The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About2009-0323 PEC,• �au�voFV�u � MEMBERS PRESENT PLANNING AND ENVIRONMENTAL COMMISSION March 23, 2009 1:OOpm TOWN COUNCIL CHAMBERS / PUBLIC WELCOME 75 S. Frontage Road - Vail, Colorado, 81657 Site Visits: No Site Visits MEMBERS ABSENT 45 minutes A request for a final recommendation to the Vail Town Council for the establishment of a new special development district, pursuant to Article 12-9A, Special Development (SDD) District, Vail Town Code, located at 303 Gore Creek Drive, Units 7 through14 (Vail Rowhouses)/Lots 7 through 13, Block 5, Vail Village Filing 1, and setting forth details in regard thereto. (PEC080074) Applicant: Christopher Galvin, represented by K.H. Webb Architects Planner: Bill Gibson ACTION: MOTION: SECOND: VOTE: 45 minutes 2. A request for a final recommendation to the Vail Town Council for prescribed regulations amendments to Title 11, Sign Regulations, Vail Town Code, pursuant to Section 11-3-3, Prescribed Regulations Amendment, Vail Town Code, to establish regulations for building wrap signs within the Town of Vail, and setting forth details in regard thereto. (PEC090006) Applicant: Vail Valley Foundation Planner: Rachel Friede ACTION: MOTION: SECOND: VOTE: 30 minutes 3. A request for a final review of a preliminary plan for a major subdivision, pursuant to Chapter 13- 3, Major Subdivision, Vail Town Code, to allow for the creation of two lots for the redevelopment of the properties known as "Ever Vail" (West Lionshead), located at 862, 923, 934, 953, and 1031 South Frontage Road West, and the South Frontage Road West right-of-way/Unplatted (a complete legal description is available for inspection at the Town of Vail Community Development Department), and setting forth details in regard thereto. (PEC080062) Applicant: Vail Resorts, represented by Mauriello Planning Group, LLC Planner: Warren Campbell/George Ruther ACTION: MOTION: SECOND: VOTE: 45 minutes 4. A request for a work session to discuss the prescribed regulations amendments to Title 11, Sign Regulations, Vail Town Code, pursuant to Section 11-3-3, Prescribed Regulations Amendment, Page 1 Vail Town Code, to allow for housekeeping, clarification and policy shifts for signage within the Town of Vail, and setting forth details in regard thereto. (PEC090007) Applicant: Town of Vail Planner: Rachel Friede ACTION: MOTION: SECOND: VOTE: 5. A request for a work session to discuss the adoption of amendments to the Master Plan, and setting forth details in regard thereto. (PEC090005) Applicant: Town of Vail, represented by Tom Kassmel Planner: Bill Gibson ACTION: MOTION: SECOND: VOTE: 45 minutes Vail Transportation 5 Minutes 6. A request for a final review of a major exterior alteration, pursuant to Section 12-7H-7, Exterior Alterations or Modifications; and requests for conditional use permits, pursuant to Section 12-7H- 2, Permitted and Conditional Uses, Basement or Garden Level; Section 12-7H-3, Permitted and Conditional Uses, First Floor or Street Level; 12-7H-4, Permitted and Conditional Uses; Second Floor and Above, Vail Town Code, to allow for the redevelopment of the Evergreen Lodge, with dwelling units, accommodation units, and conference facilities and meeting rooms on the basement or garden level, multi-family dwelling units, accommodation units and conference facilities and meetings rooms on the first floor or street level, and a fractional fee club on the second floor and above, located at 250 South Frontage Road West/Lot 2, Block 1, Vail Lionshead Filing 2, and setting forth details in regard thereto. (PEC080033, PEC080072) Applicant: HCT Development, represented by TJ Brink Planner: Rachel Friede ACTION: Table to May 11, 2009 MOTION: SECOND: VOTE: 7. Approval of March 9, 2009 minutes MOTION: SECOND: VOTE: 8. Information Update 9. Adjournment MOTION: SECOND: VOTE: The applications and information about the proposals are available for public inspection during regular office hours at the Town of Vail Community Development Department, 75 South Frontage Road. The public is invited to attend the project orientation and the site visits that precede the public hearing in the Town of Vail Community Development Department. Please call (970) 479-2138 for additional information. Sign language interpretation is available upon request with 24-hour notification. Please call (970) 479-2356, Telephone for the Hearing Impaired, for information. Community Development Department Published March 20, 2009, in the Vail Daily. Page 2 MEMORANDUM TO: Planning and Environmental Commission FROM: Community Development Department DATE: March 23, 2009 SUBJECT: A request for a final recommendation to the Vail Town Council for the establishment of a new special development district, pursuant to Article 12-9A, Special Development (SDD) District, Vail Town Code, located at 303 Gore Creek Drive, Units 7 through 13 (Vail Rowhouses)/Lots 7 through 13, Block 5, Vail Village Filing 1, and setting forth details in regard thereto. (PEC080074) Applicant: Christopher Galvin, represented by K.H. Webb Architects and Mauriello Planning Group Planner: Bill Gibson The applicant has requested that this item be tabled until April 13, 2009 meeting. There is no memo to review at this time. TO FROM DAT E: MEMORANDUM Planning and Environmental Commission Community Development Department March 23, 2009 SUBJECT: A request for a final recommendation to the Vail Town Council for prescribed regulations amendments to Title 11, Sign Regulations, Vail Town Code, pursuant to Section 11-3-3, Prescribed Regulations Amendment, Vail Town Code, to establish regulations for building wrap signs within the Town of Vail, and setting forth details in regard thereto. (PEC090006) L� Applicant: Vail Valley Foundation Planner: Rachel Friede SU M MARY The applicant, the Vail Valley Foundation, is requesting a final recommendation to the Vail Town Council for prescribed regulations amendments to Title 11, Sign Regulations, Vail Town Code, pursuant to Section 11-3-3, Prescribed Regulations Amendment, Vail Town Code, to establish regulations for temporary building banner signs within the Town of Vail. Based upon Staff's review of the criteria outlined in Sectior the evidence and testimony presented, the Communit� recommends the Commission forwards a recommendatic criteria and findings noted in Section V of this memorandum building banner sign that complies with the proposed reference (see Attachment A). II. DESCRIPTION OF REQUEST V of this memorandum and Development Department �n of denial, subject to the A rendering of a temporary regulations is attached for The applicant is requesting permission to erect a temporary building banner sign on the exterior of the Four Seasons, which is currently under construction, in order to advertise community events, specifically the Vail Dance Festival. Currently, the Vail Town Code lacks any regulations on temporary building banner signs, which by default, deems them prohibited. In order to facilitate this request, the applicant is proposing prescribed regulations amendments to Title 11, Vail Town Code that will allow temporary building banner signs within the Town. The proposed regulation amendments are as follows (text to be deleted is in cfriliofHrni�rrH text that is to be added is bold italics): 11-2-1: Definitions: Sign, Temporary Building Banner: A"banner-type" display attached to a building under construction that is composed of graphics and text elements to advertise community events Section 11-7-15, Temporary Building Banner Signs A. Purpose: The purpose of this section is to provide regulations for temporary building banner signs, which may be applied to buildings undergoing a major exterior alteration to provide advertisement for community events that have a Town of Vail Special Events Permit and/or receive sponsorship from the Town of Vail Special Events Committee B. Applicability: Temporary building banner signs may be al/owed on buildings with a valid building permit for a major exterior alteration in commercial and business districts, as listed in Section 12-7, Vail Town Code, to advertise community events that have a Town of Vail Special Events Permit and/or receive sponsorship from the Town of Vail Special Events Committee. C. Number: Two (2) temporary building banner signs per development site. D. Size: The total combined size of the temporary building banner signs, measured by the size of the banner or by the area of graphics and text superimposed on an exterior weatherization barrier, shall not exceed 1500 square feet per development site. The maximum size of graphics and text associated with the building on which the sign is affixed shall not exceed the allowable size of the building identification sign, as outlined in 11-6-4. The combined area of text associated with the community event and graphics and text associated with sponsors of the community event shall not exceed 30% of the area of each sign. E. Content: The temporary building banner sign may only include the following: 1. Graphics and text associated with community event, including one (1) website address and one (1) contact phone number 2. Graphics and text associated with sponsors of the community event 3. Graphics and text associated with the building in which the sign is affixed, which shall not include any phone number or website F. Location: Temporary building banner signs shall be affixed parallel to the building fa�ade and attached to scaffolding, an exterior weatherization barrier, or to the exterior of the building. Temporary building banner signs shall not extend above the roofline of the building. G. Duration: The sign may be erected only while the building has an active building permit for a major exterior a/teration. Temporary building banner signs sha/l be removed within 14 business days of the completion of the advertised community event. H. Material: The temporary building banner sign shall be fire retardant material. Lighting: No lighting shall be allowed. Construction lighting shall not be directed to illuminate the temporary building banner signs. � III. APPLICABLE DOCUMENTS T/TLE 11: S/GN REGULAT/ONS (in part) 11-1-2: PURPOSE: A. Genera/ Purpose: These regulations are enacted for the purpose of promoting the hea/th, safety, mora/s, and general we/fare of the town of Vail and to promote the coordinated and harmonious design and placement of signs in the town in a manner that will conserve and enhance its natura/ environment and its established character as a resort and residential community of the highest quality. B. Specific Purpose: These regulations are intended to achieve the following specific purposes: 1. To describe and enab/e the fair and consistent enforcement of signs in the town of Vail. 2. To encourage the establishment of well designed, creative signs that enhance the unique character of Vail's village atmosphere. 3. To preserve a successful and high quality business environment that is aided by signs that identify, direct, and inform. 4. To aid in providing for the growth of an orderly, safe, beautiful, and viab/e community. 11-5-2: DES/GN GUIDEL/NES: Any sign erected within the town of Vail should: A. Be consistent with the sca/e and architecture already present in the town: Sign location, configuration, design, and size should be aesthetically harmonious with the mountain setting and the alpine village atmosphere of the town. B. Be compatible with the placement of surrounding signs: Similar signs should not be placed within close proximity of each other, but should instead incorporate variety and visual interest within the "view corridor" that they are placed. The staff shall review all proposed signs in the context of adjacent signage to verify that the sign is appropriately placed. 11-5-3: DES/GN STANDARDS: Any sign erected within the town of Vail shall conform to the following standards: A. Compatibility: Signs shall be visually compatible with the size of surrounding structures and other signage and shall not visually dominate the structure or business to which they be/ong. The staff shall review all proposed signs in the context of adjacent signage to verify that the sign is appropriately sized. 11-9-2: PROH/B/TED S/GNS: The following signs are prohibited within the town of Vail: H. Any sign or structure that obstructs ingress to or egress from a required exitway, that obstructs the view of vehicular traffic entering or exiting a public roadway, or that creates an unsafe distraction for motor vehicle operators; J. Any off premises sign that is not otherwise regulated by this tit/e; K. All billboards; L. Pennants, banners, and bunting that are not associated with a specia/ event permit; V. REVIEW CRITERIA The extent to which the text amendment furthers the general and specific purposes of the Sign Regulations; and Staff believes that the text amendments do not further the general and specific purposes of the Sign Regulations because the temporary building banner signage is vastly larger in size than any other currently allowed signage. Temporary building banner signs will foster a feeling of an urban environment and will not fit into the existing signage, which is contrary to the general purpose to "promote the coordinated and harmonious design and placement of signs in the town in a manner that will conserve and enhance its natura/ environment and its established character as a resort and residential community of the highest quality." This proposed shift in Vail's character also does not further the specific purpose of encouraging "the establishment of well designed, creative signs that enhance the unique character of Vail's village atmosphere." Staff does believe that the specific purpose of "preserving a successful and high quality business environment that is aided by signs that identify, direct, and form" is furthered by the text amendments because the temporary building banner signs will promote community events that will provide economic stimulus to the Town. 2. The extent to which the text amendment would better implement and better achieve the applicable elements of the adopted goals, objectives, and policies outlined in the Vail Comprehensive Plan and is compatible with the development objectives of the Town; and Because of the sheer size and character of temporary building banner signs, Staff believes these proposed amendments will not better implement and achieve the adopted goals, objectives and policies of the Town's Development Standards and Comprehensive Plan. The Vail Village Master Plan Goal #1 is "Encourage high quality redeve/opment while preserving unique architectura/ sca/e of the village in order to sustain its sense of community and identity." Similarly, the Lionshead Redevelopment Master Plan states that "Lionshead can and should be renewed and redeve/oped to become a warmer, more vibrant environment for guests and residents. Lionshead needs an appealing and coherent identity, a sense of place, a personality, a purpose, and an improved aesthetic character." The temporary building banner signs do further the economic development and vitality goals within the portions of the Comprehensive Plan, including Goal #2 of the Vail Village Master Plan, "To foster a strong tourist industry and promote year-round economic hea/th and viability for the village and for the community as a who/e. " However, there are other forums for promoting economic health that do not conflict with other goals. 3. The extent to which the text amendment demonstrates how conditions have substantially changed since the adoption of the subject regulation and how the existing regulation is no longer appropriate or is inapplicable; and Because of the shift in economic conditions, the Vail Valley Foundation is looking for a new way to market their events to the community. While this may be one change in 4 condition that could help justify a shift in acceptable signage within the Town of Vail, the community has continued to support the protection of the unique character of Vail. Staff believes that conditions have not changed enough to warrant such a major shift in sign policy. 4. The extent to which the text amendment provides a harmonious, convenient, workable relationship among land use regulations consistent with municipal development objectives. There are numerous regulations in Title 11 that conflict with the concept of temporary building banner signs. Because the temporary building banner signs are so large and will hang much higher as compared to currently allowed signage within the Town, the proposed regulations conflict with Section 11-5-2, Design Guidelines, which recommends that signs within the Town "be consistent with the sca/e and architecture already present in the town" and "be compatible with the placement of surrounding signs. Allowing temporary building banner signs of 1500 sq ft on the exterior of a building is also in conflict with Section 11-5-3, Design Standards, which requires that all signs in the Town "shall not visually dominate the structure or business to which they be/ong. " Temporary building banner signs by nature will serve as temporary billboards to promote an event from an off-site location. These large signs will be visible from I- 70, and may become a distraction for drivers. For these reasons, the proposed text amendments are in conflict with Section 11-9-2, Prohibited Signs, which outlines the prohibition of off-site advertising and billboards, and bans any sign that "creates an unsafe distraction for motor vehicle operators. " 5. Such other factors and criteria the Commission and/or Council deem applicable to the proposed text amendment. VI. STAFF RECOMMENDATION The Community Development Department recommends the Planning and Environmental Commission forwards a recommendation of denial to the Vail Town Council for prescribed regulations amendments, pursuant to Section 11-3-3, Prescribed Regulation Amendment, Vail Town Code, to amend Title 11, Sign Regulations, Vail Town Code, to establish regulations for temporary building banner signs within the Town of Vail, and setting forth details in regard thereto. Should the Planning and Environmental Commission choose to forward a recommendation of denial of this request, the Community Development Department recommends the Commission pass the following motion: "Based upon the review of the criteria outlined in Section V of Staff's March 23, 2009, memorandum and the evidence and testimony presented, the P/anning and Environmenta/ Commission forwards a recommendation of denia/ to the Vail Town Council, pursuant to Section 11-3-1 C, Amendments, Vail Town Code, to amend Tit/e 11, Sign Regulations, Vail Town Code, to establish regulations for temporary building banner signs within the Town of Vail, and setting forth details in regard thereto. " Should the Planning and Environmental Commission choose to forward a recommendation of approval to the Vail Town Council for the proposed text amendment, the Community Development Department recommends the Commission makes the following motion: "Based upon the review of the criteria outlined in Section V of Staff's March 23, 2009, memorandum and the evidence and testimony presented, the P/anning and Environmenta/ Commission forwards a recommendation of approva/ to the Vail Town Council, pursuant to Section 11-3-1 C, Amendments, Vail Town Code, to amend Tit/e 11, Sign Regulations, Vail Town Code, to establish regulations for temporary building banner signs within the Town of Vail, and setting forth details in regard thereto, with the following findings: 2 3 That the amendment is consistent with the applicab/e e/ements of the adopted goa/s, objectives and policies outlined in the Vail Comprehensive P/an and is compatible with the deve/opment objectives of the Town; and That the amendment furthers the genera/ and specific purposes of the Sign Regulations outlined in Section 11-1-2, Purpose, Vail Town Code; and That the amendment promotes the hea/th, safety, mora/s, and general welfare of the Town and promotes the coordinated and harmonious deve/opment of the Town in a manner that conserves and enhances its natura/ environment and its established character as a resort and residential community of the highest quality. " VII. ATTACHMENTS 1. Rendering of Temporary building banner Sign on The Four Seasons 6 MEMORANDUM TO: Planning and Environmental Commission FROM: Community Development Department DATE: March 23, 2009 SUBJECT: A request for a work session for a review of a preliminary plan for a major subdivision, pursuant to Chapter 13-3, Major Subdivision, Vail Town Code, to allow for the creation of two lots for the redevelopment of the properties known as "Ever Vail" (West Lionshead), located at 862, 923, 934, 953, and 1031 South Frontage Road West, and the South Frontage Road West right- of-way/Unplatted (a complete legal description is available for inspection at the Town of Vail Community Development Department), and setting forth details in regard thereto. (PEC080062) Applicant: Vail Resorts Development Company, represented by Thomas Miller Planner: Warren Campbell I. SUMMARY The applicant, Vail Resorts Development Company, represented by Thomas Miller, is requesting final approval of limited elements of a preliminary plan for a major subdivision, pursuant to Chapter 13-3, Major Subdivision, Vail Town Code, to allow for the establishment of the width of the Colorado Department of Transportation (CDOT) right-of-way containing the relocated South Frontage Road, the location of the 20-foot right-of-way (either CDOT or TOV not determined at this time), and a the location of a 3-foot signage, lighting, and sidewalk easement for the eventual development of a final plat for Ever Vail, located at 862, 923, 934, 953, 1031 South Frontage Road West, and the South Frontage Road West right-of-way/Unplatted (a complete legal description is available for inspection at the Town of Vail Community Development Department). Furthermore, in conjunction with approving the listed elements of the preliminary plan the Planning and Environmental Commission is being asked to approve the design and configuration of the relocated South Frontage Road. Staff is recommending that the Planning and Environmental Commission approves, with conditions, these parameters of the preliminary plan and the proposed relocated South Frontage Road design and configuration subject to the findings and conditions outlined in Section VI II of this memorandum. II. DESCRIPTION OF REQUEST The applicant, Vail Resorts Development Company, represented by Thomas Miller, has participated in several work session meetings with the Town of Vail Planning and Environmental Commission to discuss the relocation of the South Frontage Road. The relocation of the South Frontage Road is an importance first step in the review of the Ever Vail project. Through the work sessions many aspects of the proposed relocation of the South Frontage Road were discussed such as retaining walls, snow storage, landscaping, right-of-way width, easements, roundabout design and capacity, etc. The Planning and Environmental Commission is solely being asked to respond to a limited scope with regard to the proposed preliminary plat at this hearing. This portion of the preliminary plan, if approved would result in the establishment of the width of the CDOT right-of-way containing the relocated South Frontage Road, the location of the 20-foot right-of-way(either CDOT or TOV not determined at this time), and a the location of a 3-foot signage, lighting, and sidewalk easement for the eventual development of a final plat for Ever Vail. Furthermore, in conjunction with approving the listed elements of the preliminary plan the Planning and Environmental Commission is being asked to approve the design and configuration of the relocated South Frontage Road. A vicinity map of the development site and surrounding area has been attached for reference. (Attachment A). A copy of the proposed preliminary plan (Attachment B), the proposed relocated South Frontage Road Option 15 with Simba Run (Attachment C), and a set of cross-sections (Attachment D) are attached for reference. III. BACKGROUND On February 6, 2007, the Vail Town Council adopted Resolution No. 4, Series of 2007, which implemented the changes to the Lionshead Redevelopment Master Plan regarding West Lionshead and the area now called Ever Vail. On January 26, 2009, the Planning and Environmental Commission held a work session at which a revised Frontage Road option was presented to both staff and the Commission which had not been previously shown. The general consensus was that the Frontage Road was moving in the direction of addressing the concerns of the Commission. On February 17, 2009, the Town Council directed staff and the applicant to proceed forward with the design of the South Frontage Road which contained certain improvements within a 20-foot Town of vail right-of-way. On February 18, 2009, the Design Review Board conceptually reviewed the proposed South Frontage Road and found the concepts presented for the proposed retaining wall and landscaping associated with the relocated South Frontage Road to be aesthetically acceptable with further review at a latter date. On March 9, 2009, the Planning and Environmental Commission tabled this application due to concerns expressed by the applicant with regard to the condition recommended by staff with regard to the future ability to shore under what was being proposed as a 20-foot Town of Vail right-of-way. IV. ROLES OF REVIEWING BOARDS Planning and Environmental Commission: Action: The Planning and Environmental Commission is responsible for final approval, approval with conditions, or denial of a preliminary plan for a major subdivision. Town Council: The Town Council is the final decision making authority for a major subdivision and the adoption of easements between a private property owner and the Town. Final actions of Design Review Board or Planning and Environmental Commission maybe appealed to the Town Council or by the Town Council. Town Council evaluates whether or not the Planning and Environmental Commission or Design Review Board erred with approvals or denials and can uphold, uphold with modifications, or overturn the board's decision. V. APPLICABLE PLANNING DOCUMENTS Town of Vail Zoninq Code: Title 13: Subdivision Regulations (partial) 13-2-2 Definitions PRELIMINARY PLAN: The preliminary drawings described in these regulations indicating the proposed manner or layout of the subdivision to be submitted to the planning and environmental commission for approval. SUBDIVIS/ON OR SUBDIVIDED LAND: A. Meaning: 1. A tract of /and which is divided into two (2) or more /ots, tracts, parce/s, sites, separate interests (including /easeho/d interests), interests in common, or other division for the purpose, whether immediate or future, of transfer of ownership, or for building or other deve/opment, or for street use by reference to such subdivision or recorded plat thereof,� or 2. A tract of /and including /and to be used for condominiums, timeshare units, or fractional fee club units; or 3. A house, condominium, apartment or other dwelling unit which is divided into two (2) or more separate interests through division of the fee or tit/e thereto, whether by conveyance, license, lease, contract for sa/e or any other method of disposition. 13-3 Major Subdivisions (in part) 13-3-3, Preliminary Plan A. Preliminary Presentation To P/anning And Environmenta/ Commission: Consideration of a major subdivision proposa/ shall be formally considered with a preliminary plan presentation by the subdivider and/or his/her representative(s) to the planning and environmental commission at a regularly scheduled meeting. This preliminary presentation shall be a public hearing according to section 12-3-6 of this code. The presentation shall ref/ect the proposed deve/opment for an entire same ownership and shall indicate all adjacent /ands owned or under option to the subdivider at the time of subdivision. B. Submitta/ Requirements: At /east thirty (30) days prior to the preliminary plan presentation to the planning and environmental commission, the subdivider shall submit at a sca/e of one inch equa/s one hundred feet (1 " = 100) orlarger, twelve (12) copies of each of the following (exceptions can be granted on individual items by the director of public works or the administrator) to the department of community deve/opment: 1. The environmental impact report required. 2. A topographic survey with a north arrow, graphic sca/e, dimensioned to nearest foot prepared by a Co/orado registered /and surveyor, shall be submitted including the following information: a. Boundary lines. b. Preliminary proposed /ots and blocks with numbers and sizes. c. Easements: location, width and purpose. d. Proposed streets, their widths of right of way and pavement, approximate grades in percentage and center line radii of curves; areas with cuts and fills exceeding six feet (6) and extent thereof. e. Utilities on and adjacent to the tract, including their type, location, size and invert e/evations of sanitary sewers, storm drainage facilities and water mains. If utilities are not found on the tract, distance to, direction of, and size and e/evations of the nearest utilities should be indicated. f. Contour interva/s of no /ess than two feet (2) if the site is two (2) acres or less; contour interva/s of five feet (5) or less if the tract is more than two (2) acres, e/evations to be based on USGS datum. g. Drainage conditions on and adjacent to the tract including /ocation and extent of watercourses, areas of 100-year f/oodplain (verified by a registered professiona/ engineer in state of Co/orado), perpetual drainage easements and /ocation of natura/ springs and ground water. h. Existing conditions on adjacent /and: The area within two hundred feet (200) from each subdivision boundary should be included in the preliminary plan to show its /and s/ope percentage, zoning, location of physical improvements and /and uses, owners of said property, division of property into /ots or tracts including subdivision names and any significant natural features. The objective of showing how the preliminary plan interfaces with all adjoining properties and uses thereof should be met. i. Existing zoning. j. All areas of forty percent (40%) s/ope orgreater, and ava/anche areas indicated as shaded areas. 4 k. Letters from all applicable utility agencies verifying service. l. Indications showing that access to the subdivision is via a maintained public road. m. Soil stability analysis. VI. SUROUNDING LAND USES AND ZONING Land Use Zoninq North: Interstate 70 No zoning East: Mixed-use Lionshead Mixed Use 1 West: Mixed-use SDD No. 4, Cascade Village South: Open Space Natural Area Preservation VII. SITE ANALYSIS As the purpose of this request for approval is limited to a portion of the preliminary plan, which would result in the establishment of the width of the CDOT right-of-way containing the relocated South Frontage Road, the location of the 20-foot right-of- way, and a the location of a 3-foot signage, lighting, and sidewalk easement for the eventual development of a final plat for Ever Vail, staff has not performed a Code analysis of the potential properties to be created. VIII. APPLICATION CRITERIA AND FINDINGS Before recommending approval, approval with conditions, or disapproval of the limited elements proposed for the preliminary plan at this hearing, the Planning and Environmental Commission shall consider the following criteria with respect to the proposed subdivision: 1. The extent to which the proposed subdivision is consistent with all the applicable e/ements of the adopted goa/s, objectives and policies outlined in the Vail comprehensive plan and is compatible with the deve/opment objectives of the town; and Staff Response: The redevelopment of the properties incorporating the Ever Vail project began in early 2006, with the start of public meetings and hearings to discuss incorporation of several parcels into the Lionshead Redevelopment Master Plan. In early 2007, Town Council adopted, through resolution, the amendments to the Master Plan that evolved over a year of public process. The proposed Ever Vail Preliminary Plan is one of the steps in effecting the change in Ever Vail that was anticipated through the adoption of the amendments to the Master Plan. Staff has reviewed the proposed limited preliminary plan and found it to be in compliance with the multiple elements of the Vail Comprehensive Plan. This portion of the preliminary plan, if approved would result in the establishment of the width of the CDOT right-of-way containing the relocated South Frontage Road, the location of the 20-foot right-of-way, and a the location of a 3-foot signage, lighting, and sidewalk easement for the eventual development of a final plat for Ever Vail. The request at this hearing is solely for the elements identified above. There will be many other elements of the preliminary plan reviewed at later dates. Those elements include creation of lots, redevelopment and improvement of the Vail Resorts service yards, to the enhancement of the Red Sandstone Creek, and to the incorporation of a new mixed-use portal to access the mountain, the proposed preliminary plan will allow these and other elements to be achieved. Staff believes the proposed limited elements of the preliminary plan being reviewed under this action comply with this criterion. 2. The extent to which the proposed subdivision complies with all of the standards of this tit/e, as well as, but not limited to, tit/e 12, "Zoning Regulations", of this code, and other pertinent regulations that the planning and environmental commission deems applicable; and Staff Response: The Town Staff, especially the Planning and Public Works Departments have been working extensively on the proposed limited elements of the Ever Vail Preliminary Plan being reviewed with this requested action. Staff has ensured that the requirements of Chapter 13-3, Major Subdivisions, Vail Town Code, have been adhered to on these elements. Staff has been working diligently with the applicant on several issues, the largest being the plans for the relocation of the South Frontage Road to the north to parallel the interstate and the generation of traffic reports which attempt to anticipate the traffic generation of the proposed uses within Ever Vail. Staff believes the proposed preliminary plan depicts a layout of new rights-of-way for the South Frontage Road which will service predicted needs in the future. Staff further believes that the proposed roundabout at the eastern end of the site and the Simba Run underpass roundabout are adequate to handle the anticipated traffic generated by current uses in the Town and those proposed within Ever Vail. However, as the project moves forward the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) and CDOT will be reviewing the plans proposed for the relocation of the South Frontage Road and the roundabouts and may require changes to be made to the design. Staff believes the proposed limited elements of the preliminary plan being reviewed under this action comply with this criterion. 3. The extent to which the proposed subdivision presents a harmonious, convenient, workable re/ationship among /and uses consistent with municipa/ deve/opment objectives; and Staff Response: The proposed limited elements of the preliminary plan are the first step in the review of the overall preliminary plan which will establish the lots and other parameters regarding the Ever Vail redevelopment. From the development and review of the amendments to the Lionshead Redevelopment Master Plan and the review of the proposed limited element preliminary plan staff believes that the 6 proposed subdivision will result in a harmonious, convenient, and workable relationship among adjacent land uses. Staff believes the proposed limited elements of the preliminary plan being reviewed under this action comply with this criterion. 4. The extent of the effects on the future deve/opment of the surrounding area; and Staff Response: They redevelopment of the area know as Ever Vail will be of a large scale and will have significant effects on the area. However, this development is located on the western edge of the developed Lionshead Core which contains multiple projects of a large scale and to the east of the proposed project is a large distance of no development until the eastern edge of the Cascade Village development. Staff believes that the effects of the proposed Ever Vail redevelopment will be positive to the surrounding areas as it will be a continuation of Lionshead and will provide a great deal of mixed-uses which will serve the new portal created in Ever Vail and the larger Lionshead area. Staff believes the proposed limited elements of the preliminary plan being reviewed under this action comply with this criterion. 5. The extent to which the proposed subdivision is /ocated and designed to avoid creating spatial patterns that cause inefficiencies in the delivery of public services, or require duplication or premature extension of public facilities, or result in a "leapfrog" pattern of deve/opment; and Staff Response: The proposed limited elements of the preliminary plan being reviewed as a part of this request will result in the planned subdivision of land to accomplish multiple goals found within the Vail Comprehensive Plan. The incorporation of the properties found within Ever Vail into the Lionshead Redevelopment Master Plan will result in planned redevelopment with the ability to anticipate impacts. The proposed preliminary plan will not result in a in a"leapfrog" pattern or spatial patterns that cause inefficiencies. Staff believes the proposed limited elements of the preliminary plan being reviewed under this action comply with this criterion. 6. The extent to which the utility lines are sized to serve the planned ultimate population of the service area to avoid future /and disruption to upgrade undersized lines; and Staff Response: Per the requirements of the 13-3-3C, Preliminary Plan, Vail Town Code, staff sent a cover letter and attached plans for the proposed Ever Vail Preliminary Plan to all the reviewing agencies identified within the Code. It has be more than 15 days since that letter was sent and per the Code, the agencies have 15 days to make recommendations or comment. Written responses were received from several of the agencies, which were provided to the Planning and Environmental Commission on December 22, 2008. There will undoubtedly need to be relocation of utility and service lines for most if not all of the utilities. In fact most services will need to be upgraded and resized to accommodate the growth proposed within Ever Vail. Staff has been working closely with several of the utility companies throughout the adoption of the amendments to the Lionshead Redevelopment Master Plan and through this process and the availability of services does not appear to be of concern for the utility companies. Staff believes the proposed limited elements of the preliminary plan being reviewed under this action comply with this criterion. 7. The extent to which the proposed subdivision provides for the growth of an orderly viable community and serves the best interests of the community as a who/e; and Staff Response: The proposed limited elements of this preliminary plan will result in the growth of an orderly viable community that serves the best interests of the community as it will accomplish multiple goals found within the Vail Comprehensive Plan. The incorporation of the properties found within Ever Vail into the Lionshead Redevelopment Master Plan will result in planned redevelopment with the ability to anticipate impacts and serve the interests of the community. The Vail Public Works Department is comfortable with the geometric layout of the design and although the roadway will cause additional maintenance costs we feel this is a roadway that can be maintained to an adequate level, if the funds and equipment are incorporated into future operating budgets. The roadway design is consistent with the Vail Transportation Master Plan regarding the various modes of travel. The design accommodates the future Simba Run Underpass and provides flexibility in the final location of the actual underpass. The east roundabout configuration has been designed to handle additional capacity improvements if needed in the future. There may still be tweaks to address the ultimate optimal solution but this would have minor impacts to the overall concepts proposed. Staff believes the proposed limited elements of the preliminary plan being reviewed under this action comply with this criterion. 8. The extent to which the proposed subdivision results in adverse or beneficial impacts on the natura/ environment, including, but not limited to, water quality, air quality, noise, vegetation, riparian corridors, hillsides and other desirable natural features; and Staff Response: The proposed limited elements of the Ever Vail Preliminary Plan and the possible redevelopment of the area will result in improvement and protection for Red Sandstone Creek and the incorporation of green building techniques within the project. The possible redevelopment is proposed to incorporate LEED design standards and other green building techniques. Staff believes the proposed limited elements of the preliminary plan being reviewed under this action comply with this criterion. 9. Such other factors and criteria as the commission and/or council deem applicable to the proposed subdivision. Before recommending and/or granting an approval of an application for a major subdivision, the planning and environmental commission shall make the following findings with respect to the proposed major subdivision: That the subdivision is in compliance with the criteria listed in subsection A of this section. 2. That the subdivision is consistent with the adopted goa/s, objectives and policies outlined in the Vail comprehensive plan and compatible with the deve/opment objectives of the town. 3. That the subdivision is compatible with and suitable to adjacent uses and appropriate for the surrounding areas. 4. That the subdivision promotes the hea/th, safety, mora/s, and general we/fare of the town and promotes the coordinated and harmonious deve/opment of the town in a manner that conserves and enhances its natura/ environment and its established character as a resort and residential community of the highest quality. IX. STAFF RECOMMENDATION The Community Development Department recommends that the Planning and Environmental Commission approves with conditions the limited element preliminary plan for the Ever Vail Subdivision, pursuant to Chapter 13-3, Major Subdivision, Vail Town Code, to allow for the establishment of the width of the Colorado Department of Transportation (CDOT) right-of-way containing the relocated South Frontage Road, the location of the 20-foot right-of-way, the location of a 3-foot signage, lighting, and sidewalk easement and the relocated South Frontage Road associated with the redevelopment of the properties known as "Ever Vail" (West Lionshead), located at 862, 923, 934, 953, 1031 South Frontage Road West, and the South Frontage Road West right-of-way/Unplatted (a complete legal description is available for inspection at the Town of Vail Community Development Department), and setting forth details in regard thereto. Should the Planning and Environmental Commission choose to approve this limited portion of the preliminary plan and the configuration and design of the relocated South Frontage Road, the Community Development Department recommends the Commission makes the following motion: The P/anning and Environmenta/ Commission approves, with conditions, the limited e/ement preliminary plan for the Ever Vail Subdivision, pursuant to Chapter 13-3, Major Subdivision, Vail Town Code, to allow for the establishment of the width of the Co/orado Department of Transportation (CDOT) right-of-way containing the re/ocated South Frontage Road, the /ocation of the 20-foot right-of- way, the /ocation of a 3-foot signage, lighting, and sidewalk easement and the re/ocated South Frontage Road associated with the redeve/opment of the properties known as "Ever Vail" (West Lionshead), located at 862, 923, 934, 953, 1031 South Frontage Road West, and the South Frontage Road West right-of- way/Unplatted (a complete /ega/ description is available for inspection at the Town of Vail Community Deve/opment Department), and setting forth details in regard thereto. Should the Planning and Environmental Commission choose to approve this preliminary plan, the Community Development Department recommends the Commission make the following findings: Pursuant to Section 13-3-4, Commission Review of Application: Criteria, Vail Town Code, the applicant has proven by a preponderance of the evidence before the P/anning and Environmenta/ Commission that the limited e/ements of the preliminary plan are in compliance with the criteria listed in Subsection A of this section; that the subdivision is consistent with the adopted goa/s, objectives and policies outlined in the Vail comprehensive plan and compatible with the deve/opment objectives of the town; that the subdivision is compatible with and suitable to adjacent uses and appropriate for the surrounding areas; and that the subdivision promotes the hea/th, safety, mora/s, and general we/fare of the town and promotes the coordinated and harmonious deve/opment of the town in a manner that conserves and enhances its natura/ environment and its established character as a resort and residential community of the highest quality. Should the Planning and Environmental Commission choose to approve this preliminary plan, the Community Development Department recommends the Commission apply the following conditions: That this approval is solely for the establishment of the width of the Colorado Department of Transportation (CDOT) right-of-way containing the relocated South Frontage Road, the location of the 20-foot right-of-way, and a the location of a 3-foot signage, lighting, and sidewalk easement. 2. The design submitted is preliminary in nature and to this point there is still significant further design and review which may modify the overall final design of the roadway. This includes the proposed development uses, access points and traffic operations of the development accesses, drainage design, structural design, as well as review by the Vail Town Council, Town of Vail Design Review Board, Planning and Environmental Commission, Town Staff, Colorado Department of Transportation and Federal Highway Administration and their consultants. There will also be a review for environmental clearances by outside agencies and subsequent referral agencies such as the Corps of Engineers and Division of Wildlife. Furthermore, the two roundabouts will be reviewed by a third party roundabout expert and optimized for traffic operations. This may cause adjustments in the geometrics of the roundabout designs. The applicant shall return before the appropriate Town reviewing authority(s) for review and approval of any changes required by any of the reviewing parties listed above that affect the elements approved within this request for the preliminary plan. 3. The developer may enter into a license agreement with the Town of Vail to allow for temporary shoring and temporary construction activities to occur within the area of the platted 20-foot wide Town of Vail right-of-way. The Town of Vail 10 agrees to not unreasonably withhold the developer's request to utilize the right- of-way for temporary shoring and temporary construction activity. X. ATTACHMENTS A. Vicinity Map B. Copy of the proposed preliminary plan C. South Frontage Road Option 15 with Simba Run m s � �� r ti � . �. . � .��- � ` � � � � �� •� � � � � �% uJ � ' o� ._ � � �f � r r � � � L = � W i� � �� W L � � � �S! � _ _ � i � � w � -�'/� f L � 5 " - '!' k � : i} tf�� '''� �"� .� ,�� '}' �� °��" � - e i t� � r � ��'�"�''� �'t:. ' � �►+'� � � � a �� L�� 65 +c 1di ! � �I�� . ..�yryl�� ..ti,t - ` � ��' � ��, ; r+. � + + ' � j � �' �, '+ � � �;_. t �.l �. �� c ° �l�b6 � � � ,�ti t� ' r.` � � � , � r�s� � E t' �� . J � - , - r � ' � , � } � '� � �� R. � � � � � ,,..� �.� �,. R �-- ��° +, 'w'4� . � � �L{�a .. � � � t, � �v `-, � .Y . �+� , , �: �'�+.'.:�� . � `` . ryf � �...'� f�r'��, '�� •_�` � '�'� �` rv��.'_� �' • � �' f' . �w,� � � - u y� + �s�' $�- � +� �. � � � � 4�� '.��- ` z �. � ,��4. �. L. � �� .. �� . ��w.. '�r'` '� � � �" , - `' � i I .'` . ,1� ��`• . , �'� . ..� 4 k� � �w 5 ��f �� . 'f � � 4 � �.�— �� . � �� '�� ,�� ` . � � �' l� k k. �;' � '�'� �_. Y�`'� �� ,�h�. . {� k .r°�� .�. �,.� .�.,_�,� - �. � � � r i � �". �' `x �y,s - ° �, �'�.,� - �., � �. � . � �� - .: � � ,� ; � � � 4�� . *�� i ,' � 1 �� ' �, . �. � Y�� . j �� 4��'• �.( , �' i `-�( 4 �`� i �*r.. � y�.� . ..{ l��9''� ' ._ ..,A 5+ � _ � L �� 5 � x'. �ti � �y, �'. � k �� t�j7 � . t . , �•..� � �„�} "- .�. ' �..i � ��, � 4 � .. 4 _ � .� . � � V 1 '1 ,� f� i�: � v� ��t � . 3kr � � 1 �� -- M x � � _ 4 " � � �, '•::� .,� r - x" � � � * - ' ` �.�s �! f � � •` {f �:?: � -�r ,. �, : �, � �. a�� . � �' X 'I� .. - : > � . § �..' ,� � �' � �: . �,. `5 q " � g, :':� + ` �� •` � � •i; �. � � -r { � : � �` ��-'. �tis� _ ` '�` � . �. J°, �� _� � .' � U �a#�v *` � +� " °•* ` "+�+i �' � ' . '�f ►• � r�`Q'�` ��`� �� ` l� f:� � �� ; �� ,, � , . . � . , :.. �.�, � �� Iw n� +�,� � � � `'"�§h :�; �; ,�, � ,�: , �,�, � { ,�. �� ,,;. � � �� f�� ' frY� � � ��, �� '� � � �� 1�,� � �x' �� ;,r' �� $ ' ] �4 ' �3 �.. .� �4 $`�''', �� k . � � � . �, '�. �`� � � � k� �4 '��L+ , ' 5�� ` ' s ' , � � ^.�,t`: � !f � �� ' i L ,,l\ •�" ��.•� �� '� � � �w� a�_ *.-e 9*- = � �; a� k�6 v�� _r� °�: �*x aR :� 3a a� 5� �x F F � � $ h� � N �--i Amended Condition requested by Staff regarding the Ever Vail Preliminary Plan South Frontage Road relocation application. Staff requests that this condition replace Condition 3 as proposed in the Staff memorandum dated March 23, 2009. 3) The developer may enter into a license agreement with the Town of Vail to allow for temporary shoring and temporary construction activities to occur within the area of the platted 20-foot wide Town of Vail right-of-way. The Town of Vail agrees to not unreasonably withhold the developer's request to utilize the right- of-way for temporary shoring and temporary construction activity. MEMORANDUM TO: Planning and Environmental Commission FROM: Community Development Department DATE: March 23, 2009 SUBJECT: A request for a work session for a review of a preliminary plan for a major subdivision, pursuant to Chapter 13-3, Major Subdivision, Vail Town Code, to allow for the creation of two lots for the redevelopment of the properties known as "Ever Vail" (West Lionshead), located at 862, 923, 934, 953, and 1031 South Frontage Road West, and the South Frontage Road West right- of-way/Unplatted (a complete legal description is available for inspection at the Town of Vail Community Development Department), and setting forth details in regard thereto. (PEC080062) Applicant: Vail Resorts Development Company, represented by Thomas Miller Planner: Warren Campbell I. SUMMARY The applicant, Vail Resorts Development Company, represented by Thomas Miller, is requesting final approval of limited elements of a preliminary plan for a major subdivision, pursuant to Chapter 13-3, Major Subdivision, Vail Town Code, to allow for the establishment of the width of the Colorado Department of Transportation (CDOT) right-of-way containing the relocated South Frontage Road, the location of the 20-foot right-of-way (either CDOT or TOV not determined at this time), and a the location of a 3-foot signage, lighting, and sidewalk easement for the eventual development of a final plat for Ever Vail, located at 862, 923, 934, 953, 1031 South Frontage Road West, and the South Frontage Road West right-of-way/Unplatted (a complete legal description is available for inspection at the Town of Vail Community Development Department). Furthermore, in conjunction with approving the listed elements of the preliminary plan the Planning and Environmental Commission is being asked to approve the design and configuration of the relocated South Frontage Road. Staff is recommending that the Planning and Environmental Commission approves, with conditions, these parameters of the preliminary plan and the proposed relocated South Frontage Road design and configuration subject to the findings and conditions outlined in Section VIII of this memorandum. II. DESCRIPTION OF REQUEST The applicant, Vail Resorts Development Company, represented by Thomas Miller, has participated in several work session meetings with the Town of Vail Planning and Environmental Commission to discuss the relocation of the South Frontage Road. The relocation of the South Frontage Road is an importance first step in the review of the Ever Vail project. Through the work sessions many aspects of the proposed relocation of the South Frontage Road were discussed such as retaining walls, snow storage, landscaping, right-of-way width, easements, roundabout design and capacity, etc. The Planning and Environmental Commission is solely being asked to respond to a limited scope with regard to the proposed preliminary plat at this hearing. This portion of the preliminary plan, if approved would result in the establishment of the width of the CDOT right-of-way containing the relocated South Frontage Road, the location of the 20-foot right-of-way(either CDOT or TOV not determined at this time), and a the location of a 3-foot signage, lighting, and sidewalk easement for the eventual development of a final plat for Ever Vail. Furthermore, in conjunction with approving the listed elements of the preliminary plan the Planning and Environmental Commission is being asked to approve the design and configuration of the relocated South Frontage Road. A vicinity map of the development site and surrounding area has been attached for reference. (Attachment A). A copy of the proposed preliminary plan (Attachment B), the proposed relocated South Frontage Road Option 15 with Simba Run (Attachment C), and a set of cross-sections (Attachment D) are attached for reference. III. BACKGROUND On February 6, 2007, the Vail Town Council adopted Resolution No. 4, Series of 2007, which implemented the changes to the Lionshead Redevelopment Master Plan regarding West Lionshead and the area now called Ever Vail. On January 26, 2009, the Planning and Environmental Commission held a work session at which a revised Frontage Road option was presented to both staff and the Commission which had not been previously shown. The general consensus was that the Frontage Road was moving in the direction of addressing the concerns of the Commission. On February 17, 2009, the Town Council directed staff and the applicant to proceed forward with the design of the South Frontage Road which contained certain improvements within a 20-foot Town of vail right-of-way. On February 18, 2009, the Design Review Board conceptually reviewed the proposed South Frontage Road and found the concepts presented for the proposed retaining wall and landscaping associated with the relocated South Frontage Road to be aesthetically acceptable with further review at a latter date. On March 9, 2009, the Planning and Environmental Commission tabled this application due to concerns expressed by the applicant with regard to the condition recommended by staff with regard to the future ability to shore under what was being proposed as a 20-foot Town of Vail right-of-way. IV. ROLES OF REVIEWING BOARDS Planning and Environmental Commission: Action: The Planning and Environmental Commission is responsible for final approval, approval with conditions, or denial of a preliminary plan for a major subdivision. Town Council: The Town Council is the final decision making authority for a major subdivision and the adoption of easements between a private property owner and the Town. Final actions of Design Review Board or Planning and Environmental Commission maybe appealed to the Town Council or by the Town Council. Town Council evaluates whether or not the Planning and Environmental Commission or Design Review Board erred with approvals or denials and can uphold, uphold with modifications, or overturn the board's decision. V. APPLICABLE PLANNING DOCUMENTS Town of Vail Zoninq Code: Title 13: Subdivision Regulations (partial) 13-2-2 Definitions PRELIMINARY PLAN: The preliminary drawings described in these regulations indicating the proposed manner or layout of the subdivision to be submitted to the planning and environmental commission for approval. SUBDIVISION OR SUBDIVIDED LAND: A. Meaning: 1. A tract of land which is divided into two (2) or more lots, tracts, parcels, sites, separate interests (including leasehold interests), interests in common, or other division for the purpose, whether immediate or future, of transfer of ownership, or for building or other development, or for street use by reference to such subdivision or recorded plat thereof,� or 2. A tract of land including land to be used for condominiums, timeshare units, or fractional fee club units; or 3. A house, condominium, apartment or other dwelling unit which is divided into two (2) or more separate interests through division of the fee or title thereto, whether by conveyance, license, lease, contract for sale or any other method of disposition. 13-3 Major Subdivisions (in part) 13-3-3, Preliminary Plan A. Preliminary Presentation To Planning And Environmental Commission: Consideration of a major subdivision proposal shall be formally considered with a preliminary plan presentation by the subdivider and/or his/her representative(s) to the planning and environmental commission at a regularly scheduled meeting. This preliminary presentation shall be a public hearing according to section 12-3-6 of this code. The presentation shall reflect the proposed development for an entire same ownership and shall indicate all adjacent lands owned or under option to the subdivider at the time of subdivision. 8. Submittal Requirements: At least thirty (30) days prior to the preliminary plan presentation to the planning and environmental commission, the subdivider shall submit at a scale of one inch equals one hundred feet (1 " = 100) or larger, twelve (12) copies of each of the following (exceptions can be granted on individual items by the director of public works or the administrator) to the department of community development: 1. The environmental impact report required. 2. A topographic survey with a north arrow, graphic scale, dimensioned to nearest foot prepared by a Colorado registered land surveyor, shall be submitted including the following information: a. Boundary lines. b. Preliminary proposed lots and blocks with numbers and sizes. c. Easements: location, width and purpose. d. Proposed streets, their widths of right of way and pavement, approximate grades in percentage and center line radii of curves; areas with cuts and fills exceeding six feet (6) and extent thereof. e. Utilities on and adjacent to the tract, including their type, location, size and invert elevations of sanitary sewers, storm drainage facilities and water mains. If utilities are not found on the tract, distance to, direction of, and size and elevations of the nearest utilities should be indicated. f. Contour intervals of no less than two feet (2 ) if the site is two (2) acres or less; contour intervals of five feet (5') or less if the tract is more than two (2) acres, elevations to be based on USGS datum. g. Drainage conditions on and adjacent to the tract including location and extent of watercourses, areas of 100-year floodplain (verified by a registered professional engineer in state of Colorado), perpetual drainage easements and location of natural springs and ground water. h. Existing conditions on adjacent land: The area within two hundred feet (200') from each subdivision boundary should be included in the preliminary plan to show its land slope percentage, zoning, location of physical improvements and land uses, owners of said property, division of property into lots or tracts including subdivision names and any significant natural features. The objective of showing how the preliminary plan interfaces with all adjoining properties and uses thereof should be met. i. Existing zoning. j. All areas of forty percent (40%) slope or greater, and avalanche areas indicated as shaded areas. l�l a k. Letters from all applicable utility agencies verifying service. 1. Indications showing that access to the subdivision is via a maintained public road. m. Soil stability analysis. SUROUNDING LAND USES AND ZONING Land Use North: Interstate 70 East: Mixed-use West: Mixed-use South: Open Space VII. SITE ANALYSIS Zonina No zoning Lionshead Mixed Use 1 SDD No. 4, Cascade Village Natural Area Preservation As the purpose of this request for approval is limited to a portion of the preliminary plan, which would result in the establishment of the width of the CDOT right-of-way containing the relocated South Frontage Road, the location of the 20-foot right-of- way, and a the location of a 3-foot signage, lighting, and sidewalk easement for the eventual development of a final plat for Ever Vail, staff has not performed a Code analysis of the potential properties to be created. VIII. APPLICATION CRITERIA AND FINDWGS Before recommending approval, approval with conditions, or disapproval of the limited elements proposed for the preliminary plan at this hearing, the Planning and Environmental Commission shall consider the following criteria with respect to the proposed subdivision: 1. The extent to which the proposed subdivision is consistent with all the applicable elements of the adopted goals, objectives and policies outlined in the Vail comprehensive plan and is compatible with the development objectives of the town; and Staff Response: The redevelopment of the properties incorporating the Ever Vail project began in early 2006, with the start of public meetings and hearings to discuss incorporation of several parcels into the Lionshead Redevelopment Master Plan. In early 2007, Town Council adopted, through resolution, the amendments to the Master Plan that evolved over a year of public process. The proposed Ever Vail Preliminary Plan is one of the steps in effecting the change in Ever Vail that was anticipated through the adoption of the amendments to the Master Plan. Staff has reviewed the proposed limited preliminary plan and found it to be in compliance with the multiple elements of the Vail Comprehensive Plan. This portion of the preliminary plan, if approved would result in the establishment of the width of the CDOT right-of-way containing the relocated South Frontage Road, the location of the 20-foot right-of-way, and a the location of a 3-foot signage, lighting, and sidewalk easement for the eventual development of a final plat for Ever Vail. The request at this hearing is solely for the elements identified above. There will be many other elements of the preliminary plan reviewed at later dates. Those elements include creation of lots, redevelopment and improvement of the Vail Resorts service yards, to the enhancement of the Red Sandstone Creek, and to the incorporation of a new mixed-use portal to access the mountain, the proposed preliminary plan will allow these and other elements to be achieved. Staff believes the proposed limited elements of the preliminary plan being reviewed under this action comply with this criterion. 2. The extent to which the proposed subdivision complies with all of the standards of this title, as well as, but not limited to, title 12, "Zoning Regulations'; of this code, and other pertinent regulations that the planning and environmental commission deems applicable; and Staff Response: The Town Staff, especially the Planning and Public Works Departments have been working extensively on the proposed limited elements of the Ever Vail Preliminary Plan being reviewed with this requested action. Staff has ensured that the requirements of Chapter 13-3, Major Subdivisions, Vail Town Code, have been adhered to on these elements. Staff has been working diligently with the applicant on several issues, the largest being the plans for the relocation of the South Frontage Road to the north to parallel the interstate and the generation of traffic reports which attempt to anticipate the traffic generation of the proposed uses within Ever Vail. Staff believes the proposed preliminary plan depicts a layout of new rights-of-way for the South Frontage Road which will service predicted needs in the future. Staff further believes that the proposed roundabout at the eastern end of the site and the Simba Run underpass roundabout are adequate to handle the anticipated traffic generated by current uses in the Town and those proposed within Ever Vail. However, as the project moves forward the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) and CDOT will be reviewing the plans proposed for the relocation of the South Frontage Road and the roundabouts and may require changes to be made to the design. Staff believes the proposed limited elements of the preliminary plan being reviewed under this action comply with this criterion. 3. The extent to which the proposed subdivision presents a harmonious, convenient, workable relationship among land uses consistent with municipal development objectives; and Staff Response: The proposed limited elements of the preliminary plan are the first step in the review of the overall preliminary plan which will establish the lots and other parameters regarding the Ever Vail redevelopment. From the development and review of the amendments to the Lionshead Redevelopment Master Plan and the review of the proposed limited element preliminary plan staff believes that the proposed subdivision will result in a harmonious, convenient, and workable relationship among adjacent land uses. Staff believes the proposed limited elements of the preliminary plan being reviewed under this action comply with this criterion. 4. The extent of the effects on the future development of the surrounding area; and Staff Response: They redevelopment of the area know as Ever Vail will be of a large scale and will have significant effects on the area. However, this development is located on the western edge of the developed Lionshead Core which contains multiple projects of a large scale and to the east of the proposed project is a large distance of no development until the eastern edge of the Cascade Village development. Staff believes that the effects of the proposed Ever Vail redevelopment will be positive to the surrounding areas as it will be a continuation of Lionshead and will provide a great deal of mixed-uses which will serve the new portal created in Ever Vail and the larger Lionshead area. Staff believes the proposed limited elements of the preliminary plan being reviewed under this action comply with this criterion. 5. The extent to which the proposed subdivision is located and designed to avoid creating spatial patterns that cause inefficiencies in the delivery of public services, or require duplication or premature extension of public facilities, or result in a "leapfrog" pattern of development; and Staff Response: The proposed limited elements of the preliminary plan being reviewed as a part of this request will result in the planned subdivision of land to accomplish multiple goals found within the Vail Comprehensive Plan. The incorporation of the properties found within Ever Vail into the Lionshead Redevelopment Master Plan will result in planned redevelopment with the ability to anticipate impacts. The proposed preliminary plan will not result in a in a"leapfrog" pattern or spatial patterns that cause inefficiencies. Staff believes the proposed limited elements of the preliminary plan being reviewed under this action comply with this criterion. 6. The extent to which the population of the service undersized lines; and Staff Response: utility lines are sized to serve the planned ultimate area to avoid future land disruption to upgrade Per the requirements of the 13-3-3C, Preliminary Plan, Vail Town Code, staff sent a cover letter and attached plans for the proposed Ever Vail Preliminary Plan to all the reviewing agencies identified within the Code. It has be more than 15 days since that letter was sent and per the Code, the agencies have 15 days to make recommendations or comment. Written responses were received from several of the agencies, which were provided to the Planning and Environmental Commission on December 22, 2008. There will undoubtedly need to be relocation of utility and service lines for most if not all of the utilities. In fact most services will need to be upgraded and resized to accommodate the growth proposed within Ever Vail. Staff has been working closely with several of the utility companies throughout the adoption of the amendments to the Lionshead Redevelopment Master Plan and through this process and the availability of services does not appear to be of concern for the utility companies. Staff believes the proposed limited elements of the preliminary plan being reviewed under this action comply with this criterion. 7. The extent to which the proposed subdivision provides for the growth of an orderly viable community and serves the best interests of the community as a whole; and Staff Response: The proposed limited elements of this preliminary plan will result in the growth of an orderly viable community that serves the best interests of the community as it will accomplish multiple goals found within the Vail Comprehensive Plan. The incorporation of the properties found within Ever Vail into the Lionshead Redevelopment Master Plan will result in planned redevelopment with the ability to anticipate impacts and serve the interests of the community. The Vail Public Works Department is comfortable with the geometric layout of the design and although the roadway will cause additional maintenance costs we feel this is a roadway that can be maintained to an adequate level, if the funds and equipment are incorporated into future operating budgets. The roadway design is consistent with the Vail Transportation Master Plan regarding the various modes of travel. The design accommodates the future Simba Run Underpass and provides flexibility in the final location of the actual underpass. The east roundabout configuration has been designed to handle additional capacity improvements if needed in the future. There may still be tweaks to address the ultimate optimal solution but this would have minor impacts to the overall concepts proposed. Staff believes the proposed limited elements of the preliminary plan being reviewed under this action comply with this criterion. 8. The extent to which the proposed subdivision results in adverse or beneficial impacts on the natural environment, including, but not limited to, water quality, air quality, noise, vegetation, riparian corridors, hillsides and other desirable natural features; and Staff Response: The proposed limited elements of the Ever Vail Preliminary Plan and the possible redevelopment of the area will result in improvement and protection for Red Sandstone Creek and the incorporation of green building techniques within the project. The possible redevelopment is proposed to incorporate LEED design standards and other green building techniques. Staff believes the proposed limited elements of the preliminary plan being reviewed under this action comply with this criterion. 9. Such other factors and criteria as the commission and/or council deem applicable to the proposed subdivision. Before recommending and/or granting an approval of an application for a major subdivision, the planning and environmental commission shall make the following findings with respect to the proposed major subdivision: 1. That the subdivision is in compliance with the criteria listed in subsection A of this section. 2. That the subdivision is consistent with the adopted goals, objectives and policies outlined in the Vail comprehensive plan and compatible with the development objectives of the town. 3. That the subdivision is compatible with and suitable to adjacent uses and appropriate for the surrounding areas. 4. That the subdivision promotes the health, safety, morals, and general welfare of the town and promotes the coordinated and harmonious development of the town in a manner that conserves and enhances its natural environment and its established character as a resort and residential community of the highest quality. IX. STAFF RECOMMENDATION The Community Development Department recommends that the Planning and Environmental Commission approves with conditions the limited element preliminary plan for the Ever Vail Subdivision, pursuant to Chapter 13-3, Major Subdivision, Vail Town Code, to allow for the establishment of the width of the Colorado Department of Transportation (CDOT) right-of-way containing the relocated South Frontage Road, the location of the 20-foot right-of-way, the location of a 3-foot signage, lighting, and sidewalk easement and the relocated South Frontage Road associated with the redevelopment of the properties known as "Ever Vail" (West Lionshead), located at 862, 923, 934, 953, 1031 South Frontage Road West, and the South Frontage Road West right-of-way/Unplatted (a complete legal description is available for inspection at the Town of Vail Community Development Department), and setting forth details in regard thereto. Should the Planning and Environmental Commission choose to approve this limited portion of the preliminary plan and the configuration and design of the relocated South Frontage Road, the Community Development Department recommends the Commission makes the following motion: The Planning and Environmental Commission approves, with conditions, the limited element preliminary plan for the Ever Vail Subdivision, pursuant to Chapter 13-3, Major Subdivision, Vail Town Code, to allow for the establishment of the width of the Colorado Department of Transportation (CDOT) right-of-way containing the relocated South Frontage Road, the location of the 20-foot right-of- way, the location of a 3-foot signage, lighting, and sidewalk easement and the relocated South Frontage Road associated with the redevelopment of the properties known as "Ever VaiP' (West Lionshead), located at 862, 923, 934, 953, 1031 South Frontage Road West, and the South Frontage Road West right-of- way/Unplatted (a complete legal description is available for inspection at the Town of Vail Community Development Department), and setting forth details in regard thereto. Should the Planning and Environmental Commission choose to approve this preliminary plan, the Community Development Department recommends the Commission make the following findings: Pursuant to Section 13-3-4, Commission Review of Application: Criteria, Vail Town Code, the applicant has proven by a preponderance of the evidence before the Planning and Environmental Commission that the limited elements of the preliminary plan are in compliance with the criteria listed in Subsection A of this section; that the subdivision is consistent with the adopted goals, objectives and policies outlined in the Vail comprehensive plan and compatible with the development objectives of the town; that the subdivision is compatible with and suitable to adjacent uses and appropriate for the surrounding areas; and that the subdivision promotes the health, safety, morals, and general welfare of the town and promotes the coordinated and harmonious development of the town in a manner that conserves and enhances its natural environment and its established character as a resort and residential community of the highest quality. Should the Planning and Environmental Commission choose to approve this preliminary plan, the Community Development Department recommends the Commission apply the following conditions: That this approval is solely for the establishment of the width of the Colorado Department of Transportation (CDOT) right-of-way containing the relocated South Frontage Road, the location of the 20-foot right-of-way, and a the location of a 3-foot signage, lighting, and sidewalk easement. 2. The design submitted is preliminary in nature and to this point there is still significant further design and review which may modify the overall final design of the roadway. This includes the proposed development uses, access points and traffic operations of the development accesses, drainage design, structural design, as well as review by the Vail Town Council, Town of Vail Design Review Board, Planning and Environmental Commission, Town Staff, Colorado Department of Transportation and Federal Highway Administration and their consultants. There will also be a review for environmental clearances by outside agencies and subsequent referral agencies such as the Corps of Engineers and Division of Wildlife. Furthermore, the two roundabouts will be reviewed by a third party roundabout expert and optimized for traffic operations. This may cause adjustments in the geometrics of the roundabout designs. The applicant shall return before the appropriate Town reviewing authority(s) for review and approval of any changes required by any of the reviewing parties listed above that affect the elements approved within this request for the preliminary plan. 3. The developer may enter into a license agreement with the Town of Vail to allow for temporary shoring and temporary construction activities to occur within the area of the platted 20-foot wide Town of Vail right-of-way. The Town of Vail � agrees to not unreasonably withhold the developer's request to utilize the right- of-way for temporary shoring and temporary construction activity. X. ATTACHMENTS A. Vicinity Map B. Copy of the proposed preliminary plan C. South Frontage Road Option 15 with Simba Run � �� ' i i � �� t . �� r�, �3'1 � � Q1 � � � �- �� I.V � � . 0 N � � � � � a/�� a..+ L � � � r �� a , i W a� � �_ fi L � � W _��1,, • ` ti „ v- � �, : -*' wt' - -� � -� t � �' - � � �� r, ` I � � f ." y}. i�.4�� 1'� � �°i,,. � F�' � _ i7� �� , i i � "'� .5.5'. E f `. � � +^ ��.'*f ' . `y � i . , f . ; .. .I. , � � :��.� t'' ,�+ �� t+� L �,. � � '��`, � � EF�[tE F,�II � R .: ,, ��C;'• .. ' � r �� { =yr � ��... r �l�� - � �• � �.��4 ' #y• y_' �. �.�� l � I til : ' .�( . 4� 3-a �' �,. � �� 6.;-. ti i.t�. $ , �,.��L. ti.. y � �, �� 4 �r�.. �� ` V �" —! �' � �i1� i� � _� , i, ,# .. � � n..� Y . �{ ,� , .�a �.. � I . � �}� � �y �` � ' ��:� 1� . ;� -� �y �" ,,,�� . ` f� '� w� = `�, �!�;,: , ar . 1� � _ r i�:. � ... �` ; 4 � . � 4 l� � .f T � � + ��•. . 1� J�' F. � W .. '� r. � I� � � � , ` . �1 � ,,� Y! ;. �{} ��•�` ► ■l-�w ,� � . � r.I� i .- .d►� . ti•. � ,T 'i "" ._ �+-�'y� -.. � , i�:�.-��p.ir ��` � y � �. ,], . .. ` _ , 2. i ' �� +� � � ��tiF -iki��'� .. lf} � /� ��- �L{�'�'` �'= . R; i �a w r� �r �, � `� R � r' � ++ . � `. 4 i�i !� . �� . v. . a �� _. r 1 `. 6 , �t}� r �.. � `��"~ � } � t s� � � � .y � _ . ��y �. J� � � �� r �i ��' , � � ��''. � � �'. � ' � ` 1 - �v- ' k � �'F'i.. ' a��:� �� •y� I �-k '�'�' �' .•. � � ��. * -� �� . ��= f � .�. �x�,.�r �• � ' � , '`a, `.:'�.,,,!►' r r �. � Y � r / f ; `, f`� ��' �� - '`.�� , �, , . �' 3 " ' 'k . � �X ' � �,.e �. � � � � � 1�,. . ,� t � �..: ,� � �`; � .�J �f �4� � r � � '� �: ��F � �` �'. 4� * 1 >, � �. �Y ��_ �� f y �.% .p � 4 ; �� - r' , -f, �� W W �-� �*, L.� r�" w � + �r "� .fl�i\�` �� . � •'� �� ''°�' ,. �i �. � , � +�- � _' "+� � ` �.� � .1.� . .� �! � �,A., �Y. � . �� 4 r ��- � ,d �. � �•. � � ; �° � ,4 � fy F� �' . 4 _- k 1� � � � �"•��r t: - �+�i�.'� r� , z +* � � • .�� .� � �f�� ,�. . � ` �` �� . � � �' �i.�"`- \ •.� . ` � � �, �. ' `� �� ♦ .`Yw_ � k - L - • d�! 2iy . �. t , -� �_ � � ..�� ., r4�` � \ ti N� , ,.. . :° .. .. �`. ��, � ��= —8 �Y . '�J'� a��. ! x6° r�� s; - �k �I- kk$ a� z? <x �a Fx 4 F �; � � -� F L 4 H $ 0 �� Amended Condition requested by Staff regarding the Ever Vail Preliminary Plan South Frontage Road relocation application. Staff requests that this condition replace Condition 3 as proposed in the Staff memorandum dated March 23, 2009. 3) The developer may enter into a license agreement with the Town of Vail to allow for temporary shoring and temporary construction activities to occur within the area of the platted 20-foot wide Town of Vail right-of-way. The Town of Vail agrees to not unreasonably withhold the developer's request to utilize the right- of-way for temporary shoring and temporary construction activity. � r � � `� � � � � � \ � �� w V \ ,` �\ o ` NZ a � � �: O� �_� � N� � � a � �� \ �m � - �.� q � c°��. � zo� ., a^ . - � Yn �m o �/l § ° i �C � � \ � 1 � x � � �w�"tY, v�, � Na-= ��g . . �� o ^ � �''� �O w3 °oa ao , � ch .� � OO � � �s.. � � W� �\ � ,�'�, ..� w U]L' �ce t� F \ . �. . . c�>` 1 � . ° g � CS � �' � ` � � � � O. o"�� •ec•�� . . . � . � �i �" Cr \ \� "b � F � �S£�gz / ` � , \ � : s� � � � h _\\ � \ �� , � � � � � � ' o C+iEr.��\ � �- _ � \ � � o � � O O `�' W \\ �` \ � � � � � o ost�� '\� � � � � e � �C�� \ \�''`� �i iw�� ` � §R�°� � � � .� <C � , —\ � .� � s� / � � s € g s � � q�� \\ o\_\� �a \`:� 1 � g�°�� O �� '-�,� � �� l i a � Qo � �c O�Ci �. \ \ '�%- 4 � _ �� ' � � � �a g �� W E� \ o�� " i., °m �� o€ 3� � � S � �° � O � e\ •h�o \ _.�� ' � .l`� c= � �� - u �/ � '� �N ' 3 B � a � ^ � a � � � ti � �] � vaa � —� � � . � W s. e w =? �> Nn 2: \ - . . N � = �� g "Y � �'� �N � ��\\ \�m� � ` -: � N I . � � $� &� �b G" - I rSr � � � (� � � '� � � \�5 a \ '�a �� I` ' � : � &§ €a � �r �'1 � �� a \� \ _�` � a LL__ o ,�� t + - ,u .. . .. � R � / b � r, o � �O �y °d.. _ �\ pa�� , •.\ /( � Q� �,� ` ti� � � � 'ti y � m , ,�.i _ � ,£b'6Ll - M„ZS,S£.00S � --} �� 1� W O �"� `�{�' \ .ssi \ �s—��\�_� ',; ; `� . � � ,n, 1 ��s.� C� O O = \ \ `h —.� _.. i3 �.� �d �r�a �ar.ia� �,-.� . � �+ \ � � ft ��S \ O � �, q � . . 1t 1. �\ °��°- 4080 � � � � w �� . \ 9Z � � \ ` J \ \ �� H p 'ti ,�" '�a �s � � "�1,, —� \ z \ �� :�� fy � �� \ � N . ,. . � \ ��. , � o� �'�k3 � �i � . � � � '` � � _ � °e �a � �� i� � � e� �� \ \� e3 \ —� �' = z�r � N� � � ` � . '� �'�.� � \ ko \ � •`��—_ _ \ ' a` ' — � '1� � i W n 3 ��qW � \ �� __ " —�' -' �� \ � — � _ � , �� ot —s� ; � g� � � � � � � -°_��-_ � � ti�z- -- �'/� � �C Eti � � —: �—<t�- si i � —�- �aa� \ � � � � \ � � _ ��e— i n�):;� _ �t3 � _ Notsorvdsnaa- � �� \ � \��--\\ ---� �� _ �J j l/ �� + � � I � � �, � o e � � .''e �� a � � � (� � ti c�� z y �, � � " �m '� ' w q � V O`:\ \ •„•;•, - _ a^ \ °a� I �Ow -y = � �. _ � s= . " . � E~r �" W F s . � \ ' '\ @�s'.. _\ �{`o �'.� s ss � w G� U 7 - � sog —\ � � � - '�'� \ � � p� z � �\ � °�� \ �\',"�c � �� \` \� \ �;� � � � � ��° �� ''� " � �� V � ,� -�, �c o a � d �au � � �,` uLL �� \ � \\�d �'� �� -- ��' � M \�, � � �� —� �� , � � Y �i �. _ � �\ �� 1 = N ��` � � � a \ \ ( U � ,0.; ,��_�� '' �� \ r �� `'�^`' � �t, �\ �' _ �e � ,`� � - s � �. ; � � .� °�' � � s _ € � _`*° � � �� °�'�o ��,� _ � m V A a .. �� . U `�' 8 � � f. 1 g � s I � I� � � sy ?� o� A : < ; _ _, \ `� � � o; � s � \ p � � ��° - � �� z � 1\ �� _ — � m� o :�m -'�'�' �` �� ,,a5 � � �� \�� " � \� _ � T�; � � � __ -_� �• ��`� \ ��` -� � i 1 � & o��ge'�a a � . �j } ..� . E & -' n 3� � � � a _ ' �5 � ` a .' U � � w' $ b O � \ � , a �r \ � N I m � � a� �� \ ` ��a" /�� __ s� s� �� n$ '„, ni�.;. e„;� . Y� � � � � �✓ \ , - . U� � � � �"� ' s n r„ � � i G Sg ° _� 4� �� °3m ° - 6� � �o \� :: N 59 . +.,� �.�w"�'Rn ' z�S.F 8 a8'� - � �,i di y "e �."�er ��j��."a °�",Fm: ��R : � � � �� " P � � ° � �+ .am�ca.i �G�i3�g��RC°uf�iL'G ��h'J5h9.^�99�^.��m��J � � O 3� \ � ��k� � � M h � � � _ � ti�' O� � �� [y� �.y �1 � ��'' �C� � � O� c�0 w � �� ' � � q �� N�� qa p� �W �N�[r ino ��Ga�O ��h '" � h �.] � � � � � � � � O � � � �� ti ��C��^� � V1 "1 N Q � � O O� �� ,\0 �h � �� q �� W� ;�o��° w � � x � h � �g� — �� '� � �� o- CC r �t � n � �� : s �a Ra $ �g�E ��agE i �' a?" � � 1` `\ ` ,1 ,� z- �og w6 \ w ` >U� � on I Rv aR , \ ,` — � — W1£$ � '� ` ` y �ma Un , + 3 � oFo g= � J a � xo � � �� W� ` �6 <� � ¢ � o F> z , \ Uh o . .9�. �` ` o _� £ \ � � \ _� '�.�SF , _� t9ZS �4� , , \ _ � � _\� � BJ � / R PD I\� �� _� �a V FORap�v� / ' �, ` 1 / 1 �� ° _� � so / � 1 � —\� _ � � I � � � \ � p ° �{ 3 I \ -�\ '� �� . \ -_g— �"� O � ^ � SA \ � . �1 �z � iPd /'� \ oN rc g \ �N ( $�� \ " W z � � �� \ �a �� \Fo �� N an II �s_ � � _� -o ��\�� 1 1 �w .`�m � �\ .��\�� . N� / � Q` I1 . �` =� — '� .£Z'6Lt - M.,iSS£.005 ,� m _ ± � � a � � � ., � L � U r's � s ++ Q W `- 9 H o � � H 8 $ �o g B � �' � � 5 = � � m K g � o a g 5 � � � � � � 8 � � � g & fi s � ° d„�aa g o � � �� g g a � � Q� g � „ � �? �F k � ��za�y�88 ��=0� g s2 � - _ �, niec�"-�sisv\: \� o \\ — — — _ — 1, �,�,.\ ,� m��a�a$ —�' � ��o\ . � 'qy-\ � .\ =p:' � °�" � �a � �� _� , � . `\ g\ \ �� aw �� \�� ¢ \\ �� c�� Y "$ , ��°� �1 \ � �� - _ « m '��' � ol � — \ `!-- ' .t _. 3� \ �� ati ' ` ' �z� oi —s�t `� A��I� � ol \ \ — \ `<t' ' _ � ti c�z_ �3a�- � � aV ' 'm '-V �_us�n a�1,� aNOtsoN�sn3a- '� J � ��:�� =� �, �� `� � � � �i j ' a V � f ' � ng L" �n tlC w \ � j� �\ �� g� '� w �� `� Y Y: Y. Y - pa, `� � I K { � aa a � oa a �°s° ��$ _\ a� c, � � �I 6 o et t . \ /�\\\ �� \\� �� \ `�`c°� \ � Ct� � �t � &$ $ \ � �w� \ \ \ �m �I�._ Y �°2 \/mo� �g�J � � wl \ � � N �\'� � � °��F a��F Q�u�F ,� '\ � � � � a g g a n a � y�° �' `-. 3 \, � �c� � � �'�' � . .\ \ f � \ \�\ � . . ;. $� N \\. \ \ � 0 a �5 \ \ �' �c'T 's.�'�t t�� \ � �� n � fr� � a� �� —m-� � _ I� \\ „�£ �,� va a \ � � � � � ��'s C ,a @� � �� \ sy . ` \\ O��- �.. . \ \� �d \� J ��'� '�' ��.. _ � �. m a�In - X n \ \/��(�Zbs � ��\U� �� . ' _ � � � MA 'zii '� '�p \ / � % — �.. ,r,.; � .� C _�C ` � Bw�m �o� � g P� \ \ \� d �J — �.,� � � ��, — �\ _ y -- e. � �� .\ .�� .. �� -�� =�I��II�� =�� - �� 0oo0-a�� o0oa oa�� o = � \ mm � � Ni OF J � '\ Wy U ��\ t � � 1 � �,q 1 ��y � � � � , �aa � \ , _ , � ,, � � � o :� . � � � a, � � ; �_� �� '' � „ w,: �� ,:�� ,,, !% f�` � �� 2 �� 4�' il� QW .,1� � � J ; I' LL , iIl W� -,I s.i, Q � _ � � � y rjd. � Q i �� ! Q z �', ;�i � a � --�i�l IL z �� !v � � `'� �'� � z � ,' �3 ,' I Q � 'i� �� ;�'I �Q i � � � � ,M o/� � �� i I^.L � '\ . LL . � r !: � S i� E !E ' �� r��. o� '� if;li �w , ! �°,!��' ��. , �� I�� ' �� I'. :�� I� , � � � 3 � II� j�� 1 E 3 ��i�k��.� � ! �� I�,1I � � � — ,'','��j� i.. .�I� h �, ` �� F,-ti,`. :�� .�j�� s �� _ �� .z ��. ».�. �. �'�.��;,�� _, � -� �i.'Y�i i Gi`f:i� � . � � ��a . �j ��{l, - �� '^ ��:��; � �� . _� .y =..,�z a n �,x� o \ °� n ;.� , ��.-� ' 1��'f;� ; �< J �' N � � ��. � �� — �� : �� e'��,E `t� o� � �'\� �` � ��o � - � \ '�� ''` ,� '` �: �.�` ��` <,�� .� a a,2; � �.� ' I,�,1 3� F?9�! (� -� T `j.. 5. W � - p �.T� G If t � S - o 'fai'S�J.Ri'�iJ`i' � l �j�1'$: �yaX �♦4 . 4 � '`9 � ;i:�«'�0. ~,��i31� I ¢ S" -$ ,' 3 3�?� � � I . I ' Z i[4� ' ��' � Y1:� � � k� �� p P ` / ,� IS �J � .s� ' � �" � � r'.( , � ,�i � : y ry ; �� q , t;%' ,._ � � �, , ; � � �E � � �4 .;;� � � r� r _. �x:::::....' ��::� . '� � �,4 � _'�: �, ��, � �=4. , _ � � �,��a��,� - � i, � ,, � `.�°' �� ' � ,.j & � c:z "''' `��'� < u ,� � � " ;�u , ��' �. m ; � )� ;i�� 1:I I F� I w f ' � 4�' � ��/7 t ! '�'! �� f;:`! q ��, � � �� rX � �7�i , ;� � � i ' K '- h� ,� � .�ii��i'� � ��,�iii�' z % �, i{� ��I�i: J w ! $ I ��q r �!k,� � Y' � ��'� 5�� %II� Q ��§ �; II 4. V� I(l��r.'�i z I �. i ; �III�I ��'�!;;�� q Yi �S� �1 1�' i�... � } :y�� I P� � 1; ��i� � t ' ��i �s I iI ,��' I '8 i, ��, i ��.� i l �. F ��. r,� f,,. �54.; �� : sa1 , �� `i � � � U a Ip �;�� vi Ilg�� 8 � U C d s � e � � � MEMORANDUM TO: Planning and Environmental Commission FROM: Community Development Department DATE: March 23, 2009 SUBJECT: A request for a work session to discuss prescribed regulations amendments to Title 11, Sign Regulations, Vail Town Code, pursuant to Section 11-3-3, Prescribed Regulations Amendment, Vail Town Code, to allow for housekeeping, clarification and policy shifts for signage within the Town of Vail, and setting forth details in regard thereto. (PEC090007) Applicant: Town of Vail Planner: Rachel Friede I. SUMMARY The applicant, the Town of Vail, is requesting a work session to discuss prescribed regulations amendments to Title 11, Sign Regulations, Vail Town Code, pursuant to Section 11-3-3, Prescribed Regulations Amendment, Vail Town Code, to allow for housekeeping, clarification and policy shifts for signage within the Town of Vail, and setting forth details in regard thereto. Because this is a work session, no formal action is required at this time. Staff requests that the Commissioners listen to the presentation, ask any pertinent questions, and provide feedback on the policy questions found in this memo. II. DESCRIPTION OF REQUEST As a part of the 2009 Code Revision Project, Staff is working on revising Title 11, Sign Regulations. Because the Town and co-applicant, the Vail Chamber and Business Association, reviewed policies of the Sign Regulations in 2007, there are a limited number of policy questions that remain for discussion. The following are the policy questions that Staff is requesting feedback on from the Commission: 1. Should sign application review procedures be amended to allow all signs to be staff reviewed in order to streamline the process? Currently, the Sign Regulations require that Staff provide a first review of signs, only approving those that meet all requirements and guidelines within Chapter 11-5, Design Standards and Guidelines. However, it may be beneficial to expand the role of Staff to provide all review of signage, with a decision made on the Staff level. Should this role be expanded, Staff decisions could be appealed to the Design Review Board. This would streamline the process for applicants and allow a determination to be made on all sign applications in a timelier manner. Staff recommends that this change in policy occur, with the Design Review Board serving to review only sign programs and hear appeals of Staff determinations. The following is the language from the Sign Regulations that relates to this question: 11-4-2: S/GN APPL/CAT/ON REVIEW.� A. Criteria For Decision: Each sign application is subject to the following two (2) leve/s of review: staff review and design review board (DRB) review. 1. Staff Review: The community deve/opment department of the town of Vail shall accept for review the properly completed sign application. a. If the staff determines that the sign application unquestionably meets the standards of this tit/e, including the design guidelines and standards as they are stated in chapter 5 of this tit/e and the technical requirements as they are stated in chapters 6 and 7 of this tit/e, staff shall then approve the application. All applications approved by the staff shall be listed on the next publicly posted agenda of the design review board. b. If the staff determines that the sign application meets the standards of this tit/e, but does not unquestionably meet the design guidelines and standards as they are stated in chapter 5 of this tit/e and the technical requirements as they are stated in chapters 6 and 7 of this tit/e, staff will schedule the application for review by the design review board at their next hearing, he/d the first and third Wednesdays of each month. c. If the staff determines that the sign application does not meet the standards outlined in this tit/e, including the design guidelines and standards as they are stated in chapter 5 of this tit/e and the technical requirements as they are stated in chapters 6 and 7 of this tit/e, staff shall deny the application. Upon denia/ of the application based on lack of compliance with any part of this tit/e, the applicant will be notified of the denial in writing and may submit a new application to the staff, file an appea/ of the staff decision to the design review board, or file an application for a variance in accordance with chapter 10, "Variances And Appea/s", of this tit/e. 2. Design Review Board Review: The design review board will review all sign applications scheduled on their agenda by staff, in the required presence of the applicant or such applicant's representative, to ascertain the proposal's conformance with the design guidelines and standards as listed in chapter 5 of this tit/e and the technical requirements as listed in chapters 6 and 7 of this tit/e. a. Upon determination of compliance with the design guidelines and standards listed in chapter 5 of this tit/e and the technical requirements as listed in chapters 6 and 7 of this tit/e, the design review board will approve, or approve with conditions, the applicant's sign proposal. The applicant will be notified in writing of the approva/ and any conditions placed on the approval, and may then erect the sign according to the approved application. b. Upon design review board denia/ of the application based on the design guidelines and standards listed in chapter 5 of this tit/e and/or the technical requirements listed in chapters 6 and 7 of this tit/e, the applicant will be notified in writing of the reasons for denia/ and may submit a new 2 application to staff according to the recommendations from the design review board. The applicant may file an appea/ to the town council if he/she chooses not to submit a new application to staff (see chapter 10, "Variances And Appea/s", of this tit/e). 11-5-2: DES/GN GUIDEL/NES: Any sign erected within the town of Vail should: A. Be consistent with the sca/e and architecture already present in the town: Sign location, configuration, design, and size should be aesthetically harmonious with the mountain setting and the alpine village atmosphere of the town. B. Be compatible with the placement of surrounding signs: Similar signs should not be placed within close proximity of each other, but should instead incorporate variety and visual interest within the "view corridor" that they are placed. The staff shall review all proposed signs in the context of adjacent signage to verify that the sign is appropriately placed. C. Be composed of predominately natural materia/s which may include, but are not limited to, painted, stained, solid, or carved wood,� brick; stone; wrought iron or meta/s such as copper or brass that have been treated to prevent ref/ective g/are; nonref/ective g/ass and stained g/ass; other naturally textured building materia/s. P/astic and other synthetic materia/s that are not naturally textured, such as sign foam, vinyl or P/exig/as0, are discouraged. D. Use natural co/ors: 1. Earth tones: Full spectrum of soil, clay, and metallic co/ors; 2. Neutra/s: Off whites to deep brown and black; 3. Bright co/ors should be used only as accents. E. Use creative graphics and lettering: The creative use of depth, relief, shading, three- dimensional projections and other pleasing textural qualities is generally encouraged. The guidelines that apply to genera/ sign co/ors likewise apply to graphics and /ettering. Three-dimensional projections shall not be calculated as part of tota/ sign area, but the size, placement, and style of the projections shall be subject to design review. F. Be surrounded by landscaping: Landscaping, when appropriate, should be designed in harmony with surrounding natural landforms and native plants (Xeriscaping). G. Use inconspicuous lighting: Lightin the sign, both in co/or and placement, necessary to make the sign visib/e at encouraged. 11-5-3: DES/GN STANDARDS: g should be integrated into the overall design of and should be of no greater illumination than is night. Recessed and indirect light sources are Any sign erected within the town of Vail shall conform to the following standards: A. Compatibility: Signs shall be visually compatible with the size of surrounding structures and other signage and shall not visually dominate the structure or business to which they be/ong. The staff shall review all proposed signs in the context of adjacent signage to verify that the sign is appropriately sized. B. Co/ors: Fluorescent, Day-G/o0 and neon co/ors are prohibited. C. Ref/ective Surfaces: Sign surfaces that ref/ect light are prohibited and shall instead be comprised of matte or f/at finishes. D. Lighting Fixtures: Lighting shall be white in co/or. Lights shall not shine or ref/ect onto adjacent properties. Internal illumination and fluorescent/neon light sources are prohibited. All lighting shall be subject to design review. E. Sign Maintenance: All signs, including their support structures and re/ated fixtures, shall be kept in good repair,� this includes replacement of lighting, repainting when appropriate, and other actions that contribute to attractive signage. The display surfaces and hardware of all signs shall be properly painted, finished, or posted at all times. The g/ass surfaces on which window signs are affixed shall be well maintained. F. E/ectrica/ Wiring: E/ectrical wiring shall be concea/ed. In addition, all signs that contain e/ectrical wiring shall be subject to the provisions of the adopted e/ectrical code of the town and the e/ectrical components shall bear the /abe/ of an approved testing agency. G. Wind Pressure And Dead Load Requirements: Any "sign", as defined throughout this tit/e, shall be designed to withstand wind pressures and shall support dead /oads as required by the most recent building code (IBC) at the time of construction, as adopted by the town of Vail and determined by the chief building official. H. Moving Parts: Signs that have, or appear to have, moving parts (aside from natural wind induced movement) are prohibited. l. P/acement On Public Property: Signs shall be constructed on private property outside of the town right of way and shall not project onto the town right of way except when permitted under a licensing agreement or a revocab/e right of way permit issued from the town of Vail. J. Sign Inspection: Each sign for which a permit is required shall be subject to inspection by the staff. Chapter 8: S/GN PROGRAMS 11-8-1: S/GN PROGRAM DESCR/PT/ON: The purpose of the sign program is to encourage a comprehensive approach to the design, size, number, shape, co/or, and placement of all signs pertaining to a particular deve/opment or building containing a business or group of businesses. A sign program shall convey an organized, innovative, and unique approach to multiple signs. 4 11-8-2: CR/TER/A: Sign programs shall be required for all new or demolished/rebuilt multi-family residential projects and for new or demolished/rebuilt commercial projects. Sign programs may be required for other significant new deve/opments (e.g., subdivisions, ski base facilities) or for redeve/opment projects at the discretion of the staff. Existing multi-tenant commercial buildings shall be required to submit a sign program when applying for new signage. Sign programs shall be subject to the provisions, standards, and guidelines listed in this tit/e. 11-8-3: S/GN PROGRAM REVIEW.� All sign programs shall be subject to the design review process detailed in chapter 4, "Sign Application Procedures", of this tit/e. 2. Should the window sign policy be amended to allow businesses to cover windows in their entirely with signage or graphics in order to shield view from storage rooms or other undesirable uses? Recently, some businesses have completely covered windows with graphics or signage in order to block view to storage areas. While most businesses put storage in the back of house where the space is already undesirable for retail use, others are using space near windows that border pedestrian ways to accommodate their stock. Under current regulations, window signs can cover up to 15% of the window area, with no one sign exceeding six (6) square feet. Many businesses are covering the windows completely, with some placing the signage at least 3 feet from the window to remain in compliance with the law. Windows adjacent to pedestrian ways provide visual stimulation for pedestrians and enhance the retail experience of the commercial cores. Staff contends that the Sign Regulations and the Zoning Regulations should explicitly require that windows not be covered unless a window box for display is created, allowing merchandise to be displayed rather than a large graphical sign. This will prevent businesses from covering their windows, which will detract from the overall pedestrian experience and will create a less inviting retail atmosphere. The following are regulations that pertain to this question: 11-6-3: BUS/NESS S/GNS: E. Window Signs (SD 1 And SD 2): 1. Number.� The number of window signs is not regulated as /ong as area requirements are met. 2. Area: The area of any window sign shall not exceed fifteen percent (15%) of the area of the window in which it is placed, with a maximum size per window sign of six (6) square feet. Mullions that are more than twelve inches (12') wide shall be considered window separators, thereby signifying a separate "window area ". Sa/e signs, business operation signs, promotiona/ event posters and open/closed signs do not count toward window sign area calculations. 3. Height: The top of any window sign shall not extend more than twenty five feet (25) above existing grade. 4. Specia/ Provisions: Signs placed inside of a business, within three feet (3) of a window and visible from the outside, including, but not limited to, sa/e signs, business operation signs, and open/closed signs, shall be counted toward total window sign area. 3. Should balloons be allowed outside of businesses? Recently, a number of businesses have been placing balloons outside of their establishment to attract customers. Currently, the Sign Regulations only allow balloons as part of a special events permit, including the new Special Business Promotion Permit that allows individual businesses to have increased signage and balloons if providing some public activity that is outside of their regular business activity. Recently, more businesses have taken advantage of the Special Business Promotion Permit and more balloons have appeared throughout the commercial core. While balloons could be viewed as providing livelihood to the pedestrian areas, once deflated, the balloons become a nuisance and typically end up as trash in the streets. The balloons also contrast the small mountain resort town aesthetic that is characteristic of Vail. Staff recommends that balloons continue to be allowed only as a part of a special events permit in order to limit the amount of balloons in the commercial core areas. The following are the regulations related to balloons: 11-7-11: BALLOONS: All balloons, regard/ess of their size, shall be subject to a specia/ events permit. 4. Should lighting requirements be amended to meet the lighting requirements of Title 14, Development Standards? In 2009, the outdoor lighting requirements in Title 14, Development Standards were amended to require that all lights be fully cut-off in order to reduce lighting pollution and lighting trespass onto other properties. This only applies to lighting applied for in the future, and will not retroactively put requirements on existing lights. While most lights in the Town of Vail will have to conform to these requirements, there was an exemption written in for the Sign Regulations until a decision could be made on sign lighting policy. Currently, the Sign Regulations include the following regulations on lighting: D. Lighting Fixtures: Lighting shall be white in co/or. Lights shall not shine or ref/ect onto adjacent properties. Internal illumination and fluorescent/neon light sources are prohibited. All lighting shall be subject to design review. The vague nature of the regulations allow for a wide variety of sign lighting that, in many cases, is unnecessarily bright for its intended use. The regulations that are currently in place do not provide direction on what is necessary to light a sign. Therefore, many businesses utilize high power lighting sources that reflect light onto the street, providing yet another source of light pollution. Staff recommends that the lighting regulations be amended to provide the same requirements as other outdoor lighting. The outdoor lighting regulations are as follows: 6 14-10-7: OUTDOOR L/GHT/NG: A. Purpose: This section establishes standards and guidelines for minimizing the unintended and undesirable side effects of outdoor lighting while encouraging the intended and desirable safety and aesthetic purposes of outdoor lighting. It is the purpose of these standards and guidelines to allow the minimum amount of lighting needed for the property on which the light sources are /ocated, while protecting the legitimate privacy of neighboring properties. The standards and guidelines established in this section are a/so intended to promote the use of environmentally sensitive and energy efficient lighting techno/ogies, and to promote "dark sky" lighting fixtures and installation techniques to reduce light pollution. B. Applicability: Except as provided e/sewhere in this tit/e, the design, placement, and use of all outdoor lighting within the town limits shall conform to the standards and guidelines as set forth in this section. C. Definitions: FULL CUTOFF: Light fixtures that do not emit light above the horizontal plane of the light source. L/GHT SOURCE: A sing/e artificial point source of luminescence that emits measurable radiant energy in or near the visible spectrum. LOW DENS/TY RES/DENT/AL PROPERT/ES: For the purposes of this section, low density residential properties shall be defined as properties with no more than three (3) dwelling units or employee housing units. MULT/PLE-FAMILY AND COMMERC/AL PROPERT/ES: For the purposes of this section, multiple-family and commercia/ zoned properties shall be defined as those with four (4) or more dwelling units or employee housing units, commercial uses, or mixed- uses. OUTDOOR L/GHT/NG: Any light source, or collection of light sources, located outside a building, including, but not limited to, light sources attached to any part of a structure, located on the surface of the ground, or located on freestanding po/es. D. Lighting Regulations. 1. Quantity of Light Fixtures: The maximum number of outdoor light sources for all properties is subject to the requirements of the adopted building codes and design review. For low density residential properties, the maximum number of light sources per lot shall be limited to one outdoor light per one thousand (1,000) square feet of lot area. Light sources which are no more than eighteen inches (18") above grade, as measured from the top of the fixture to the finish grade be/ow, and are full cutoff fixtures, may be allowed in addition to the total number of permitted outdoor light sources. 7 2. Height Limits for Light Fixtures: Outdoor lights affixed to a structure shall not exceed the height of the roof eave. The maximum mounting height for light sources on a po/e shall not exceed twenty feet (20). 3. Full Cutoff.� All outdoor lights shall be fully cutoff to not emit light above the horizontal plane of the light source. Outdoor lights must be llluminating Engineering Society (IES) "Full Cutoff" C/ass, Internationa/ Dark-Sky Association (IDA) approved, or have similarly recognized verification of being full cuttoff. Lights must be installed and maintained in such a manner that the full cutoff is effective. Exceptions: the following outdoor lights may be non-full cuttoff.� a. Up-lighting fully contained by an overhanging building e/ement that prevents the light from emitting upward to the sky, when the light source is shie/ded from the sides. b. Up-lighting for f/ags when the light source is shie/ded from the sides. c. Lights with a gas f/ame as the so/e light source. d. Lights specifically recommended by the Vail Comprehensive P/an. 4. Lighting Direction: All outdoor lighting shall be directed at the object intended to be illuminated and away from adjacent properties and public ways. Outdoor lights shall be directed downward, unless contained by overhanging building or landscape e/ements with the light source shie/ded from the sides. Up-lighting is allowed for f/ags when the light source is shie/ded from the sides. 5. Energy Efficiency: All outdoor lighting shall comply with the Town's adopted energy conservation code. E. Lighting Guidelines: 1. Compatibility: All outdoor lighting fixtures, fixture /ocations, and the co/or and intensity on the lighting should be aesthetically compatible with the site and structures on which they are /ocated, the character of the surroundings, and with Vail's environment. Outdoor lighting must a/so be consistent with any applicable design guidelines outlined in the Vail Comprehensive P/an. 2. Light Pollution: All outdoor lights should be designed, installed, and maintained to minimize the contribution of outdoor lighting to night time light pollution. Examples of /ow light pollution fixtures are available from lighting manufacturers and organizations such as the Internationa/ Dark-Sky Association (IDA). 3. Energy Efficiency: Outdoor lighting should use the /east number of light sources necessary to achieve the safety and aesthetic purposes for the lighting. Outdoor lighting should utilize energy efficient light sources of the /owest wattage feasible, and utilize energy efficient techno/ogies. Outdoor lighting should a/so be operated and maintained to eliminate any unnecessary day-time use and to reduce night time use during non-business hours and periods of limited residentia/ activity. F. Prohibited Outdoor Lights: 1. Lights that f/ash, move, revolve, rotate, scintillate, blink, flicker, vary in intensity or co/or, or use intermittent e/ectrical pulsation. 2. Lights affixed to the top of the roof of a structure. 3. Neon, or similar gas filled, lights. 4. Laser source lights. 5. Search lights. 6. Lights attached to vegetation, except decorative holiday lights. 7. Any lighting that could interfere with the public hea/th, safety, or we/fare. G. Exemptions: The standards of this section shall not apply to: 1. Decorative holiday lights. 2. Sign illumination, as set forth in Tit/e 11 of this code. 3. Officia/ government lighting, other than those owned and maintained by the Town of Vail, installed for the benefit of public hea/th, safety, and we/fare. 4. Outdoor lights associated with an approved Specia/ Events Permit. 5. Outdoor lights associated with an Art in Public P/aces Board (A/PP) approved public art display. 6. Temporary construction zone work lighting associated with an approved building permit or design review approval (construction zone security and egress lights are not exempt from the provisions of this section). 7. Lighting identifying hazards or road construction. III. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Because this is a work session, no formal action is required at this time. Staff requests that the Commissioners listen to the presentation, ask any pertinent questions, and provide feedback on the policy questions found in this memo. Staff also requests that this item be tabled to the April 13, 2009 PEC meeting. 9 �� ,� , � � ► + ,�,, s' � r r ,3 r f y� . � , , �� '� •�_� � ��_ .4� h � � � i'� �. ��a ��M � . � � .� ` . ,.�� .�+ - �� T�f w � � � . � . � � .� �� ;� � ,! . . , -. �, ` 1�,. � �� -� R�" �s��r ��ans rt�� a� . � � � � ��+-_-"+_S. �� Y t� E _ r.." . �• ., � ' , ,- �-_�: r��'�•�� . . _ �.r ; z ��I"G� �4�g • 1 � � .� � � � � �� . �� + . . , `�'�r`�� --�e�,�, � . '`�-� � '�� • _ �4 w� �=. � ;� * - ' . �w I'"t � � a�'�'i �k�,� ' . J ',W •�. _F y �� - "�: wv� . . f� � � ��' ...� . '� . ` , � ` F L� � • ' i � ,� - � - L , ' - . . . �- � � � - � '� ' -� � F '� ; ' it �' ` ; .,� � � � �` �L': , y, _ ' _ � . �e I � , ''+ # ' ' � .� � �; _ _• • �;� �. � . �.� � �j ii �, , �' °,,..,.+1�► � � ' � � ;, � � -"�- . x {,� w �r . - �;v �� .�' '. •i� - '� . � � . . + ��'..' 1I s �- . + � � Tr• t'�r .p I!. YI . 4 � +�� 1" �� '�� 'R° 'r �.:� '� �r i . � � 'rd r �. � :1�� y: i 1 !, r � � . . ~. � . '3 ,' • 4 ?�� , i ° _ .;�� t � - � � ��'�� , w �'. . � , , rx�,.� ,�•_- w,�„ ; � . ,, 1�, a. , �,* ti � �' �.� �` , �.�.� , „ ��ti � 1 ; �t* _ } . �•� � � 2 _ L �i4 1 �� ' ' •�• ��e�_ t � xw.. � � • ' J 4 � . � ` . �•� i a� -�. 1.� ;�, e �.'t I�i � �� y 1 �� . � A' ' _ .f Y ` � �.F , q� •' � . t,- ,� + � . � h � . . .. � . . ' ��'� ` . . _ -. +� - � • �� y.. i A . � — _ Vail Transportation Master Plan Document In order not to overwhelm you we have trimined the entire report down to just the the Vail Transportation Master Plan main document and Appendix G— Fron,tage Road Access Management Plan. The Access Management Plan is a took that wi11 be used by both the Town and CDOT. The Appendices that have not been included are; A-F which are generally technical back-up for information within the report, and Appendices H-T are historical documents that provide a foundation for the report. These additional Appendices are available upon request and will be available on the Town of Vail website by the beginning of next week. Please let me know if you would like a hardcopy of any of them and we will provide one. Thank you. Tom Kassmel tkassmel�vail o� 479-2235 VAIL TRANSPORTATION MASTER PLAN UPDATE �-. ._ Prepared for: Town of Vail Public Works Department 1309 Elkhorn Drive Vail, Colorado 81657 Prepared by: Felsburg Holt & Ullevig 6300 South Syracuse Way, Suite 600 Centennial, CO 80111 303/721-1440 And Town of Vail Public Works Staff Project Manager: Christopher J. Fasching, PE FHU Reference No. 05-168 March 18, 2009 Vail Transportation Master Plan ilpdate LIST OF APPENDICES APPEIVDIX A TRAFFIC COUNTS APPENDIX B EXISI-ING LOS CALCULATIONS APPENDIX C DETAILED TRAVEL TIME DATA APPENDIX D FRONTAGE ROAD COLLISION DIAGRAMS APPENDIX E DEVELOPMENT AND TRIP GE�IERATION ESTIMATES APPENDIX F CONCEPTUAL LAYOUTS OF INIPROVENIENTS PLAN APPENDIX G FRONTAGE ROAD ACCESS MANAGEMENT PLAN APPEIVDIX H VAIL 20/20 STRATEGIC PLAN - 2009 APPENDIX I LIONSHEAD TRANSIT CENTER WHITE PAPER 2008 APPENDIX J EVALUATION OF HIGHWAY NOISE MITIGATION ALTERN��TIVES FOR VAIL COLORADO - 2005 & VAIL NOISE MEASUREMENTS - Tec,hinical Memorandum 2007 APPENDIX K LIONSHEAD MASTER PLAN - TRANSPORTATION ANALY;31S - 1998 & 2006 APPENDIX L A REPORT ON THE RECOMMENDATION OF A PREFERRI�D SITE FOR THE VAIL TRANSIT CEN"fER - 2005 APPENDIX M VAIL TUNNEL OPTIONS - SQUARE 1 DOCUMENT (DRAFl�) - 2005 APPENDIX N VAIL TRANSPORTAI"ION MASTER PLAN UPDATE - 2002 APPENDIX O VAIL VILLAGE LOADING AND DELIVERY STUDY - 1999 APPENDIX P WEST VAIL IIVTERCHAIVGE ALTERIVATIVE ANALYSIS - 1996 APEENDIX Q FEASIBILITY STUDY I-70/CHAMONIX ROAD - 1996 APPENDIX R IVIAIN VAIL INTERCHANGE FEASIBILITY STUDY - 1995 APPENDIX S VAIL TRANSPORTAI"ION MASTER PLAN - 1993 APPENDIX T FEASIBILITY OF A PEOPLE MOVER SYSTEM TO REPLAC;E THE IN-TOWN SHUTTLE BUS ROUTE - 1987 . FELSBURG �i HOLT & ULLEVIG Vail Transportation Master Plan Update PREFACE Purpose of the Master Plan The purpose of the Vail Transportation Master Plan is to consolidate and update the transportation planning and desjgn efforts that have been on-going for the past 20 years. This most recent document, which is based on the existing conditions of Vail's transportation system, current trends and the anticipated growth, will guide the implementation of Vail's transportation system for the next 20 years. In order to keep the plan a viable document over this time period, continuous monitoring of the transportation system and periociic updates of the plan are needed, including periodic traffic counts and formal master plan updates. Previous transportation documents are referenced and summarized in the appendices of this document. These referenced documents remain relevant and provide additiorial insight and guidance for transportation planning and design purposes. The scope of each of these referenced documents focus on various transportation related topics with som� overlapping subjects. The redundancy in this is deliberate to create a historical base and provide the necessary background information to predict accurate trends. It is implied that all overlapping, inconsistent information between documents shall be superceded by the most recent and relevant document. This master plan is intended to provide direction for a period of time over the next 20 years. It does not convey approval for any one particular improvement, development, project, or facility. Every improvement shall go through the applicable town review process prior to implementation. Adoption and Amendment of the Master Plan The Vail Transportation Master Plan was adopted by resolution No. _, Series of 2009, on , 2009, by the Vail Town Council following a recommendation to approve by the Planning and Environmental Commission. Future amendments to this master plan must be approved by resolution or motion by the Town Council following ;a formal recommendation by the Planning and Environmental Commission. Implementation activities and ordinances will be approved in accordance with the Town of Vail Municipal Code. � FELSBURG C� HOLT b: ULLEVIG Page i Vail Transportation Master Plan Update TABLE OF CONTENTS Paqe PREFACE---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- i Purpose of the Master Plan-------------------------------------------------------------------------------- i Adoption and Amendment of the Master Plan -------------------------------------------------------- i EXECUTIVE SUMMARY -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------iii I. INTRODUCTION -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1 II. EXISTING CONDITIONS -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 4 A. Traffic Conditions---------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 4 B. Parking----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------15 C. Transit -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------16 III. AN'I'ICIPATED GROWTH -------------------------------------------------------------------------------19 A. Development --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------19 B. Parking ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------20 C. Inter-Relationship of the Various Modes ---------------------------------------------------22 IV. PRO.JECTED 2025 PM PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC CONDITIONS-------------------------------23 A. Traffic Volume Forecasts-----------------------------------------------------------------------23 B. Traffic Operations --------------------------------------------------------------------------------26 V. IMPROVEMENT ALTERNATIVES------------------------------------------------------------------ -33 A. Main Vail Interchange ---------------------------------------------------------------------------33 B. West Vail Interchange---------------------------------------------------------------------------37 C. South Frontage Road — Vail Road to Ford Park------------------------------------------40 D. South Frontage Road — Vail Road to West Lionshead (Ever Vail) ------------------43 E. West Vail Redevelopment----------------------------------------------------------------------44 F. Other Improvements-----------------------------------------------------------------------------45 G. Frontage Road Cross Section-----------------------------------------------------------------45 H. Transit-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------46 I. Parking ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------48 VI. FRONTAGE ROAD ACCESS MANAGEMENT PLAN ------------------------------------------51 VII. RECOM M EN DE D TRANS PORTATION P LAN ----------------------------------------------------52 A. Roadway Improvements------------------------------------------------------------------------52 B. Travel Demand Management -----------------------------------------------------------------61 B. Travel Demand Management -----------------------------------------------------------------62 C. Transit-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------62 D. Parking ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------66 E. Pedestrians and Trails --------------------------------------------------------------------------66 VIII. IMPROVEMENT TRIP THRESHOLDS --------------------------------------------------------------67 IX. IMPROVEMENT COST ESTIMATES ----------------------------------------------------------------70 X. OTHER CONSIDERATIONS ---------------------------------------------------------------------------73 A. Priorities --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------73 B. Other Planning Efforts---------------------------------------------------------------------------73 C. I-70 P E I S------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 74 D. Implementation of Recommended Plan ----------------------------------------------------74 E. Funding Sources ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------76 F. Next Steps -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------78 � FELSBURG C' HOLT & ULLEVIG Vail Transportation Master Plan Update LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1 Figure 2 Figure 3 Figure 4 Figure 5 Figure 6 Figure 7 Figure 8 Figure 9 Figure 10 Figure 11 Figure 12 Figure 13 Figure 14 Figure 15 Figure 16 Figure 17 Figure 18 Figure 19 Figure 20 Paqe Townof Vail Study Area ------------------------------------------------------------------------- 2 Existing Peak Season Traffic------------------------------------------------------------------- 5 Existing Levels of Service----------------------------------------------------------------------- 8 Existing Vail Bus Routes -----------------------------------------------------------------------18 Trip Assignment Distribution-------------------------------------------------------------------25 Residential "Close-in" Areas for Trip Generation-----------------------------------------27 2025 Peak Hour Traffic Projections----------------------------------------------------------28 Year 2025 Peak Hour Levels of Service----------------------------------------------------31 Vail Frontage Road Daily Traffic During Winter Peak Season------------------------32 Central Vail Parking Imbalance---------------------------------------------------------------50 Recommended Frontage Road Improvement Plan — Central Vail-------------------53 Recommended Frontage Road Improvement Plan — West Vail----------------------54 Vail Frontage Road Laneage------------------------------------------------------------------58 Vail Frontage Road Cross-Section-----------------------------------------------------------59 Year 2025 Peak Hour Traffic Projections with Recommended Plan ----------------60 Year 2025 Peak Levels of Service with Recommended Plan-------------------------61 Proposed Vail Bus Routes ---------------------------------------------------------------------64 West Vail Frontage Road Improvements---------------------------------------------------71 Main Vail Frontage Road Improvements ---------------------------------------------------72 Figure Coming Soon ----- Transportation Master Plan Preliminary Prioritization and Implementation Plan------------------------------------------------------75 LIST OF TABLES Table 1 2005-2006 Season Travel Time Summary ------------------------------------------------10 Table 2 Vail Frontage Road Accident Summary — Six Years ------------------------------------13 Table 3 Trip Generation Rates---------------------------------------------------------------------------26 Table 4 Travel Time Comparison — Year 2025 Peak Season, PM Peak Hour --------------29 Table 5 Main Vail Interchange North Roundabout — Alternatives Assessment -------------34 Table 6 Main Vail Interchange South Roundabout — Alternatives Assessment-------------35 Table 7 West Vail Interchange North Roundabout — Alternatives Assessment -------------38 Table 8 West Vail Interchange South Roundabout — Alternatives Assessment-------------39 Table 9 South Frontage Road Alternatives Analysis — East of Main Vail Interchange — 2025 Traffic---------------------------------------------------------------------41 Table 10 Vail Interchange PM Peak Hour Levels of Service (LOS)------------------------------57 Table 11 Mitigation Measure Offset; Total New Trips Equivalent --------------------------------68 . FELSBURG Ci HOLT & ULLEVIG � � � Vail Transportation Master Plan Update � � � EXECUTIVE SUMMARY � � The Town of Vail continues to experience growth through new development and the redevelopment of older commercial and residential buildings. Recently, the Town has been involved in planning �� significan# redevelopment projects including West Vail, Ever Vail, the Lionshead Parking Structure, �. and Timber Ridge. Numerous other developments have been recently completed, recently approved, are under construction, or have made application to the Town. In addition, Town staff has � assessed the redevelopment potential for numerous other sites; the culmination of all these � development and redevelopment projects will collectively add noticeable demand (approximately 2,800 trips per hour at peak times, or approximately 25 to 30 percent increase over current Town � development trip generations) on the Town's transportation system. This study was initiated by the Town to assess the nature of the increased transportation demands placed on the Town's systems by all potential developmenUredevelopment as well as that from other regional growth. The study focuses on the Town's Frontage Road System, but considerations for transit service and parking are also ac#dressed towards the development of a comprehensive plan. This study also serves to provide the following: ► Establishment of a Frontage Road improvements plan from which to develop appropriate transportation improvement projects for the Town's primary road system. ► Develop transportation demand management measures to reduce peak traffic flows during the winter. ► Develop a Frontage Road Access Management Plan with support from CDOT for all future access points along the North and South Frontage Roads. ► Identify a strategy and establish direction towards developing a Town parking plan and a transit plan given potential growth. Existing Conditions �^; A significant amount of traffic data has been collected in support of developing this plan. The data � were co�lected over a host of holidays and spring break time periods to reflect peak conditions. Further, roadway/intersection capacity analyses (LOS calculations) accounted for conditions � indicative of mild snow and wet pavement. The analyses of existing traffic conditions led to the � following findings: '� ► The interchanges tend to be the most critical components in the Town's system. Besides � providing access to/from I-70, the interchanges are also the only points within Town where � traffic can cross I-70. This concentration of traffic through these bottleneck areas negatively effect travel time for drivers and for transit service. ► At peak times, drivers are challenged to turn left onto the Frontage Road (either north or south) from a side street. The nature of the challenge varies by cross-street and sectMOn of Frontage Road, but there are numerous locations where drivers attempting such a left turn experience delay. Again, this effects transit operations where bus routing is required to make such turns. � iii � � FELSBURC � �� HOLT & ULLEVIC Page ill � I� Vail Transportation Master Plan Update Parking in Vail has been a high profile issue for many years during peak times. The Town operates two parking structures capable of accommodating 2,500 vehicles. In addition, the Town has established Ford Park for permit parking and allows parking on the South Frontage only when overFlow conditions occur. Frontage Road parking tends to occur 25 to 40 times per winter season depending on conditions (the Town's goal is to achieve 15 days or less per season). Additional parking is needed to better accommodate the frequency of peak days during ski season. The transit service provided by Vail is heavily used. The Town has some of the highest ridership in the state with six outlying routes and a central "spine" route referred to as the In-Town shuttle. The East Vail outlying route often experiences capacity conditions in the morning (inbound) and in the evening (outbound) due to high demand. The two West Vail routes, which travel in a clockwise and counter-clockwise fashion through the West Vail area, provide needed mobility for areas along both sides of I-70, but the interstate is a barrier in providing efficient service to all areas in West Vail. The In-town route is by far the busiest route on the system and it provides frequent service between and within the Lionshead and Vail Village areas. Busy times see this route at capacity as the Town adds buses to maintain frequent service and increase capacity. Delays are often experienced at the Golden Peak area and at the Frontage Road within Lionshead Village (due to the need to turn left onto the Frontage Road). The location of parking areas with respect to commercial uses and ski portal usage is not in a precise balance. Much of the skiing terrain lies toward the eastern end of central Vail (Lionshead and the Village), yet over half of the parking is located in the western portion of Central Vail. Similarly, there is far more commercial use in Vail Village than in Lionshead, further adding to the unbalanced situation of parking demand and supply. Projected Conditions The Town is anticipating a significant amount of growth in the next five to ten years. Considering approved development, submitted development proposals, and potential redevelopment proposal in the future, the Town could experience an additional net 3,000 new units and an additional net new 700,000 square feet of commercial uses. "fhe combination of this additional development is projected to add approximately 2,800 PM peak hour trips onto Vail's roadway system during peak times in the winter. The consequences of the combined traffic impact of the development will significantly impact mobility within Vail, particularly during snowy weather. Transit will also be affected negatively as buses travel along the same roadways and will pass through the same congested intersections as other traffic. Specifically, the following issues are anticipated during the peak hours of peak season: ► Long delays and long lines of vehicles stacked along the westbound off-ramp at the Main Vail interchange (attempting to enter the north roundabout), particularly during the AM peak hour iv � FELSBURG C� HOLT & ULLEVIG Page IV Vail Transportation Master Plan Update ► Long delays and long lines of vehicles stacked alor�g the westbound South Frontage Road approach at the South Main Vail interchange intersection (attempting to enter the south roundabout) ► Significant delays for motorists turning left onto the Frontage Road at numerous cross streets in the Main Vail area and in the West Vail area. ► Significant delay for motorists turning left from the Frontage Road onto Vail Valley Drive due to the peculiar stop sign configuration. (Frontage Road approaches stop while Vail Valley Drive approach does not.) ► Long delays and long lines of vehicles stacked along the westbound North Frontage Road approach at the West Vail interchange intersection (attempting to enter the north roundabout). Numerous options were considered to correct these issues. Some options were intended to address a localized issue whereas other options could address a myriad of issues. A consideration of pros and cons for options as well as other analyses, have led to the recommended plan shown in Figure ES-1 and ES -2 and the general frontage road widening scheme shown in Figures ES-3 and ES-4. One of the most crucial improvements recommended in this plan is the proposed Simba Run underpass of I-70. There are numerous mobility benefits that this improvement would provide to the Town including: ► Traffic congestion relief of the West Vail interchange roundabouts. ► Traffic congestion relief of the Main Vail interchange roundabouts. ► Increased flexibility and efficiency to provide transit service to West Vail including a potential for a"line haul" rapid service connecting the Town's major activity centers. ► Accommodation of a trail connection to serve bicycle and pedestrian activity between areas north and south of I-70. ► Improved response time for emergency vehicles. Other needed improvement considerations as part of the plan include: ► Construction of roundabouts along the North and South Frontage Road at strategic locations to accommodate minor street left turn movements onto the Frontage Road at peak times. ► Lane additions as well as signir�g and roadway lane striping to establish two northbound lanes under I-70 at the West Vail and Main Vail interchanges (lanes would each be 11 feet wide). ► Expansion of the north roundabout at the Main Vail interchange. v � FELSBURC C' HOLT & ULLEVIG Page V � � V W � W ��-1 'a0�1 wZ� �� U U• � � c t � m o � � � � O �p �oo � o c d U c�i a� U U `� � 2 � J V � � . C � C d � C a � � p c � � � o � o U m N O � � a L ai w 3 a N � � U � �n J � � o oa�'�o' � N (O � � 'o � _ C ll � � � C 1 7 aw � EL� U 3 c°� a� t � O U � _ p N t7 � itl C 0� � C C � y p� C O .-. N ` � � (n O C > N "�O d m U � c O � j-o 0 N c�i ;� V� U� �i d° O � [ � O � C � � � c � X O w o� Oy N � a� d� � � N / d 7� y'J✓in y� :� �ai1�a�1eY ��e aJnJ,� a6��s � a'�v �a�u O a6�� Pd �!�n H 41 U u �o n� m � a � 0 �m c. C � � � Q rE �ey�Pd. ,'�. �ot .` .66 O�� `� Olj Cp � �G ,` Jp O ., '�,d y C � i g � '3 � a� � o � � � n � � � — c � o. o � (q 7 N � a m � c �u��o o �° � '� U � ° o 0 N U Y U (O � d � � �i �i � � �� -� �� 3 3 ... � a� c 0 c m rn� � C � N L '0 �' C � �O ��na U m m c � �o � a 'o « Q E �' d � 01 V � � C � 10 � � o � y � d � Q Q d � d i N w � � — N � � W � Q� d. C� V L � �� U � � O L Q � � c� 0 � a� � c� � c � L �..L � � � C � E O U � � � o �� c >� � � O � � � 7 cd � W m � a � � � m aa � . E r � m c�i C O m Q m N 1� O m .c a, m m � c� '�fi �U @ t "c �� m E ��. � i'J ''' � rG� D •o o c m' L a=..' Y lC � m � , � n � � � �! �. m i� :� S� m Q m m rn� � 'c' m � N � � �� m � Z �� z � N � � 0 N N Z m � c _ n N c F > c � �a � a 'o �Q y N � N d � �� a � c /° �a � � o N N N V = t�,� t� Q Q- d N � L N F U �1S U cG ��w � �O� wZ� �� C +--' � O a�i � > � o � E � � � — O � � i � � (� � .� � � � t� '� U Q � � � � (� � � � (� � cIi O �O�o b �jaa�� i._.,.. � � ro J .?c c 0 � � U �7 m� � � � � �— o � U U � (� u� O � � Q Q c� � � rn 1r � � 5 1 � 1 1 L 1 � o � �. � Z � l I ` I � � � I �� a ^ i r.+ ob � I � v, ... ia�„ 1 a� �� 4 ,�; f= � 1 t ^ � iC � � �' ^� '� � � �� ..i �a � a ' o � ,� z o 1 � ,. I � � 1 � � � � 1 1 ! t � � � � I � 1 ` 1 � I � � � j � + ` �I 1 I e t � � �� }; C C 7 C � � � � �C � C Q � .� U � � i C1 � � � � � � � � O � OU � � � � @ C 0 � L 7 O N � a> c c� m Z N o � Q� � Q i � a� a� � � N � — N � � W � d d N L � � � � � �C G � � O Q. � � c� 0 � � � c� � c O � � a� � c a� E 0 U a� � �� z GN�'�N� � � �p� o a� � � � �,a� 3 v 05� o� 1� d5`o�ePa. � Ped �a� � ��. �g� es�ra � ,�e �C� ePa� P`aA /l1 �(e//2� �� 6ui��pd .'0b �a1ua� egp��l '3 6��J1'J � peaysuoi�•jy� \ �N� L �P U��U � � � f�� W �O� wx� .`. _ e�Pa. G�e r� ,re 0J 0 Z W � W J � � c p .o 0 � V � N (n � (n � � �' o 0 (j U U � � � � � c � � J J '--� � O � j � � � II II II U C O L N � ,tie� a� G�� ai � �c �« c �° v 310v Qoc � « �p m"« ��c �._m ��E�o c � a•- N d � ` 'mW�u d=vd a c�cV o u :o °�cq (�`dN N r a c�i r.i N C d Q O'OCT c�m °�-3 Nya�irn v�S F � V � O— �« za Wcn �a'1 aye 5 0 Y U a� `o c7 � O�`�Q�. G,�a�` �' M � � y � � W � L � � � J � � � � C� O � � G� � � c� c � 0 �i � c� � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � . � � � � � o � a � m � � N 0 N � m Z m � 0 m � 0 n N C � � � > � —�� o � Z � / . FELSBURG �I HOLT & ULLEVIG 6' 12' Lane 12' Lane 6' oulder Should Bike � � Bike � y � �� ■ �==r� 2-LANE CROSS-SECTION 10' 12' Lane 12' Lane 16' Lane 12' Lane 6' Walk or Me ian h� � � Bike � � � �� . _ 4-LANE CROSS-SECTION 6' 4' 12' Lane 16' Turn Lane 8� Median 13' Lane 14' Accel/Decl Lane 10' Bike Path arking hld . � � or Thro� Lane Bike Lane � - — ,� 5-LANE CROSS-SECTION NOTE: All cross sections are subject to additional laneage with respect to turn lanes. Some adjustment may be necessary for certain Ixations. Figure ES-4 Vail Frontage Road Cross Sec�lions Veil Transportatlon Services, 05-168, 2116/09 Vail Transportation Master Plan Update Vail Transportation Master Plan Update I. INTRODUCTION The Town of Vail continues to experience growth through new development and the redevelopment of older commercial and residential buildings. Recently, the Town has been involved in planning signiFicant redevelopment projects including West Vail, Even Vail ,Timber Ridge, and the Lionshead Parking Structure Redevelopment. Numerous other developments have been recently completed, recently approved, are under construction, or are in the development review process (Appendix E shows the list of developments and redevelopments). In addition, Town staff has assessed the redevelopment potential for numerous other sites; the culmination of all these development and redevelopment projects will collectively add noticeable demand on the Town's transportation system. �;� This study was initiated by the Town to assess the nature of the increased transportation �, demands placed on the Town's systems by all potential development/redevelopment as well as demand from regional growth. The study focuses on the Town's Frontage Road System, but �'v considerations for transit service and parking are also addressed towards the development of a � comprehensive plan. This study also serves to provide the following: ► Establishment of a Frontage Road improvements plan from which to develop appropriate transportation improvement projects for the Town's primary road system. ► Develop transportation demand management measures to reduce peak traffic flows during the winter. ► Develop a Frontage Road Access Management Plan with support from CDOT for all future access points along the North and South Frontage Roads. ► Identify a strategy and establish direction towards developing a Town parking plan and a transit plan given potential growth. �, This study addresses existing and future conditions for the North and South Frontage Road extending from the West Vail interchange to Ford Park including the West Vail and Main Vail � Interchanges. The focus of this effort has been on the South Frontage Road along the Villages � (Vail and Lionshead Village), but areas such as the West Vail commercial area and the two primary interchanges were analyzed in a bit more detail than other areas within town. The study '� area is generally shown in Figure 1. �' Vail recently completed a planning effort, Vail 20/20, in which the community developed a �, strategic plan to improve the community. Transportation considerations were a big piece of the � overall strategic plan, and the community authored a paper outlining a strategic direction for the Town's transportation system. The five-page paper summarizes current practices/strategies, � future goals, and potential actions to achieve their vision and values. Summary "bullets" from � this effort include: ► Maintaining mobility through out Town ► Discourage use of the automobile ► Manage parking demand/supply to reduce overFlow parking along the Frontage Road ► Provide necessary support to maintain and embellish the area's transit services. ► Accommodate pedestrian and bicycle activity throughout town ► Reduce the negative impacts of I-70 on the Town such as noise. � FELSBURG �' HOLT & ULLEVIG Page 1 w u �� a �� '� :' �� Peasa�ds� U�U K - ��.> m�u� �OJ LL = � '� � � m � � a � T � � � N .@ � O C 3 0 � �� i a a � � � Z � 6 P $ C Vail Transportation Master Plan Update For this Master Plan effort, progress meetings were held on a regular basis with Town staff, and CDOT was involved in many of the progress meetings as well. The conduct of this study coincided with other major planning efforts within the Town of Vail. These included: ► West Lionshead Redevelopment (referred to as Ever Vail) ► West Vai! Redevelopment planning ► Potential redevelopment of the Lionshead Parking Structure Regionally, other transportation planning efforts were oceurring as well including: ► Interstate 70 Central Mountain Transportation Corridor Coalition, Draft Recommendations for the I-70 Mountain Corridor on Travel Demand Management prepared by the Northwest Colorado Council of Governments. The document outlines a series of travel demand management strategies designed to shift travel to outside peak times and encourage transit and high occupancy vehicle travel. ► Intermountain 2035 Regional Transportation Plan recognizes the need for the Simba Run underpass, Frontage Road improvements, an inter-modal facility, West Vail Interchange modifications, trail/pedestrian improvements, noise barriers, and various transit items on the preferred plan. However, only transit-related items were listed in the Region's Fiscally Constrained Plan. ► Eagle County Regional Transportation Authority's (ECO) Transit Vision 2030 which encourages appropriate land use patterns, local supplemental bus services, and the potential for an eventual fixed guideway service extending from Gypsum to Vail. ► I-70 Mountain Corridor Programmatic EIS which considered alternatives along I-70 from C-470 to Glenwood Springs. Within Vail, the effort recognizes the potential for a new underpass of I-70 as well as an intermodal site, and widening of I-70 at Dowd Junction. The current draft PEIS also recognizes preservation for future rail service between Denver and Vail's Transportation Center. � � FELSBURG �� HOLT & ULLEVIG Page 3 Vail Transportation Master Plan Update II. EXISTING CONDITIONS Developing a plan to solve future transportation issues first requires a solid foundation of understanding where Vail is today relative to transportation. This chapter describes current conditions. A. 1. Traffic Conditions Traffic Volumes - Peak Season Peak hour turning movement counts have been collected at numerous locations throughout Town at various peak time periods; the peak winter time periods were the focus of the collection effort. Intersection turning movement counts were collected over a variety of times including the Christmas holiday, Martin Luther King weekend, Presidents Day weekend, and Spring Break times in 2005 and 2006. AM and PM intersection turning movement counts were collected, and adjustments were made for balancing reasons between successive intersections. Figure 2 shows the existing peak season AM and PM peak hour traffic flows. These represent reconciled traffic counts which were collected over a series of peak times, raw traffic data are shown in Appendix A. The PM peak hour traffic demands tend to be greater than the AM peak hour traffic, but some of the predorriinant patterns are reversed. During the morning peak hour, movements tend to be oriented toward the parking structures. The interchanges experience far more traffic exiting I-70 than entering during the AM peak hour, and vice-versa during the PM peak hour. Other characteristics from the data are described as follows: The greatest point of traffic concentration within Vail is at the Main Vail South Ramps/South Frontage RoadNail Road roundabout intersection. During the AM peak hour, approximately 2700 vehicles per hour pass through this intersection and 3200 vehicles per hour pass through it during the PM peak hour making it the busiest intersection in town. Of the peak hour traffic passing under I-70 at this interchange, over one-half of the AM traffic is from I-70 East. During the PM peak hour, over 40% is oriented to I-70 West. Between 30 and 40 percent is estimated to simply cross I-70 (both peak hours). ►"fhe West Vail interchange serves a relatively significant pattern of traffic to/from Down Valley. Given this traffic pattern combined with the traffic generated by the West Vail commercial development, the West Vail north roundabout serves about 2500 vehicles per hour during the PM peak hour (only 1,150 during the AM peak hour), making it the second busiest intersection within Town. Of the PM peak hour traffic passing under I-70 at this point, approximately 10 percent is oriented to/from I-70 east, 45 percent to/from I-70 west, and 45 percent is estimated to simply be crossing I-70. ► The South Frontage Road carries far more traffic than the North Frontage Road. East of the Main Vail Interchange, the South Frontage Road serves nearly 2000 vehicles per hour at peak times. This is the heaviest traveled roadway segment within Town (other than I-70). Of the 2,000 vehicles per hour, approximately 30 percent are comprised of trips between the Main Vail roundabout and the Vail Village parking structure. � FELSBURG C� HOLT & ULLEV►G Page 4 i � e 0 3� J� � ' � r * �� °��`n . -95 �y �" -��_ R' ^n • gtr .. �` om . : (, � S9 *- �y m ° N . OZb 25 � ; -• �� h ^N . ^ Nh a ;� St io � , ¢ � e . -SG ,�o m '' I� � \ Nry r� �Q�� ' �Ob e rr N N j m N > > O O d > > a U U V1 � � � <p <p � U � � 41 V) L 7 7 Of O > 2 2 � � � Y Y U O c0 (p (p � J L N N .d_. H a a� � N i i-- o � a a `0 c� � o n u u u z � X X X X e !F J X X N U � � 7 � � � LL C 0 � � Y lC � � C .� w �� - N �° ° m ry � � S2 R. =\ ooL , S�b�y�� S�E , 0 0 _ o � � , ��5 � �, , � � � � � o� � u,� s�s� � � . s< <�%� 0 � �. � o �i e s � ' go i `�E m � •2� �°�°'�, . �o hl �e4e^ Ne� PtCN�' � 3 5 � } Bw�ued �j' JU \Pd. N O � Pb�elUe 4o�0s � N � � �elll� � � - _ " pd� � . " �'�6 � 'PFII!eA pBd59�e6`o�e � �\a ;s`�� , p . ' � • V 0 - � ��5 ' - � s � �e+ �do � ti �,�e\ � H � ' os � `� , , o ,� . ,` " ` � f � ,L66 e ,� ♦ � h . �6`a�i� ' t Or . , O � . i� `L69 S � i �0�o ss� ,, � I , e ra i PPq4r�oed �_ _ S�"�`� ♦ - `�05`�B '��p� . � , /) � � e �j2� ,� O��e O`flin �i^ � � , O� a�J `�6 l l �� p0 �j � eis,�p . . , Qa'm� o l � �n .o ' �.� ti Peaysooi� �3 . � 0 9� P . Go 5+�9 �.� �� ` � �� `G�eM �i�� - I �aeis,�p �"�. er � ` 2 pee4suoi��M ♦ O , �J� � �g69 26./ * o '� ,0'- > �s��' � 5' ' ;`�' '�`' �` F�� ``Ni �`Cm eA ,�i.y.� R � � n �� /'t(.N * h y , '`"�`L `ob � `�,o rn � �P ,*�o ^v�"� . �� e ``�`{�,0 - - �r'f'r'i� 0� `�O �O � Q in iF in .. ; 6S � if N .i I � d a \'+�0 e . J \ , � ♦ � G` -S [#) �, � , s , �� 00 � i� ; o -006 (OOZ . ss� O S\ e o � „� � 0 : OSS fSZZI ��6 � ,J� , � � o II g 0.� ♦ � i `- ss i ' - � \ s�r6 50t0� e 3 . °m� °�s 0 1 �� ; _ v��n .'XOp , . . * o ss e SN�� os�' � �� ry�NN �� - - L �oo o � . �� -� d0 ��% - a�r � '�� +�� , �o � � �,. � y� � .� �, �oo a rn • S6 , ` � � ' � - � - � � 9�d �t� i � � OOL ' • 09 [S61 3 ' ` a�� ' � ISl � or_ . . ss foel a0 � � �� ooe( os _ �� :- os � scI � �� S�ilooz : � . o� los] � m � _ . � • S � , �J b^0,1 �� . F♦ ' / � � � � *�o ��n � u�i m o m , � � /,l c��c�S''`� �0� ��1 . _ ,Y ry N a � /�p�c� _ . �. � : ryo, ^� ,�60 ��v� �—o�noo �a�c��B� � � ♦ ,��, SO ��0� `\q0 NNNOD �f�9�6 . : c�QE ; � l��n � .- o °�r o ' U� zs o N y . m�� — . � '' �' Lb __ `` ry�^o � ��9J��1 ��. �� l �� 8 a � � � � � � Vail Transportation Master Plan Update The interchanges, West and Main Vail, are locations of significant traffic concentration because they serve as the access to/from I-70 and they are the only means of crossing I-70. As roundabout intersections, the ramp terminal intersections also serve through movements along the Frontage Roads which further contributes to the traffic concentration that takes place at these points. Along the Frontage Road, the other notable heavier-traveled cross-streets during peak times including: ► Lionshead Parking Structure Access — Heavier demand is due to this being a major parking facility within Town. ► Village Parking Structure Access — Heavier demand is due to this being a major parking facility within Town. ► Vail Valley Drive — Heavy demand can be attributed to activity associated with the Gofden Peak lift area and associated programs that based there. ► West Vail Commercial — Numerous driveways serve the shopping area in West Vail. Individually, the traffic levels served by each driveway is less than the three heavy cross-streets stated just above, but collectively they represent a major generating center within town. Numerous other cross-streets intersect with the Frontage Roads, but many of these serve localized areas and do not carry significant levels of traffic. The Frontage Roads serve as Vail's arterial system serving the vast majority of the vehicle-miles traveled within the Town. 2. Intersection Levels of Service (LOS) Intersection Levels of Service (LOS) were calculated for numerous intersections including the roundabouts at the interchanges and many of the cross-street intersections and access points along the North and South Frontage Road. For nearly every case, the PM peak hour traffic was the focus of the LOS analyses. The exceptions include the Main Vail interchange and West Vail intercharlge intersections where the AM peak hour was also analyzed. LOS is a traffic qualitative measure described by a letter designation ranging from A to F. LOS A represents minimal or no delay while LOS F represents excessive delay. The calculations are geared toward estimating the delays for traffic movements and then converting the results to a LOS measure (based on the Highway Capacity Manual published by the transportation Board) with the following: ► LOS A, 0-10 seconds for STOP-sign controlled movements, 0-10 for roundabouts ► LOS B, 10-15 seconds for STOP-sign controlled movements, 10-20 for roundabouts ► LOS C, 15-25 seconds for STOP-sign controlled movements, 20-35 for roundabouts ► LOS D, 25-35 seconds for STOP-sign controlled movements, 35-55 for roundabouts ► LOS E, 35-50 seconds for STOP-sign controlled movements, 55-80 for roundabouts ► LOS F, greater than 50 seconds for STOP-sign controlled movements, 80 for roundabouts � The roundabout intersections are located at the Main Vail and West Vail interchanges, and their operation has an impact on the ease of access to/from I-70 as well as the ability to cross I-70. If � the roundabout intersections don't function well, the Town's entire transportation system suffers. ,� Because they are critical junctures, the levels of service were calculated for inclement weather � � � � � FELSBURG C� HOLT & ULLEVIG Page 6 Vail Transportation Master Plan Update conditions. Results for all of the LOS calculations are shown in Figure 3, and worksheets are presented in Appendix B. For the roundabouts, the software package Sidra was used to estimate the LOS's. Parameters in this software package were adjusted in attempt to calibrate delay results against delays that were observed in the field at the West Vail interchange. Further, adjustments were made to try and account for poor weather. The following adjustments were made to SIDRA as part of a roundabout calibration process: ► Lane storage lengths and diameters were adjusted to match field conditions ► Approach speeds were reduced from the default of 40 MPH to 25 MPH ► The North American Driver "environmental factor" was used (1.2) ► A peak hour factor of 0.79 was used for ideal conditions, 0.68 for snowy conditions (approximately representing a 20% loss in capacity due to snow). The lower-than-normal (15% less) peak hour factor for ideal conditions was based on the Highway Capacity Manual statement that a roundabout is at its capacity when V/C = 85% For Vail, acceptable operations were established at a LOS C or better. Typical LOS threshold objectives in larger busy urban areas are usually LOS D, sometimes LOS E, during peak hours of the day. In extreme cases, LOS F is tolerated. Smaller rural communities will tend to establish LOS C as their criterion objective relative to traffic operations along their streets. A LOS C/LOS D threshold, for peak hours during peak seasons, was chosen as the appropriate threshold for Vail given its resort stature and the desire to provide a highly functional transportation system to enhance the guest experience. Exceptions for poorer LOS that would be acceptable include inclement weather in which a LOS D/LOS E is considered acceptable. In addition, a LOS D or even worse is acceptable for a movement with extremely low traffic flows. The LOS's for the STOP-controlled intersections were calculated using the Highway Capacity Manual procedures per HCS software; no inclement weather factors were used to evaluate the stop-controlled intersections. Figure 3 shows the LOS results for existing conditions. The roundabout intersections all currently operate at acceptable LOS's with each approach being at a LOS C or better. Several of the Frontage Road cross-street intersection movements operate poorer than LOS C. Intersections with a LOS E or LOS F include: � FELSBURG C� HOLT & ULLEVIG Page 7 � 0 � a Ja` � �a . ��' b C.� � � r � i � � • b �,�� •' 7' : � e `° � _L C.� R W �' �l.'—y� / ' R m B i.. i,�l;� e � e �., p LL I � �I N , .R�.\ q 8 .. � a �.��,� 0 ,Q-�� W r a !c o 8 �'k� ' P�pj � e a � �N� W xt.reue�„e^ �PS�N� om Bui�ied /� � U `p,d s - Pb ielue� eBellr� •e �0 0 . /�. 5a�d5`o�ePa � �� Dtl �!Bn Ped � � � � " �a g a �' � � � �, � ;, . . e _ o� � ` : t `� . � � o . ' / -. � �ec � �: � l b 6�� B ne ys�a, `Ne . .\ e��np \e- � �� . ,ob� U e _ " �� , - _ ��'Oi — Peaysnoi�.3 "j� .'�. � . /� .--, ' B A ° ✓ / � / � `° � A '"� / � \ � r� � � wPa yy� � � • /- o b �p �a °s E i. �°� 1� �3 a��np 0° 0 *_ `peeysuo�l�M U U � .� cn cn 0 0 � J J C � N � C C 7 7 N � � _ = C C U O Y Y lp O O � (0 (0 L (J J l0 � a m 3 C C � �`c c° o' o' � Q�. � U ¢ II II II II II 0 z f W JIx� �8O a � � � U 7 � � y � � O � a> > J C .N W �� ' � ' �-�: ■ � � Q : �. � � •, , •, �� , � �� 8 � ��y �s`µe` ``�, " D a � • j�� h, p' c,'� e o U � e v . • � '� , � �� , _ e�s`1 e � � � y�\ e 3 W� '�� [�� ` � ' f ,�, ' i� � �e � . . 'Q �/ � `�\ �� /_ fl � 0 � �� . �o� Gr9 � � � _� e a�J �F> m�u� �CJ LLS� �� 9 � � U i :' � Q ,,� � � � � �� jPJe . .' - ° 9 �fl✓ 1 ��. A ✓c _ _• 0 �e[a] - � :+' ,( � a \ r�+ ' i �- � :� ' ` ' � %� `;f' .r +�_ '. 0 � , � Q 0 � � w � � y � � L � _ _ V - _, V, �� I .4 �'�� ele� � C� � � z Vail Transportation Master Plan Update ► Village Structure Access — The specific traffic operation issue here is the ability to turn left out of the structure onto the South Frontage Road. The LOS estimate at peak times is LOS E. The delay incurred by these drivers exiting the parking structure is above and beyond the delay that these drivers incur within the structure to pay the parking fee. In fact, the fee booths inside the structure tend to meter outbound traffic. Otherwise, the outbound peak hour traffic demand counts would likely be greater. ► Lionshead Structure Access — The outbound movement from the structure experiences a LOS D during peak times. Similar to the Village Structure Access intersection, these drivers are incurring additional delay beyond the LOS D due to waiting in the structure to pay the fee. ► East Lionshead Circle — The East Lionshead Circle approach to the South Frontage Road operates at LOS E during peak times. This movement includes In-Town shuttle vehicles, and this intersection's poor operations has a negative impact on the Town's transit system. ► Safeway Access — In West Vail, there are numerous access points onto the North Frontage Road serving retail uses. The access in front of the Safeway is the heavier-used access based on the traffic count data. This access approach onto the North Frontage Road operates at a LOS E during peak times. The East Lionshead Circle access operation has an effect on the In-Town Shuttle bus routes as this bus is required to turn left onto the Frontage Road as part of its normal scheduled route. The Vail Valley Drive intersection does not have any movements operating in LOS E or LOS F, but interestingly this intersection is characterized with a greater number of movements subject to delay. Total vehicular delay at this intersection is greater than many of the other intersections in Town due to the unique stop configuration. (Frontage Road approaches both stops, Vail Valley Drive approach is given the right-of-way due to grade). In addition to intersection LOS calculations, Town staff has also recorded travel times between activity areas. Staff made numerous runs between activity areas during peak and non-peak times, as well as under varying weather conditions. Table 1 summarizes average travel times between the key activity areas, and the detailed data collected are presented in Appendix C. � FELSBURG C� HOLT & ULLEVIG Page 9 Vail Transportation Master Plan Update Table 1 2005-2006 Season Travel Time Summa Peak Season Non-Peak Season Origin/ Destination/Route Non-Peak PM Peak Non-Peak PM Peak Hour Hour Hour Hour Village Structure to Safeway South Frontage Road -Clear 7:11 -Wet 8:01 -Snow ack 7:21 12:08 North Frontage Road -Clear 5:32 5:47 -Wet 8:52 -Snow ack 5:57 8:33 I-70 -Clear 4:57 -Wet 4:32 -Snow ack Safeway to Village Structure North Frontage Road -Clear 5:40 5:56 -Wet -Snow ack Lionshead Parking Structure to Safeway South Frontage Road -Clear 4:45 4:57 5:19 -Wet 5:25 -Snow ack 4:59 4:52 North Frontage Road -Clear 5:53 -Wet 6:23 -Snow ack 10:49 6:55 I-70 -Clear 4:50 -Wet 5:17 -Snow ack Safeway to Lionshead Parking Structure South Frontage Road -Clear 4:45 5:50 -Wet -Snow ack Red Sandstone Road to Cascade WB Frontage Route -Clear 5:31 -Wet 7:25 I -Snow ack 5:40 EB Frontage Route -Clear 5:32 -Wet 6:45 -Snow ack 5:51 . FELSBURG C� HOLT & ULLEVIG Page 10 Vail Transportation Master Plan Update 3. Accident Data Approximately six years worth of traffic accident data were compiled from the Town of Vail Police Department's records which identified 288 accidents occurring between 1999 and 2005. CDOT data were also explored, but the Town's accident records identified more accidents than CDOT's database along the Frontage Roads. It is likely that many of the accidents recorded by the Town along the Frontage Roads do not reach CDOT for inclusion in their database. As such, the Town's Police Department records were used in this analysis. The data are summarized in Table 2. Collision diagrams of each intersection are shown in Appendix D. Observations of interest generally included: ► South Frontage Road/Matterhorn Circle — Recently, this intersection was improved to include an exclusive turn lane. This widening is thought to have provided a significant benefit to any safety issues at this intersection since the data show that most of the accidents at this location occurred in 2002 or earlier. ► West Vail Interchange, North roundabout intersection — A fairly pronounced pattern of rear-end collisions along the I-70 westbound off-ramp show up in the data. Many of these occurred with a slick roadway surface, and the downgrade of the ramp may be a contributor to this pattern of collisions as well as the shading patterns caused by the I-70 embankment. ► Vail Valley Drive — A noticeable pattern (approximately two-thirds of the accidents) at this intersection includes collisions with eastbound through movement vehicles. The collision diagram suggests that eastbound Frontage Road drivers do not always understand that they are subject to stopping and that the side-street approach has the right-of-way. ► The Main Vail Interchange experienced a fair number of accidents within the study period, but when compared against the "exposure" of traffic, the accident occurrence at this interchange is not alarming. ► Approximately 40 percent of all trafiic accidents recorded along the Frontage Roads, including the roundabouts and the cross-street intersections, occurred on slick roadway surfaces. The Colorado Department of Transportation maintains accident statistics along all of its roadway facilities and typically produces average accident rate statistics stratified by facility type. The rates are determined by segment rather than by intersection and the Department typically calculates the number of accidents per million-vehicle-miles of travel for a given segment of road. As such, it is not possible to directly compare the results in Table 2 to industry standards. However it is possible to convert the data in Table 2 into segment data to allow for a comparison to CDOT data. Assumptions have been made with respect to daily traffic from the peak hour traffic counts. In addition, continuous traffic data from CDOT's files were used to estimate seasonal variations in daily traffic data toward estimating the total annual traffic served by each segment. Of the state highway locations with continuous traffic count data, US 6 near Keystone was used for this assessment with respect to seasonal variations. While a counter on I-70 near pown Junction is available and was reviewed, the I-70 traffic demands at that location peak during the summer months, whereas Vail roadways are busiest in the winter months. The US 6 permanent counter near Keystone displays seasonal patterns that are more in line with traffic demand fluctuations experienced along Vail's Frontage Roads. Therefore, the US 6 counter was used for only gauging seasonal fluctuations with respect to calculating annual accident rates for roadway segments. � FELSBURG C� HOLT & ULLEVIG Page 11 Vail Transportation Master Plan Update "fhe following shows the converted accident data and how it compares with CDOT data for urban minor arterial road facilities. ► N. Frontage Road, Chamonix to Buffehr Creek — 3.5 accidents/million vehicle-miles ► N. Frontage Road, Buffehr Creek to Main Vail — 3.0 accidents/million vehicle-miles ► S. Frontage Road, W. Vail Roundabout to Forest Road — 2.5 accidents/million vehicle-miles ► S. Frontage Road, Forest Rd. to Vail Road - 3.5 accidents/million vehicle-miles ► S. Frontage Road, Vail Rd. to Vail Valley Drive — 4.0 accidents/million vehicle miles Based on the most recent CDOT data available (2004), urban minor arterial state highways have experienced 3.45 accidents per million vehicle-miles of travel in 2003 and 2004. The accident rates listed above for the Frontage road segments are close to this or are less, except for the segment befinreen Vail Road and Vail Valley Drive which is slightly higher than the CDOT data. This segment of roadway is the busiest road section in Town (other than I-70), and increased traffic increases the exposure and correspondingly the accident rate. � FELSBURG C' HOLT & ULLEVIG Page 12 � � 'C� �� 01 � � � � O . �., � � � � � � � � [� � .N � � � 4J %� X ... CA I � � � C/� � � v 'C ...� u u 'C eet O � v bl) eet � � O �, W ... � � N v .� � E"� m � U � L N � L �C � � (U � m O � N � 'V w � N C � � > •C � •� � O �� C O C C O >'j � N � � U o a� � � � � � Ef°� ��' �'`� _ �+ � U � � .0 � _ � ` � � � � V M � 0 L J (� O N d _ C � � d C �— t„1 '� � M 00 O O� O�� N � CD ti 00 V� t w O � N � � � N O O O �� O � Q Q� W d � �' Y �C \° \° \° \° \° \° \° \° \° \° \° \° \° \° \° ��V� o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 �� y 0 O � CD (D 00 M M N� ti CD M M � � `,� � N � M � M M� N � CD � � M N M d a w � � � � � � ti � O M � � M � M O � N � � N � � � H d t O � � O � M � �� N N N O � ti w � � � O 0 O M !� � r O N M N O O O O � CD � d � � M� � � �� ti � N � O 0 m � � �`C N N � �� 00 �� 00 O � � � � O � � c O j � � � ` > C � ' > C � '� � d � � � � � j'C O � � .r � s Y •> U U ` o � � > � m �°. � � � � � � c�a m � u�i '� � co o j � �� a� p� p w w � � C(n C C(p N C C p. V � O _ �O U � � O t L � � � C V � � � (0 C i>� `p ` L� p C L Q-' N� Q � � � C 3 � j � � � N J � C .0 � ~ C � � � � O >� O > � >� `p > J O (U = (0 N (� O p (0 � f/� > Q' > � > ll > W J�� i U i ll J i Q M �--I bD R '� �U�U > m�W �Y� �� '� �� `i�l � � � 0 'N `1�1 � � 0 � � � H '!N � ,--, 'd v � �r � �r 0 U `. � � v i'i .� � i � � � � � � a� b 'u V b � �0/ F%1 GJ bA �a � � 0 i� w ;� � � N v �N � E� � o � � o � � � c � �- � � N � "O � U V +� � > (0 C � � � C p `C O � £ � �"a fn N U j� G � L V— � Y U 0 aJ .-. U� O U �(0 �.: � N � N � � (n � C ? �i �o p O � 7 � (0 C O � o � � C � � � � � � t � U (p �, � > � � � L � 7 � O Q c�o J� Z> I� Cn r � � � •� d C � - Cl 'i � � � O N �� t� N O O N N Q Q� W d � �� cYi�° o 0 0 0 0 0 0 m .- �o i"� (n � I� M 00 a0 � I� � 9> a �a O � M � � � N N F- d � o � o 0 0 � � O v �� 0 r� � � o �� m ,v_ � � � � M N N � � 0 m V n� � O � N O � M M �,w � � � � � �° � � �o � � o � o � � � � V a% � IY J C 7 d :° o... m o 0 � c � Z � a� � � � � w: � o - �° U � ;a -° - c ti � j v s O��> r m �. � � C � y"� � � � � 3 `.� tn C "a z° ¢` � �° m' a° � � � � N ao �a � a`�v ��'m � �� u�.=� �� Vail Transportation Master Plan Update B. Parking Currently, the Town owns and maintains two large parking structures in Main Vail. "fhe Village Structure, located east of the Main Vail interchange, provides 1300 spaces for skiers and activity at Vail Village. During ski season, a fee is assessed to park during the day if a vehicle stays at least an hour and a half. Employees and residents have an option of purchasing seasonal parking passes, each providing a different set of privileges. Without a pass, an all-day fee is currently $25.00. This structure generally fills between 50 and 70 times per season and occasionally during summer activities (when parking is free). When full, drivers are directed to the Lionshead Parking Structure. The Village Structure also serves as the Town's Transportation Center serving as a hub for a variety of bus and transportation services. The Lionshead parking structure is located approximately one-half mile west of the Main Vail interchange. It can accommodate 1200 vehicles. During winter season, the Lionshead Structure generally fills only after the Village Structure fills. The structure fills an estimated 20 to 40 times per season, and once full, vehicles are directed to parallel-park along the South Frontage Road. An extreme peak day can sometimes see over 1000 vehicles parked along the South Frontage Road. The location of the parking supply within the Main Vail area (Lionshead and Vail Village) is not entirely in alignment with the parking demand generators. The Lionshead parking structure contains only slightly less than the Village Structure, but there is considerably more parking demand generation in the Village area. The following illustrates the imbalance: ► Village Structure • 1300 spaces of supply , • 300,000 square feet of commercial services being served • Approximately 55 percent of the lift capacity • 85 percent of the skiable terrain (east of Vail Road) ► Lionshead Structure • 1200 spaces of supply • 150,000 square feet of commercial services being served • Approximately 45 percent of the lift capacity • 15 percent of the skiable terrain (west of Vail Road) The ski area is oriented easterly from the Main Vail interchange. The Vail Village parking structure is located approximately at a central point to the ski area on the mountain. The Lionshead parking structure is skewed to the west of the ski area. Because of their relative locations, skiers tend to fill the Village Structure before the Lionshead Structure. General parking demand for the Village Structure is further highlighted by the fact that there is more commercial space nearby and that the lift usage is greater than that in Lionshead (even though lift ca aci is approximately balanced). The commercial space produces additional parking demand by virtue of the need to accommodate these visitors who only want to shop and the employees needed to operate the commercial activity. � FELSBURG �� HOLT & ULLEVIG Page 15 � �� Vail Transportation Master Plan Update � � � Other parking areas are also provided throughout town, bUt most are relatively small providing up to � 15 spaces. Other locations such as Ford Park and the Soccer Fields (located east of Golden Peak) can accommodate more vehicles, but these are restricted to permitted vehicles only. � The Town of Vail has continued to explore means of adding public parking to the supply within the � central areas of Lionshead and Vail Village. A current need of at least 400 additional spaces has been identified by the Town in attempt to reduce the number of days that the Frontage Road is pressed into � service to accorrimodate overflow parking. The 400 spaces are needed to maintain a supply � accommodating 90 percent of the demand days, a Town parking objective. This is based on many seasons of collected Frontage Road parking data. However, 1,000 additional spaces would � accommodate 99 percent of the current demand days. Over the long-term (20 years), the 1,000 � spaces are estimated to accommodate 90 percent of the future demand days. More detail with respect � to further parking needs is described later in this report, but the Town's ultimate goal is to add 1,000 spaces for general public use to meet their 90 percent objective. C. Transit The Town of Vail operates a free bus service for residents and guests. The service is among the busiest in the state serving approximately three million riders per year. The heaviest used route is the In-Town shuttle which continuously travels between Lionshead and Vail Village; this route makes up 60 to 70 percent of the Towns bus service ridership, and it typically serves with five to seven buses; peak times can see 8 to 10 buses traveling along this route depending on time of day with headways ranging from 5 to 7 minutes. � Outlying bus routes each serve a different area of Vail. The East Vail and West Vail bus routes � experience the most ridership outside the In-Town Shuttle. West Vail, having a frontage road along the north and south side of I-70, is served by opposing loop services in which one West Vail route runs �� clockwise along the South and North Frontage Road and the other runs counter-clockwise. While � these two routes have offset start times from the Transportation Center, buses along these two opposing routes cross in the Meadow Creek/Intermountain area, and this area receives relatively � infrequent service (because two opposing buses drive by at the same time). Most outlying areas are �. provided service every 15 to 20 minutes; the Meadow Creek/Intermountain area, in which the � opposing West Vail bus routes cross, experiences service every 30 minutes, albeit with two buses. This quirk in the service is the result, in part, of limited I-70 crossings and the need to serve both sides � of I-70 with transit. Existing Transit routes are presented in Figure 4. Other characteristics of the Town's bus system include: ► Heavy end-of-the-day-use of the In-Town ► shuttle as skiers utilize this service to return to their parked vehicle or residence. ► Congestion at the Golden Peak portal; this creates delay to the In-Town shuttle. This is most prevalent on Saturdays. ► Challenges with the In-Town shuttle serving the western-most reaches of Lionshead due to delays associated with turning left onto the Frontage Road (from East Lionshead Circle). ► Outlying bus routes that serve Main and West Vail are subject to passing through the interchanges which can add delay to the service due to traffic congestion. ► West Vail routes experience overloading mostly at Timber Ridge during morning hours. "fhe West Vail Green route (which is clockwise) also experiences overloading in the evening between the West Lionshead Plaza and the residential areas west of Cascades. � FELSBURG C�HOLT & ULLEVIC Page i6 Vail Transportation Master Plan Update The East Vail bus route is overloaded during peak hours with inbound riders in the morning peak hours and outbound riders during the afternoon peak hours. . FELSBURG C� HOLT & ULLEVIG Page 17 � 6 \� � � $,��— � �� v � v W � W .--1 --� � .�_.1 W.�C� �:� � e c4 � 0 c7 �p� t9 � � � c z W �3 W J � N � +� L � � O � � � N � � .� � � � �+ � �X W � � y-+ y-+ � L '�^ O V/ � � O � � C � y�-+ O L � � Q � � Z (n c �' o a a c� �7 J O O � C � J J � L � — . > U � 3 � � > > � � � � � � � � W C7 li �� J�� u n u u u n u u CI : � � � 0 rn 3 � � v� I � � m U .Z m � c 0 � 0 a � c m � > Vail Transportation Master Plan Update The Transportation Center, located atop the Village Parking Structure, is at its capacity. Besides Town routes, this Center also serves the Eagle County bus system, charter services, regional services as well as other transportation providers. The Center also serves as a location to switch out buses during the day and as a place for drivers to take a break. The increase in ridership amongst all providers has maxed-out the facility's capacity, and potential increases in transit use in the future has the Town considering a second transportation center facility somewhere. "fhis is discussed in a later chapter of this report. III. ANTICIPATED GROWTH A. Development As mentioned, the Town initiated this effort to ascertain the impacts of foreseen and potential growth throughout the Vail Valley. The growth includes the following: ► Development that is currently under construction, ► Development that has been approved by the Town, but had not yet been constructed, ► Development that has been submitted to the Town for consideration, but not yet approved, and ► Parcels of land that have the potential for redevelopment for more density. Town staff have carefully considered parcels throughout town subject to being developed or redeveloped. While these land uses are intended to represent year 2025 conditions, the expectation is that much of the development and redevelopment assumed in this report will occur within the next five years. Appendix E shows the specific details, but overall anticipated growth can be characterized as follows: ► Approximately 3000 net new residential and hotel units ► Over 1500 replaced residential units ► Approximately 700,000 net square feet of retail development Areas within Town that are anticipated to experience the greatest amount of growth include the following: West Vail — The existing shopping center has the potential of being redeveloped to include approximately 130,000 square feet of additional commercial space than currently exists and a net increase of approximately 210 units. This is estimated to take place within ten years. West Lionshead (currently referred to as Ever Vail� — This includes redeveloping the Vail Resorts maintenance yards and relocating the South Frontage Road up against I-70. Current plans are still evolving, but the potential exists for approximately 590 units (although the latest proposal only includes 425), 165,000 square feet of commercial space (including 35,000 square feet of office space) and additional access to the mountain (including a new gondola). The proposal would also include additional public parking (400 spaces). This is estimated to take place within five years. ► Timber Ridge — This is a redevelopment of an employee housing complex located on the north side of I-70 approximately just west of the Post Office. This complex could include 325 new units and the redevelopment of another 198 units. This is estimated to take place within five years. � FELSBURG C� HOLT & ULLEVIG Page 19 � � � � Vail Transportation Master Plan Update � ► Lionshead Parking Structure — The Town is currently considering to entirely replace the � Lionshead Structure with a larger structure (adding 300 more public spaces), approximately 365 units, 70,000 square feet of commercial space, and 20,000 square feet for a conference center. �� 7his is anticipated to take place within five years. Most of the other development considered in this report is comprised of numerous smaller parcels, many of which are located within the Lionshead area and the Vail Village area. B. Parking � The additional needed parking supply is based on historic parking counts (along the Frontage Road during peak days) and on projected demands tied to growth within the region and along the Front � Range. Since the 2000-2001 ski season, the 15th highest parking day (Vail's objective design level) � has produced anywhere from 214 to 541 number of vehicles parked along the Frontage Road (when � it is pressed into service). The annual average has ranged from 325 vehicles to 483 with an overall average of about 350 vehicles. "fhe 10th highest day has averaged approximately 465 vehicles of � overflow parking since the 2000-2001 ski season. From this, the Town has identified the need to establish another 400 spaces over the short-term planning horizon. The Ever Vail development � project may fulfill this need, but these additional spaces would be west of the primary parking "desire" �; locations. Over the longer term, the expectation is that an increase in population and employment (locally, regionally, and state-wide) will only add to the parking demands that Vail will need to accommodate. The following describes, given rough assumptions, the nature of additional parking demand in Vail over the long-term. � ► Local Skier Merchant Passes — The Town estimates that jobs within Eagle County could approximately double by the year 2030, but that merchant pass holders may increase at a rate � less than this, say 60%. This would produce 3000 more merchant pass holders. Assuming 30 � percent use their pass on a peak day, approximately 900 new pass holder skiers would visit Vail on a peak day. Assuming 50 percent use their car at two persons per vehicles, an additional � demanci of 225 parked vehicles would be generated. Eagle County Part Time Resident — Approximately 12,000 additional units are planned throughout Eagle County; approximately 2000 of these will be affordable homes. Of the other 10,000, it is estimated that 30 percent of the homes would be occupied at peak times with an average occupancy of three people per unit. Assuming 10 to 12 percent of these people ski at Vail and 50 percent utilize their automobile with three people per vehicle, an additional demand of 175 parked vehicles would be generated. � ► Front Range Visitors — The Front Range population is projected to increase by one million persons in the next 20 years or so, and 10 to 15 percent of this increase is estimated to be skiers. � This could add 125,000 prospective skiers to the Colorado market. Currently, a peak day could � see Vail serving 0.5 percent of this market, or the equivalent of 600 to 700 additional skiers. � Assumir�g 95 percent reach Vail via automobile at three people per car, this component would generate an additional demand of 200 parked vehicles. . FELSBURG C� HOLT & ULLEVIG Page 20 Vail Transportation Master Plan Update Employees — The number of jobs within Eagle County is projected to increase significantly by 2030. Within Vail, new development is estimated to add 3600 jobs. With 30 percent of these employees being housed within town, 2520 employees would be out of town needing transportation. Ernployees are also subject to shifts and do not work everyday. As such, they do not generate the concentrated parking demand that other users above might. Further, assuming 50 percent drive at two persons per vehicle, an estimated additional parking demand of approximately 325 vehicles would be generated. In considering the combination of the above four components, an estimated 925 spaces would be needed to accommodate growth over the next 20 to 25 years. When adding in the 400 spaces needed to address current parking shortfalls, a total of 1325 spaces could potentially be necessary However, a planning level of 1000 spaces is considered appropriate when considering: ► The managing of parking may be more aggressive in the future ► Some of the employee-generated parking demand may be served on-site (at the place of employment) ► A portion of the part-time residents may participate in "parking clubs" ► The potential of some double counting in the 4 components above. The long-term "targeY' of providing an additional 1000 spaces is appropriate for the Main Vail area Areas where this supply may be increased are described as follows: ► Ever Vail Redevelopment. A range of 300 to 500 public spaces have been identified for this area. The analysis presented herein assumes 400 public spaces (which is consistent with current development plans). To the extent possible, the Town should pursue as much as is reasonably possible, realizing that access to/from the Frontage Road (roundabout intersection desired) and bus stop facilities will also be necessary. ► Lionshead Structure. If this is redeveloped, a total of over 2,000 parking spaces will be provided as part of this development. Over 600 of these spaces will be dedicated to the development, but over 1,400 would be available for public use (a 200 to 300 space increase). This too, along with a possible transit center, will drive the need for one or two major intersections onto the Frontage Road, perhaps being served via a roundabout. ► Ford Park. Potentially, 300 to 600 net new spaces could be provided in a structure at Ford Park. Transit service connecting it to the Village would be necessary during winter, but the parking could also be used for various events at the park during other times of the year. Between these three areas, the potential exists for the Town to add far more than the minimum 400 spaces in a manner that allows the parking supply to be spread around the Main Vail area. However, most of the new spaces would be located in Lionshead or the western side of the Main Vail area. As mentioned, most skiers vie to access the mountain through Vail Village since the vast majority of the ski area's acreage is oriented to the east of the Villages. While the additional parking supply in the Main Vail area would be a boon to the Main Vail area, it may better serve the Main Vail area if most of the new supply was located in Vail Village rather than Lionshead (east rather than west). A map showing parking locations in relation to other activities is presented later in this report. . FELSBURG C' HOLT 6c ULLEVIG Page 21 Vail Transportation Master Plan Update C. Inter-Relationship of the Various Modes Clearly, a cohesive transportation system requires integration of all modes of travel. Public parking areas, for example, naturally attract traffic and can experience heavy concentrations of traffic depending on size and location. In addition, the parking areas are also candidates for transit service, especially where parking areas are located away from prime uses. Because Vail's "base" area is large and spread across multiple villages, parking areas are also spread across the villages along the Frontage Road. So the planning for one mode affects another; parking attracts traffic and requires frequent transit service at peak times. Areas that can accommodate large amounts of parking are limited at Main Vail, so their locations are somewhat predetermined. This, in turn, shapes the traffic and transit patterns and service that is needed. The modes are also interrelated in that roadway improvements to alleviate traffic delays and congestion also help transit service as buses are part of the traffic mix. Also, the policy to manage parking and skier-drop-off activity can affect traffic and transit demands and the trade-off thereof. Vail's Transportation and Parking Committee continuously monitor parking trends and develop strategies to help alleviate parking problems within town. These strategies can have an impact on how many users are willing to drive versus utilize transit or another mode. As such, parking policy, management, and location directly impact traffic demands and transit demands. The process is dynamic. Traffic, transit, skier drop-off and parking, while inter-related, also need to be appropriately planned with respect to the ski-area terrain location, access to the ski area, and proximity to the commercial development. Future plans for Main Vail will increase commercial space as follows: ► Vail Village — from 300,000 to 350,000 square feet ► Lionshead Village — from 150,000 to 250,000 square feet ► West Lionshead (Ever Vail) - approximately 165,000 square feet (retail and office) In addition, West Lionshead is anticipated to be served by a new ski lift onto the mountain and this development is being planned to accommodate skier drop-off activity, particularly for charter buses and shuttles. Additional parking areas are possible at Ford Park, Lionshead Parking Structure (as part of potential redevelopment), and West Lionshead. The new lift and the new parking areas have the potential of attracting traffic to that localized area and each warrant consideration for transit service embellishments. In essence, the addition of parking, commercial space, and skier access to Main Vail and the fact that each of these will be rnore spread out than current conditions requires embellishments to the transportation system with respect to carrying traffic and providing transit service. . FELSBURG C� HOLT & ULLEVIG Page 22 Vail Transportation Master Plan Update IV. I� PROJECTED 2025 PM PEAK HOLTR TRAFFIC CONDITIONS Traffic Volume Forecasts Projected traffic demands along the Frontage Road system are key to assessing and mitigating future transportation conditions. As mentioned, the PM peak hour traffic is generally heavier than the AM peak hour, with a few pattern exceptions. As such, year 2025 traffic forecasts have focused on the PM peak hour time period for analysis, with exceptions being the Main Vail and West Vail Roundabout Interchanges where cursory-level AM peak hour forecasts were developed as well. The total PM peak hour forecasts were developed with the use of a travel demand model utilizing the TRAFFIX software package. The model was developed by estimating the amount of additional PM peak hour trips for each development and redevelopment proposal, and then assigning these new trips to the street system. Forecasts then resulted from the additive nature of the new trips in combination with the existing traffic which was increased modestly (0.5% per year) to year 2025. The AM peak hour traffic was developed by applying an approximate 35 percent flat growth factor to the existing AM peak hour; the 35 percent was based on the level of growth resulting from the 2025 PM peak hour projections (as compared to existing traffic levels). Table 3 shows the trip generation rates that were used, and Figure 5 shows the trip distribution assumptions that were used in this analysis. Trip rates were based on a combination of sources including the Institute of Transportation Engineers' (ITE) Trip Generation and the Lionshead Transportation Master Plan. ITE trips rates were primarily applied to development located away from the Vail base areas. Because of the heavy transit use and the fact that much of the development is mixed and close-in (lending itself to trips made via walking), the trip generation rates used in this study are less than the ITE rates because the ITE data are intended for more typical suburban settings where commuter activity is prominent. At peak times in Vail, tourist activity is prorr�inent. The close-in trip generation rates used in this analysis are in line with ITE's Recreational/Home category. Areas where the close-in residential trip rates were applied are shown in Figure 6. A 20 percent reduction in trip generation rates was applied for the close-in areas. The increased retail uses within the villages were also subject to reduced trip generation rates as compared to I"fE's shopping center category data. A PM peak hour trip reduction of 65 percent was applied due to the following reasons: ► The retail and commercial activity, being located at the base of the ski area, is heavily dependent upon people who are already in the village for skiing purposes. ► There are many units located close to the new retail uses which tends to induce walking trips to rather than vehicular trips. ► Many of the employees of the retail uses are typically discouraged to drive themselves to work, in part due to the parking fee at the structures. A cursory-level evaluation of existing retail trips was conducted by reviewing the level of traffic turning into the structures today. During the PM peak hour, the outbound traffic contains a significant amount of skier trips, so it is not appropriate to include these outbound traffic with respect to gauging trip generation rates. Inbound PM peak hour traffic contains trips associated with retail and some other uses, so while it is not 100 percent retail traffic, it does serve as an upper limit. At the Lionshead Parking Structure,150 � FELSBURG C� HOLT & ULLEVIG Page 23 Vail Transportation Master Plan Update inbound PM peak hour trips exist current; the Lionshead Village contains approximately 150,000 square feet of retail-related use. At the Village Structure, 310 vehicles entered during the PM peak hour; that village contains approximately 300,000 square feet of retail/commercial. These traffic numbers represent a 45 to 50 percent reduction in ITE shopping center trip rates if they were all retail-related, but they are not. Other trip types that are part of the inbound movements to the structures include: ► Library trips (which is open until 6:00 PM on weekends, later on weekdays) ► Dobson Ice Arena trips (which typically has a full schedule including hockey events, figure skating, lessons, and public skating) ► Adventure Center trips. The Adventure Center provides other recreation including tubing, ski biking, snowmobiling, snowshoeing, and a trampoline, and it is remains open until 9:00 PM on weekend nights. ► Residential uses. Several residential complexes within the villages are not able to adequately park their own overnight guests, so the parking structures are used instead. At Lionshead, staff estimates that approximately 100 vehicles are parked overnight at peak times related to selected residential uses. At the Village Structure, between 200 and 300 vehicles are parked overnight related to some of the residential uses there. ► Special events. Both villages routinely host evening events such as concerts, festivals, exhibits, and other attractions. � All of these attract trips beyond the retail/commercial attraction. As such, the true retail trip rate is even less that the 45 to 50 reduction quoted above. As such, using rates that equate to a 65 to 70 � percent reduction for the new retail development is not inconsistent with current trip-making trends in � Vail. Again, Appendix E shows the trip estimates for each of the development areas. In total, all of the considered development could generate an additional 2,800 trips per hour during the PM peak hour. The following summarize some of the bigger trip generators: ► West Vail — the net increase in square footage and residential units could generate a total of 470 additional trips during the PM peak hour. This would be above and beyond the estimated 800 to 1000 trips per hour generated by the West Vail development today. ► Timber Ridge is estimated to generate an additional 180 trips per hour during the PM peak hour. ► West Lionshead (Ever Vail) has the potential of generating an additional 580 trips per hour during the PM peak hour. ► Lionshead Parking Structure redevelopment is estimated to generate 275 trips during the PM peak hour. ► The Lionshead Village area (excluding the Lionshead parking structure) is projected to generate an additional 490 PM peak hour trips given the collective development. The Vail Village area redevelopment is projected to generate an additional 260 PM peak hour trips given the collective development potentials. � FELSBURG C� HOLT & ULLEVIG Page 24 U � V � � � � �- � w �--� O --� w � ✓ '� � v � a L c 0 � � � �L �� 0 �� C C � � .N � Q Q L � �� Z � O T t0 m t0 N O N m U � m � C O � 0 n N � f- 1 Vail Transportation Master Plan Update Table 3 Trip Generation Rates Trip Generation Rates (per DU for Res, per 1000 Sf otherwise) Use ITE Vail-Remote Vail-Close In Daily P ak �aily eak Daily P ak Residential — New 5.86 0.54 5 0.5 4 0.4 Residential — Re lace NA NA 0.75 0.08 0.6 0.06 Commercial - Office 11.01 1.49 11 1.49 11 1.49 Commercial — Retail 42.94 3.75 42.94 3.75 15 1.3 Hos ital 17.6 1.18 17.6 1.1 NA NA Figure 7 shows the 2025 total PM peak hour traffic projections at the Town's roundabout intersections and many of the Frontage Road cross-streets. In general, future PM peak hour traffic flows along the frontage roads are projected to increase an estimated 30 to 40 percent over existing traffic flow levels at peak times. The interchanges will experience a greater concentration in traffic with the additional trips. Major cross-streets will still include Vail Valley Drive, both parking structure access points, and West Vail accesses (if access modifications are not constructed). Moderately traveled cross-streets include all of the Lionshead Circles, Village Drive, and Forest Road (given Ever Vail redevelopment and if left intact). B. Traffic Operations Similar to the existing conditions LOS analysis, the roundabout intersections were analyzed for ideal conditions as well as for snow conditions using the same factors and adjustments mentioned before. Figure 8 shows the results of the PM peak hour analyses. Noticeable capacity deficiency highlights include: ► Main Vail Interchange — The north roundabout is projected to operate at a LOS F during the PM peak hour. The south roundabout is projected to function at LOS D, but several approaches are expected to operate at LOS E or LOS F. ► West Vail Interchange — Both roundabouts are projected to operate at LOS F during the PM peak hour. . FELSBURG �' HOLT & ULLEVIG Page 26 � � v W � W � � � � � wxa �:� Qa� w �o �,� c �o � pea SUO � �_ a��ai� peaysuoi� •3 �d• ed'ards�ore/ � pa0� ��a//L'^ ��g� p� �a�ua� a,��1 P�i I!�n � 3 a��ai� suoi�•M � � a� �� c o� J ` �U es��d � Fot � ` cfl c a, o � � � � Qi L � � � � c.� n �L � L O � N (� � L Q � .� N 0 v c� � c a� � .N a� � � 0 � c 0 C7 J Y � n c z, W C7 I W J c� Z rn 0 � � � 0 m U � � � � 0 n c � > � C �' mj N p � � �m E x oi i� � y �a j n ii .o h U N � � � � � � („) I4 �� y � _�� ? Z > � r�� ~ i o c O � Y U � O �� N � _ � � n � � � m y Y i � ""' . a � � y � S! � `' � -�Ob{ � II II II � N C / � � h ¢ � � W X e * O � I; } O o� i.7 X , - 90l _ � _ J� el� } y06$ LL \ �I� ' � o-°�° , �" / .// � I `' Sb ID �£ � � �p�� 0 0 /v ^ a�i , e , � �, _ Os . P�oj py��c? , ZO , e' A�' � •' ••S � I � � � �rs�d! m° A1 T �.�N� 16 y �� S, ane� na� P'(�N "3 �10 o ; � eu�H,ed �'i' - � � J� `Pd. ± I N pH �alua� 96g11/^ �o es � - � � ��. i � � . � �� .6yp � � 'Ptl I!QA PedCje�a e m � �� s '� � . � �, � �S� _ � o "S � o � �. / ��O � . � � . 5�� . �� . b ��, S _ ? �Y'l� ,'�{+ ��o �o ossh � co�. oos� . e+ ,°`� 6p 0� e \:J 0`��e o � Pe94s�uo� �� - �� `f'�B A . �� \ �S �� o��. ss� as _ �o _ o.� ` 5.,0 od , y B�JII� e a�A V 's n.s . a peeysuoil�3 % De6, � .. ,FP�. `v ; � OSc�s e � Gia° °S f �` 0 ♦ � . r '3 ep��p �� a •'�'� I 00�° � � O pee4suoi��M ♦ Op! e , s!! �p,jy r S A �>� �e �. ! ' NF. � °� ryeho R� ;n`° /`lG��` h �� o �9'`oh , " �,* c� !�p` , � 'o ° � �. e - ,ry_ ,P r � � ��. �n it �n . / e " � � � �� d' � ' G09� . r �. � � r S � ,a . , -op � OZS V ��, ��am� ' S�� ' o . � � N , � � . 006 100 � a . � o � . . � � � � ,�A � ` � ,� �,� � , . •4 ,_sOS - � s�e+� y�•'�" � � �� soZ 65 � - " � 3 0� '� � o �• � 1 �oo � �o i 0� ��yp _ . S� O \ S�S� 0 � ��"� I , � , o � � N , ♦ �' S'S6' OC' e - ( � m v � � ��'` �� % O�� ' �o��y,0 ,'�o � � ` � 2 - �� s �r0 . -401 , � � . s�,�"p � . -011 ! SL � , rZh�, � � oei . . -oo� ,�oh 0 � � oea� � - -soa sei_ • � s� � m sar � � %� 'i� `�. . o - bi��' '� ��n� + vi�noo /� S� �O . . . ry ry��IN�� :1 ��° � � � Z,o�� ,�ooE, , ` 5°' �� . 1� . d'e� - •iti • s�� s� �.,��, �� S�� 0 UK �S U , � �s ' �► > � �. m J � _ , . ♦ . b% W � � � �/ -� . $2 / �:. ��* � G� � a � � y � � � S Vail Transportation Master Plan Update ► Cross-street intersections that are projected to have a LOS F left turn movement include: • Village Parking Structure Access • I_ionshead Parking Structure Access • Vail Valley Drive (left FROM the Frontage Road) ► Cross-street intersections that are projected to have a LOS E left turn movement include: • West Vail commercial accesses • East Lionshead Circle (which impacts the heavily-traveled In-Town shuttle bus service) • Village Center Drive • West Lionshead Circle LOS E and LOS F were described in Chapter Two with respect to corresponding motorist delay levels. These poor LOS's indicate that mobility within Vail will be severely limited during busy times. This impacts not only private automobile users within town, but it also will have a significant impact on the Town's abiliry to provide transit service. Given poor weather conditions, many drivers will be frustrated traveling within Vail, thereby exacerbating a visitor's resort experience. In addition to intersection LOS's, travel time estimates between Safeway and the Village Parking Structure, as well as Safeway and the Lionshead Structure, have been developed for the PM peak hour of projected Year 2025 conditions as follows in Table 4. Table 4 Travel Time Comparison - Year 2025 Peak Season, PM Peak Hour Safeway to Village Village Structure to Structure Safewa North South North South Safeway to Cascade Red Route Route Route Route LH LH Structure to Red Sandstone Structure to Safeway Sandstone to Cascade Existing Ideal 5:30 6:30 6:00 8:00 5:00 5:00 5:30 5:30 Snowy 7:30 9:00 8:30 10:30 5:00 5:00 6:30 6:45 2025 (without any improvements) Ideal 6:30 7:30 8:30 10:00 7:00 13:00 6:00 6:00 Snowy g:00 12:30 15:00 14:00 10:00 17:00 8:45 7:15 . FELSBURG �' HOLT & ULLEVIG Page 29 Vail Transportation Master Plan Update As shown, travel time within Vail during peak times could increase by as much as 12 minutes depending on conditions and routing. Much of the additional delay will occur at the intersections where LOS's are anticipated to be poor Beyond the comparisons shown in Table 4, travel time estimates were also developed between Cascade Village and West Vail. Given the LOS results of Figure 8(and corresponding delays), year 2025 snowy conditions would require 8 to 10 minutes of travel between these two areas. These trips would experience significant travel delay would be incurred at the West Vail interchange roundabouts and through turning onto the Frontage Road. In addition to the peak hour projections, daily traffic projections were developed along the frontage roads which is shown on Figure 9. The daily traffic is shown as a means of quickly comparing the order of magnitude changes in traffic due to growth, as well as the resulting demands due to implementing the recommended plan (discussed later in this report). � FELSBURG �' HOLT & ULLEVIG Page 30 � Oj J0 �m �� ' • R T ,= -- e � � u Q Q _ �• � i ' .O � � �� - � _ / � '' Q � � � . ,l - � `o . 8 '� .. � t p � . �O .. e . B �. � Pipy i " . �, q � - P e '�. a_ P i} � � i . MTalla^I/e^ ` - . � 6alA�ad !1 � Py'a��a� agBii!� 0—v P �' �� '�� a • � G� m � 1 � / .Pd. N N j m � O E E _ > > 0 o d > > a U U V1 � � N N l0 l0 � 2] U � �m E t > > � Z > S S L O C l0 l0 � V L d d c m H � ��- N m d Q � � � n u n u O W x 'x. � O co J � � y U 7 � rn � � � 0 y > J O S Y f0 � d N O N � � � ��y�o�° � . G� � P!f I!QA p� � �� o �� , I C $ B P / �� o � �\/\: \ � C O` \ P �j m� 8�,�,p a �,ab�°a � ' a 8 Paa4rao�� j � N 9 � e. a,�„� bae � ' q pea�suo�� 3 � m� � . _ . °c eµPa .�y' d � , � . � � ��m °s f ..: �3 e��iip � 0°�0� � 0 peaysuoi��q �, B H�� P�� c _ . �, ,-• �- � � ; ` �� v 0 _..I T `•_ P � G�t9� e� � � � G � Q - , • �'� � . B U � p�0� O � 0\ 3 0•• �, � -� ■ • � ' - � B ' � e � B � , � � � ��fl� � a U � ��! � � � / C0 � � . � �� ' �� „�+°`� .� � 0�,a G� �� 8 _ - - � � �. G :: ;, � � : � fl , � �, � � � 0 . � �p� .--. '� - Q . \y�j , � F" � � � '• ' - � 0 ` �' ' �, � ■ ■ ��► �. ��U � � � � > � J � �CJ LLS� �:. � a � � d � � $ F S C/ x N��NE �� \ \\� ea �a�as`o�e Pd P �� N � O � r r r r u� � O � cD�� ~�� Pea4s�o d a � N t3� � o� J ` 3 � �Pa. F o�es � � � c Q �� O�� Q� o cc oo p o I � utir � � Ql O Je(� � ��,�a e� �e n '(\ ePa. P`aA � P�p j �� \ 00o Pa. I � � � G�ee� N � ur �0r� �--�� r 0v DOO _ M'�all2^ ��^ p � O 6ui��ed C�p M 1� � � � �� pb �atua � ag��/I O O O O O O 'PFi I!e� cD � a0 C� 0� 1� � u� O O O _��M � � M � N N �� e�ai� Pee4suoil '3 �r� o°o°o � M O p�j �D 0� �3 a�ai� `�� peaysuoi�•M �j P ��C� � E-- > Q� � W � � O � wZ� �� _ CU c 0 a� m O O O ti � � O 1� M � � � �� e� � a� G`�� 0 Y U 5a�0�a� � 3 U U � � � (d (d �., H� H� c � � �� c � °o °�Y " ` c � d Q � � L � ~ N � N O � � N� N�� L� L� L (d .r (d .r Q w �� n u n �' X X X cW.� X X X J x x � O O O O O O 1� O O CO 1� M � �� O�' o�� G,�ac� � c� c :� o L ,� y ca � ~ V� � � 'ca cYa p N � � � L �� a� � � � � � c • L �..L Q .� � 000 O O O O � O NCO� � � � �� : : � � 0 a � v� m U � m 0 � a N C f i i Vail Transportation Master Plan Update V. IMPROVEMENT ALTERNATIVES Based on the traffic operations presented in the previous section, improvement alternatives were developed and analyzed relative to their impact on the critical street system components within Town The critical consideration areas include the following: ► Main Vail Interchange ► West Vail Interchange ► South Frontage Road from Vail Road to Ford Park (Village Frontage) ► South Frontage Road from Vail Road to Forest Road (Lionshead Frontage) ► West Vail Redevelopment Area Alternatives were identified and analyzed for each of these critical areas to determine the most appropriate alternative (or combination of alternatives) to mitigate projected traffic demands. A. Main Vail Interchange Numerous peak hour traffic patterns are served by this interchange, and many are in direct conflict with each other. The predominant PM peak hour traffic pattern consists of movements from the Village Structure Frontage Road "leg" to the westbound I-70 on-ramp. But other noticeably heavy patterns during the PM peak hour include movements between the Lionshead leg and the eastbound on ramp, the westbound off ramp and the South Frontage Road (both directions) and movements simply crossing I-70. Additionally, a major pattern during the AM peak hour is westbound I-70 traffic exiting the freeway and turning south heading to the parking structure. Alternatives that were considered to alleviate poor LOS's can be categorized as either capacity improvements, travel demand measures, or provision for alternative routes. Tables 5 and 6 were developed to clarify the issues associated with each of the interchange's roundabouts during the PM peak hour. The tables show realistic improvements as well as supplemental mitigation considerations to achieve acceptable LOS's. Table 5 presents material associated with the north roundabout and Table 6 presents information relative to the south roundabout. � FELSBURG C' HOLT & ULLEVIG Page 33 Vail Transportation Master Plan Update Table 5 Main Vail Interchange North Roundabout - Alternatives Assessment Main Vail Interchange, North Roundabout LOS F projected along WB off-ramp and Spraddte Creek A roach Sno and Ideal Conditions Primary Issue(s): Major traffic conflict is between NB left turn movement (to WB I-70 and Frontage Road) and WB left turn movement from WB I-70 off-ram . Expand to a full two lane roundabout; add northbound approach Realistic Capacity Improvement(s): lane from under I-70 (possibly reversible lane); add bypass lane from Fronta e Road to WB I-70. Supplemental Traffic Reduction Still Still need to reduce PM peak hour forecasts by 50 to 100 Needed for LOS D on otherwise �ehicles per hour, or 2 to 4 percent. oor o eratin a roaches Sno 2025 Traffic Composition: 30% is from proposed development. Potential Measure Traffic Flow Effect Relative Cost (as Isolated Measure)" Total traffic reduced by 150 to 200 High, but measure would 1. Add Simba Run underpass. vph (6 to 8%). provide other benefits as well. 2. Encourage use of East Vail Estimated ramp traffic removed is Low; would require VMS Interchange between 100 and 150 vph (4 to along I-70 and along 6 /o . Bi horn Road. Estimated traffic removed is Low; would impact parking 3.Parking Management Measures between 100 and 150 vph (3 to olic 5% . P y' 4. Express Bus Service linking West Estimated traffic removed is Vail, Lionshead, and Vail Village between 50 and 100 vph (2 to Medium. 4 /o . 5. Extended Skiing Hours Estimated traffic removed is p Low. between 25 and 50 vph (1 to 2/o). 6. Metering of Outbound Structure Estimated traffic removed is Low; toll booths already in Traffic (toll booths)'''''' between 50 and 75 vph (2 to 3%). place. Other Considerations Mixed Use Trip Gen Reduction Could reduce intersection's PM ��,,,, peak hour traffic by another 25 V h 1% Employee housing auto disincentive Could reduce intersection's PM (Timber Ridge) peak hour traffic by another 25 to 50 v h 1 to 2% " Combining measures will reduce the effect of certain measures as some mitigation measures target the same traffic "group". "" This consideration entails redeveloping the West Vail area to better balance uses and incite internal trip- making. ''''''Potentially, improvements in parking control equipment over time may allow for a more rapid exit flow rate. While this will be advantageous to those attempting to exit, it will contribute to the peak traffic concentration alon Town roads. Meterin this outbound flow would rovide a little benefit to traffic o erations. � FELSBURG C' HOLT & ULLEVIG Page 34 Vail Transportation Master Plan Update Table 6 Main Vail Interchange South Roundabout - Alternatives Assessment Main Vail Interchange, South Roundabout LOS F projected along WB Frontage Road Approach and along Vail Road a roach sno Primary Issue(s): Major movement is WB right turn to under I-70 (much of which is oriented to WB I-70). Largest conflict with this movement includes the combination of movements onto the EB on-ram . Realistic Capacity Improvement(s): Incorporate second northbound lane under I-70 and re-designate WB Frontage Road lanes to utilize it (right, through/right, and left/through). Still need to reduce PM peak hour forecasts by 50 to 100 vehicles per Supplemental Traffic Reduction Still hour, or 1 to 2 percent. Additional reduction may be desirable to Needed for LOS D(Snowy): provide excess capacity for U-turns from/to the west (due to right- in/ri ht-out access restrictions nearb . 2025 Traffic Composition: 25% is from proposed development. Potential Measure Traffic Flow Effect Relative Cost (as Isolated Measure)* Total traffic reduced by 150 to 200 vph (3 High, but measure would 1. Add Simba Run underpass. to 4%). provide other benefits as well. Estimated ramp traffic removed os Low; would require VMS 2. Encourage use of East Vail between 50 and 100 vph (1 to 2/o). This along I-70 and along Interchange measure would also create some "shifts" gighorn Road. in traffic entering the roundabout. 3. Parking Management Measures Estimated traffic remov ed is between Low; would impact parking 125 and 200 vph (2 to 4/o). policy. 4. Express Bus Service linking West Estimated traffic removed is Medium. Vail, Lionshead, and Vail Village between 50 and 100 vph (1 to 2%). 5. Extended Skiing Hours Estimated tra ffic removed is between 25 Low. and 50 vph (1 /o). 6. Metering of Outbound Structure Estimated traffic removed is between Low; toll booths already in Traffic (toll booths)""" 100 and 150 vph (2 to 3%). place. Other Considerations Mixed Use Trip Gen Reduction Could reduce intersection's PM peak (WV)"" hour traffic by 25 (<1 %). Employee housing auto disincentive Could reduce intersection's PM peak Timber Rid e hour traffic b another 25 to 50 v h 1% Hospital Access onto Fr. Road " Combining measures will reduce the effect of certain measures as some mitigation measures target the same traffic "group". "" This consideration entails redeveloping the West Vail area to better balance uses and incite internal trip- making. """Potentially, improvements in parking control equipment over time may allow for a more rapid exit flow rate. While this will be advantageous to those attempting to exit, it will contribute to the peak traffic concentration alon Town roads. Meterin this outbound flow would rovide a little benefit to traffic o erations. � Fe�ssuRc C' HOLT & ULLEVIG Page 35 Vail Transportation Master Plan Update Improvements that show promise for the Main Vail interchange's PM peak hour operation include: Simba Run Underpass. This improvement is estimated to attract 3 to 4 percent of the traffic passing through the south roundabout and 6 to 8 percent of the traffic traveling through the north roundabout. The Simba Run Underpass would provide some needed relief to the Main Vail interchange by giving local drivers another option to cross I-70. This is a relatively expensive improvement, and the relief it provides to the Main Vail Interchange alone is probably not enough justification for its construction. However, the Simba Run underpass would provide other benefits such as: • Provide significant relief to the West Vail interchange intersections, • Provide a safe means of crossing I-70 to serve pedestrians and bicyclists, • Allow a greater level of flexibility for the Town's bus system, which would increase the system's efficiency, • Allow faster response time for emergency vehicles � ► Widening/enhancing the roundabouts (particularly the north roundabout) to establish continuous � double lanes carrying traffic from the Village South Frontage Road "leg" to the I-70 West on-ramp "leg". Signing will be crucial with this improvement to clearly guide motorists through the � interchange. The roadway below I-70 would need to be striped and signed to clearly show two � northbound lanes and one southbound lane. There is 34 feet of width allowing for three 11 feet lanes. A potential embellishment could be the provision for the center lane to be reversed during � the AM peak hour through dynamic traffic control planning involving temporary barriers and signs, � but both roundabouts will need to be properly designed to accommodate this potential. Providing a full four lanes under I-70 would be an ideal long-term consideration when the I-70 bridges are �� replaced by CDOT (which may not be for many years given CDOT's favorable Sufficiency Rating � of these bridges being in the low 90's). � ► Alternatives that involve parking management could collectively make a difference as weli. With � the Town "core" located right at the interchange and much of the public parking associated with � "core" activity (skiing, dining, shopping, etc.), the ability to manage afternoon traffic spikes generated from the parking structures can lessen some of the concentration of traffic experienced �, at the Main Vail interchange. Management could also include providing real-time information to � guests with respect to travel conditions along I-70 and/or existing the structures. Guests may opt to stay in town longer after a day of skiing if they learn about real time congestion problems prior � to reaching their vehicle. There may be other parking policy and/or economic consequences in � applying these management techniques, but properly managing the parking could have an impact on peak traffic demands. Encourage use of the East Vail interchange via dynamic signing can also remove an element of the traffic from the Main Vail interchange. The primary means of conveying information to drivers would be via dynamic signing upon exit of the Village Parking Structure and along westbound I-70 prior to the East Vail interchange. The one drawback of this alternative is that it would place more traffic along the Frontage Road east of Ford Park, but this section of Frontage Road has excess capacity as a two-lane road given that it carries less than one-half of the traffic the other Frontage Road segments carry. This alternative would be most effective to relieve the AM peak hour time period by intercepting traffic arriving from Vail Pass (which is significant during the AM Period) and will be essential to accommodating AM peak hour concentrations of traffic exiting I-70 from the east. Intelligent Transportation System (ITS) mitigation measures should be implemented to � FELSBURG C� HOLT & ULLEVIG Page 36 Vail Transportation Master Plan Update the extent possible to optimize existing transportation infrastructure. Providing public parking at Ford Park would complement the notion of encouraging usage of the East Vail interchange. Another consideration listed in Table 6, but not specifically quantified, is the modification of the Hospital's access. The Vail Valley Medical Center is currently served by Meadow Drive via Vail Road. As such, nearly all of its traffic impacts the south roundabout intersection along the Vail Road (south) leg. "fhe Center is in the planning process to reconfigure its facility such that it might have an access directly onto the Frontage Road west of the roundabout, across from the Municipal Center. This would "shift" some of this facility's traffic out of the south roundabout and off of the south roadway "leg" which is projected to operate at a poor LOS. This scheme requires coordination with the other nearby uses' access points, but it could offer a small dose of traffic relief to the heavily-used south roundabout. B. West Vail Interchange The predominant movements through this interchange during the PM peak hour include movements from the North Frontage Road and from the South Frontage Road to westbound I-70. AM peak hour traffic patterns illustrate the reflection, but the magnitude of traffic during the AM peak hour is much less than that of the PM peak hour based on the existing counts. Part of this phenomenon is due to the commercial activity in West Vail (north side of I-70) which is a more significant generator during the PM peak hour than during the AM peak hour. The PM peak hour major movements all merge within the north roundabout, and the north roundabout intersection is the most challenging component of the interchange complex. Like the Main Vail interchange bridges, the West Vail I-70 bridges have a very high Sufficiency Rating, and CDOT is not likely to replace these any time soon. Tables 7 and 8 show the effectiveness of various alternatives on the PM peak hour operations of this interchange. A key improvement for this interchange is the establishment of two northbound lanes under I-70 from the south side and maintaining two continuous lanes to westbound I-70 (through the roundabout). Like the Main Vail interchange, there is adequate width to accommodate these (35 feet, allowing for three 11 feet lanes), but striping and signing enhancements will be necessary to clearly convey this lane configuration to drivers. Also, the southbound Chamonix approach into the roundabout should be widened to include two entering lanes. The nature of the West Vail area being removed from the skiing "core" of Vail results in less effectiveness of the travel demand measures considered in the Main Vail interchange alternatives analysis (including managing traffic demand from the parking structures). "fhe most effective mitigation measure for West Vail would be the construction of a Simba Run underpass. This improvement would remove 10 to 12 percent of the PM peak hour traffic utilizing the interchange complex. � FELSBURG C' HOLT & ULLEVIG Page 37 Vail Transportation Master Plan Update Table 7 West Vail Interchange North Roundabout - Alternatives Assessment West Vail Interchan e, North Roundabout LOS F projected along WB Frontage Road Approach and LOS E alon SB Chamonix Drive a roach sno Primary Issue(s): Major movement is WB left turn to under I-70, to WB I-70, and NB approach to EB Frontage Road and onto WB I-70. Largest conflict involves NB left turn onto WB I-70 with the left turns from WB Fronta e Road. Realistic Capacity Improvement(s): Add northbound approach lane from under I-70. Should also add SB Chamonix a roach lane. Supplemental Traffic Reduction Still Still need to reduce PM peak hour forecasts by 200 to 250 Needed for LOS D(Snowy): vehicles per hour, or 6 to 8 percent. 2025 Traff'ic Composition: 21 % is from proposed development. Potential Measure Traffic Flow Effect Relative Cost (a�� Isolated Measure)* Total traffic reduced by 400 to 450 High, but measure would 1. Add Simba Run underpass. vph (10 to 12%). provide other benefits as well. Estimated traffic removed is Low; would impact parking 2. Parking Management Measures b�tween 25 to 50 vpd (less than policy. 3. Express Bus Service linking West Estimated traffic removed is Vail, Lionshead, and Vail Village between 75 and 100 vph (2 to Medium. 3 /o . 4. Extended Skiing Hours Estimated traffic�removed is less Low. than 25 vph (<1 /o). 5. Metering of Outbound Structure Low; toll booths already in Traffic (Village and LH toll Estimated traffic removed is o place. Metering outbound booths)""" between 25 and 50 vph (1 to 2/o). West Vail commercial traffic ma be beneficial. Other Considerations Mixed Use Trip Gen Reduction Could reduce intersection's PM ��,,,, peak hour traffic by 25 to 50 vph 1% Employee housing auto disincentive Could reduce intersection's PM (Timber Ridge) peak hour traffic by less than 25 v h <1% CouGd reduce intersection's PM Less West Vail Development peak hour traffic by 25 vph per 10,000 SF reduction in retail. " Combining measures will reduce the effect of certain measures as some mitigation measures target the same traffic "group". "" This consideration entails redeveloping the West Vail area to better balance uses and incite internal trip- making. """Potentially, improvements in parking contro! equipment over time may allow for a more rapid exit flow rate. While this will be advantageous to those attempting to exit, it will contribute to the peak traffic concentration alon Town roads. Meterin this outbound flow would rovide a little benefit to traffic o erations. � FELSBURG C� HOLT & ULLEVIG Page 38 Vail Transportation Master Plan Update Table 8 West Vail Interchange South Roundabout - Alternatives Assessment West Vail Interchange, South Roundabout LOS F projected along EB Frontage Road Approach (relative minor and alon EB Off-ram snow . Primary Issue(s): Major movement is WB right turn to under I-70. This movemenYs largest conflict includes the eastbound off-ramp left turn to under I- 70. Realistic Capacity Improvement(s): Add northbound approach lane from under I-70 (extended back to the south roundabout Supplemental Traffic Reduction Still Still need to reduce PM peak hour forecasts by 100 to 150 Needed for LOS D(Snowy): vehicles per hour, or 3 to 5 percent. 2025 Traffic Composition: 21 % is from proposed development. Potential Measure Traffic Flow Effect Relative Cost (as Isolated Measure)* Total traffic reduced by 400 to 450 High, but measure would 1. Add Simba Run underpass. vph (14 to 16%). provide other benefits as well. 2. Parking Management Measures Estimated traffic removed is o Low; would impact parking between 25 and 50 vph (1 to 2/0). policy. 3. Express Bus Service linking West Estimated traffic removed is Vail, Lionshead, and Vail Village between 75 and 100 vph (3 to Medium. 4 /o . 4. Extended Skiing Hours Estimated traffic�removed is less Low. than 25 vph (<1 /o). 5. Metering of Outbound Structure Estimated traffic removed is Low; toll booths already in Traffic (toll booths)'''''' between 25 and 50 vph (1 to 2%). place. Other Considerations Mixed Use Trip Gen Reduction Could reduce intersection's PM ��,,,, peak hour traffic by 25 to 50 vph 1 to 2% Employee housing auto disincentive Could reduce intersection's PM (Timber Ridge) peak hour traffic by less than 25 vh<1% Could reduce intersection's PM Less West Vail Development peak hour traffic by 25 vph per 10,000 SF reduction in retail. '' Combining measures will reduce the effect of certain measures as some mitigation measures target the same traffic "group". *� This consideration entails redeveloping the West Vail area to better balance uses and incite internal trip- making. *��Potentially, improvements in parking control equipment over time may allow for a more rapid exit flow rate. While this will be advantageous to those attempting to exit, it will contribute to the peak traffic concentration alon Town roads. Meterin this outbound flow would rovide a little benefit to traffic o erations. � FELSBURG �' HOLT & ULLEVIG Page 39 Vail Transportation Master Plan Update As mentioned, the Simba Run underpass would be an expensive improvement. It would provide some benefit to the Main Vail interchange, but it would provide far more traffic operations benefit to the West Vail interchange. In addition, this underpass's provision for a third crossing of I-70 provides more flexibility for transit service and bus routing as well as provision for pedestrians and bicycles. A more detailed Simba Run Feasibility Study should be considered to fully flush out all pros, cons, and impacts associated with this potential improvement project. C. South Frontage Road - Vail Road to Ford Park �� This stretch of the South Frontage Road is characterized as being the heaviest traveled segment of �, Frontage Road in Town (just east of Vail Road) and by having heavy cross-street movements, namely the Village Parking Structure and Vail Valley Drive (also known as Blue Cow Chute). Further, the Vail � Valley Drive intersection is characterized by a unique stop-sign configuration in which approaches � along the Frontage Road are stopped and Vail Valley Drive traffic approaching the intersection is provided the right-of-way. This is unique in that it is the only Frontage Road intersection in Town with �' this traffic control configuration. As mentioned, some of the accidents that have occurred at this �i intersection appear to be caused in part by this unique configuration and the fact ihat drivers traveling � along the Frontage Road do not expect the need to stop. Other intersections which exist within this stretch of roadway include bus and top-level parking access points to the Village Structure as well as � Village Center Road located just west of the Village Structure. Much of the Frontage Road is five lanes � wide, but it narrows to a two-lane section east of Vail Valley Drive. � Numerous alternatives (and sub-alternatives) were considered to better accommodate traffic demands along this stretch of Frontage Road. Some of the alternatives were intended to mitigate localized � deficiencies like tough-to-make left turn movements onto the Frontage Road. Others are intended to � mitigate forecasted deficiencies like traffic generated by a potential major parking area at (or under) Ford Park. Also, the considered concepts look to alleviating some of the difficult left turn movements from the � side streets by allowing (or forcing) these drivers to turn right, travel a short distance, and then make use � of a new roundabout to u-turn back west, effectively making a left turn onto the Frontage Road. � Table 9 shows the alternatives and intersection sensitivity LOS results for each alternative. From the ,� table, it can be seen that 2-lane roundabouts would function well along this stretch of the South Frontage Road. However, this size of roundabout requires a significant amount of space (150 feet � minimum diameter). Preliminary roundabout layouts showed that this concept would not properly fit �; between I-70 and the Parking Structure unless allowance was made to encroach into I-70. Potentially, � grade adjustments could be made to I-70 and/or the Frontage Road to accommodate vertical design issues, but the horizontal encroachment of a roundabout into the I-70 mainline would likely not be � accepted by CDOT or FHWA officials. The notion of encroaching into the "development side" of the frontage road also offers challenges by virtue of the existing parking structure. This would not be an � easy facility to move to allow for more space. Other locations along the frontage roads have similar � challenges in that the freeway constrains widening on one side and development on the other. The � development side of the frontage roads can also pose grade challenges with respect to the served cross-street. But in light of the freeway, all improvements along the frontage roads should not encroach � beyond the "B" line of I-70. Other considerations for this stretch of Frontage Road include: ► Heavy left turn movements from the Village Structure ► Unique traffic control configuration for the Frontage Road/Vail Valley Drive intersection, due in part to the steep upward grade to the Frontage Road (and eliminating a high flow of traffic stopped on a slick roadway approach slope). The potential that Ford Park may be the site of additional parking supply in the future. . FELSBURG �' HOLT & iJLLEVIG Page 40 Vail Transportation Master Plan Update Table 9 South Frontage Road Alternatives Analysis - East of Main Vail Interchange - 2025 Traffic Intersection PM Peak Hour �eyel of Service Alternative Village Village B�Ue New Vail Center Structure Ch tu e Valley Dr. No Action E F F na Signal or Manual Traffic Control at Village Structure E B F na Alt 1a- Roundabout at Vail Valley Drive E F D na Alt 1 b- Same as 1 a, but make Village Structure 3/4 F(A if 2 movement (forcing left outs to turn right and u-turn E C lane Na through roundabout) roundab out Alt 1 c- Same as 1 a, but make Village Center Drive E(A if 2 3/4 movement (forcing left outs to turn right and u- C F lane Na turn through roundabout) roundab out Alt 2a- One Way Vail Valley Drive with new connection onto Frontage Road near Ford Park E F A F (new bridge over Gore Creek with one way eastbound circulation Alt 2b- Same as 2a but with one-lane roundabout intersection for the new one-way out intersection E F A D near Ford Park Alt 3a- Roundabout at Village Structure (2-lane) E A F Na Alt 3b- Same as 3a, but make Village Center Drive � 3/4 movement (forcing left outs to turn right and u- C A F Na turn throu h roundabout F* F* Alt 3d- Same as 3b, but also make Vail Valley Drive (NB right (A if 2 lane 3/4 movement and add another roundabout at west C A Turn roundabo end of Ford Park to accommodate U-turns. onl ut Recommended Alternative (see below� Ford Park Roundabout, '/4 quarter movement of Vail Valley C B A N/A Drive with Lane Addition to Ford Park, Police Control at Villa e Structure Access � FELSBURG C' HOLT & ULLEVIG Page 41 � � � �� ' Vail Transportation Master Plan Update Given the host of considerations, constraints, and projected traffic operations, the following plan components are recorrimended relative to the South Frontage Road, east of Vail Road: ► Roundabout at Ford Park to serve as a means of "u-turning" (eastbound to westbound) and to potentially serve a future parking structure. � ► Restrict the Vail Valley Drive to three-quarter movement (no left out) and add a continuous right turn lane along the South Frontage Road (along the Wren's frontage) allowing for free-flow right �� turn movements from Vail Valley Drive onto the Frontage Road and extending to Ford Park (and �. the new roundabout). �, ► Provide police officer traffic control at the Village Parking Structure during the PM peak hours on � peak days of activity. This would effectively serve as a manual traffic signal (but without lights, poles, mast arms, etc.). ► Leave the Village Center Drive intersection as it exists. Drivers attempting to turn left onto the Frontage Road at this location might experience some delay at peak times, but there is the option to instead turn right and travel to the roundabout at Ford Park to "U-turn". This left turn rnovement is not anticipated to be heavy. This recorrimended alternative creates "out of the way travel" for motorists attempting to go westbound along the South Frontage Road from Vail Valley Drive or any other access between Vail Valley Drive and the recommended Ford Park roundabout. Though the perception of this additional travel time inconvenience may seem to be onerous, it is outweighed by the safety and traffic operations improvements. The majority of accidents which occur at this intersection are due to the odd confjguration at this intersection and driver expectation. Due to the high volume of thru movement traffic crossing the Frontage Rd., requiring Frontage Rd traffic to stop, the LOS for the Frontage Rd. during peak times is currently at a C and D with the future expected to worsen to D and F. The recommended alternative improves the existing and future LOS for the Frontage Road. to an A and lowers the LOS on Vail Valley Drive from an A to a B. � The neec! to travel out of the way is not new to Vail. Vail is a community divided by the interstate with anly two points for crossing; and therefore today it is the norm for many motorists to have to � backtrack and drive out of the way to get from one side of the interstate to the other (i.e. traveling � from Red Sandstone area to Lionshead area). This new imposed movement at Vail Valley Drive will �. be simi4ar, yet on a much lesser scale. It may be expected to cause frustration at first, but become the norm within time. It is estimated that the additional length of travel is approximately 1800 feet or � 60 seconds of additional travel time assuming an average speed of 20 mph. Options 2a and 2b consider a new traffic pattern allowing only one way traffic along Vail Valley Drive, exiting to the east via a new bridge over Gofe Creek at the east end of Ford Park. This option minimizes the conflicts at the current Vail Valley Drive and S. Frontage Rd. intersection, however these options incur far more "out of the way travel". It is estimated that the additional travel would be approximately 4800 feet or an additional 2 minutes and 40 seconds. These options also require a long span bridge over Gore Creek that would double or triple the cost of the improvements. The recommended plan is estimated to be approximately $3 million, with the majority of these costs being burdened by any expansion of Ford Park (i.e. Parking, Recreational or Cultural facilities). � FELSBURG C� HOLT & ULLEVIG Page 42 Vail Transportation Master Plan Update This plan provides the benefits of: ► Converting the South Frontage RoadNail Valley Drive intersection into a more conventional type of intersection that would provide for free flow along the Frontage Road approaches (and a potentially safer intersection). ► Alleviating the poor LOS of turning left out of the parking structure. ► Providing a major access point for Ford Park to serve its activities including events and potentially increased parking (for skiers). D. South Frontage Road - Vail Road to West Lionshead (Ever Vail) This stretch of roadway is also heavily traveled at peak times, especially the segment just west of Vail Road. The major access onto this stretch of road serves the Lionshead Structure. The cross-section of the road at the Vail Road roundabout is five lanes, but this transitions to two lanes west of the Municipal Center (approximately 1000 feet west of Vail Road). As part of the Lionshead Master Plan adopted by the Town in 1998, the section of frontage road west of the Municipal Center is planned to be widened to include a westbound bike lane (also to be used for overFlow parking), a center median for left turn movements, and a continuous accel/decel eastbound right turn lane (although two continuous westbound lanes are included as far west as Lionshead Parking Structure). Projected traffic levels along this stretch of the South Frontage Road are on the order of 14,000 to 15,000 vehicles per day during peak times (as was shown in Figure 9). Between the daily traffic projections and the peak hour projections, widening of much of the frontage road system is required as the traffic demand levels would support the need for four or five lanes of traffic. Further, adequate width is needed to accommodate snow storage during the winter. The planned frontage road cross-section within the Lionshead area is discussed later in the report. Moderately traveled cross-streets in this stretch of roadway include both West Lionshead Circle intersections as well as East Lionshead Circle. The intersection at East Lionshead Circle is also a critical consideration in the master planning of the Frontage Road because it serves Vail's busiest bus route; the In-Town shuttle. These buses are required to turn left onto the Frontage Road from East Lionshead Circle to cover the western Lionshead area, but this can be a difficult left turn movement to make during peak times due to heavy traffic flows along the Frontage Road. Other considerations that play into developing a plan for this stretch of the Frontage Road include the potential redevelopment of the West Lionshead area and associated realignment of the Frontage Road adjacent to I-70. The Ever Vail development proposal is currently under consideration by the Town and it includes this Frontage Road realignment. Further, the Lionshead Parking Structure is proposed to be redeveloped to include more parking, residential uses, commercial, and potentially community uses, as mentioned. As part of the Ever Vail development proposal, a section of the South Frontage Road is planned to be realigned up against I-70. Discussions between Town and CDOT staff have revealed the need to recognize a legally established Barrier Line (B-Line) along the south side of I-70. With the realignment and the widening of the remainder of the South Frontage Road, the ultimate Frontage Road width cannot impede beyond the B-Line. All future planning and engineering of the South Frontage Road expansion needs to recognize this. The north-side South Frontage Road right-of-way line could coincide with the B-Line, but it cannot extend beyond it. Given these considerations and all of the past planning, improvement alternatives were not specifically considered for this stretch. Rather, the following guidance has been provided to development planners: . FELSBURG �i HOLT & ULLEVIG Page 43 Vail Transportation Master Plan Update West Lionshead Area (Ever Vail) — With the Frontage Road likely being realigned adjacent to I- 70 (in the Forest Road area), the potential exists to incorporate a major intersection in the form of a roundabout. This intersection could be located such that it connects Forest Road and West Lionshead Circle into a common intersection. Potentially, the Forest Road leg could also be a major access for the West Lionshead redevelopment. This would help mitigate that redevelopmenYs traffic impacts and at the same time better serve the difficult left turn movement onto the South Frontage Road from West Lionshead Circle. Two existing intersections could be consolidated into one, served by a roundabout. Lionshead Structure Redevelopment — If this entails a total demolition and reconstruction of the current structure, the potential exists to combine its primary access with East Lionshead Circle as a roundabout intersection. "fhis design would better serve the Lionshead Structure in terms of accommodating left turn movements onto the South Frontage Road. This design would also better accommodate left turn movements from East Lionshead Circle onto the Frontage Road, including In-Town shuttle bus movements. -fhe fact that this redevelopment entails an entire "re- do" of the facility could also lend itself to explore grade-separating movements into or out of the parking area from/to the Frontage Road. "fhe exact configuration of the roundabout at the East Lionshead Circle intersection should be defined at the time the precise redevelopment plan is considered. ,� ► Hospital Redevelopment — Specific plans are continuing to take shape for the Hospital. The facility is currently located along West Meadow Street which provides all of its access. The site �' does have frontage onto the South Frontage Road, but there are grade difference challenges. � Redevelopment plans may include the incorporation of an access onto the South Frontage Road � which would at least require an assessment of the Frontage Road width at that location. This access would relieve traffic from Vail Road and reduce the amount of peak hour trips entering the � Main Vail Roundabout. These concepts have been forwarded to the appropriate development design teams for possible integration into their respective plans. E. West Vail Redevelopment Numerous access options were considered during the planning of the West Vail redevelopment located on the north side of I-70 just east of the West Vail Interchange. A few alternatives that were considered and their dispositions were as follows: Access Chamonix Lane along the north side of the development. This concept would rely on other intersections to access the North Frontage Road, namely Chamonix Road into the northern leg of the West Vail roundabout and Buffehr Creek Road. However, encouraging most of the redevelopment's traffic onto Chamonix Lane (located along the backside of the West Vail commercial development) will change that roadways local character. Analysis has also revealed that focusing too much West Vail redevelopment traffic into the roundabout via the north leg (Chamonix Road) would be problematic. As mentioned, the two major traffic streams from the South Frontage Road and from the North Frontage Road to I-70 west merge at this point within the roundabout creating very few gaps for traffic entering the roundabout from the north. ► A series of access points along the West Vail Frontage. This would be similar as exists today for this center. Analysis has indicated that the South Frontage Road's increase in traffic over time will create greater difficulty for drivers attempting to turn left onto the South Frontage Road. Because of this increased difficulty and the potential for increased left turn movements onto the Frontage Road, this option was not pursued. � FELSBURG C� HOLT 6c ULLEVIG Page 44 Vail Transportation Master Plan Update The option that is being recommended includes the establishment of a maior access intersection, perhaps in the form of a roundabout. A traffic signal has been raised as a possibility for this major intersection, but the overall community has maintained that traffic signals should not be used in Vail. The precise location of the roundabout can be made in concert with the redevelopment program as needed. Beyond this, a right-in/right out access could possibly be provided on either side of the roundabout intersection, subject to intersection spacing and the closure of the existing access points. The final plan should be clearly coordinated with redevelopment planning efforts and it would likely result in fewer access points onto the North Frontage Road than exist today. F. Other Improvements Sub-sections A through E in this chapter provided analytic information for mitigation measures for the critical sections with Vail. Beyond these, other cross-street intersection improvements are needed as well based on the projected traffic volumes. These are described as follows: ► Simba Run Underpass Roundabouts — As mentioned, there would be a benefit of providing another crossing of I-70. Several intersection configuration options were assessed for the Simba Run underpass intersections onto the Frontage Roads. Options included straight tee intersections as well as an angled crossing that would favor a continuous traffic flow between the North Frontage Road west leg and the South Frontage Road east leg (with the two frontage Road legs "teeing" into this continuous frontage road). LOS analyses clearly favored roundabout intersections as minor street left turn movements in the other two options were projected to operate at a LOS F. As single-lane roundabouts, the Simba Run intersections are projected to operate at a LOS D under snowy conditions during the PM peak hour. While single-lane roundabouts would be appropriate, certain movements should be provided with a by-pass lane to ensure adequate operation at peak times. These assessments should be pursued further as part of a Simba Run underpass feasibility study. ► Based on the State Hiqhwav Access Code, turn lanes should be added at the intersections of: • North Frontage Road/Red Sandstone Road — right turn lane and center left turn lane. • North Frontage Road/Lionsridge Loop — center left turn lane • North Frontage Road/Buffehr Creek — center left turn lane One other consideration in Frontage Road improvements is the access into Red Sandstone Elementary School. The Frontage Road is two lanes at this location, and there is a concentration of turning movements before and after school. This condition is prevalent when school is in session and involves bus turning activity as well as private vehicles. Because the turning movements are fairly concentrated due to school activity, a center left turn lane should also be considered at the school's entrance. G. Frontage Road Cross Section Some of the frontage roads segments will need to be widened to accommodate higher concentrations of traffic and other activities. "fhe fundamental characteristics of these cross-sections involve the following (See Figure 14): � FELSBURG C' HOLT & ULLEVIG Page 45 Vail Transportation Master Plan Update ► A minimum 6' paved shoulders along two lane sections of the Frontage Rd. to accommodate adequate shoulders to meet CDOT minimum standards and to function as shared bicycle lanes. ► A continuous auxiliary lane along the developed side of the roadway, where required in high density areas, the commercial cores. This lane will serve as a continuous right-turn acceleration and deceleration lane for high traffic access points. ► A left turn lane for access points where necessary, along with raised medians in the high density commercial core areas to provide access control and provide landscape areas for signage, wayfinding and aesthetics. ► A combined 10-foot at grade paved shoulder/shared bicycle/overtlow parallel parking lane on the freeway side of the frontage road in the village commercial core areas. This will provide safe accommodations for multiple uses including; break down lane, maintenance bypass lane, bicycle lane, and for emergency overFlow parking in the near term; designed so that it may be converted into an additional thru lane if needed in the future, if traffic warrants and overtlow parking is no longer an issue. Parking on the development side of the roadway should be prohibited as it will create sight distance problems for vehicles pulling out of the side-streets attempting to turn onto the Frontage Road. Further, the clear zones required along the development-side of the frontage roads to accommodate an access and provide for some sight distance would greatly reduce the amount of parallel parking that could be provided. ► A 10' raised and separated multi-use recreational path along the development side of the Frontage Rd. This wide cross-section is intended to accommodate winter conditions when spill-over parking occurs most frequently as well as summer conditions when bicycling (and not spill-over parking) is more prevalent. Later in the report, these characteristics are "captured" as part of a 5-lane cross- section prototype. H. Transit Growth within Vail and within Eagle County will require enhancements to Vail's transit service for guests and residents. In addition, the construction of certain roadway improvements, such as the Simba Run underpass of I-70, provides increased routing options for Town buses. The areas of Town that could experience the most growth, and hence the most potential for transit demand increases, are West Vail, Timber Ridge, West Lionshead, throughout the Lionshead Village, and throughout Vail Village. Realizing all of this, options for service could include the following: � ► Establishment of a"line-haul" service entailing the routing of buses between the West Vail �, commercial center, Timber Ridge, West Lionshead, Lionshead, and the Village (and possibly Ford � Park). The Simba Run Underpass would be key for this service, and then the complementary bus routes would "feed" those riders to the Line Haul route, thus providing those who reside away � from the Line Haul route. Service to West Vail and to outlying areas north of I-70 could be focused around a new transit center at Lionshead, perhaps on the North Day Lot. As mentioned, the Village Transportation Center is at its capacity, and the Town is pursuing another site within Lionshead as a means of relief. The Lionshead Transit Center could be that site in which the Sandstone route, the Lionsridge Loop route, and potential opposing-loop West Vail routes are based. Riders served by these routes destined to the Village or Golden Peak could transfer to the In-Town shuttle at the Lionshead Transportation Center. To supplement the additional demand placed on the In-Town Shuttle, a high frequency express roufe could be provided connecting the two transportation . FELSBURG �� HOLT & ULLEVIG Page 46 Vail Transportation Master Plan Update centers as well as West Lionshead given the parking and new ski lift planned in that area; this could effectively be referred to as a Village Express route. With the possibility of four bus routes terminating at the Lionshead Transportation Center rather than the Village Transportation Center and with the potential for significant parking supply taking place at Ford Park, supplemental service to the already heavily used In-Town Shuttle makes sense. During the day, the In-Town shuttle could �un from the Lionshead Mall (on the southwest corner of the Lionshead Parking Structure) to Golden Peak. In addition, a separate "extension" shuttle service between Ford Park and Golden Peak could be provided given the potential of additional parking spaces that may be provided at Ford Park. An "extension" service route could also be provided at the west end connecting West Lionshead (Ever Vail) to the Lionshead Mall. In the evening, both of these "extension" services could be discontinued, and the routing of the In- Town shuttle could be extended from West Lionshead to Ford Park. Golden Peak could be served via the golf course route in the evening. Without the Simba Run underpass, transit service within Vail will continue to be similar as it exists today; there is limited routing flexibility in serving future demands. A line-haul system is not possible without omitting at least one of the major interstate crossing bottlenecks and adding travel time by forcing buses to pass through interchanges. The Lionshead Transportation Center would be more effective with the Simba Run underpass as the Center would be better suited to serve West Vail, both sides of I-70. The better suited that the Lionshead Transportation Center can be, the more relief it can provide to the Village Transportation Center. A Simba Run feasibility study should be pursued to better understand the pros and cons of this improvement, but one advantage includes the synergy it helps build with a new Transportation Center at Lionshead. There wifl be a genuine need to establish a transportation center in Lionshead. Today, Lionshead is a major hub including a gondola and ski lift, a major parking structure, and tourist-oriented commercial space, and condominium units. Recent redevelopment such as the Arrabelle and planned redevelopment, as described in the Lionshead Master Plan and contemplated redevelopment at the Lionshead Parking Structure will establish Lionshead as a near equal rival to the activity in Vail Village. Currently, the Lionshead Village area is anticipated to see approximately 1500 net new units and 290,000 additional square feet of non-residential development given current plans. With the potential to construct a new underpass of I-70 at Simba Run, a Lionshead Transportation Center will be in a much better position than the VTC to serve as the ski-area access hub for western Vail with respect to transit; the synergy that could be developed by a Lionshead transit center and the Simba Run Underpass together will be an extraordinary enhancement to transit service in West Vail A Lionshead Transportation Center will also provide needed redundancy to VTC. Today, it is not uncommon for the VTC to experience more buses on-site than bus-spaces. The VTC is also a designated area for bus drivers to take a break. Regulations require drivers to park their vehicle and rest at minimum specified intervals, and the VTC has historically served in this capacity. Vail is ideal for ECO service driver breaks given that Vail is the terminus of many ECO routes. With the potential of more service, regionally and locally, there will be greater demand for a dedicated driver break area The VTC will not be able to accommodate all services, all routes, and all driver break activity in the future. Another means is necessary to relieve the VTC; a Lionshead Transportation Center would be able to provide this relief to the VTC. So, the need for a Lionshead Transportation Center is driven by ► The need to provide a high level of transit service to a dense area of activity within Vail. The intent to leverage the future Simba Run underpass to vastly improve the nature of transit service connecting western Vail to Central Vail. � FELSBURG C� HOL? & ULLEVIG Page 47 Vail Transportation Master Plan Update ► The need to relieve the VTC of some of its transit-related demands with respect to regional routes and driver break areas. ► The need to "clean up" significant conflicts which occur at the Lionshead Mall/Lionshead Parking Structure entry area, particularly with pedestrian activity. ► The desire to better accommodate hotel shuttles. ► The desire to better establish an official, organized skier drop off area. (� The Town may also want to explore the possibility of using different sized buses. Some routes clearly � experience major spikes in demand that might be better served with higher-capacity buses. Increased � frequency could also be a consideration, but too many buses along a particular route eventually results in dimensioning returns and becomes a waste of resources. � With an additional Transportation Center at Lionshead and an additional means of crossing I-70 � (Simba Run Underpass), there are numerous options for the Town. As is the case today, routing will ! be dynamic and adjustments will need to be made every season in response to changing conditions � within the Town. � The Eagle County bus system (ECO) would also make use of the Lionshead Transportation Center. It � is anticipated that demand served by ECO will grow in the future given the strong potential for growth Down Valley within Eagle County. Potential routing of this service within Vail could also be enhanced � with a Simba Run underpass. � L Parking � � Currently, the town-owned Village Structure and the Lionshead Structure provide 2500 total spaces of � public parking. Ford Park offers parking for an additional 250 vehicles during ski season supplemented with transit service to the Village; this parking is restricted to permitted vehicles only. � As previously mentioned, the Town has set a goal to establish 400 additional public parking spaces for the near-term planning horizon and a total of 1000 additional public parking spaces for the long- � term. These objectives are based on winter season parking data relative to the frequency of using the �; Frontage Road to serve overflow parking demands, and the additional parking is intended to reduce � how often the Town's supply is exceeded. Frontage Road parking statistics are collected nearly every time the Frontage Road is pressed into service. The Town has established an objective to � accommodate the 90'h percentile design day, which is approximately equal to the 15'h busiest day � during winter ski season; the 400 and 1000 space increase would meet this goal for the short-term and long-term time-frames, respectively. �' Location options to place the increased parking supply include the following: ► West Lionshead (Ever Vail) as part of that area's redevelopment. Between 300 and 500 additional public parking spaces are being considered as part of the West Lionshead plan (beyond parking to be dedicated to development uses). In association with this and the new lift planned for West Lionshead is the potential for a roundabout intersection onto the Frontage Road and transit facilities. ► Lionshead Structure as part of its possible redevelopment. The redevelopment of the Lionshead Structure could incorporate an additional 200 to 300 public spaces for public use (beyond the parking needed to support the proposed uses). . FELSBURG C� HOLT & ULLEVIG Page 48 Vail Transportation Master Plan Update Ford Park - Preliminary study conducted by the Town has yielded the possibility of adding 300 to 600 spaces at Ford Park, likely below the playing fields. The potential of constructing a roundabout at Ford Park would support the additional of parking in this area relative to access onto the Frontage Road, and transit service providing connectivity to the Village would be necessary to support this concept. Besides serving parking demands during ski season, the provision of parking at Ford Park would support event activity during the summer. The future location of the parking supply within the Main Vail area (Lionshead and Vail Village) may remain a bit out of alignment with the parking demand generators. If the development and redevelopment of Vail comes to fruition as described in this report, there will be a bit of a mismatch with respect to the placement of the parking versus the demand for the parking. Figure 10 illustrates the imbalance. As mentioned, the ski area is oriented easterly from the Main Vail interchange. The Vail Village parking structure is approximately located at a central point to the ski area on the mountain. "fhe Lionshead parking structure is skewed to the west of the ski area, and the West Lionshead (Ever Vail) is skewed to the west even more-so. Because of their relative locations, skiers tend to fill the Village Structure before the Lionshead Structure. Additional parking provided in the Main Vail area would better serve the Town if it can be located to the east. However, the location of parking must also be balanced with site opportunities to provide it. Currently, the most promising opportunities to gain parking supply is via the Lionshead Parking Structure redevelopment, Ever Vail and Ford Park. Two of these three are located to the west, a bit aside from the skiable terrain. While the Town should look to capitalize on these opportunities, the Town should also pursue parking opportunities in the eastern area of Main Vail to better balance supply and demand locations. An improved balance translates into less travel within and between the Vail areas (much of which would need to be served by transit service). The provision of additional parking supply in the eastern reaches of Central Vail would also support a travel demand recommendation that entails encouraging usage of the East Vail interchange and the Main Vail interchange (discussed more later in report). � FELSBURG �� HOLT & ULLEVIG Page 49 ��c� ��w �^ � �/ � wZ� �� ed � p�a4sUO d O c a � � � O '" a N �_ 8��J1� peaysuoi� �3 v v tio pao� a � C* 7 � //C'j� ��,� p� �a�ua� a6��1 /ti�a' o�es F W C9 J J � J � W C9 Q J J � C W S H Z 0 J � m U � iL U7 0 a� O a �. �7� O d � � (fl eC1! �E] LSSt r Cr] 0(] � � � n � ti � � '�s � i� in � �U � �� F� a L _ � —' py py-- fd ❑, � � � � � �J � � � ■ q�j � o 0 U �] � 1!3 � O � � O � 0 C7 C'U � Ca c 4 � o }' r � O � � L .� � m � a� U C CC c� �C C � � L CC � .� � � � � c a� U � a� U (� d � m C Y L ^� LL U � ^� LL � C .� X w 'a a� � 0 a 0 L � N N U (� d � � C .Y L ^� LL � � � � '� ¢ �� Z � � k J ?C 1� �� z OI O 10 a m � 0 N U � m 0 � 0 a C f 1 Vail Transportation Master Plan Update VI. FRONTAGE ROAD ACCESS MANAGEMENT PLAN As the Town's Transportation Plan was being developed through this process, CDOT and the Town agreed to develop an Access Management Plan (AMP) for the North and the South Frontage Road. The AMP will serve as a planning tool for CDOT and for the Town in that it defines allowable access from which proposed development can plan. The AMP is a document that CDOT and Town staff agree to in principal; it is not subject to a formal IGA and agency adoption. The plan is intended to show the long-term access onto the Frontage Roads. It is NOT the intent to use the plan as a means of closing access to an existing thriving use. Rather, the plan is used as a framework for new development and redevelopment of properties. If development or redevelopment does not occur, then access will continue as it exists today, barring a safety issue. Further, the access locations are not meant to be precise. The plan shows potential access locations that are plus/minus 50 feet or so, and shifts larger than this might be possible as well. Besides showing access onto the roadway, the plan also shows each parcel's access if it is not onto the Frontage Road. Examples of this include a parcel accessing a cross-street (rather than the frontage road) or gaining access through an adjacent parcel. Further, the AMP is based on the assumption that individual parcels will remain under individual ownership. In the event that a development plan incorporates numerous individual parcels as part of a common proposal, then the access scheme needs to be carefully evaluated and could be different than what the AMP shows. The AMP is shown in Appendix G and it recognizes the elements of the plan that have been described to this point. Many of the existing access points are recognized in the plan. The most notable intersection/access change is the Simba Run underpass of I-70. This will create two major intersections onto the frontage road system. Other areas of anticipated change include the following: ► A new access to serve the Vail Valley Medical Center is shown along the South Frontage Road approximately 900 feet west of Vail Road. Additional coordinating with the Medical Center may be needed as their plans continue to evolve. Potential access consolidation should be pursued. ► The redevelopment of the Lionshead Parking Structure will alter the access for this site. Specifically, a"front door" access is being proposed as well as a major access to the parking area at approximately the current location. One the major differences is that the parking access may include a grade-separated ramp for the westbound left turn in movement. A planned roundabout at the East Lionshead Circle intersection onto the South Frontage Road will also serve access needs for this redevelopment. ► The West Lionshead Redevelopment Plan, otherwise known as Ever Vail, entails relocating the South Frontage Road to adjacent to I-70 in the proximity to Forest Road. This along with the development planned in that area will introduce five access points onto the Frontage Road (including the Forest Road roundabout), but it will eliminate 10 accesses serving current uses. ► West Vail commercial uses are potential candidates for redevelopment at the future time. However, a master plan has not been finalized and there are numerous land owners in this area that still need to coordinate. However, the AMP is showing a roundabout access and additional partial movement accesses. This would eliminate other access points along the North Frontage Road. ► Timber Ridge is a planned affordable housing project located along the North Frontage Road approximately equidistant between Lions Ridge Loop and Buffehr Creek Road. Its potential access scheme includes two accesses onto the Frontage Road. . FELSBURG C' HOLT & UI.LEVIG Page 51 Vail Transportation Master Plan Llpdate VII. RECOMMENDED TRANSPORTATION PLAN From the analysis shown in the previous chapters, a Town Transportation Plan has been developed and is presented in this chapter. The Plan is comprised of several elements including: • ► Roadway Improvements ► Parking ► Transit ► Travel Demand Management Considerations ► Access Management Plan ► Cost Estimates and Potential Funding Sources A. Roadway Improvements Figure 11 conceptually shows recommended roadway improvements needed to accommodate travel demands within the Main Vail area and Figure 12 conceptually presents improvements that would be planned for West Vail. The major components include the following: 1. The Simba Run Underpass This is a critical component to serve Vail's traffic needs in that it provides some relief to the Main Vail Interchange and a fair amount of relief to the West Vail interchange. Additional benefits realized from this improvement include the provision for an additional pedestrian crossing of I-70 and a dramatic increase in bus routing flexibility within Town. This underpass of I-70 will greatly improve mobility within Vail and it benefits all modes of travel. Traffic-wise, this improvement will provide moderate relief to the Main Vail interchange approximately improving operations by one-half a LOS (some approaches more than others). IYs most significant tra�c operations benefit is realized at the West Vail Interchange in which peak hour operations have the potential of improving by up to two Levels of Service at peak times. The grade-separation of I-70 will provide for crossing capability without relying on the interchanges where traffic concentrations occur due to I-70 access. This underpass is anticipated to reduce traffic by approximately five percent and 12 percent, respectively, at the Main Vail and West Vail interchanges. Further, the increased ease of crossing I-70 would reduce total travel along the Frontage Road system. . FELSBURG C' HOLT & ULLEVIG Page 52 Vail Transportation Master Plan Update Figure 11 Recommended Frontage Road Improvement Plan - Central Vail ;��-- - m :��'��'~y D o 3� a ; � b �° og ��3'�°.sa �: �;� €s�oaa ,<�o�m _ a b o S� o^ 53 : o ^ o � ��g"� e mm � c g'�1.-ro0� n � o � � � � � � n T O 7 w m � 0 m � � 0 m C) � �� K N � w � e C o m w � .+ � � J � FELSBURG C� HOLT & ULLEVIG �� a�s � $ � = ��1 S�g r G b °-' m m a � C � 3 9� �• am �N m i � 0 I 1'1 (/1 M Q � � y m� d m m IN m v ^ 0 5 a er I " � �„sr o� v: �° � sgo� a=.$ : e d 2 a;°�' e�o° ��A � y- § F � cb � '. �� ti o� � m �• Vell Rd. � �/ � � �`'� o �e, N D 'j Q� O � D� «a �� S� ��C��gB � �e _ � =S8 ga; �o n8Q ao^ g� a°y �'s� �- ��" Q� � � � g : ' 3 � � 3 q�o ls�m i �° an: Prna gmn { a° P � _ o� m �3� ag� �� r+ og m Y �S Y �% O g ?Q � �6 � � S� �gn "�� r_x� r�� rp� C '-1 C n�n Page 53 c � ao �a E�' m �' �� c `° �a � � o �N �� Q a d N � v� ° U w V cG ��w � -`n-� O � wZ� �� c �- a> � � o � Q > � o � E � � � � o � � L � � c� a� .� �� '� U Q � � � fn (� �� >� � � U � a. c� O peob, �/aa�� J .x 0 E w U /W/� � V/ � � � � — � � U U �'^ (� V/ O L � /Q� � y� Q � � � m r�� 1 y p 1 t L �� z � � � � �` C� 'd � � C i1l � • � � �. � G � � � C l '� � dA) 1i ,. c � p`"` � "� 1 l � � 1 �,p� ` o� �\ Z o } � �. � � � 1 � l l l ; � l r' t / r '4 r ti � + i � �� J � f ti r � � � , � � :-: C C 7 � � � � � O � Q� � .� U � ai i Ci � � � ��a� � o � OU � � Q � � � � 0 � ✓ 0 N � � � c� m z N �o �/� � l..l� ^L` � W � � N � — r � f� G� f� � 7 � N � y � LL a"� � C � � � > O i Q E � c� 0 � Q� � � � C O i L.L � � � C � E 0 U � � �� 0 z � N � � N O D N m E 0 � c w m m U � m � C O m 0 0 � � � > Vail Transportation Master Plan Update Transit-wise, the Simba Run underpass would provide an excellent opportunity to enhance service and increase efficiency. The areas served by the West Vail routes are awkward given major origins and destinations along both sides of I-70. Buses, like all traffic, are forced to cross I-70 at the Main Vail and the West Vail interchanges, and the circular routing through town is cumbersome. The underpass would allow for a host of route revisions resulting in far fewer vehicle-miles of bus travel required for service level (or better). With major activity centers possible along the North Frontage Road west of the new underpass as well as along the South Frontage Road east of the new underpass, the potential exists to establish a"spine" or line-haul" service connecting all of these centers. Other routes within town would then "feed" into the line-haul service. Pedestrian-wise, the Simba Run underpass would provide a crucial link between the north and south sides of I-70. Pedestrian activity has been known to take place across I-70 at-grade near the Simba Run location. It is an extremely unsafe situation when pedestrians are crossing the high-speed freeway. Fencing barrier exists along both sides of I-70, but openings in the fences are often created (illegally) allowing pedestrian activity to cross the interstate. The Simba Run underpass would mitigate this issue. Further, the Simba Run underpass would provide an excellent means for bicyclists to cross I-70, allowing riders an alternative to pedaling through the roundabout interchanges. The crossing could reduce bicycle/pedestrian travel by as much as four miles (depending on the specific origin/destination along either side of I-70). The one drawback of the Simba Run underpass is it's expense. This is the most costly element in the Transportation Plan. However, it is also an improvement that provides a significant level of benefit to the Town's mobility for all modes of travel. As a next step, the Town should undertake a more detailed feasibility study to fully appreciate the impacts, costs, benefits, and potentially identify a means of funding. A schematic layout of the Simba Run underpass is shown as part of Appendix F. 2. Main Vail Interchange Roundabout Enhancements. The key enhancement at this interchange is to establish two continuous lanes from the east leg of the South Frontage Road to the I-70 west on-ramp. Signing, striping for two northbound lanes under I-70, and enlargement of the north roundabout are the primary elements to this improvement. These improvements would greatly alleviate poor Levels of Service improving the overall LOS to LOS E from LOS F during snowy conditions. This improvement alone is not adequate to mitigate traffic impacts, but it serves as a piece of the ultimate transportation plan in attempt to achieve acceptable conditions at this interchange. 3. West Vail Interchange Roundabout Enhancements These improvements include establishing two northbound lanes under I-70 and entering the north roundabout. Also, a desirable improvement addition to this includes adding a second southbound entry lane along Chamonix Road subject to acquiring right-of-way. "fhese improvements would help alleviate poor Levels of Service (improving to LOS E from LOS F during snowy conditions) for the westbound North Frontage Road approach along the south roundabout and the westbound off-ramp approach at the north roundabout as well as the southbound Chamonix approach into the north roundabout. These improvements alone are not adequate to mitigate traffic impacts given future traffic demands, but they serve as a piece of the ultimate transportation plan an in attempt to achieve acceptable conditions. � FELSBURG C' HOLT & uL�evic Page 55 � � � � Vail Transportation Master Plan Update � 4. Other Frontage Road Roundabouts �y Roundabouts should be constructed at strategic cross-street locations where volumes are relatively high and poor minor-street left-turn movements level of service are projected (if left under stop-sign control). � The roundabouts alleviate the poor left-turn operations. Locations include: ► Ford Park (in association with parking additions) ► Lionshead Parking Structure redevelopment ► West Lionshead redevelopment (Ever Vail) ► Simba Run Underpass (both intersections, one onto the North Frontage Road and one onto the South Frontage Road) ► West Vail commercial redevelopment These roundabouts should be adequate with one circulating lane provided that bypass lanes are provided to serve the heavier movements. 5. Roadway Widening Roadway widening is also needed at selected locations to accommodate projected volumes and/or improve safety. Locations include: ► Vail Valley Drive to Ford Park - This widening, to a 4-lane section, entails adding a second eastbound lane and is in conjunction with the three-quarter movement restriction at South Frontage Road/Vail Valley Drive and the roundabout at Ford Park. ► Municipal Center to West Lionshead — This widening, to a 5-lane section, is consistent with current plans by the Town and would better tie Lionshead activity areas with the Main Vail interchange. ► Turn-lane additions at North Frontage Road/Buffehr Creek Road, North Frontage Road/ Lionsridge Loop, and North Frontage Road/Red Sandstone Road. Turn lane additions may also be appropriate at development accesses pending the development's precise nature. Timber Ridge may be one example. Also, there is a need for a left turn lane at the Red Sandstone Elementary School. As part of these improvements, it may be desirable to incorporate raised islands for reasons of aesthetics. ► Shoulder widening along existing/future 2-lane sections of Frontage Rd. should occur to bring the Frontage Rd. up to current CDOT safety standards and provide for a shared bicycle lane. Given the improvements presented as part of this plan, intersection levels of service should be at acceptable levels. Figure 13 shows a color-coded map of the frontage road system symbolizing general widening needs based on a number of considerations and Figure 14 shows the prototypical cross-section of each. Traffic loading was one such consideration in which sections anticipated to serve less than 12,000 vpd were prime candidates to be left as two lanes with cross-street/drive way turn lanes at necessary. Four lane roads were identified as those of segments serving volumes greater than 12,000 vpd and/or needing additional width to accommodate short sections of additional lanes. An example of this includes the South Frontage Road segment between Vail Valley Drive and Fort Park, where an additional auxiliary lane is provided. The five-lane cross-section is intended for the highest traveled segments in Town where there is also other activity, like the need to provide overflow parking and the need to accommodate relatively high cross-street traffic loadings. The five-lane category is intended for the segments adjacent to the active Lionshead and Vail Village areas. Figure 15 shows the projected PM peak hour traffic given the recommended plan improvements, and Figure 16 shows the corresponding LOS results. All improvements are schematically shown in Appendix F. � FELSBURG C' HOLT & ULLEViG Page 56 Vail Transportation Master Plan Update Table 10 shows a summary of the LOS changes for the interchange intersections given the growth to 2025 and growth with recommended improvements. The table shows that the interchanges would be congested with the anticipated growth, but that implementing the recommended improvements plan would help alleviate much of it. Table 10 Vail Interchange PM Peak Hour Levels of Service (LOS) Main Main West West Scenario Vail Vai� Vail Vail North South North South Existing (Ideal) B A B B Existing (Snow) B A B C 2025 Do Nothing (Ideal) F B C F 2025 Do Nothing (Snow) F D F F 2025 w/Improvements (Ideal) B B B B 2025 w/Improvements (Snow) D D C D � FELSBURG C' HOLT & ULLEVIG Page 57 ��N� ��-`�� ea Sa�aS`o�e Pd P Pe 4suo d � m a� r�N C � O J ` �U O(. �e�` e� 3�e��,�a �(� ePa� P`�� P�Oj e�Pa. G�e J�er� _ M '�a//en ��n 0 6u��ed \ p�'e�ua � ag��/I 'pFi I!�n B��JI'J peeysuoi��3 3 a�ai� Suoi��M �� j P�� W � W �l � � � wZ� �� c p � o .0 'U •U � � � � � � � � � � o 0O L L �j U U � � � � ro ro J J J � L � 7 � � L.L L.L u n u 0 W W J U c 0 L N � ,�e� a� G�� i � rno c �° v � �0 v W '�" � a V C 7 � W NaE�e c � a•- •N�W~ 'W W � u � C� � C�cV o u :o d C N W V N tl1 NraV y C �u Q C � C � W u„_3 y �v2 �� y:r ZQ mfA �a� a�e 9 o` Y U a� 0 c7 � O�\�0�. G,�ac� M � r � C� �� j„L J � t� O � N � C� � C O L �..L .� � �� : c 7 rn 0 a � N m U � � 0 y 0 n w c m m > i . FELSBURG �I HOLT & ULLEVIG 6' 12' Lane 12' Lane 6' Shoulder Shoulder Bike � � Bike .` ^ � � � l. _ Y"�u . _ 3 2-LANE CROSS-SECTION 10' 12' Lane 12' Lane 16' Lane 12' Lane 6' Walk or Me�n � Shoulder � � � Bike ��y 12' Lane � 4-LANE CROSS-SECTION 16' Turn Lane 8� Median � 13' Lane � /� . 14' Accel/Decl Lane �,10' Bike Path or Throuah Lane 5-LANE CROSS-SECTION NOTE: All cross sections are subject to additional laneage with respect to turn lanes. Some adjustment may be necessary for certain Ixations. Figure 14 Vail Frontage Road Cross Sections Vail Transportatlon Services, OS-168, 2/16/09 '� � O I� ' �' `-oSs � �' m � � �pN W y � 1 L� SO ( � � 06g � �i• � �o � h � �' /mi Jx` �� y n �� ♦ i y il � e o4� O� �Op� - a ,.° o+ O in O e/ �h N `06' / . � � � `t'p �� r 'OL 1 P.pj � ' _�s q, . � � I � , 20 ` op'h � �� 0 � ° . � M Te�laq Ilaq PS( BufH.ad �.1•�. o } , �'o � Pyieloa�p6e�pA 41 j d � _ >° o. U f/1 � y N �p 1] U F E t g �o z' > o m � �n _ � o c Y E '� m a w N ~ N d y a a � � n n u n O W X X e # C7 X W J 2�y �Si� � ', 925 � �� . � �. S�S� Pd ' . o�°s\ , �yp �a,Sa '� ♦ A � 50�e5`o�e 000`,.os� S e �. . oss , , � ce nen \ Pee S`'�,,c � , y I Ses e g/ � � OO¢S S�Ol� �.?� , G' � � �� \ � Q� ' .+ .� o � p o " c 3 50 a5 � .. � �� 5��, �S �S+ �� ' - � �i �� ♦ - 55 • � �� 4 e 0� � �`� .. �,S na � o� � . 1��0� ��oPS, �� `� � � p� o�s+� � Q,�� - - �o ° � y o� o Q � s ss`� � • y'�y y, ew,�p , �� `�'is,�/ � de�� ° �a��d6, . peeysuoi� �3 �o g oe� � wP� ,.�o � "�' • .. . S � e `G`m0 Os � (� � S �3a��ip a � eo�0� �,��09�/ peaysuo��M �', � , O� . S ! ..�� 35��• � C � ♦.�� , �,� /�� ' / `NE `�`�0 3° `ti69yy, � R � �s,n �jPt�N� a `'^hh"' e 2h°�ti°y �s�*�'� r . �* .r Sa, �� a�'�°� \ �p\ � �� s e ` � � / �� S'�� . � . p`1 .� \i�.� r' � . G o i S (S) ) � c� R� DOd oe �` n N 0 �r S�(g 1096) 9`'� �� S+y � � a � i 1� e� o \ 1 � � .584 � S � �0� � ' O �' i 011 , �g P� . 5a e 3 a` �A � � tr � : � � � � y � �^� - � �NO - - \ p�\ . * O y� � O � . � ��t . O` a N� � �� . "`� � .e. � . ^a�N �'� ' OO , O ` � m a rn � � �g" � •S�us' �m6' . � �p . � .°o�°o � ' Z2L� ��.� G,�x� I �O6 � � � � O 1L. � SZl , � SL �SSi . g5 �Ol, 006 OEl _ • 90l S81 � '�� fsai S�a i 0 -:soz �so�; N� (ose�sse � s� (oz� � � . i� • . y ,,'�; n� . . '��0� i odoo �ohh rninmin - '��n r�u��, ; ��o ry S'�{+`D 20p \ `! `�p —�.......�.... � � � � N �� r a 0 s�m m 117 V7 C � C (p ` O � � U � ?� a� a� lL 'p � C d OJ c� E c�`v o � � � � o t x ." Y 3 (C d � N O N (� } U�U c� – > m J � V% J -�OJ LL = � '� 0�� 5 �y� �*� J �� 3 8 � � � 9 $ � C 3 i R � . � ,�� \ a , 4 � . 'C r • �� 8 � L . � V Y '� o � 4 v �' � u Cq � •o � --.'� �' /e� J� J� U m � r• y � �e) e m ` " � j �. � � ^ ll � Q � � .or B � 7, p M'�Bna�ne� e�� ,� 6�li+Bd � � . / ' Pa�elUa O e6e��^ � �veeen Pe�se�as\o�0 el ' B � � O � .A O � 3 G Pae45�a d s��ip pee4suoi��3 � ' '�\ � G/ , �; , , • . o• � � , � B \ ••'� ` P � / eq�' p �iG� 0°��0 U� m � �' Ic "m i ..�i Q m � . i � . �..i . � , � �ra � , !Y � � �..i ��i' � � � �� .�� 8 fA � �_ � � • ,� " V � �1��d� ..a i i ' E� � , O `�,� � � �` �1 QQ � '�v � '� � i— I � .o � �. _ r, (�) � � � � . � �� -(�� e l �. �I: � � � .� � � 0 � . °� r � � _,� � � � p � . .O y.� _ , � ;� GA pq > • ,' 4 � �£I)� o �� i, ' P, e � [I 0 � � � � � � +'.�.� ■ '' 0, � 0 ' � , .o � �a ° I " [e�v �9 '�, `a � �� z `? . [$]s �.� m�W p� • � �� o � — �� p ' LLS� V � .� a��a o a. B `' 9 a �• G B � c �� IUl � N C D U � � � o �n � c° - c E cn O O � Z � U o 0 o a E U � � d � T N D 10 E � n c °� o in O cn � � W o �� Z W W Y. ,x. eO k J tp N C � U (Q ` i a � N 'O � UJ N � a O � ti � > E � O J V Y d (C � � L � w-.I � � N O N �a � 1 l�� 1 � �l — � 6� l� �\� 6 ✓6 � Q , . � �o�� . � � _ � �`41 . �G� �: � _ �6 - �G ��.�� c d y G 4 � � � � �� i � i � � \ �d�l t P� _, Y J'o� � `.' � � \ e � �� o / �� / a d 5a`0� C C �� \I \'l �✓ I � �✓ 6- � SVI e , , 6 ` . ��6✓6 4+`��Q' P P `G� �G1 Il�/,�,1��'i � � `Q� \ J� �� 6 � � � 3 o„\+°�` cr0`� 8 � � d_ � �1 �� J � �Q.% : �'L. Qy i U a ; � �. `v�\�� ;_. A, 1` �� : a � � y � z , � � �e, , lb� e � C� _ � � � � � � � � Vail Transportation Master Plan Update B. Travel Demand Management Measures should also be pursued to reduce spikes in traffic demands, especially for the Main Vail Interchange. Considerations include: ► Encouragement of drivers to use the East Vail interchange, through dynamic signing, when the f'' Main Vail interchange is operating at its capacity. This will be critical toward alleviating operational � issues during the AM peak hour. ► Look to meter outbound traffic from the Parking Structures. This occurs some today in the form of toll booths with drivers needing to stop and pay upon exit. Assuming this continues, the outbound metering will continue as well. ► Ski passes can also be used to help control demand on peak days. The Town should work closely with Vail Resorts on this so as to not encourage inexpensive skiing at times when high travel demands are anticipated. ► Provision of real-time information to skiers about conditions along I-70 and/or within town (such as how long of a wait to exit the parking structure) could also help manage traffic demand during the afternoon. Again, the Town and Vail Resorts should coordinate to determine an efficient and effective means to inform skiers at the end of the day as to current conditions. If drivers are forewarned about congested conditions, they may tend to naturally "spread ouY' over time and be less concentrated at peak times. ► Explore parking management options in which potential fee incentives are applied for drivers who avoid entering and leaving during peak hours. ► Encouraging all potential ride-sharing services including van pools, bus pools, and any other specialized transit to serve major travel "markets " including employees, clubs, Front Range areas, and Down Valley. C. Transit � With Growth occurring in West Vail, Timber Ridge, West Lionshead, Lionshead Village, Vail Village, and potentially Ford Park (in the form of parking supply), establishing a line-haul transit system that � directly connects these major activity centers with frequent service would be beneficial. The In-Town �" Route would essentially remain as-is with the potential for some adjustment at the east end and the � west end with variations pending time of day. Other outlying routes would be geared toward moving people to and from the primary line-haul route. A key consideration for this line-haul concept to function is the Simba Run underpass. This construction improvement is essential to the line-haul concept by routing buses past each of the key activity centers without the need for back-tracking. This improvement also builds synergy with a future proposed Lionshead Transportation Center. This would then be best situated to serve Lionshead and West Vail with this underpass. As the ability of the Lionshead Transportation Center is increased to serve as a transit hub for the west half of Vail, more relief can be provided to the heavily-used Village Transportation Center. Other routing options can be developed, but the provision of the Simba Run underpass provides routing flexibility within town and would result in service efficiencies. � FELSBURG C� HOLT & ULLEVIG Page 62 Vail Transportation Master Plan Update Figure 17 shows a potential bus routing system map of Vail. As previously suggested, the plan would take advantage of the new Simba Run underpass of I-70. A brief description of each potential route follows: In-Town Shuttle — This route would be similar to the current routing, but one key, and time saving, change would include eliminating the western-most leg to West Lionshead Circle. This would eliminate the need to turn onto the Frontage Road; the In-town shuttle would be entirely off of the Frontage Road during peak times. West Lionshead Circle could be served by an exclusive shuttle extension route until a roundabout at East Lionshead Circle onto the South Frontage Road is completed. Time-of-day routing adjustments could be made such that the In-town shuttle's eastern terminus is Ford Park (given additional parking that would be provided there) once ski activity is completed for the day and Golden Peak is no longer a high-demand area (in the evening). ► East Vail and Golf Course — Both of these routes would remain similar as they exist today. "fhe Vail Transportation Center would continue to serve as the hub terminus for these routes. Additional overflow service should be considered for East Vail at peak times. ► Ford Park — This route is intended to transport users parked at Ford Park to the Vail Transportation Center. This route would remain as it exists today, but the frequency of service may be increased pending the construction of additional parking supply at this area. After peak hours, this route could be served by a re-routing of the In-Town shuttle. A variation could include a shuttle to Golden Peak. ► West Vail/Main Vail Frontage Road — This route would be the "Line Haul" previously referenced in this report. Buses along this route would simply travel directly between the Vail Transportation Center and the West Vail commercial area. Major stops along the route would include the planned Transportation Center at Lionshead, West Lionshead (Ever Vail), and Timber Ridge. The Simba Run underpass is a crucial improvement needed for this route to make sense and be efficient. ► West Vail South — This route would run along the South Frontage Road from the Vail Transportation Center west with stops at the redeveloped Lionshead Parking Structure, North Day Lot, and West Lionshead. Further west, this route would stay on the south side of I-70 also serving Cascade Village, West Gore Creek Drive, and Intermountain. To provide transit service across I-70, this route would cross at the West Vail interchange and terminate at the West Vail commercial area before turning around and back-tracking to the Vail Transportation Center (or the Lionshead Transportation Center) via the South Frontage Road. � FELSBURG C' HOLT & ULLEVIG Page 63 LJ Kl LJ G:i W ~ C3.1 �-1 � Q ��-1 wZ� �� R s 3 "s 0 � c z W C,7 W J ti � r � � � L � � Q) � � � � m .� � � Q� � � Q. � L � T C � L � � � � � � � L > L d > > O X O _ = Y (n � Z W (n j V � 3 � > > > � � � � � � � � W C'J li � (n � � � u u u u u u u u � �� 0 � a m � � 0 � m U � m � C O � O a m � > Vail Transportation Master Plan Update West Vail North — This route would parallel the West Vail South route in that it would utilize the North Frontage Road. However, it would also utilize the South Frontage for a portion of its travel. This too would stop at the redeveloped Lionshead Parking Structure, North Day Lot, West Lionshead, Timber Ridge, and the West Vail commercial area. However, it would also serve the Lionsridge area and the residential areas in West Vail on the north side of I-70. This route also requires the Simba Run underpass to efficiently connect with the major stop areas. Sandstone — This route would be remain as it exists today which includes service between the Vail Transportation Center and the Red Sandstone Road area. The ECO service to Vail would also be able to take advantage of the Simba Run underpass. Potentially, ECO routes could access the Town via the West Vail interchange with programmed stops at the West Vail commercial area, Timber Ridge, West Lionshead, the redeveloped Lionshead Structure, and the Vail Transportation Center. "fhis potential ECO routing would mimic the "line haul" concept previously described. In addition to regular transit service, charter bus, private shuttle and van services, and general passenger drop-off and pick up facilities need to be enhanced to handle the current need and future growth. Each of these types of services will need to be accommodated at the new Lionshead Transit Center, and at appropriate future Mountain/ Major Destination Portal hubs. Portal hub recommendations include; ► West Vail Commercial Redevelopment: Hub shall accommodate 3 town of Vail (TOV) bus routes, ECO bus routes, 2-3 shuttle/vans, 4-6 passenger vehicle drop-offs ► Cascade Ski Lift: Hub shall accommodate 1 TOV bus route, ECO bus routes, 1-2 shuttle/vans, 3 passenger vehicle drop-offs ► West Lionshead Development (Ever Vail): Hub shall accommodate the In-Town Bus, 2-3 TOV bus routes, ECO bus routes, accommodate15-20 Charter buses during a typical day,3-5 shuttle/vans, 20-25 passenger vehicle drop-offs. This location should provide premier charter bus services, providing arrival services, restrooms, lockers, a meet & greet location, guest information, etc... ► E. Lionshead Circle / Concert Hall Plaza: Hub shall compliment the new recommended transit center accommodating the In-Town Bus, TOV bus routes, and 4-6 shuttle/vans. ► Gold Peak: Hub shall maintain existing sevices including the In-Town bus, 1 TOV bus route, 1-2 Charter buses when needed, 2-3 shuttles and 20-27 passenger vehicle drop-offs. Currently DEVO drops off in this location, the Town should continue to work with Vail Resorts in providing a better location or a better managed operation to accommodate the influx of passenger vehicle drop-offs and pick —up that occur in this location. The congestion it causes creates significant delay along Vail Valley Drive during the AM and PM peak drop-off times. ► Ford Park: Hub shall accommodate 3 TOV bus routes, 2-3 Charter Buses, 2-3 shuttle/vans, and 10-15 passenger vehicle drop-offs A more detailed study to verify the above Portal Hub recommendations at these locations will need to be completed by the Town prior to any implementation. The study will need to take into account the aforementioned potential recommendations in conjunction with transit service frequency as well as look at other configurations that may accommodate the transit demand. . FELSBURG C� HOLT & ULLEVIG Page 65 � � � � � � Vail Transportation Master Plan Update D. Parking � The Town should look to expand the public parking supply within Main Vail to reduce the frequency of � Frontage Road use for overflow parking. Based on accommodating a 90`h percentile and based on Frontage Road parking data over the past few ski seasons, 400 new spaces should be developed over �, the short term. Over the long term, 1000 additional spaces (600 more) should be developed in Main Vail. �; To the extent possible, more new public spaces should be located in the eastern sections of the Main Vail area. Potential locations include: ► West Lionshead (up to 400 additional spaces) ► Lionshead Parking Structure (as part of its redevelopment; possible net gain of 300 spaces) ► Ford Park (at least 300 additional spaces, and possibly more if the above-mentioned locations do not include an increase) The addition of these parking areas, along with additional commercial and skier access would "spread ouY' Vail's base area to approximately 1.6 miles of frontage. Because of the increased density, activity, and distance, the Town's transportation system within and to the Main Vail area clearly needs to be enhanced to support these activities through the combination of roadway improvements and transit service enhancements. A more detailed parking study to verify these locations and the associated number of additional spaces will need to be completed by the Town prior to any irriplementation. The study will need to take into account the aforementioned potential recommendations as well as looking at alternative locations, transit incentives, in combination with parking management solutions that may alleviate the parking situation, which may include outlying lots with bus service. E. Pedestrians and Trails Vail maintains a system of trails to accommodate pedestrian and bicycle activity throughout town. Multi- use routes are provided along the 12-mile long Gore Valley Trail (GVT) on the south side of town, the 2 3/4-mile long North Recreation Path (NRP) along the north side of town as well as several short "spur" trails. These trails combine detached recreation paths, attached bike lanes and residential streets to provide pedestrian and bicycle friendly routes to most areas of the town. In the spirit of maintaining a multi-modal transportation system, a goal of the trail system is to offer safe and efficient non-motorized routes for both recreational and commuting purposes. The recommended Simba Run underpass will provide an important pedestrian and bicycle connection across I-70. In particular, the connection will serve pedestrian activity between the Timber Ridge employee housing development and the ski area. The Town's Recreational Master Plan recommends bike lanes along all Frontage Roads in the town. The following recommended roadway guidelines (Fqgure 14) accommodate this goal: ► Widened paved shoulders along all 2-lane sections of roadways to provide a shared bicycle lane in each direction. � ► Continuous auxiliary lanes in the 4 and 5-lane sections of roadways to be used as shared bicycle ways. Vail's peak biking season, the spring, summer and Fall, falls opposite o# the peak traffic � season, winter, when the auxiliary lanes are most used by vehicles and least by bicyclists. "fhis � � � FELSBURG � �� HOLT & ULLEVIG � Page 66 Vail Transportation Master Plan Update helps minimize bicycle/vehicular conflicts in the auxilary lanes. A well defined signage program will need be installed to make bicyclists and motorists aware of the "Share the Road" policy. ► A 10' wide shared shoulder/parking/bicycle lane along the I-70 side of the Frontage Roads in the proposed 5-lane sections of Frontage road to provide a shared bike way. Similar to the auxiliary lanes the parking/motorists conflicts are minimized as the peak seasons of each are opposite. Again a visible "Share the Road" signage program should be installed. ► A 10' wide multi-use recreational raised and/or separated path shall be provided along the entire lengths of the highest traffic volume sections of the Frontage Roads, specifically from the Dowd Junction path at the west most end of town to Ford Park along the South Frontage Rd. and from the north West Vail Roundabout to the north Main Vail Roundabout along the North Frontage Road. VIII. IMPROVEMENT TRIP THRESHOLDS The preceding analysis and resulting Transportation Plan is based on future development throughout Town. The total PM peak hour trip generation of all new development is estimated to be 2,800 trips. The recommended plan was based on the premise of achieving acceptable Levels of Service at the critical locations within town. This chapter of the report is intended to provide a sense as to the effectiveness of each improvement toward alleviating a projected poor Level of Service measured against an equivalent trip generation associated with new development. Three critical operational traffic components are considered here including: ► Main Vail interchange, North roundabout, WB I-70 Off-ramp approach ► Main Vail interchange, South roundabout, WB Frontage Road approach West Vail interchange, North roundabout, WB Frontage Road approach The effectiveness is measured in terms of the equivalent offset in total PM peak hour trip generation. In other words, each improvement can offset a certain amount of traffic impact from new development measured in total trip generation. Estimates of the effectiveness were based on a series of sensitivity LOS analyses given varying degrees of trip generation from the new developments (i.e. portions of the 2000 new trips estimated) Table 10 shows the effectiveness of each improvement, and the bottom row of the table shows the needed trip offset to achieve a LOS D under snowy conditions. The structure of Table 10 is a menu allowing one to pick and choose measures, summing the effectiveness offset values to achieve the figures in the bottom row. All values are given in terms of ranges as these are gross estimates. It should also be noted that actual values will vary depending on where within town development takes place. In addition, values may decrease as more irriprovements are considered. The north roundabout at the Main Vail interchange is a component requiring the greatest amount of trip "offset" to achieve a LOS D. Only 200 to 300 total PM peak hour trips from new development could occur before LOS E is reached, so 1700 to 1800 new PM peak hour trips need to be offset by improvements (given that all new development will generate nearly 2,800 PM peak hour trips). From Table 10, improving the roundabout and establishing two northbound lanes under I-70 at this interchange would be the single most effective measure for the WB I-70 off-ramp approach. But this alone would not offset enough impact to achieve LOS D; other measures would also be required such as the Simba Run underpass and/or a combination of other items listed. � FELSBURG C� HOLT & ULLEVIG Page 67 Vail Transportation Master Plan Update Table 11 Mitigation Measure Offset; Total New Trips Equivalent Effective PM Peak Hour Tri Generation Offset Main Vail Interchange West Vail Potential Measure Interchan e North Roundabout South Roundabout North Roundabout WB I-70 Off-Ramp WB Frontage Road WB Frontage Road A roach A roach A roach 1. Expand Main Vail North 1400-1500 0 0 Roundabout 2. Add NB Lane Under I-70 (Incorporated in 500-600 300-400 at both interchan es Measure 1 3. Simba Run Underpass 500-600 200-300 1200-1300 4. Encourage Use of East Vail 300-400 100-200 0 Interchan e 5. Parking Management 300-500 250-350 100-200 Measures 6. Express Bus Service �2� 200-250 100-150 200-300 7. Extend Ski Hours 100-150 50-100 <50 8. Meter Outbound Parking 150-200 150-200 100-150 Structure Traffic Target — Number of Trips from New Development to Offset to 1700-1800 600-700 1000-1100 Maintain LOS D During Snowy Ca�ditions �3� ' Values in columns represent the effectiveness of the improvement in terms of total generated PM peak hour trips from new development. Values will vary for each of the three critical traffic approaches listed below depending on the specific location of a new development proposal and based on how many of the improvements are packaged together (the effectiveness of each improvement will lessen as the number of ineasures/improvements to be implemented increase). �2� Measure requires Simba Run underpass for best results. �3� Values in this row show the objective amount of PM peak hour trips that need to be offset by the improvements above or through reducing the level of planned development. Total PM peak hour trips from new development are estimated to be 2,800 when built out. At the Main Vail South Roundabout, establishing the second northbound lane under I-70 (and installing appropriate striping and signing to take full advantage this improvement) would be the most effective offsetting measure, but again at least one other measure would also be needed. At West Vail, the Simba Run underpass is really the only measure that would produce enough effectiveness to alleviate a LOS E. Based on operations at the West Vail north roundabout, Table 10 indicates that the Simba Run underpass should be in place by the time that three-eighths of the proposed development is completed (bottom row shows the need to offset 1,000 to 1,100 trips out of the 2,800 total peak hour trips projected). . FELSBURG �' HOLT & ULLEVIG Page 68 Vail Transportation Master Plan Update As an example in applying Table 10, suppose a development/redevelopment proposal is estimated to generate a total of 400 PM peak hour trips. If mitigation measures were to be applied so as to offset the impact of these trips on the interchange roundabouts listed in the table, then one would select the appropriate mitigation measures such that the offset values sum to 400. Table 10 would suggest that the impact of these 400 total trips could be offset at the Main Vail North roundabout via encouraging other traffic to use the East Vail interchange (Number 4, 300-400 trip offset effectiveness). However, this measure would only offset about one-half the impact at the South Roundabout intersection, so one may also choose to provide Express Bus Service (Number 6, 100-150 trip equivalent) and extend ski hours (Number 7, 50-100 trip offset equivalent) to fully mitigate the traffc irripact of the development at the south roundabout. With respect to these three offsetting measures for the West Vail roundabout, Numbers 3, 6, and 8 would fall just short of offsetting the impact of a 400-trip development. One other measure would be required, perhaps Parking Management Measures (Number 5, 100-200 trip offset). Another application of the table is to use it in assessing a particular improvement, say the Simba Run Underpass. If the Town is able to advance this improvement, then enough trip offset would be in place to offset the impacts of 1200 to 1300 trips per hour from new development at the West Vail Roundabout. However, this improvement would "buy" less impact offset at the Main Vail roundabouts. The table is intended to be guide. Clearly, the location of the development will have an effect on the relative impact to the roundabouts listed, so some engineering judgment is required in the table's application. Also, the table only addresses the PM peak hour. As previously shown, there is one notable operational issue anticipated during the AM peak hour in 2025; the north roundabout intersection at the Main Vail interchange. The crucial mitigation measure to alleviate this issue is to encourage approximately one-half of these trips to exit I-70 at East Vail (rather than Main Vail) through the use of variable message signs placed along I-70. . FELSBURG C� HOLT & ULLEVIG Page 69 Vail Transportation Master Plan Update IX. IMPROVEMENT COST ESTIMATES Planning level construction cost estimates have been developed for the Frontage Road improvements. "fhese have been grouped into Frontage Road sections and include the improvement recommendations presented here as well as other maintenance activities such as overlays. Figures 18 and 19 show the improvements, their cost, potential funding sources and a rough estimate as to the appropriate timing. These figures were developed by Vail's Public Works staff. The figures break the frontage road system up into numerous segments, and the improvements called out also include other enhancements to such has recreational paths and medians to be integrated into the overall improvement. Center roadway medians are only shown adjacent to the commercial core areas, West Vail, Lionshead and Vail Village where: ► Traffic volumes tend to be highest ► Cross-street movements are most signifcant ► Delineation and direction are most critical to motorist Raised medians can provide safety and aesthetic benefits to the traveling public, but they also create increased challenges with respect to maintenance including snow removal. As such, their application is limited to those segments in which tourist activity is the greatest (and so are the traffic loadings). �,; Besides cos#s, the figures also identify potential participation by nearby development as well as to a general timing for the improvement as to the time frame of when it should be built. This time frame is �' based partially on need and partially on the timing of development, when the development � participation can be realized. The total cost for the program improvements is approximately $63 � million in 2007 dollars {2009 costs could be approximately 20 to 25 percent higher). The Simba Run underpass would be the single most costly improvement. However, this improvement would deliver �� significant benefit to the Town as this report has identified. The nomemclature in figures 18 and 19 can be further generally defined as the following; ► Cost: Estimated cost based on 2007 construction costs seen in Vail. Estimates are provided by the Town of Vail staff, with supporting information being provided by FHU ► Development Funding: Provides potential funding sources other than the Town of Vail or CDOT budgets ► Improvement: Provides a brief description of general type of Improvement that is recommended by this plan: Safety. Recommends a safety type of improvement (i.e. shoulder widening, guardrail) Rec. Path: Recommends a recreational path improvement (i.e. bike lane / adjacent path) Min. Std: Recommends the road to be brought up to Minimum CDOT standards (shoulders) Turn Lanes: Requires additional turn lanes Capacity: Requires capacity improvements (additional lanes / roundabout) Roundabout: Roundabout recommended Access: Recommended access improvements Medians: Recommends medians for access control and aesthetics Underpass: Recommends a new underpass Interchange Improvements: Recommends interchange improvements ► Timing: Provides an estimate timeframe that the recommended improvements should be implemented . FELSBURG C' HOLT & ULLEVIG Page 70 s � �- L u u ��c x — ��w � �O� wZ� �� T � L � � � N � � QC� G Q� > O L Q � � � M� 1..1.. � � � �� L �..�.. .� > � N N � H C O �+ !C v O �+ v 41 41 . � M r+ � � !C ,� O d 'p 'C 41 OC Nd C� •- O 41 y � � !C H � 41 � �+ � � Ey ::c N {C d � �+ d H y O d ci o Wd ZQ �� z 0 a � � 0 m � � � � 0 a � � � > �� o � 2 � a� c J �' N C � m _ O Y t > — — � ro � T d � � ro � U O �� lC m � �� c tn� U G g 0 w � �� c � c � � � E o°c' O � � rn�, m � . rna i� > C d � c� � �i E H v � v CG ��w � -`n-�O� wZ� '� Il � � � . Q �C� � .� � � X : � } Z c m W O b /l N � � O U � � � � ( � � � �� 0 c� O � � � � � 6� Il . I -mo � �n� �� '�'� � ��yx � _ �, � �� , �� o� .c � c �� o m _� � � __ � �� ° m 2 LL � 'O iC w � }C o rn � m � m rn C � U C U O � � m.a •� � � U co a m•� �� a > a o � 69 J W� U f0 J i%� � c � c E � E � o� o � m � . �n > c a E U � �i � � ;G S � � Z Y � i � � ` �� 0 fn � N — \ C = i — � ` J � � m � U >, c � Q�U d �� m � >. U m � � � T C � � � � a U � r c E�' E es m � O C w > c o- E U � li � � o� � � � a� a, � � � a, ii > 0 � fl. E � c� 0 � a� � c� � c 0 � � .� � C .� G N C O �I, V O �+ v a1 a1 N V � 10 ,� O d 'O � � � O � Nd �� Q V y 10 � fA � a1 � � � � d d � �+ 41 N v O d V Q Wd � v ZQ �� . rn 0 � � � m Z � 0 � 0 a � � > Vail Transportation Master Plan Update X. OTHER CONSIDERATIONS A. Priorities Improvements in this plan may require time to implement as funding becomes available. Roadway construction including the underpass will take time to fund. As such, the lower cost travel demand management measures should be pursued first. These include parking pricing policies and encouragement to use the East Vail Interchange. These should be the simplest measures to implement and "test" for effectiveness. Relative to improvement priorities, the Simba Run underpass provides a wide variety of benefits to Vail's Transportation system. Traffic-wise, this improvement relieves both interchanges, provides an option to cross I-70, provides for a pedestrian crossing of I-70, provides greater flexibility in routing Town buses, allows emergency response agencies to react quicker, and it allows for a planned Lionshead Transportation Center to better serve the community and relieve the heavily-used Village Transportation Center. Also, securing funding, obtaining necessary approvals, design, and eventual construction will take time. As such, the Town should consider moving ahead with the approval and clearance processes for the Simba Run underpass. This may best be done by first conducting a more detailed Simba Run Underpass Feasibility Study to better understand and quantify all of the benefits, disadvantages, impacts, and costs associated with this project B. Other Planning Efforts Additional planning studies may be required for various pieces of this plan. Improvements or actions that impact any portion of I-70 or the right-of-way thereof may be subject to State and Federal approval procedures. Modifications to the interchanges are subject to CDOT's Policy Directive 1601 which may require a feasibility study. Environmental clearance will also likely be required for interchange modifications as defined in CDOT's Policy Directive 1601 and in the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA). Transportation Improvements that impact Ford Park may also be subject to 4F regulations and procedures. Longer term, the ideas have been raised to perhaps dramatically change I-70 through Town. The thought is based on the potential of utilizing the space that I-70 currently occupies for development as the value of this property may more than offset the costs of reconfiguring I-70. Two ideas have been raised. One includes "cut and cover" in which I-70 would be depressed in its current alignment and structural decking would be placed atop of I-70. The other idea includes the potential of re-routing I- 70 under Vail Mountain south of Town. Far more study is needed to determine if either of these is feasible, but in the event that one of these options is approved and funding is identified, the Tawn's transportation plan should be updated. Under either one of these scenarios, I-70 would no longer be the barrier that it is currently, allowing a host of options transportation-wise. In addition, an assessment should be made to determine if, and what, type of east-west roadway would be needed through the Town. If either of these ideas becomes eminent, any improvement recommended in this plan should be reviewed carefully before implementation to ensure it would still be warranted. . Fe�ssuRc C� HOLT & u��evic Page 73 Vail Transportation Master Plan Update C. I-70 PEIS CDOT has issued a draft of the I-7CI PEIS document for public review. This effort considers an extended length of I-70 from C-470 to Glenwood Springs including through the Town of Vail. Results of the effort identify the potential for rail service from Denver to the Vail Transportation Center. In addition, the Town of Vail is a member of the I-70 Coalition and is in full support of the Coalitions actions with respect to the PEIS and the future of I-70. Their latest activity can be found at httq:!lwww,i70saluti�ns.orq. A Record of Decision (ROD) is anticipated in year 2011. Further, the Town is a member of the Rocky Mountain Rail Authority and is participating in their high speed Rail Feasibility Study which is expected to be completed by Summer of 2009. Currently the rail study has identified Vail as a potential rail station site. The addition of a high speed rail from Denver, thru Vail and beyond will have a dynamic effect on transportation and transit in Vail. An additional study will be required to determine the impacts on Vail of such an improvement. D. Implementation of Recommended Plan The recommended plan is mainly driven by the anticipated growth and development of Vail. The timeline for implementation also is driven by development. The major infrastructure improvements; ie. The Frontage Road widenings, the construction of roundabouts and roundabout improvements, and the Simba Run Underpass, will need to occur along side the anticipated developments. Other ancillary� improvements, noted as safety, minimum standards, or recreational path improvements should be done regardless of development in a timely fashion, as these types of improvements are not necessarily development driven and are existing needs. � A preliminary prioritization and implementation plan is provided in Figure 20 (currentiv provided as a s�enarate document to be discussed with the Town Council and to be included in the plan once � ado tec�. It should be noted that this figure assumes all of the major anticipated development occurs � and occurs in a timeframe as outlined. The cost estimates provided in Figures 18 and 19 have been transferred to this chart and further broken down into the major funding sources; Town of Vail capital � budget, Town of Vail RETT budget, Tax Increment Financing, traffic impact fees, developer required � improvements, and CDOT funding. These funding sources are generalized and limited. Each � project, or section of road system, will have a detailed in depth funding scenario completed prior to implementation. The detailed funding scenario wiil finalize exactly how the projects will be funded, � analyze the master plan assumptions, and look at any additional funding mechanisms. � FELSBURG �� H O L'T & ULLEVIG Page 74 Vail Transportation Master Plan Update Figure 20 Figure Coming Soon --- Transportation Master Plan Preliminary PrioritizaEion and Implementation 1'lan . FELSBURG C� HOLT & ULLEVIG Page 75 Vail Transportation Master Plan Update E. Funding Sources To fund these transportation system improvements, the Town must rely on some of the following funding mechanisms and sources. • Colorado Department of Transportation (CDOT) • Federal Agencies (Federal Transit Asministration, Federal Highway Administration) • Private Developers • Town of Vail Traffic Impact Fees (revised and codified) • Tax Increment Financing (TIF) — Town has a$15 Million Bonding capacity at this time • Real Estate Transfer Tax (RETT) — for landscaped areas and paths • Town's Capital Budget • Vail Resorts Inc. $4.3 million parking commitment • Conference Center Fund of $9.3 million for possible reallocation if approved by voters • Selling or leasing development rights on Town of Vail land identified in the Lionshead Master Plan and the western south side of the Village Parking Structure • Required voter approved initiatives o Tax Increases o Improvement Districts o Bonding or refinance the Town debt after 2012 CDOT All of the roadways 8� interchanges discussed in this memo are under the jurisdiction of the Colorado Department of Transportation. The Vail Fro�tage Roads are the number —five - priority of the Intermountain Transportation Planning area for Region 3;. However, only the first four projects are currently scheduled to be funded between 2005-2035 given all the other regional priorities. Simba Run is listed as a project in the I-70 PEIS. In addition, interchange improvements may be cleared independently of the overall project if there is no mainline roadway improvements associated around them, similar to the Edwards roundabout scheduled interchange project. Once the overall PEIS record of decision is released in —2011, individual projects may apply for funding. The cost of the PEIS in 2005 was estimated in excess of $4 billion and to date only $1.8 billion is earmarked for the next 25 years. CDOT schedules asphalt overlays for the frontage roads approximately every 15 years. The next overlay was scheduled for 2QQ9 but has since been pushed out to 2Q13. It is advantageous to the Town of Vail to widen shoulders for vehicular and bicycle safety and make other frontage road improvements prior to any overlay to take advantage of a CDOT funded overlay of the whole road. When the overlay is completed the overall project will have a finished look and be a better road in the long run. � FELSBURG C' HOLT & ULLEVIG Page 76 Vail Transportation Master Plan Update CDOT has recently proposed we accept $11 million to take over the 11 miles of Frontage roads that run thru Vail. This would give ownership to Vail, making the Town responsible for all the maintenance and capital costs going forward. Currently the Town receives $115,000 per year from CDOT to perform snow removal and minor pothole maintenance. CDOT is currently responsible for all capital improvements, including maintenance overlays and reconstruction costs. Federal Aqencies The Town of Vail has been awarded $ 2.4 million in 2008 and $ 235,000 in 2009 for a Lionshead Transit Center. It is unlikely the remaining $4 million will be awarded in 2010 which would complete the town's three year requested and funded amount of $7 million dollars. The Town of Vail is in line to collect an estimated $2-4 million for the proposed Lionshead transit center. It was originally scheduled to be released over a three year period starting in Federal FY 2008, however since no specific project was designated it will now have to be completely released to a viable project in 2010. The Town is obligated to contribute a match of at least 20%, or $0.4 to $0.8 million. Mike Rose, Transit Manager, went to Washington D.C. as part of the Colorado Association Transit Agencies delegation to finalize the request. Private Developers It is anticipated that all of the developer impacted roads will be constructed by a consortium of developers over time. The main contributors will be the Lionshead Parking Structure, West Lionshead (Ever Vail) development, Strata, Evergreen, Four Seasons, Solaris, Arrabelle, and the Ritz. As well as, the Timberline Lodge (Roost) and west vail commercial. Traffic Impact Fees The Town to date has assessed traffic impact fees in excess of over $3.5 million. Many developers have constructed improvements in lieu of paying fees to the Town . The Town has available $584,000 of unallocated dollars for traffic impact mitigation. If they continue to follow the current approach, the Town will end up with few dollars to fund the cost of a Simba Run or Main Vail interchange improvements. Increasing the traffic impact fee would allow the Town to collect additional dollars to offset the cost of the future improvements. Relying on traffic impact fees to offset the cost of the improvements is relative to timing. Both the Lionshead Parking Structure and West Lionshead (Ever Vail) developments are expected to create significant transportation improvements. The value of the fee would be significantly less than the value of the improvements. Additionally, these developments will greatly influence the need for Simba Run and Main Vail. West Vail on the other hand would not have to construct significant improvements relative to the size of project that could be developed and therefore could generate more impact fee dollars to be used elsewhere. However, this would most likely be the last place for significant development, again thus causing a timing issue. The Town is currently under contract for a traffic fee Nexus study, however it is currently on hold until the recommended improvements are adopted. "fhe nexus study is critical for two reasons: one to determine if any adjustment should be made to the current fee, and two, to o�Fficially codify the traffic impact fee requirements. Tax Increment Financing (TIF) Using Tax Increment Financing to bond the cost of the projects meets the needs we have addressed above and most of the projects fall under legitimate use of Tax Increment Financing. Again, timing is critical as bonds can only be let with a payback period that expires in 2025. For each year that passes, the payback period is shortened by one year. There may be a need to modify the boundaries � FELSBURG �i ►, o �T & ULLEVIG Page 77 Vail Transportation Master Plan Update of the current Urban Renewal District. There are also streetscape costs not inc;luded in the above that may also need to be funded by a portion of TIF. The Town Finance Department has estimated the town's TIF bonding capacity at approximately $15 million at this time Real Estate Transfer Tax (RETT) RETT has and will continue to be used to make improvements to the trail system along all of the frontage roads. In addition, the Town has used RETT for landscaping the medians along the frontage roads. A large percentage of the cost of the work outside the development area can be attributed to the cost of the recreational enhancement to the roadway. In addition, the cost of providing parking for park and recreation uses is a use of RETT. The RETT can also be bonded against. A signiFicant portion of streetscape has been funded with RETT in the past. There are current and future projects planned for the use of RETT funds for recreation enhancement projects. Capital Budget Previous presentations have shown little or no ability to fund projects from the capital account beyond the capital maintenance to extend the life of existing infrastructure. In 2012, the town makes its final debt payment on its current bonds. The payments have been about $ 2.5 million per year. F. Next Steps • Adopt the 2009 Vail Transportation Master Plan • Complete the Nexus study in 2009 for a trafFic irripact fee to codify the current practice and adjust the fee if desired based on the new transportation need and cost information • Complete the Lionshead Transit study in 2009 • Prepare a Simba Run and Main Vail interchange feasibility study in 2009. • Prepare a Ford Park Parking Feasibility Master Plan study in 2009 • Continue to participate and complete the Rocky Mountain Rail Authority Rail Study • Continue to coordinate long term transportation planning effort with EC;O and Eagle County (Expansion of ECO transit / Regional Rail study) • Present a comprehensive list of all the projected costs for all projects and begin to compare this to a comprehensive list of funding sources • Expand the Urban Renewal boundaries to allow tax increment financirig to be used from West Vail to Main Vail along the frontage roads, interchanges and the location of Simba Run underpass • Lobby the Department of Transportation to participate in the funding of these roadway improvements. The ability to have "shovel ready" projects, as fundi�g scenarios are always cha�gir�g, is a proactive step in competing for funding. This allows completion of the Vail's master transportation improvements plan to be more of a reality. • Install permanent traffic counters at the roundabout interchanges to monitor trip trends . FE�ssu�c �� HOLT 6c ULLEVIG Page 78 Vail Transportution Master Plan Update APPENDIX A TRAFFIC COUNTS . FELSBURG �� HC7LT & Ul_LEVIG Appendix A Vail Transportation Master Plan Update APPENDIX B EXISTING LOS CALCULATIONS . FELSBURG C� HOLT 6. ULLEVIG Appendix B Vail Transportation Master Plan Update APPENDIX C DETAILED TRAVEL TIME DATA. � FELSBURG C� FIOLT & ULLEVIG Appendix C Vail Transportation Master Plan Update APPENDIX D FRONTAGE ROAD COLLISION DIAGRAMS � FELSRURG Ci HOLT &. ULLEVIG Appendix D Vail Transportation Master Plan Update APPENDIX E DEVELOPMENT AND TRIP GENERATION FSTIMATES . Fe�s�uRc CiHC)LT & ULLEVIG Appendix E Vail Transportation Master Plan Update APPENDIX F CONCEPTUAL LAYOUTS OF IMPROVEMENTS PLAN � FELSBURG �� HOLT 6c ULLEVIG Appendix F Vail Transportation Master Plan Update APPENDIX G FRONTAGE ROAD ACCESS MANAGEMENT PLAN � FELSBURC; C� HOLT & ULLEVIC; Appendix G North 1-70 Frontage Road /� CE5S � i.� »4..x� ;,4 ^5'":"rt �. � e�'y ,�k •: h��.'� '.�y�- �"�%., ,�� ¢ 1..` ,��A"€'��.. a,��,�'�; -. a� ' s d ,., m�y;�'i�s"��' A3.`3, ��E�1�� . ir a� r vs e¢ .. ; . x� i�w, t ^ry �� ,� i c� re, � .. �r� �„ �s Si . .,r , P 3i;�, x . ;��enf�,�JS�'or�figuta�ion _° Proposeclt3� r�d�'��g�?r�taan..>., �� s� r,:€ �3e,scrr t�a� ��_�: �rs��acat�or�� 1 17332 Left Former Wendy's Restaurant Access 300 feet west of West Full movement, Closed-down Full movement, Mixed Use Vail Interchange Fast Food Restaurant Development 2 173.35 Left Former Service Station Access 160 feet west of West Full Movement Closed upon redevelopment and Vail Interchange the ability to have cross access with Access point #1 3 173.38 Both Chamonix Road West Vail Interchange Roundabout - Full Movement Roundabout - Full Movement 4 173.41 Left Commercial Use 90 feet east of West Full Movement Right In/Right Out, Restricted Vail Interchange Movement 5 173.44 Left Commercial Use, Hotel/Motel 260 feet east of West Full Movement Right In/Right Out, Restricted Vail Interchange Movement 6 ��3�4$ Left Commercial Use, Hotel/Motel 560 feet east of West Full Movement 3/4 Movement Vaillnterchange 7 173.54 Left Commercial Use 810 feet east of West Full Movement Right In/Right Out, Restricted Vaif Interchange Movement g 173.60 Left Commercial Use 1,160 feet east of Full Movement Closed West Vail Interchange 9 173.65 Left Commercial Use 1,430 feet east of Full Movement Roundabout - Full Movement West Vail Interchange 10 173.70 Left Commercial Use 1,685 feet east of Fulf Movement Right In/Right Out, Restricted West Vail Interchange Movement 11 ��3.74 Left Commercial Use 1,900 feet east of Full Movement Full Movement West Vail Interchange lz 173.81 Left Zermatt Lane Zermatt Lane Full Movement Full Movement, but Convert to 3/4 Movement If Safety Conditions Warrant 13 � 73�83 Left Commercial Use 100 feet east of Full Movement Closed Zermatt Lane 14 �73 $$ left Playground/Park Access 310 feet east of Full Movement Full Movement Zermatt Lane 15 � 73.96 Left Buffehr Creek Road Buffehr Creek Road Full Movement Full Movement 16 ��3�99 Left Commercial Use 170 feet east of Full Movement Closed - Provide Access to Meadow Buffehr Creek Road Ridge Rd instead 17 174.04 Left Commercial Use, Hotel/Motel 400 feet east of Full Movement Convert to Full Movement Out Only Buffehr Creek Road lg 174.06 Left Commercial Use, Hotel/Motel 540 feet east of Full Movement Convert to Full Movement In Only Buffehr Creek Road 19 174•39 Left Commercial Use 0.43 miles east of Full Movement Full Movement Buffehr Creek Road Zp 174.52 Left Residential 0.58 miles east of Full Movement Full Movement Buffehr Creek Road zl 174.54 Left Residential 0.60 miles east of Full Movement Closed - Buffehr Creek Road zlq 174.59 Left Residential 0.65 miles east of N/A Full Movement - Transit Only Buffehr Creek Road zz 174.63 Left Residential 0.70 miles east of Full Movement Full Movement Buffehr Creek Road 23 174.73 Left Residential 0.25 miles west of Fuil Movement Full Movement - If Possible Connect Lions Ridge Loop to Future Simba Run Underpass Roundabout 24, Otherwise Shift West zq 174.78 Left Simba Run Resorts (Future Simba 0.21 miles west of Full Movement Roundabout - Full Movement Run Underpass) Lions Ridge Loop L:\05168\Access Plan Table\Vail Access Plan Complete Table DRAFT update.xls Zqq 174.81 Left Residential 0.18 miles west of Full Movement Full Movement - If Possible Connect Lions Ridge Loop to Future Simba Run Underpass Roundabout 24, Otherwise Shift East 25 ��4 92 Left Commercial - Vail Run 250 feet west of Lions Full Movement Closed - Provide Access to Lions Ridge Loop Ridge Loop instead 26 ��497 Left Lions Ridge Loop Lions Ridge Loop Full Movement Full Movement Z7 175.04 Left Residential 160 feet west of Red Full Movement Closed - Provide Access through Sandstone Road adjoining property to Red Sandstone Road 2g 175.07 Left Red Sandstone Rd Red Sandstone Rd Full Movement Full Movement zgq 175.17 Left N/A 500 feet east of Read N/A Full Movement - New Sandstone Road Playground/Park Access if 29 is closed 2g 175.20 Left Playground/park Access 710 feet east of Red Full Movement Full Movement - Close Access if Sandstone Road parcel integrates with neighboring development to the east 30 ��5.24 Left Commercial Use 0.17 miles east of Red Full Movement 3/4 Movement Sandstone Road 31 175.32 Left Commercial - Condos 0.23 miles east of Red Full Movement Full Movement Sandstone Road 32 175.36 Left Red Sandstone Elementary School 031 miles east of Red Full Movement - Out Only Full Movement - Out Only Sandstone Road 33 175.39 Left Red Sandstone Elementary School 033 miles east of Red Full Movement - In Only Full Movement - In Only Sandstone Road 34 175.52 Left Commercial - Condos 0.46 miles east of Red Full Movement Full Movement Sandstone Road 35 175.86 Left Middle Creek Village 0.20 miles west of Vail Fuil Movement Full Movement Rd 36 �75•89 Left Middle Creek Village 910 feet west of Vail Full Movement Inbound Bus Use Only Rd 37 175.93 Left Middle Creek Village 510 feet west of Vail Full Movement Full Movement Rd 38 176.02 Both Vail Rd Vail Rd Roundabout - Full Movement: Roundabout - Full Movement L:\05168\Access Plan Table\Vail Access Plan Complete Table DRAFT update.x�s South 1-70 Frontage Road i�'�CE55 �- r s 2�" a" w' � '� »�+�r . '" � c o�°.t�+ ��,Lr : ��s- ��.; �a , : '��, '' 8 _��d"' . � a i � s > ° j �� , � - 4 {, �"ia�b . 4� '� � � a� � . � ; v¢� �. Az�� . Number �Mife Pus�` � .:;Ss�ie��"��z: Descripti,o,n„ ' � ,; �LticaXio�,�i�„� . �,G�ent�JS.,��Cqnfigurat��n„ , Propased Lfx��or�f�g�hy� tan �..., 39 17338 Both Chamonix Road West Vail Interchange Full Movement, Roundabout Roundabout - Full Movement 40 173.50 Right Service Station 550 feet east of West Full Movement/ Service Statio� Full Movement/Service Station Vail Interchange 41 173.52 Right Service Station 680 feet east of West Full Movement/ Service Station Convert to 3/4 Movement Upon Vail Interchange Redevelopment of Site (Close When No Longer a Service Station) 42 �73.63 Right W. Gore Creek Drive W. Gore Creek Drive Full Movement Full Movement 43 ��3 �8 Right W. Haven Drive W. Haven Drive Full Movement Full Movement 44 173.85 Right W. Haven Drive W. Haven Drive Full Movement 3/4 Movement 45 »4 �� Right Residential 260 feet west of Full Movement Full Movement Matterhorn Circle 46 »4 �5 Right Matterhorn Circle Matterhorn Circle Full Movement Full Movement 47 174.15 Right Donovan Park Access 420 feet east of Full Movement Fuil Movement Matterhorn Circle 48 174.57 Right Westhaven Drive Westhaven Drive Full Movement Full Movement 49 �74.78 Both Future Simba Run Underpass 0.25 miles east of N/A Roundabout - Full Movement Westhaven Drive 50 ��4 85 Left Commercial Use O.ZS miles west of Full Movement Closed Forest Rd 51 �74.9� Both Commercial Use 805 feet west of Forest Full Movement Full Movement, Align Left and Right Rd Accesses 52 174.96 Right Commercial Use 475 feet west of Forest Full Movement Full Movement Rd 53 �75 �� Both Commercial Use 300 feet west of Forest Full Movement Full Movement Rd 54 175.06 Both Forest Rd & Commercial Use on Left Forest Rd Full Movement Full Movement 55 175.13 Right W Lionshead Circle W Lionshead Circle Full Movement Full Movement 56 17520 Right Commercial - Vail Spa Condos 490 feet east of W Full Movement Right In/Right Out Movements Lionshead Circle 57 17528 Right Commercial - Lionshead Inn, Vail 200 feet west of W N/A Right In/Right Out Movements Chophouse, Lionshead Circle 58 175.32 Right W Lionshead Circle W Lionshead Circle Full Movement Full Movement - Convert to 3/4 Movement when operations transfer to Los F. 59 175.38 Right Commercial - Condos 480 feet east of W Full Movement Full Movement - Convert to 3/4 Lionshead Circle Movement when Roundabout installed at 6Q 60 175.52 Right E Lionshead Circle E Lionshead Circle Full Movement Roundabout - Full Movement 61 �75.59 Right N/A 415 feet east of E N/A Full Movement Lionshead Circle 62 175.68 Right Commercial - Parking Structure 805 feet east of E Full Movement Full Movement - Major Intersection Lionshead Circle 63 175.8� Right N/A 0.22 miles west of Vail N/A Full Movement Rd 64 175.83 Both Commercial Use 900 feet west of Vail Full Movement Right In/Right Out Movements, Rd Both Sides 65 15 88 Both Vail Valley Medical Center 740 feet west of Vail Full Movement Full Movement - Atempt to align Rd accesses from both sides upon redevelopment 66 � �5 93 Right Vail Plaza Hotel 400 feet west of Vail N/A Add Access - Right In/Right Out Rd Movements 67 175.95 Both Commercial Use 270 feet west of Vail Full Movement Full Movement Rd 68 176.02 Both Vail Rd Vail Rd Roundabout - Full Movemenl: Roundabout - Full Movement 6g 176.05 Right Commercial Use 120 feet east of Vail Full Movement Right In/Right Out Movements Rd 70 176.12 Right Commercial Use 450 feet east of Vail Full Movement Full Movement Rd L:\05168\Access Plan Table\Vail Access Plan Complete Table DRAFf update.xls 71 176.13 Right N/A 500 feet east of Vail N/A Right In/Right Out Movements Rd 7z 176.15 Right N/A 600 feet east of Vail N/A Right In Only Rd 73 ��6 �8 Right N/A 725 feet east of Vail N/A Right Out Only Rd 7q 176.21 Right Village Center Dr Village Center Dr Full Movement Full Movement 75 176.23 Right Commercial - Parking Lot 130 feet east of Village Full Movement Transit Only, In Only Center Dr 76 176.26 Right Commercial - Parking Lot 250 feet east of Village Full Movement Full Movement Center Dr 77 17629 Right Commercial - Parking Lot 550 feet east of Village Full Movement Full Movement Center Dr 7g 176.39 Right Commercial - Parking Structure 870 feet east of Village Full Movement Full Movement - Major Intersection Center Dr 79 176.42 Right E Meadow Dr E Meadow Dr Full Movement 3/4 Movement-Subjectto Roundabout at 86 gp 176.45 Right Utility Access? 203 feet east of E Full Movement Right In/Right Out Movements - Meadow Dr Subject to Roundabout at 86 gl 176.11 Right Commercial - Condos 310 feet east of E Full Movement Right In/Right Out Movements - Meadow Dr Subject to Roundabout at 86 gz 176.48 Right Commercial - Condos 400 feet east of E Full Movement Right In/Right Out Movements - Meadow Dr Subject to Roundabout at 86 g3 176.53 Right Commercial Use 510 feet east of E Full Movement Closed Meadow Dr gq 176.55 Right Commercial - Wren 660 feet east of E Full Movement Right In/Right Out Movements - Meadow Dr Subject to Roundabout at 86 85 176.57 Right Gerald Ford Park - Service Rd Access West end Gerald Ford Full Movement Right In/Right Out Movements - Park Subject to Roundabout at 86 86 � �6.62 Right N/A Gerald Ford Park N/A Roundabout - Full Movement Location To Be Determined g7 176.80 Right Gerald Ford Park Access 0.40 miles east of E Full Movement In Only - Future Configuration To Be Meadow Dr Determined gg 176.84 Right Gerald Ford Park Access 0.44 miles east of E Full Movement Out Only - Future Configuration To Meadow Dr Be Determined 89 176.89 Right Gerald Ford Park Access 0.49 miles east of E Full Movement Closed Meadow Dr L:\05168\Access Plan Table\Vail Access Plan Complete Table DRAFT update.xls •!l��i��i��l��••�•!•i!••ri••��•!� �, _ �. ..�,. , . �. �� r �= i .'� r- p � r i�, m `� ^ , �, � ^��F �� .., +. �, i� �' ` � � '. �le �� 4�. " Y �'#. ,� �� a _�. �- ti } � S �{� �� u,., � -. + � .. �.. � � � � � �,� �� .'�_'� � / � wa f �` . i�� ;� .� � d - - :��, . a �w , � �pi Y � �4 � � � fl { _ � � �, . t � ' ' T r , . � Y � � � _ � Ni. , O i 1,: _.. �' _ � `� � , S f , I , �, y- � >+ ' -, , � � .�'�► � . . �t ,� � :� � '� � � ;s� ..�.�, _ o x ; ' � � i } -u • g � m � m t� 9 � r� . Q e? � r E E •� �- - m �Y , # � - , � �� ` f - � � } •� �� .c_ � � •.�'=�fi t � , ' i '�*{'i,s� �.�- ' ,'8 , . . � � � �Y'•a'' #. ;�io . �'. Rmr�- � ..� � �� , ��K ±� �� g� r i � t�. r -�, a : . M�' 3 a i � � � � V .. �� , � ' � ,� �' i ��►�� o . � � t.�� Y / �j � X• � .K r ']y: r � _� �� o F � ° =m°� {�� A ` 'as.� �s� i - � N;�q ' �ooN � :� � =N� - ''';j': � m so Js� � � r . Oop£ '��', NT j. O f{�Ny �i af i:a ��n�i �'.' _ A . 1 � � � , ~F=` P� .. �o � �i > � A r o �� 2'1HS 33S 3N1� �1'dW ••!��l�i��f••!••!!!•�l��i••i�•�•�l��• �� 1��•••••••�ii••�••�!!��l�!•i!••••l��•i �,�� - .� �� 4 .. �a�r " . r = ,� '�+�- � * �.� � AT LINE SEE 5Hi. 'c ' � ;.►,. � . , * . — -� . � + _ r ' � � .� �` �s � v , ' ` A � � % � _ � , � ��. � � � • � * � r ='M* � � �+ � ?' ° 9 A r � ,.. ,. . �. = ib r b y ^�` . ' v , ��, p .�'� _ a• . q � r ,� � � � . , �7 �+ � «. o , � �,ii, t _ '� +� r � �e, ,..h. � , �� •� `5, . � � �, N '�' ��.` �V M �,Zla ; � o ,�' ' .� m '`t� "�`.�' � � ' . a ry $v�. . . i � � ' t � # t i , - °" � � . a ;y" ,y � � � ;'r, - '.z., . r O � ' •�+ T � q - • � a Y � � . � . � ` r s r , .�� ` _ � � �p°or m - ,� � �m ��O � � ,�rN 0 �yO ti rn N �W��. � , m�mN � ,y �, � p 0 '�, f aoz � � + �. �poar .f:. _.d m� ' '1i ��,, �� az �� 'x r _� �'��~ � •p '�• '� ~ ;� * �. xR� � � ?�� "� �11?' � ,.� �� { _�• , ~ �'^ °� �` • � , �� z I�;:` tt M� � �r �=oi"r' ,� � � � �. __. � . 1 9 _ g "`' W � ' �, � � : ,:'�: ' �' � •.� r�• �:1 . � .� » � � � eo °°„ ',, •,}. m �. o° ?� . `t : I . . �s .�� £cin � . �= � � 'z; �, mnm . � . • . � s x°� �. w ' �ca a � !{�~n } �� ' . , _ . iy7. � . �n -� �,_ k . _ ._ � ' .� � -� � 7"" . _ � �. ��, " ` y* ��,[J � � ,� _ ; � �� z �� ., .. : e � �� y, d4 , 1F m � „ �!� .. d1� �!, ' � o N � _ # t � ... �` 'M � A � '"'� " - .• . _ i ' ! D A � riC4� � � y �� °q�'gC s'+ � �7 n � � � o U1 s ,P '�. �� > N .,. � g�; � , �n ' N� ; � �� , r O V � � � �� , 4 � ` p �} �. � �. -'+ � t . D � .� - Z , _ v �' � � � 'w ^ � b 'SHS 33S 3NI�H 1 ''� c..� ^ r o f � . �� ` r?�►. ► ' ., •��••�••��l��••i•��i••••��o•••••• � � r� � � n �� '� r� cn �n � r a z +> �� :.� : �_ �� ^�; rn `�� '-: � = �y ;�' � - �� " ..��r � : � �P 4 [�F' �F-' � .� �� 1 � � . � + � � r� ,� !��••!f•��!!�l��ii��ir•i��i�!•�� - , - � � SEE SH7. 4 � � ��•, � � � ` � � ' 1� ., � � y �� r . �.— ^. '.f..l .. . _ � 1 � _- � � _ � c � i � _ ;' ' / i; � -�1 y J� y � 6� � � � ,� � + � w ' r .'` � � � � ` — i �. � v � � � O � � � � T * (f . f . / . '~� a � * � 6 '� � � � � � � �/ �. � ti � ,� � � � �;��. .� � � � �� # � r f � � � } � � �. I i i, f !_ � � �. , , a , • . , � a� T , .�+'� ' '` ► r � . �� `� � .„ J �� , �t ° �� ;� ;.: > . � , � _ :.� � � ,. i,�. r � , i � � '� F ' � � '' �_ �� r* .t � .. .. ''�.�� . �'t � � '`.�,�• . �. a _ y. s - � ! � � � Y �' ,� � � � . ' �� t r � � - � � � . . - � � . + � � 1 �� + f �+ • ~f � e �,~,, � � K -S� �� s �. .3 - • ��' , ' ' � J ' F I i � o a . � i � m.; t � ' � } . $ � . �,.. � � c � � �� , `'�'� , � . � � �� Z ` _ - + : �- ow � � �� .��_ , �. __; K 4 ' � � s 7' `°Z�� ( � � Y ,s s� ; �n � A I �� , L . - � � � � � . � I4 . � , :, , . . � tt,, 9'1HS 33S 3R`I�H�l'dW � ,�� r • / \ � , . z � o"Z � . r ( � . �� p o O o�m � � , °'` �. - g�, ' z c m ° �"' ' • /` Jr ' o u�za„ • � F�so ./, � N oa�� + � o f "°? �rj ,i� mN '�� .*I • I' xR{� , o o a� ry�m . . � .. �� o � c � � �� .. j* . q, (' v _ i �. a � - . C3t P . . a. e� • ' I .. '.�, J ,,- r s"; 1. I� r••••••l��••••��r��••��••��i�i4�•�� — ^ r�r _�. � � f 1 ,`� y � � �°g� -��mr �tm� �"=s �F�on �mN~� �t N °o, N F I '� rn rr �� ? , r � /k� + � _ . r � s MA�CHL E SWL. 5 T � ��• � � � � '� � � � .� � � r , ,' ' � F � 1. '„�,, � �' V!" r, �� , � •��I � . � 1 ;� - . �' . �, n , � �` ' � # a . �. . w •4 � , ,� ,�� . � .: . } . � - � ,' � � �� a - . � ' � � � � � '� ,� `., - 4 .�A �� y �+ �,:�:� ` � . i t . i . ' _�' '"1� t � i�M'� '� ,��7 � N � � �� ''. � � �. / � F . •� a ��' .e .' -.4.. . t t � '` � ' • A �°I�[ s.-. . c d r b �' -' , . � � �'� _ : � �'�� . � ' �r . +.� � .� �# ; -�r 44'' r i.,� , �• � �, /. ��' .-� .7: � � � ` ��,�'�"` `^� � C� �..� ' � ��'� = ~ � ' �ii SZ � �� '�� 1f � W f ` � T � v '0� / '- .} . ' _� c . *' �! a �—.�� , � � . , •4 . ' y �, .,r � �� . • '� ' ',+ �,. ., r r ,�^• r � -s� •� ' i � ' • 'ri ' . � •��fs��`��••••��r��r��•••s••• J .,,� �� `�. �; v �■t.�f. � r- � � � = 'v: . i �� r- "; .f .^ ,�' � . �.F,� .� a �y �. �' . � A � "� MATCHLINE S E SH7. 6 / oo • . ' \� . OD 7 * a �P � _ � � 5=T � � . w "k " , r�� ' �fy- 1 P �'' * i�• �. � . .�� K ,'� ' � .} 4 r X� f :, �f. . � �. , .� . � � � ..�,, •, , �''� �,�� . ; M ��' � .,' � � � �:�. �. �� , , . ��. ; �,,� , .. s x '� • �, r � • � w � � � � � ' Vail Transportation Master Plan Update APPENDIX H VAIL 20/20 STRATEGIC PLAN - 2009 . FELSBURG �� HOLT & ULLEVIG Appendix H Vail Transportation Master Plan Update APPENDIX I LIONSHEAD TRANSIT CENTER WHITE PAPER - 2008 . FELSBURG �� HC�LT & ULLEVIG Appendix I Vail Transportation Master Plan Update APPENDIX J EVALUATION OF HIGHWAY NOISE MITIGATION ALTERNATIVES FOR VAIL COLORADO - 2005 & VAIL NOISE MEASUREMENTS - Technical Memorandum 2007 � FELSBURG C� HOLT & ULLEVIG Appendix J Vail Transportation Master Plan Update . FELSBURG C� FiOLT & ULLEVIG APPENDIX K LIONSHEAD MASTER PLAN - TRANSPORTATION ANALYSIS -1998 & 2006 Appendix K Vail Transportation Master Plan Update APPENDIX L A REPORT ON THE RECOMMENDATION OF A PREFERRED � FELSBURG C� HOLT 6: ULLEVIG SITE FOR THE VAIL TRANSIT CENTER - 2005 Appendix L Vail Transportation Master Plan Update APPENDIX M VAIL TUNNEL OPTIONS - SQUARE 1 DOCUMENT (DRAFT) - 2005 . FELSBURG C� HOLT 5c ULLEVIG Appendix M Vail Transportation Master Plan Update APPENDIX N VAIL TRANSPORTATION MASTER PLAN LTPDATE - 2002 . FELSBURG C� HOLT & ULLEVIG Appendix N Vail Transportation Master Plan Update APPENDIX O VAIL VILLAGE LOADING AND DELIVERY STLTDY -1999 � FELSBL'RG C� HOLT &. ULLEVIG Appendix O Vail Transportation Master Plan Update APPENDIX P WEST VAIL INTERCHANGE ALTERNATIVE ANALYSIS -1996 � FELSBURG C� HOLT & ULLEVIG Appendix P Vail Transportation Master Plan Update APPENDIX Q FEASIBILITY STUDY i-70/CHAMONIX ROAD -1996 � FELSBURG �if►vLT �: ULLEVIG Appendix Q Vail Transportation Master Plan Update APPENDIX R MAIN VAIL INTERCHANGE FEASIBILITY S'TUDY -1995 � FELSBL'�RG �i ►-� �� L T �. ULLEVIG Appendix R Vail Transportation Master Plan Update . FELSBURG ��HOLT & ULLEVIG APPENDIX S VAIL TRANSPORTATION MASTER PLAN -1993 Appendix S Vail Transportation Master Plan Update � FELSBURG Ci HOLT SL ULLEVIG APPENDIX T FEASIBILITY OF A PEOPLE MOVER SYSTEM TO REPLACE THE IN-TOWN SHUTTLE BUS ROUTE -1987 Appendix T PLANNING AND ENVIRONMENTAL COMMISSION March 9, 2009 : 1:OOpm 7�11WN OF VAlL ' TOWN COUNCIL CHAMBERS / PUBLIC WELCOME 75 S. Frontage Road - Vail, Colorado, 81657 MEMBERS PRESENT MEMBERS ABSENT Bill Pierce Rollie Kjesbo Scott Proper David Viele Michael Kurz Susie Tjossem Sarah Paladino departed at 2:40 during the third item 30 minutes 1. A request for a final review of an amendment to an existing conditional use permit, pursuant to Section 12-16-10, Amendment Procedures, Vail Town Code, to allow for the extension of an existing temporary business office conditional use permit, located at 450 East Lionshead Circle (Treetops Building)/Lot 6, Vail Lionshead Filing 1, and setting forth details in regard thereto. (PEC090004) Applicant: 450 Buffalo Properties, represented by Michael Hecht Planner: Bill Gibson ACTION: Approved, with conditions MOTION: Kurz SECOND: Proper VOTE: 6-0-1 (Pierce recused) CONDITION(S): 1. The approval of this conditional use permit extension shall be valid until August 30, 2012. 2. If Vail Resorts vacates the first floor office space, then this temporary business office conditional use permit shall no longer be valid. Bill Pierce recused himself due to a conflict of interest as the property has been his client numerous times in the past. Warren Campbell made a presentation per the staff inemorandum. Ross Davis, attorney representing the applicant, appreciated the staff's hard work. On behalf of the applicant he expressed his belief that the application met the criteria prescribed for a conditional use permit. Chris Jarnot, Vail Resorts, expressed his support for the application and expressed that Vail Resorts is planning to move their existing office uses from Concert Hall Plaza over to this location and other locations. He thanked the Commission for their continued support and open minded thinking. He is hopeful that within three years a permanent location would be found. Jim Lamont expressed the importance of the Lionshead redevelopment Master Plan and understood that an interim use may be acceptable. He believed that the continuation of the conditional use permit was in keeping with the goals of the Master Plan. He stated that if Vail Resorts, current tenant, left the office space, then that should trigger the re-evaluation of the conditional use permit. Commissioner Kurz was supportive of the extension and commented that it seems practical to keep the office uses in that location. Page 1 Commissioner Paladino was in support and added that it is valuable to have office in Lionshead to support the neighboring businesses. Commissioner Proper supported the extension and wished to tie the approval of a conditional use permit to this specific tenant. Commissioner Viele was in support, but did not believe the conditional use permit should be tied to this specific tenant. Commissioner Kjesbo agreed with Lamont and Proper that the conditional use permit should be tied to Vail Resorts, and he was in support. 30 minutes 2. A request for a final recommendation to the Vail Town Council on a proposed major amendment to Special Development District No. 39, Crossroads, pursuant to Article 12-9A, Special Development District, Vail Town Code, to allow for an increase in the number of dwelling units from 77 units to 78 units; located at 141 and 143 Meadow Drive/Lot P, Block 5D, Vail Village Filing 1, and setting forth details in regard thereto. (PEC090003) Applicant: Solaris Property Owner, LLC, represented by Mauriello Planning Group, LLC Planner: Warren Campbell ACTION: Recommendation of approval with condition(s) MOTION: Kjesbo SECOND: Kurz VOTE: 6-1-0 (Pierce opposed) CONDITION(S): The Developer shall address the following conditions of approval prior to appearing before the Vail Town Council for second reading of an adopting ordinance for the establishment of Special Development District No. 39, Crossroads: The Developer shall prepare an amended written agreement, for Town Council review and approval, outlining the responsibilities and requirements of the required offsite improvements, as indicated on the proposed Approved Development Plan. This agreement shall include, but not be limited to, all streetscape improvements along Village Center Road and East Meadow Drive, public access to the plaza for pedestrians and Town sponsored events, which may include the establishment of an easement on the plaza and language in the covenants and declarations for owners of property in the project regarding the use of the plaza for special events, inclusion of the loading and delivery facility in the overall loading and delivery system, payment of traffic impact fees and credits given to offset fee, and details for funding public art. The Developer shall address the following conditions of approval prior to submitting a building permit application (a grading permit/excavation permit shall constitute a building permit); The Developer shall submit a final exterior building materials list, typical wall section, architectural specifications, and a complete color rendering for review and approval of the Design Review Board, prior to submittal of an application for a building permit. 2. The Developer shall submit a rooftop mechanical equipment plan for review and approval by the Design Review Board prior to the submittal of a building permit application. All rooftop mechanical equipment shall be incorporated into the overall design of the structure and enclosed and visually screened from public view. Page 2 3. The Developer shall receive all the required permits from the Colorado Department of Transportation (CDOT) prior to submitting for a building permit. Failure to receive the appropriate permits to access the South Frontage Road per the Approved Development Plan will require the project to return through the special development district review process. 4. The Developer shall comply with the written final comments of the Town of Vail Public Works Department outlined in the memorandum from the Town of Vail Public Works Department, dated January 16, 2006, prior to submitting an application to the Town of Vail Community Department for the issuance of a building permit for this project. 5. The Developer shall submit a written letter agreeing to install a public safety radio communications system within the subterranean parking structure which meets the specifications of the Town of Vail Communications Center. The specifications and details of this system shall be submitted to staff for review and approval with the application for a building permit. 6. The Developer shall submit a fire and life safety plan for review and approval by the Town of Vail Fire Department in conjunction with the building permit submittal. The Developer shall address the following conditions of approval prior to release of a full building permit, requesting a temporary certificate of occupancy, or a final certificate of occupancy; The Developer shall submit a comprehensive sign program for review and approval by the Design Review Board, prior to requesting a temporary certificate of occupancy, or a final certificate of occupancy. 2. The Developer shall be assessed a traffic impact fee of $6,500 per net trip increase in p.m. traffic. The traffic and trip generation report prepared by Fox Higgins Transportation Group dated June 2007, that specifically addresses the change in number of condominium units from 75 to 77, states that the net peak increase is 81 trips, 13 more trips than in the original approved traffic study dated November 2005. Since the usage of the commercial space is still in flux the Public Works Department will require that a new study be performed prior to the issuance of a full building permit to address the traffic generation created by the specific tenants that will lease the commercial/retail space within the project. This change may cause the trip generation to increase. The applicant shall be responsible for mitigating the number of net peak trip increases depicted in the revised study. This impact fee shall not be offset by any public improvements and shall be paid prior to requesting a temporary certificate of occupancy or certificate of occupancy. 3. The Developer shall post a bond to provide financial security for 125% of the total cost of the required off-site public improvements. The bond shall be in place with the Town prior to the issuance of a temporary certificate of occupancy. This includes but is not limited to the proposed streetscape improvements. 4. The Developer shall commence initial construction of the Crossroads improvements within three years from the time of its final approval at second reading of the ordinance establishing Special Development District No. 39, and continue diligently toward the completion of the project. If the developer does not begin and diligently work toward the completion of the special development district or any stage of the Page 3 special development district within the time limits imposed, the approval of said special development district shall be void. The Planning and Environmental Commission and Town Council shall review the special development district upon submittal of an application to reestablish the special development district following the procedures outlined in Section 12-9A-4, Vail Town Code. 5. Emp/oyee Housing: Crossroads shall furnish deed restricted employee housing sufficient to accommodate 22 occupants by executing appropriate restrictive covenant(s) on form(s) provided by the Town. Any dwelling unit(s) restricted shall conform to the following floor area requirements: a one-bedroom unit shall contain at least 550 sq. ft. of floor area and accommodate no more than 2 occupants; a two- bedroom unit shall contain at least 850 sq. ft. of floor area and accommodate no more than 3 occupants; a three-bedroom unit shall contain at least 1,350 sq. ft. of floor area and accommodate no more than 4 occupants; and a four-bedroom unit shall contain at least 1,500 sq. ft. of floor area and accommodate no more that 5 occupants. The Town may approve minor variations in floor area when the overall intent of the floor area requirements is being met. Any deed restriction shall be for property located within the Town. Such deed restriction(s) shall be executed and provided to the Town for recording and restricted unit(s) shall be available for occupancy prior to the issuance of a temporary certificate of occupancy for the Crossroads Project or any phase thereof. Any deed restricted employee housing unit shall comply with the standards and procedures established by the Town Zoning Regulations. 6. The approval of SDD No. 39, Crossroads, shall restrict the uses upon the plaza level tenant spaces to retail uses solely and shall not be utilized for professional offices, business offices, and studios. The second floor retail space may be utilized for any allowable or conditional use as listed in the Commercial Service Center Zone District. No space noted as retail space on the Approved Development Plan shall be converted to a residential dwelling unit. Temporary real estate sales offices may be allowed on the plaza level of retail during the first two years following the issuance of a certificate of occupancy in order to allow effective sales of dwelling units on- site. Warren Campbell made a presentation per the staff inemorandum. Dominic Mauriello, representing the applicant, gave a power point presentation detailing the request and the reasons for the request. Ann Bishop, attorney representing the Vail Village Inn Phase III H.O.A., under authority of Deanne Hall, president, stated they are in support of the proposal. Connie Knight, resident, asked for clarification on the employee housing requirements. Gwen Scalpello, resident, stated her concern about the creep up in dwelling units on the site. She cited that the original approval was for 69 units then it went to 75 then to 77 and now 78 units are proposed. She added that while this space may be challenged that a restaurant or office might be ideal for the space as they tend to be destinations. She pointed out Campo DiFori which is on a second floor hard to find space, but is successful. Commissioners Kurz, Paldino, Tjossem expressed their support for the proposal, identifying that the space would be difficult to make successful. Page 4 Commissioner Proper stated that he understands the difficulty in renting the space for commercial due to the resulting design, but he added that almost all commercial spaces have some challenge which can be compensated for by charging an appropriate rent for the space. Commissioner Viele stated that the building is approved and under construction, and the Town should do everything they can to make sure the project does not go upside-down. Commissioner Kjesbo stated his support of the proposal and his agreement with Commissioner Viele. Commissioner Pierce stated that he did not believe that an empty condo adds to the character of the neighborhood and therefore is in opposition to the proposal. 30 minutes 3. A request for a work session to discuss the establishment of a new special development district, pursuant to Article 12-9A, Special Development (SDD) District, Vail Town Code, located at 303 Gore Creek Drive, Units 7 through14 (Vail Rowhouses)/Lots 7 through 13, Block 5, Vail Village Filing 1, and setting forth details in regard thereto. (PEC080074) Applicant: Christopher Galvin, represented by K.H. Webb Architects Planner: Bill Gibson ACTION: Tabled to March 23, 2009 MOTION: Kjesbo SECOND: Viele VOTE:6-0-0 Warren Campbell made a presentation per the staff inemorandum. Dominic Mauriello, representing the applicant, gave a power point presentation providing the history of the development on the site and the proposal. Commissioner Kurz asked if the owners have owners committed to making improvements to their units and would they reconstruct all at one time? Dominic Mauriello stated that all the owners are committed to reconstructing their homes, however he did not see they performing construction all at the same time. He suggested that two units may reconstruct at the same time. Commissioner Kjesbo asked what the heights of the already reconstructed units were currently and pointed out the decrease to the side setback on Unit 13. Dominic Mauriello stated that they were approximately 42 feet so the proposal was not for a significant increase in height. Commissioner Tjossem inquired as to the impacts of applying an SDD to only Units 7-13 and not all the units. Dominic Mauriello reviewed the history of the development and that they were platted differently from each other. Units 1-7 were condominiums and 7-13 were townhomes. Connie Knight, property owner in the adjacent property to the east, asked if this SDD would apply to other townhome properties, why an SDD was needed, and what would keep neighboring properties from applying for an SDD as they have similar situations? She added her concern over the proposed 10 foot setback on the east, is not a good idea adjacent to the public park. Page 5 Warren Campbell stated that the proposed SDD would only apply to these 7 lots, that an SDD was only one method to address the desire to not have to request multiple variances each time someone wished to redevelopment (new zone district, rezoning to an existing district, amend existing district, or do nothing), and neighboring properties would have the same opportunity to request an SDD to aid in their redevelopment. Commissioner Pierce inquired as to the existing GRFA on the sites and how it compared to what was being proposed. Allison Kent, representing the applicant, provided the GRFA of each structure existing currently which in many case exceeded the allowable GRFA for the property. Warren Campbell pointed out that those properties exceeding the allowable GRFA have likely utilized there 250 additions. Connie Knight asked for clarification on the proposed setbacks and noted her concern that the public benefit being proposed was not sufficient. Gwen Scapello, resident, pointed out that the SDD process is the most onerous and expensive process. She stated that it appears that the Town has forced the property owners into a tough position. Perhaps the Town should look into a zoning district change that would be appropriate for the townhomes, instead of creating an SDD. Dominic Mauriello stated that we the SDD process is not significantly different form amending or creating a zone district. Kyle Webb, architect, on behalf of applicant. Stated that the existing units are 2-3 bedroom with partial basements. Everyone in the neighborhood is unique, therefore blanket zoning wouldn't work. He commented that if the development rights are increased, the development will need to contribute to employee housing per the regulations. Connie Knight pointed out the proposed large increase to GRFA on each lot. Warren Campbell explained that the proposed GRFA is not the only parameter, and that setbacks, site coverage and height also regulate development. He added, that he suspected that the proposed GRFA maximums would not be obtainable when the other parameters were taken into account. Commissioner Kjesbo also explained that the Design Review Board would also need to approve any redevelopment. Connie Knight asked if what was being proposed could be accomplished through the creation of a new zone district for all the townhome type projects? Warren Campbell explained that yes a new zone district could be established for properties like the Vail Rowhouse, Vail Trails East and West, and Texas Townhomes; however, each project is different, which makes it difficult to chose a blanket district, and the result would likely be that each property would still have to request a variance as they would not be able to comply completely with the new zoning districts requirements. Commissioner Pierce asked for clarity on the public benefit of heated paver installation that would need to be heated by the Town and would create a heated street portion between two unheated portions. He would like to see more improvements made in public parks or streets. Page 6 Commissioner Proper asked if the proposal was to heat from the bridge adjacent to Gorsuch to Staub Park? Dominic Mauriello stated that no they were proposing to install paver and heat melt tubing along the Frontage of the Vail Rowhouse property. Warren Campbell stated that staff would have additional conversations with Public Works and the applicant to flush out the specifics of the proposed street pavers and tubing. Commissioner Pierce suggested that the sidewalk be heated instead or that improvements be made to the adjacent park. Commissioner Proper asked if the public benefit mitigates the increased development potential? He asked staff to provide more direction at the future hearing. He believes the setback and height is substantial. Commissioner Kjesbo stated that the idea is to make the review process moire predictable by avoiding variances. The property is unique and the SDD is the right way to go. Commissioner Viele thinks the proposal includes a substantial windfall of increased development potential. Maybe the intended result is to ease the review process, but the result will be an over- developed property. He felt the proposed deviations, including GRFA and decreased setback on Lot 13 are significant and need to have a significant public benefit to off-set those increases. 5 minutes 4. A request for a work session for a review of a preliminary plan for a major subdivision, pursuant to Chapter 13-3, Major Subdivision, Vail Town Code, to allow for the creation of two lots for the redevelopment of the properties known as "Ever Vail" (West Lionshead), located at 862, 923, 934, 953, and 1031 South Frontage Road West, and the South Frontage Road West right-of- way/Unplatted (a complete legal description is available for inspection at the Town of Vail Community Development Department), and setting forth details in regard thereto. (PEC080062) Applicant: Vail Resorts, represented by Mauriello Planning Group, LLC Planner: Warren Campbell/George Ruther ACTION: Table to March 23, 2009 MOTION: Tjossem SECOND: Kjesbo VOTE: 6-0-0 5 minutes 5. A request for final review of conditional use permits, pursuant to Section 12-71-5, Conditional Uses: Generally (On All Levels Of A Building Or Outside Of A Building), Vail Town Code, to allow for the development of a public or private parking lot (parking structure); a vehicle maintenance, service, repair, storage, and fueling facility; a ski lift and tow (gondola), within "Ever Vail" (West Lionshead), located at 862, 923, 934, 953, and 1031 South Frontage Road West, and the South Frontage Road West right-of-way/Unplatted (a complete legal description is available for inspection at the Town of Vail Community Development Department), and setting forth details in regard thereto. (PEC080063) Applicant: Vail Resorts, represented by Mauriello Planning Group, LLC Planner: Warren Campbell ACTION: Table to April 13, 2009 MOTION: Tjossem SECOND: Kjesbo VOTE: 6-0-0 5 minutes 6. A request for a final review of major exterior alterations, pursuant to Section 12-71-7, Exterior Alterations or Modifications, Vail Town Code, to allow for the redevelopment of the area known as "Ever Vail" (West Lionshead), with multiple mixed-use structures including but not limited to, multiple-family dwelling units, fractional fee units, accommodation units, employee housing units, Page 7 office, and commercial/retail uses, located at 862, 923, 934, 953, and 1031 South Frontage Road West, and the South Frontage Road West right-of-way/Unplatted (a complete legal description is available for inspection at the Town of Vail Community Development Department), and setting forth details in regard thereto. (PEC080064) Applicant: Vail Resorts, represented by Mauriello Planning Group, LLC Planner: Warren Campbell ACTION: Table to April 13, 2009 MOTION: Tjossem SECOND: Kjesbo VOTE: 6-0-0 5 minutes 7. A request for a final recommendation to the Vail Town Council for prescribed regulation amendments, pursuant to Section 12-3-7, Amendment, Vail Town Code, to amend Section 12- 10-19, Core Areas Identified, Vail Town Code, to amend the core area parking maps to include "Ever Vail" (West Lionshead) within the "Commercial Core" designation, and setting forth details in regard thereto. (PEC080065) Applicant: Vail Resorts, represented by Mauriello Planning Group, LLC Planner: Warren Campbell ACTION: Table to April 13, 2009 MOTION: Tjossem SECOND: Kjesbo VOTE:6-0-0 5 minutes 8. A request for a final recommendation to the Vail Town Council for a zone district boundary amendment, pursuant to 12-3-7, Amendments, Vail Town Code, to allow for a rezoning of properties from Arterial Business District and unzoned South Frontage Road West right-of-way which is not zoned to Lionshead Mixed Use-2, properties known as "Ever Vail" (West Lionshead), located at 953 and 1031 South Frontage Road West and South Frontage Road West right-of-way, (a complete legal description is available for inspection at the Town of Vail Community Development Department), and setting forth details in regard thereto. (PEC080061) Applicant: Vail Resorts, represented by Mauriello Planning Group, LLC Planner: Warren Campbell ACTION: Table to April 13, 2009 MOTION: Tjossem SECOND: Kjesbo VOTE: 6-0-0 9. Approval of February 23, 2009 minutes MOTION: Kurz SECOND: Tjossem 10. Information Update VOTE: 6-0-0 The Commission was provided a copy of Title 11, Sign Code, to begin reading in preparation for the work session on March 23, 2009. 11. Adjournment MOTION: Kurz SECOND: Kjesbo VOTE: 6-0-0 The applications and information about the proposals are available for public inspection during regular office hours at the Town of Vail Community Development Department, 75 South Frontage Road. The public is invited to attend the project orientation and the site visits that precede the public hearing in the Town of Vail Community Development Department. Please call (970) 479-2138 for additional information. Sign language interpretation is available upon request with 24-hour notification. Please call (970) 479-2356, Telephone for the Hearing Impaired, for information. Community Development Department Published March 6, 2009, in the Vail Daily. Page 8