10, 2005. The proposal does nat call for any additions ar modifications to the building except for a tenant finish af the existing restaurant space #o render i# more suitaale for a professional ofFce. The applicants do not intend to perform any exterior modifications to the building and will have to go through the Design Review Board approval process should any signage be desired for the new uses. No development standards will be negatively impacted by the prflposed conditional use permit. There are presentfy 74 enelosed parking spaces at the Vail Spa C4ndominiums_ The parking requirement far a professional affice is less than • that for a restaurant. The vacant res#aurant space to be utilized with this conditional use psrmit propasal is approxirnateJy 2,500 square feet in area. A professianal office in the LMU-1 zone districf requires 2.7 parking spaces per 1,000 square fEet of otfice area (6.7 spaces), and an eating and drinking establishment in LMU-1 requires 1 parking space per 250 square feet (10 spaces). The new catering kitchen aperation will only require ~ one em,ployee parking space and ane delivery vehicFe s,pace. The applicants have fourteen (14) parking spaces at their disposal in the existing parkirrg structure. ~ As indicated above, staff is recommending approval of the applicant's praposa6, pursuant to the findings and conditians outiined in Section IX of this memorandum, I11. BAGKGROUND In December of 1979, cons#ruction of the Vail Spa Condominiums buifding was evmpleted. In 1998, fihe restaurant formeriy known as Cyrano's clased its operations. l7n October 10, 2045, the PEC approved a canditional use permit for a professional office to operate in the res#aurant space vacated by Cyrano's, and stated their suppart for a conditional use pem+it far the operation of a catering kitchen. 1V. REVtEWIIVG BOARD ROLEs Order of Review: Genera!!y, applicatrons will be reviewed first by the PEC fcar acceptability of use and then by #he l'7RB for compliarrce of proposed buildings and site planning. Planninq and Environrnental Commission: Actian: The PEC is resporrsible for frnaf approva!/denial of CUP. The PEC is responsible for evaluating a proposal for: ~ 1. Ftelationship and impact of the use on deve1opment objectives of the Town. 2. Effect of the use on light and air, dis#ribution of population, transportation facilities, utilities, schools, parks and recreation faciGties, and ather public facilities and public facilifi€;s needs. 3. Effect upan traffc, with particular reference to congestion, automotive and pedes#rian safety and convenience, traffic flaw and control, access, maneuverability, and removal of snow frQm the streets and parking areas. 4. Effect upan the character of the area in which the proposed use is to be located, including the scale and bulk of the proposed use in relation Qo surrounding uses. 5. Such ather factaes and criteria as the Gommission deems applicable to the proposed use, . 6. The environmental impact report concerning the proposed use, if an environmental impact report is required by Chapter 12 of this Title. Confarmance with deaeloprnent standards of zane district Lat area Setbacfcs Building Height Density GRFA Site coverage 2 Landscape area Parking and loading ~ Mitigatian of development impacts Desi n Review Board: Actron: The DRB has lVO rerriew aufhori#y on a GUP, but must revfew any accompanying Df2B ap,alicatron. Town Council: Actians of DR8 or PEC may be appealed ta the Town Council or by the Town Council. Town Council evaLuates whether or nat the PEC or DRB erred with approvals Qr denials and can uphold, uphold with modi#icatians, or aWertum the board's decision. Staff: The staf4` is responsible for ensuring that all submiffaf requirements are provided and plans conforrrk to the technical requirements of the Zoning Regulations. The staff also advises the applicant as to compliance uvith the design guideGnes. Staff provides a s#aff mema containing background an 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. APPLICABLE PLANNING DOCUMEhITS Title 92, Town of Vail Zoning Regula#ions ~ For the Planning and Environmenta) Cammission's reference, Section 12-16-1, Val Town Code, identifies the purpose for a conditional use perrrait as follows: !n arder to provide the flexibility necessary to achieve the objectives of this tit1e, specified uses are permitted r"n certain districts subject to the grarrting of a conditional use permif. Because of their unusual or special characteristies, conditional uses require review so that they may be located properly wifh respect to the purpases of this fitle and with respect to fheir effects on surrounding prvperties. The review process prescri,bed in this chapter is intended to assUre compafi6ility arrd harmoniaus developrrrerrt be#ween conditronaf uses and surrounding properties in the Town at large. Uses listed as condrtional uses in flae various distrr`cts may be permitted subVect fo such conditions and limitations as the Town may prescribe ta insure that the location arrd operafion of the corrdifianal uses will be in accordance with the developrnent objectives of the Town and will no# be detrimental to other uses or properfies. Where conditions cannof be devised, to achieve these o61ectives, applications far eonditional use permrts shall 6e denied. The Vail Resorts maintenance site is located within the Lionshead Mixed Use 1 zone district. The purpose of LMU-1 is: 12-7H-1: Pt1RPOSL: ~ The Lronsheacf Mixed Use 9 District is intended fa pravide sites for a mixture 4f multiple-famrly dwellrngs, Iodges, hofels, fractional fee clubs, trme shares, lodge dwellrrrg units, restauranrs, offices, skier services, and commercial esfablishmenfs in a clusfered, unified development. Lionshead Mixed Use 1 3 Drstrrct, in accordance wifh the Lionshead Redevelopmenf Master Plan, is intended to ensure adequafe fight, air, a,pert space and ofher amenitr'es ~ appropriate to the permifted types of buildings and uses and to maintarn the desirable qualifies of the G?isfrict by establfshing approprJate site devefopment starrdards. 7'his District is rneant to encourage and provide incent?ves for redeveloprraenf in accardance wrth the Lianshead Redeveloprnent Master Pfan. Thrs Zone District was specirically develaped fo provide incentive,s fQrproperties to redeveIap. The ultimate goal of these incenfives is to creafe an economically vibrant lodgirrg, housirrg, and commercial cvre arca 7he incentives in this Zone Qistrict rnclude increases in aIlowable gross r°esidential floor area, building height, and density over the previously established zoning in the Lionshead RedevePopmenf Master Plan study area. The primary goal of the incentives is to create ecoraomic conditr`ons favorable to irrducing ,private redevelopmertt consistent wifh the Lionshead Redeveloprrlent Master Plan. Additranally, the incentives are created tQ help frnance public, off-site, improwernents adjacent to redevelopment profects. Public amenities whrch wilJ be evaluafed with redevelopment prapQSals taking advantage af the incentives created herein may include: streetseape ?mprovements, pedestrian/bicycle access, pu6lic pfaza redevelopment, pubGc art, roadway improvernenfs, and sirrailar improvements. Vl. SI7E ANALYSIS Legal Descriptian: Lat 1, Block 2, Vail Lianshead Filing 3 Address: 710 Liortshead Circle Zoning: Lionshead Mixed Use 1(LMU1) District Lot Size: 152,460 sq ft(3.5 acres) ~ Land Use Plan Qesignation; Resort Accommodations and Services Current Land Use: Vacant Restaurant Space Parking: Yotal for Val Spa Condominiums: = 74 spaces Required for Professional (3ffice: = 6.7 spaces Required for Kitchen Facility: = 2.0 spaces Required for Eating and Drinking Establishment = 10 spaces VII. SURROUNDING LAND USES AND 24NIN+G Land Use Zoninq Nar#h: CDOT ROW n/a South: HatellResort Lionshead l'Nixed Use-1 District (LMU1) East: Residential Liflnshead Mixed Use-1 District (LMU 1) West: Mixed Use Arterial Business District (ABD) Vllf. CRITERIA AND FfNDINGS The applicant's proposal fs subject ta the issuance of a coroditional use perrfiit in accordance with the provisions af Chapter 12-16, V'ail Town Cade. A. Gonsideration of Factors Reaardinq Conditional Use Permits; 'i. Ftelatianship and impact of the use on the developbnent objectives of ~ the Tawn. 4 Staff has determined the proposed conditianal use is consis#ent with the development objectives of the Town ofi Vail. The ki#chen faci(ity use wili have • no negative irnpacts upon the zone district, surrounding uses, traffic or parking, and will provide a clear benefit to the Town of Vail irr ompraving the park'rng capacity af the subject property with the proposed change from a• restaurant use to strictly a kitchen operation. 2. The effect of the use on light and air, distribution of population, transportation facilifies, utilities, schoals, parks and recreation facilities, and o#her public facilities needs. Staff believes the proposed conditional use will have no discernable effects upan the elements this criterion. Because the location af the proposed conditional use is completely internal within the existing buildong and no modifications to the exterior are proposed, stafF believes that there is no effect an light and air. 3. Effect upon traffic with particular reference to congestion, autamotive and pedestrian safety and convenience, traffic flow and control, access, maneuverabilify, and removal of snow from the street and parking . areas. The Empacts of the proposed conditional use uRon traffic will lae negligible, with orre ar two daily trips rnade by the kitchen's deliven} vehicMe. Also, as discussed abave, parking will be improved by removing the more parking intensive restaurant use and replacing it with a use which requires less of a ~ parking capacity. 4. E#fect upon the character of the area in which the proposed use is ta be located, including the scale and buik of the proposed use in relation to surrounding uses. The granting of a conditional use permit for the proposed use wiil have no effect upan this criterion. B. The Planninq and Environrr+ental Commissioro shall make the followinq findinqs before qr_antinq a conditional use qermit: 1. That #he proposed locatian of the use is in accordance with the purposes of the conditional use perrnit section of the zaning code and the purposes af the Lionsheacl Mixed Use 1 Zone District. 2. That the proposed facation af the use and the conditions under which it will be operated or maintained wiPl not be detrimental ia the pubiic health, safety, or welfare ar materially injurious to properties or improvements in tne vicinity. 3. That the proposed use will comply with each of the applicable provisions af the canditional use permit section of the zoning code. s • IX. STAFF RECOMMENDATION The Community Development Department recommends thaf the Planning and Environmental Cammission approves the applicant's request for a conditivnal use 5 permit, pursuant to Section 12-7H-4: Permitted and Conditional Uses, Second Floor and Abo+re, Vail Town Code, #o aflow for a kitchen facility, located at 710 Lionshead Circle, ~ Units A and B(Vail Spa)1Lot 1, Block 2, Vail Lionsheacf Filing 3. Staff's recommendation of approval is based upon the review of the criteria described in Sectian V1E1 of this memo and the evidence and testimony presented. Shauld the Planning and Enwirunrnental Commission choose #o approve this request, the Community Development Department recommends the Camrnission makes the follawing findings: "The PIanning and Environmental Corrrmissron frnds.• 1. That the propcased lacation of the use is in accardance with the purposes of the conditional use permif section of the zoning code and ihe purpases of fhe dis#ricf in which the site is locafed. 2. 7`hat the proposed Iocation of fhe use and the canditions under which it wauld be operated or maintarned would nat be detrimerrtal to the pu6lic health, safety, or welfare or materrally injurious t4 properties or improvetrtents in the vicinity. 3. That the proposed use would corrrply with each of the applr`cable pravisions of the conditional use permit section of the zoning code. X. ATTACHMENTS A. Vicinity Map ~ B. Reduced Floor F'lans C. Applicant's Request . • ~ 6 er ,.a sa ~n,~ x ~ ~ k ~:'a~~'~"~ • . r d ,t7' ~ ~c U ar , ' „ ' • . ; . a.. _ ~l 4~ ct 4'~ ? i~° ~i . a ~8 iG . l~~~!~r~! ~ya" Li$• -t ' t ~ m a ~ [9' - F y" L ~r? x r v, ~7`+s:Y1 • a~,r_. SCit 7 S t 0. ~All~ LO ~74 C ~ TA ~~1d _ ' S ~ ~W:'v'r f~-*•, oL ~ ~ Q 7 T S ~ .j ~ ~ ~ l R~ y • n ur ~ ~ ' O il.,• ~ . _ ~ J ~ •x~f l ~ ~ ~ .«~,`~Y. ~ ~ C ~ ~ t-~ " w 1 t YS ~ Cn . ~ O ',x ti ~ _ ?7 ~ h? T ~~,i4~ . ~ ~ ~ ~ a k ; ~i~ . ~ . 4 m Q :z'^',. - e-+f ~ f~`:,,: ~x~! ~ ~ .E a~~ ~+3}" ~ ~ ~ x d~ ybi ~ -:r „~p. ~,i ~2t, ' _ ~V ~ ~ ~ ~ . cw,V, ~ ~ • s a) ~ ~ v 4 n ' . - ' ~r ~ R ~ ~y ~,r ~ ~ t ~ ~ : ~ ~ ~ C x X £ C ~ . r t •~el ti r,~. a ; 1~ ~ ".7` 1 , r~+ ~ ~ "MS o l ¦ ~ ~ L "~t ry~~~~ d' ~ ~ f } ~ * ~ ~ 4 y. ? . c' ~ ~ ~ `t~f s. ~ ~ ~ ~ f/ ~ ~+'~C^ 0. '~D, ~ y n `y T'`i. 1 ~ ' a - 1"§.t a r . 3 ~ ~ N `y yi. ~ ~ ~ ~ : ~ ~ ~ , . 1~-'~ ~,~r ~ys ¦ r A a . ~ cc +x Y^I 4.1i ~~-q 'P ~ d e~h~~~ _ i ~ . •_4 V w ~ { 3-yyaC k _ T~r~~ + ~D~N~ ~ CU 1 i . r~~n~,~y ~w i ; ~ ~ ~ ~ r^r • + IR ~ ,„C . ~L ;1 ~ ti `t-.1 S ~ j:f 4~ 4 y# aS'.-. ~ k x ' y~W~ 3 x - F t:rx £ ti ~ ~ .'FK ° ~ sa ` . k . f t ~ .tik , ' ~ te~.. • . a~ ~ ~ . M .f S, ~M . t.. " ~ ~ . . F~ y I o ? Z aa.~.' °~~s r~ ~ x ~ 3~~ ~ ~e ~ ~,.SY#~` ° r:. _,.4 ^ • - kt~• ~t a '~a~r,V ~rr.~'f ~..r ~ ~ _ T?~ ~ +'~r' 4 . .'i.+ .Y ~a ~ "P1 f nf V WOM~J11A, I~pl7Lf1 V } rino~ an ~ 1 a U f17a~.4 ~i - - ~ a ~ W ~ u n ~ x d g- ' cr- ~ 4 ~ x ~ ~ _ FAW Ws+ruosu aurmwi OQtdtl7dS lfld o ~ ~ i1P[I0Y tlPA I6I LpG 1IS1101W 391LIR7! MlWS 154 s~m~rwaza} aMr r~s in~ ~ sa~sa rarlV„o ~ q ~ 9 M ' ~ uoilehouaa aIill° _ _ oc aI iq3i e qqaM •q•~ m4L ~ Q,ga U ~ Q a ~ g~ LL a ~ Vl i~~ ° w € ~ ~ c[ LU G y i- ~a k e og ~7& I U- L.L 0 5-t ~g3 Cn ~ ~ 3 ~ • ~ a ~ ~ g = ~ ~ J LL Y ~ 9 ~ z E ~ 0 U tA w ~ V) 2 4N ~ - 0 w U =Ot Fry W~ ~ 3 M1 ~ ~ • ~f 1 ! 9. i2.a5 Attachment: C • Wiggint fl Commercial Space Yail Spa Condominiums, Units A& B ~ UESCIlIP110N flF PROPfi?SED USE: Applicant addresses the matters set forth in t6e application as follows: A. Desrribe the prerife nature of the propored ufe and meaaurea propored ta make the ule tnmpati6le with otherpropertie.r in the vitimity.° The Commercial space in questivn is whollr Ivtated inside the Yail Spa Condaminium5 structure with no exteriar huilding walls and only skyfights (or natural ligh#. Formerly a restaarant spate, this locatinn has been vacant since 1998 and historically has not been sutcessful as a restaurant spare. The Applicant is proposing ta keep the existing Kitchen area to Eunction a3 a Catering liitchen, and convert the iormer dining and bar area inta office spaces. The surrounding neighborhand, although in a great state of transition, is typitafly hotel rooms or condaminiums. There are isolated 3imilar eommercial spaces located in the Marriott, and the Lionshead Inn that are ty,picalEy vacant nr have been camerted to meeting rooms, therefare the use is currently eompati6le with adjacent uses. 8 The relationshrp and impact of the use on derelopment obfectives of the Town. The proposal doea not alter deveaopmemt o6jectives of the Town as thi5 is an occupanry of an existing vacate space. Moreover, this will brtng actirrity and use to a tpace that has prflven no ~ ather potential econ4mic usage or activity in the past seven rears. U The praposed request is fully compliant with Town of Vail planning policies and is an encouraged pattern to redevelop and upgrade Lionshead properties. ~ C fffert of the use on light and air, divi6atron of popufation, tran,rpvdation facilitiej, UIlI1fIE'fy y schoal,r, parkr and recreatian farilitier, and other public facrlities and pu6fic (acrlitre.r need.r. " The proposed change in use will not alter any of the above factors from the current situation...i( the space was not vacant as it is currently. ~ a The effett upan tra~c, with particular referente tn cangeation, automatire and pedertrran .ra/ety ~ and canvenience, traffrc flow and control, acce,r.r, maneuverabrlr~; and removal of tnow frvm Fhe ~ streets and parking area. ~ v The proposed thange in use will not alter any of ihe abave factors fram the current situation...i( the space was not racant as it is currently. ~ f. The effect upnfl the character of the area in which the propased u.re if located, intJudrng the fcale and bulk o/ rhe pro,pa.red u.re in re/atron to .rurrounding are.r. -.0 Due to this being wholly existing interior space, this is irrelevant. ~ 953 SOEDTH FA4NIAGE BOA4 WEST STE 2 IG YAIL COLORADO 8165J 47 0.47 7.2490 47 9.4 I7.2415 {F I www.khwebb,tom N!Mdf A I?! TMF AMi.! 1CAN INJ I17UIf 0 ! AM lNI Ff f 1f ~ MEMaRaNDUM . TO: Planning and Environmental Cammissivn FRQM: Carnrnunity Development Department aATE: Navernber 14, 2005 SUPJECT: A request for a fnal recommendatian #a the Ua61 Town Council of a zane district boundary amendrnent, pursuant ta Section 12-3-7, Amendment, Vail Town Cade, to rezane Lot 2, Bfock 1, Vail Lionshead 2"d Filing, Evergreen l.odge at Vail, from High Density Multiple Farnily (HDMF) zone ciistrict to Lionshead Mixed Use 1(LMU1)zone district, located at 250 Sauth Frontage Raad WESt/Lo# 2, Block 3, Vail Lionshead 2"d Filing, and setting fcrrth details in regard theretn. Applicant. Evergreen Lodge at Vai1, Ltd., H.B. Development Co., represented by Thomas J. Brink Planner: George Ruther 1. SUMMARY ~ The app(icant, Evergreen Ladge a# Vail, Ltd., H.B. Dev.eloprnent Co., represented by Thamas J. Brink, has subrnitteti a dewelopment review application #o the Cammunity Qevelopment Department to allow for the rezoning of Lot 2, Block 1; Vail Lionshead 2"d Filing Subdivision, from Special Devebpment District No. 14 with the underlying zoning of High Density Multiple Famify District (HDMF) to Lianshead Mixed Use-1 District (LMU-1), The applicant has su'bmitted #he application in anticipatian o# the redeveiopment of the Evergreen Lodge. Staff is recommending approval of the applicant's deuelopment review application. ' .I I ll. aESCRIPT'ION OF REQIJEST The app8icant, Evergreen Lodge at Vail, Ltd., H.B. Development Co., represented by Thamas J. Brink has submitted a developmenl review applicatian to the Tovun of Vail ~ Cammunity Deveiopment i3epartment. The purpase of the application is tfl amend ; the Official Zoning IVlap ofi the Town of Vail whereby Lot 2, Block 1, Vail Lionshead 2"d Filirrg Subdivisian is rezoned #o Lionshead Mixed Use-1 zane district. A,ccording ~ to the applicant, the rezoning is intended to facilitate the redevelopment 'of the ° Evergrean Ladge. 9f approved, Special Development District No. 14, Evergreen Lodge, would be repealed by the amending ordinance. It is important ta note that shoukd this request be approved by the Vail Tawn Council, the amending ordinarrce rezoning the property +nrill alsa include provisions for repealing Specia6 Development District No. 14 in its entirety ~ 1 A vicinity map of the development site and surrounding area has been attached tor ~ reference. (Afitachment A) III. BACF{GROUND On April 1, 1986, the Uail 7awn Gouncii appra+red Drdinance No. 5, Series af 1986, an ordinance establishing Special DeVelapment District IVo. 14, Double Tree Hotel. The underlying zoning on the property was High Density Multiple Family (NDMF). This appro+ral granted develapment rights for a total of 220 accommodation units, 24 dwelling units with a total allowable GF;FA of 116,153 squere feet. Qn March 21, 1989, the Vail Tawn Council appraved Ordinance No. 7, Series of 1589, an ardinance repealing and re-enacting Ordinance No.S, Series of 1986. ; Ordinance No. 7, Series of 1989, granted #he property Qwner rights to develap i "rransient resrdentiaf dwelling units or resfricted dwelCing units" as defined within the j ardinance. In essence, a transient residen#ial dwelling un[t ar restricted dwelling unit ~ is a dwelling unit managed for shart-term rental in which all such units are operated i under a single management providing the occupants of #he units custarrtary hotel serviees and facifities. Accarding to the flrdinarace, each transient residential dwelling unit or restricted dwelling unit is limited #a 645 square feet in size, shall root be rented for more than 31 consecutive days, and may irtGlude a kEtchen not rnore ~ than 35 square fiee# in size which can also be locked off and separated from the rest ~ of the unit. Gn February 6, 1990F the VaiC Town CounciE appraveci Ordinance No.1, Series of ~ 1990, an ordinance amending the previous approved develflpment pban to allow a 190 accommodatian units of which 62 can be transient residential dwelling units or restricted dwe6lirag units, 24 dwelling units, and an 18,000 square foot spa facility. On August 22, 2005, the Tflwn of Vail Planning & Environmental Commission held a public hearing on a proposed amendmen# the boundary of the Lianshead Master Pfart Study Area and torwarded a recommendatian of approval with modifications of the amendment #o the Town Council, The modifications included texf Ianguage changes ta the amendment. The purpose of fhe amendment was tQ amend the boundaries af the Master Plan to include the Evergreen Lodge development site and to add detailed plan recommendations for future development an the Evergreen Lodge development site, as prescribed in Ghapter 5, Detailed Flan Recommendations, Lianshead Redeveloprnent Master Plan. On September 6, 2005, the Vail Town Council voted to approve Resalutian No. 15, , Series of 2005, a resolutian amending certain sections of the Lionshead Redevelopment Master Plan expanding the boundaries of the Master Plan to include the Evergreen Lodge develapment site and adding detailed plan recommendations fflr future developmen# on the Evergreen Ladge deveEopment site, as prescribed in Chapter 5 af the Lionsheat! Redevelvpment Master Plan, and setting forth details in regard khereto. The motion to approve the resolution, however, included a condition that the resolution shall became effective upon the adoption of an ordinance zoning the property to Lionshead Mixed Use-1 District. ~ 2. C11. ROLES OF THE REVIEWING BODIES ~ RezaninalZone arstrict Boundars+ Amendment Planning and Environmental Cvmmission: The Planning and Environmental Commission is advisory to the Town Council. The Planning and Enviranmental Cammissian shalE revi+euv the peoposaf and rroake a recommendation to the Tawn Council on the compatibility ofi the proposed zaning with surrounding uses, consistency with the Vail Comprehensive PIans, and impact on the general welfare of the cornmunity. Design Review Board: The Design Review Board has no rewiew authority on zoninglrezonings. Staff: The staff is responsible for ensuring that all submittaC requirements are provided. The stafE advises the appficant as to compliance with the Zaning Regulatians. Staff provides a staff memo cantainirag background Qn the property and pravides a staff evaluatian caf the praject with respect to the required criterva and findings, and a recammendation an approval, approval with conditions, ar denial. Staff afso #acilitates the review pracess. Town Courrcil: The Town Council is responsible for final approvalldenial af a zoning/rezoning. The 7own CouncEl shall review and apprave the proposal based on the compatibili#y ~ of the proposed zoning wifh surroundong uses, COnS15tEf1Cy with the Vail Comprehensive Plans, and impact on the general welfare of the comrnunity. V. APPLICABL,E PLANNING D{)CUMENTS Tovun of Uail Zoninq Regulations (TitEe 12, Vail Town Code) 12-611-1: Purpase; High [3ensity Multiple Family District The high density multiple-family tiistr`rct is rnteraded to provide sites for multiple-famify +dweHings at densitoes to amaximum of twenty five (25) dvuelling units per acre, together with such public and semipubl7c facilities and lodges, prtwate recreation facilities and relatsd visitar areented uses as may appraproately be Iocated in the same district. 7he high density multiple-family district is intended to ensure adequate fight, air, open space, and other amenities commensurate with high density apartrnent, condominium and 6odge wses, and to maintain the desirable residentiai and resart quaiities of the district by establishing appropriate site deveioprnent standards. Certain nonresidentiaY uses are permitted as conciitional uses, which relate to fhe nature of Vail as a winter and summer recrea#ion and vacatian community and, where permifted, are intended to biend harmoniously with the residential character vf the district. 12-7H-1: Purpose; L.ionshead Mixed Use-9 District The Lionshead Mixed Use 1,C)istrict is intended to provide slfes for a mixture of ~ multiple-tarniiy dweflirrgs, lodges, hofels, fraetional fee clubs, time shares, ladge dwefling units, restaurants, offices, skier senrices, arrd commercial esfablishrnents rn 3 a clustered, unified developmenf. Llonshead Mixed Use 9 Qrstrrcf, in accordance with the Lfonshead Redevelapmenf Master Plan, Is intended to ensure atlequate light, air, ~ open space and other amerritres appropriate to fhe permitted types of bufldings and uses and to maintarn the desirable qualities af thE District by esfablishrng apprapriate srfe development sfandards. This Districf is meant to encaurage arad provrde incentrves for redevelopment in accordance wfth the Liorrshead Redevelopment Master Plan. This Zone Distrr`ct was specifieally develvped to provide inceniives for propertres to redevelop. The ultimate gflaf of these incentives r`s to creafe an economically vibranr lodging, housing, and commercial core area. The rncentives in fhrs Zone Disfrict include 1rlCreases in allowable gross residenfial floor area, building heig.ht, and density over the previ4usly esfa6lished zanir?g in the Llonshead Redevelopment Master Plan sfudy area. The primary goal of the incenfives rs to create economic conditions favorable to inducing private redevelop+ment consrstent wrth the Livnshead Redevelapment Master Plan. Addifronally, the incenfives are creafed to help finance public oh`-site impravements adjacerrt to redevelopment proJects. With any develapmentlredcvelopment proposal taking advanfage of the incentives created _ herein, the following amenities will be evaluated: streetsca,pe irnprvuemenis, pedestrian/bicycle access, pubfic plaza redevelopment, publlc art, roadway lmprovements, and similar improvements. Town of Vail Land Use Plan C,hapter - Land Use Plan Gaals/Paficies 1.1 Varl should confinue to grow rn a cQnfrollsd envrronment, mairrtarning a ~ balance 6etween residenfial, commereial and recreational uses to serve bath the vrsitor and the permanent residerrt. 7.3 The quality af development shoufd be maintained arad upgraded whenever possi6le. 1.12 Vail shQUld accommodate most of the additronal growfh in existing developed areas (infiJl areas). 3.1 The hofel bed base should be presenved and used more efficrently. 3.2 The Vi!lage and Lianshead areas are the 6esf location for hafels to serve the fufure rreeds of the desffnation skiers. 3.3 HQfels are impartanf to the canfinued success of fhe Town af Vail, therefare conversion to condorrriniums shauld 6e discouraged. VL ZONING ANALY5IS The folfowing zoning analysis provides a carnparisan of #he development potential currently allowed under Special Development Drstrict No. 14 with underlying zoning of High Density Multiple Family District to that of the proposed Lionshead Mixed Use- ~ 9 Dis#fict. 4 ~ Legal pescription: Vail Lianshead 2nd Filing Land Use Designation: Resort Accommodations and Services Lot Size: 114,563 sq. ft.l2.63 acres Develo ment Standard SDD #141HDMF LMU-1 Lvt Area: 10,000 sq.ft. min. 10,000 sq.ft. min. Setbacks: Per the approved 90 ft. min. development plan Neight: 0' - 43`, and per the 82.5 ft, rnax. approved deveiopment 71 ft. average plan Density Control: 24 d.u.s and 92 d.u.s, unlimited 190 a.u.s a.u.s, f.f.u.s, e.h.u.s, (8 ciu's per buildable and timeshares acrelper the approved {33% ouer existing development p9an} or 35 d.u.slacre whichever is greafier) GRFa: 147,027 sq. ft. per 286,407 sq. ft. the approved plan if entire site is buiidable ~ (33°la OVEC BXIStlilg or 250% of buildable area whichever is greater) Site Coverage: Per the apprcrved 80,194 sq. ft. deve{opment plan (70%) Landscaping: Per the approved 22,912 sq. ft. deaeiopment plan (20°fo) Parking Per Chapter 10 0f Per Chapter 10 of the Zoning the Zoning Regulations Regulations VII. SUFtROUNDING LAND USES AND ZONING Land Use Zvnin Narth: °fown Gavernment General Use Sauth: Hospital General Use East: Profiessionaf Office Gommercia! Service Genter West: Residential High Density MuItiple Family ~ 5 VIll. CRITERIA AND FIND[NGS ~ Amend_men# to the Official Zoning Map of the Town of Vail (rez.oninq) Chapter 3, Administration and Enfarcement, Ti#le 12, Zoning Title, of the Vail Towrr Code authorizes amendments to the Official Zoning Map of the Town of Vail. Pursuant ta Section 12-3-7, amendments, in part, "an applicarion to amend the d'istrict 6oundaries of the Zonirrg Map may be r`nitiated by petiflorr vf any resident or praperty owner in the Town.,, Furthermore, Section 12-3-7 C prescritaes the crit+eria and findings the Planning and Errvironmental Commission and Town Council shall consider with respect to a request to amend the Zoning Map. The applicant is seeking a recamrreendation of approval to rezone Lot 2, Block 1, Vail Lionshead 2"a Filing, frorr9 High Density Multiple Family {HQMF} District to the Lianshead Mixed Use-1 (LMU-1) District, Accarding to Section 12-3-7 C, of the Vail Town Code, Be#ore acting on an application for a zone distr+ct boundary amendment, the Planning and Environmental Cornmission and Town Councr'1 shall consider the follawing factors wrth respect fo the requesfed zone dist,ricf boundary amendment: 1. The extent to which the zone district amendment is consistent with ~ all the appficable e[ements of the adapted gaals, objectives and policies autlined in the Vail Comprehensive Plan and is compatible wvitFa the development abjectives of the Tawn; and Section V of fhis memorandurra autiines all of the goals and policies implemen#ed pr that are relevant to the prapased rezoning af Lot 2, Block 1, Vail Lionshead 2"d FiGng. The propased rezoning specifically implements the Vail Land Use Plan fand use designation of Resort Accorrmmadatian and Service which states, in part, that, "This area includes aciivitres airned af accommodating the overnight and short-term visrtor. Primary uses include hotels, lodges, servrce stations, and parking sfructures with densities up ta 25 ciwelling units per acre." Accarding to Sec#ion 12-7N-1: Purpose; Lionshead MixEd Use-1 District, "The Lionshead Mixed Use 9 Distrr`cf is infended to provide sites for a miacture of multiple-family dwe!lings, lodges, hatefs, frac#ional fee elubs, time shares, lodge dwelling units, restaurartfs, offices, skier SENICGS, and commercial estabJrshmenfs in a clustered, unified developmenf. Lionshead Mixed Use 1 Districf, r`n accardance wlth the Lionshead Redevelopment Masfer Plan, is intended ta ensure adequate light, air, operr space and other amerrities appropriate to the • permitted rypes of bufldings and uses arad to maintain the desirable 6 quafities of the District by establrsfrirrg appropriafe site development ~ standards. Thfs District is meant to encourage and provide incenfives for redevelopment in aecordance with the Lionshead Redevelopmerrt M2StBl Plc?C1. " This Zone District vvas specrficaIly d'eveloped to provide rncenfiues for properties to redevelop. The ultimate goal of these incentives is to crea#e an econQmically v?brant lodging, housing, and commercial core area. The incentives in fhis Zone District anclude increases in allowable gross residentr`al floor area, buildirtg height, and density over the previously establlshed zoning in the Lionshead Redevelapment Master Plan sfudy area. The primary goal af the ineentives ?s ta create economic concfitfons favorable to r`nducing - private redevelapment corrsistenf with the l.ionshead Redevelopmenf Master PPan. Adclitrortally, rhe incentives are created to help finance public aff-sife improverraents adjacent to redEVelopmerat projects. Wrth any developmerrt/redevelopra3enf proposaf faking advantage of the incentives created hereira, the following ameraities will be evaluated: sfreetscape ia»provements, pedestriara/bicycle access, public plaza redevelopment, public art, roadway improvements, and similar improvements. The propased rezoning is consistent and compatible with the Vail Comprehensive Plan and the Town's deve9opment objeetives. ~ 2. The extent to which the zone district amendment is suitable with the existing and potential land uses on the site and existing and potential surrounding land uses as set out in the Town's advpted planning documents; and 7he Lionshead Mixed Use-1 District establishes zoning that is consistent with both existing and proposed uses on the parceL The proposed use of the proper#y wFll rernain as a lodge 1hus providing short-terrn accommod'ations for guests and visitors to the Tawn. Special attention shcruld be given however ta the proposeti De#ailed Plan Recommendations out[ined Ghapter 5 af the Lionshead Redeveloprnent Mas#er Plan, if adopted, tha# stakes, "5.19.3 Preseevation of Exis#ing Accc+mrnodataon Units 'fhe Evergreen Lodge presently contains 128 short term accommodation units. In addition, The EvergreEn Lodge also contains a restaurant, Iounge, spa, and meeting space facifities incidental to the opera#ion of the Ladge. Given the importance and need far short term accommodations to the vitality and success of the cammunity, any future redevelopment of the site shall ensure the preservation of short terrn accorrimodation units on the site. The preservateon of short term accommadations should focus on maintaining the number of existing hotel beds and • the amourat of gnoss residential square foofage c+rr the site rather than merely requiring the preservafwon af 928 accarrimodation 7 units. INith this in mind, the quaNity of the existing accommodation ~ uni# roorn could be upgraded and the roams could be reconfigured to create mult€-room suites. in no instead, horwever, should the amount of gross residential floor area dewoted'to accomrrzodatiQn units be reduced. " 3. The extent to whieh the z+one district amendment presents a harmonious, convenient, rn?orkable relationship amang land uses consistent wi#h municipal development objectives; and The Uonshead Mixed Use-1 (LMl9-1) Distric# is eortsistent with the existing and praposed use of the property. Ths praposed zane distriet implements specific goals of the Vail Land Use Plan and Lipnshead Redevelopment Master Plan. Siaff befieves that the praposed re-zoning presents a harmanious, convertient, and workable relateortship with Iand uses in the area consistent with the existing and praposed use of the property. 4. The extent to which the zone cfistrict amendment provi+des for the grvwth of an arcierly viable community and €loes not constitute spot zoning as the amendment serves the best interests of the community as a whole; and The proposed re-z+aning establishes consistent zaning fQr the property. Thrs re-zoning wiel create a zone district cansistent with the existong and ~ proposed use of the property. The proposed re-zoning and deve@opment plar, provide for the develapment of arr orderly viable communify consistent with the Town's developmerrt interests as expressed in the Lionshead Redevelopment Master Plan, 5. The extent to which the zone district amendment results in adverse or beneficial impacts on the natural environment, including but not limited to water quality, air qualityr, noise, vegetation, riparian corridors, hillsides and other desirable natural features; and The proposed re-zoning will not significant{y alter the existing character or uses allowed on the site. As such, staff does nat for see any adverse impac#s an the natural environment to inciude water quafity, air quality, noise, vegetation, etc. In fact, given the language as adopted for the detailed recommendatians for the site, it could be reasonab[y expected #ha# beneficia1 impacts cauld result from the rezoning and redevElopment of the site. 6. The extent to which the zone district amendrnent is consistent wi#h the purpose statement of the proposed zone district. The Lionshead Mixed Use-1 (LMU-1) District is proposed for the subject property. The proposed zone district is consistent with the intended purpose of that zone district. 0 S 7. The extent to which the zone district amendment demonstrates how ~ cvnd`rtions have changed since the zan'rng cfesignatian of the subject propertty was adopted and is no longer appropriate. Since the ariginal adaption of zoning on the property, the Town of Vail has undergone and extensive study for the redevelopment of the Lionshead aeea of Tawn. As such, the Town has adopted ckearly identi4`iable goafs and objectives for deVelopment in this generai aa-ea of Town. In arder ta ensure that these goals and objectives for developrnerat are carried aut, the Town adop#ed two new zane districts; one flf which is the Lionshead Mixed lJse-1 Distrdct. If approved, the appiicant will be affarded the opportunity to redevelop the s'rte with the Town's goals in mirad. To that end, the Lianshead Redevelapment Master Pfan, through the adoptian of ResoEution No. 15, Series of 2005, outlines very clear and specific 4bjectiwes for develapmsnt on the Evergreen Lodge site. These oajectives can be faund in Chap#eF 5 of the Lionshead REdevelopment Master Plan. 8. Such other fae#ors and criteria as the Cornmission andlor Council ' deem applicab[e to the proposed rezoning. IX. STAFF FtECCl1WIMENDATIQN T'he Community Development Department recomrriends that the Planning and ~ Enviroramental Cornmis5ion forwards a recommendation of appraval of an amendment to the C?fficial Town of VaiF Zoning Map, pursuant to Chapfer 3, Title 12, Zoning Regulafiflns, Vail Tawn Code, to rezane Lot 2, Black 1, Vail L'ranshead 2nd Filing to the Vail Town Council. Staff's recommendation is based upan the rEView of the criReria outlined in Sectian Vfll of this memarandurn and the evidence and testimony presented, subject ta the fiollawing findings: "Before recrammending and/or granting an approval af an applrcation €or a zone distric# boundar}r amendment the Planning & Environmentaf Commrssian and the TQwn Council shall make the fQflowing findings wifh respect to the requested amerrdment: 1. Tha1 the amendment is conslstent with the adopted goals, objecfives arad policies autlined in the Uai! Camprehensive Plan and campaflble with the development abjecfives of the Town; and 2. That the amendmenf is cvmpati6le with and suita6le to adjacenf uses and appropriafe for the surrounding areas; and 3. That the amend'ment prornotes the health, safefy, morals, and gerreral welfare of the Town and promofes the coordlnafed anrl harmonious development of the Towrn rn a manner fhat conserves and enhances ~ lts nafural environment arrd its establrshed eharacfer as a resort and residential community of the highest quadidy. " 9 } i r i ` r'~' , . , _ r • ~ , t ~ F ~ ~?T " a cq CL 0 ~ ~ ' ~J 1f t [."'~yx•. ,P rri y;~`' ~ ~ ~i~? r~,~~.:Zdi, )lilo " VI '4~'%.. Y ~•q ! Y ~t i . >r ~ 0 U. r ~1 ;s4•,4'~~` ~ a t, t c r il /A V~ 1~c) , ~ ~ L N ~ to ~ w io - L3,1 ~ CD ~ ~ " ~ ' ~ . ~ r s • , ~ i • a . . a . - . : .n v a ~ 'S! . ,Fr ~a r rt ~.'fa a `C f ~ P~_d ~~Y' . ~ - - ~ ~ ~ ~ 'vr+~. :1~~ _ t R~.~`N'. ?.Y `i~.L.'~"'t H_ # t ' ~'T~ ~ j ~ ~~t t ~ 4 Attachment: A MEM4RANDUM ~ T0: Planning arrd Environmental Commission FROM: Cammunity Development Department DATE: November 14, 2005 SUBJECT: A r€;quest for a final review ofi a majar exteriar alteration, pursuant to Section 12-7A-12, Major Exterior Alteratians or Modifications, Vail Town Code, ta allow for the construction of the Timberline Lodge, lacated at 1783 North Frontage RoadfLats 9-12, Buffehr CreeEc Subdivisian, artd setting farth details in regard #hereto. (PEC05-0080 & 00$1) Applicant: 7imberfine Roost Lodge, LLC, Tepresen#ed by Mauriello Planning Group, LLC Pkanner: George Ruther 1. 5UM IVIARY i ! The purpose of today's work sessian hearing with the Planning and Environmental Commission is to alle?w the applicant and staff an opportunity to present the major exterior alteration appEication to aElow for the construction of ~ Timberline Lodge. The presenfia#ion will incfude: 0 A description of the applicant's major exterior al#eration request and assaciated developrroent applications; ~ • A summary nf the Commission's roles in the development review i pracess; • An overview af the applicable review criteria tv be used by the 0 Cotnmissian; and ' • A summary af the development standards and zoning regulations. The Commission is not being asked to take any forrnal action on this application af this time. ps such, staff is not praviding a formal recommenda#ion at this tsme. The Commissian, hawever, is being asked to pravide initfal feedback regarding the proposal in antieipatian of a final decision on November 28, 2005. S#aff and the applicant request that the Planning and Environmental Commission tables this application to the November 28, 2005, public hearing. 11. DESCRIPTION OF THE REQUEST The applicant, Timberline Roost LodgE, L.L.C., representing by Mauriello Planning Group, L.L.C., has submitted three development rerriew applications to the Tawn of Vail Cammunity Develapment Department to facifitate the j redevelopment of the Roost Lodge, lacated at 1783 North Frontage Road. The p thres development applicatians include: ~ ~ . E ~ . i} A major e3cteriar alteratian to aElow for the demolition of the . existing Roost Lndge and the construction af the new Timberline Lodge; and I 2) A text amendment to amend Sectian 12-7A-3 Gonditianal l9ses, adding "accamrnadation units with kifchen facili#ies" as a new conditional Use in the Public Accommodation (PA) zone district, subject ta the issuance af a conditional use permit in accordance with the procedures autlined rn Chapter 12-1 fi, Conriitional Use Perrnit, Vail Town Cade; and 3) A conditional use permit to aiEow for the aperatian af a lodge with 124 "accomrmodation unifs wr`fh kitchen facififies" The det+elopment site of 1he Timberiine l.odge is located at 1783 North FroRtage . RoadILots 9-12, Buffehr Creek 5ubdivision. According to the stamped topographic sunrey, the development site occupies approximatefy 1.988 acres ar 86,597 square feet. The applicant is proposing to construct a new for to six story tall lodge comprised of 124 accommadation units, 39 dwelling units, 3 empGoyee housing units and 196 above and below grade parking spaces. The applicant anticipates that the new Iodge will be aperated by Marriott ar another national hotel brand as a"select senrice" hoteL As proposed, the accommodatian units vary from 463 to 731 square feet while the dwelling units are approximately 850 square #eet in size eaeh. ThE three employee housing units are roughly 464 square feet in size each and configured to provide housing for a total of five employees. A vicini#y map identifying the location of the development site has been a#tached ~ far reference (Attachment A). A descriptian of the project provided by the applicant is attached for reference (Attachment 6). A reduced set of pfans dated September 7, 2005, are attached for reference (Attachrnent C). IiL BACKG3ZOUND The Roos# Lodge was originally constructed in the early 1970's as a motel praject. The existing IQdge contains 72 hotel rooms, one dwelling unit, and a paved surface parking {ot. Accarding to the Town's files, with the exception of mtnor applicatians for repainting, new deck rails, reproafing, etc., the Raost Lodge has ssen no significant rnodifications s?nce its original construction. IV. ROLES QF Tl-!E REVIEWING B4ARDS The purpase of th9s section of the rnemorandum is to clarify the 'responsibifities of the Design Review Board, Planning and EnVironmental Camrnissian, Town Council, and Staff on the varivus applications submitted on behalf of Vail Resorts DeVelopment Company. ~ A. Exterior Alteration/Mndification in the Public Accommodation zone dis#rict i Order of Review: Genera9ly, applications will be reviewed first by the ! Planning and Environmenta! Commission for irnpaets af useldevelopment ~ 2 L _ - ~ M. and then by the Design Review Board for compliance of prvposed ~ buildings and site planning. Planrting and EnUironmental Gommisslon: Action: The Planning and Environmental Commission is respansible for final approval/denial af a MajorlMinor Extehor Alteration. The PPanning and EnvironmentaC Commission shall review the proposal for compliance with the adopted criteria. The Planning and Environrraenta( Commissaan's approval "shali constitu#e approval of the basic form and Iocation of impravements inciuding siting, buifding setbacks, height, bUilding bulk and ma$s, site 6mprovements and landscaping." Design Reuiew Board: Aetion: The Design Review Board has na review authority on a Major or Minor Exterior Alteration, but must revriew any accornpanying Design Reuiew Board applieation. Staff: The staff is r€sponsible for ensuring tha# all submi#tal requirements 'are provided and pians conform to the technical requirements of the Zoning Regulations. The staff alsa adwises the appIicant as to compliance with . the design guidelines. Staff provides a stafF mema containing background on the praperty and provides a staff evaluation of the project with respect to the required criteria and findings, and a recommendatiQn an approval, appraval with conditions, or denial. Staff also facilitates the ~ review process. Town Council: Actions af Design Reuiew Baard or Planning and Environmental Commission may be appealed to the Tawn Council ar by the Town Council. Town Council evaluafes whether or not the Planning and Environmental Commission or Design Review Baard erretf with approvals ~ or denials and can uphakd, uphold with mQdifieations, or overturn the baard's decision. B. Conditional Use Permit CUP Order of R,eview: Generally, applications will be reviewed first by the Planning and Environmental Commission for acceptability af use and then by the Design Review Board far compliance of prvposed buildings and sdte planning. PJannrng and Envrronrrrenra! Gommission: Action; The Planning and Enviranmental Commission is responsible for _ final approvalldenial af CUP. The Flanning and EnvironmentaC Commission shafl review the reques# for compliance wi#h the adopted canditianal use permit criteha and make fndings of fact with regard td the project's compliance. Design f2eview Boar'd: ~ ~ Action: The Design Review Baard has no review authority on a CUP, but must review any accompanying Design Re+riew Board applicatian. 3 , ~ Staff.' ~ i The staff is responsible for ensuring #hat alf submittal requirements are ~ provided and plans canfarm to the technical requirements of the Zoning Regu4ations, The staff also advises the applicant as ta campliance with the ciesign guidelines. S#aff provides a staff memo containing background on the property and provides a staff evaluatian af the projec# with respect to the required criteria and #indings, and a recommendation on appraval, apprcrval with conditions, ar denia1. Staff also facilitates the review pracess. Town Council: Actians of Design Review Baard or Planning and Environrnenfal Camrnissian may be appealed to the Town Council or by the Town Council. Town CQUncil evaluates whe#her or not the Planning and Environmental Commission or Design Review Board erred with approvals or denials and can uphold, uphofd with modifications, or overtum the bcaard"s decisic+n. ~ ~ C. Text Arnendmertt PlannrRg and Environmerrta! Commissiarr: i Action: The PlanniRg and Environmental Comrnission is responsible for ~ forwarding a recammendation af approvallapproval with ~ I conditiansldenial to the Town Gouncil of a text amendment. ~ j The Planning & Enviranmental Commission shall cansider the following i factors with respect fo the requested te7ct amendment: i 1. The extent to which the text amendment furthers the general and i speci#ic purpases of the Zoning Regulations; and I 2. 7he extent ta which the #ext amendment would befter implement and ~ better achieve the applicable elements of the adopted goals, objectives, and policies outlined in the Vail Comprehensiwe Plan and is compatible with the development objectiwes of the Town; and 3. The extent to rivhich the text amendment demonstrates how conditivns have substantially changed since the adoptlon of the subject regulation and haw the existing regufatiQn is no longer appropriate or i5 inapplicable; and 4. The extent to which the #ext arrtiendment provides a harmoniaus, convenient, workab{e relationship amang land use regula#ions ' consistent with municipal develvpmer+f objectives. 5. Such other factors and criteria the Commassion deems applicable to the proposed text amendment. Deslgrr Review Baard: Action: The Design Review Baard has na review authvrity afi a tex# amendm+ent but must review any acGOmpanying Design Review application. I ~ Town Council: 4 The Town Council is resportsible for final approva!lapprvval with ~ conditionsldenial of a text amendment. The Town Cauncif shall consider the foflawing factors with respect ta the requested text amendment: - 1. The extent to which the text amendment furthers the genera1 and specific purpases af the Zoning Regulations; and 2. The extent to which the text amendment woutd better implement and better achieva the applicable elements of the adopted goais, objectives, and palicies outlined in the `Jail Comprehensive Plan and is compatible with the deWefopment objectives of the Tou+n; and 3. The extent to which the text amendment demonstrates hvw conditions have substantially changed since the adaption of the subject regulation and how the existing regulatian is na longer appropriate Qr is inapplicable; and 4. The extent to which the text amendment pravides a harmanious, canvenient, workable relationship amang land use reguEatians consistent with municipal development objectives. 5. Such other factors and criteria the Commission and/or Council deem applieaale to the praposed text amendment. Statf.- The staff is responsible for ensuring that all submittaf requirements are proaided artd pEans conform ta the technical requir€rnents of the Zoning ~ Regulations, The staff also advises the applicant as to compliance with the design guidelines. Staff provides a staff memo containing background on the praperty and prvvides a staff evalUation c,f the praject with respect to the required criteria and findings, and a recommendation an appraval, approval with conditions, or denial. 5taff also faciiitates the review process. V. APPLICABLE PLANIVING D4CUMENI'S Vail Land Use Plan Accarding to the OfFicial Land Use Plan for the Touvn of Vail, the development site has a land use designation of Medium Density Residential. Pursuant to the Vail Land Use Plan, "The Medium Densify Residential land use designatian includes sites for housing which would typically be designed as attached uraifs ?vifh comrraon walls. Densifies in thls categary would range from 3 fo 74 dwelling urrifs per buildable acre. Addifional types of uses in thr`s catcgory would include prlvafe recreatfon facilities, private parking facilitres and instifutionaJ/public uses such as churches, fire statians, and ,parks arra? open space facilities. " ~ Zonin Re ulations 5 PUBLIC ACCOMMC)DATIi?N Z+DNE DISTRICT (in part) ~ 92-7A-1: PURPOSE: 7he pu,blic accomrrrodafion disfricf is interrded to provide sites for lodges and resldentia1 aceommodations for visrtors, togefher with such pu6lic and semipu,blic facilrfies arrd fimifed professianal offlces, medical facrlities, prrvate recreaffpn, commercial/retail arrd related visitor Qrienfed uses as may appropriately be located wrthin the same distrlct and compati6le with adjacenf land uses. The pubfic accommodation district is inferrded fo errsure adequafe lrghf, air, open space, artd other amerrities cvmmensurate wi#h fpdge uses, and to mainiain the desirable resort qualities of the - district by establishing ap,propriate site development standards. Addifional nonresidential uses are permiffed as conditional usES which errhance the nature af Vail as a vacation corrrmunity, and ?vhere permrtfed uses are intended fo function campatibly with the high density lodging character of the disfrict. 12-.7A-12: EXTERIOR ALTERATEC7NS C]R MODfFICATIONS: A. Revr"ew Required: The constr-uction of a new building or the alteration of an exisffng ,building shall be reviewed by the design review board in accordance with cha,pter 11 af fhis title. However, any proJect which adds additional dwellfng urarts, accommodation unxts, fractional fee club urrits, any project whfch adds more than one thousand (1, 000' square feef of cammercraJ floQr area or common space, or any project which has substantial off srfe impacfs (as determrned by the ~ adminisfrator) shall be reviewed by the planning and envrronmental cornmission as a majar exterior alteration in aecordanee with this chapter and sectron 12-3-5 of this title. Carnplete applicatians fvr majar exterfor alterations shall be submifted in accordance wr'th adrrr?nistrafr'ue schedufes developed by the departmenf nf community development far plannrng and envrronmental eom,mission and design review board review. The followirrg submfttal rtems are required: 7. Applicaflon: An applicafion $hafl be made by the awner af the bulldrng or the buifding awrrer's authorrzed agerrt or represerrtative on a forrn provlded by the admrrrrstrafor. Arry applfcation for cnndornrnrumized buildings shall be aufhorized by the condominium assaciation in conformity wifh a11 pertinent requiremenfs of the condvminium association"s declarafions. 2. Application; Contents: The adminisfratrar shall esfablish the submiftal requirements for an exterior alteratian or modificatiora applrcafion. A complete Iist af the suhmittaf requirements shall be maintafned ,by the adminisfratar and filed irr the rJepartmenf af community development. Certain submiftal requiremenfs may be waived and/or madified by the adrninistrator and/or the reviewing 6ody if it is demanstrafed 6y the applicant thaf the informafion and rnaterials required are not relevant to the propased devefaprnent or applica,ble to the planning dc?cumerrts that eomprise the Vail comprehensive plan. The administrafor and/or the reviewrng body may require the submissian of addrtional plans, drawings, specifications, samples and other maferials if deemed necessary ta properly evaluate the proposaP. ~ 3,. Work Sessions/Gancepfual lqeview: If requested by sither the applicanf or the adminisfr'ator, submittals may proceed to a work sessron wifh the planning and . 6 environmenfal cvmmr`ssion, a concepfual revlew with the des+gn review board, or ~ a'work sessian uvith the fown council. 4. Hearing: The publrc hearing befQre the planning and environmental s cammrssion shall be held in accordance with section 12-3-6 oi this tr'tle. The i plannrng and enviranmental comrrlission may approve the appfication as ; submitted, approve the applicatiora with conditionS or modifications, ar deny the a application. The decisian of the planning and environmer?tal commis5ian may be ' appealed to the tawn eouncrl in accordance with section 12-3--3 of this title. ~ 5. Lapse Of Appraval: Approval of an exterior alteration as prescribed by this article shalf Iapse and become void three (3) years follovvrng the date of approwal by the design re?riew board unless, prior to the expiration, a building ,permit is issued and corastruction is commenced and diligently pursued ta completion. Admfnrsfrafive extensions sha!l be allowed far reasonable and unexpected delays as long as code ,provisions affecfing the proposal have not changed. 92-7A-93: C(lMPL1ANCE BCIRDEN: !t shall be the burden of the applicanf tv prove by a prepor?derance of the evidence before the plannrng and envirnnmental cammrssion and the design review board that the proposed exferior a(feratian or new development is irr complrance wifh the purpvses of the public accornmodation zone distrr'ct, that the proposal is consistenf with applicable elements of the Vail vrllage master plan, the Vai1 vilfage urban design guide plan and the Vail streetscape master plan, ~ arad thaf the praposaf daes rrot otherwise have a signfflcant negative effect an the character af the neighbarhoad, and that the proposal su6sfantially complies with other applrcable elements of the Vail camprehensive plan. 12-7A-14: MITIGATlOIV C7F DEVELQPMENT IMPAGTS: Property ownerslde?relapers shali also be responsible far rnitigating direct impac#s of their development on public infrastructure and in all cases mitigafion shall bear a reasanable relatian to the development impacts. Impacts may be d6termiraed based an reports prepared by qualified consultants. The extent of mitigation and pubfic arr3enity improvernents shall be balanced with the goals a# redevelopment and will be determined by the planning and environmental commission in review o# develapment prajects and conditional use permits. Substantial off site 'tmpacts may include, but are not limited to, the foflowing: deed restricted employee housing, roadway improvements, pedestrian walkway irnprvvements, streetscape irnprovements, stream tractlbank restora#ion, loadingldelivery, public ark improvements, and simiiar irnprovements. The intent of this section is ta Qnly require mitigation far large scale redevelopmentldevelopment proyects which praduce substantial off site impaets. VI. ZONIMG ANALYSIS AddresslLegal Description: 1783 North Frontage Road/Lots 9-12, Buffehr . Creek Su6divisian ~ ZQning: Publec Accommodation (PA) District Land Use Designa#ion: Mediunn Density Residentia{ 7 Development ~ Standard AfiowedlReauired Praposed Lot Area: 10,000 sq. ft. min. 86,597 sq. ft.. Density: 49 Dwelfing Units 39 Dwelling Units AU's Unlimited 124 AU"s , GRFA: 129,896 sq. ft. 100,240 sq. ft_ Building Neight: 48 feet 48 feet 5ite Coverage: 56,288.23 sq. ft. (65%) 32,864 sq. ft. Landscape Area: 25,979 sq. ft. (30°!4) 31,960 sq. ft. Setbacks**-*#: North: 0'-20' 20' 1Nest: 0'-20° 20' I East: 0'-20' 20' South: 0'-20' 20' Parking: 191 spaces 196 spaces ' Loading: 1 berth 1 berth ~ Employee 3 uni#s (5 beds) 3 units (5 beds) Housing: Subject to review and approva[ by the Planning & Enviranmental Commission. VII. SURRQUNDING Lr4hJQ USES A{VD ZON1h1G Land Use Zoninq North: Residential Two Family PrimarylSecondary Residentiai South: 1-70 ROW NIA Epst: Residential Two Family PrimarylSecondary Residentia! VV'est: Residential Residential Cluster Districf Vlll. MAJt7R EXTEREOR ALTERATION REVIEW CRITERIA Section 12-7A-13, Compliance F3urden, Vail Town Code, autlines the review criteria for major exterior alteratEOn applications proposed within the Public Accommodation (PA) zone district. According to Sectian 12-7H-13, Vail Tauvn Code, a major exterior alteration sha11 be reviewed for compliance with the following criteria: ~ 1) Compfiance with the purposes o# the PUblic Accommadatian zane clistract; ~ 8 ~ ~ 2} That the propasal is consis#ent with the Vail Viflage Master Pian, ~ the Vail Viilage Urban aesign Guide Plan and the Vaif Village Streetscape Master F'lan; 3) That the proposal does not otherwise have a significant negative effecf on the character of the neighborhoad; and 4) Tha# the proposal substan#ialfy eornplies witFt other appficable i elements of the Vail Comprehertsive Pian. ~ 5hould the Planning and Environmentaf Commission chaose to approve the ; major exter'tar alteration application, staff recommends that the Comrnission ' makes the fcrllowing finding as part of the mataon: "Pursuant to Section 12-7H-8, Compliance Burden, Varl Town Code, the applicarrt has proven by a preporaderance of the evidence before the Plannirrg and Environmental Commissian and the Design Revieuv Baard ~ fhat the proposed major exterior alteratian 1s in compliance wr'th the purposes bf the Pu,blic Accommodatron zone dlstrict, that the proposal as for a development site locafed outside of the scope af the Vail Village Master Plan, the Vai! Village Urban Design Guide Plan and the Va11 Vilfage 5freetscape Master P'lan and therefare these plaMnrng documents are nof aApfrcable fo fhis applieatiQn; and that the proposal does not ofherwfse have a srgniffcant negative effect on the character of the nsigh6orHood, and thaf the proposal subslarrtrally complies wlth other applicable elements of the Vai! Comprehensr`ve Plan. " ~ IX. GONDITIONAL USE PERM17 REVIEW CRtTERIA As previously discussed in Section II af this memarandum, the applicant, if possible, will be requesting approval of a conditiana1 use permit, pursuant to Secti4n 12-7A-3, Gonditianal Uses, Vail Town Code, to construct 124 , "accommadation units with kitchen facilifies° in accQrdance with the provisions ~ autlined in Chapter 16, Canditianal Use Permits, Vail Tbwn Code. In order ta ~ make this request, however, the Vail Town Council mus# first acfopt an amending ~ ardinance adding "accommodation unrts wrth kitchen facilities" as a new ~ conditional use in the Public Accomrnodation zone district. Sectian 12-16-6, Criteria; Findings, Vail Town Code, autlines the review criteria for conditional uses permit requests praposed within the Public Accommodatian zone districf. According to Section 12-16-6, Vail Town Code, the Planning and Environmental Commission shatl cansider the follouving factors with respect to the praposed use: 1. Relationship and impact of the use on development abjectives af the touvn. 2. Effect of the use on light and air, distribution of popuiation, trarrsportatNOn facilities, utilities, schools, parks and recreatian facilities, and other public facili#ies arrd public facilities needs. 3. Effect upan trafFic, with particular reference to congestion, automotive and ~ pedestTian safety and conuenience, trafFic fiow and contraf, aecess, maneuverabili#y, and remaval af snow frorn the streets and parking areas. 9 1 4. Effect upon the character of the area in which the proposed use is to be ~ lacated, incEuding the scafe and bulk of the proposed use in relation to surrounding uses. Shauld the P{artning and Enviconmental Commission cheose to approve the application, staff recomrrwends that the Commission make the foltowing findings before granting a conditianal use permit: ~ 1. That the proposed focatian of the use is in accordance with the purposes . of #he Zoning Regulatians and the purposes of the Public Accommodation ~ zone district. ~ I 2. That the prvpased location af the use antf the conditions under which it ~ wauld be operated or maintained will not be detrimental to the public health, safety, or welfare, or materially injurious to praperties or improvements in the vicinity. 3. That the propased use complies with each of the applicable pravisions of the Zoning Regulatians. X. DESCUSSION ISSUES ~ Comple#eness of Application e • The CornmunRty V7evelapment pepartment has completed a ' "campleteness" review af the major exkerior alteration application for the construction of the TimbErline Lodge. Upon completifln of the review it ~ has been determined that the application is largefy complete. With the exception vf additional building height information, updated traffic study I in#ormation, and increased sealed drawings, the appEication is camplete. ° The applicant, hawever, requested at a pre-application meeting that the ~ requirement for an architectural ar massing madel by waived pending input fram the Planning & Environmental Comrnission. Does the Pianning $Environmental Commission believe that an architectural or massing mociel is required to complete a thorough review of #he majar exterior alteration apptication? I# a model is requtired, which type is preferred, digital or physical? Per the submittal requirements, is there any additional submittal ma#eriais that the Commission wishes to rerriew (additional plans, drawings, specifications, samples, etc.) prior ta taking final action on this application on November 28, 20057 Site Planning • The Community Development Department has revdewed the proposed site plan submitted for the 7imber{ine Lodge. Upon compietion of the review, several questions arose regarding the praposed site design. While the ~ P[anning & Environmental Commission is not being requested ta take ; fnal action on this application at this time, we believe that it is valuable ta i provide the applicant uvith any feedback and input the Commission and I staff may have at this time. ~ 10 ~ That said, the staff believes that the applicant has done a goad job of ~ designing a building which complies with the development standards prescribed for develapment in the Pubfic Accommodatian zone district. Far exarnple, through the creation of an underground parking structure the applicant has successfulEy camplied r?vifh the rriinomum parking requirements. Staff does believe, ho+rvever, that additional design work and thought shouid be given to the site design and layout af the new lodge. As I proposed, the resulting site pian creates several undesirabEe , consequences. For instance, a#wenty-four foo# tall retaining wall design ~ with tuvo-foot wide benches between the walls located at the rear of the ~ new ladge, a loading and delivery berth located at the guest drap to the iodge, a landscape design and planting plan whieh does very little to compliment a fiour to six-storytaEl building, a grading plan which patential9y requires easements or a similar form of agreement with adjoining property awners to grade off of the property, etc. While none of these issues I prevent #he eonstruction of a new lodge, they da pose potential3y , undesirahle consequerrees which bear further study and review. What additianal input ar feedback, if any, does the Commission have for the applicant wi#h regard to the proposed application? TrafFic Cieculation • In accordance with the prescTibed submittal requirements, the applicant ~ has submitted a prelirnirtary Traffc Analysis for the Raost Lodge Expansian Project, dated July 21, 2005. In summary, the traffic engineers conclude that the average daily trips to and fram the development site wi61 increase by 429 trips. This is up fram an estimated 416 trips under current conditions. As a resukt however, thE consulting traffic engineers do not believe that the new lodge wtll warrant the need , for enhancements to the existing trafEic cantrol or geornetry along the i frontage road corridor. A copy of the Analysis has been attached for i reference (Attachment D). Prior to taking fnal action on this application the Community C7evelopment Department recommends that the ~ applicant"s consulting traffic engineers and the Tavun Engineer present I their findings and cancRusions to the Commission for review and ~ consideratian. Mitigation of Develapment Impacts • Pursuarrt to Section 12-7A-14 vf the Zoning Regulafiions, "Property owners/developers shall also be respansible far mrtigating direct tmpacts of their development on ,public infrastructure and in all cases mitrgatian shall bear a reasonable relation to the rleveloprrrent impacts. Jmpacfs may be defermined based on reports prepared by qualified cflnsultants. The exfent of mitigatian and public amenity improvemenfs shafl be balanced wirh the gaals vf redevelopment and witl be determined by the planning ~ and envrronmental commission in review of devefopment profecfs I and canditional use permits. Substantial ofi site impaets may include, 6ut are not Cimited to, fhe following; deed restricted I1 1 employee hvusr'ng, roadway improvements, pedesfrian walkway ~ improvements, streefsGa,oe improvements, stream tractlbank re.storation, loading/delivery, ,pu6lic arf improvements, and similar improvements. The intenf of this section is to only require mifigatian for large scale redevelopmenfldevelopmenf projecfs which produce substantial off site impacts.'° In keeping with the intent of Section 12-7A-14, Mitigation of DeWelaprnent Impacts, the appfcant is proposing to oifset the impacts of the praposed development by providing employee housing far a minimum of five emp1oyees, placing approximately 365 linear feet of exisfing overhead pawer Eine underground, and constructing a new pubkic transit stop along fhe Narth Frantage in front of the new lodge. 11Vith the exception of the providirrg employee housing, the applicant will be required to work with Holy Cross Energy, the Town o# Vail, and the Colorado Department of ' T'ranspQrtation to untierground the overhead utility line and canstruct the new public transit stop. Are there any ather direct impacts of the praposed development besides employee generafion, utility line relocatfon, and puhlic transit enhancemertts that the Commission belier?es the applicant should mi#igate? Public Warks Comments • On 4ctaber 27, 20(}5, the Tawn Engineer generated a written Iist of ~ comments in response to his revie+rv of the proposed major exterior alteration application. A copy of the memorandum has been attached for reference. Priar to taking finaf action on this application, the applicant will need to demonstrate ta the satisfaction of the Cammission and Tawn staff that the issues identEfied in the memorandum have been either address or are no longer applicable. In addition to the camments out[ined in the memorandum of October 27tn, are there any additional issues that the Commission has at this time with regard ta public works issues? Xi. NEXT STEPS The fallowing ss a tentatiWe schedule of hearings dates at which the Planning and Environrnentaf Commission (PEC) and the Design Review Baard (DRB) will be asked ta review, comment, and take aetion on the proposed Timberline Lodge: • Town Cvuncil November 15, 2005: Worksession rneeting to discuss alfowing "accommodatiorr units wifh krtchen facilities° as a conditional use in the F'ublic Accommodation zone district. • DRB Navember 16, 2005: lntroduction #o the praject by the applicant and Staff. The DRB will be asked to provide irtatial comments. No formal action requested. ~ + PEC November 28, 2005: Request for final rev6ew of the praject by the applicant and StafF if a11 comments and concerns have 12 ~ ~ been addressed. This review wilf be canditioned upan Town Council action an December 6, 2005. « December 6, 2005: First reading of an amer+dirrg ardinance ta allaw for "accommQdatian unifs with kifchen facillties" as a conditional use in the Public Accammfldation zone district. Xll. STAFF RECDMMENDATION The Community Devefopment Department and the applicant request that the ~ Planning and Environmental Commission tables the fdnal review maJor exteriar ~ aIteration, pursuant to Section 12-7A-12, Majar Ex#erior Afterations ar Madifications, Vail Town Code, to allow for the construction of #he Timberline Lodge, lacated at 1783 Aicarth Frantage Fioad]Lots 9-12, Buffehr Creek Subdivision, ta the Navember 28, 2005, public hearing. XIiL ATTACHMENTS Attachment A: Vicinity Map Attachment B: Applicant's Written Description af the Request i Attachrnent C: Reduced Drawings Attachrnent D; Traffic Analysis ~ J i ' . I , i ~ 13 ~ } I ~dYdit'.'l ~~~F~"1. ~ ~ Jry~~7 4A y 4' ~~c "a~^ ~ ~ ~ ai G .?ki ~ ~ 5 °Y ^aK i z • c~ . p y ~ .ry 3' e, I~ ~ y* ' i c ~ ~1 k~~rt'~ q"Cv", t l~ ~ `~t. ~ 3 ; 1 k~ * h ? R y . ` . CN v ~ a ~'r ~ ~ ~ y~.8,~'~` mY' f ~ 4 ~ S = P V ¦ w ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ titi ~€p,~ ~ ~y I r O O j v`;-`~."y,~+ > S •~r ~s T ~r y~„ ~ a n A ~ ~ wK V c ~ 3S y+V' s~~'~ ~ ~ ,i ~ ~ ~ i ~ Fp~~~~ ~ t ,ax'` LL 0 ~ 1~r ~ ~ ~ ~9 -*.~ij~~~; t,~$ yWr-td-a'",yP' ~~1~ ~ v~~.•,~'y.,n'~g,~~T~F# a, a~,.., '~;s y 4c~;;; TQ ~ ~ ~p~,~r~ 5~ ~ .~I~° d+-~~ . y5~ ~ qx ~~.~K . u~'' ~iR Fq~, ~ ~ ~yy , ~ ~ 3~iy Yl~ ~ V~~"~~'~r'~~ Ab~ ~ •~yf S6 ~ 1 ~ ~ *p,, I ~i ~y A~7..~' ~ a ? ~ ~ - ` i ? ..y 9*k, . v ~'h^ 1 S:i~' ~':~rk 3 . Timberline Locicje Redeve,lopment Project (former Roo5t Lodge) ~ . ~ ;.n , I-N, E-A ~~t~" . ~ # ~ ro1"~ ~s~-.. r"~ ~ ]I x t?i r ~I l~ ~ ~ xr.-' 3' , i t,~yF dr t ~ x i~ "'k~• + . . ,.J,~_t},; ~t ~ ~~,.~y _ h'-„ ~^°3,.,;-.: ~ . • . . . . , , . . ~ . . . . - -i ~ De~icjn Review ancl Major f-xterior Alteration Apphcation5 C)ctober 2005 J~ it Mauriello Planning Graup ~ I. Background and 5ummary of RecIue5t The applicant 15 propo5eng to redevelop the existing Roost Lodge property as the Timberline Ladge. The develapment plan for thi5 new hotellcondominium proJect will expand the existing use of the property. The development plan Ga915 for the demolition of the existing hotel and the devoloprraent of 1 28 new hotel roams (72 raoms existrng today), 39 dwelhnq units (1 ckwellinL] unpt ex15ting today), 3 on-5ite employee houscng units with 5 pillows and surface and 5tructured parksng. The propo5ed Project w+ll focus on providing a price sensitive accommodation option while substantially upgrading the ae5thetics of the facil}ty and provicfinq additional amenities to ladging cjuests. The proposed candam7nium5 (39 units) are propo5ed to be approximately 850 5quare feet. This redevelapment project wO increa5e both the accommodatian and dwelling lodgrrs,~ base for the Tawn of Va11. Pl~as~ note that lhere liave been same progr,~m refinernents srnce the arlgrraal submittal to the TDwn staff and this report proUides Updated rnformabon that may be sliyht/y dIfferent than the T'own memn oh the project. The Roast Ladge wa5 originally cnnstructed in the early f 970'5 a5 a motel project. The ex15ting 5ite contains 72 hotel room5 with 5mall kitchen5, includin,~ refri9eratar5, stoves ancl microwaue avens, one dtivelfing vnit, a pool facility, and paved 5urface parking. ~ The property 15 zaned Pubfic Accommodation. The praposed praject is being developed under exi5ting zoning (i.e., no 5aD). The prapased project will be designed to reflect a "Indge style" architecture that will contain 126 hotel rooms rangin63 in size frnm 463 scluare feet to 731 5c}uare feet includir+g 5mall kitchens, 39 condominiums of approximately 850 5q. ft. each and three on-site employee hau5mg urnts contacning pillows for 5 employees. The project will ai5o have 173 enclosed structured parksnc~ spaces, 23 5urface parking spaces and related hatel and condominium fac111tie5. ft 15 anbcipated that the ho#:el +,vill be operated a5 a Marriatt Re5idence Inn or as another national brand "sefect 5ervice" hotel. A large percentage af the hotels currently being developed throughout the United 5tate5 are being desEgned as "select 5ervICe" hotels. ThiS is a growing trend in the hospitality industry to re5pon6 to cansumer demand. A"select service" hotel often include5 one or two bedrooms, agreat room, bathroam and a smaVl kitchen. All of the national hotel companies are aqgre551ve1y expanding this concept throuc3hout the United 5tate5. An e-xample of 51milar "select service" hotels are Towne Place Suites by Marriott, Amer15uite5 by 1lyatt, llawthorrae 5ubte5 by tlyatt, 5prin(~hili Suites by Nlarriott, hameward 5uite5 by 11iIton, tiiltan Garden Inn, Comfort Suites by Comfart Inn and Extended Stay America. Even the very popular MarroQtt Gour-tyard wiil soon include some kitchen faciiitie5 in the newer hotel5. Guests are flockSnl nationally to hotel rooms with amenitie5 that ,nclude kitchens, gyms and business centers. While the seEect • Timberline Ladqc I MaurIello Planning Group, LLC ~ service sector is rapidly growing, the rnaJor hdteliers are scalin,~ back an "full 5ervoce" hotels to respand to market treiids. Marriott alone currently operatCs over G00 °`select service" hotels (total vf approxin,ately 53,000+ rooms) tin the Unsted States with a comparable amount under deve-lopment. Nilton, 5heraton, Comfort Inn and Nyatt all have major expansion plans af their respective "5elect service" hotel brands that will mare than bouble natoonal count of 5elect service hotels. The consumer expectations far a hotel in today's marketplace have expanded to include kitchen facilitie5 a5 well a5 a living roorn, busine-ss 5ervice5 and faMiCy amenities. The de5ign and architecture of the proppsed buildings wiEl be a vast improvement when compared with the current de5i63n of the Roost ar most other 5tructures located on the north side of the hlehway or 4utside of the ViItage Core. The proposed buildings inc_lude 5tone, stucco and 5imulated wood facade5 (SimGlar to the Lion5head fulE-service Marriott) w6th the addition of heavy tirnber accent5 to create the "ladee" feel. i The prap05ed Timberline LorAge facality 15 anticipated ta serve a certatin nicl7e within the Iodgonc~ market by providing a priGe 5et15ltIVo "5elect 5ervice" hotel facility that meet5 the current underserved demand for affordable hatel room5 within the Tawn of Vail. In ac#drtion, the project will provide nice, we61 appainted two bedrporn condaminium units with ea5y acce55 tO the Village Core. V 7~r ~1Pt,~ ~ iT'"~ FT ~ eA~~~T{r,~~~~ '"d'~'? ~7~ = Q t~ pp ~ ~y it , ~ ~ . F. ' ~ . . ~ . . ' t y~ ~ ~ f,.lu ff 5 ' y.r ~ y~ ~ ~ ~ F" ~ #.~v~ u _ / ? r h 4~ L ~ zt'~ . } ip ~ ,J(•' J'~ ~ 5A s'J' : y~,~ 'x~~ _ ~s~'~ ~ x , r A rx ~~.y~ _ V", f}.~ ;r . . ~ep`G~" F ~ . . ~ . 'c~' . 31u•• t°f'~~ ' ..U .4' ',y~~ • ~ ~b~~ +'s : •~y~ 4 ~ : . y,4 ~ +,~~"e~~* ~ - i\ `4 ' !'t, ~ ro~' , ..4. ~ . . . hk r " a~ ~ ~ ' ~ ? ~ . . . , . a ~ . . ~ E3gj10{. eiM".x``~i ~ : ~ r , ,N'' . , ..a• . ~ Aereal View of Existing Roost Lodge Timberline Lodye 2 Mauriello Plannin,~ Group, LLC ~ Zoning Analy515 Zonincj: Tublic Accornrnodation (PA) I Lot Size: 86,597,28 sq. #t. or 1.988 acres Standard Allowed/Req,uiired T Prop05ed Density= 4J Qwelling Units 39 Dwellrng Units AU'q- Unlimited 126 AU15 GUA: 129,895.92 5quare fe~t 104,505 s,~uare feer buildinq Height: 48 feet 48 feet 51te Coverage: 5~,288.23 5cluare feet (65%) 32,8G4 square feet LandSCape Area: 25,979 square feet (30970) 3(,960 square feet Setbacks: ~ fVorth: 0' 20' ~ 1lwe5t. Q' 20' East: O' 20' South: O^ 20'+ Parking: 195 spaces 207 5r3ce5 Loading: f berth I berth Employee 5 pillows 5 pillows i flau5incj: ~ ~ ~ Fimberf~ne Lodge 3 Mauriello Planning Group, LLC ~ lII. Mitigation of Development Impact5 The RooSt Lodge still operates a5 a 1imated 5ervice 'notel/rraotel on the property. Becau5e of its current use as an accommodation unit operatiQn, the off-51te impact5 of Ehe proposed develQrament to the cflmmunity are negliqible. Set forth below is a detailed analy515 of both the employee housin,~ and traffic irrapacts for the proposed proJeGt. A. Employee Mou5inr~ The Town of VaGI has hi5torically required the awners of new and redeveloped projects to provide em5;,loyee housin~ when developing m the Town. h1stc~rically c thG5 ha5 boera based on rhe incre-mental increa5e rn the number of employees generated by a new prnject. The `(own, to-date, ha5 never codified this requirement ar the formula used by staff to determine the employee hou5ing requirement. Under the5e circum5tance5, the appI~cant has appl+ed the fvrmula that has been traditionally u5ed by the TQwn staff. {n addition, the Tawn has hi5torically applied a credit to applzant5 for the exi5ting uses Eocated on the property. Utilizincj thi5 historical formula, the project is forecast to generate the need far 5 emplayee pillows. Accordingly, the applicani will prov+de 5 emplayee pillrws that will be included pn-site within the property. Set forth C~elow is the ~ calculation a5 it relates to the project: Em lo ee Housin Calculation Existin Roost Develo ment Sq. Ft. or Units Formula Gross Em lo ees Hotel Rooms 72 0.2500 18 NEulti le-Famil Units 1 0.4400 0.4 Tatal 18.4j Pro osed Roost Develo men# Sq. Ft. or Units Formufa Gross Em lo ees Hotel Rooms 12$ 0.2500 32 Multi le-Famul Units 39 0.4000 15.6 Total 47.6 Net Increase in Gross Employees 29.2 15% FactorlTotal Beds Required 4.4 ~ I TimberlEne Lrdle 4 Mauriello F'Ianning Group, LLC ~ B. 7raffic Generation Accordang to the updated traffic report for the project as prpvided heredn and ba5ea upon conver5atioI15 Mth CQfJT, r1o acceleratian lare5 or turn lane5 off of the NQrth Frontage, Road will be required. The attached traffic 5tudy indicate5 that there 15 a minar net +ncrease of 40 PNl peak hour vehicular trips procluced by the redevelopment of this 5ste. IV. Text Amendment to A6Eovw Kitehens in Accarramodathc~n Units The proposed hotel I5 antscipated tO operate as a Marr~ott ReSidence, Inn or another national brand "Select service" hotel. A Residence Inn or 5irnilar type hotel affers a certain clas5 of amenittes to serve an ever-,orawing rnarket niche and ta respand ta con5umer demand for additional amenttae5. The hotel amenities expected by guests who stay In "select Service" hatel5 mclude kitchen facilities wit'nin the hotel roam5, bu5ine55 5erWice5 anc~ farnily amenities. The proposed hotel ha5 been initvally designed to meet this demand and to provEde a product under repre5ented in the TQwn of Vail. The propo5ec# text amendrnent will allow accnmmodation units with a kitchen, to be iiIcluded a5 part of accommodation units subject to a conditional use permit. Set forth ~ below is the praposed language to the amendment: Add to the I15t of conditsonal uses in the PA Zone district_ * Accommodation units within a lodge or hvtel facility with kitchp-n facilitwes. The prap05Cd text aralendment w11 ailow the Plarining Cnmmiss4on to approvO this type of hotel product within the Public Accommodation zorle d~5trict Subject to the existinq conc£itional u5e cr,teria. This allows each individval 5ite to be reviewed in the context of the rown's goafs and objectives when approving hotels contaming accpmmodatidn units with k4tchens. It 5hould be noted that even thoucjh the hoted rooms have kItchens, the development plan approval and the Tavvn Gode would prevent these rnoms fram ever being condominiumrzed and 5old a5 dwellinz3 un+ts. ~ T~mberl~ne Lodge 5 Mauriello Planning G{au;a, LLC ~ V. CvndFtional Use Permit Criteria As the proposed "5elect 5ervice" hote-l has kitchen facilitie5 within the hotel rooms, a conditional use permit will be required fo alfow the5e kjtchen facilit4e5. The Town of Vail GDnditiOnal use criteria are addressed bePow. A. Reiationship and impact Qf the use on develapment objective5 of the tawn. Our A»a/ysrs: The prvpo5ed facri,ty wflf pravrde select serv,ce hotel faeihtles ,n the west 1/ail area that wifl -gerve a difFerent 5e.ct4r of the tourot rndu.5try In the rn'~?rket not currerrtly met !n the ror,vn Qf V'arf. The proposed accomrnodat~on unit5 with kftchen facrlttles wrll help f.o rncrease the r,-~inge of lodgrraq opporturntles in the Tawri. A maJorrty of hote15 berng developed m both resort and oatrorrdl markets are "5el~ct " 5ervrce hotels that rnclude krtcherr fac•lIrties. The pro}ect wirll redec%e/op a property that was orrgrnally develaped in the !9E'O's ai7d ha3 6een fdentlfrec4 by the Town as a loqical redetrefopment srte wrthln the Towrl. The prapc.sed use wrll provlde a net irrcrea5e in ho~el bed accommodatfon unrts whrch ha5 been a stated goaf of the lovvn. ~ B. The effect af the use on 9ight and air, c115tributron of pQpuiatiioro, transportation facilltIe5, utiljtIes„ 5chaol5, parks and reGreatFvn facilEtIes, and other pub{ic facilities needs. Our An,3Iy5is: The praposed conditidnal use will have Iittle, if any, negabve rmpact or7 tfae above referenced issues. The propo5cd praject 15 betrzg deueloped w1Chin the strrct corrfvrmance of the deve10pr7-?0r7t 5tandard"5 of the PA zone distrlct. The conditronal use permlt !s onfy required to alfow the hotel rooms to haue krtcheo facrfitles In conformance with the "-gelect 5eroce " designatlon. The ,qddittan of k1tchen fac~IltEes wrfl haue na additlQraal Impact upvn the 1550e5 ra15ed by thrs crfterf0n. C. Effect upon traffic with particular reference ta cange5tian, automotive and pede5trian 5afety and convernenee, traf#ic flow and control, accCss, maneuverability, and removal o# 5naw from the 5treet and parking area5. Dur Ana/vs1s: The proposed condrtIonal use wrll 17,3ve little, if any, negatrve rmpact on the a6ove referenced rssrees. The pro1,2oaed project !s be,rrg develdpecl wrthtrr the strrct ~ T~mber9~ne Lodg~ ro €V1auriello 1'lannirsq Gfoup, LLC ~ conformarrcc: to the deve/oprr1ent st~r~ca'ards of the PA zone di-5trrct. 7-he candltronal use permit rs anly requrred to allaw ~he hotel rooms to have krtchen facrbtie5. The vddrtiorr pf kitchen focahtle5 wifl haue rro addltrvnvl impact upon the ~55ues r,71sed by th15 criterion. i D. Effect upon the character of the area in which the proposed use 15 to be located, including the 5cale and bulk of the propased u5e in relation to surrovnding u5e5. Our Anafy515: The proposed conditronaf u.5e avill have lrttle, if any neqative impact on the abav-e referenced 155ue5. The propo5ed prolect es being developed wlthm the 5trlct cc,nformance to the devefopment sL;ndards of the PA zone drstrlct and ther-efore 15 deemed to be consrsterrt wlth adjacent properties ar& surroundeng uses. The property ha5 been u5ed a5 a hotel &clfity for mare than 40 years with Itmited kltcherr facifities. {ssues a{ cam,ratib;lity of the hotel Ljse Lgrrd the nelghborrng uses have rrot beerr identEfied as a concern, 7-17e canditronal 1)5e permrt is only reqUrred to alfaw the hptel roon75 to have kit.cherr f3c:rlltte.5. The addttlorr af kitchen facrltt'~e5 Wrll havc no add,trona/ lrnpr7ct upon the 15--ve5 raised by tlai-5 cnterron. ~ ~ TimberIirie Lodge 7 Mauriello P#anning Group. LLC „ w~^ C,as~l~~ ~a~S3~oo~ ~ ~ C~~.~~~z ~w4^- U'4~tV+t~'1-T Z~ ^N~P~~rvW~ 2 ~ x -~ah<u~~nmW_ e LLJ C) ~fIVUUUUUV I J Qti.4'4GC<K6 I ~ LLJ 6~f1 c~ ~ IW~ I q ~1 ~ 2 ~Fy L ~ ~ ~ eJ V ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ C/O) ~ ~ ~ ~ O L I a ~ ~ I c ~ Z od ~ r ~ ~ Q ~ t~ ~1~\ a ~ O~5 ~ ~ ~ L/ 0 1 0 N et~ p- Q ~ j~l v a: n-- LL. LL ~ U ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ dz~~ i rAL<P D c~'` / I ' I 9 a wo a~+t ~ ~ ,ti o-°~ I r _ ..o pg i y ' I o ~ _ 4s C` 3~ F r Sh (J ~ -~<ch, ~ O O K 2 J U1 I II , • ~ } I , , b . I I / ~ N'7'iJ'12"W ~ 93,40•~ 1 S ~ / I _ secw~x y._un* ~ I ~ j~Y~~''~~ ~ ~\~c• ~ ~ fl~, I i ~ ~ I qy / 1 +l 1 9 g ~ I ~O ~ Yi~ ~ I ~ Q. ~°z { 9 ' ~ ~ fJ a 1 px 1+ Y II {,h, I ` I C O [ i ~ ~ ^ 5 4 W a 37 I' 2" - 1.77 10' S ~ I V °I ~ ie qLo I ~ ~ I y N I~ ~ ~ m I V ~ 4 C.~)os ~ ~ 3. I y M~7'S3~I2"W - 13^ a~ 4r V ~ ~ ~ ~ ~I II ~ I I y I I w¢ ~ 4 I l I ~ ~ S 1 I ~ a n I rY'"1 , , 1 I ~ ?I , , ~ : ! 1 ~ ~ •j , ? f ~ • ~ ~ i r~ r r:•r.~l~ I ~ ` a~'~'• ~ f ~+f ` ~ ~ ~ ' ~ ~~j ..;d ~ . ~ ~ z•. ~ ~ ~r ? f~~~ ~,,J ~ r f I ~ ~..5'!' 1 t f a r ~ ~ I Ol `'b ? f'~, ~ ~ e . l ~~,a ~11 r ~ ~ I ~ 1 ` TMT~•, o r 21 I t ` ~ ~1 . ~ ' • i~.' ~ F.x~ c? ~ 6 1 ti I I ,I y 4 ~ ~ . 1 ' I I, ~ p 1 f I 1 1 ~ ~ f 41 1 a.. ` ~I I I 1 ~ ~ w i r ' ~ I1 I~ ~ ±~.firvl ? . ~ ! f , ~ ? ~ ,yfa5 I t p` { "`^•.4 ~ ` fil~ ^-j ~ J-4~~ ~ I 1 / ~+r f,•^r~ ~ f ~ ``~,,~f ~ ? 1 !r j+ ~ ~ . , ~ ~ j ~f I t • n= j! h ti ~ a \ f ` ~ 4h 1 ~ + \ ~ l ~ n ~ ~ . ~ I ` 4'•,. ` , I ~ Y N ~ 1 1 p w~ ! • 5 c' ~ a~ ~71~d ,'j I y V 1 1 ~ ~ ~ • ~ ~ ~ ? ~ ~I Y ` ` e7 4~ 4 ~ d d r~/ , ~ W~ w~ fJrf ! Gi 0. ~ I ~ f ! I'{ ,'~'.q ' 1 ~ ( W M ~ f ~ ~ c~' Q _ ` •o ~ ~ it cy I 5 G n, f ~ ' ~ `5 ° ~ ) ~ I t ~ ~4 4 ~•4 ~ s t ~ ~~~1 l L ~ I , ~ C ~ ~ ~ o a ~ ~y, ~ tl ~ ~ tl ~ 1 ? ~ # 1 1 V c 11M a ~ p~ p , _o ` ~ Q ~ ~ ~ ~ . ~ Y j ! ^L ¢'i 1 ~ ~ ~ } l K ~ ~ t ~ tt ~ r f / r r fI ~ ' ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ j j ~ , ; ! ! ~ ~ I W ~aj KI' ~ . ~r~ r~/y$i ~ ~F ~•i ~ j rf ~j)) 1 llAlil~'1~~'~ ~ ~ ~~f-l~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ , << ~ ~ ~ ~ ~I I~a~~ J~j .n ~ t~~ V ~'f ' • y " v , ~1 , . ~ ~ '~I ~t.rj~..~ ~.,a; ~ ~ti~~.A • , - 1~~. 1' s ~ -~.Y`~c ~ 9 ~ ' c~ ~ ~^~~•4,+, . . . - ~ - I . I ~ i ~ - ry ~ ` ~ a ~ '~~'ti ` J a c ~ ~ rI • ~ ~ ~ R''~ 1~ S ~ ~m t lal ~ ~tyr~ cp I ~ i s c rAt~ r 1 Otl .1,1 1 . ` yX x Z ~ f ti. t 1~ 1 5 ~ r ~ ~~y 1!I K r r ' N //r t;r ry /1 ~ J J w 0. qJ.s ; V, j ~ ~ ; , y :,;a* ~ I I r ` ~ • ~ ~ r ~ ~ ~y ~ : ~ ~ \ I Id L , o ry~, r, ~ 1M `„ha `y I ' ~ 1 G ~ Y Wr~ i ~x J 1 ~1 1 ~ 1~'I ~ ; • l. Y I ~ II I I ~ ~ ~ ~ ~r ~ ~ i r~ 1 % ~~i I i r ~ ~ ~ ~~i'' j~q;,'1~ i ~ ~ ~ ~~i ~ .r~ ' ~ b ~ r ~ ~ ~ ~ , ~ I \4 r W Q ~ ti ~ ~I I x ~ ~ 8 ~ ~g~ ~ i I Y . I QO w j W ~ FH - ~ ~I~. I I a o~ Q o m~~ . y~ 1~; ' Z ~6. ~ W W Z Ul J~ ~ IJ~ ~ # { k X(r~3~'`z 1~~ j t~ 1 { ~ . c~y ua?~+r J r ~ I ~ ~ '9 u ,~.P k' ~ i1 I I t~ I ~ 1 ~ ~ I I ~ ~ I ~ n r3t ' 1 1 , 1 ~,j,~ ~ ~ ~ 1 ~ . ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ' ' ~ ~ ~ I \ ~ ~ ~ , ~ ~ ' o ~ f~~~ ' ~ ~ I ~ , `a ~ ~ } $ ~ i ~ ? ~ ~ ~ ; ~ ~ r ~ ~ ~ ~ ~,,R~ l ~ ~ ~ ~ . ~ I rr'~~ ~ I ~ ~ ' ° z ~ i ~ 4 ° ~ i ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ' @ ~ . j < < I ~ _ ~ ~ t 1 I / a'` ~ Ot R. /J / tr 1 JF, ~ ~ ~ \ 4 ~ ~ - ti~~~ . !i ~ _ § ~ q 1 ~ r~, ~ 1 ~ ~ ~qEt'~ / . 1 ~ 4 ~ . qj ,p~~ ~ ~ ~Q b S s~P ~ ~ 4 ` `6 \ tr ~ d ~ ~ ( ~ ' ~ E \ y ~ ~ J ~ ~j~'~~ ~ ~ ~ 4 t 1 t j '~'8~p , ~ _ ~ ~ I , ~ ~ , ~ ~ m ~ , r ~ ~ $ . 1 ? ~ ~ r ~ rv ~ / tr ? ~ e -s y~,, ~ / ~ + ~ } ' E Y ~ : ~ / ti ~ j ~ e A, ~ ~ . t ~ E r / / ~ ~ ~ i ~ ~+y' ` I i { ~ ~ y 4 f. 1 1 ~ ~ 1 ~ t 1 1 / ~ ` 1 i~ f L ~II \ ~ ~ fii ~ I 1 ~ ~ ~ 1 ~ ! ~ I 1 ~ ~ c o-t i 1 ~ w / ~ , , ~ ~ , ~ 1 S r ! ~ ~ / 1i ' ` r ~ 1 i ~ ~ ~ ti r' ~ i .~f ~ - ~ t ~ / ~ 1 ~ _ 4 h ~ 1 3~i l~ / ` ti~ ~ ~ j p f ` 1 I Ii • I W ! 1~ I ~ 4 ~ C ~ "~l I 1 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 4~ i~ ; ~ + y ~ ~ ° ~ ~ a ~ a ! Sj4 ~ ~ h ' ; Q j t ~f ~ a r ~ II ~ ~f b°,,;4 ~ ~ ~ ~ .t. -~-t ~ 8`~~~ ~ 1 ~ ~ J @w 1 ~'A°'~te, ~ ° ~ ~ ~ ~ uc / ,3F~S Il a I ~'9f,~ y~ I l ~o~m Qi~a~ ~ ~ ~ M1~~q*~ W6 l I ~ d ~ ~ Q # I , '~4 ` " 1 ~ i ~~~7~ ~ I, ~ ~ . ~ m`~~ t ~ . r ~ a triT ~ ~ ~ ~ , ~ , :Sr, ~ ~ W S I l~, ~ I ~ .~h~~'~ ~ ~ ~ + I ~ ~ I ~a~=~W ~ a; ~ i 'i F~~y~~ ~ t I II ~ ~ , ~z c~~~ ~ ~ ~ 1 1 ~i o ~~n., ~ ~l ~ I ~~w~~~~ I 1} I ' '~a„a~~w` ~ 4 1 } . 4 ~ 'z ~ v" ~ I ~ ~ 1 I I ' ~vi~ ~ l ~ I ~ 1 ~ I ~ ~ I p I 11 ` v a ! ~I~ ~~1 ~ r 1 ` ~ ~ > ~ ~ w a ~ W q a ~ ~ / ' s ~ ` i ~ # I ,~J• I W W !vt); ~ Z - ry ~ Y ~ ~ c, F F 3 z rZ x z a a ,n ,z v+ w,m ~ j~~ l p . ~ x° o X°Q' V 2 z~ w w'^ , / j~ a.n WIL ww Z ~ wa~n~ w ¢ ~ cn¢~. ' ~ f~f ~ 'Y~ . /:f _ i. , ~ o W ° ~ - j • iif ~ ~ ~ I . I- I I I ~ ~ ~ ~ I ~ 1 I:~°"~~~ ;i I . :r ~ # . ~ ~ - r . , I 1 ~ i • I f ' ` . . . + FI + ~ I 1 ' , I , r ~ i ~ , ~I ,~~r` ~ ~ I ~ ~ 1` ~ r ~ ~ + 1 f~~t I 1 GZ t ~ 1 ' cl: 0 #1 ~ ~ , v' n I Z ~ i 1 Ei I . 1 ~~f I I I -~-Ae'~ i~f gII % _ i ~ ~ 'I I ? -d_-- ~'I PI'~. I k ~ I 1~ ! r. I 1 ~ ~ ~ ; , • / I C~ I ~ ~ ~ 'i / I Q ' ' 4 I =i ' ' 1: f - ; ~ , J`•. ; ~ / . ~Tj ~ I I` ~ I I~I ~1~. 1 i ~ 1 LLJ ~ i (fJ Z LLJz ^ I I I ,'.F- `N I I T C Q ~ ± J ~ CCV j~ ~ w s Y w~ ~°f rn ~a`ts ~ V w '~n V ~~i ~ T i ~ I ~ . ! J ~ ' s • r,~ , , . . <ri~ ~ [ i ~ ~ { i ? r-- o ILn 4, c a oC) to a, ~ f r \ J I i I I ~ ~ ~ r? • ~ J l ~ , ~ ' ~~j ! ' I ~ ,~i ' , ~ I I I ~ ~ ' , ~ ~ Mo Un 'I :o cD t~ rr7 C, ~7 n N N N i Q O ~ C~ 7I I ~ O ~3 4 O ~ Q) Oa d d O ~ 7r,~H ~f f~~ i I 1 oC1 co aJ a7 oC1 00 W F~- . / i , ~ i~ ~f a I I ~ co o co ni cN n cu o> cn , r`i a ~ ~ ~ r-- ~ ,r ~ ~ ~ Q C7 C~ C) Q C7 C7 C,~- O O ] co DO dO co co 96 oD W C', •j ~„i~ r f/j~/if~~ ~ i~ ~ ~1 I II I , / ~ ~ ; ~1 i ~ . •,:i.+ ~ ~ ? ~r ~ , f ~ I ~ ' • b ~ l I ~I I/ / I k'I~~~~I~',!I',,~~ I ~ - A , - \ ~ % l ~ I ~ ' t r f ~ 4' ~ ~a~' ~ ' ' ? ~ • ~ I / °Z < _ w ~i FT f r o~ I I s 3 I ~ , ~ ~ d ~ wY ~ ~ ti II z ~ f ~ I~ J I ~ !I! I ! / ~i ' ' '(r I ! ~ I m 46 d ~ 0pm r ~p~ ~s,i S 7 ~ w ° LLi cr G 1 F'~ = E ' ~ ~ ~ ' ~ ~ • r,~~~i 5p ~ ~J d { ° ; ' ~ ~ %w ~ ~ ~ ~ ° ( Q ~ • . 1 ~ i r" r ff~"g • ~ - ~ ~ ,1 , ~ ~ ff T~~~`• R ~ m ~ ; • F ~ . ' ~ ~ . ~ ~ ~i~ ~ ~ ~ , ~ ~ I l ~ 1~ ~ ~ ~ t ~y ~ ~ • \.~,4_`~~ 11 1 ~ ,4 I o M ~ a loc t 31 - ca a 1a I o ~ rs 1 . ! ' . o • S 6 tl- w7 Z~A ~ ~ 1 1 Z ~ m ~ tv ' V1 ~ry ~ P C b: ~(`l U t"fN~O C 1~ ' I f ~ ~9 p~ tl, J t:' ~ . ' }F ! 1 P~ ~ 4y ~[y~~L`n 4'j~0 I 1 ~ 1°S 9 ~ 7 ~u ~a.cua rnmc v'e~o"aa.r ~ ~ ~ N~`5 t N N i N VI i+a ~ ~ I y ~ I ~ k~- ~ I i W ~ l. 1 I a F N a'. ~ J Z~ z a- o^i z ,Y o' s3 °~:n °r~ x~c`°za zd v'Y zo ~n ~~~di?`"7'- ~o oc~iu~.. q- Wz ~.z~zr a. g ~pw i4~z rzG #3'# >WRN S U Z } y ~ r O yY"~ ~ KW~ S~ ~ rv ~ ~4K a G~ 3' ~O aD.-~D2 U~¢O Nu~2 d~.~i G~ !-z ~z~P= -a 9°° Ce ~'aoz.~ s~5'+acn~ina wm ~ ~ p~p mp~ z,'a~"k+ ou.d ~n 3~ ~~~ma~~ ~=5~~uc#r~w~w~ w~oq= #z~~ ~ ~~~~¢mO.uo ~vuc,~u mcryco6z-y3"~~ ~~2 c=iawS Z~ 2~~ m u W.~ C 3 O ~CC q~0 rz ~ ~.~i j o~n d p 5 a 1 7 ~ ~ q W~^s a 6 V E. Y1U ~ y z~I U~-~iNZ O~ q~J~ ~,n,G]~ W W W V~ ~z U~C 2 d~ 7~~~C~O ~ a r~ C~ CC.u¢dOG J ViuZ.i3 dtJ3 VU P ~'Fi W~.y J5 c~ d 1~ ~i'1 z~~~~O=,Q ~ R Vj ~s r ~-r V:.J'Jw~ 2 VrC~Y~.q¢ ;~•p~ ~ O Y Y tA! @va~.N L]4 4'+Lv-~ ~~oas~'r=-3~x~~e6z m ~ r. ~ Q a x Q a~ z Lyl . > cc ~ o QV c W ~ ~ 3: p ~ ~ rt ~ ~ ..~~i. ly~ ~ t] r2- O~, ~n u 2 i`" f7 % ~ w <[E? ~0~~ g O ~C a Z~ rd~ aw _ ~ ~~a ri z~ 6j Vi Q Q ~ ~ r \ ~ ry Q q~~ Z < ~o=L y3~~ n_ ilf 1 0 m Jf V LLJ w ct~ 9by ~ w CC f`3 LL ct w r Wm K ~ w ? ~ t taJ Q Of lO ce. LL Q~ M = J ~.J Z 4 C7 ~ t11 Z ' g = v K ~ Li w a ,n ~ A~ p a v i W w z w tv '4 I.n J wz ~n ~ w a o cn o N w< <n a~o zwr y YQZ . •T n N w Z ^ x C7~G (7 N 4'~ i.-e 4 C3 te^. • y,~j ~ W ~ ~ ~Jo U o VjW 71 z~ o a Z ~ Q. ,.~~N z J QaZ z>~~ ~'`u avi) 4Q N '2 ~ Zw U~<~ z xW o ~n~ Nz_ I_ i~aC c,~~ ia xY fn Q W c q ry ° ~ L.Lj -o a Ln Q W QD '"f~ Z k ~ ~ ^ ~ ~ ~ { 1 ~ ~ z7s a~ J vai m ( W q a ~ q m ~ W I 1I v ^ 4 ~ ~ a ~ 4 ~ ~ z I I MZ~1}~ J ~p ~ lU m ~ z Ln, n y, Z CS N ~O w M(F ~ ~ W N Z C'v ,ry• ".rN ~l ~ J S "i J WD 4~~ F M~ ' NZ 'Y 2 y~ W 9 7 X ~ z W W X 4.' _ ~ c: cc~ ' C ~ l.~ ~ W CC rJ in O W: L1 m 7~ fY k Z c,'wn +ro ~¢c3 ra 3 ~ ov~ 0 ~ W z m ~ r ~W c'1 i]D~ w3q ~w~ C z ~~~SY ~ O 7 c) 3 L O Z ~.r z " 2 _ .ryE .Y.P. f/ z ~ Y~ 1 ,~~r 9, r u , . a` ~ ,.K ~ ~ •',~';1q I A U ~ I ~I _ I tr v ~I l~ u ~ 11 - 1 I i - i y _ r^ ~ M• O - Ey U r J C) GZ"i "Cy p--=- r, a a ~i ~ • ~ J cU.l , .~;E, ~ ~Y7 \ 2r ~ ~ C ~ ~ Wg . aN ~ W .~'m pG CS ~ a r ~4 ~ c~ 4 p~ VyJ ~ 2. V~'+~ ~ W ~ 1~, . ~Jp t W . . , -r` q~ ~ ~ 1 / 1 r~ ~ ~ ~ i~ ~ i ~ . W \ Z ~ d 1 ~ 'G4N W a j!.~,:°~ , V ~ ~ ~~i ~i f" s l tr~' \ Y, ' ~ _ N~4~~;:, 9 i' o r, °r, ~ ~ l ij ,y t7~f .~.`~~::.if.: i" ~ / 1'',:,;.;;. ~ t ~ :ti a h ~ ~ ~ ~x~ ~ ~___~w+~,_.y~ . Xg d ~ f --0 ~J ~ ^ _ _ . O ' x N i ~ J p }nl ~ Y 0 ~e ~4 fP . ~ w ~ ~a F ,0'.4Z .0-~41... ~ ~ ~I a,~ ~ _ ~ ~ 4 ~ ~-~y , ~ ~ a c f~- ~ ~i - S ~ ~ ~ - - z ~ ~ ~ I W ~ t , ~i a a g'~ ~ ~ a g _ § ~ ~J ~ § ~ G . fr ~ a lL~~ w ~O a , [y r,"~ ~0 2 ~ ~ a ~ ~ ti ~ Gi ~;Q4 j o~ [ f 1 4 Xf r a ~ . 1 y~ ` or u, { ~ t? tt ~ 4 ~ 1 3' ~ I ~ 5~ ! a r ~ y ~ o~ N S ~ ~ \ 4 ~ g ~ 91 'v ~ 0 a P ` O W ` D ~ b b'. AA ~ Y . J~ cl ~ W « N ~ V~ ~ ~ ~ " / tnD , g ry ~J a o~1 f ~ X fi" ~W ~r IF a~ x~ c¢ Vo a .0.~ ~ V Q O ~ AP 0 a ~Fp ~A yd 'A ,q tj 4~ d \ ~a .R ~ . \ I . t, v_ ~ a N • ~ ~ ~ ~ W Cf ~ ~ 41 ! q O.' • 5 i -i p , O •a 'a ~ • ~ ~ • V ~ O• p a~ ~ • ~ V~: '•Q ~ ~ IX cD N 6i _ ~ 6~ = ~ •qo p~ Ti Ej O O vt pm, ql ,~jp cl . x ~ ~ pZ T u1 „c O tl ~ a"~ a m m ° F~ s x _ S'~y ~ i K p 9 ~y ~ ~ om a m ~ p f~ m a'~ $ ~ V . o 0 S, 0. = ~ • S YA ` ~T/ f ~iyF o~u a~u ~d ¢ O Z ~ 4 a F a ~ O b S ~ •9$ J $ % O '9,. V b• Q = o 4` '•=v~i i ~I Y+ ID 'JO ry k 4 = 4 a ~ P y~ ~ 4 'YW ~ Y ~ It U .j72 ~ S N~ y, . O ~Qb F ~ J = ~ ~ 3 9 Q "i' ~^A I J0 G O I lf~y N y ~ m' ' I 4M Le) ~ ~ .e N h ~ O ~ O 9 ~ Fg p 0 ~c ~ G b 20 ~ ~ m2 NV S N ~,P r o N V ~ ~Ot y ~ =N JL ~'m~ I wm ~0 4 m ~ ~w° ~ - - o 0 w ~j 9 V A. . .d Q .E•.? T a ~ p D u ~ v~ F V C 0 • ~ ~ p u ~ 4 'l '-0 U ry 4` 'J U R3 'R~ Q N t' . ~ 'U 7 ` ~ 2 V~i•. o o . --T io- U~ V 'o a A.F I v~i ?~i'• .S, O_ G K K :4 f V U ~ ' C] ~ • rv T. o o ~ a D ~ l 2 Y ~ t O C C o, r ~ b s ~ ; I ~ W ~ e¢ ,a'Fu 6 . G ~ O ~ • - d ~ 8 0~ a ~ d , 's q ao ° °o ~d ds~ m o 'Re 4p -;4j N m ~ ~ 1 N V Y' O m ~ u;N rvu •a ~fl ,{;t ~o-. .o-i "K Kg T ~,L1i F~ 51 ~ e ~ Ir ~ ~ a O I~ Q ao N ~ T ~ w I'yl J ' 1 U ~~1 Vl W ZN ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ , ; fi ~ ¢ p ~ ~ ~ m~ ~ ~ .~r fi ~ ~ ~ ` ~ a ~ ~ ~g ~ ~ r ~r { W d ~ ~ ~~t! m .c~,~ ~~h{ o . fj~~ r P o ~ ~O C ~~U S ~ ~ p~ .o; -n Jh! ~ ~ Dpp f =Jf ~ ~ ~ l 7 ~ ~ H ~ m ~IJ f N ~ p ~T ~ . j n a a ~ y W~ N cJ ~ N ~ W ~ ~ ~'A c~ ~ ~ 1 7 F 'y..,.,~„~. N V ~u A ;L5 \ `o'do "pjy .n ~ ~ ` ~ ~ ~ ~ w ~ 1 ' ~ ~ 1~ 3 f ~A I I ~ p ~ 1I r~~ 3 II I7 ~ ~ ~ ~I II! I l 9 i 1 ~ LJ~ I~ i I il k~ _ -77 _`i , i n u _I j r # ~i ~ M u~~ 'i ii~ "i I ~I I ~f ~ E'i ~..i=.l E El! '4 O l ~ ~ ~ ~ ii ~i .~•.n .~-,iu .c-Ai A-Ai .o-.a~ a-m~ .o.' I- ~ ].~t 4i ii .or.u ~I • i~{ cW ~N ati~ ~ ~ 1_ li II } T4I~ i ~ ~ J II S~d~. I. II~ If _I ~5 Il II ' ~I II I~ ~ I I , . ~ . ~TI~, ~ ~ n n F it t II Id ~ II I I ~ C? il ~ - t` t{' ~ u^ • i- t::, i i. ~ a M ~ " ` ~ a r~ ~ ~ ^ ,~b ! I ' i', ` ' L-1 I I ED I IEZ ~ ! ~i f . ~ ? li~--~~' I! i~~ = ~i i P ~;t ~I g~ I - ~ ~ ~ ~ a' ~ ~ M-jl B~i I~~ j ii " r_ I o-.n a II jLt. I fl ~E af ~I ~I ~I ~I gl $I ii j~'ti~ ~ i,~' ~--I ~ I ED [E, m5; Fj -+L ~ 22~- w tilt i i ~i h E El L .-~L! `i" _ ~ El 2-1 ~ 71 ~ ' a•' ~,x~ ~ OR ~ 4 - ~ i t 1!. 1 I ~ ~ 1• ...Y e3 1 ~~~eae ~ ~i. 4y 3 0 ~ I 1+1 I i 1 i 1 Y 1 f 1' 1 1~ ~ ,.J 1 S 1 f} A f ~ V Y,~'.t,5~ ! ~ 4+ 9~ 1 ! ~ ¢ ~ ~.a i zri c f~ ~ ~i x I s! : e saF. t e ~q] p ~ 1 y p]~ ¦ p*~p, `iA~~~'~ ~ ~,t 4 ~ 0 I,~I~ ~f ._l/"..i 6 . ~ L-LEL jq ~ ' / . 4' .1 r 1 a f e 1}. p ~ ! S I f.i e 1 7 1: ~ . 'Cf . J~ ~ r_ 7 P . ~ 5 l f I j,f f j~r i i ti I ' ~ + r 5 t a a : [ - ~ P t I- 1 a ~ • f ~ ~o ~-p I q71~!"7 e~ ~Y;e . ~ ~ d I. T' t 1]' f 1 i J f, ! 1 ~ 1 Y4 I~!1 t ~.I' ~ . ~ 4 4 6I~~o~ , ilvp i i x~~~~ i . .~i~ ~ m /r~ ~ \ a e IY1 S { . .4 ` ~ ~ W ~ I; 1 i Y y • t-; i [1 ,y4 ~ ~ ~ R 1 ~ a ' ~ I i .l~..l ~ ~ # . ~41 H W 7, !I. ~ : • 'Y' 1 , ~a S,~I'I I . Vp { ix,Sres ~ ~ ? i . , ~ e r ~ ' ~ ~i~ si,~ i ~ i ~ i ~ ~ . a : ~ ~ . . . •J~ ~ i ~'f b~h . , $ . - ~ ~ ~ II ~ • ~ t ~ d .V : ~ e !J ~'`a{ 1 7 I~ I{.i I II ' ~._,i t .J,• I'~' I'III: ~ ? v ' ~ . ~a ;\1 ' i!r ,~~~-y--~-• , , ~ y~ a ~i 3 ~ : ~ [ . 1 Y h. 5 5 I 6"/~1 5~l TrArtf-9-T~6"~"Y~i ~ I ~ ~ I I j al , iF r e > > . ' 4A y?~ ~ j 1 i., , ~ ` f ~ ~,il.., ~Jv lp~' ~I 1 ~r. ? .F ~ ~ ~ i ~ 4 fc• 1 ~ ~ t ~ t r , ' .+r' F i t , I 1 I ~q EF, ~ ~ ~ ~ !1 Y / ' ' I ! ~ I ~ I 1 ~l 1 ~ PS 1 i ~ l 1 ~ ~ ! r ~ t 1 I ' ~ .n ~ i $ , ~ • o ~ MEMORANDUM Ta: Rlanning and Environmental Commissian FRQM: Department o# Cornmunity aeuelopment DATE: November 14, 2005 SUBJECT: A request fvr a recammendation to the Vail Town Counci6 of a text amendment, pursuant to Sectian 12-3-7, Vail Town Code; to amend Titke 12 af the Zaning Regulations, as necessary, to allow accommodation units to include "kftchen facrlitfes", and setting farth detaiEs in regard thereto. (PEC05-0079) Applicant: Town of Vail Planner; George Ruther 1. SUMMARY The applicant, Timberline Lodge, L.L,C., is proposing a text amendment to cer#ain sections of the Zoning RegulatiQns, Vail Tav+m Code, to allow accammodation units to include "kitchen faeilifies", and setting forth details in regard thereto. The Cammunity Development Department recommends that the Planning & ~ Environmental CQmmission tables this application to the November 28, 2005 public hearing of the Planning & Environmental Gommission and directs the staff to conduct further research inta the pros and cans of allowing accommodation units with Nkitchen facilities". II, DESCRIPTION OF THE REQUESfi ' The applicant, Ttmberfine Ladge, L.L.C., is propasing a text amendment to certain sections of the Zoning Regulations, l/ail Tawn Code, to allow accommodation units to incfude "kifchen facrlifies", and setting farth details in regard thereto. The Zaning Regulations currently define an "accommodafion unit"as, "Any room ar group of rQOms wnrithout kitchen facilities designed for or adapfed to occupancy by guests and accessible frDm cammon corrrdars, walks, ar balcanfes wifhout ,passing fhrough an4ther accommodafron uni# ar dwefling unit." According to the applicant, the gaal of this text amendment is to a#low Vail to remain competitive in the dEStination resort market by ensuring a wide range of shart-term Ivdging apportunities to meet the needs of our guests and visitors. For zoning purpases, the Zoning Regula#ions defne °krtchen facrlifies"as, "Fixtures and equr,pmenf for faod storage and preparafion of ineals, includrng a sink, sfave, and refrigeratron and food storage facifities. " ~ The applicanf is proposing to amend Section 12-7A-3, Canditional Uses; Public Accommodation zone district; Vail Town Code to allow "accommodatran units wrfh 1 r krtchen facilit6es" as a new conditional use, subject to the issuance af a canditional use ~ perni#. The purpose of this public heahng is to determine whether the Planning & Environmental Commission believes that the Community DevelQpment Department shQU#d pursue a text amendment to tfis Zoning Regulations wrhich would aildw an accommadation unit to I inclutSe "kitchen facilities". If the Cammission believes that this text arrfendment is worthy of further discussion and deliberatian, staff recommends that the Commission tables this appiication to the November 28, 2005 public hearing of the Planning & Environmental Commissian and directs the staff and the applicant to re#urn with more ' in#orrraatipn regarding the propQSed text amendment and how it might be best implemented. IIC. RDLES OF REVfEWING BQDIES Order of Review: Generally, text amendment applications wi91 be rewiewed by the Planning and Environmental Cornmissian and the Gommission will farward a recnmmendation to the Town Councii. The Town Councll will then review the iext amendment applicatioro. Planning and Environmental Commissidn: The PNanning and Environmental Commission is responsible far the review of a texf amendment application, pursuant ta Section 12-3-7, Amendment, Vaif Town Code, and forwardeng of a recommendation to the Town Council. Design Rerriew Board: ~ The Design Review Board has na review authority over a text amendment to the Vail Ton Code, Town Cauncif: The Town Gouncil is responsible far final approval, approval with modifcations, or denial of a text amendmen# application, pvrsuant tn Section 12-3-7, Amendment, Vail Town Code. The Town Gouncil has the authority ta hear and decide appeafs from any decision, determanation, or interpretation by+ the Planning and Environmental Commission andlor Design Review Board. The Town Council may also call up a decrsion of the Planning and Environmental Commission andlor Design Revi+ew Baartl. Staff: The Town Staff facilitates the application review process. Staff reviews the submitted application materia4s for compfeteness and general cQmpliance with the sppropriate requirements of the 'fown Cade. S#aff also provides the Pfanning and Environmental Gommission a mernarandum containfig a descrip#ion and baclcgraund of the application; an evaCuation of the applicatian in regard to the criteria and firadings out6ined by the Torun Code; and a recodnmendation of approual, apprava9 with modifications, or denial. IV. REl/IEVII CRITERIA The review criteria and factars far cflnsideration for atext amendment application are ! es#ab1ished 6y the provisions af Sectian 12-3-7, Amendments, Vail Town Code. 2 ~ 9 ~ 'l, The extetrt to which the text amendment furthers the general and specific purposes af the Zoning Regulations; anci, 2. The ex#ent to which the text amendment wou{d better implement and better achieve the applicable elements of the adapted goals, objectiWes, and policies autlined in the Vail Comprehensive Plan and is compatible with the develapment objecfives of the Town; and, 3. The extent to whicM the text am+endment demoRStrates hauv conditions have substan#ialiy changed since the adoption o# the subject regulation ~ ancl how the existing regulation is np langec apprapriate ar is inapplicable; ! antl, ~ ~ 4. The extent to which the text amendment provides a harmoniaus, ~ convenient, workable relationship among land use regulations cansisterrt with municipal deveiopment objectives; and, 5. Such other factors and ariteria the Comfinission anclJor Council deerns applicable ta the propased text amendment. V. STAFF RECOMMENDAT10N The Gommunity Developmen# Department recommends that the Planning & ~ Environmentai Commissian tables this application to the November 28, 2005 public hearing o~ the Planning & Environmentai Commission and directs s#aff to conduct further research into the pros and cons of a[lowing accommodation units with "kitchen facrlities" in the Tawn of Vail. Staff believes that there maybe rraerit in amending the Zoning Regulations as proposed and beEieves thaf if it were deerraed benefcial to a[law accammQdation units to have "kifchen faer`lifies°, theee may be a befter way to implement the new palicy. Are there any specific questions that the Cornmissian would like the staff or appficant to answer w`rth regard to the propased text amendment? I ~ 3 MEMORANDUM ~ TO: i'lanning and Enviranmental Commission FROM: Community Development Departmenf DATE: November 74, 2005 SUBJECT: A request fior a final review of an amendment to an Approved Deveiopment Plan, ta allow foe modifications to the existing platted building envelope (Lot 1), site , access (Loi 1), an increase in Gross Residential F9oor Area (Lots 1-6); and a request far a final review of an amended final plat, pursuant ta Ghapter 13-12, Exemption Plat RevieE+v Procedures, VaiC Tawn Code, ta amend the allauvable Gross Residential Floor Area and platted building ertvelope (Lat 1), within the Eleni Zniemer Subdivision located at 1701A-F Buffehr Cree4c Road/Lats 1-6, Eleni Zniemer Subdivisian, and satting forth details in regard thereta. Appficant: Buffehr Greek Partners, represented by Fritzlen Pierce Architects Planner. VIlarren Campbell 1. SUMMARY The appficants, Quffehr Creek Partners, the Ranallas, and the Brandts, represented by Fritz[en Pierce Architects, is requesting finai revfew of an amercdment ta an Approved aevelopment Plan, to alEaw for modifications to the existing pEatted building envelop€ ~ (Lot 1), site access (Lot 1), an increase in Gross Residential Floor Area (Lats 1-6); and a request for a finai reuiew af the Amendeti Final Rlat, Eleni Zneimer Subd`rvision, A Re-subdivision of a Part of Tract A. Lion's Ridge Subdivision. Filinq No. 2, pursuant to Chapter 13-12, Exemption Plai Review Pracedures, Vail Town Code, to amend the allowable Gross Residential Fioor Area ancf platted building envelope (La# 9), within the Eleni Zniemer Subdivisian lacated at 1701A-F Buffehr Creek RoadfLots 1-6, Efeni Zniemer Subdivision. If apprQVed, this request would result hn the piat being amended to show a'E 0% increase in GRFA for each lot, the building envefope for Lot 1 being amended, and the access for Lot 1 being taken off of Buffehr Creek Raad verse the existing shared driveway. Staff is recommending approval af this application subject to #he findings and criteria outlined in Sect9on Vlll of this memarandurrt. ll. DESCRIP710N OF REQUEST The applicants, BufFehr Creek F'artners, #he Rana6los, and th Brandts, reprasented by Fritzken Pierce Architects, is requesting final review of an amendment to an ApproWed Development Plan, to allow for modifications to the existing platted buifding enuelope (Lot 1), site access (Lot 1), an increase in Gross Residential Floor Area (Lots 1-6); and a request for a final review af the Amended Final Plat, Eleni Zneimer Subd+vision, A Re-subdivision af a Part of Tract A, Lion's Ridqe Subdi+vision. Filinq Na. 2, pursuant tQ Chapter 13-12, Exemptian Plat Review Procedures, Vail Tawn Code, to amend the allowable Gross Residential Floar Area and platted buMlding envelope (Lat 1), within the Eleni Zniemer Subdivisian Iocated at 1701A-F Buffehr Creek Road/Lots 1-6, ~ 1 Eleni Zniemer Subdivision. The applicants' request is comprised two applications to accomplish three goals. The applications and accompanying gaals inc6ude: • An application ta amend an approved deweloPment plan in order to ~ increase the allowable GRFA on the Lots 1-6, obtain a new building envelope on Lot 1, and new vehacular access to Lot 1; and • An exemption plat to adjust the platted building envelope an Lot 1 and arnend the plat restrictions on GRFA for the L4ts 1-6. A description of the request from the applicants' is attached for reference (Aftachrnent A). A vicinrty map of the area affected by #hese applicatit,ns is attached for reference (Attachment B). A reduced copy of the site plan and proposed amended pla# is attached for reference (Attachment C). III. BACKGROUND The area currently platted under the Eleni 2neimer SubdiVision was annexed into the Town Uf Vaif fram EagEe Coueroty by Ordinance 9, Series of 1987 rrvhich became effective an April 29, 1987. It was previously identified as Phase Vi of The Valley Subdivisian. The Valley Phase VI was approved as a Planned Unit Development (PUa) under Eagle County jurisdictivn in the fall of 1980. That plan included 42 tawnhouses with a total GRFA of 77,150 square feet. 1Nhen the plan rnras annexed into the Town of Vaif, a pravision of the anrtexation ordinance required that any major modification to #he County approved plan would require PEC approvaL In that same ordinance residentia! Cluster Zoning was applied to the Eieni Zneimer Subdivisian. C)n October 22, 1990, #he Planning and Environmental Gamrnissian unanirnously ~ approved an amendment to #he appraved PEJD from Eagle County. The amended development plan incfuded the ability to canstruct 13 single-famiky dwelling units with the ability to construct a caretaker/employee housing unit in conjunction with each single- family dwelGng unit. Atotal of 55,500 square feet of GR,FA was approved for the 13 single-family dwelling eanits and an addifional 10,400 square feet was approved for the 13 potential caretakerfempioyee housing units. . {7n August 34, 1990, March 31, 1994, and June 6, 1996, tne plats establishing Lots 1-7 of the Lia Zneimer Subdivisian were recflrded. The L.ia Zneimer Subdivision is located on the sauth side of Buffehr Creek Road. On February 19, 2003, the plat establishing Lots 1-6 of the Eleni Zneimer Subdivision was recorded. 7he seven lots created in the Lia Zneimer Subdivision and the six lots created by the E'ieni Zneimer Subdivision comple#ed the platting of the 13 single-family lots approved under the October 22, 1990, apprar+ed development plan. C)n October 39, 2005 the Design Review Board reviewed the propflsed new building envelope and curb-cut access proposaC on a concep#ual basis and unanimously agreed that the prapased relocation of access was a be#ter site design solution than taking access on the existing driveway through the retaining walls. They believed the praposed design would have less impaet on the site. ~ • 2 I IV. ROLES QF REVIEVIIING BUARDS ~ Develaament Pian 4rdinance 9, Series af 1987, included a provision that the PEC review any rnajor changes to the approved development plar+ fQr the Eleni Zneimer Subdivisian. The PEG shail approve, approve with madificatmons, or deray the requested amendment to the appraved develdpment plan. Exemqtion Plat . Planning and Environmental Commission: Action: The Planning and Environmental Commission is responsible for final appro+val, approve with modifications, or disapprove the plat. Specifically the code states on Section 13-12-3C, Review and Action on Plat: 7he plannrng and environmental commission siaall review the plat and associafed materials and shall approve, approve with modrficarions or disapprove the plaf vtrithin twenfyr ane (21) days of the first pubfic hearing on the exempfion ,plat ap,plication or the exemption plat applicatiQn vvifl 6e deemed approved A longer time period for rendering a decision rnay be granted subject fv mutuaf agreerraent betu+een the plannrng and enviroramental eommission and the applicant. The criteria for reviewrng the plat shall be as corafar'ned irr section 13-3-4 of this title. Design Review Board: Actian: The Design Review Baard has NO revierrv authority on an exemption plat, but ~ must review any accorrtpanying aesign Review Board application. Town Gouncil: The Town Gouncil is the appeals aufhority fiar an exemption plat review procedure in accardance with Section 13-3-5C, Vail Town Code, which reads as foliows: Within ten (10) days the decisrorr of the Planning and Environmenfa! Cammassion Qn the fanal pfat shali be transmitted to the Councrl,6y the staff. The Council rraay appeal the decisian ot the Plannrng and Envirenmental Cornmassiorr within seventeera (17) days of the Planning arrd Environmenta! Co,rrrrmissian's action. !f Council appeals the Planning and EnvironmentaJ Commrssion's decision, the Gouncif sha11 hear substantially the same presentation by the applicant as was ,heard at the Planning and Environmenta! Commission hearing(s). The CounciF shall have thirty (30) days to affirm, reverse, or affirm with modifications the Planning arrd Environmenta! Cammission decision, arrd the Cauracil shalf conducf the appeal at a rsg,ularly scheduled Council meeting. S#afF: The staff is respvnsible for ensuring that all submitfal requirernents are prQVided and plans conform to the technical requirements of the Zoning Regulations. The staff alstr advises the applicant as to compiiance with the design guidelines. Staff provides a staff memo cnntainirtg background an the property and provides a staff evafuation of the project with respect to the required criteria and frrdings, and a ~ 3 reammmenda#ion on approval, approrral wi#h conditions, or denial. S#aff also facilitates the review process. • V. APPLICABLE P'LANNING DQCUMENTS ~ TOWN OF VAIL ZQNING CODE TI7CE 13: SUBDNISIC)N REGULAT14hIS (in part) 13-2,2 DEFiNITIONS EXE,MrPTlO1V PLAT: The platting of a partian of iand or property fhat does not faN withrn the definifion of a"subdivisran" as contarned in this secfion. 13-12 EKEMPTION FLAT REVIEW PROCEDURES 13-12-1: PURF'OSE ANa INTENT; The purpose of this chapter is to establish cri#eria and an appropriate review process whereby the planning and environmental cammission may grant exemptiorrs from the definition of the term "subdivision" for praperties that are determined to fiaPl oufside the purpase, punriew and intent of chapters 3 and 4 of this title. Thrs process is intended to allow for the platting of property where na additional parcels are created and conformanGe with appficable provisions of this code has been demonstrated. (Ord. 2(2001) § 1) 13-12-2: EXEMPTIONS IN PROCEDURE AND SUBMITTALS: ~ "Exemption Plats", as defined in section 13-2-2 of this title, shali bs exempt from requarements related to preliminary plan procedures and svbmiftals. Ecemption piat applicants rnay be required to submit an enviranmental impact report if required by title 12, chapter 12 of this code. 13-92-3: PLAT PROCEDURE AND CRITERIA F()Et REVIEW. The procedure for an exemption plat review shall be as tollows: A. Subrnissuon Of Proposal; Waiver Of Rsqufrements: The applicant shail submit twa (2) copies of #he propasal fallowing the requirernents for a final plat in subsection 13- 3-613 of this title, with the provision that certain of these requirements may be waived by the administrator aradlor the planning and environmental eommission if determined not applicable to the project. B. Publie Hearing: The adminisfrator will schedule a public hearing before the planning and environmental commission and follow natifiication requirements far adjacent property awners and public raatice far #he hearing as found in subsection 13-3-681 of this title. C. Review And Action On Plat; The plannin:g and enwironmental commission shall review the plat and assocaated materials and shall approve, apprQVe with modifications or disapprove the plat wi#hin twenty ene (21) days of the first public hearing an the exemption plat application or the exerrtption plat application will be deemed approved. A ~ 4 ` longer tirne period for rendering adecision may be granted subject to mutual agreement between the planning and enviranmen#af cammission and the applicant. The criteria for ~ reviewing the plat shall be as contained in section 13-3-4 of thus title. VI. SURROUNDING LAND USES AND Zf3N[NG Land Use Zoning North: Forest Service NA East: Residentiaf Residential Cluster West: Forest Senrice NA South: Residential Residentiai Cluster VII. SITE ANALYSIS Development 5#andard Aliovved/Reauired Exrstin Praposed Lot Area Lot 1 15,000 sq. ft. 218,235 sq. tt. No Change Lot 2 15,000 sq. ft. 92,957 sq. ft. No Change Lot 3 15,000 sq. ft. 95,788 sq. ft. No Change Lot 4 15,000 sq. ft. 83,286 sq. ft. No Change Lot 5 15,000 sq. ft. 2$,357 sq. ft. No Change Lot 6 15,000 sq. ft. 22,476 sq. ft. No Change Tract A 15,000 sq. ft. 393,303 sq. ft. No Changs Frontaae ~ Per the approved development pPan the six IQts included within the Eleni Zne"rmer ' Subdivision were to gain access off the extended driveway which has been consiruc#ed per the approved plasns. This propasal would amend the access to Lot 9#o be directly off of Buffehr Creeic Road. Lot 'I 460 feet a{ong Buffehr Creek Drive Site Dimensions Per the approved development plan each lat was plafted with a building envefope. The platted building envelopes are permitted to take an new dimensions uncieE the approved development plan. However, the new proposed envelope canrtat shift more that 15 feet from is platted Iocation and it nnust contain the sarrte amourat of square footage of buildable area as the platted envelape. This proposal propases to shift the building envelope on Lot 1 in ane area approxirnately 3"! feet to the east. The existing buiiding envelope on Lot 1 measures 5,462 square feet and the proposed revised (shifted) btaildang envelope wauld measure 5,462 square feet. Sit1e Setbacks Per the appraved development plan the platted buildnng envelopes were located as to maintaon desired spacing between the structures. All physicaC improvernents #o the sites other than grading and landscaping rraust accur vwithira the buildJng envelape. In additiany e there is a 15-foot setback off of the perirneter of the Eleni Zneimer Subdivision. ~ 5 I i GRFA Allowed Lot Existinq Proposed ~ Lat 1 4,788.5 sq. ft. 5,267.4 sq. ft. Lat 2 4,788.5 sq. ft. 5,267.4 sg. Tt. Lot 3 4,788.5 sq. ft. 5,267.4 sq. ft. Lat 4 4,788.5 sq. ft. 5,267.4 sq. ft. LQt 5 5,000 Sq. ft. 5y500 Sq. ft.. Lot 6 3,800 sq. ft. 4,1$0 sq. ft. Tract fi Na development Potential Na Change , VIIL APRLICATt0N CRITERIA ANO FINDIhIGS Derrelapment F'lan Amendment: As stated previously, when the Eagle County approved development plan was annexed intt? the Town of Vail in 1987, aprQVtsion af the annexation ordinance required that any major modificaticrn to the Gounty appraved plan would require PEC approval. On October 22, 1990, the Planning and Envsronrnental Commission unanimausly approved an amendment to the approved PUD frorn Eag1e County. The arnended develapment pEan included the ability #a construct 13 single-family dwelling units with the abili#y to construct a caretakerlemployee housing unit in canjunctiQn with each single- fiamily dwelling unit. A tofal of 55,500 square feet of GRFA +nras approved for the 13 single-famely dwelling units and an additional 10,400 square feet was approved for the • 13 potentiaE caretakerlemployee housing units. As Planning and Environmental Commission review of this application is requieed by ~ annexation agreement and nat Code, the only evabuation criteria to be used is to compare the existing, approved plan, to the praposed plan and determine that the intent and goals of the currently approved plan are being maintained. The proposal incfudes three changes to the apprDVed plan. The proposeci changes are as fQllaws; Chan e to GRFA limitations: Staff believes that the propased amendment to increase the maximum allowable GRFA on ths six fots within the Eleni Zneimer SubdivisiQn is reasonable and appropriafe as the proposed amendment will maintain the intent of the C7ctober 22, 1990, approval. The amendments to the GRFA regulations enacted by Ordinance 14, Series of 2004, affected the rnethod by which GRFA within #he Residential Cluster zone district is measured. Because the GRFA for the Eleni Zneimer Subdivisian is {imited by the plat the Iots within the subdivisian were negatively afFected by Qrdinance 14 as the GRFA amendments require wall thickness to be counted as GRFA (within Ordinance 14 a 1 0°`o increase in GRFA +,nras included to compensate far the thickness of walls). The proposal is to increase #he maximum GRFA permitted on each lot by 10% to recap#ure #he GRFA "Iostf'when wall thickness was changed to count as GRFA. This proposal will not change the intended size, bulk, and mass of structures within the subdivision. Conversely, if this amendment is not appraved the effect of Ordinance14, Series of 2004, will be a reduction in size, bulk, and mass of the structures ~within the subdivision by 10%a. The proposed GRFA changes for each ~ 6 lof are detailed in Sectian VIl af this memorandum. ~ Change to platted building envelope for Lot 1: The approved devefopment plan from October 22, 1990, included prnvisions for platted building envefopes on each ot the six lots located within the Eleni Znefiner Subdivision. The fallowing is the text fr4m thaf approved development plan discussing fhe platted building envelopes: "Building envelopes indicateo' upon the approved site pfan may be modified wrth approval of the D,RB 6ased upon defailed review af an lndividual dwveFling unif. 7he L1RB shall find that the modificatlan to any 6Uilding envelope does not su6stanfially rESUIt in any negative impacts upon the sife, aaf}oining prraperty, or have any adverse impact uporr required geologic harard considerafions. If an associatrorr of hpmeowners within the project is formed, any madifieafion of a bulfding envelope shall also corrform fo the rules and regulations adopted by the associatirn. Any modification shall not exceed 15 feet and in no case ~ shall any structure be built in #he 20 faot setbacks shawn on the apprAVed development plan. " Staff has made the interpretatian that the modificatian af an envelope of 15 feet or less can be made if the DRB makes the findings stated in the above paragraph. However, the resulting modified buiVding envelope must be no more square faotage than that of the piatted building envelope. The s#ructures currently constructed and under cQnstruction on Lats 5 and 6 of the Eleni ~ Zneimer Subdivisian went thraugh the process described in the paragraph abowe. This proposal includes a request to shift a portion af the pla#ted building envelope on Lat 1 on the northeast corner of the platted envelope approximately 31 feet ffl the east. The exfsting building envelope on Lot 1 measures 5,462 square feet and the propased revised (shifted) building envelope would rneasure 5,462 square feet. Tfne proposed building envelope change is attached for reference (Attachment C). On actober 19, 2005 the Design Reuiew Board reviewed the prapased new building envelope proposai on a cQnceptual basis and unanirnausly agreed that the proposed new envelope was appropriate and did not negatively affect the adjoining properties. It was expressed that the propnsed new build3ng envelope in conjunction with the proposed new driveway access would have fess impact on the site. Staff belieWes the intent of the appraved deWeloprnent plan and the platted burlding envelopes is being met. The existing and pr'oposed buiiding envelopes are identicai 3n area. Staff agrees with the DRB that the proposed envelope will allow for adequa#e profection af the existing aspen grave on #he lot. Change to access location far Lo# 'E: ~ This proposal includes a request tfl refocate the driveway access to the structure 7 proposed to be built on Lot 1 af the Eleni Zneimer Subdivision, It was the intent of the October 22, 1990, PEC approval that ali six lots within the Eleni Zneimer Subdivision would gain access through a shared common driveway, which is ~ currently constructed. This propasal would relocate the access for Lot 1 appTOximately 250 feet further to the east (uphill) frorn the existing access. The applicant has proposed the movement of the driveway access, as taking access aff the existing driveway through the reta'rning walls wiEl result in #he constructian of multiple retaining walls t4 hold the slope back, uvhereas the propased driveway reiocation will rgsult in less disturbance to the hillside. On Uctober 19, 2005, the DRB cancep#ually reviewed this application. Initially they were very eOncerned about relocating the access, however, after performing a site visit they unanimously agreed that gaining aceess to Lo# 1 was accomplished with less negative impact to the site by relocating the access 250 feet to the east. Staff has reviewed this application and determEned that the standards of site distance for locating the driveway in its propased location have been satisfied. The standard for sight distance of a curb-cut or? Buffehr Creek Road (25 mph) is 150 feet. The praposed location provides a sight distance in excess of 250 feet which is the standard required on a road in which trafFic travels at 35 mph, Several neighboring residences have expressed concern with vehicles exceeding the speed limit anci safety dangers of Iocating this driveway in the praPased locatian. TwQ letters farm neighbars are attached far PEG reView (Attachment a). Staff believes that the proposed driveway relacatian does nat violate the initial inten# of the October 22, 1990, PEC approval. StafF agrees with the DRB that a structure built an Lot 1 which gains access at the new 14cation wiEl allaw far a better site and archi#ectural design which does not incorpora#e numerous retaining wafls. ~ Exemption Plat (Defers to Section 13-3-4, which is as folEows); The ,burden of proof shall rest with the appficanf fo show fhaf the appfication is irr compliance with tire infent and purposes of this Ghapfer, rhe Zoning ardinance and ofher pertinenf regulatrons that fhe PIanning and Envirnnrnenia! Comrr?ission deerns applica6le. Due consideratran shafl be given fo the recommendafions made by public ageneies, ufility comparries and other agencies consulted under subsectlon 93-3-3C a[aave. The Planning and Environmenta! Commissian shafl revrew the ap,plicatiorr and consider its appropriafeness in regard fo 7own poficies relafing fo subdivision corrtrol, densities prapased, regufafions, ordinances and resalLitions and ofher appficable documents, environmental integrity and compati,bility wifh the surrounding Iand uses and nfher applicable documents, effecfs on fhe aesfhetics af the Town IX. STAFF FiEGt]MMENQATIfJN The Community DeveEopmen# Deparfrnent recomrnends approval, of the request for a final review of an amendment to an Approved Qevelapment Plan, to allow for modifica#ions to the existing platted building envelape (Lot 1), site access (Lot 1), an increase in Gross Residential Floor Area (Lots 1-6); and a request for a finaE review af the Amended Fina! PZat. EEenr Zneimer Subdivision, A Re-subdivisian af a Part o# Traet A, Lion's Ridae Subdivision,Filin4 No. 2, pursuant to Chapter 13-12, Exemptian Plat Review Procedures, Vail Town Gode, ta amend the allowable Grass ~ s ; I ~ Residenteal Floor Area and platted building envelope (L.ot 1), within the Eferti 2nierner Subdivision located at 1701A-F Buffehr Creek RoadlLots 1-6, Eieni Zniemer Subdivision ~ and setting forth detaiks in regard thereta. This recammendatinn is based upon the review af the criteria in Section VI II of this memorandum and the evidence and testimony presented. ' Amendment to the A raved Devela ment Plan Shauld the Planning and Environmental Commission choase ta approve this amendment to the approved develapment plan, the Communi#y Development Department recommends the Cammission pass the following motion: The Planning and Environmental Commission apprvves the amencfinent to the approved develaprrtent plan, to aflow for an rncrease te the maximum permif Grass ,R'esidenfial Floor Area far ,Lots 1-6 of the Elenr Zniemer Subdivisiort, an arrrendment fo the building envelope, and access an Lot of the Eleni Zneirrrer Subdivision located at 1701A-F Buffehr Greek Road e/Lats 1-6, Eleni Zneimer Subdivislan and setting forth details.in regard thereto. Should the Planning and Enviroremental Cammission choose to approve this amendment ta the approWed develapment plan, the Gommunify Developrnent Department recommends the Comrnission rrzakes the following finding: 1. That the proposed amendmenfs to the approved develapmenf plan for the Edeni Zneimer Subdivision are in keeping with the fntent and goals af the developmen# plan approverl on October 22, 9990, and complies with a11 Town of'U'arl technrcal ~ requirements. Amended Final Plat Shnuld the Rlanning and Environmental Cammission ehoose to apprave this exernption plat, the Cornmunity Qevelopment Department recommends the Commissian pass the following motion: The Planning and Envir4nmenfaf Commission approves the Amended Finaf Pdat Eleni , Znelrner Subdivisfon, A Re-subdivision af a Parf of 7ract A, Llon's Ridqe Subtfivision. Filing No. 2, pursuant to Chapfer 93-72, Exempfian Plat Review Procedures, Vall Tawn Code, fo amend the allawable Gross Residentr'al FfoQr Area, and building envelope on Lot 9 wifhin the Eleni Znlemer Subdivrsian located at 17O7A-F Buffehr Cresk Road/LQts 7-6, Eleni Zniemer Subdivrsr'on and setting fortla defaids irr regard thereto. Should the Planning and Environmentai Commission chaose to approve this plat ameradment request, the Community Development Department recommends the Commission makes the follo+wing findings: 7. That the applicatian is rn cornpliance with the rntenf and purposes of the Subdrvisron Regulatians, the Zanfng Ordinance and ofher pertinent regulatrorrs that the Planning and Environmental Cornmissron deems applicable. ~ 9 2. That the applicafian is appropriate in regard fo Town policies relating fo subdivision control, densifies prapased, regulations, vrafinaraces and resolutions and ather applica6le a'ocuments, environmental integrity and campatibility w?th ~ fhe surrcrunding land uses and other applicable documents, and effects on the aesfhetics of the Town. X. ATTACHMENTS • A. Appfcant°s Request B. Vicinity Map G. f2educed Copies of Site Plan and Amended Final Plat D. Lefters fram Neighbaring Property 4wners . , . ~ ~ 10 aliiana F- P erte: ,~,rcinles:i FRITZLEN PIERCE WARCHIT~CTS t:atf;-~ He~sinoa MarIa;;:-r VA1L, COLORADQ ~ The interrt af this prqject is !or the develppment of a new single family residence on Lot 1 of the Eleni Zneimer Subdivision. Acce55 ta the site was initially planned to be from the priwa[e raad to the 5outhwest of the lot Yhe elevation difference between the private road and the center of the site is greater than 30 feet. The reason far the driveway IocatioEi change is to reduce the amount of site retaining walls su6stantially. 1Nith this submittal we are requesting to access the site from Buffehr Creek Raad, approximatefy 250 feet eas# of the iaitersection of Laons Ridge Laop Road and BufFehr Creek Road. With the proposed plan, the impacl will be more aesihetically pleasing to the owners and the4r neighboes, In addition ta the access reyt,est, we are also submitting to request the modification of the existing building enveiope. It is our intent to have the builcling limits in the same relative locatian. The proposed limits have been modified to take advantage of the views from the site. The proposed building limits have the same tota[ area as the existing limits, a tatal of 5462 square feet, as defined in the survey. The total allowed GRFA for this Lot has been cfefined in the wlat When the Town of Vail arnended tFre definitic,ns, and revised the method by which GRFA is calculated; the pla;t for this Subdivision was nat amended. The previous definition of calcu9at.ing GRFA uses square faot totals to the interior of the framed wz{Is. The current definition takes the total square footage to the exterior of framed walls. ~ With this change having not affected the tatal allowed for lots 1-6 of the Eleni Zneimer 5ubdivision, we are requesting a l Ofo increase in allowed GRFA as shown in the new plat propasal. The GRFA aflowed per the existing plattotals 4788.5 square feet With a 10% increase the total GRFA wou9d allow for 5267.35 square feet for buildable area. FRITZLEN PiERCE 9: Attachrnent: A Eleni Zneimer Subdivision Development P'lan Amendment and Exemp#ion Plat Planning and Envirnnmental Commission - Nouember 14, 2005 - ~ .A, 7,7 . ~ - ` 'v,: ' W } ~ A. }~X i .r 4 q~ S- k N ~ I' i~ S f I S, l o s Z ~ ff s ~ ~ ~ ~ t l.. 'T, 1 ~ h k ti ' ! k , £ ' ~ ~ ' . ~ id. ~ 's _ li ~ ~ ~ 1~i ~ ? i t ,~r 'p i v~a,~ r q~~"^ t . . i ~ ~d .(Y'na rrv~ a 1 YA' y~ ~ ~ /y k C Y iW ~h r'tl ! l. f r 4 ! ~ } ~ Z F ' y. t~ '4 f:~ dA ~ „ R y_, "i . t . . ~ V ' f ~ ~ ~~'$s ; ~ r s F.i tT ~ ~ ~ • . - tP t~ .s yaa ~.r r -'Kx wP 1, i 4r~ '~n 4,4 1. Is Jy c f r - 1 . : re r^ ! ~ `...1 L.t ~ s . ~+'S ti k r ,r~n ms r;'.~ ~ tta , ' , ~ v v t ~ x ~r ~e ~ wr'`+y ; ~ ~ " " } ~ g 1 a n ~i ~r ~a~ ~ 1~ ~y ~ ' r ~ 1 ~ ti , .m z9 1 ,.~p T f Y- 4 ~ . 1 ~~'yC ti~'i ~ 3 "~tk w ~Y ~ r 6 i. ~ : t ~ r i y,~ -3 0 " '~-`yk ~11, ' °3° g r.: ~ n ~ .r , 'k . n ~ft i ~ ~v~. k°~ a Y t 1 5 i + ~ ~ 4 y r yw 1 r x ~i~ y s p4 f ~ ~+~.*A 'x ti r 3 E ~r J[ ~11 ~ q 'r ~ t ~ s ~ ~ P ~4r, ~ € 1~,t~, ° ~ ~ i s~ , e~ i " R ,t•r .;iR" j _ i ~ qt G X 1g~' 'K` 5 t.~` 5~ ~ 5 K '!~4 ~'i' ~ 4 , ~ `a + ~ r 1 Y% y ~a+ .a 6<3 i -I~aM'r j.~ r:-,~~ > >f ~ ' Ir, a a:~C b 4 & i~'~G~ V` ~ M ~ v r x i w . ~ ; i r t Y° ~ t L ;r ~u~k'P Y xa ; _ ~ . r~ '„X- ~a ~ } } d ~ - 4 ; ~ ~ £ 9 ~ S - ` ~ ~ s ~ ' 5 5' "s t ~ r €~f ,vt.F ~ ~ ~ ~ . .rr~~' ~ fy ` ` r~. ~ ~d r ; xY i: ;a ~ 5 i 'S+ F 4 y-1 . _ s f n e C ; r ~ " s ~ : ~ - ; ~ ~M S ~ p ~ t eA" 1+ ~ J ~ : } 1 l y 'EtL ~ j tK ~ { - ~ F ~ ~ 1J •7S} ! ~ ~ - ~ 4 r; ~ ,X's_. x~ } 4 ! ~ 1 ~Y.. ~ . . A - "k' ~F.ri5.5 s, #~'S~'~`(i' ~ ! a ~ ~ t t Fe lµ} ~ ~ f ' - f - ,S 5 f g 4 ~ fil +°`."f I ~ c7'~ l~, ~ . ~1.`tt ~li t . A ' , , ~ t i F.` ~ ka 'Y` . t' ~ F/ L' ' i P 1y r k "a 3 ~:~71 t,.'~i~r 19~r ,I...~- a j~ a.~ t ' f ~4 . # ~ . ^ X ~ ~ , l) ~ 5 W 4 Yr ) 4 }l ,Y LIK~ ~ 1 t ~i f:~ ~ ~ : x : s 7 ' 1 i itr ~ ~ + .:.~c, < ~ . 4 s ' - 7 ~ * ft 7 4"*r ~ I yk ` " 1~ . i k r y t l' 2„ . i'~- " s .,y v '~°.'..rg~~ r •ti'~a ~sf ` ~'L ~E i`~ ~1 ~ , a~~*,~,~ f'F raS aa`~',t! ~S ~x'sG ~~ri ~ o-',~-+~r~, i ~ ~ s y a:.,~ ''`r'g` ' :~s~~ ` ; ' r . ~ > , . ~~Yc ~ ,.i" f } I i : t 3 , .t ~f!'f ' i .4 -11 A 5-1-f+ -E~s ZA' i t ~e 'f $•d`i?~~tr~ ~ s+~ r+f :D F N4 r `i .3 ~ $ Y ~ T ~ - ~,u TA?- i '5 _i«~ A 3~ ;i~~ M ~lJ' l V f y`~ 5~~~ . ' f LXF jl'Y pY n~ ~F ) i j' ~ ,y y m , ~ : ~Cyt 7 r R 4 ;~'r~T~ i.F~~~ 0~x Y%4 A~ f"~Y }r 1 Y~U~ k'~~d~ ~ °~e~~i..3~~7~~` % ~ n, y, q g q Y~ y ~W,~ xy s,~ y.. J ~ 5 4.'X ` t a[k u~ r~ . v'~ . y,~ ,zl ; f - i ~ r ; ~ - I t x i ~ C. - r ~ k {..ti ,rIQ i . t+' . ti ^ i v / 3a ~ ' aU r'~~ . ~ j ~ d. Er . i ~ n - ~~d k 1 ' fi ~ ~ a'~ x - ~ ~ ; ~ ~ f ~ . . t - 4 _ ~ e ~ . ~ 4nc ~ r ~ . , t ~Tr - ~ 'K ~ r ; ~.3 e~ ~ ~ ~ "s~r~, j~Jl! ; µ ~ ? z' ~ 7a ~ t i +F4 t i 1. rt ~ ~';7 ~ t~t.~W'~ 7e k~ 1.~ S~ 4 tz j;; ~ 2. d- , -s S . i ' > ' L j s k '~4 A ' ~ h r { ~ ~ ~ ~,,f~,s~ y~ ~ I yyr /~Y ~ , r.4 ~ 5 v-; y . ~ 11 - C _Y d' { , ~ 5i~.1 ~ 1 1~ r~~'~ { L 'i E , } " t , k ~ fi/ Y ~ :yd l ~ - { ' ~i . ,~t t~~. p,~ r - , #~4~ - te . }'~~~i~ ~ t C $ ~ r : r t e ~ ~ v' a~g..k z 5 w ~x ~ ~ ~ k u .V"i v 4'~ f ` ~'~7.~ ; ' ~ ,4 ~ ~ c~{ 4r'~ ~ 7~ 4t' r ?a dd'~ ~~Lr ' 3 - . J1 . ~+j ~ h F ~ g x~~-4 J~ i't 7{.~ 13.1'tS'~,~',.~ l' fr r C: j . Yti~ ~ 'Sf ..J _.j.y ~y ~ 1~~,~y .',`..`'t~,~`~ r~ ~t~,~{ f"k - r ~ , F . it`"1 t - i tS' i p Ji a~. fi M L' ~Ka~ r1j 4. : 1 1 W i i4 M - ' ~ ~ t ' ~S'~,e~`~ '„1 7.-7~^h~i~#~,r,~~`~~~r. .h'~ i>'~ ~ f t ~ - T A~ ;i t ~ 'J~ ~ r ! ¢ y I t , 1 f 1 ~ l ~ h t ~ Yt ~ s ~ , t t r u. ti. . a qrf°< . . y .v k - s,y ~ E; t f' ! ~ "r+~q~j~Wy~} ~T.-,~, G-°' s. 1 ~f j' t e t { ~ ~y~ ~ a, ~ ~ a,. i't ' p~ C~~~ ~'~!iF;t'i d L .~~.k Y #t r~'p,'~ . _eJ ;~#e 4 . S p~~ r ~ r ~ ~ i~ ~ ~a , p''. '3 ' kh . .Y Y ~A(dc~,"~7~': _ - s . ~ Y ~ _e.. f > 1 j ~f~ 't~ t~' d 'I.# f k F ~@ ,~+f~sU .y... 0lx } : i- 3 e r , ' Y , w ~ ~ 9 i ^ r ~ ~ ~u-1~'"' : 4 ~ ~ ~ . e r ' . w y j.ai+ r~~t F . . . . .n ~ _ a ' 1 F ~ ,r~ y. r~ i, ~ t ~ r y ~ 4 e rr?. ,.ru~ 'p~r~~ V4`i° s 1 •Tf,, n k ? ~ ~ ~ ~ 1 ~ ~ .i 4 ~ ~ 7 r. ° . 4 F ` y ~i P Y°"rS z Y , ~ ~ ~Z~~r~i c tr i ' ~'F~A ,r~,P~~,t~A` t~fe~i~~~WpA r~,"S ~ ~yg~'~:-,+ T ~~sM1~'~+~~..~$i.~~,i , ~ ` !9 t r ~ i : ~t A ' ~4 ~ ~f D ""~'~~y'~a s"~'~n k~S~~ 4 ~ ` r' d, ~AC 1 t -..25 ) f ~f +Y~ ~ ~ ~ 1j % Tiy~1j 61~q~}lph'%*~ 4 I ~ ~ ~ ~.a r ~ .n.. ''r$ . ~t ' . S 4 '~wl~ i:.dG ra4 } ~ r, : l ~w e ~y,.~,~' k A~ ~ y..srf ~ 4 S s~ R ~y ~ f'" F~~°r' t - ~A ~.P ry.,~~jS~~^`E i' 1u 1 7,_ ' ~ ,tW, r~44 Y 1 ~ {~r 3`" ~ : f p,~,,~~.~r rhi ~aNY .1 ~ l~~ ~a j`^ ~r j a~ p~'W k rv ~ { ~ y~ i ? ~tr y f~C`~ ~w~qr„%.r^;r'~ j r~,~r`a ° , ~r ,~u,`x F ~ ; { a x;y 1 ~ ~ `v ;,r~j" ° ~9 I 1 N'~y~, ; h- d t~' : ~ 'r i° _ - { ` i 1 oyb F~~~ dr ~ dY." ~'z' ~ !l y, " 4 Y u~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ t1~f ~~i k d i! d'7 5+~~.Y¢,y4'~.°1~.~~~Y~4' ~i ?~~~r7]k~ iil~, j ~ i d v ~~x i a, 5°9?' t ~x ~ ~ ,i ~ , . e ' ~~i y ° , 4~ r ~s ta~: w d~~ ) 9 wy ..~~y y . F t t ~ ~'i ~ ~ i° ihs it 4.x 1a -11 7 . ` s .i 3~dtF.".1 5~1~ '?~F 115~~. P ~,*p i~Jt 1... -k . ~'d ~ S F ~ }/~~,u yw ~ "1" r~ ~,s x ~ 15 a , e e k „1:' ~k`i+ ~ ` v~ a ~ ; ~ a + q ~ ;a;as 4 ~ ~ ~ ~ re u~_ M,~... y ~E ' b q~`Fr k i 1. ' } ¢ r A: ~ rs.:.~ ~ $ s D y ~ : ~ ; ~'`u-~'t,`~u:. ~ ~ r~?~i ~'7°°~ ::~~t r~~''3~~"$ .cui(! .~°4 tt 1 ~ z ra~,s ~h~. ~F ij .,.d~. ,'a' ~ ,isu t- i,,~ o~' ^~s ~ , a e i a~d~ ~rs~F" ~E. . ~ u A t ~ . . rt I x ` r~' ~i~a ~ ) ~ e rm~ , r kfr" eR i f +i~36~~t. l..x.,#~i.~.~ ~ :'_Y;.~ ~e2;;.~J.. r.s'.: yg +ai F~ m Y ay M * }U %y+svrp ,'i s~'7+r'r r 11 ^ i a~ ~`.-Y~~ J ..1 x t~ V"I,F l~4~3 I', 11 -r ~r~ d'1.~+°~"h . " i ~i , e g a~a ~ T a .~.~'4".r'r"~ ; r th a~; i s q t ~ ~ a a "'~u}-.~ k.~~ rl E~ ~I = ~ ~r ~tl f r: xa ~ r t ~ ,.r 41 " , M1 d. ~ , ~ ~ ~ F }~q ~ ~&5 ~ , r , , u Attachment: B ~I "d ~~'~a ~a' "s4 i k - ~ I r i~ °~3 t"t~~ea C' ti " " ~ I_~ ar~~ ~d~4t~`i~~c5a_ 46~ +v~,.~M'~~n.,r~,.a=,> v . _ , ~ ~ 00 4 1 e9 Feet Thle maP was crflaSnd hy the T. M V-II 345 6ePnrlmeM. Use n1 W5 m.G sMeAd 6e for gereral purpases only. ~ f! ~1 The Tuwn pt Va31 daes no4 waararrt tlie accuracyo# the ir~fortnal4n aon~amedherGin. ~J (parcel Ilne work Ls 2pproMlmatei • ~~~d ,•~.o-~.+~~ . CDQbZdOZ03 `ILI.KflOD 31Jda , asz-sc uan 10 riMoi a-n'~ui,~an.mS NO1SFAIQSfIS 2i3Ma14Z I1VLH7R `i 10'130 12IVd V s,re;yc.~ 3s, dl;i/1i DIHdV3IJOdO.L ' 4 ~ 7 ' . y€& Y y 4 r ~ r ~ zF $ ~ ~c S z . ~ ~ + n-k E va a c. ? I~c~~8 4~gK~am (t z w oi a~ 63 I I ~i I I I i ~ / \ v) nl.:llo~ I.~ I° I`a m ~ 1 6 ~ ~ Y f \ \ i g~~ - I I~I ~ 1 1~ 1 V ~ I ~,~~~1~i1 ~r~ ~ la ~i? ~+P ~ ~ ' - ~ ; t:~• ~ ~ , I ' ~ , l ~ i i ~ I i ,f ' $ ~ ~ ~ l ~ ~ ~~sass ~y,QR~~ I ~ ~ ~'1 1 z 1 7 u N~ r r =1 l~i~ m 4D6 Attachment: G *;e ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ I ~ ~ 1 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~3~?~ v0-~~ 101 ~ 1 ro ~ , = i.~ ~ IL ~ i ~ ~ ~ > ~ c~ z ? f~ Pw x . #yy }p~~Q~y{',E ~ s .~~e-~ . t ~231 ra ti~ A~ E 4 ~ j~ 1 ;S#1i€ ; ~ ' ~`"s~ 1 ~~~a~'~ ~ ~ ~ § eq`~}y~~; pg i ~ i~ ° ~ °a ~g~SL6~ L L~ 6a~as~ ~ ~ ~ ~t tc ?v~~~ s~~# i $F-~~ ^,t ~ I 9r4YC R~~i ~t ~ ~3 t ~~~;~i. ~ g~~ I ° ~ ~ } 5 'r,,,~. v,,4?~ , +~•Tr~r. ~ " ~~~~E~~~~ 1 o z ~ $ f ~ p~~'- e ~ S ' Z ~CZ L L J a- ~ O ~ ~ ~ u'(.''~ p ' ~ ~y'~~~~ i ! Q' ,J p ` ~ ~ ~ , l7 V1 f ; ~ ~p Ll Z) z o ~ l d t~'y^+~ W 4 t 7-7 Q CO fl ~ U S.~ ui ~~r -9£ 0 uu d ¢ Q , . e 1 l~«^.-ti~` `'kgg~ ~i C` [D U') J ~ Z lt.l Z Q t,. ° ~~il$ V J < J qt rt., ~ y _ 1L W tk% d U- g 0 x g ~ ~ 1~ L ~ ~ U~[ ~ e . ~ V--~ ~_a~i x~ ~ Z . Q t~- ' N 'VO U ` •:------------y ~ e . ~ ~ ry ,y= _s9Ei----_~ lLf ~ Q x r~ ~ ~ > ~g Y~ ~ax" r~,,.it W u- 0 V6 s ~~s C) 5i z , ; ~ ~ z 0 C) ~ ~ry^ iJl ~ 3 4 - ` ed a ~ ~ ' ? ~ ' o t3 ~ x • ~ 4 ~ 1 i I y p \ ~ F I I ~ r 91 . lC ~ig 1 t ~ I e W I ~ `e ~ M ~ ~ i ~ 1 %91 y sjb ,aor ~ ~`.l~ i -'~„-'e'•:~ 3~,~\ s Y 1 ~ < $ ~ ~P \ 45L~ N 6i~ 4 ~ ~ •Y 1 - ~ ~ Z' ~ ~ b .T`___--___--_..---_`._-- . " f L'01C z ____-wl+an)uSn ~ __-`1-___-...-_ 5 h~_. A.~, . 90'nG ~ • . _ _ _--.t XLLCL6 - '3.4S,9CiDN ~ . ~e LL~ e- 9 a . • l~TOVember 9, 2005 Mr. Warren Campbell Planner Town of Vail 75 South. Frontage Road Vail, CU 8l fi57 Dear Mr. Campbell, As a resident of 1718 Buffeter Creek Raad in Vail I have been notified of a request to amend the Approved Development Plan far the Eleni Zniemer Subdivision located at 1701 A-F Buffeter Creek RoadlLots 1-6. This letter is to express my concerns regarding the site access request. Having lived across from the building site (Lot 1) and along Buffeter Creek Road for six plus years I have personally observed 8 vehicular accidents (2 motorcycle and six automobile} resulting from excess speed while traveling down Buffeter Creek Road in this specific location. Despite the best efforts of the Vail Police to enforce the ~5 mph speed limit, traffic generally drives between 35 and 45 mph an this section of road. It is my understanding that the Town of Vail public works group has reviewed this access request and based on the ZS mph speed limit has approved this site access request. I would recommend before the PEC grants approval of this site access request that this specific access point be reevaluated based an the actual speed of traffic on this section of Buffeter Creek Road versus the posted speed limit. I also request that an evaluation of this requested access point be done under winter conditions (greatly increased stopping distances) with its limited Iine of sight. The safety of the eventual residents of this property potentially is at issue here and I believe every precaution should be considered prior to approval of this request. Sincerely, ~ ~ ~~ Bill Jensen 1718 Buffeter Creek Road Vail, CO 81657 n • Attachment: D ~ - I . . . . . . . . , ~ . : . . ' . . • _ ' . . . . : ~ ' ' . . . . . , . . . ~ . . . . ~ ~ . To: Warxen Campbell, TpV Comauaity Development $ubject: Response To Request For Three Rmendment Items To An Approved Development p1an, 11f14/05 hearirly hy PEC, reqarcting Lat 1, Eleni zneimer Subdinisiom This letter is expressing oppoaition to one of t3ie three ament3ment it- . Thia SIIROIVes relacating t3ie accesa from the approved, existiag, common subdiviaion rflad to a newly-conceived, direct access from Huffehr Creek Raad, it ia our wnderstaading tiai.s requeSt rres subacitted basecl on connanience fos acceas to the btii.J.ding envelope. We are opposed to trie request for the folloxinq reaaona: (1) SAFETY: The Fropoaed access point is tpD eloae to the hlind curve uphill. Conaider four factars. Firat, the reality is cars come downhill considerably faster than the posted 25 MFH apeed 13mit--poa3ibly negating the etandard m,sdeSinee fos visibility. Seaond, in the four yaars we have awned our progerty, six cara aom.inq downhi,ll have failed to make the blind cua.ve wheae it resulted in either a head-on collision or ~ ending up in the meadow cpposite the prbpvsad aeeeaa pairat. Thfsdly, consider Bu{£ehr Creek ltoad ia used heavily by hikere and bikers. I.astly, the Apgrovec9 Development Pian strategical.]ly laid out the connon drive to intexsect Buffehr Creek Raad. This affprds good visibility and helpxag ~ laxge trucks backing in/aut by utilizing our faCinq Lia 2nea.mer S-D common drive. 42} RATIONALE FpR REQpEST; The site plas available during the waeR o€ 10/31J05 indicated the proposed new accesa road wauld have a three tier retainzng wall with an eJ.evaLion differential of 16 feet. We unde=stand the intent of the request was to lessen the slevation differential for access to the $ui2 ding enuelope. But, accosding to a visual irtspection, the oonstructed elevatioa differential is spproximately Y7 feet at the approved access point. Hence, there ia a marginal seduetion of approxirnately one Poot in the elevation diffe=entia3 in the proposed amendmeat, (3) ~~OLOGICPS. IMFLICATIpN5. The aubject property is in a designated rook-fall zone. Asi open question is whether rocks cauld be projecCad xith additional velocity and/os def}.ected further eastwasd by the proposed acoesa road_ Ttsis could pose additional xisk to the public oa Buffehr Creek Raad or further down the "fall-line" to residenta an the common drive for the lots in aur Lia Znel.mer aubdiviaion. NOte: the northern portic3n af pur Lots 1-5 Sre 7.q the hazard ZOrie. {4} AE,gTHETICS: The existing retaining wall above the eoumon roadxay ' for the subject subdiv,iaion is constructed using blocks that don't blend in vxth.the natural environment. They are generally depicted in, ~ landseape arehitectural magazines for an ufban 9ettinga {aak for example).. Approving the amencfinent would likely alkrna a repetiti.on af this os ather urban-type block, flr, an approved amencflneni mfqht atipulate a moxe natural looking retaining xall, but at the 11th hour, a cc)ntractor es>uld £ind out t2u s rao,,;rement would not be acceptahle fram an engiaesring standpaint and requeat ahardship waiver. In any caee "one xall is iJK, two is a highway,^ SSy PRECIpENT: Could apgrpving this amendment requeet have cascading effecta on other developmerits7 (6) p7ElGggpggdpgy; y,neCdot811y, surrounding homeowner3 have purchased thair propertiea with certain underatandings concernixtq the CIf'JYe14pAReIIt. The praposed access amendment destroya the enc3.ave cancept for the potential of six hpmes pulled together with comraarxality of iafrastructuXe, desiqn theaie and neighborhood. We aXe sensitive ta the desires to optiatize utilizaGfon of the aubject prpperty, but we feel the preceding points alSOUld be seriously. cpnsitiered in our oppoaition tq L.Is,e accese portion in the thxee part amendment request. t Sincerely, ~t tfj ~y f~ Faul & Nancy Roncieau, ' ~f Lot 2 Lia Zneimex 5-D, 1710 Buf#ehr Creek Road, Vaii 81657 MEMORANDUM ~ TO; Planning and Environmental Commission FROM: Community Developrrient Department DATE: Navember 14, 2005 SUBJECT: A requsst for a final rewiew of a majar exterior alteration, pursuant to Section 12-7H-7, Exterior Alterations or Modifcations, Vai! Tawn Code, and a fnal review of a conditional use permit, pursuant to Section 12-7H-2, Permitted and Condifional Uses; Basement or Gardera Leuel, and 'f 2-7H-3, Permi#ted and Canditional Uses; First Flflor on Stree# Level, Vail Town Cade; and final review of architectural deviations, pursuant to Secti4n 8.3.3.A, Review Criteria far Deuiations to #he Architectural Design Guidefines f4r New Developrnent, Lionshead Redevelaprnent-Master Plan, to aliow for the develapment of 107 multi- family residential dwelling units, located at 728 West Lionshead Circle/Lot 2, West Day Subdivision, and setting fvrth details in regard thereto. (PEC 05-0062 and PEC 05-0063). Appficant: Vail Resorts Development Company, represented by Braun Associates, Inc. Pfanner: Warren Campbell ~ L SUMMARY ' The purpose o# today`s work session hearFng with the Planning and EnWironm+ental Cornmission is to aalow the applicarat an apportunity to present the changes which have been made to the application in response to camments from the previous rneeting. The desired outcome of the hearing is for the Planning and Environmental Gammission to Understand the following: • The prapased structure in terms of bulk, mass, height, and operation, • The criteria by which the applicant is requesting flexibility regarding the area of flat roof on the structure and the proposed the architectural mechanical screening sQlution. The Commission is not being asked to take any formal action an this applica#ion at this time. As such, staff is no# providing a forrnal recammendatian at this time. StafF and the applicant request that the Planning and Environmental Commission tables the applicant's request to the Norrember 28, 2005, hearing. I# is antieipated that the appGcant will request a final approval at the November 28, 2005, Planning and Enviranmental Commissian hearing. li. QESGRIPTION OF THE REQUEST ~ The purpose of today's wark session hearing with the Planning and Environmental Carnmission is to aflow the applicant an opportunity to present the changes which have been made to the application in response to comments feom 1 the previous meeting. After the presentation the Planning and Enviranmental ~ Commission will be asked to praWide additional feedback regarding the revisions to the propasal. The primary changes made since (]ctober 24, 2005, are: • The elimination of the screening element for the mechanicals lacated over the primary ridge; • The reduction of f6at roofed areas and increase in roaf top terraces; and • The incarporation of an architectural landmark tower measuring 112 feet in height. . . The propased Ritz-Carltan Residences projec# is on the third and final parcel of the comprehensive development site encompassing the existing Marriott Hatel, the Gore Creek Residences, and the West Day Lot parking area. The West Day Lat parking area and the existing Marriott parking structure sites total 2.399 acres in size and is focation of the proposed Ritz-CarCton Residences prcaject. A vicinity map identifying the locatian of the development site has been attached for reference (Attachment A). A redueed set of revisions are attached for reference (Attachment B). The Ritz-Carlton Residences proposal is camprised of two (2) different de+relapment review applications. Each application is intended to facilitate the redevelapment proposal. The develapment applicatians include: • A ma'ar exterior alteration a lication for a new 107 multiple- ~ family dwElfing unit structure; and • A conditianal use permit aqqfication 'Far "lodge rovms or d'welling unlfs" located on the basement or garden level and the first fEoor or street level af the structure. The key elements of the proposal include: • A107 multiple-famify dwelling unit condorrainium structure; • A to#al of 212,695 square feet of Gross Residential Floar Area ( G RFA); • A 388 space below grade parking structure to serve as parking for the Marriott Hotel and the Ritz-Carltan Residences; * A landmark tower feature which is 112 feet in height; • A loading and delivery facifity comprised of #hree bays ' • A labby/lounge area with a front desk, concierge, and ualet; and • A media roorrt, game roam, and poollh+at tub deck. III. BACKGROUND `fhe subject development site includes several parceEs of land currently used fc+r the Marriott HQte{, the parking structure for the Marriatt Hotel, the Goee Creek Residences, and the West Day Lot, ~ 2 Marriott Hotel His#ory (Parcel 1 of the Wes# Day Subdivisan) ~ The Marriott (previously "The Mark") was approved by the Tawn in 1977 as a hatel and condaminium project and was zoned Special Development D9strict No. 7'by Ordinance 3, Series of 1977. Tha project was expanded and modified thraughout the 1980's and 1990's. In 1999 the Marriatt property, along with the rest of Licrnshead, was rezoned to Lionshead Mixed Use 1 and SDD No. 7 was repealed. The MarrEot# as developed today includes 35 dwelling units, 276 hotel rooms, meeting rooms, a restaurant, and other hotel amenities. West Day Lot Hist+ary (Parcel 2 of the West Day Subdivision) The western portion of the site (the Morcus 5ubdivision), knawn as the "West Day Lot", ?nras regraded and used for Vail Resorts employee parking. Prior ta the rezoning af this parcel to Lionshead Mixed Use 1 in 1999, the property was zoned Parkang Distric#_ • On August 22, 2005, the Planning and Enviranmental Commission held an initial hearing an the Ritz-Carltan Residences. At that hearing StafF peaved the Commission with parameters by which the project would be reviewed. At this hearing the Commission requested to see how the parcels recently acquired by Vail Associates and #he potential of reiocating the Frontage Road would affect this property. In addi#aon the Commission asked for a response as ta why a conditional use permit was ~ appropriate to be granted for condominiums on the ground floor next to a potential future lift and within an overall greater por#al to the mountain being created in western Lionshead. On September 12, 2005, the Planning and environmental Commission expressed that there were na concerns with the Conditional Use Permit that was being request foK dwelldng units on the first floor or garden level. The Commission continued by expressing concern regarding the height of the landmark tower. The general cansensus was that a height of 140 feet vuas inappropriate. In addition, the Commission stated that the height of the screening element for the mechanicals had not been justified in the presentation and other optians should be examined. The Commission was nat comfortable with approving the height af the screening element aver fhe maximum height of 82.5 feet. Finally the Commission expressed that they would like greater infarmation regarding the flat roof maximum area requirement faund in the Lionshead Redevelapment Master Plan. Severai members expressed a need for tFte western e{evat`on along the Frontage Road #o have step backs incorporated into the architecture. Dn September 26, 2005, The Pkanning and Enuironmentaf Commission gerrerally expressed that of the three OptionsfAlternatives presented that that Uption{Alternative B was preferable to OpttonlAl#ernati+re C. The GommassiQners generally felt that whi{e Optian/Alternative B incorporated the mechanical screening salution which exceeds the maximum height, it ~ does not result in additional head hieight in the top floor units as in OptionlAlternatiae C. Sarne cancerned was expressed abaut how mechanical screening which exceeds the rnaximum height could be 3 limited and contralfed so as not to be abused on future projects. ane ~ thought expressed was ta have more specific language in the Master Plan to address screening of inechanical units. Same members believed that enough regulations, or safeguards, were in place to insure that meehanical screening abuse wouid not aceur on ather projects as they would need to pass PEC and DRB review. For instance, the applicant ' _ was directed to pravide a sample of the mechanical sGreening material, loak at incorporating roof-top terraces, and examine the possibility of creating a mare "cascading roaf effecY' on the southeast elevativn. On October 10, 2005, the Planning and Environmen#al Cammissivn gaVe direction to the applicant regarding the proposed aechitectural deviations. The Commission in general felt the praposed iandmark tower was still foo tall at 120 feet and that there vvere concems wsth the height of the architectural screening solutian for thE mechanicais. The Commissian was relatively comfortable with the flat roof area of the building, however, they directed staff to call Jack Zehren, of Zehren and Associa#es, one of the individuals wha par#icipated in the writing of the Lionshead - Redevelopment master Plan. On October 19, 2005, staff spoke directly with Jack Zehren regarding the intent of Sec#ion $.4.2.1, Roofs, and what the design gpal/intent was of Gmiting flat romfed portions of buildings to 500 square feet. Thraugh conversation it was learned that a draft prior to the approved Master Plan iden#ified a rnaximum of 250 square feet for flaf raofs. He continuecf by stating that #he number of 500 square feet was arbitrary and that the ~ goallintent was to allow far larger buildings which have complex roof systems to utilize the flat r4ofed areas as "transitions" between the complicated systems. He stated that it was the understoad during the drafting of the Allaster Plan that some structure5 would have multiple flat roofed areas located an larger buildings which might total mare that 500 square fieet. He conclude by stating that the writers of the Mas#er Plan realized tha# some flat roofed areas may exceed 500 square fee#, however, if those flat raofed areas did not disrupt the overalE roof sys#em and architecture they cvuld be approved per the fQllawing statement from the Master Pian: Secandary roof forms which Qccur at logical breaks rn buildrng massing may exceed 500 square feet if the general infent of fragmented forms and visual harmony is met. 4n C3ctober 24, 2005, t!he PEanning and Environmental Commission generally supported the archi#ecture of the proposed structure. Regarding the prQpossd architectural deviations (flat rvof area, mechanical screening, and a landmark tavuer) there were varying ' thoughts. Several mernbers were comfartable with the mechanica6 screening solution as it was a gaod solution by which other developers cauEd aspire, while other memb€rs were adamant that the height limitafion of 82.5 feet not be exceeded. In regards to the flat roof area of the building the general consensus was that the area proposed was ~ appropriate. Several rnembers desired to see the architectural 6artdmarlc retum tQ the design of the project. Some members feft the tower should 4 camply with the 97.5 feet height requirement and others tnaught it could ~ go slightfy taller. On Novernber 2, 2005, the Design Review Board, at its regular hearing vofed unanimousiy to forward a recQmmendatian of appraval on the architectural deviatEOns (flat roof area, and architecturaE landmark tower) to the Plannirag and Environmental Comrnission. Gore Creek Residences Historyl (Parcel 3 of the West Day Subdivisi+an): ~ C3n Nowernber 24; 2003, the Planning and Environmental Commission approued text amendments to Section 12-7H-5, Conditional Uses; Generally (on all levels of a building or outside a building), Vail Town Code, to aIPow single-family resEdential dweflings arad two-family residential dwellings as conditional uses in the Lianshead Mixed Use 1 District and Section 12-16-7, Use Specific Griteria and Standards, Vail Town Code, to provide ceiteria to whieh a single-farnily and two-family residential dwelling proposal within the Lianshead Mixed Use 1 Dis#rict must adhere. The text arriendments were subsequently appraved by Tawn Councif upon second reading in Ordinance 36, Series of 2003, on December 16, 2003. On June 28, 2004, the Planning and Environrriental Commission appraved, with conditions, a conditional use permit and a major exterior alteratian application on this site for eight two-family structures for a total ~ afi 16 dwellirtg units. On December 13, 2004, the planning and Environmentaf Commission approved a minor subdivision establishing the West Day Subdivision . which js eomprised of three parcels. The approvaf and reccrrding of the West Day Subdivision was the culrriination of the review of the Gore Creek residences during which it was agreed fhat the three lots compnsing the West Day Subdivisifln would be tied together for zaning purpases. A note was p1aced upan the Wes# Day Subdivisian which states the fallowing: "For fhe pUrpases af zoning, Lofs 1, 2, and 3, creafed by this subtlivision are to be treated as orre developmerrt srte. Development standards shall bs based uparr the rmprovemerrts and land area of fhe combined area of Lots 1, 2, anal 3.,, - As a part of the approval of the West Day Subdivision, a spreadsheet identifying the development potential for each of the three parcels was approved in conjunetion with the minor subdivisEan. That spreadsheet, was entitled, "West Qay LatlMarrio#t HatellGore Creek PEace Approved Deveiopment PIanlDevelopment Allacations°", and dateti December 6, 2004. IV. ROLES OF THE REVIEWING BO,4RaS ~ Tha purpose of this section of the memorandum is to clarify tkre responsibilities of the Design Re+riew Baard, Planning and Environmental Cornmission, Town 5 i Gouneil, and Staff on the various applications submitted on behalf of Vail Ftesarts ~ ?evelopment Company. A. Exterior AlteratiQn/Modification in the Lionshead Mixed-Use I zone district 4rder of Review: General[y, applicatiotas will be reviewed first by the Planning and Environmental Commission for impacts af use/develapment and then by the Design Review Board for compliance of prapased buildings and site planning. Planning and Environmental Commission: Action: The Planning and Environmental Cornmission is respansible for final approvalldenial of a MajorfMinor Exterior Alteration. The Planning and Environmental Cornmission shall review fihe pro;posal tor compliance , with the adopted criteria. The Planning and Environmental Commissian's approval "shall constitute approval of the basic form and lacation of improvements including siting, building setbacics, height, building bulk and ~ mass, site impravements and landscaping." ~ Design Review 8oard: Action: The Design Review Board has no review authority on a Major or Mincar Exterior Alteration, but must review any accompanying Qesign Review Board applicatian. Staff.' ~ The stafF is responsibls for ensuring that ail submittal requirements are I pravided and plans confcarm to the technical requirernents of the Zoning Regulations. The staff alsQ advises the applicant as ta compliance with ~ the design guidelines. Staff provides a staff rnerno containing background on the property and proWides a staff evaluation of the project with respect ta the required criteria and findings, and a recommendation on approval, appraval with conditions, or denial. Staff also #acilitates the review process. Town Council: Actions af Design Review Board ar Planning and Environmental Gommission may be appealed to the Town Council oe by the Touun Council. Town Council evaluates whether ar nat the Planning and Environmental Commission or Design R.eview Board erred with approvals or denials and ean uphold, uphold with modifications, or overturn the baard°s decision. B. Ganditianal Use Permit (CUP] Order of Review: Generally, appltca#ions will b€; reviewed first by the Planning and Environmental Gommission for acceptabilify af use and then by the Design Rsview Board for compliance of proposed bupldings and site planning. ~ Planning and ,Enuironrrrenta! Commissiorr: Action: The Planning and Environmental Commission is respansible for ~ 6 ~ final approvalldenial of CUF'. The Planraing and Environmental ~ Commissian shafl review the request for compfiance with the adapted cQnditional use permit criteria and mafce findings of fact with regard to the project's cornpliance. Design Review Board: . Action: The Design Review Board has no review authority on a CUP, but maast review any accompanying Design Review Board application. 5faff.• The staff is respansible for ensuring that all submittal requirements are provided and plans conform to the technical requirements of the Zoning Regulations. The staff also advises the app9icant as to compliance with the design guidelines. Staff provides a staff rnemo containing e background an the property anci pravides a staff evaluatian af the project ~ with respect to the required criteria and findings, ancf a recammendation ; on apprava[, approval with conditions, or denial. Staff also facilitates the ~ reviewr prace5s. ~ I ! Tawn Cou,nCil: . ~ Actions of Design Review Board ar Planning and Enviranmental ~ Commission may be appealed #o the Touvn Council ar by tha Tawn s Council. Town Courrci) evaluates whether or not the Planning and ~ Environmen#al Cvrnmissian or Desigro Review Board erred with approvals ar denials and can uphoed, uphald with modifications, or overturr7 the ~ board's decision. i V. APPLICABLE PLANN1NG aqCUMENTS - 7he foflowing checklist was created to provide a means of evaluating the Ritz- Carfton Residences proposal for comp[iance with the Lionshead Redevelopment Mas#er P1an. The checklist is intended for the Pfanning and Environrnenfai Cornmission to use in conjunction with their copies of the Lionshead i Redevelapment Master Plan to focate relewant portians of the Master Plan which ~ pertain ta thes proposai. ~ Lionshead Redewelopmenf Master Plan i Chapter 2: Intrcrduction ~ ? 2.1 Purpose of the Master Pfan Q 2.2 Definition of a Master Plan , i a 2.3 Po9icy Objectives ~ ? 2.3.1 Renewai and Redevelopment i ? 2.3.2 Vitality and Amenities i ? 2.3.3 Stronger Economic Base Thraugh Cncreased Live ; Beds ? 2.3.4 Impraved Access and GircuMatian ~ ~ ? 2.3,5 lmproved Infrastructure ` ~ i i 7 v 2.3.6 Creative Financing for Enhanced Private Profits and • Public Revenues Chapter 4: Master Plan Recammendations - Overall study Area ? 4.1 Underlying PhysicaC Frameworic of Lianshead a 4.1.1 Lionshead Mas#er Plan Concept 0 4.1.5 West Lionshead - ResidentiallMixed-Use Hub ? 4.3 Cnnnec#ions ta the Natural Environment ? 4.3.1 Visual Gannectians . ? 4.3.1.2 Narth-South Orientation of Buildings a 4.6 Vehicular and Pedestrian Circufation ? 4.6.4 Modifications tfl West Lionshead Circle and Liorashead Place zi 4.6.4.1 East Intersection of W. Lionshead Circle and South Frontage Fioad 0 4.6.4.2 Intersectian of Lionshead Place and West Liorrshead Circle a 4.6.4.3 Pedestrian Sidewalks and Crossings a 4.6.4.4 Visual Impravements ? 4.7 Loading and DeliVery a 4.7. 1 Properties with Direct Ser?ice Access ~ ? 4.8 Rarking 0 4.8.1 Potential Uisplacement of Existing Parking ? 4.8.1.2 West Qay Lot fl 4,8.2 Residential Properkies ? 4.9 Housing 0 4.9.1 No PVet Loss of Emplayee Housing ? 4.9.3 Palicy Based Housing Qpportuni#ies n 4.10 Gateway, Landmarks, and Portals v 4.90.2 Landmarks ? 4.31 Public Art Chapter 5, Detailed Plan Recommendations Li 5.13 The Marriatt 0 5.13.1 Redevelopment or Deveiopment of #he Parking Structure Q 5.17 West Day Lot/ Vail Assaciates Service Yardl Hafy Gross Site Chapter f, Site Design Guidelines ~ ~I . ? 6.4 Secondary Pedestrian Walk 8 ~ ? 6.6 Pedestriart Path Chapter 8, Architectural Design Guidelines ? 8.1 Vision Statement 0 8.2 Qrganizafion, Purpose and Scape ? 8.4.2 Architecture cl 8.4.2.11ntraductiQn a 8.4.2.2 Building Fflrm and Massing ? $.4.2.3 Building Heigh# 13 8.4_2.4 Ezterior Walls ? 8.4.2.7 Roofs , ReSQlution 18, Series of 2044: A Resalution Amendin Certain Sections Of The Lionshead Rederrelo ment Master Plan Clarif in And Affardin ALL T es 0f ' Develoamen# Proiects, "New And Redeveloprnent'; Flexibilitv In The Application Of The Archi#ectural Design Guidelines, As Prescribed In Chapter 8 Of The Lianshead Rsdevelo ment Master Plan And Settin Forth Qetails In Re ard Thereta ~ 8.3.3.A Review Criter'ia for L}eviafioris to the Architectura! Design Guidelines for New Development Simrlar to the rmplementafion policies of the ,qI?G prescribed fvr existing structures, the 7own has defermined thaf fhere rraay be r`nstances where ~ flexibility in feQiJIrIRg sfrict compJiance with the Guidefines for new developmenf maybe in the best iraterest vf the community and the furtherance of the gaafs and objecfives ,stated fn the Lionshead Redevelopment Nfaster Plan. That said, howewer, rt is acknowJedged fhai such instances are rare and extraordinary, and sha11 be cQnsidered on a case-by-case basfs. To aid in deferminrng when flexrbilify sha!l be afforded to new development from sfrfct compJr`ance wrth the Guidelines, revrew criterla have been established. The degree of desigra deviatr'on flexibilify afforded fo a development profect sha11 bear proportionatefy to the sxfent af the improvemerrts proposed. For example, a developmenf ' applicatron thaf proposes the constructlon of a r?ew struc#ure which includes fhe demalition of an exlsting strucfure or adds significanf volume or mass to a property, shall more fuJly comply with the prescribed Architectura! Design Guidelines ouflined in fhe masfer plan fhan an application which proposes a renovatron or addition fo an exrsfing buildrng The foJlowing criferia shadl be useci by the Town of Vail Plannirag & ,Enviranmenfa! Commission and Design Review Board to determine rf deviations fo fhe Guidelines shauld be granfed: It shall ,be fhe burden of the applicant fo cfemonsfrafe to the safisfaction of the Town of Vai! Planning &Eravirorarrrental Camrrrission foflowing a recommendation from fhe Design Review Board thaf: • The reques# for design deviations are in cornpliance with the purposes of the zone districf; and ~ 9 • The proposal which irrcludes the design deviativr?s is consistent ~ wifh applicable elernents of fhe Lionshead Redevelopment Master Plan; and • The proposal which includes the design deviatrons d'aes not have a signiflcant negafive effecf an the character of the nefghbancood; and • The proposal substanfia!!y complres with vther applicable eIements of fhE Vair camprehensive plan; and • The design deviation mee#s or exceeds the infenf of the s,pecTfic cfeslgn s#andards as prescribed in Section 8.4; and, • A pubfic 6enefit is achieved as a resuft af the design deviativn; andr • The design devrafion furthers the goals, objectrves and purposes as stated in Secfions 2.3, 2.5 and 8.2 of the Lionshead Recfevelopment Master Plan. Zoninq Regulafions Lionshead Mixed Use - 9 Zone District (in part) 12-7H-1: PURP05E: The Lionshead Mixed Use-1 zone district rs intended to provide sifes for a ~ mixture of multiple-farnily dwellings, lodges, hotels, fr'actional fee clubs, fime shares, ladge dwrelling units, restauranfs, offlces, skier servrces, and commercial esfablrshrrrenfs in a clustered, unr`fied develapment. Lianshead Ivfixed Use 1 zone disfrrct, in accQrdance with the Lionshead Redevelapment Master Plan, is intended to ensure adequate light, air, open space and flther amenities appropriate to the permitted types of buildings and uses and fo mairttain the clesirable qualities of the Distrlcf by esfablishing appropriate s1fe develapment standards, This District rs ,meant to encourage arrd pravide incentives for redevelopment in accordarace with the Lronshead f2edevelopmenf Master Plan. This Zone Drstricf was specrficaNy develaped to pravide incentives fnr properties fo redevclop. The ulfrmate goal of these incentives rs to creafe an cconamieally vibrant lodgrng, housrng, and commercial care area. The incentiwes in this Zone Disfrict rnelude increases in allowable gross residenfial flaar area, bu1lclrng height, and density over the Rreviously esfa,blfshed zonr'ng in the Lionshead 14edeveloprnent Master Pfan study area. The primary goal ai the irrcentives is to create economic conditions favora6le ta inducing prrvafe redevelopment cansisterrt with the Lfonshead Redeveloprnent Masfer Plan. Addifiana!!y, the incentlves are creafed to help finance pu,blic off-sife improvemenfs adjacent ta redevelopmenf profecfs. Wifh any dewelopment/rea'evelopment praposaI takr`ng advanfage of the incenfives created herein, the fo!lowing amenities will be evaluated: streefscape impravements, pedestrrarl/bicycle access, publrc praza redevelopmenf, public art, rQadway irrrprouemenfs, and similar improvements. ~ 10 12-7H-2: PERN1177Efl AND Ct}NDIT10!`I'AL USES; BASEMENT D,R GARDEN ~ LEVEL: - A. Definition: The "basement" or "gerden ievel" shall be defined as that floor of a buildrng thaf is entirely ar substantially below grade. B. Permitted Uses; The foflawrng uses shall 6e permifted in 6asement or garden levels within a structure: Banks and financial instrtutions. Cornmerciaf ski sforage. Eafing and drinking establishments. Personal services and repair shops. Prafessional affrces, business officss arrd studias. Pubflc or private lockers and sforage. Recreation faeilities. ,Retail establishments. 5kier ticketing, ski school, sJcier servrces, and daycare. 7ravel agencres. Addrtronal uses d'efermined to be srmilar to permifted uses described in fhis subsection, itt accordance wrth the prouisions of Section 12-3-4 of fhis Tttle. C. Conditronal Uses: The followfng uses shall be permitted in basement or garden feveCs wfthrn a sfructure, subject to issuance of a canditional use permit !n accord'ance with fhe provisrons af Chapter 16 of this 7`ifJs: ~ i Gonferenee facilitr'es and meeting raoms. Liquar sfores. Lodges and accommoa'atian units. MaJor arcade. Mulfiple-family resrdential dwelling units, time-share urrits, fractionaf fee clubs, Iodge dwefling unifs, and employee housing uraits (Type I11(EHU) as prQVided in Ghapter 13 of this Title). Radio, T1/ sfores, and repair shops. Theafers. Addifional uses defermined to 6e similar to conditional uses _ descrlbed in this subsection, in accordance with fhe provisiorts of Section 92-3-4 of thrs Title. 92-7H-3; PERMITTED ANl] CO,ND1T14NAL USES; F1R5T FLOC)R OR STREET LEV€I.: A. Definition: 7he "firsf floor" or "sfreet level" shall be defined as thaf floor of the building that is Ioeated at grade or sfreef level along a pedestrianway. 8. Permiffed Uses: The following uses sha!l be permitted on the first floor or street level withirr a sfructure: Banksr with walk-up teller facifitres. ~ Eatinq and drinkr`ng esta6lishments. Recreation faGilr#ies. ketail stores and establishments. 11 Skier ticketing, skr school, skier services, and daycare. TraveJ agencies. ~ Additianal uses deterrnined to be similar fo permi#ted uses dESCribed , fi7 tI7d5 SUbS£'Ctl!?n, in accordance wrth the provisions of Section 12-3- 4 of fhis 7ifle. C. Conditiana! Uses: 7he follvwrng uses sha116e permitfed on the first floor or sfreet leuel flvor within a s[ructure, subject to lssuance of a conditional use permit in accardance with the provislons of Chapter 18 of thrs 7itle: Barbershops, beaufy shaps and beaufy parlors. Cant`erence facilities and meefing rooms. Financial institutiQns, afher than banks. Liquor stores. L.odges and accommodation uraits. Multiple-family residential dwe!ling units, fime-.share units, fractianal fee clubs, Iadge dwelling units, and employee housing urrits , (Type 11f (ENU) a5 provided in Chapter 93 of this Tifle). Radia, 7V sfares, and reparr shops. Addifional uses determined to be simi(ar to conditianal uses described in this su6secfian, irt accordance with the pt'ovisions of Section 92-3-4 of thfs Trtle. 12-71-f-4: PERMlTTED AND CC1NDfTFONAL USES; SECOND FLQ4R AIVD AB09/E: ~ A. Perrnitted Clses; Excepfron: 7he following uses shaJl be perrrtifted on fhose floors above the first floor within a sfructure: Lodges and accommoalafiorr urrrts. Mulfilple-family resrdential dweflirrg unifs, time-share unrfs, frac#lorral fee clubs, lodge dwefling units, and erraployee housing units (TYpe fll (EHU) as provided in Chapter 13 of this T1tle). Addiflorral uses d'eterrrrined fo be srmilar fo permitfed uses described in this subsection, in accord'ance with fhe provisions of Section 12-3- 4 of this Trt1e. 12-7N-6: AGCESSORY USFS.• 7he folbwFng accesscrry uses shall be permitted in the Liorashead Mixed Use 1 zorre district: Home occupations, subject to issuance of a hame occupation perrnit rn accordance wifh the provisions af Sectron 12-14-12 of this Title. Loading and delivery and parking facilifies customarily incidenfal and accessory ta permitfed and canditianal uses. Minor arcade. Offices, Iob6ies, laundry, and other facrlfties customarily rneicfelataF and accessary to hotels, lodges, and multiple-family uses. Outctoor dinr"ng areas operafed in corajunction wifh permifted eating and drfnking esfablishmenfs. ~ Swlmming paols, tennfs courts, patias or other reereation facilities . eustamarily fncidental to permitted resldentral or !oclge uses. 12 afher uses custa,marily incrdenfal and aceessory tta permifted or ~ eonditional uses, and neeessary for fhe operatiora thereof. 12-7H-8: COMPtIANCE BUR,DEN: lf shafl be the burden of the applicant to prove 6y a preponderance of the euidence before the Plannrng and Environmenta! Commission and the Desigrr Review Board that fhe propased exteriar alteratron,ar new afevelopmeRt is rn compliance wfth fhe purposes of the Lionshead Mixed Use 9 zvne disfrict, #hat the propasal is consistenf wfth appliea,ble elements of the Lionshead Redevelopment Master Plan and fhat fhe proposal does not otherwise have a significant negatirre effect on the character of the neighborhooaf, and that the ,proposal substanflally complies with other appfieabEe elemerrfs of fhe Vaif comprehensive ,plan. 12-7FI-18: MITlGA7ION OF DEVELOPMENT IMPACTS.` P'roperty ownersIdevelopers shall afso be responsible fQr mrtigating direcf lmpacfs of fhely develapmenf on public infrasfructure and in all cases mitlgation shall bear a reasonable relation to fhe devefapment impacfs. lmpacts may be determined based an reports prepared by qualifred consulfants. The extenf af mifigatian and pu,blic amenrty rmprovemenfs shalf be balanced with fhe goals of reafeuelopment and will be determinsd by fhe planning and enviranmental cDmmission in ,revrew of developrnent prolects and condifionaf use permits. Mitigation of impacfs may include, but is not Iimifed to, fhe followirrg: roadway improvemenfs, pedesfrran waJkway improvements, streetscape improvements, ~ stream fract/bank imprevennents, public art improvements, and similar improvements. The intent af fhis sectian is to only require mifigatian for large scale redeveloprnenf/development profects which produce subsfanfial otf sife • tm,oacfs. V[. ZONING ANALYSFS AddresslLegal Description: 720 and 72$, West Lionshead CircEe, and 825 V1/est Forest RoadlLots 1, 2, 3, Wes# Day Subdivision Parcel Size: 6.82 acre (297,165 sq. ft.) - Zaning: Lionshead Mixed Use 1 Land Use Designatian: Resort Accommodations and Services The West Day Lot Developrnent is compeised ofi three parcels which include the existing Marriatt Hotel and the 16 Gore Creek Place Residences, and the proposed Ritz-Cariton Residences. As was s#ated PfeVIt7U5Iy in the + memorandum these three parcels are tied tagether and treated as one large development site by the recorded plat. Below is a zaning analysis which incarporates all three parcels and the develapments. which exist, are under construction, and are proposed on the three lo#s. This analysis will become a part of the Approved Deveiopment Plan for the three parcels inGluded wifhin the West Day Lat aevelopment Site. Qevelopment Standard Allowed Existing Proposed Land Uses: ~ Lot 1 - Marriot Hotef Lot 2 - West Day Lot and IVlarrioit Hatel Parking Structure Lat 3- Gore Creek Residences 13 Lat Area: 14,000 sq. f#. 297,165 sq. ft. 297,165 sq. ft. ~ Setbacks AI! Sides: 10 ft. 10 ft. 10 ft. Building Height: 71 ft. avg. 70 ft. avg. 67.9 ft. aWg. 82.5 ft. max 80.5 ft. rraax 82.5 ft. max . Density: 238 DUs (35/ac.) 51 QU (7.51ac.) 158 DU (23.1/ac.) Unlimited AUs 276 AU 276 AU GRFA: 742,912 sq. ft. 213,239 sq, f#. 425,934 sq. ft. Site Coverage: 248,015 sq, ft. 148,076 sq. ft. 203,234 sq. f#. (70%) (49.8%) (58.4%) Landscape Area: 59,433 sq. ft. (20%) 139,713 sq. ft. (41 119,772sq- ft- (40.3%) Parking: 158 (1.4/DU) 412 spaces 498 spaces 276 (4.7fA1!) The following analysis as performed soiely on the site proposed #c be the location af the Ritz-Carltan Residences. AddresslLegal Description: 728 West Lionshead Ckl'CleILO'I 2 WVest Day Subdivision ~ Parce! Size: 2.399 acre (104,500 sq. ft.) Zonirrg: Lionshead Mixed Use 1 Land Use Designation: Resort Accommodations and Services Development Standard Allowed Existina Praposed Land Uses: Lot 2- West Day Lot and Marriot# Hote! Parking Structure Lat Area: 10,000 sq. ft, 7{}4,500 sq. ft. 104,500 sq. ft. Setbacks All Sides: 10 ft. NA 10 ft. Building Height: 71 ft. avg. NA 66.4 ft. avg. 82.5 ft. max 82.5 ft. max Density: 83 DUs (351ac.) NA 107 DU (44.6/ac.) UnlEmited AUs GRFA: 261,250 sq, ft. NA 212,695 sq. ft. Site Coverage: 73,150 sq. ft. NA 77,760 sq. ft. (70%) (74.4%) Landscape Area: 20,900 sq. ft. (24°/a) NA 25,060sq. ft. (23.9%)~ Parking: 145.6 (1.41DU) NA 38$ 5paCES"` 14 Of the parking proposed to be provided 146 spaces wilE serrre the Ritz-Carltfln Residences, 237 will serve as repEacement spaces fort he Marriott Hotel t+o replace the structure, and 5 are surplus. VII. SURROUNDING LAND USES AND Z(JNING Land Use Zo~ IVorth: Residential Lionshead Mixed Use 1 Distric# South: Open Space Natural Area Preservation District East_ Residential Lianshead Mixed lJse 1 District West: Pubfic Ufility General Use District VIII. MAJOR EXTERIC}R ALTERATIUN REVIEW CRITERIA Section 12-7H-8, Compliance Burden, Vail Town Code, out[ines the revpew eriteria far rnajor exterior alteration applications proposed within the Lionshead Ivlixed Use 1(LMU-1) zone drstrict. According to Section 12-7H-8, Vail Town Cade, a major exterior alteratian shall be revierved for cvmpliance with the following criteria: 'f. That the proposed rraajor exterior alteration is in compliance with the purposes of the Lionshead Mixed Use 1zone district; 2. That the proposal is consEstent with applicable efements of the Lianshead ~ RedevelQpmenf Master PBan; 3. That the proposal daes not otherwise have a significant negative effect on, the character of the neighborhoad; and, 4. Thaf the propasal substantially complies with other applicable elements of the Vail Compeehensive P4an. Should the Planning and Enviranmental Cornmission choase to approve the rraajor exterior afteeatian appficatian, staff recommends that the Commission makes the folEowing finding as part nf the motion: "Pursuant to Secfion 12-714-8, Compliance Burden, Vai! Town Code, fhe appfrcant has proven by a preponderarace of the evide,nce before the Planning and Environmenfal Commissiora and the Dcsign Review Board fhat the proposed major exterior alteration rs in cvmplrance wifh the purposes af the Lionsfaead Mixed Use 1 zone district, that the proposal rs eonsistent virr`fh applicable elemenfs af the Lionshead ,Redsuelopment JV1as#er Plan and thaf the proposal does not other°wise have a srgnificant negative effect ora the characfer of fhe neighborhood, and thaf the proposal su6stantially complies with other applicable elemenfs of fhe Vail ; Gomprehensive Plan." IX. CONDITIONAL USE PERM1T REVtE1N CRITERIA ~ As previausly discussed in Section II of this memorandum, fhe applicant is eequesting approvai of a cor+ditional use permit, pursuant ta Section 12-7H-2, 15 " Permitted and Condit{onal Uses; Basemen# ar Garden Level, and 12-7H-3, ~ Permitted and Canditional Uses; First Floar on Street Level, to construct dwelling units within the Garden Level and on the First Flnor of the proposed struc#ure, subject tc+ the issuance of a eonditional use permit in accordance with the provisions outiined in Chapter 16, Canditional Use Permits, Vail Town Code, Section 12-18-6, Criteroa; Findings, Vail Town Code, outlines the review criteria • for conditional uses permit requests prnposed within the Lionshead Mixed Use 'I (LMU-1 ) zone district, According #o Sectian 12-16-6, Vail Town Code, the ' Pfanning and Environrrental Commissian shall consider the folfQwing factors with respec# to the prQposed use: 1. Relationship and irnpac# of the use Qn development objectives o# the town. 2. Effect of the use on light and air, distributian of population, transporkatian facilities, utilities, schoals, parks and recreation facilities, and other public facili#ies and public facilities needs. 3. Effect upan tratfic, with particular reference to congestdon, automotive and pedestrian safety and convenience, traffic flow and control, access, maneuverability, and remavaE of snaw #rom the steeets and parking areas. 4. Effec# upon the character of the area in whieh the proposed use is ta be located, including the sca(e and buik of the proposed use in relation to surrounding vses. ~ Should the P1anning and Environmental Commission choose to apprave the application, stafF recommends that the Comrnission make the folfowing findings before granting a conditional use permit: 1. That the proposed location of the use is in accardance with the purposes af the Zoning Regulatians and the purposes of the Lionshead Mixed Llse 1 zone district. 2. That the praposed location of the use and the canditions under whECh it wouid be operated or maintained will not be detr[mental to the public heafth, safety, ar welfare, or rnaterially inAurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity. 3. That the proposed use complies with each af the applicable provisians of the Zoning Regulations. X. RESOLUTION 18, SERIES DF 20€14, REVIEW CRI7ERlA ~ The applicant is requesting two archi#ectural design deviatians which are permitted flexibili#y under the Lionshead Redevelopmerrt Masfier Plan and are subject to review by the Pfanning and Enuironmental Cornmissian under a set of criteria. If cerkain findings can be made by the Planning and Enviranmental Commission, upon receipt of a recommendation by the Design Review Board, ~ tlex'rbility can be granted, The two archi#ectural design features the applicant is requesting flexibility from are: 16 ~ 1. The Master Plan limitation on a maximum of 500 sq. ft. of flat raofed ~ areas; and 2. The Master Plan requirements far an architectufal landmark which is 112 feet tall. Staff will not addeess the specific cri#eria at this time regarding the two architectural design elements the applicant is requesting to deviate frurn in the Lionshead Redevelopmenf N1aster Plan. Attached are the responses to the specific criteria submitted by the applicant regarding the praposed deviations (Attachment C). Sta#f's initial arralysis of the two architectural design deuiations are as fo{lows: i 1. Flat Roofed Area of the Structure: The Liansheatf Redewelopment Master Plan identifes a maximum area of 500 square fee# far flat roofed portions of a s#ructure. Staff believes that the intent af this provision is to limit buildings to minimal flat raofed areas sa as to encourage true sloping roaf forms. Staff believes that the fimitation of 500 square feet per area fior a structure located on a site encompassing 2.399 acres may be unreasonable. The proposed structurE has a tatal roaf area of approxima#ely 58,433 square feet and the propased flat roofed portion of fhe struc#ure is propased to be ~ approximately 3,910 square feet or 6.7 percent of the tatal area. This is a reduc#ian frorn the previausly proposed roof design which contained approximately 5,442 square feet or 9.2 percent o# the total area. The current roo# plan now incorporates 4,454 square feet of roaf-#Qp terrace. The applicant has prap4sed a roof design in which they believe the flat partion is secondary to the sloped roofed areas. Thraugh the use af sloRed mansard roof forms the applicant has attempted ta reduce the uisibility of the flat roofed partians af the structure from many perspectives. The flat roofed areas will no# be visible from a pedestrian perspective nor from the surround praperties as the height af #he building is above a majority af the neighboring strUCtures. The fkat roofed areas will, however, be visible from the ski mountaEn. ~ ~ 2. Landmark Tower Elemant: The applicant has prapased to locate a landmark tower element an the nQrkhwesfi corner of the proposed structure. The Master Psan identifies the importance af landmark elements on projects within Section 8.4.1.2, Landmaeks. The specific language in the Master Flan is as follows: A landrnark provides a sense of orientation for the communfty, ~ and reinforces ifs "sense of place" or image. As such, if must ~ be visible from key lacafions wirhin fhe commurrify, such as portals and rnajor pu6lic spaces, and must affer an image consisfent wrth Lionshead. As a unique architectural eIement, a Iandmark should be designed fo clearly stand ouf fram the 17 ~ resf of the community, whlle sfill presenting a consistent ~ design language. Care shauld 6e takerr to provide a clear hierarchy 6etwee,n the vIllage landmark and ofher, secondary lanclmarks. Landmarks are mos# successfuJ when they serve • special funetions such as bell towers, clock fowers, monumenfs, or publrc art, rather than being self-serving. Further,more, fhey shDUld be carefulfy scaled to the buildings ad'jacent to them, as wefl as ta the overall scale of the urban vr"!lage. Title 14 of the Town o# Vail Zoning Cade states that: Tawers, spires, cupoloas, chi,mneys, flagpoles, and simiJar architecfural features not useable as habifa6le floor arsa ,may extend above the heiqht limit a distance vf not rnore fhan tvnren#y-five percent (25°fo) af the height limif nor more than . fiffeen feet (15). 1'he proposed tower has a height of 112 fiee#, measures appraximately 25 feet by 25 feet, and is loca#ed in cEose proxirnity ta the intersectian of the South Frontage Raad and West Lionshead Circle. This revised ~ proposal has reduced the heiglat of the landmark tower a total of 8 feet from 120 feet depicted on the pfeWid!!S plans. The praposed architectural landmark tower dQes not contain any GRFA above the max'rmurn heighr af 82.5 feet in height. Currently the feature is ~ anticipafed ta be illuminated frorn the exterior with up lighting. At a height of 192 feet the proposed tower is 14.5 feet (14.9%) taller than the maximum height of 87.5 feet iderrtified in the Master Plan. The Planning and Environmental Commission does have the authority within the Master PEan in conjuncfian with the criteria found in Reso6utian 18, series af 2004, to apfcrw far an architectural geature as proposed if the findings found below are made. It shal4 be the burden of the appiicant to demonstrate to the satisfactian of the , Tnwn of Vail Plarrning & Environmentai Cammission following a recammendation from the Design Review Board that; 1. The request for design cEeviatians are in cornpliance with the purposes of the zone district; and 2. The proposal which includes the design deviations is consistent with applicable eietments of the Lionshead Redevelopment INaster Plan; and 3. The proposaf which includes the design deviations does nat have a significant negative effect on the character of the neighborhood; and ~ 18 I I 4. The proposal substantialiy complies uvith other applicabie elements of the ~ ~ Va61 cornprehensive pBan; and I 5. The design deviation meets or exceeds the intent of the specific design j . standards as prescribed in Section 8.4; and, ~ I I 6. A public benefit is achieved as a result of the design deviation; and, ~ I r. The design deviati4n furthers the goals, objectives and purposes as stated ~ in Sections 2.3, 2.5 and 8.2 of the Lionshead Redeveloprrtent Master Plan. ~ Should the Plann9ng and Environmenta! Commissian choase ta approve the appfiGation, staff recornmends that the Commission make the foilowi~g findings before granting a flexibility under the recommendations of the Lianshead RedevelQpment Mas#er Pian: 1. That the request far desigra deviatians are in compliance with the purposes of the zone district; and I . 2. That the proposal which includes the design deWiations is consis#ent rrrith applicable elemen#s of the Lionshead Redeveiopment Master Plan; and ~ I ~ 3. That the proposak which includes the design deviations dnes not have a significant negative effect on the character of the nekghborhoad; and ! 4. That the proposal substantiaaly complies with other appBicable elements of the Vail comprehensive plan; and 5. That the design deviation meets or exceeds the intent of the specific design standards as prescribed in Sec#ion 8.4; and, 6. That a public benefit is achieved as a result af the design deviatian; and, 7. That the design deviation furthers the goals, abjectives and purposes as i stated in Sec#ions 2.3, 2.5 and 8.2 of the Limnshead Redevelopment Master ~ Plan. I i XI. NEXT STEPS The follawing is a tenta#ive scheduie of hearings dates at which the Planning and Environmentaf Cammission (PEC) and the Design Review Board {DRB} will be ~ asked to review, comment, and take actian an the prapased Ritz-Carl#on Residences: 19 ' • November 28, 2005, Planning and Environrriental Commissian final review. ~ • Decerrmber 7 and 21, 2045, Design Review Board work sessions preparing #or final review and approval. ' Xll. STAFF RECOMMENDATIQN Staff and the appficant would request that the Planning and Environmental Commission tables the applicant's request to the November 28, 2005, hearing, ! XIII. ATTACHMENTS A#tachment 11: Vicinity Map Attachment B: Reduced copy of the propased revisions Attachment C: Response to the Criteria found in Resalution 18, Series of 2004, provided by thue applicant i I ~ . ~ 20 ~n ~ l 'Fq¦~• . ~i t?~~ r~ I ~''`M~TCI ~TF . 1.~ F - ~ t 9~15 [ I ' f~J - C m 'h=~~ ~ ~c. ~ ~4 ~ y,~'~ t ~ a ; ~ ~w' ~ ? ~ ~,_'S' ~ r ~ ~ gr`~ rg.,t ~~,.~~:5 ~ ,6 ~r,,•,.+~ r 'y.~ l_^ a~ . ~ ~ w. 1-. ~ r • , ea+ s ~ ~ ~ ? Y.~Rc. 1 ~ . e wr ; r xr r 0. an 4k~'~ ~3" :~C~~ . . ~ t~~ T ~ ~ ~ ~-ife~-~" 4 ~ - ` FF 4 _ 1.. i~•` '~y ~ ~ f5 .'i~~~ ~ = r a . Yf ` ~l Ja» y ' l ~ x,r ~ U) ~l•! ~ ~,'-~'J'e - . . ' I ~ ~ 1 F-M,'str-"'~",y~~ 13 Q -e ~ ~ ~ d ~ r~ a- 7~ . ~ 4 5 Y F~ f w.,a . O N Ay ~ a ~ `~a ~~1~~'` ~ t ~ ~ ti e ~ L w ~ .A~ ~ a°.oa c ~ f ~~yer.i*'~i.' ~ ~ ±j~ ,3 a~.-,-~i N J ~ r ~ z~rq/r ' Li QD r ~ O 4 °uy~-~`~" y'i~~, ~ - ~ > . • ~a ~ "+~1't y; f "f1'+ . . r .1 ' e ~ t~h . F~ i y ~ ~ ~y ',c ?a ~~~a`~,~`b d`"''~ +r }'Mf~ ¦ry ~ y y Ml'.~~ 1 ?'i~ '4 ~ ~/i - 4 1 ~ L ~ t : ~ ?5 1L _,;'~~a ~ ~'~y ~Ii~~ v - t- t R ] t. oi ~ ~ . 1 ~ ~ s d ~ ~ . ~i~ ? .t~ I {u Ex ~ a ~-W 3 f ;~~r,~~~; ~ Ak~' ~ ~ ~ ,~!'Y ? s~Y.... t ~ ~1~ 1 Attachment: A i ...~~- .~ _ -~_ I ~~ ---~`~ .. ~ ~~~~~~ ~ ~ ~ ~s sw6 "~ ~--~-: ~- ~ -_ ~, ~... .~ i ~ ~~ ~ ~ _~ LL. ._ .. ~ ____ _ CC? ,r ~- ~ ~~ ~ d' -_ ,f ~ /y ti -ter ~~ 1~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ c*~ ~d~' rf7 '~t ~ ~" ~~ ~ cfi~ ~ d' ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ .,r- T ~ r-'~ t~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ O ~,, ~ w E_` ~~ ~ ~ ~~ ~ `~ ~ . J .~ ~• ,. ~' ~~- ~ - e!' OQ ~~ ~! __ - - - ~ . - - - C `C ~ ~ ~ , / t ~ E J . ~ . •~r 7; ~•~r`§ ` }~h t.. y ~r.'y . E 5'~ . • i ~f.. ,N ~ ~ , f~ ~ ~ ; ~ ^ ~ ` i ~ , ~ _v r ~ ~ . / t:; ~;y'~_•'\k ~~~s ~e ~ ~ . . • , , ~ ` , , . ~ ? .j. ~ l ~ . ~ ! ~ ~ + - ".c . ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ' ~ ~~-~w.~ r• T` ~ r • ~ t~ ~ . ti~ f ~ _ 4 i~ .f '.'p~ . _ ~ Y"._ + ~ ~ ' : ~F _ ~ j j \ 1~W.t i• ~.y.~L ~ I vt~` 'y~ ~'"-.~~"~''h-°1-~ \ . r y P y~}~ ~ ~ ; . ~ ~ . . r,r.,r.-'~` ~"n ,r~._ . . , ~ ~ ~ .~...,5 ~ j~./,l/! t~{~°'~~ll l t-- `i C ~ ~ . . l ~ ~ ~Y ft tK-i _ ~r 4 ~Y. ; . ~~t~ 4 y~\~X - ~ \ / /t l ~ ~ F"~I J , , ,~•,~~_-Y , t k I ~ f . / , ' r~~ . ` ~ ~ ~ \ i ! ~ ~ ` ~ `~t'^~~ x , ~ t~~ • f 1 I ri ~ - ~ --~''r~ ~~y~ ` ~ ' 4t f~' ~ f ~ ~`,lt ~ ~ A~~. ~ ` J~ ~ ~ ~ 1 ~ ,4 ' ~ ~ ~ ~ 1 Ji~:, r f` f ~ _ d~`'~ii~t`~~ ~ , ~ ~ - ~~1 r,. 1 ' f ~ ~ j , ~ -r„' f ~ i ~ . . `~l l~~+.-. . ~ . j~+° `4 4 . ~i \ ~ w ~ Fr ~ ~ ~ ` 7 ~ ~ . .ft ~ 1 i ~ ~ ~ t ~ r,i1~ ~+f S ~ \ ~ ~ ~ - } _ - ~ ~ " ~ _ ~ ~ ~ ~ , ~ ~ ~ f : ~ ; 'r~tl a_ x_ l F y { ~ - ~ '~x Y`~ ~ ~ ~ - ' - - - - - - - r- - '~'t---i- _ -~a ~ ~ ~ r ~k - s 1 1 ~ ~ ~ . ' w A ~ ~L ~ , ~ RESOLUTION 18. SERIES OF 2004, REVIEW CRITERLA. Two deviations to architectural design standards of the Lionshead Re+deveiopmen# 1Vlaster Plan are praposed by the Ritz Residences. Flexibility to these standards is subject to review by the I'lanning and Environmental, Commission (following a reccsmmendation from the DRB). The two deviations to these standards are: "Second re?of elements" in excess of 5(}0 s. ft. The pz-oposed building has a tatal xoof area of appraximately 58,433 squas-e feet and the ' proposed flat roQfed pQrtion of the structtre is praposed to be approximately 8,364 square feet or 14.3% af tiie tatal raQf area. Of this flat roof area approxirnately 3,909 sq. ft. wi1l be rooftop terraces resealting in 4,454sq. ft. of flat roof, or 6.7% of the tatal roof area. T`he propased roaf plan depiets 26 separate flat roofed areas. Of these anly five exceed 500 sq. ft. and these fve areas range in size frQm 576 ta 949 sq. ft. A numher of these flat roofed areas accommodate mechanicai equipment. The averail roof desigzi is predaminantly a gable form along with partions of mansard roof. From the public damain the building will not "read" or be perceived as a"flat roofed" building. ~ On November 2nd the DRB unanirnausly recornmended approval of this proposed design. LandmarklTower feature in excass af 82.5' The LHNIP specifically encDUrages architectural landmark features as a means to define spaces and ta create unique and creative building forms in Lionshead. The Plan also states that the height of sueh features may exceed the aliowable building height. The Plan does not specify to what extent a landmark/tnwer may exceed allowable building height, hut sinnply states appraval is subject to the reviewing board. Proposed pIans for the Ritz include a tower located at the main entry ta the building. In addition ta defining this entry the tower "anchors" the corner af the project and also establishes a landrnark feature at the western end of Lionshead. While the PEC has not taken formal action on the height of this tower, the Connznission has indicated that a landmark feature is apprapriate in this location. On November 2°d the DRB unanimously recoznmended approval of this propased design. As zneasured to its geak the tower is 112 feet taIl from exis4ing grade and'47.5 feet from proposed finished grade. There is no habitable space above the maximun building height ~ of 82.5 feet. RITZ CARLTON RESIDENCES 1 Response to I3esign Deviatian Criteria Attachment: C ~ I ~ 1. The re uest for desi deviations are in com liance with the u oses of the zone district; and The purpose of the Lionshead llTixed Use I Districf is "tQ provide sites for a mixture of m ultiple -family dwellings, lodges, hoteds, fractaQnal fee clubs, time .shares, lodge dwelling units, restaurants, affices, skier services, and cornrnercial establishments in a elustered, unified development.... and to maintain the desirable qualities of the District by establishing appropriate site develapment , starrdards The Ritz Club Residences is comprised of multi-famaly dwellings whieh are in keeping with this stated purpcase. Aside,f~am the tvvo proposed deviataons the praject is designed in canformance to established development stanclards, thereby furthering the desirable qualities of the District and ensut-ing adequate light, air, open space, etc. 7`he minar nature of the proposed deviations as such that the project is stild very much in compliance with the purpose of the LH.MU-1 llistrict. 2. The proposal which includes the design deviations is consistent with applicable elernents of the Lionshead Redevelopment Master Plan; and ' The Ritz was designed ta conforrn 1o applicable elements of the Master Plan and the LHUM-1 zane district. The proposed building has been before the PEC on ftve occasions and to date the anly tautstanding issues pertain to these praposed deviatinns. This would imply that the overall project design is consistent with relevrant elements of the pdan. 3. The proposal which includes the desigm deviations does nat have a significant negative ef#'ect on the character of the neighborhoad; and Flat roof areas are very limited and are located such that it is unlikely they will I be visible to any significant ex1ent from virZually crnywhere. This is due to lwa fiactors - flat roofs comprise only a small partion of the toPal roQf area and rn all cases the.flat raQf portians of the building are on internal areas of the roof The buildang will "read" as thaugh it has a pitehed roof. Ae flat roofed portian will have no significant negative ampact to the neighborhood. T'he vast majority of the tQwer is below the ma,ximum allo}vable bu#ldrng height of 82.5 feet. Portions of 1he tower above 82.5' are generally limited to the narrow spire. 1'he locataon af the tawer is such that zt will orient prirnarily to the Frontage Road and ta the VR Maintenance Yard. While the tower will be visible from the Yail Spa, it daes not have a sigrticant negative effect on neighborhood. ~ RITZ CARI11"ON RESIDF,NCES 2 Response to I3esign Deviatian Criteria u 4. The propasal suhstantiallv camplies with ather applicable elements of the Vail ~ com rehensive lan• and The 7'own's Comprehensive Plan includes a wide variety of documents, f7ne of the most recent plans and clearly the mast relevant plan to consider in relation to this praject is t.he Lianshead Redevelopment MetsteY Pdan. As described in item #2 above, the Ritz projeet is cansistent with applicable elements of this plan. 5. The desigLi deviation meets or exceeds ttie intent of the s ecifie desigLi standards as. rescribed in Seetion 8.4; and The LHMP includes a vast number of design goals and objectives. One of these is to encourage the use of roofs to "pravide visual cohesion to the urhan fabric" and to ensure that "raofs are predominantly gables and hfps, with sheds or flat roofs which cover rnore than 500 sq. ft. " The Plan goes on to state that "secondary roofs that occur at lagical break:s in bualding massing may excced 500 sq. ft. YYhile no1 specifically stated in the LHMP, it can be inferred that the intent of the limitation an flat roofs is tca further the gaal of having ' pr-edominantly gahle raofs The ,proposed roaf plan depicts 26 separate flat roofed areas. Df these only five eaccecd 500 sq. ft. and these five areas range in size froriz 576 to 949 sq. ft. Fram a quantitative standpoint the portaon o_,fflat raof thax exceeds 500 sq. ft. is very ~ insignificanl. Frnm a qualitative standpoint the_,f1'at rcrof pnrtions of the building are innocuous. The proposed devaation clerrrdy meets the intent of Section 8.4 as it pertains to flat roofs. The LHMF specifically states that "landmark" butlding elements sueh as towers may exceed maximum building heights. The PEC has acknowledged that a cower ~ I in the location proposed is appropriate. The proposed height af 'the tower has ' 6een determined in arder to establish an apprapriate relatianship with the rest of i the building. In doing so the tower meets the specific design standards of Section j 8.4. 6. A public benefit is achieved as a result of the design deviation; and, 7he design deviatiens, Wj21lF? TYtIiTOY in nature rxre important elements of the prQpased buzlding. The sereening feature, while exceeding the 82.5 building height lamit, provides a significant publtc benefit by screening raoftop meehanical equipment. Virtually all of the flat roofed portions of the building that exceed 500 sq. ft. also serve as rao}`top patios or locataons,for mechanical equipment - a public benefit i.s achieved by locatin,g this equipment on the roof in laeu of ground level loeation. When consid'ered in the context of the praposed building and ln the context of the three parcels of the West Day Lot subdiuision, approval of the ~ proposed deviations wild result irx an improved design solution whieh in turn achieves a public benefit consistent with the otiJerall redevelopment of Linnshead. RzTz cARLTarr REsrDErrcEs 3 Response tQ Design Deviation Criteria A majar design goal of the LHMP is to estahlish "speeial landmark fea,tures ~ The design of the Ritz includes a tower feature and in doing so addresses this design goal and prravides a public benefit. 7. The desi deviation furthers the goals, objectives an.d purposes as stated in Sections 2.3. 2.5 and 8.2 of the Lionshead Redevelopment Master Plan. 5'ection 2.3 refers to broad policy objectives such as redevelopment, irnproved . accessfcirculation, improved infrastructure and enhanced public revenues. Seetion 2.5 addresses broad urban design principles and Section 8.2 addresses the overall design intent far Lionshead. By virtue of the project's compliance with specific releuant guideldnes the Ritz . f`urthers these broad gaals and objeetives. The two minor design deviatians proposed by the 12itz C'arlton Residences are irnportant elements of the overall building design as and such also serve ta further the goals of the sections referred to abave. ~ RITZ CARLTON RESIDENCES 4 Response to Design Deviation Criteria , MEMaRANDUM T0: Planning and Environimental Commission (PEC) FROM: Community Dewelapment Department DATE: November 14, 2005 SUBJECT: A request for a final recomrnendation to the Vai] Town Councii of a majar amendrnent ta Special Dewelopment Districf Na. 4, Caseade Village, pursuant ta SectEOn 12-9A-10, Arriendment Procedures, Vail Town Cflde, to allow for additiana[ dweliing units and office uses in 5DD Mo. 4, located at 9310 Westhaven' DriWe/Cascade Village, and setting forth details in regard thereto. (PEC05-0082) Applicant: Cascade Viilage Theatres, Inc., represented by Mauriella Planning Group, LLC Planner: Matt Gennett 1. SUMMARY The applicant, Village Theatres, Inc., represented by Mauriello Planning Group, LLC, is asking the Planning and Environmental Commission for afinai recommendatiQn to the Town Council an the proposed Vail Cascade Residences project, located at 1310 Westhaven arive/Area A, CaSGc'ide VIIIag6. Pursuant to the criteria and findings listed in Section VIII of this memorandum, and the conditions lisfed in SectEOn IK of this memorarrdum, staff recammends the Planning and Environanental Commissian forward a recomrnendation of approval with conditions to the Tawn Council on the proposal cfetailed herein. II. DESCRIPTIDN aF THE REQUEST The appficant, Gascade Village Theatres, Inc, represented by Mauriella Planning Group, LLC„ has requested a final review hearing with the Planning and Environmental Carnmission to present a proposeti deVeloprroent plan and request for an amendment to Area A of Speciaf Development Qisrrict (SDQ) No. 4 ta develop the VaiE Cascade Residences, located at 1310 V11esthaven DrivelArea A; Cascade Village. A vicinity map has 6een attached for reference (Attachment A). fihe prcaposaE inciudes the development of 11 dwelling units, vwith some commerciai, retail and office space cantempfated as rrvell. A Majar Amendment is required for the additional number of dweliing units; however, fhe proposed Gross Residential Floor Area (GRFA) is within the allowable GRFA in Area A of SDD No. 4 and does not require an amendment. Currently, the property hauses classrooms, related educational facilities, and the Cascade Viilage Theater, A restaurant and eight iwo-story residential candominiurn units are likewise located within the building today; hawever, thase uses and units will remain and are na# cantemplated for redevelopment in assaciation with this application. According to the applicant, #he primary catalyst for redeveloping the educational and theater 1 Planninq and Enviranmental Commissian: Actian.• 7'he PEC is advisory ta the Town Council. The F'EG shall review the proposal fQr and make a recammendation to the 7own Council based an the Criteria and Findings Eisted in Section lX of this memorandum. ~ Desiqn Review Board: Acfian: The Df;B has N4 review authority on a SdD praposal, but must review any accompanying QRB applica#ion The DRB reviewv af an SDD prior to Town Council appraval is purefy advr'snry in rtature. Staff: The staff is respansible for ensuring tha# ali submittal requirements are provided and plans conform to the technical requirements af the Zoning Regulations. The staff also advises fhe applicant as to compliance with the design guidelines. 5taff provides a staff enemo containing background on the properry and provides a sfaff evaluatian of the project with respect to the ret{uired crFteria and finding5, and a recomrnendation on appraval, approaal with canditions, ar denial. S#aff also facilitates the review proeess. Town Gauncil: Ac#ion: 7he Town Council is responsible for frrral approval/cfeniaf of an SDD. The Tawn Council shall review the proposa] using the Criteria and Findings listed in Section !X af this memorandutn. V. APPLICABLE PLANNING DOCUMENTS Article 12-9A: Special Developrnent (SQD) District (in part) 12-9A-9: PUf2P45E: The purpose of the special development drstrict is to encourage flexrbility and creafivity in the development of land in order to promote its most appraprrafe use; to imprQUe the design character and quality of fhe new development with the town; to facilitate the adequate and economicaf provision of streefs and utrlities; to preserve the natural and scenic features of open space areas; and fo furfher the overall goals of fhe co,mmunity as stated in the Vail camprehensive plan VI. SITE ANALYSIS Legaf Desceiption: Cascade Village (GMC Building, specifically) Address: 1310 Westhaven Drive Lot Size: .67 acres (29,495 sq ft) 3 achieved: A. Design compatibility and sensitivity to the immediate environment, neighborhood and adjacent proper#ies relative to architectural design, scale, buik, building height, buffer zones, identity, character, visual integrity and orientation. The applicant is praposing an exterior alteratian w'hich staff beiier+es will greatly enhance the visual appeal and complement the architecturaP aesthetics of ac[jacent praperties. The design of the exterior is sensitive #o the immediate environment and is campatible with the neighborhood surrounding Area A of Speciaf Development District No. 4, and its environs. The height, scale, design, buik and mass and mf the building wilC meld 'onto the architectural context of the Cascade Resort and neighbaring residential uses. ; B. Uses, activity and density rrvhich provide a compatible, efficient and workable relationship with surrounding uses and actiyity. The applicant is not proposing any changes of use that deviate frorn the inteRtions of Special DeveEopment Distriet No, 4. The slight increase in density by (11) eleven dwelling uni#s under this proposal will not have ar+y r,egative impact on the functions of the surrounding uses and activities. Considering the applicant's parking analysis on page 10 of their written submittal (Attachment B), the parking demand will decrease with the changes in use from Movie Theater and a private educatianal institution, to mastly residential with some small office, retail and educatianal uses on the first floor of the buiCding. Given #he present functionaii#y o# Cascade Viliage and it not having evolved into a"third VilEage" as contemplated in the ariginal adopting ordinance, staff does not see any probiem with lacating {irnited cammercial office uses on the first floor of the building. The ordinance to be brought forward ta Council will include amending language to allow office uses on the first floor, in a limitetl capacity. ~ C. Compliance with parking and ioading requirements as outlined in Chapter 12-10 of the Vail 7own Code. The provisions of SDD No. 4 state off-street parking shall be provided in accordance with Chapter 12-10, except far 75Q/o of the parking in Area A shall be iocated within a parking structure or buildings. The ordinance requires that 421 parking spaces be provided for the uses in Area A in the exisifing Cascade Club parking structure. A17.5 percent mixect use cred'at per the Tawn of VaiP parking code has been applied to thE total nvmber of required parking spaces in the Cascade structure. The parking table withan the approved develc?pment plan fflr SDD No. 4 includes an allocation of parking spaces to be provided for the uses constructetf on-sEte. The Colorado Mauntain CQllege build+ng (how the entire building, including the theaters, is described in the ordinance) is parked entirely within the Cascade Club parking structure aceording to the following breakdawn: Theater, 28 parking spac.es; Colfege Glassroorns, 40 parking spaces; Callege Office, 4 parking spaces; Theater Meeting Roorn 2J, 11.5 parking spaces, Sub- Total, 83.5 parking spaces; BIue TigerlC9ancy's, 13.3 parking spaces (na change proposed); Cascacfe Perrthouses 16 parking spaces (no change proposed). 5 designed to prociuce a functaanal development responsive and sensitive to natural features, vegetation and averall aesthetic quality of the community. The praposal does noi cal@ for any modifications that would impact natural features or vegetation. 5taff believes that the averall aesthetic quality of the cornmunity would be enhanced by the propased exteriot` changes and physical impravemen#s proposed by the applicants. G. A circulation system designed for hath vehicles and pedestrians addressing on and o€f-site traffic circulation. The applican# is proposing changes that wilf have a positive impact on vehicle and pedestrian circulatory patterns. StafF believes this criterion will be met by the applicant's considering the inclusion of a plan to remove #he existing pedestrian walkway aver Westhaven Drive and rebuiid i# at a height suitable for large trucks and buses to pass undemeath. H. Functional and aes#hetic landseaping and open space in order to optimize and preserve natural features, recreation, rriews and functians. The applicant is not proposing any cFranges which would have a negative impact upon the elements of this criterion. f. Phasing pian or subdivisian plan that will maintain a workable, functional and efficient relationship throughout the development of the special development disfr`rct. 5taif is nat aware af any intention on the applicant's behalf to phase this project, however, shoulci a phasing plan be praposed, this criterian mus# and will be met in full. IX. STAFF RECQMMENaATION The Gorrrmunity Deveiapment Department recommends tha# the Planning and Enwironmental Commission forwards a recammendation of approval wifh conditions of the propased SDQ amendment to the Vail Town Council. Staffs recornmendation is based upon the review of the criteria found in Sectian VIII of this memarandum and the evidence and tesfimony presented, subject to the fallowing canditions: 1. F'rior to first reading of the arnending ardinance beFore the Vail Towet Cauncil, #he applicant shall submit a detailed parking plan to the Cornmunity Developrnent Departmerrt for incausian in the amending ordinance to ensure adequate parking will be maintained at all tirnes for the eleven (11) new residences. Should the Planning arrd Environmental Commission choose to fiarward a recommendation of approval to th€: Vail Ta+rrn Council of th9s proposed amendment to an SDD, the Department of Community QeveEopment recommends fhe Commission pass the follawing motion: 7 c ~,:J i ~,'J.,4.1 M+-. / .ti .t' ~e'.~~"~~nC~'C °h ~`:'~},+T'~`F R ' a+ ~ °5. i i f 4, ~..J A ~ ~""'°a"M`s~ , • ~`^4 a ~'s ~ L ~ ` • . . . , . a. " ` ~ s m s ".~A- r'Y~* _ ~ 4 M Mf'3i'~ i~'~ .,y. Y9 . ~ ~ r 1f ft t,f7 . C) ~ C> °ti~"°~ _ _.y }q ~ ~i w'~'1<•.rz 4~y~.1~^~ Q ' at" ~ i 7 + 07 (D 1 t ~ ~ IM j ~ ~ Q ~ > ~~t'~S L R P -.~,:~;e•r ; ~ i_ +~st`~~ ~~qY'v f t ;a#', ~ °}y~ \ 4:~a~- 4' ~ :x.~~". ~r~~'.~;,,; Z~~i. y~•~{i'r~'~~~~ 1~. ~~Y•~' ..t:~_=:.'T: ~ 'Vl ~ ~ ~s ~ ~ `~~y, *k.\ 'L ~ ~ ~Y ~ ; ,.i' ~ x~ r ~ '~'a.~.• a~ . A# 4 • ~ ",~+1. ~tr'~}~, '~F~` ~ CT5 i r ~ ~ . ~ i..n ~ ~ ~ • Ye }~~j`~ f j14 "4~ `~a~}7` ~ r.r T (U , ~ ~ ~ i; t~"~z`~'^ `'~w' ~'~5 a °t r ~ ~ I ~ y~C'~,~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~.1 ~~A~ dv~:}~'~,. l' y ~~,r F'~•+` r'y.~: ~ Q y y, ~ . ~ ~ . > ,X~~1 .i . >r y~- >.3, yw k,L y r~~'' w~~, , p ~ ~ ~ -W~ y~ I. ..~+t o i !il~I w ~ J M r r ~F+ ~4 ~ . A ~ ~ µ a\. ~}j S}~ .~,+"~s~ ~ ~,:,r1 •z,,~" . .f. ~ {'4.. _ V 70 77, - . °r 'h ~7F~t 1 ..5' i~' pi, ~S .~r t,G,.H-.,r,.Y l~ ,.dt~.. ~1/ - ~ I; d' ~ 6 ~ ~ ~ 4 . k a c~,+?7 . ' ~•4 - '~yti ~ ' tl-.t i a ` ti S d ,y v hr~"y, ? ,.:*r . i ,K ~ F ~7F` :~7~ ~"-3^r -}f' ~§rf' ,y S~ v C'-~ ~ ' lr" ~ -.s~ ~:`'n y ~c~ a .~~W ! ~ ~ c~ ; ° y N ' 4~i~~ .t`z "«5 4 * ~ '~a" ;~t ra ~ ~ _ ~ ~°i _ ~ i~',~' +Y f~ r ~ ' "~i ~ w ~yw ~ { ~Ct ~ ~ r:~k.k`w~)r~ y~ ~,z.. _ Q 7 4 ~ x ~ v ~~a ~ y r ~ .t z;C'r~ _ y • l+,~R.y . 't~1.~. i , a~ry~.~ ; ~~••.c ~ ~ v ' i • + `.t~'~ :rt, r 44 . yv t a 't, k - ~ 7 a., ~`-w~ . 4 ~ s ~ r X 1 i :a.. ~ y~',}4 4 ~ ~ . ~ -.4 3 ~ ' • k ~ ;k ~v.l } ;q},~ -/'4 { ~ 4 ~ ~,r . ~ Recievelopment Of Vall Ca5Cade, ~es~dence~ •i F h - 7c . .4~S~k a A. ~N KI CFF ~ Application for IVlajar Amendrnent tv Special Development District Number Faur A#tachment B Mauteella Ptanning GrQUp i ~ ~ C7wner and Consultant Directory OwnerJApplieant: Cascade Village Theater, Inc. CIo Steve I.indstrom PC7 Box 1152 Vail, GO 81658 970-476-3035 131C Buffalo Properties, LLC C/o Michael Hecht Pfl Box 331 Baulder, CO 80306 970-476-7781 Plann4ng: Dnminic F. IVlauriclla, AICP Mauriella Planning Group, LLC ~ PO Box 1127 Avon, CO 81620 ~ 970-748-0920 Architect: Jack Snow RKD, Inc. PO Bax 5055 Edward5, CC3 81620 970-926-2622 ~ ~ . ~ ~ Tab1e of Conxents Chapter Pa#;e 1. Introduction 1 II. Existing Conditions 2 IIL Detailed Project Description and Zoning Analysis 4 TV. 5pecial Developnient District - Stanaaxds and Criteria 15 V. Comprehensive Plan Goals and Direction 1$ ~ ~ ~ ~ . ~ ~ 1. Intaroduction and Summary of Request This apglication represents a request tQ redevelop the Vail Cascade Residences 7acateci at 1310 Westhaven Drive in Vail, Coloa-ado. Today that property houses classrooms and related educational Facilities as avell as the Cascade Village Theater. Although a rescaurant and eight, tvsro-story residential condorniniurrn units are also located within the building, those uses and units will retnain and are not besng retieveloped as part of this application. The primary impetus to redevelop the educatiQnal and theater components of tkais buildizag was th.e recent move by Calorado Mountain Gollege to its new caxnpus in Edwards, Colorado as well as the limited economic viability of the theaters in their present location. In cantemplating redevelopment of the Vail Cascade Resiclences eare has been taken to consider the requireinenrs of Special Develapznent District No. 4, Area A("SI»?" or "SDD No. 4") in whiclz the property is located as well as the Town of Vail Comprehensiue Plan. This stibmiltal addresses each of the criteria identified far develapment within SDD No. 4. Specifically, the applicant is seeking a major amendrnent pursuant ta Section 12-9A-10B of the ~ Town of Vail Municipal Code due to a proposed change in the number of dwelling units within the overall SDD. The applicant desires an amendment ta SDD No. 4 so it rnay develop ~ eleven (11) residential units as well as cornm.ercial, affice, retail and school space on the graund floor and throughaut the building. The proposal includes renovations which include a new roof which will be modified to the existing highest point of the fourth floor sky lights (i.e., all impravements are below the existing maximurn elevatian of the building). Such a modification will accornmadate a fifth floor loft area within the building. Other renovations include several new windows and a new fa~ade all of which will renzain within the existing footprint and represent reductians in total building niass by remaving existing portinns of the building. All of the praposeci exterior ehanges to the building will enhance the buildings aesthetics anel form and will help the building relate better to other buildings in the vicinity. Aciditionally, the existing pedestrian bridge across Westhaven Drive will be :removed and replacecl with a new bridge that allows taller trucks to travel beneath it. The groposed development is harmonious with the general character of the Town and the goals of SDD Na. 4. The propased density is low and the new uses wi]1 be an asset to the Tawn. The current development standards within SDD #4 al1Qw all of the density and GRFA being allocated to this structure. ~ ~ Vail Cascade Residences Redevelopment 1 Mauriello Planning Group, LLC I ~ ~ II. Existing Conditions A. Zone 17istriet The Vail Cascade Residences property is located within SI]I) Nca. 4} Area A. While the property was orig;anally zoned PUD by Eagle County it was approved as an SDD withOut an underlying z.one district. As a result the SDD orciinance (in conjunction with the 'I"own oiE Vail Municipal Code) is the guiding doeument. SDD No. 4 was adopted by Ordinanee No. 5 in 1976 and has been amended a numher of times with the inost recent amendment accurring through Ordi:nance No. 12 in 2005. The most recent Ocdinance is clear that 5DD I'•To. 4 was established to "ensure comprehensive development and use of an area in a manner that will be harmonious with the general character of the Town, pravide adequate open space and recreational amenities, and promote the objectives of the Vail Camprehensive P1an." The proposed projeet maintains the goals identyfied for SDI7r No. 4 while employing creativity and bringing vitality to [hi$ area of the Town.. W. ~ y k. ~1 ' t M Y •.f. ~ . . ~ . ~ . ~ . - ~ K 'R ~:A_ } ~ ? . . :n . - _ r . ..~.3,;, v x, ~s ~ , . . - • ~ Existing Cascade Aerial Yierv ~ Vail Cascade Rr:tidences Redevelapinent 2 Mauricllo Planning Group, T: LC; ~ ~ B. Existing Ileveloprnent and Uses The cEirrent building was originally constructed in 1983 as a mixed use commercial and residential develapment. I"he follQwing is breakdown of the eurrent uses on-site: • Common Area 17,245 square feet • Delivery Area 4,007 square feet • Private Storage 727 square feet • Colorada Mountain College 15,204 square feet • Theaters 10,568 square feet • Restaurant/Qff ice 3,547 square feet dwelling tinits (wilI not be modified) 15,494 square feet ~ ~ ~ ~ `Jail Cascade Residences Redeveloptzxent 3 Mauriello Planning Group, LLC ~ III, Detailed Project Description and zonxng Analysis A. Praject Site and Ownership SDD No. 4 is 97.955 acares in: area and developrnent Area A within SDD No. 4 is cornprised of 17.955 acres. The Vail Cascade Residences are located at 1310 Westhaven Drive within Area A. The building is lacated on 0J16 acres. Ta the north and across Westhaven Drive are the Westhaven Residences (the existing "ruins" site) and the Caseade Club athletic club and spa facility. Tv the east and sauth of the garoperty are a court yard and the Cascade Club Hotel. The Millrace Condominiums are located to the west. The theater, certain common areas, and the Colnrado Mauntain College space are the subjeet of this redevelcapment application. The existing spaces at issue are awned by 1310 Buftalo Properties, LLC and Cascade Village 7'heater, Inc. with Michael Hecht and Steve Lindstrom being thc respective priticipals of each entity. Neil Sirotkin owns a sma11 office spaee within the building which is also included in chis application. The rernaining condaminiurn units and restaurant within the building are not part of this applicatian atZd are individually owned. The conciominium association has conserated to the £iling af this application. ~ B. Proposed User ~ The redevelopment plan proposes ta locate eteven (11) residential candominium units sn the building as well as cnmm,ercial uses including office, retail and educational facilities on the first floor of the buiIding. The basement level of the building which has an exterior wall on the u-est side of the building will be developed with twa (2) residential units anti common areas. The street level of first floor of the building wi11 include common foyrer and entrance for the restden ia 1 t condominiums, restatiirant spaces, retail space, a:nd office use. The finaI compositian of uses on the first flocar has noz been finalized. The alIawable uses are being modified tn allaw office use on this level of the builciing. The second floor will ineYude portions of five (5) dwelling units. These dwelling units are two story units and therefore oCCUpy the third floor as well. The fourth floox includes four (4) dwelling units. These units are also two story units wnth same limited tloor area added as a fifth level to the building. SDD No. 4, Area A allows as permitted rises far the first floc,r or street level the uses listed in Section 12-7$-3 (Commercial Core 1) of the Town of Vail Municipal Gode. ~ Those uses include but are not limited to retail shops, eating and drinking establishments and lcadges. SDr] No. 4 further provides that in developrnent Area A all ~ Vail Cascade Residences Redevelapment 4 Mauriello Pl.inning Group, LLC ~ ~ other #1oor lewels besides the first flaor street level "may inelude, retail, theater, a-estaurant, and office except that no professional or business office shall be tocated on stxeet level or $irst flaor unless it is clearI}r accessary to a 1Qdge or educational institutican except fnr an offfice space liaving a maximum square footage af 925 square feet located on the first floor an the northwest corner of the Plaza Conference Center Building.'° Finally, SDD No. 4, Area A cnncemglates other permitted uses which inclucle lodge and multi-family dwellings. A1l of the uses propaseti by the applicant for the street level af the praperty are permitted uses with the exception of professional/office or educational space. The applicant respectfully requests that the Town of Vail a19ow these uses an the street level of the property far a number of reasons. First, the applicant will use its best efforts ta locate any retail or restaurant space to the front of the building to allaw for an attractive streetscape. Seconci, the Cascade Village was origanally contemplated as a third portal to the ski mountain. The goa1 was to create a sinaller, third comrraercial center after Vail and Lianshead. As t.inle hrzs passed, it laas becpme elear that the original vision for Cascade Village has been only partially realized. Wtzile the ski lift, hotel and athletic club ~ support certain retail and commercial uses, the building is 4ve11 suited for office and professaonal space. The obvious lack of fioot traffic in the area has limited the viability ~ af retail anci restaurant uses in zhe area. Indeed, the current use of the street level for this property is adininistrative offices, classroorxis and meetzng space associated with an educational facilicy, and circulation z-amps for the rheaters. To allow this contznued use as well as prafessional and office space will maintain the historic eharacter of the graperty and address a carnrnunity need with minimal ixnpact. ~ ~ Vail Cascade Residenres Redcvelopment 5 Mauriello Planning Grotip, LLC ~ +k 1 ~ ~ ' ',~.v,~ ~~~f~""'~.•~.: ~ ~q~,a~ - ' ~ } ~ _ 1~, . ..m f ~ -;.f.. ~ . ~ ~ . . .-:~i . 't Before - From iCascade Hotel ~ ~ 5 4 ~ ~ + , " ~ ,r ~ a w ± h 4 wl". ~ ^ '(r'OAb+'~ After - From Cascade Hotel ~ Vail Cascade Residenees RedeYeloprrrent 6 Mauriello Planning Group, LLC ~ ~ ~ _ Y • ~ 4 °L~ ~ ~ • ~ . ~ . ; £k . . . ~ ~ < ~ ~ Trt - I~ 4 f . ~ . . . . ~ . ~ . . . . . - -~w..... . _ k -`°"F^'~" , , , Before - rrodn Westhaven Drive ~ ~ , , 4 i ~h , , ~ ~ -t , . ~ ~ ~ V~ . . : ~~i. . ~ ' •4:. ~ ~ I . _ . ~ . ~ x ~ A ~ . ~ : • ~ .,.x ~ :T _..!s ° - . . . . . _ . ,.t . ".""'a._ . . _ . _ . .r.l~ . _ . ' 1 . After - Fram West Haven Drive ~ ~ Vail C:ascade Residences Redevelopment 7 Mauriello Planriing Group, LLC ~ C. Buildang Design ~ The applicants are propQSing to provide an adaptive reuse of this building to accommodate camznercial and resic.iential uses. The prop4sed changes to the building will essentially utilize the existing building rnass to sculpture a new building form. This rneans that overall building mass will be reinoved fraYn the building to create additianal areas of glazing and interest to the building. Frorn the pedestrian perspeetive the builciing wilS h.ave less impact on the common areas and West~iaven Drive. The north, sauth and east fa~ades of the building will be completely redeveIoped. Since the vvest fa~ade of the building contains private condominiuxns, that porxian of the building is not being redevelopeci with this application; instead this application is praposing improvements and enhanceinents urhich were develaped using Nlexisting architectural tkaeines frorn the west elevation. This approaeh will ereate a compatible and consistent architectural salution to the building while not burdening the existing eondominiutn owners the need to participate rn the improvements to the buiIding. ~ ~ ~ • . ~ ~ ; . ~ 10 ~ Ori kK ~ - , 3 ' I `••x Massing Perspective of East Elevation from Above ~ ~ Vail Cascad'e Rcsidences Rzdevelopttient 8 14"Iatariello P1~3nning Group, LLC . ~ 30 COPY D. C'ommercial Floor Areas ANLABLE ~ SDD No. 4 states ThaL for Area A commercial area shall not exceed 35,698 square feet. To date only 24,598 square feex af commercial space has been developed leaving 11,100 square feel of comzarjercial floor that is yet undeveloped. The theater and college spaces were not included in the comrnercial floor area numbers. The proposed application will add a net additiona14,087 square feet of commercial floor area to the building. This is well within the 11,100 square feet allaw ed_ E. Reszdentierl Floar Areas The proposed application will canvert existing theater and college spaces in the basement and on the seeond, thirci, and fcrurth floors of the buBlding. The redevelapment will also add asrnall £ifth floor to the building. Whexa corzxpleted, the project will provide a total of 31,056 sq. ft. af GRFA. ~ :c- ~ x,_ ,.S.f•~.#, ' . . . -A . , s ~ t - " , < z., ~ Niassing Perspective of East Elevatian from Below ~ ~ Vail Cascade F.esic#ences Redevelogrzient 9 M-auriello Planning Group, LLC; ~ F. Parking and Loading ~ SDD No. 4 Pravides that off-szreet Parking shall be Provicied in aecordance with Chapcer 12-10, except that 75% of the parking in Area A shalI he located within a parking structure oz- buildings. The ordinarice requires that 421 parking spaces be provided for the uses in Area A in the main Cascade Club parking structure. A 17.5 pearcent mixed use creciit per the Towm o# Vail parking code has been agplied to the total number of required parking spaces in the Cascade strueture. The parking table within the ordinance approving, SDD No. 4 includes an allocation of parking spaees ta be provided for the tises constz'ucted on-site. The Colorado Mountain College builciing (this is how the entire b«ilding including the theaters is describec{ in the ardinance) is parked entirely within the Gascade Club parking structure according to the followizag breakdown: Theater 2$ parking spaces Callege Classrooms 40 parking spaces Corlege C7ffice $ park.ing spaces Tlieater Meeting Room 2J 11.5 parking spaces ~ Sub-Tcatal 83.5 parking spaces ~ Blue Tiger/Clancy's 13.3 parking spaces (no change proposeci) Cascade Penthouses 16 parking spaces (no change proposed) Therefore, 83.5 less the mixed use parking credit of 17,5% for a total of 69 parking spaces are provided within the Cascade Club parking structure for this building. The propased uses w ithin the builcling generate the following parking need: Eleven dwelling units: 27.5 parking spaces at 2.5 per unit Cc,mmercial Fflaor areas as office use: 16.3 parking spaces at 1 per 250 sq. ft. (4,087 net inerease sq. ft. retail/office) 7'otal: 43.$ parking spaces Total less 17.5'°{o multi-use eredir 37 parking spaces Therefore, there is a net reciuction in the number pf spaces (32 less spaces) required to be provided within the existing parking structure. The required parking for Area A is owned by a third party. However, xhat does not change the fact the parking must he available to rneet the parking requirement of uses vvithin Area A as described in the regulating ordinance. Since the proposed redevelopment of the subject property will have markedly less impact an the parking, ~ the owner of the parking strueLUre also stands to.benefit from the proposed applicatian b}- unbw-dening 32 parking spaces originally set aside far the Colorado ~ Vail Cascade Residence_s Redcvclopnnen[ 10 Mauriello Planning Graup, LLC . ~ Mountain College and Cascade Theaters. No additional parking is theretore required ~ for this application, nor is ownershap of that parking required far the proposed uses. All Ioading and clelivery is currently provided w•ithin the existing structures. There is a genez-al reduetion on loading and delivery needs baseci nn the proposed change of use. G. Access and Circulation The access and circtilation for the project remains tinchangetl from its present form. The primary vehicular access point fc7r the project is From Westhaven Drive. A three level parking structure serves this pxoperty along with the adjacent axhletic club and hotel. There is a zxet reduction in traffic with the propased application based upon the change a:E use. Level of serviee wili only imgrove on Westhaven Drive due to the proposed change ot use. H. Density I7ensity is expressed as the number of residential dwelling units per acre of land. The ~ ardinance for SpD No. 4, Area A indicates that a minimum of three hundred fifty- two (352) accommodatian or transient dweiling units and amaximum of ninety-four ~ (94) dw elling unfts for a total dcnsity of two hundred seventy (270) dwelling units. A review of the C_lydina;nee 12 Series of 2005 illustrates that 2$$ accommodation units, 74 dwelling units (plus ? EHU's) have beendeveloped to date. Additionally, Westhaven Residences was approved with a totaI of 13 dwelling units. T'he an:tacipated density in the form af accommodation units (when ersnverced to dwelling units at 2 accommodation units per dweliing unit) results in a surplus af 41 uzadeveloped dwelling units. Additionally, the number of undeveloped dwelling units is nine (R). This leaves an overall availahle density of 50 dwelling units within Area A. Thus, the acidition of 11 dwelling utaits is well within the densrty requirerr3ents for Area A. This proposal fully coinplies with the density requirernents established by the Town of V ail. L $iaiddang Height SDD Na. 4 requires that height be measured "vertically from the existing grade or finished grade (whichever is more restrictive) at any given point to the top of a flat roof, ar rnansard roof, or to the highest ridgeline of a sloping roof" unless otherwise specified. The subject property is allowed a maximum height of 71 feet under Ordinance No. 12, Seraes 2005. The existing and proposed Vail Cascade Residences ~ are below the maximum building height. ~ Vail Cascade Residences Redeveloprnent 11 Mauriello Planning Group, I.C.C ~ J. Setbctcks ~ Setbacks far Area A are as indieated in each development plan with a minimum setback on the periphery af Area A pf not less than twenty feet. Further buildings within Area A must maintain a SQ foot stream setback from the Gore Creek. Because this propQSal cioes not include an addition to the existing building or change ta the building envelope all setback requirements have been satisfied. K. Site Coverrzge Site coverage is a measure of bttilding foocprint to total lot area. In Area A, na more than 45°l0 of the total site area shall be coverecfi by buildizags unless otherwise indicated on site speeific developtnent plans. Again, the buitding, footprint is nat being increased with this praposal. As a result all site coverage requirements continue ta be rrret. L. Landscape Area/Streetsccrpe Ordinanee No. 12, 5eries 2005 establishes the requirements for landscaping within SDD No. 4. The total development area shall be lanciscaped as provided in the ~ development plan to include retention of natuxal landscape, if appropriate. In Area A, 50% of the area shall lae landscaped unless otherwise indicated_ The applicant will not ~ reduce the existing landscape area associated with this building. T'he landseaping requirem€nts have been satisfied. ~ ~ Vai1 Cascade Residences Redevelopment 12 Mauriello Planning Group, LLC , ~ ~ M. Employee Housing The Tawn of Vail ha$ required the owners of new and redeveloped projeets tc) provide employee liousing for the incremental increase in the number af employees generated by a project. The Town, to-date, has never caciifzed this requirement or the formula used by staff to determ.ine the requirement. Vile have applied the formula traditionally used by the To«%n staff to this praject while taking a credit for the existing uses laeated on the property. The formula beloNv indicates an overall reduction in employee generation based on the change in use on the groperty. Em !a ee Hausin Galculation Existin Buildin S. Ft. or Units Formula Gross Em la ees Colle e UseslClassrooms 13,004 0.0010 13 Colle e Offiee 1,500 0.0050 7.5 Ftestauran# Office Use 974 0.0050 4.87 Theater Uses 600 o.o050 3 ~ Tatal 28,37 ~ Praposed Cascade Develaprnent Sq. Ft. or Units EFoirmula Gross Em lo ees Dweilin units 10.2500 2.75 CommerciaN 7Jses 5,061 0.0050 25.305 Total 2$.055 Net Decrease in Gress Emplo ees -0.315 Note: In deriving the emplc,yee generation for the college uses and the theater, consultatic3n with the theatcr operator and the Colorado Mountain College was canductec{. ~ ~ Vail Cascade Residences Rede'. elopntent 13 Mauriello Planning Group, L.LC N. Existing tis. Praposed Flaor Areas ~ Existin Suildin Pro osed Suildin Coznrnon Area 17,245 s. ft. 8,083 s. ft. Restaurant/Office 3,547 s. ft. 2,573 s. ft. Existin Condominiurns (8 15,490 s. ft. 15,490 s. ft. Private Storaae 727 s. ft. 727 s. ft. Delive Area/Lcaadin Dock 4,007 s.ft. 4,007 s. ft. Calorado Mountain Colle e 15,204 s,ft, NIA Theaters 10,568 s. ft. N/A Commercial/'Office S ace NIA 5,061 s. ft. I~ew ftesidential Units (11 N/A 2$,439 s. ft. New Undefined Residential Area 1`*T/A 2,617 s, ft. Total Area b6,788 s. ft. 66,997 sq. ft. ~ ~ ~ ~ Vail Caseade Residezaces Redevelopment 14 iVlauriellc, Planning Gro€ap, LLC ~ ~ IV. Special Develapment L7istrict - Standards and Griteria "The purpose af the special develogment distz-ict is to encourage flexibility and creativity in the development of land in order to promate its Fnost appropriate use; to improve the design character and quality of the new develflpment with the Town; to facilitate the adequate and economical provision of streets and utilities; to preserve the natural and scenic features of open space areas; an.d ta fuz-ther the overall goals of the community as stated in the Vail cornprehensive plan." The following design criteria are used by the Town in the evaluation of a Special Developrnent District. The proposed Vail Cascade Residences redevelopment plan adequately addresses each of these criteria. Below is a summary of how the project implements each of these crxteria. Please note that tkae entire application and submittal materials for this application address the criteria helow in addition to the summary provided. A. Compatibility: Design compatibility and sensitivity to the immediate environrnent, neighborhood and adjacent properties relative to architectural design, scale, bulk, building height, buffer zones, identity, ~ charaeter, visual integrity and orientation. ~ Otaz- Analvsis: The praposecfi Vail Caseade Residences redevelopment Ieaves the existing; building generally intact. The building has and continues to be compatible with the iznmediate enviranment, neighborhood and adjacent properties relative to architectural design, scale, bulk, building heig,ht, buffer zones, identity, charactez-, visual integrity and drientation. The changes to the exterior af the building will reduce ics impact upon the neighbarhood and rtiake the lauilding fnore campatible with the cnmmercial and residential uses in the area. B. Relationship: Uses, activity and density which provide a compatible, efficient and workable re(ationship with surrounding uses and activity. Our Analysis: The applicant is not proposing any ehanges that deviate significantly from the intentians af SDD No. 4. Tlxe Cascade Village area and SDD Na. 4 is characterized by residential, lodging, and comrnercial develapment. SDD No. 4 was established to ensure camprehensive develapment in a rnanner that is harmonious with the general character af the Town. The proposed ~ redeveloprrient plan responds to the resident3al and conamercial uses already developed in the neighbarhood and adds to the high quality rnix of uses existzng ~ Vail Cascade Residences Redevelopment 15 Mauricllo Flanning Graup, LLC . R ~ ~ along V(lesthaven Drive. The proposed uses will enhanee this resort hub within the Cascade Village and gen,erate actAVZty that will not only benefit the property owner but the citizens of ehe Tc,vvn o# Vail. The propased project cz-eates a compatible, efficient, and workable relationship tiuith suxrounding uses and activities. C. Parking and Loading; CompIiance with parking and laading requirements as autlined in Chapter 10 a£ this Title, C7ur Anal sis: The proposed redevelopxneiit plan zneets or exceeds all af the garking and loading standards found in Chapter 10 af the Zoning Regulations oz- thase contained within the ordznance regulating SDD I`elo. 4. Please refer to other sections of this report and the proposed develagznent plan for details an parking and loadimg. D. CompXeh+ensive Plan: Conformity with applicable elements of the Vail Comprehensive Plaa, Tawn Policies and urban design plans. ~ Our Analysis: The proposed Vail Cascade Residences redevelapment plan complies with all ~ relevant master plannzng documents and Town policies. Please refer to section "V" af this report for a comprehensive review of the Town's master planning docurnents and policies that are implemented by this plan. E. Natural arad/or Geologic Hazard: Identification and rnitigation of natural and/or geologic hazards that affect the property on which the special developrnent district is proposed. Our Analysis There are no natural or gealagic hazards existing or mapped by the Town for this site. F. Design Features: Site plan, building design and location and apen space provisions designed to produce a£unctional development responsive and sensitive to natural features, vegetation and overall aesthetic quality of the community. oUr Anaivsis: Tl1e building at issue has been developed for mare than 20 years and therefore ~ there are na natural features on the site. The property is well landscaped. The proposed prcrject was designed ta reflect the more modern design of the existing ~ Vail Case,ade Residenees Redevel6pment 16 Maurie]lo 1'IaEiiiing Groeip, LLC • ~ ~ buildirig as well as other adjacent buildings, the climate, and quality demancied by the "I'own. Tlie project vvas also developed araund the gaals identified for SDD No. 4 and specifically Area A. The proposeci plan includes exterior improvernents to the building that will enhance the aesthetics of the a,rea for local residents and visitors. G. Traffic: A circulation system designed for both vehicles and pedestrians addressing on and off-site trafFic circ:ulation. Our Analysis: The propased groject does not change the access or circulatian systezn for the area. The proposed change in use will reduce the impact to traffic in the area. H. Landscaping: Functional and aesthetie landscaping and open space in order to optimize and preserve natural features, reereation, views and function. Our Analysis: Area A is eurrently developed with landscape iznprovements and npen spaces «=liich co€nply with the original approval far Cascade Village. The proposed ~ project will nat imgact landscape or apen space requirements. ~ I. Workable Plan: Phasing plan or subdivision plan that will maintain a workable, fu:nctional and efficient relationship throughout the development of the special development district. Our Analvsis: The projecr is proposed to be eleveloped in one phase. Building pez-mits for the interior and exterior renovations will be pursued. A condominium plat will be required prior to CO of the project. ~ ~ 1,'ail Cascade Residences Rzdevelopmcnt 17 Mauriello Planning Groupa LLC 4 ~ ~ V. Camprehensive Plan GoaIs and Direction The Town's master planning clocuments have been analyzed with respect to the pz-oposed redevelopment project. Below is a list of the Town's gdals and abjeetives that are cansistent with the proposed redevelogment plan. Iter7is listed in itulics are of particular impartance to the proposed redevelopment plan. A. Vail Larid Use Plan 1. General GrowthlDevcloprnent 1.1 V'ail slanuld eontinue to graw in d cantrolled environment, maintaining a balance between residential, cornmercirxl and recreational uses to serve bath the visitor and the permanent resiclent. 1.2 The quality o# the environment including air, water and ather natural resources should be protected as the Town grows. 1.3 The qudlity of cleuPlopment should be maintained and upgraded whenever possible. ~ 1,5 Commercial strip development of the Valley should be avoided. ~ 1.12 Vail should accomrrtodate most of the additional grozvth in existing developed areas (infi ll areas). 2. Skier/Tauarist Concerns 2.1 The conzmunity should emphasize its role as a destination resort while accomtnodating day visixors.. 2.2 The ski area owner, the business commtinity and the Town leaders should work together closely tfl make existing facilities and the Town functian more effectively. 3. Commercial 3.4 Cornrnereirzl growth shauld be conc•entrctted in existing corramercial areas tn aecorrzmodute both lneal and visitor needs. ~ ~ Vail Cascade Residences Recieveloprnent 18 VIauriello Planning Group, LLC s w ~ 5. Residential ~ . 5, 1 Additian.al residentidl grozvth should contanue to oceurprimarily in exzstarrg, pfatted rzreas and as approprictPe in new areas wbere high hazards clo not eacist. 5.4 Residentl.a1 grc}wth should keep pace wath tlae rnarket pluce ctemdnds,for a full range Uf hoarsing Pypes. b. Comrnunity Searvices b.l Services shauld keep paee with increased growth. 6.2 The Town of Vail should play a role in future developinent through balancing grawth with services. 5.3 Services shauld be adjustetl to keep pace with the needs of peak periods. ~ ~ ~ ~ 4'<iil Cascac{c ResidenCes Redeveloprrcent 19 Maurscllo Planninp Group, LLC =g = - , ~ .U~3 Attachment: C _ $1; ~ • ~i ~s ~~=~"~~~~~x~~ ` . ib- ~$14 -41 3 67~y:~'r I~ t~ a ~ . . Z'z 17 im ;a~ ~ u ~ ~ w ~ Z a0 U z ~tia o W °E ag o~ I ~\~S ~11 `~l cr~ ~d' N ~ 2 u4 nL~ } 4+ w Q ; ~~t a~ 5p<g~ i "0 1+ a~ ~ Z.~ ~5 U~ a° Q~~7 Z J ~ M~ =~~°no.N awl v~ F 4U D~~fa ,.u~n N V iy! yJ3eu3 W m1. WO 6 41,i T~ N M+ IV ~ ~y ~ I1, Q~~~,•~\ 22E2 u ~ i11, ~ f+N `1 rr VN ~ e rC r. ~ __e cY • •o V : ~ . ~qi T3 .~+~q. j U•. „y 7', ~ r l ~ L L Y) i 1 _ ~ I ° - d u J 7 w ~ • - ~ ~ ~~~a ~ i~ +~~k~~ ~ ~ f~~ ~ ~ i .:t~~ ~ j 1 ir'•~~ 1 l ~ ~ . ~ f ~ ~ ? ,,,,ry.,,, , ~4, ~ / t r,: r .,Y•J ~S . f ' ~ ~ t s `t 1 , ~tave _f.1:~~ i , a , r ~ ~ . ~ d . , .a_. i . . . r . R . . e ti ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ f- , . , i • „ ~ . ~ r~..~. _ (S'l~ . YItWVi 1. - • 3S ~ ~ J + ! ~ E J P ~ N ID Q J U ~ a ? J ~ a 4 ' . • i r '-r 5~~. I 3 ~a.r, a~~#,w ' ~ ~ 7-=b I ~ . ~ ~ i , ' / ~ i 1 , , . ' ~ I ~ 1 ~ ~ Fl j-±~`~" r~ . I>- ~ . ~ I ~ \ . J ~ I ~ . ~ • 1 . _ - . , { . - j ' ir I ~ ~ ~-1 . : - ~ ' w , r 1 . , l 3'`s3~,~ F . a~il~~ _ 7 • . ~ ~ f j ~ ~ ti ~ ~F x,,r k . _ ` :~.ff/ +f y `0. ~ I i .%F • ~ . d, ~ :I ~ ~ f ~r„a ~ % ' 7', ~ i - ,i , ° rl~ T^-"-----;•. ''f/~,~ t~7_~ ~ 3fJtl~ ~N0 ~Gt4SNQO jb : 11WVI ~ - y~- 'r s~~-j . . - ~ , ~ _ r w~r ~ a ~ a N a a`n o a ~ o N p N W ~y i! iL 3 r. 2 F F 7 ~ .r. J 0 J a, , J ' r;• LL Y Y Y Y Y Y Y I I I I I I I I I I I h I I I I I I ~ I I I I I I I I I I I I I 9 I I q JCDO ~ - . . - ~ ~ J I I I I C ~ 7 7 ~ o ~ ~ a I~ ~ I I I I ~ I I I 9 k I ~ ° r- --7~ Y ~ ~ I I I I a 4 I- r ~r ~ I~ ~ I, I~ I I Q ~ ~ - - ~ ~ f LL I ! I 'I E ~ a I I I I ~ 0 0 I I I I I I R . m ? I I I I I I ~ ~ I I I e~ ° I I ~ I I I I ~ m ~ ~ - ~ I I I I I I I Q I I m I ~ d I I I > ~ 11 I I ~ I I I I ~ Ln I I ~ I I I I _a._.- . _ - _ - ! I I ~ I I I p 3_ - . - Y Y Y Y Y I C I I I I I 1 I I I ~I I ~_e_+~_--1 , . , , ~ i - - 7 7. I ~ h 77. i I~~ ~ I I J ~ J_ a ~ ~ I I I 1 I I ah - - - - - - -j - - - - - ~ I I ~ I I I 4 ~ I I I I I I 4' I I I I I I I I I I I I QI, 0 I I I I I - I i i I I I I ~ i d I i i I I I I I I I i i I I I I I ~ ~ 7 7 7 T 7 7 I I I I I I I I I C I I - ~ 4 = I ~ ~ I ~ U (Dp I o~ ~ ~ O o ~ ~ I po~,~ I ' b II I ° I~, ~ ~ ~ I - - ~V ~ = I I u - o o - ~ Li ~ r--- i `i ~ o~ z~ 5 ~ I ~ I I _ . . _ , . - . . _ . . - . _ - . _ - - . - . . - - - - _ - . - _ . - - ~ 0 0 I I N I I i I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I T T T 7 7 7 1' _ ~ ~ - ~ I 1 2 I I L - - .e.. ~ - 0 O ~ I ~ I o ~ ° `--I 0 0 Q J~~ - y ~ ~ I ~ j o L > ~ -4)--~- ~ J I - i ~ a a i I m a ~ ~ ~ I 4 ~ ~ r m 00 flu n I ~ ~ ~ It ~ I o 1 ~ 4, _ - . - _ - - . - - m. - ~ 00 N ~ ? II ~ I I I I ~ I I r ~ ~ _ 0! ~ ry I.. ~ I I m ~ ~ ~ I I ~ ~ I I I I ~ ~ ~ I I I I a -Nr' 7 T T 7 7 7 Y Lil ~ - ~ ~ aie 3 ~ I I ~ ~ I I I I I I m ~ o I I m~ I~ I I I L~ ~ _4Q I ~ I~ ~ I I I I o- I ~ ~ Q ~ I Li I~ I I ° I W . ~o a I~~ I ! I 4 m ~ ~ II ~ I I I m ~7 N m I- ~ I I I I I ~ ~ ~ I I I I I _ _ ~ _ . - - - - I I I I I ~ 0 ~ I~ I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 1 I Y 7 7 7 Y Y Y f I f I I I I 1 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 1 I I ~ I I I I I I ~ ~ D LL ~ ~a ? w N ~ - (Di ~ a _ ~ _ Li r o II I j~ ~ ! I i l ~ ~ B ~ ~I ~ I I f ~ I ~ fI ~ I I I Ln: ~ f , I , ] I ` . Q ~ ~C I I I IY 4 L - ~ - I- ~ ~ a u~ Ir m I I I I o I I~ . I ; . . . ~ ~ - _ - ~ i ~ jl I I I I IODO ~ ~ ~I I I I I ~ _j_ -r .-0 I 'I I I I I I 4 . I ~ 1.: I f I I .w - _ s.._ -1. . I ~I I I E I I . . o - - - - ...p T T T T T T T I 1 I I I I a N 1 . - - 4 u ~ _ _ . . r.. . ~ ~ I z k" I u _a ;/3 I ~ ~ ~ A!. Y f' ~ ' p[ ~i. -'YJ ~ I ~ , - 17 C •,rv ;b j ~ , r J , f l :Y~ ! ~ d I Q ~ - < ~ 4 { 1~° I! ~ I 1 I a a k 1 ~ l I I I ~ I = f 1 I o I R^ I I il I I ~ ~ - I I I I ~ I~ I I I I I ! I 1 I I I I r Y r s Y r Y Y h I I i I I ! f I I 1 I I I l i I i I ~ I I ~ 1 I 6. I~ =T - - - . - . - . - . ; ~ ~ - - A. s ~ i { . i r-'. . ~ . . . . f A { S ~ ~ - ~ E , ',f •~fY{4~ _ . ~.y i Q, 1 - - . - - ~ - - . - ~f~,~_ - ~ 11 . , ~ r.. . ~ ~ ~ ~ , - . : _ L1 I I f m ~ :I- f I I { c ' ~ - . I I I . . ~ . . _ . _ . _k._.-'~'~-...,.~_.. ...w..~_.._.-.n._~..~_.~.....V . _ . _ . . - . _ I_ . . _ . . . , . . - _ ' _ _ - . 'ti ~ . i , ~ r r T T r r i I I I i I I I I 4 I I I . ~ I I I I I I I I I I ' I _ - _ . _ - . _ . _ ~ - I - - . - ~ - m-~ E - - ~ . . - - ~ - r ~ I ~t 1~ I P ~ OL , , ~ 1~---=='^--,--- . , _ - ; . . : ; ~ ^ _ •f} . . I'~"'\ ~j - . ' ~ 7-7- _ ~1 - ~ . . . . ' . . 3 ' . ~ . . . ~ I . i ~ , ~ ~ , ~ i ~ si i _ . , . - . . - . . - . _ _ . . - . ~ : k _ ~..JL.•-~ :i -y . 3 - _ ' { ,s, - . . C3 0 _ _ . _ _ . . , ~ - - E ' ~n1 u ~ ~a R 1~ J 9i m "r I I 1 ~ ° I I ~ I' I I 1 I I I 6 I I ! I I I I I I ! I j%Y~ ~ ~l `f " i ~ ~ ~t' 4 1 E c„~_i ~ y ~i ~ ~ i INt r } sk { m--1 ~ ~ _ , - 0 - ~ ~ ~l ~Y~ ~1 f o - , a 1 , ~ - ~ I - - I I I I I i I I I I I I I I I I I I I 9 I I I I I I I I I ' I Z~ 9 I I - ~ 4 73 LO ` ~l ~ I o~? -I - - I - - -0 ~ ~ ~ ? ~ ' ~ ` I I I ~ i-i- - ~ a o - v ~ ~ f ~ - I i i ; . ~ I~I ~ I ~ - °.~o I~ s ~ I I I Q ~ . _ f} y~ I " x~ 4 - I~~ I I I I I c ~ I I I I I m I I i I ~ 0 I I I I - I P I 1 I I I I ! I i I I I I I I I I 7 7 T T 7 'T' Y I ~ ! 1 I I I I I ~ I I 1 ! _j ~ I I i I I f 9 I~~ Eo I i I 4I I~ ~T~ m ~ I I I ~ II- - - I I I Q ,IF: o I~ ~I ~I I I I I = - ! ~ ; I J I. - ~ . ~ . - . . - . . - . . - . . - . . ~ . . - I. . - . . I . _ _ - I. - . . ~ O - ~ Ir - x u ~ . _ . . _ ? ~~u- LJ W fl i~~ - -~I-1 II m I I ' I I Q II II ~ ~ . I I I _ IL.- Ij m li ° ~ ~l I I I I Q ~ I ~ l I I I f ~ . ~ I i I I f I . ~ I f~ I I I P f ~ I ~ I I I ~ I I I a I I I I I ! I I I i I Q ` C , . . . . ui ,.L- 4 V~~Q.C7C L tCO~O~1EG~yOM ip~ 'J S LL D.~ .~p~~.C[O~CC]~oMNC~ e0l~ ~ ? 17m rli Q { .OC~- ~ ~IL-LLCO ~Q ~ 3rt OC 0.-qlw a M15 E1 ro CdD~.~ ~ C"~ ttl~^Ji9 ~ fCM1NNp ¢C N C'V CCc pm~C~0D50.ylLVWC ~ roS N~ ~ a t9C~.>~ s6 16y}t]~ O C ~Eh C ~.E Q~ SV a OL~~.^ ~ faV 0}~2 ~ aca w ~ o w~c~~ai~~ c~ E~ryOHw~~~cE Wm `m 6°^Lo.ca o¢`* ooa'~~n a mc~ 'lc o rn~ a.',r~ ,~m 1ii vum~~~ ow$ L 3cs~~~vi° L w~ m o a ywm Ew =,o•°'~ ~ .o^ 2 E~+i m~ ~ m~~ a.~..~ pc p m0NY=S-a~~oaJH ¢ mo-n°z0m3 ~d r.. F~Eno`~1° cinNt~' arv,~ 30 Z 0 - S o 2,raNg.mcT awc ¢ O Cr~-c~4mc a~ E w i ~qQ (3 ~LL ru ea Z > Em.c ~ ~ ~v~_..-4 awo`~''~ a U~ c0 =n~ o~nm ~=m2mcs~"`°mc-Wa mm o` 0 ~?~~ww cm~Sa$o U;,c~ c=u,~ ~i Z~ ~ce -.Tirnm ~ m~`c~a06a~iY'm w- Eo~aGs. `0 2m~m~g~ ~~tAOC' i¢t ~ O a O~ 2c a`°i uCFi o9-t~~ ~as~>9 ~7 b o"c`mFn O gmm°'i.5m~mm4~ z8m Q~ U C 1U U mlil~ m~a~ .a ~~3 U c ~mm ~E~eQ ~ mc = J. } H H ro ~ ~ U 'C3 C3 2'7 ~ , (J7V~ i?! D D'. r' ~ d~ O LZo c u n rr m ~ ~ Cu u fj N m ~ W ~ j4~ ~~-C U+ Ql ~ Qm al !¢-~i Z~_ ~a 3 mo..q -[pm ..ZZ y~n3cS t~~ ui~ro m ..c c rT,'-ooy~,mU'~~"c d rJ W ) 'O,~ L3~ ~ 2U [Wi3yZy1 ~ ~rn a o ~ori ~ aC7 -~~~E-~N` ZO ~a m °o~ ca cm..2~ mo a--r~ Z ~a Z2 z OCj l'Wtm ~+m ~ ~ rn aaraJO .~Q~u~~mo~~E a 2~pg ~o¢gmmo~qa c~~ ao°c~~ ~~~^¢m_ 8ma~.t~o .~tiL0o Wa: aO O~ 2~ 37~ om W a~~L4L~¢d4~ ¢F~Y};o0 0r~n~'tl~eaQ2 COp_ flQd4~ daU°~~~q0 aSm ¢o.~~@Z qnlimUp mo~ ~ w ww ~v. cnc c~~ m°~w w.ti~g c mwa~~'~ sU °i'3° 4au~..4m ¢~a.. ~ _ ~mo+~~ma~ 7EE w'~Z m_ ~mc m~ ma~NC JJ z'~ ~nm. ~ fJ mm ~ o ~ Oc M:~ ~¢mYU~ Q1 ~ o.`E 4l d~ ~ E Y`mr~~cn~~ '~a yrna tTl O rs+iUriO a 2 m U aE 22 h~~nr ~o Ei c~ ~ m3 ~ C~'9m10ET' m~.~_mEL viw~e-d-Ctm vm CLF- xao ,C7 EQ v~mm._u~vctll md aN v, ffi IO axill G~.i F.~'+ O Q ~ leT a Vj ~ O ~ Z! ~ 7 • ~ +`l'J m J i y ~ cy„' -L9 :'0 ~ C-4 ~ ~ ~ G "~3 ~ c~~' 'i7 ~ ~ W • a ~ ~ 7G 41 ~ W ~ a`n ra[J ~ O N a \ a~3 t a 4~~ ~ y ~ 3 .~c v o q ~ ~ ~ • ~ ? ° 4" Y 0 ~O L (U > 3-1 C~-ri• LM G> t~c3 G.. C O `~t T3 cd rn 7:; , G G l7 ~::s ~ ~ O ~ ~ 3 rl q~j `c~°' ~ • V a+ O ^e~ ~"Gp aN.u ~ F N L. cd 'd ~ C„ y c.y > +`i G~.S • ~ C]. ~ ~ 'G O 's3 b tQ - CL+ ~ 'cl ~ ~ O CIa ~ cs y 'b eG ~ a~ ~ d3 T ~ dq Cd cd O 'G cd ^ y ~ ~ C~' W' ,y~ vp ~ w~~ Q C0 a+~ v ~ ~ 4 ~ ~ y ••i 0-4 _ V cd~ o ~ ~ a ~ • ~ '~l i~ E'° rn C y C~~~,q u O4 O ~ ~ y dy IL 0~ N ` ~ i E ct ° ~ C~ .~0: Y' ° ~ ~ ~ ~ O a V u a• ~ c~i -t~ s a°~ ~ ~ ZV , ° u ~ ~ a~Aoiw c 10 ~ ~ ~ ° ~ ~ ~ ~ ro r o cd ~ u Q (U C) e~C = ar r cd 'O ~n ~v S7 C/1 N Town Code, end a final rpvlew ol a aandit4anel use ~ permii, pursuan[ tc. Seciion 12-71 Pcrmitted anci Contlitional Uses; Basemenl or Garden Level, and i 12-7H-3, Permitted and Candil'GOnal Uscs; Fust FIO4r on Sdreet LevBl, Vail Town Codr.; and linal review of architeclural rSeviations, pursuant lo Sec- tion 6.3.3.A. Heview CriterRa 1oa Devifl6ons [othe Architectural Desfgn Gwdelines lor New Devel- opment, Llonshead Retleveiapment Masser Plen, to allew inr the tlevelopment al 107 mulm- farnily re5idenlfal dvdelling units, lucatetl al 728West Lionshead CirClerLot 2. West 4ay SuYrdivi- sion, and spttirrg ioeth tletails in regard thereta. qppiicant: Vail Ctsrp., represerned by &aun Assxiffies. Inc. Ptanner: Werren Camphell ACTION: MOT}pN: SECOND: VOTE' 7. A request tor a final recommendati~on to the Vai1 7o1vn Council ot a major amendment eo SpBCiel D2velopment Districl NO. 4, Cascade Vf6- lage, pursuanS to Section 12-9A-10. Amendmenl Procecures. Vail Town Cotle, to allow for additian- . af tlwefling unRS and oiiice uses in SDD M1Va. 4, h3cated at 1310 Westhaven DrivelCascatle ViI'ia{e. and setting Forlh tl2tail5 In regard thproEa. kppf;eant: Cascade WNiage Theaarss, Inc., reRresented hy MauriellL) Planiiing Graup, I,.L,C Ptanner. Man Gertnett AC7fON: MOIION: SEGOND: VOTE: 8. A reyuesL tor a Ilnal recommcndatien ~ So {he Vail Town CowSCid of a zone tliskric# boun- dary amentlment, pursuarn to Seciion 12-3-7, Amendment, Vai, Town Code, ta rczone Lots 1-3, Vail das Sehonc Fifing 1. Lot 1; and Vail das Schone Fiiing 3 from the Conmerciaf Core 3 i zane districl to the Pu41ic Acc:ommodalFon (PA) zone disiricl, located at 2211 Norlh Frcmtage --qoa.&'LOis 1-3. Vail das Scf,ane fE;ng 1 and 3, and sizl!;n7 forih detai€s in regarcl theretn. App fcan9: VanqUiSh Vaii I LLC. represan[ed by Bharat Bh2ktfl - PEanner: Matl Gennetl ACTION: Ta61ed to Jaauery 9. 2006 MOTION: SECOND: VOiTE: g_ A request ior final review of a tinal pfaL pursuFn; ^.oChapter 13-4, Minor Subdivisions, ~ Vail Trnvo C*tle, to allow tar tne subd+vision of the Conference Cenler davelapmenl s+te; linal re- vim, of a conditionaV use permil, pur5varn W SEC- - tian 12-8C-3. Ganaitional Uses. Vail Town Gxle. to allow ior a pubiiC Conven4qn IaCiiity end pubMC parkong facili;ioS and siructures: anp Tinal review ol -chneatural deviations, pursuant to Section , _.3.3.A, Review C: iieria tqr Deviaiions to the Archiieciural design Guideunes ior New Develop- menL Lrdnshead RedeveVopmenl INasker Plan, to allow for a pub9ic conwenlion facAity and putNic parkmg faci9ities and str.iciures. GacateG at 395 EaSt Lionshead Circle,' Lo[ 1, glock 2. Vaii Lions- tiead Filing 7. Lo1 3ant1 5, BloCk 1, Vsil L:ionsheed Filing 2, and seitlng iorth details it) regflrd Ihereto. Applican[. Town af l, represen!ad 6y Pylman & Associates. Inc.. Planner, (3ill Gibsr,n ACTISJN: WITIiDRAWN 10. A request for a coreection to the Vail Land Use Plan lo designate ttxe Llonshead Rade- velopment Masler Ran Area, .mtl setikng forth cetails in regard lhereto. ' Appficant: Town of Va41 Planner: Bfll Gi6son AGT10N: WITHDRAWN 1 t Approval of €7ctOher 24. 2065 minules MpTION: SECONO; VOTE: 72. lnformation Update 13. AdjaurnmertC A60TiQN: BECOND: VOTE: The appiica?9ons and information aboui the propos- aES are avgiiabie for pw6lic icispection duriny regu- 3ar oNice nouvs at the Yawn caf Vail Commundy D~ velopment DepartmeM. 75 Sovtt~ Fran4ape Road. The oublie is invi3ed to aRenc# the projecl onente- tion and the site visits that precetle the publie hear- ing in the Town of Vell Community Devefopmeni Oepartment. P{ease ca{I (970) 479-2138 for adtl6- Goeral inlornl8tion Sign langcage interpretation is availaiole upon re~ quest with 24-he,tu noliFicatidn. Please call 1970479-2358, Tel?phone inr the Hearlnq Imnaire:d, to. 6nformation. ~ Community DevelDpmtnt DeparLmenQ Pu64ishr,d Noventber 1 I, 2005, in Ihe Vaiq Daily. cszs,os2ay