Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2010-0510 PECPLANNING AND ENVIRONMENTAL COMMISSION May 10, 2010 1:OOpm TOWN OVAIL'� TOWN COUNCIL CHAMBERS / PUBLIC WELCOME 75 S. Frontage Road - Vail, Colorado, 81657 MEMBERS PRESENT MEMBERS ABSENT Site Visits: None 45 minutes A request for a recommendation to the Vail Town Council on prescribed regulation amendments to Chapter 12 -6, Residential Districts, Vail Town Code, pursuant to Section 12 -3 -7, Amendment, Vail Town Code, to establish a new zone district, Townhouse and Row House District (TRH) District, and setting forth details in regard thereto. (PEC100011) Applicant: Chris Galvin, represented by K.H. Webb Architects /Mauriello Planning Group Planner: Bill Gibson ACTION: MOTION: SECOND: VOTE: 30 minutes 2. A request for a final recommendation for the adoption of the Frontage Road Lighting Master Plan, an element of the Vail Transportation Master Plan, and setting forth details in regard thereto. (PEC090014) Applicant: Town of Vail, represented by Tom Kassmel Planner: Bill Gibson ACTION: MOTION: SECOND: VOTE: 30 minutes 3. A request for the review of a conditional use permit, pursuant to Section 12 -9C -3, Conditional Uses, Vail Town Code, for a public transportation terminal, to allow for the construction of skier drop -off and a bus stop associated with the Lionshead parking structure, located at 395 South Frontage Road West /Lot 1, Block 2, Vail Lionshead First Filing, Lot 3, A Resubdivision of Lot 1, Block 1, Vail Lionshead Second Filing, and part of the South Frontage Road West and East Lionshead Circle rights -of -way, and setting forth details in regard thereto. (PEC100020) Applicant: Town of Vail, represented by Tom Braun Planner: Warren Campbell ACTION: MOTION: SECOND: VOTE: 5 minutes 4. 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, 8, 9, 10, 12, 13 (Vail Rowhouses) /Lots 7, 8, 9, 10, 12, 13, Block 5, Vail Village Filing 1, and setting forth details in regard thereto. (PEC090037) Applicant: Christopher Galvin, represented by Mauriello Planning Group, LLC Planner: Bill Gibson ACTION: Table to June 14, 2010 MOTION: SECOND: VOTE: Page 1 5 minutes 5. A request for an amendment to an Approved Development Plan, pursuant to Section 12- 61 -11, Development Plan Required, Housing Zone District, Vail Town Code, to allow for revisions to the required landscape plan and geologic hazard mitigation plan for the redevelopment of the easternmost 5.24 acres of the Timber Ridge Village Apartments; and a request for the review of a variance, from Section 14 -5 -1, Minimum Standards, Parking Lot and Parking Structure Design Standards for All Uses, Vail Town Code, pursuant to Chapter 12 -17, Variances, Vail Town Code, to allow for a crossover drive aisle width of less than thirty -feet (30') within the required parking structure, located at 1280 North Frontage Road /Lots 1 -5, Block C, Lions Ridge Subdivision Filing 1,and setting forth details in regard thereto. (PEC100018 /PEC100019) Applicant: Vail Timber Ridge L.L.C. Planner: George Ruther ACTION: Table to May 24, 2010 MOTION: SECOND: VOTE: 5 minutes 6. A request for a work session on a major exterior alteration, 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, office, and commercial /retail uses, located at 862, 923, 934, 953, and 1031 South Frontage Road West, and the South Frontage Road West rig ht -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 May 24, 2010 MOTION: SECOND: VOTE: 5 minutes 7. 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 May 24, 2010 MOTION: SECOND: VOTE: 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, Amendment, 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 May 24, 2010 MOTION: SECOND: VOTE: 5 minutes Page 2 9. A request for a final review of a variance from 12- 71 -14, Site Coverage, Vail Town Code, pursuant to Chapter 12 -17, Variances, to allow for additional site coverage below grade, within "Ever Vail" (West Lionshead), located at 934 (BP Site), 953 (Vail Professional Building), 1031 (Cascade Crossing) S. Frontage Road / Unplatted; 862 (VR Maintenance Shop) and 923 (Holy Cross Lot) S. Frontage Road / Tracts A and B, S. Frontage Road Subdivision; 1000 (Glen Lyon Office Building) S. Frontage Road / Lot 54, Glen Lyon Subdivision (a complete legal description is available for inspection at the Town of Vail Community Development Department), and setting forth details in regard thereto. (PEC090035) Applicant: Vail Resorts, represented by Mauriello Planning Group, LLC Planner: Warren Campbell ACTION: Table to May 24, 2010 MOTION: SECOND: VOTE: 5 minutes 10. A request for a final recommendation to the Vail Town Council for a proposed major amendment to Special Development District No. 4, Cascade Village, pursuant to Article 12 -9A, Special Development District, Vail Town Code, to allow for the removal of the Glen Lyon Commercial Site, Development Area D, (Glen Lyon Office Building) from the District for incorporation into the properties known as "Ever Vail" (West Lionshead), located at 1000 S. Frontage Road West/Lot 54 Glen Lyon Subdivision, and setting forth details in regard thereto. (PEC090036) Applicant: Vail Resorts, represented by Mauriello Planning Group, LLC Planner: Warren Campbell ACTION: Table to May 24, 2010 MOTION: SECOND: VOTE: 5 minutes 11. A request for a final recommendation to the Vail Town Council for prescribed regulations amendments to Title 12, Zoning Regulations and Title 14, Development Standards, Vail Town Code, pursuant to Section 12 -3 -7, Amendment, Vail Town Code, to provide regulations that will implement sustainable building and planning standards, and setting forth details in regard thereto. (PEC090028) Applicant: Town of Vail Planner: Rachel Friede ACTION: Table to May 24, 2010 MOTION: SECOND: VOTE: 5 minutes 12. A request for a work session to discuss prescribed regulations amendments, pursuant to Section 12 -3 -7, Amendment, Vail Town Code, to Title 12, Zoning Regulations, Vail Town Code, and setting forth details in regard thereto. (PEC090017) Applicant: Town of Vail Planner: Rachel Friede ACTION: Table to May 24, 2010 MOTION: SECOND: VOTE: 13. Approval of April 26, 2010 minutes MOTION: SECOND: VOTE: 14. Information Update Linn Brooks, Assistant General Manager of the Eagle provide a brief update on District matters. She will also might be of interest for future presentations by the Distric Gore Creek and its watershed, the affects of land use c District projects that impact stream flows. 15 minutes River Water & Sanitation District, will query the Commission on topics that :t, such as information on the health of n water supply and water quality, and Page 3 15. 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 May 7, 2010, in the Vail Daily. Page 4 MEMORANDUM TO: Planning and Environmental Commission FROM: Community Development Department DATE: May 10, 2010 SUBJECT: A request for a work session on prescribed regulation amendments to Chapter 12 -6, Residential Districts, Vail Town Code, pursuant to Section 12 -3 -7, Amendment, Vail Town Code, to establish a new zone district, Townhouse and Row House District (TRH) District, and setting forth details in regard thereto. (PEC 100011) Applicant: Chris Galvin, represented by Mauriello Planning Group Planner: Bill Gibson SUMMARY The applicant Chris Galvin, represented by the Mauriello Planning Group, is requesting a work session on prescribed regulation amendments to Chapter 12 -6, Residential Districts, Vail Town Code, to establish a new Townhouse and Row House District (TRH) District. At this time, there is no application to apply this proposed zone district to any specific property. The purpose of this work session is to provide the applicant an opportunity to introduce the proposed text amendments to the Planning and Environmental Commission and to provide the Commission an opportunity to ask questions, request additional information to aid in the review of this request, and to provide the applicant with preliminary feedback concerning the request. The applicant's request has been attached for reference (Attachment A). A letter of support has been submitted by the Texas Townhouse Association (Attachment B). As this is a request for a work session, the Community Development Department recommends the Planning and Environmental Commission tables this item to its May 24, 2010, hearing for further deliberation. II. DESCRIPTION OF REQUEST The applicant Chris Galvin, represented by the Mauriello Planning Group, is proposing to amend Title 12, Zoning Regulations, Vail Town Code, to establish a new zone district specifically intended to regulate townhouse development. The applicant is proposing to name this new district the "Townhouse and Row House (TRH) District." At this time, there is no application to apply this proposed zone district to any specific property. The applicant intends the proposed TRH District to address zoning challenges faced by existing townhouse developments such the Vail Row Houses, the Texas Townhomes, and others. The Vail Row Houses is an example of a thirteen lot townhouse project where the western six lots were condominiumized and are treated as a single development site for zoning purposes, while the eastern seven lots were subdivided fee simple under Eagle County jurisdiction and are treated as individual development sites for zoning purposes. The Vail Row Houses are located in the High Density Multiple - Family (HDMF) District. The HDMF District was intended to regulate multiple - family projects as a single development site. As a result, the eastern Vail Row House lots treated as individual development sites are legally non - conforming in regard to many of the standards prescribed by the Town's Zoning Regulations. III. APPLICABLE DOCUMENTS Staff believes the following documents are relevant to the review of this proposal: TITLE 12: SIGN REGULATIONS (in part) 12 -1 -2: PURPOSE: A. General: These regulations are enacted for the purpose of promoting the health, safety, morals, and general welfare of the town, and to promote the coordinated and harmonious development of the town in a manner that will conserve and enhance its natural environment and its established character as a resort and residential community of high quality. B. Specific: These regulations are intended to achieve the following more specific purposes: 1. To provide for adequate light, air, sanitation, drainage, and public facilities. 2. To secure safety from fire, panic, flood, avalanche, accumulation of snow, and other dangerous conditions. 3. To promote safe and efficient pedestrian and vehicular traffic circulation and to lessen congestion in the streets. 4. To promote adequate and appropriately located off street parking and loading facilities. 5. To conserve and maintain established community qualities and economic values. 6. To encourage a harmonious, convenient, workable relationship among land uses, consistent with municipal development objectives. 7. To prevent excessive population densities and overcrowding of the land with structures. 8. To safeguard and enhance the appearance of the town. 9. To conserve and protect wildlife, streams, woods, hillsides, and other desirable natural features. 10. To assure adequate open space, recreation opportunities, and other amenities and facilities conducive to desired living quarters. 11. To otherwise provide for the growth of an orderly and viable community. 12 -3 -7: AMENDMENT: (in part) C. Criteria And Findings: 1. Zone District Boundary Amendment a. Factors, Enumerated: Before acting on an application for a zone district boundary amendment, the planning and environmental commission and town council shall consider the following factors with respect to the requested zone district boundary amendment: (1) The extent to which the zone district amendment 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 (2) The extent to which the zone district amendment is suitable with the existing and potential land uses on the site and existing and potential surrounding land uses as set out in the town's adopted planning documents; and (3) The extent to which the zone district amendment presents a harmonious, convenient, workable relationship among land uses consistent with municipal development objectives; and (4) The extent to which the zone district amendment provides for the growth of an orderly viable community and does not constitute spot zoning as the amendment serves the best interests of the community as a whole; and (5) The extent to which the zone district amendment results in adverse or beneficial impacts on the natural environment, including, but not limited to, water quality, air quality, noise, vegetation, riparian corridors, hillsides and other desirable natural features; and (6) The extent to which the zone district amendment is consistent with the purpose statement of the proposed zone district; and (7) The extent to which the zone district amendment demonstrates how conditions have changed since the zoning designation of the subject property was adopted and is no longer appropriate; and (8) Such other factors and criteria as the commission and /or council deem applicable to the proposed rezoning. b. Necessary Findings: Before recommending and /or granting an approval of an application for a zone district boundary amendment, the planning and environmental commission and the town council shall make the following findings with respect to the requested amendment: (1) That the amendment is consistent with the adopted goals, objectives and policies outlined in the Vail comprehensive plan and compatible with the development objectives of the town; and (2) That the amendment is compatible with and suitable to adjacent uses and appropriate for the surrounding areas; and (3) That the amendment 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. 2. Prescribed Regulations Amendment: a. Factors, Enumerated: Before acting on an application for an amendment to the regulations prescribed in this title, the planning and environmental commission and town council shall consider the following factors with respect to the requested text amendment: (1) The extent to which the text amendment furthers the general and specific purposes of the zoning regulations; and (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 (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 (4) The extent to which the text amendment provides a harmonious, convenient, workable relationship among land use regulations consistent with municipal development objectives; and (5) Such other factors and criteria the planning and environmental commission and /or council deem applicable to the proposed text amendment. b. Necessary Findings: Before recommending and /or granting an approval of an application for a text amendment the planning and environmental commission and the town council shall make the following findings with respect to the requested amendment: (1) That the amendment is consistent with 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 (2) That the amendment furthers the general and specific purposes of the zoning regulations; and (3) That the amendment 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. IV. DISCUSSION ITEMS • Is creating a new zone district the appropriate method for addressing non - conformities at existing townhouse developments? Or, are granting variances, establishing special development districts, amending the Town's non - conforming regulations, amending the definition of "development site ", maintaining the status quo, etc. the appropriate process for addressing these issues? • Should the zoning standards of a townhouse district be established at a level rendering all existing conditions conforming? Or, should the zoning standards of a townhouse district be established at levels reflecting the desired outcome with the understanding that some existing conditions may be rendered legally non- conforming? • Should the zoning standards of a townhouse district include incentives for redevelopment such as increases in allowable density or GRFA (gross residential floor area)? • Should a townhouse zone district address the desired aesthetic character of townhouse developments? For example, should there be a consistent architectural theme to townhouse projects or should each individual townhouse units be allowed it own unique architectural expression? 4 Where in Vail should a townhouse zone district be considered? Should a new townhouse district be limited to specific geographic or master plan areas of Vail? Should a new townhouse district be limited to only existing townhouse projects? If allowed throughout the community, should there be more than one townhouse district with different zoning standards to reflect the unique character of the various neighborhoods? • Should a townhouse zone district only be applied to an entire townhouse development or could it be applied to only certain individual units within a townhouse development? • What additional information does the Planning and Environmental Commission need to for its further review of this proposal? V. STAFF RECOMMENDATION As this is a request for a work session, the Community Development Department recommends the Planning and Environmental Commission tables this item to its May 24, 2010, hearing for further deliberation. VI. ATTACHMENTS A. Applicant's Request B. Texas Townhouse Association letter dated April 22, 2010 Attachment A Text Amendment to the Town of Vail Zoning Regulations, Creating a New "Townhouse and Row House" District Planning and Environmental Commission Submitted March 15, 2010 Kevised April 15, 2010 � Planning Group I" WEVI U011W V LDILF OAR QA 1"00M10Iufts UKR R 11i1L (YtOUN elij; I. Introduction to the Zoning Code Amendment The intent of this text amendment to the Town of Vail Zoning Regulations is to correct a long standing problematic application of High Density Multiple Family Zoning to town house projects within the Vail Village. The proposal will create a new "Townhouse Zoning" that can be applied to townhouse properties in the Vail Village area , proposed as the "Townhouse and Row House" District (TRH) and outlined in Section III of this submittal. There are several townhouse projects within the Vail Village area which were originally platted as townhouse parcels under Eagle County jurisdiction before there was zoning in Eagle County and before the Town was incorporated in 1966. Zoning was not adopted in the Town of Vail until 1969 (Ordinance No. 7, Series of 1969). These properties were then zoned High Density Multiple Family (HDMF). Under the 1969 zoning code, there was only a front setback requirement and no side setback requirements, there was no building height limitation and the GRFA limitation (then termed Floor Area Ratio — FAR) was 1.5 to 1, meaning that 150 sq. ft. of GRFA was allowed for each 100 sq. ft. of total land area instead of the 0.76 to 1 ratio that exists today. (The 1969 HDMF Zone District is attached). Now, 46 years later, the zoning on these properties is more restrictive and does not appropriately recognize traditional townhouse development, which is described as a series of attached homes with zero lot lines between the units. Unlike a condominium development, town houses traditionally sit on fee simple parcels of land. Under current HDMF zoning, these types of lots are not in compliance with many of the HDMF zoning provisions. In order to address both the fee - simple lot format and the condominium format of town houses found in Vail Village, the proposed district will accommodate both ownership formats. As a result, the applicant is proposing a new zone district, referred to as "Townhouse and Row House" District (TRH). The TRH zone district will allow for redevelopment of individual units within a townhouse or row house configuration, without the need for numerous variances but with review by the Town of Vail to ensure compliance with the regulations. The proposed zone district re- establishes the original 1969 GRFA allowance for these properties, allowing up to a ratio of 1.5. However, recognizing that this additional GRFA should be mitigated, we are proposing that for units which add beyond the .76 ratio that is permitted today, an increase in the amount of employee housing required by Chapter 14, Inclusionary Zoning, is appropriate. As proposed, units in the TRH zone district would be required to mitigate at a rate double that of the current requirements. New Zone District: Townhouse and Row House II. Proposed Text Amendment The purpose behind this proposal is to streamline the redevelopment process and avoid the need for multiple variances for even the smallest of development projects. In addition, it is intended to recognize and restore the historical development rights of townhouse projects, while off - setting the additional potential through an additional employee housing requirement. HDMF was used as the basis for the new zone district, with changes to allow for townhouse and row house development. The following is the proposed new zone district, along with a description of why the modifications are necessary to facilitate townhouse redevelopment: ARTICLE J. TOWNHOUSE AND ROW HOUSE (TRH) DISTRICT 12 -6J -1: PURPOSE: The townhouse and row house district is intended to provide sites and maintain the unique character of existing townhouse and row house development in the Town of Vail. Townhouse and row house development has occurred in a variety of methods over time. In many cases, there is no established homeowners association, creating difficulties for on -going maintenance. Often a townhouse sits on a fee - simple owned lot, with no common ownership among the properties, and with limited party-wall agreements establishing rules for redevelopment. In other cases, townhouses have been developed on a single property, but the characteristics of townhouse development and ownership make redevelopment more challenging. The townhouse and row house district was specifically developed to correct nonconformides resulting from changes in these Zoning Regulations that have occurred over the last forty years, and too allow for redevelopment of attached row dwellings, without the limitations of the previous zone districts which required multiple variances as a result of subsequent revisions made to these Zoning Regulations which substantially reduced the development potential of these existing attached row dwellings. These corrections include, but are not limited to, the elimination of interior setbacks between units, allowing existing density and restoration of historical gross residential floor area limitations, and other considerations to existing development patterns. It is understood that properties requesting a rezoning to this district may be individually owned, fee - simple lots, and that adjacent properties may not request a rezoning at the same time. An entire townhouse or row house project does not need to comprehensively apply for the rezoning, and individual applications will be considered based on section 12 -3 -7 of this tide. The townhouse and row house district is intended to ensure adequate light, air, open space, and other amenities commensurate with attached or row dwellings, and to maintain the desirable residential and resort qualities of the zone district by establishing appropriate site development standards. Certain nonresidential uses are permitted as conditional uses, which relate to the nature of Vail as a winter and summer recreation and vacation community and, where permitted, are intended to blend harmoniously with the residential character of the zone district. The townhouse and row house district is intended to guide and allow for redevelopment of existing attached row dwellings. 12 -6J -2: PERMITTED USES: Lodges were removed as a permitted The following uses shall be permitted in the TRH district: use, as these amendments are not applicable to lodge development. Employee housing units, as further regulated by chapter 13 of this tide. Multiple -family residential dwellings, limited to town houses or attached row dwellings. 12 -6J -3: CONDITIONAL USES: The following conditional uses shall be permitted in the TRH district, subject to issuance of a conditional use permit in accordance with the provisions of chapter I 6 of this title: New Zone District: Townhouse and Rom House 3 Bed and breakfasts, as further regulated by section 12 -14 -18 of this title. Communications antennas and appurtenant equipment. Home child daycare facilities, as further regulated by section 12 -14 -12 of this title. Private unstructured parking. Public and private schools. Public buildings, grounds and facilities. Public park and recreation facilities. Public utility and public service uses. Timeshare units. 12 -6j -4: ACCESSORY USES: The following accessory uses shall be permitted in the TRH district: Conditional uses were simplified to remove uses not appropriate for townhouse or row house development (such as funiculars and dog kennels) Home occupations, subject to issuance of a home occupation permit in accordance with the provisions of section 12-14-12 of this title. Private greenhouses, tool sheds, playhouses, attached garages or carports, swimming pools, or recreation facilities customarily incidental to permitted residential and lodge uses. Other uses customarily incidental and accessory to permitted or conditional uses, and necessary for the operation thereof. 12 -6j -5: LOT AREA AND SITE DIMENSIONS: There shall be no minimum lot size. However, lots shall be permitted to eliminate interior lot boundaries to combine row dwellings. Additionally, minor interior lot adjustments shall be permitted as necessary for redevelopment, in accordance with Tide 13, Chapter 6: Condominium and Townhouse Plats. 12 -6j -6: SETBACKS: The minimum setback shall be twenty feet from the perimeter of the zone district or as currently exists as of the date the subject property is rezoned to this district. There shall be no setback from property lines which exist between attached units. At the discretion of the planning and environmental commission and /or the design review board, variations to the setback standards outlined above may be approved during the review of exterior alterations or modifications subject to the applicant demonstrating compliance with the following criteria: Lot sizes vary based on how the site was subdivided. In some cases, the lot lines for townhouses are the exterior walls of the building, some sit on large lots in a condominium format, and some site on fee - simple owned lots extending from the right -of -way to the rear property line. Setback requirements are modeled after the PA zone district, which allows for flexibility to be granted based on specific criteria. It was also amended to include 0 setbacks from interior lot lines between units. This eliminates the need for multiple variances for even the smallest of additions. A. Proposed building setbacks provide necessary separation between buildings and riparian areas, geologically sensitive areas and other environmentally sensitive areas. B. Proposed building setbacks comply with applicable elements of the Vail Village urban design guide plan and design considerations or other applicable design guidelines. New ,Zone District: Townhouse and Rote House C. Proposed building setbacks will provide adequate availability of light, air and open space. D. Proposed building setbacks will provide a compatible relationship with buildings and uses on adjacent properties. E. Proposed building setbacks will result in creative design solutions or other public benefits that could not otherwise be achieved by conformance with prescribed setback standards. 12 -6J -7: HEIGHT: For a flat roof or mansard roof, the height of buildings shall not exceed Overall height remains the same, but in forty five feet (45�. For a sloping roof, the height of buildings shall not order to maintain the character of the eight feet 48 For units being substantially redeveloped, the relationship v townhouses to the street, exceed forty g ( �• g } p the initial eae height is restricted to 35 initial cave height along a public street shall be 35' subject to Design Review ft., subject to DRB review. Board review. 12 -6J -8: DENSITY CONTROL: Total density shall not exceed twenty-five dwelling units per acre of total site area or as currently exists as of the date the subject property was rezoned to this district. A dwelling unit in a multiple- family building may include one attached accommodation unit no larger than one -third (1 /3) of the total floor area of the dwelling. 12 -6J -9: GROSS RESIDENTIAL FLOOR AREA: Not more than one hundred fifty (150) square feet of gross residential floor area (GRFA) shall be permitted for each one hundred (100) square feet of total site area. Existing attached or row dwellings in this zone district shall not be entitled to additional gross residential floor area under section 12 -15 -5 "Additional Gross Residential Floor Area (250 Ordinance) ", of this title. Many of the existing townhouses do not meet density requirements of the HDMF zone district, often due to the method of platting. As a result, density is limited to 25 du per acre (as allowed by HDMF) or whatever currently exists as of the date of rezoning. Many of the existing townhouses do not meet GRFA requirements of the HDMF zone district, often due to the method of platting, and due to the changes to GFRA requirements, which was originally permitted at 1.5. This ratio is re- established by this section. 250s are no longer permitt i n this district. Any GRFA added above seventy-six (76) square feet per 100 sq. ft. of buildable site area, is subject to special provisions as indicated in section 12- 6J -12. 12- 6J -10: SITE COVERAGE: Site coverage shall not exceed fifty five (55 %) or the total site area, or as currently exists as of the date the subject property was rezoned to this district. 12- 6J -11: LANDSCAPING AND SITE DEVELOPMENT: At least thirty percent (30 %) of the total site area shall be landscaped, or as currently exists as of the date the subject property was rezoned to this district. 12- 6J -12: PARKING AND LOADING: Off street parking and loading shall be provided in accordance with chapter 10 of this title. Required parking currently located in the front setback area Site coverage and landscape area remains as permitted by HDMF, or as exists as of the date of rezoning. Many existing townhouses do not meet site coverage and landscaping requirements due to the method of platting_ End units often comply, but internal units do not. Parking requirements must be met as required by chapter 10. However, as many townhouses have existing parking in either the front setback or right -of- way, this section has been amended to allow this use to continue, subject to review by the Town. New Zone Disirict: Ton nhouse and Rom House and /or within the right -of -way may continue, provided that the public safety is maintained and subject to a revokable right -of -way permit issued by the Town. 12- 6j -13: SPECIAL PROVISIONS: In order to mitigate for the additional GRFA being allowed by this chapter, those units which are modified beyond seventy-six (76) square feet for each one hundred (100) square feet of buildable area shall be required to exceed the square footage requirements of Chapter 14 Inclusionary Requirements by 100% for that area in excess of seventy six (76) square feet per one hundred (100) square feet of buildable area. For example, if the requirement is to mitigate at a rate of 10% of residential floor area, then the mitigation rate shall be 20 %. This zone district would be included into the inclusionary zoning requirements. To off -set any impacts of GRFA beyond what is allowed currently by HDMF, the inclusionary requirement will be double what is currently required. New Zone District: Townhouse and Row House III. Review Criteria for a Text Amendment The Town of Vail Zoning Regulations provide the criteria for review of a text amendment. For the purposes of this application, each criterion will be addressed below: 1. The extent to which the text amendment furthers the general and specific purposes of the zoning regulations; and Our Anal, The Town of Vail Zoning Regulations, in Section 12 -1 -2: Purpose, describes the general purpose of the regulations as follows: 12 -1 -2: PURPOSE: A. General. There regulations are enacted for the purpo e of promoting the health, safety, morals, and general welfare of the town, and to promote the coordinated and harmonious development of the town in a manner that will conserve and enhance its natural environment and its established character as a resort and residential community of high quality. Section 12 -1 -2 also provides the specific purposes of the regulations as follows: 1. To provide for adequate light, air, sanitation, drainage, and public facilities. 2. To secure safety from fire, panic, flood, avalanche, accumulation of snow, and other dangerous conditions. 3. To promote safe and efficient pedestrian and vehicular traffic circulation and to lessen congestion in the streets. 4. To promote adequate and appropriately located off street parking and loading facilities. S. To conserve and maintain estabAshed communiy qualities and economic values. 6. To encourage a harmonious, convenient, workable relationship among land uses, consistent with municipal development objectives. 7. To prevent excessive population densities and overcrowding of the land with structures. 8. To safeguard and enhance the appearance of the town. 9. To conserve and protect wildlife, streams, woods, hillsides, and other desirable natural features. 10. To assure adequate open space, recreation opportunities, and other amenities and facilities conducive to desired !swing quarters. 11. To otherwise provide for the growth of an orderly and viable communiy. The proposed text amendment also furthers the purpose statements of the Vail Zoning Regulations. Each of the purpose statements is clearly enhanced by the proposed amendment. 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 Our Analysis: The goals contained in several of the Town's comprehensive, guiding documents are applicable during the review process for the text amendment. The applicable plan sections below are identified as relevant to the review of this proposal. Vail Land Use Plan (in part) 1.0 General Growth /Development 1.1 hail should continue to grow in a controlled environment, maintaining a balance between residential, commercial and recreational uses to serve both the visitor and the permanent resident. New Zone District: Townhouse and Row House 7 1.3 The quality of development should be maintained and spgraded whenever possible. 9.12 Vail should accommodate most of the additionalgrowtb in existing developed areas (infllareas). 4.0 Village Core / Lionsbead 4.2 Increased density in the Core areas is acceptable so long as the existing character of each area is preserved thorough implementation of the Urban Design Guide Plan. 4.3 The ambiance of Vail Village is important to the identity of Vail and should be preserved. (scale, a pine character, small town feeling, mountains, natural setting, intimate side, cosmopolitan feeling, environmental quality.) 5.0 Residential 5.1 Additional residentialgrowth should continue to occur primarily in existing, platted areas and as appropriate in new arms where high ha .Zards do not exist. 5.3 Affordable employee housing should be made available through privateartr, assisted by limited incentives, provided by the Town of Vail with appropriate restrictions. 5.4 Reridentialgrowth should keep pace with the marketplace demands for a full range of housing types. 5.5 The existing employee housing base should be preserved and upgraded. Additional employee housing needs should be accommodated at varied sites throughout the community. Vail Village piaster Plan (in part) The Vail Row Houses is located within the "Vail Village Master Plan" land use category. The following stated goals of the Vail Village Master Plan are applicable to this application: Goa! #1: Encourage high quality redevelopment whilepreserving the unique architectural scale of the Village in order to sustain its sense of community and identity. Objective 1.2: Encourage the upgrading and redevelopment of residential and commercial facilities. Objective 1.3: Enhance new development and redevelopment through public improvements done by private developers working in cooperation with the Town. Policy 1.3.1: Pubkc improvements shall be developed with the working participation of the private sector working with the Town. Goal #3: To recognize as a top priority the enhancement of the walking experience throughout the Village EAST GORE CREEK SUBAREA ( #6) ""C AS7 ME AiWi , � c � - - _ � �, +' - + . • EASE °— VtIAC+E .. �1 _ EAST GCyir New Zone District: Townhouse. and Row House `A number of the earliest projects developed in Vail are located in the East Gore Creek Sub Area. Development in this area is exclusively multi family condominium projects with a very limited amount o support commercial. Su rface parking is found at each site, which creates a very dominant visual impression of the sub -area. While the level of development in East Gore Creek is generally greater than that allowed under existing caning, this area has the potential to absorb density without compromising the character of the Village. This development could be accommodated by partial infill of existing parking areas balanced by greenspaee additions or through increasing the height of existing buildings ( generaly one story over existing heights. In order to maintain the architectural continuil�' of projects, additional density should be considered only in conjunction with the comprehensive redevelopment of projects. Clearly, one of the main objectives to consider in the redevelopment of any property should be to improve existing parking facilities. This includes satisfying parking demands for existing and additional development, as well as design considerations relative to redevelopment proposals. The opportunity to introduce below grade structured parking will greatly improve pedesi ianilation and landscape features in this area. This should be considered a goal of any redevelopment proposal in this sub -area. Development or redevelopment of this sub -area will attract additional traffic and population into this area and may have significant impacts upon portions of Sub -Areas 7 and 10. " 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 Our Analysis: In 1969, when the Town of Vail zoned many of these townhouse and row house projects HDMF, they generally complied with zoning. There was no minimum lot size, there was only a front setback of 15 ft. and the floor area ratio was 1.5:1. (see below) (a) Floor Area No minimum; (b) Lot Area: No minimum; (c) Setback: Front - 15 feet. (2) Floor Area Ratio: The floor area ratio shall not exceed 1. 50 :1. (3) Off - street Parking Off- street parking shall be provided in accordance with requirements set forth in the Supplementary regulations. (4) Off - street Loading. Off - street loading shall be provided in accordance with the requirements set forth in the Supplementary regulations. However, since that time, amendment to the HDMF zone district have rendered these properties nonconforming with regards to almost every development standard of the district, including but not limited to: • Density • Lot Size New Zone District. Townhouse and Row House • Street Frontage Setbacks • Landscape Area • Parking • Parking Location (front setback and right -of -way) These amendments have made redevelopment of individual units recant on the variance process, rather than providing a clear road map for redevelopment. As a result, HDMF is no longer appropriate for these properties. 4. The extent to which the text amendment provides a harmonious, convenient, workable relationship among land use regulations consistent with municipal development objectives; and Our Analysis: The new TRH zone district maintains the uses that are permitted, conditional, and accessory uses within the HDMF zone district. Many uses have been eliminated from this zone district that are not applicable, but none have been added, ensuring that this text amendment is a harmonious, convenient, and workable relationship among land use regulations. 5. Such other factors and criteria the planning and environmental commission and /or council deem applicable to the proposed text amendment. Our Analysis: Not applicable. Neu) Zone District: Toivnhot +se and Roa House 10 1969 HDMF Zone District (3) Off - street Parking: Off- street parking shall be provided in accordance with requirements set forth in the Supplementary regulations. SECTION 3. HIGH DENSITY MULTI- FAMILY DLSTRICT (a) Uses Permitted A person shall not use any premises in a High Density Multi- family District except as hereinafter permitted. (1) Uses by Right (a) Hotels, motels and lodges; (b) Multi - family dwelling structures; (c) Professional, service and business office and studios; (d) Recreation Centers; (e) Libraries, art galleries and museums; (f) Private clubs; (g) Parks and playgrounds:, (2) Accessory Uses by Righ (a) Restaurants, bars and retail services when located within the principal use or on a porch or patio appurtenant thereto; (b) Private swimming pools, playing fields, tennis courts, ice skating rinks and buildings accessory thereto; (c) Parking spaces in addition to the minimum off - street parking spaces required by these regulations. - 17 - (d) Any other structure or use on the same site with the principal use, incidental and accessory therto, and necessary for the operation of the principal use. (3) Conditional Uses (a) Public utility and public service structures and installations; (b) Public Buildings and Grounds; (c) Ski Lifts and Tows; (d) Schools; (e) Day nurseries and nursery schools; (f) Hospitals, medical and dental clinics and centers; (g) Public transportation terminals; (h) Commercial Parking Facilities, including structures and lots; (i) Theaters and Convention Facilities; (j) Arenas; (k) Bowling Alleys; (1) Planned Unit Developments. (b) Regulations The regulations under which the uses in a High Density Multi- family District are permitted are as follows: (1) Minimums: The following minimums shall apply: - is - (a) Floor Area: No minimum; (b) Lot Area: No minimum; (c) Setback: Front - 15 feet. (2) Floor Area Ratio: The floor area ratio shall not exceed 1. 50:1. (3) Off-street Parking Off - street parking shall- be provided in accordance with requirements set forth in the Supplementary regulations. (4) Off- street Loading. Off - street loading shall be provided in accordance with the requirements set forth in the Supplementary regulations. SECTION 4. PUBLIC ACCOMMODATIONS DISTRICT (a) Uses Permitted A person shall not use any premises in a Public Accommodations District except as hereinafter specifically permitted. (1) Uses by Righ (a) Hotels, motels and lodges; (b) Single - family and two- family dwelling structures; (c) Professional. service and business offices and studios; (d) Recreation Centers; (e) Libraries, art galleries and museums; - 19 - I ; (f) Private clubs; (g) Parke and playgrounds. (Z) Accessory Uses by Right (a) Restaurants, bars, and retail services when located within the principal use or on a porch or patio appurtenant theretq; (b) Private swimming pools, playing fields, tennis courts, ice skating rinks and buildings accessory thereto; (c) Parking spaces in addition to the minimum off-street parking spaces required by these regulations; (d) Any other structure or use on the same site with the principal use, incidental and accessory thereto, and necessary for the operation of the principal use. (3) Conditional Uses (a) str (b) (c) (d) (e) Public utility and public service uctures and installations; Public buildings and grounds; Ski Lifts; Schools; Day nurseries and nursery schools; - Zo - a ■ Attachment B r�1pr.26.2010 06:59 AM ■ r. Texas Townhouse Association 483 Gore Creek Drive, Vail,CO 81657 Kyle H. Webb AiA, Architect K. H. Webb Architects P.C. 710 West Lionshead Circle, Suite A Vail, CO 81657 Re: Amendment to HDMF Zoning Dear Kyle, April 22,2010 PAGE. 1/ 1 Thanks for meeting with our Board and presenting your proposal to amend the zoning of the Texas Townhouse property and the nearby Rowhouse property. The Texas Townhouse Association Board of Directors has reviewed your proposal and we conditionally support your efforts to modernize the zoning in Vail to include "Townhouse Zoning." The condition is any zoning non - conformities be grandfathered and allowed to remain as currently constructed. Please keep us informed of this process as it evolves. Sincerely, o 4ul "/ Director and Secretary Texas Townhouse Association TO: Planning and Environmental Commission FROM: Public Works Department and Community Development Department I SUBJECT: A request for a recommendation to the Vail Town Council on the adoption of the Frontage Road Lighting Master Plan, an element of the Vail Transportation Master Plan, and setting forth details in regard thereto. (PEC090014) Applicant: Town of Vail, represented by Tom Kassmel Planner: Bill Gibson 1. SUMMARY The applicant, the Town of Vail, is requesting a recommendation to the Vail Town Council on the adoption of the Frontage Road Lighting Master Plan, an element of the Vail Transportation Master Plan. The proposed Frontage Road Lighting Master Plan includes recommendations on the location of street lights, light pole heights, lamp selection, fixture selection, and control system criteria. Based upon Staffs review of the criteria outlined in Section IV of this memorandum and the evidence and testimony presented, the Community Development Department and Public Works Department recommend the Commission forwards a recommendation of approval subject to the findings noted in Section V of this memorandum. As stated in the proposed Frontage Road Lighting Master Plan: "The purpose of the Frontage Road Lighting Master Plan is to evaluate the current lighting conditions along the frontage roads and provide direction to the Town of Vail for improvements that are intended to: 1. Improve safe utilization of the frontage roads by motorists, bicyclists, pedestrians, and overflow vehicle parking. 2. Manage appropriate lights levels and illumination strategies along the frontage roads, 3. Manage long term economics and maintenance for lighting systems. 4. Establish consistency in the aesthetic appearance of lighting systems. In addition to outlining the plan's objectives, the proposed Frontage Road Lighting Master Plan includes recommendations on the location of street lights, light pole heights, lamp selection, fixture selection, and control system criteria. Recommendations for implementation strategies and material specifications are also included in the proposed plan. The proposed Frontage Road Lighting Master Plan has been attached for review (Attachment A). [if The Town of Vail, in conjunction with the Colorado Department of Transportation, adopted the Vail Transportation Master Plan in May 2009 in response to the on-going and projected increases in development activity, the results of past master planning processes, and pending redevelopment plans. As a separate element of this plan, the Town is also in the process of adopting a lighting master plan for both the North and South Frontage Roads. While the need for improved safety and way finding are the primary drivers for creating this lighting master plan; the Town is also addressing aesthetics and environmental stewardship issues in this plan. The proposed lighting master plan is intended to be implemented in stages as opportunities arise over time. There are currently no funded projects within the Town's budget to move an initial phase forward. Both frontage roads are located within the Federal Highway Administration's (FHWA) right-of-way (ROW) and are administered thru the Colorado Department of Transportation (CDOT). Pursuant to Section 43-2-135, Division of Authority of Streets, Colorado Revised Statutes (CRS), the Town of Vail is responsible for the illumination of the frontage roads. The frontage roads currently have minimal roadway and pedestrian lighting, The existing roadway lighting is limited to the roundabouts, and the existing pedestrian lighting is limited to the commercial core areas and street intersections. With this limited lighting, there are both safety concerns and way-finding challenges for all modes of transportation. The overflow vehicle parking that occurs along the frontage roads at peak times is a significant safety concern. Overflow parking occurs on the frontage roads 30 to 50 times per year. This parking occurs at the busiest times of the year, in the busiest locations along the frontage roads, during the shortest daylight hours of the year, during times of inclement weather when road conditions are poor. The parking also occurs on the opposite side of a visitor's primary destination thus requiring pedestrians to cross the frontage roads. The combination of these factors presents a precarious situation for vehicles entering and exiting parking spaces along the frontage roads, for pedestrians entering and exiting their parked vehicles, and for pedestrian trying to cross the frontage roads at various locations to access the commercial core areas. Other safety concerns include the general inability of vehicle drivers to adequately see pedestrians, bicycles, stopped buses, and other obstacles at night. Nighttime way-finding challenges currently exist at the roundabouts and at local road intersections along the frontage roads. The existing frontage road conditions limit the ability of drivers to determine their necessary direction of travel without becoming lost. Primary vehicle routes need to be illuminated at major intersections to lead drivers who are unfamiliar with the area down the right path. Secondary road intersections also need to be illuminated to allow the unfamiliar driver an opportunity to anticipate upcoming intersections and to give the driver the ability to read relevant signage. Notable destination points such as the Village parking structure, Lionshead parking structure, and Ford Park also need to be property illuminated, The Town anticipates that the proposed lighting master plan will be implemented over time as roadway and private development construction projects occur. Staff believes it is critical that each individual development project adjacent to the frontage roads be coordinated with a comprehensive street lighting master plan. Unfortunately, there are multiple private developments and roadway improvement projects already under 2 construction adjacent to the frontage roads. The roadway and pedestrian lighting improvements associated with this construction is currently being implemented on a project-by-project basis, rather than in a comprehensive and coordinated manner. The proposed lighting master plan is intended to remedy this situation and provide direction into the future, The Frontage Road Lighting Master Plan was first presented to the Commission in March of 2009 as an element of the Transportation Master Plan (adopted May 2009). Subsequent work sessions with the Commission in April, May, and September 2009 discussed the key elements of the lighting master plan and its purpose. Commission's discussions focused on the future use of high pressure sodium lights or LED lights as recommended by the draft plan. High pressure sodium is the current standard roadway lighting in Vail. High pressure sodium street lighting is a proven technology, is relatively energy efficient and cost effective, and produces an aesthetically pleasing warm light source. LED's are a relatively new technology for roadway lighting that offer higher levels of energy efficiency, greater cost savings, and improved color rendering and visual shape recognition. However, LED's produce a whiter, "cooler" light that has a different aesthetic character than high pressure sodium lamps. At the Commission's September 2009 work session, the majority of the Commission preferred the aesthetic character of the existing high pressure sodium lighting over the proposed LED lighting. Since the Commission's September 28, 2009, work session, the proposed Frontage Road Lighting Master Plan has been further refined. Additionally, the Town's energy audit consultants, Rocky Mountain Institute and Johnson Controls Inc,, have also reviewed the proposed master plan regarding LED lighting and its use relative to the objectives of the Vail Environmental Sustainability Strategic Plan, A copy of Commission's September 28, 2009, meeting results have been attached for reference (Attachment B). The proposed master plan recommends the implementation of the LED light source as it is more effective, more efficient, and endorses the Town's objectives of environmental stewardship. This decision has been endorsed by the Rocky Mountain Institute and Johnson Controls Inc.: "Rocky Mountain Institute, currently serving as a Town of Vail energy audit consultant, endorses the Frontage Road Lighting Master Plan. The plan clearly identifies the intended end-uses) of the light, such as visual acuity and aesthetics, for each lighting zone. By focusing on the end-use first, the report demonstrates that LED technology can adequately meet the need on the frontage road with far fewer carbon emissions and less cost than the current lighting solution. ".-Michael Bendewald, Rocky Mountain Institute. Johnson Controls Inc. agrees with the statement below: "The installation of LED lighting along the Frontage Road is consistent with the environmental sustainable goals endorsed by the Town and consistent with the recommendations of the Town's Energy audit consultant, Rocky Mountain Institute, and that future installations of street lighting should consider LED technology where appropriate as they are environmentally friendlier than other lighting sources, " 1 got the impression from Kristen (Kristen Bertuglia, Vail's Environmental Sustainability Coordinator) that the PEC prefers the HPS lights as they appear to be less obtrusive to the surrounding night environment. While this is true, it is basically due to the fact that the yellow light output of HPS lamps makes visual recognition difficult at night. Figure 2.6 in your current Frontage Road Lighting Master plan is a great example of the poor rendering characteristics of HPS compared to LEDs which have a bluer/cooler spectrum. Dark sky initiatives and light pollution concerns should be addressed by fixture selection and mounting heights as is recommended in your lighting plan, not by providing an inferior light spectrum,"... Erin A. Ells, P. E, C. E M, Johnson Controls IV. REVIEW CRITERIA 1. The extent to which the amendment furthers the general and specific purposes of the master plan. The current Vail Transportation Master Plan does not address street lighting for the frontage roads. The proposed amendment addresses this key topic. The proposed amendment addresses the issues of public safety, environmental stewardship ("dark sky" friendly lighting and energy efficiency), and community aesthetics. The proposed amendment addresses this key topic. Therefore, Staff believes the proposed regulation amendment is consistent with the purposes of the master plan. Z. The extent to which the 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. The current Vail Transportation Master Plan does not address street lighting for the frontage roads. The proposed amendment addresses this key topic. The proposed amendment addresses the issues of public safety, environmental stewardship ("dark sky" friendly lighting and energy efficiency), and community aesthetics. Therefore, Staff believes the proposed amendment better implements and achieves the adopted goals, objectives and policies of the Town's Comprehensive Plan. 3. The extent to which the 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. The current Vail Transportation Master Plan does not address street lighting for the frontage roads. The proposed amendment addresses this key topic. Therefore, Staff believes the proposed amendment addresses this criterion. 4. The extent to which the amendment provides a harmonious, convenient, workable relationship among land use regulations consistent with municipal development objectives. The current Vail Transportation Master Plan does not address street lighting for the frontage roads. The proposed amendment addresses this key topic. The proposed amendment addresses the issues of public safety, environmental 4 stewardship ("dark sky" friendly lighting and energy efficiency), and community aesthetics. Staff believes the proposed amendments will facilitate and provide a harmonious, convenient, workable relationship among land use regulations consistent with the Comprehensive Plan and development objectives. 5. Such other factors and criteria the Commission and/or Council deem applicable to the proposed text amendment. UNENJIL-1126MM61-911JU LY14 Z I by IN] � The Community Development Department and Public Works Department recommend the Planning and Environmental Commission forwards a recommendation of approval to the Vail Town Council on the adoption of the Frontage Road Lighting Master Plan, an element of the Vail Transportation Master Plan, and setting forth details in regard thereto. Should the Planning and Environmental Commission choose to forward a recommendation of approval for this request; Community Development Department recommends the Commission pass the following motion: "The Planning and Environmental Commission forwards a recommendation of approval to the Vail Town Council on the adoption of the Frontage Road Lighting Master Plan, an element of the Vail Transportation Master Plan, 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 findings: "Based upon a review of Section IV of the Staffs May 10, 2010, memorandum to the Planning and Environmental Commission and the evidence and testimony presented, the Planning and Environmental Commission finds: 1. That the amendment is consistent with 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 2. That the amendment furthers the general and specific purposes of the Transportation Master Plan; and 3. That the amendment 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. " V1. ATTACHMENTS Attachment A: Frontage Road Lighting Master Plan Attachment B: September 28, 2009, public hearing results (in part) Frontage Road Lighting Master Plan FRONTAGE ROAD LIGHTING MASTER PLAN FA B RAY ARCHITECTURAL LIGHTING DESIGN 3881 North Steel Street Unit B I De—r, C0 80205 t 303.242.9663 e nancy @fabraylighting.com ni fabmylighting.com Town of Vail, Colorado Department of Public Works and Transportation 1309 Elkhorn Drive Vail, Colorado 81658 May 2010 Frontage Road Lighting Master Plan Acknowlegements We appreciate the following people and organizations in assisting in evaluation of the Master Plan, and contributing to the development of a Plan that is in compliance with Town of Vail guidelines, standards, and character. Town Council Mayor Dick Cleveland Mayor Pro -tem Kim Newbury Council Member Kerry Donovan Council Member Susie Tjossem Council Member Margaret Rogers Council Member Andy Daly Council Member Kevin Foley Public and Environmental Commission Chairman Bill Pierce Co -Chair David Viele Commissioner Sarah Robinson - Paladino Commissioner Tyler Schneidman Commissioner Henry Pratt Commissioner Luke Cartin Commissioner Michael Kurz Desian Review Board Chairman Pete Dunning Co -Chair Tom DuBois Board Member Elizabeth Plante Board Member Brian Gillette Board Member Rollie Kjesbo We extend appreciation to the community for participating in the survey at the lighting test site during the summer of 2009. We appreciate the following enterprises for assisting in the preparation of the Frontage Road Lighting Master Plan: Cator Ruma and Associates, Co. 896 Tabor Street Lakewood, Colorado 80401 DHM Design Inc. 1390 Lawrence Street, Suite 100 Denver, Colorado 80204 Frontage Road Lighting Master Plan TABLE OF CONTENTS PART 1: Introduction A. Executive Summary /Purpose B. Areas Covered by the Frontage Road Lighting Master Plan C. Areas Not Covered by the Frontage Road Lighting Master Plan PART 2: Frontage Road Lighting Master Plan Summary A. Conclusions B. ConditionsValidating the Master Lighting Plan C. Pole Height Options Studied D. Lamping Options Studied PART 3: Frontage Road Lighting Master Plan Objectives A. Roadway Safety B. Compliance with Objectives of Vail Lighting Ordinance and Environmental Stewardship C. Positive Aesthetic Effect PART 4: Frontage Road Lighting Master Plan Recommendations A. Equipment Locations on Frontage Roads B. Pole Height C. Lamp Selection D. Fixture Selection E. Controls System Criteria PART 5: Frontage Road Lighting Master Plan Approval Documentation PART 6: Appendix A A. Standards, Studies, and Guidelines Referenced B. Similar LED Roadway Lighting Installations PART 7: Appendix B A. Manufacturer's Specification Sheets PART 8: Appendix C A. Life Cycle Cost Analysis - 5 source sample study B. Life Cycle Cost Analysis - LED full installation C. Details PART 9: Appendix D A. Photographs and Field Measurements of Light Levels at Town of Vail Comparative Sites PART 10: Roadway Photometric Plans Frontage Road Lighting Master Plan Part 1: Introduction to Frontage Roads Master Lighting Plan A. Executive Summary The Frontage Roads Master Lighting Plan is the culmination of research, discussion, test applications, and community input. This document represents the best evaluation and recommendations, based on the most current theory and practices for safe roadway lighting, weighted with the imperative to support the character and aesthetic that has made Town of Vail a unique, premier destination resort. The purpose of the Frontage Roads Lighting Master Plan is to evaluate the current lighting conditions along the Frontage Roads and provide direction to Town of Vail for improvements that are intended to: 1. Improve safe utilization of the frontage roads by motorists, bicyclists, pedestrians, and overflow vehicle parking. 2. Manage appropriate light levels and illumination strategies along the frontage roads. 3. Manage long term economics and maintenance for lighting systems. 4. Establish consistency in the aesthetic appearance of lighting systems. The Lighting Master Plan is a guiding document and does not constitute final approval to proceed with any of the recommendations. Any specific project, private or public, will prepare and submit required documents to the agencies, boards, commissions, and councils within the Town of Vail who are charged with review and approval prior to implementation. The Frontage Road Lighting Master Plan conforms to current lighting ordinances and standards adopted by Town of Vail to the extent that the purpose of the Lighting Master Plan is achieved. A variance is recommended in the Frontage Roads Lighting Master Plan to increase the pole height for frontage roadway lighting to 25' -0 ". Per the Town Code, 14- 10- 7.D.2, "Height Limits For Light Fixtures: Outdoor lights affixed to a structure shall not exceed the height of the roof eaves. The maximum mounting height for light sources on a pole shall not exceed twenty feet (20')." Supporting documentation for the variance recommended in the Frontage Roads Master Lighting Plan is explained in detail in Part 2 /C. Periodic review of the Lighting Master Plan is advised to evaluate suitability of applications, evolving technologies that may equate to cost savings and improved performance, and trends in design practices. B. Areas of the frontage roads addressed by the Frontage Road Lighting Master Plan include (see Figure 1 .1): 1 . The south frontage road: Ford Park to West Vail 2. The north frontage road: Main Vail to West Vail 3. The future Simba Run underpass C. Areas of the Frontage Road NOT addressed by the Frontage Road Lighting Master Plan include: 1. Main Vail interchange and roundabouts 2. West Vail Interchange and roundabouts 3. Private Property 4. Commercial Core Areas Frontage Road Lighting Master Plan LL 00 If ICU A v D cd o ° s td va � r ca 4- LA m b 1 C) cd e 40 �°vG ®-0 9 4a ° o u f \4 ,v Figure 1.1 PART 2: Frontage Road Lighting Master Plan Su � Q o �a i Frontage Road Lighting Master Plan A. Conclusion 1. Based on the lack of effective roadway lighting along the Frontage Roads, and the resulting safety hazard to all Frontage Road users, the Frontage Roads Lighting Master Plan proposes lighting systems that: a. address the conditions conducive to night -time visibility, b. support the Town of Vail commitment to environmental stewardship through energy efficiency and dark -skies compliance, C. minimize the impact of additional lighting on the character of Town of Vail through considerations for quality and quantity of light, d. and minimize the life -cycle cost of such a system to the town. 2. The Frontage Roads Lighting Master Plan proposes a solid -state LED roadway lighting system, based on anticipated energy savings of approximately 50% and 25% minimum life cycle cost savings compared to the Town of Vail standard lamp source, which is high pressure sodium. 3. In addition to the proposed roadway lighting system, which is a "whiter" light source, The Frontage Roads Lighting Master Plan recommends integrating other methods to enhance the "romantic" character of the Town of Vail including: a. The use of the Village Lantern, a warmer lamp source, on a decorative 14' -0" pedestrian scale pole. b. Placement of bollards to match those installed on the bike paths leading to Donovan Park at high density traffic intersections with bike /pedestrian path crossovers to improve visibility for bicyclists and motorists. C. 14' -0" height banner arm poles to match the Village Lantern pole installed in new medians at key high activity turn lanes, such as the Village and Lionshead parking structures, as an opportunity to educate and inform residents and visitors of Town of Vail features and events. The Frontage Roads Lighting Master Plan does not recommend locations for placement of banner arm poles, however product specifications are included to suggest design characteristics consistent with the roadway lighting equipment characteristics. t I Frontage Road Lighting Master Plan B. Conditions Validating the Frontage Roads Lighting Master Plan 1. The frontage roadways are not adequately illuminated for safety. a. Existing frontage roadway lighting is limited to street lights at the Village and West Vail roundabouts, area lights in the underpasses, and pedestrian -scale street poles at intermittent properties and intersections such as at Matterhorn Drive. There is no effective street lighting along either frontage road. See figure 2.1 and 2.2 as an example. b. The north and south frontage roads are arterial roadways shared by vehicles, public transportation, bicyclists, and pedestrians. Specific areas of the frontage roads also serve as roadside parking when the Vail parking structures are full, which occurs 25 -30 times per year. c. The lack of appropriate roadway lighting inhibits the quick, accurate, and comfortable visibility at night needed for safe utilization of the Frontage Roads. The benefit of quality nighttime roadway lighting, as substantiated by IDA Outdoor Lighting Code Handbook, IESNA RP -8 -00, and the NEMA /ANSI Standard for Roadway and Area Lighting (see Appendix A for more information on these referenced organizations), is to facilitate assessment of roadway conditions such as: • Pavement that is clear and free of obstacles for a reasonable distance. • Position of a moving vehicle relative to lane and roadway edges. • Location and meaning of traffic and directional signage. • Position and anticipated course of moving objects on and near the roadway. • Recognition of destinations in order to make timely driving decisions. d. The recent adoption of an updated Transportation Master Plan, which responds to current and future growth and development for Town of Vail, identifies a clear recognition that frontage road improvements provide a benefit to the community. Addressing visibility deficits is key to the safe utilization of the Town's frontage roadway system. 2. Providing roadway lighting at selected sections along the Frontage Roads will benefit the safe utilization of the roadways by residents and visitors. a. IESNA RP -8 -00 is an industry standard which identifies recommended practices for roadway lighting applications (See Part 6 /Appendix A for more information on this standard). Criterion in the Recommended Practice used in developing the Frontage Road Lighting Master Plan includes: Light levels expressed in terms of maximum, minimum, and average footcandle illuminance (direct light incident on the roadway) for roadway usage classifications in conjunction with high, Frontage Road Lighting Master Plan medium, and low pedestrian conflict classifications. These are baseline light levels appropriate for an urban setting. Values for uniformity of lighting based on the ratio of average to minimum illuminance. The Frontage Roads Lighting Master Plan establishes light levels that are appropriate for the rural setting and character of Town of Vail. The Local classification for roadway usage, as defined by IESNA RP -8 -00, is the criterion that most closely fits the light levels appropriate for Town of Vail. Determination of these light levels was made based on: • Measurement of existing light levels at the Village and West Vail turnabouts and I -70 off - ramps, as the baseline for the highest level of light acceptable for Town of Vail. • Comparative studies and light level measurements for illuminated sites and intersections in the Town of Vail including Safeway and City Market parking lots, Village pedestrian cross walks, Matternhorn Drive intersection, and Donovan Park parking lot. • A test site installed at the Ford Park bus stop drive an LED source and the standard High Pressure Sodium source installed. • Photometric studies of a sample roadway section (Village round about to Ford Park) • Feedback from Town of Vail City Council, Planning and Environmental Commission, and Design Review Board, expressing the community value to maintain a low level of lighting. C. Based on preferences expressed by TOV City Council, Planning and Environmental Commission, and Design Review Board, the Frontage Roads Lighting Master Plan recommends a zone strategy for light levels, based on volume and complexity of traffic/ pedestrian activity at sections of the Frontage Roads: • High Zone: Existing Village and West roundabouts. This represents the maximum target light level and applies to the portions of the Frontage Roads with highest volume and complexity of activity such as the proposed Simba Run roundabouts. • Medium Zone: High volume, high activity, and high potential for conflict (between motorists, pedestrians, bicycles, and /or parked vehicles) - primarily major parking structures and approaches to such. • Low Zone: Medium to high volume traffic, medium activity, and medium potential conflict - primarily transitional roadway sections between major commercial access and medium /high zones. • Secondary Intersections Zone: Intermittent intersections along the Frontage Roads, not within a low or medium zone, with volume, activity, and /or potential conflict substantial enough to benefit from area lighting. • Portions of the Frontage Roads with limited residential and /or commercial access and minimal conflict potential (any zone not included in one of the four previously defined zones) which are intended to remain "dark zones" - no roadway lighting recommendation in the Frontage Roads Lighting Master Plan. C. Study of Pole Height Options: 1 . Calculation of light levels were performed for a sample roadway section (Medium Zone classification), from the Village Roundabout to Village Parking Garage, using a 20' -0" pole and 25' -0" pole to understand the potential impact of pole height on the application of Frontage Road lighting. Three significant conditions were revealed in the study, indicating the 25' -0" pole provided benefit associated with cost, performance, and aesthetics: The 25' -0" pole provided better uniformity of illumination across the roadway as compared to the 20' -0" pole. The 25' -0' pole met target illuminance values across the width of the Frontage Road for most 3 and 4 lane sections with poles positioned on just one side of the roadway - see figure 2.5 which illustrates the light coverage for the 4 -lane section of roadway (diagram from the Master Transportation Plan). The 20'- 0" pole, which reduces the area of illumination by 20% commensurate with the proximity of the source to the pavement by 5' -0 ", requires poles placement on both sides of the roadway to meet target illuminance values across the width of the Frontage Road. Frontage Road Lighting Master Plan The 25' -0" pole met target illuminance values with 20% fewer poles compared to the 20' -0" pole in the sample study area 2. The benefits of using 25' -0' poles installed primarily on one side, in the shoulder adjacent to the Interstate, are: a. Reduced initial equipment cost due to fewer poles and lights. b. Reduced installation cost associated with earthwork and electrical distribution /branch circuiting. C. Lower life -cycle cost. d. Reduced disturbance to private and public properties during installation. e. Less visual impact with fewer poles. Conkmts AcwFO@ad Twu Uses 1 Q 14' lase J /2 lane I 1 re 17 tare 6' l+be §Wds am � 4 -LANE CROSS- SECTION 25' -0" Pole - light distribution at 60 degree angle Pseudo -color lamp distribution at 25' www� Line 16 SJ 0 1: Ca 16L n. 17L.. IAA or N 4 -LANE CROSS- SECTION 20' -0" Pole - light distribution at 60 degree angle Pseudo -color lamp distribution at 20' Figure 2.5 D. Study of Light Source (lamping) Options: The standard street lighting lamp utilized in Town of Vail is a I OOW high pressure sodium (HPS) lamp, GE LongLife Lucalox ED23.5, which is a common industry lamp for roadway applications, predicated on the rated lamp life (40,000 hours) and efficacy (66 lumens per watt - a measure of light output relative to power input). The intent of the Frontage Roads Lighting Master Plan is to achieve equal or improved cost and performance, using the standard HPS lamp as the baseline for comparison. Three lamp sources representing newer developments in lamp technology - Ceramic Metal Halide (CMH), Induction, and LED solid state - were compared to the standard HPS for technical characteristics, cost, and actual visual performance. The studies performed are summarized in the following. The resulting conclusions of the combined studies were: Frontage Road Lighting Master Plan • The CMH compared unfavorably in the cost analysis, and was eliminated from further consideration. • The induction source, in visual observation, produced distracting shadows and distorted modeling, and was eliminated from further consideration. The LED solid state source exceeded the HPS baseline in most categories of technical, cost, and visual performance. Technical characteristics of the four lamp sources were compared. The study results is summarized in the table below, and characteristics which represent improvement compared to the HPS baseline source are highlighted in red /bold text. a. Light Output and Efficiency Characteristics data published by lamp manufacturer's based on industry testing standards. • Efficacy - lumen output relative to wattage input, or light delivered relative to power used. Expressed as lumens per watt (LPW). The higher the LPW value the better the efficacy. • Rated Lamp Life - The average life of a lamp of a given type, as determined from a large sample operated under laboratory conditions. Lumen Depreciation - A value, expressed as a percentage, which reflects the overall performance of a lamp over its life. As lamps are burned, their lumen output decreases. The lower the percentage, the better the life time performance of the lamp. b. Quality of Light Characteristics data published by lamp manufacturer's based on industry testing standards. These qualitative characteristics improve night time visibility in that they effect perception of color, depth, and contrast: • CRI - color rendering index, a value from 0 -100, which indicates the spectral range of colors detectable under the source. The higher the value, the better the source allows us to see objects as we would expect to see them in daylight. • CCT - correlated color temperature, a value expressed in degrees Kelvin (K) that describes the overall color appearance of the source, from yellow or orange /warmer (2600K is incandescent) to bluish /cooler (4100K is the color of moonlight). Recent studies indicate that the eye adapts better to cooler color temperatures at night. Source Specification System Initial Efficacy Rated Lumen CRI CCT Wattage Lumens Lamp Life Depreciation (hrs) HPS Lucalox 138 9200 66 LPW 40,000 20% 25 2000K baseline LU100 /100 /SBY /D CMH Phillips Pulse Start 125 9000 72 LPW 24,000 25% 85 4000K DM/1 OO/U/PS/4K/ALT O LED - BetaLED 166 8998 55 LPW 75,000 15% 70 4300K 525mA 90/525mA/4300K Induction U.S.Lighting Tech 110 8500 77 LPW 100,000 30% 85 4000K 2. Initial and life -cycle costs were compared for the four sources, based on a sample pole layout for a section of the Frontage Road, from the Village Roundabout to the Village Parking Garage, and targeting the illuminance and uniformity values as defined by IESNA RP -8 -00 for local roadway usage classification. In the summary table below the costs which represent an improvement compared to the HPS baseline source are highlighted in red /bold text. The CMH source was eliminated from consideration based on cost. Frontage Road Lighting Master Plan nor Source Life Cycle Energy Cost Life Cycle Maintenance Cost Initial System Cost Total Life Cycle Cost( *1) Amortized Annual Cost ( *2) HPS Baseline $31,639.00 $53,729.00 $64,550.00 $149,918.00 $5,997.00 CMH $28,659.00 $106,858.00 $62,284.00 $197,801.00 $7,912.00 LED - 525mA $28,246.00 $56,776.00 $56,804.00 $141,826.00 $5,673.00 Induction $27,237.00 $57,097.00 $45,630.00 $129,965.00 $5,199.00 (*I )Total Life Cycle Cost is for the total quantity of luminaires represented in the sample pole layout for 25 years ( *2) Amortized Annual Cost is for the total quantity of luminaires represented, annually for a 25 year life cycle. 3. In addition to the statistical analysis, the actual visual performance of the sources was evaluated: a. The City of Loveland, Colorado, installed a roadway lighting test site using LED, Induction, and HPS on 25' -0" poles. Public Works officials including Greg Hall, Tom Kassmel, Todd Oppenheimer, and Leo Vasquez visited the test site to evaluate the sources. Observations of the three sources facilitated the selection of a single comparative source - LED - for a test site at Ford Park. Ford Park Test Site: Comparison between a HPS and LED roadway light, installed on 25' -0" poles, yielded the following results: The LED source, with a similar lumen output to the HPS, appeared too bright. By adjusting the power driver current at the luminaire (a characteristic unique to LED technology), the LED source light output could be reduced by 40%, which resulted in less light but acceptable visibility. Less light equates to less energy usage, and increased anticipated lamp life. Technical and cost studies between the LED source and HPS were then re- evaluated with the new LED performance metrics, and results are summarized in the tables below. The LED source outperformed the HPS in most categories studied. Source Specification System Initial Efficacy Rated Lumen CRI CCT Cost Cost( *1) Wattage Lumens Lamp Depreciation HPS $31,639.00 $53,729.00 $64,550.00 $149,918.00 Life Baseline LED - 350mA 1 $15,333.00 (hrs) 1 $41,602.00 1 $113,687.00 1 $4,547.00 HPS Lucalox 138 9200 66 LPW 40,000 20% 25 2000K baseline LU100 /100 /SBY /D LED - BetaLED 76 4472 59 LPW 131,000 15% 350mA 60/350mA/4300K Source Life Cycle Life Cycle Initial System Total Life Cycle Amortized Energy Cost Maintenance Cost Cost( *1) Annual Cost ( *2) Cost HPS $31,639.00 $53,729.00 $64,550.00 $149,918.00 $5,997.00 Baseline LED - 350mA 1 $15,333.00 1 $56,752.00 1 $41,602.00 1 $113,687.00 1 $4,547.00 • Figure 2.6, photographs taken at the Ford test site, illustrates the difference in color appearance and impact on visibility for the two sources. The white LED source clearly outperforms HPS. • Surveys were left at the site for community response. Two of the three responses collected supported the improvement in visibility and quality of light produced by the LED. The third response indicated that the LED was less desirable than HPS for the atmosphere in Vail. 12 Frontage Road Lighting Master Plan PART 3: Frontage Road Lighting Master Plan Objectives A. Improvements in Roadway Safety Improve Roadway Visibility a. The north and south frontage roads are arterial roadways shared by vehicles, public transportation, bicyclists, and pedestrians. They also serve as roadside parking when Vail Parking structures fill, which occurs 25 -30 times per year. Roadway visibility is key to safe use of the Frontage Roads in user conflict zones. b. Visibility deficits are key factors in a number of undesirable safety conditions. • Reduced potential for night -time collisions. • Aid to police protection and enhanced sense of personal security. c. Improved nighttime visibility facilitates driver confidence and encourages usage of private and public enterprises during the night -time hours, providing economic benefit to the community. 2. Assist motorists in anticipating and responding to traffic circulation and roadway transitions. a. Public Works recently submitted an updated Transportation Master Plan that responds to current and projected future growth and development studies for Town of Vail. The Transportation Master Plan recommends improvements to traffic management and access strategies along the frontage roads, including widening portions of the roadway and establishing turn lanes. The Frontage Roads Master Lighting Plan addresses night -time visibility strategies to parallel the Transportation Master Plan improvements. b. In addition to aiding in visibility, lighting is a visual cue that is easily recognized and interpreted. Light identifies roadway transitions and signals important driving decisions. The main village roundabouts and the west Vail roundabouts are well illuminated nodes that provide this type of signaling. They are memorable markers that help to orient the community. B. Support Objectives of Vail Lighting Ordinance and Environmental Stewardship 1 . Dark Sky a. With the adoption of a dark -sky ordinance in 2008, Vail is clearly championing the philosophy of dark -sky preservation. The ordinance governs the use of full cutoff light sources directed where needed and requires that light levels be the minimum needed for safety and security. The Frontage Roads Lighting Master Plan is strictly in conformance with full cutoff criteria and minimum light levels for roadway safety. b. The Frontage Roads Lighting Master Plan establishes zones of beneficial light, as described in "Part 2/B/2/b" and illustrated in 'Part 4 /A ", at light levels appropriate for Town of Vail. The Lighting Master Plan supports sections determined to be best served by no new roadway lighting, to promote the accessibility of night time viewing. C. Patterns of light distribution along the frontage roads have been selected specific to the roadway configuration in each zone of beneficial light to optimize roadway coverage without light trespass. 2. Energy Efficiency a. The cost of procurement, utilization, and maintenance of a public lighting system is carried by the municipality. The Frontage Road Master Lighting Plan addresses the many variables to lighting systems that factor into the successful life time performance and cost of a roadway lighting system, including: • Usable life of the equipment and all associated parts • Durability of finishes • Efficiency of lamp sources and reflectors that house the source Frontage Road Lighting Master Plan • Measurable performance of the source • Proper maintenance practices that may impact the life and performance of the equipment • Environmental factors that may impact life and performance of the equipment • Equipment design that may ease or hinder the economics of maintenance • Hazardous materials that may require special disposal b. Specific criteria for energy efficiency addressed by the Frontage Roads Lighting Master Plan include: • Life -cycle energy cost reduced compared to current Town of Vail standard municipal lighting standards. • Flexible control options that allow Town of Vail to adjust light levels in accordance with need. • Modular equipment design that can be easily retrofitted over time as advancements in technology provide greater efficiency and performance. C. Positive Aesthetic Impact 1 . Consistent Character a. While the Frontage Road Lighting Master Plan is not intended to direct the selection of lighting equipment outside of the municipal right -of -way, the standardization of roadway lighting applications will help guide the interface of current and future developments with Frontage Road access. b. The Lighting Master Plan defines the selection of equipment, including the roadway pole, pedestrian scale pole, and bike /pedestrian path bollard, for the Frontage Roads. In doing so, the visual impact of the lighting systems, by day or night, is consistent and replicates the visual language from east to west Vail. C. In taking a global approach, the Frontage Roads Lighting Master Plan controls light levels and the appearance of light in away that address both need /safety and balance with ambient light conditions in the community. In this way, roadway lighting can serve the community with the most desirable results. 2. Appropriate Light Levels a. The Frontage Roads Lighting Master Plan includes adjustments in target light levels as defined by IESNA RP -8 -00 based on the following: • Field measurement of existing lighting levels in specific public right -of -way areas in Vail, as well as familiar private enterprise lighting installations. Refer to Appendix D for photographs and measured light levels at these location including: Village and West Vail roundabouts, I -70 off ramps at the roundabouts, Safeway parking lot, City Market parking lot, Donovan Park parking lot, and the intersection of South Frontage Road and Matterhorn Drive. • Observation, light level measurements, and community response for the selected LED pole mounted light installed as a test site at Ford Park. • Studies and community response from similar LED installations in the United States - refer to "Part 2 /E" for a summary of similar installations. 3. Color a. The color appearance of the roadway lighting system is a factor in successful performance of the system as well as acceptance within the community by residents, business enterprises, and visitors. The objective of the Frontage Roads Lighting Master Plan is to provide the best color characteristics of the light source used in roadway lighting to facilitate good night time vision. b. "Part 2 /D /b" explained CCT - the appearance of a light source as whiter /bluish or yellow /orangish - and CRI - the measure of a light source's ability to make people and objects appear as they would during daylight. c. The Frontage Roads Master Lighting Plan follows conclusive evidence that night time vision is improved under whiter /blue light sources (higher CCT and CRI) as compared to yellow /orange sources (lower CCT and typically lower CRI). One such study conducted by The Lighting Research Frontage Road Lighting Master Plan Center (LRC) /Rennselaer Polytechnic Institute is identified in Part 6 /Appendix A. The affects of higher CCT and CRI sources on night time visual functions include: • Targets in the field of vision are more easily detected • Peripheral vision is enhanced • Same or better visibility in low -light conditions, including lower roadway surface lighting • Enhanced sense of safety and security d. Supplemental lighting, such as the standard Village pedestrian lantern and bike path bollard, will be integrated with the roadway lighting to enhance the frontage roads with familiar color appearance and characteristic appeal. 4. Glare Control a. All light sources inherently produce glare, a function of the angle of light source distribution at a specific viewing angle. According to industry standards, glare is classified as either disabling or discomforting. b. Disability glare can impair the ability of a driver to perform necessary tasks. The Frontage Roads Lighting Master Plan includes strategies to help mitigate the potential for disabling glare from roadway turn lanes and cross traffic access points. Strategies include: • Placement of poles so that source distribution angle is outside the visual field of the driver • Addressing lighting uniformity and contrast ratios to minimize visual adaptation between light and dark fields. C. Discomfort glare is an unwelcome by- product of bright light sources, although it is not considered to impair visibility. The Frontage Roads Lighting Master Plan includes strategies to mitigate the potential for discomfort glare for residences and business enterprises with frontage road views. Strategies include: • Placement of poles so that the source distribution angle is outside the visual field of the viewer to the greatest extent possible. • Utilizing "backlight" shielding to eliminate light distribution behind the pole, where poles are installed adjacent to commercial and residential properties. • Limiting roadway lighting to sections of the frontage roads where it is most needed, an out of primarily residential zones. • Utilizing pedestrian lanterns in concert with roadway lighting where commercial enterprises are built to the property line shared by the frontage roads. Frontage Road Lighting Master Plan PART 4: Frontage Roads Lighting Master Plan Recommendations A. Location of Equipment Along Frontage Roads 1 . Roadway Lighting Zones Strategy: Figures 4.1 , 4.2, 4.3 and 4.4 illustrate the recommended strategy for zones of roadway lighting. The illuminance design basis for each of the four zone categories, as recommended in IESNA RP -8 -00 Table 2 for local roadway classification, is as follows. These are target illuminance values and may vary slightly in application depending on roadway and median configurations and conditions. Lighting Zone Traffic Description Target Target Target Pole spacing Designation Average Average Avg:Min ( *1) Illuminance Illuminance Uniformity - Roadway - Intersection (footcandle) (footcandle) High Zone Existing TOV roundabouts (based As required on field measurements) Medium Zone High volume, high activity, high 0.7 1.4 6:1 100'-150' conflict Low Zone High volume, medium activity, 0.4 0.8 6:1 150'-225' medium conflict Secondary Intermittent roadway 0.4 0.8 6:1 100'-150' Intersections intersections with enough volume, activity, and conflict p otential to justify lightin ( *1) pole spacing will vary within the zone depending on roadway and median configurations, and location of intersections. Strategy - Vail Village to Ford Park High Level Mid Level, 100' -150' spacing Low Level, 175'- 225' spacing L Secondary Intersections o Fiaure 4.1 Frontage Road Lighting Master Plan Strategy - Village to Lionshead High Level � Mid Level, 100' -150' spacing Fiaure 4.2 Strategy - Evervail High Level Mid Level, 100' spacing Low Level, 225' spacing Secondary Intersections tom- 4 c a Fiaure 4.3 Frontage Road Lighting Master Plan High Level Strategy - West Vail Mid Level, 100' -150' spacing g r ° 4 Low Level, 175'- 225' spacing Secondary Intersections, V O (� n � Lull D U m° 0 0 80 6YS� Om n - CJ 4 eon 0 I po a Fiaure 4.4 P cica, ad 2. Placement of LED roadway lighting poles within the zone strategy, to achieve target illuminance and uniformity values, is guided by: • The roadway configurations for typical 3, 4, and 5 lane roadway sections, as proposed in the Master Transportation Plan. Primarily, roadway lighting pole placement is recommended on the Interstate side of the Frontage Roads to minimize installation cost and constructon impact. 4- land and 5 -lane roadway sections in Medium Zones, in some cases, require pole placement on both sides of roadway (and /or in the median) to provide sufficient illuminance and uniformity. • Proximity of roadway section to commercial and /or residential development property. Where direct glare from the roadway light cannot be mitigated by any other means, pole placement is recommended on the development side of the roadway so that the light source can be directed away from the property. • Viewing angles for motorist positions at turn lanes and stops. Pole position is offset by 60 degrees to mitigate potential for glare at fixed motorist positions. 3. Recommendation for placement of HPS decorative Village Lantern pedestrian pole is guided by: • Contribution to night time visibility for pedestrians. • Contribution to roadway illuminance where needed to supplement roadway lighting. • Contribution to character. 4. Recommendation for placement of low level bollards is guided by: Convergence of city bike /pedestrian paths with moderately to heavily used intersections. Frontage Road Lighting Master Plan 5. Dimensioned Lighting Layout Plans correspond to the Lighting Zone Strategy and to Photometric studies included in the Frontage Roads Lighting Master Plan, Part 10. Lighting Layout Plans included in the Lighting Master Plan are: • LD -1 West Vail Part 1 • LD -2 West Vail Part 2 • LD -3 West Vail Part 3 • LD -4 Timber Ridge Part 1 • LD -5 Timber Ridge Part 2 • LD -6 Lionshead Part 1 • LD -7 Lionshead Part 2 • LD -8 Lionshead Part 3 • LD -9 Vail Village Part 1 • LD -10 Vail Village Part 2 • LD -11 Vail Village Part 3 • LD -12 Vail Village Part 4 a. Dimensions shown are intended to reasonably predict placement of poles to achieve anticipated target light levels and uniformity. Prior to implementation, field conditions relative to pole placement must be reviewed and necessary adjustments to pole placement identified. Additional photometric studies are advised if pole placement requires adjustment of more than 10% of the dimension indicated in the Frontage Roads Lighting Master Plan. b. Dimensioned Lighting Layout Plans are based on roadway, right -of -way, public and private property apportionment as it exists or is anticipated at the time of Adoption of the Frontage Roads Lighting Master Plan. Future modifications to any of these may impact the feasibility of the Lighting Layout Plans, and further study of the frontage roads lighting plans must preclude the implementation. 6. Landscape material including trees, monuments, artwork, etc. that may be part of future frontage road planning and development should be coordinated with the Lighting Layout Plans to avoid creating obstructions that may interfere with anticipated performance of the frontage roads lighting systems. Refer to Part 8 /Appendix C /Details for diagrams which suggest clearances between lighting poles and landscape vegetation or features. 7. Refer to Part 8 /Appendix C /Details for recommended set -back of poles relative to roadway, bike -path, shoulder, and /or pedestrian walkways. B. Pole Recommendations 1 . Based on studies conducted and described in "Part 2: Frontage Roads Lighting Master Plan Summary", a 25' -0" pole for roadway lighting is recommended to capture cost benefits, minimize the visual impact of the lighting system, and minimize construction disturbance. 2. Manufacturer's Technical Specification Sheets for the following scheduled equipment are included in "Part 7: Appendix B ". 3. Design of structural base for the poles is not included in the Frontage Roads Lighting Master Plan. Frontage Road Lighting Master Plan Equipment Description Pole Pole Pole Finish Pole Accessories Designation ( Height Diameter Construction P1 Village Pedestrian 12'-0" 4" Straight Steel Epoxy Primer 5 "h x 15.25"D Pole (24" and Black base cover. head on Electrostatic Optional GFI top) Powdercoat receptacle, planter Painted arms, irrigation Topcoat ( *2) P2, P3, P4, Roadway Lighting 25' -0" 5" Straight Steel Epoxy Primer 36 "H tapered cast P5 Pole and Black iron pole base, Electrostatic cast aluminum Powdercoat acorn finial Painted Topcoat Decorative Banner 14' -0" 4" Straight Steel Epoxy Primer 5 "h x 15.25"D Arm and Black base cover, 24 "L Electrostatic alum dual break - BA1 Powdercoat away banner arms, Painted cast alum Topcoat decorative acorn finial BL1 Bikeway Bollard 3' -8.5" 7.8" shaft Corten Steel Raw (appears NA shaft, cast rusty over iron head time) ( *1) Equipment designation is referenced on the Lighting Layout Plans and describes all components including the pole. ( *2) Planter Arm and receptacles are options that need to be discussed with Town of Vail planners prior to implementation of this Lighting Master Plan. C. Lamp Recommendations 1 . The Frontage Roads Lighting Master Plan recommends the 4300K LED lamp, operated at 350mA drive current, as the primary roadway lighting source for the performance benefits associated with the task of driving and for the life -cycle cost benefits. The complete life -cycle cost analysis is included in Part 8: Appendix B. Based on the analysis, the lighting system using the recommended LED source, compared to the High Pressure Sodium source which is standard to the Town of Vail, anticipates 52% less energy usage and a life -cycle cost savings of 25 %. 2. The High Pressure Sodium lamp, standard to the Village lantern and bollard, is recommended: As a decorative element, where the warmer color appearance supports the aesthetic and character of Town of Vail. For pedestrian zones where visual acuity is less critical than for the task of driving. As a visual cue at roadway intersections where bike /pedestrian paths cross over. Lamp characteristics for each of the pole /fixture assemblies are described in the following table. LED lamp specifications are integrated with fixture specifications. HPS lamp and ballast specification sheets are provided independent of the fixtures they are installed in. All Manufacturers' Technical Specification Sheets included in "Part 7: Appendix B ". Frontage Road Lighting Master Plan Equipment Description Lamp Source Wattage CRI (Color CCT (Correlated Designation Rendering Color ( *1) Index) Temperature) P1 Village HPS /LED(in 100W /1W 22 2000K Pedestrian Pole the decorative chimney) P2, P3, P4, P5 Roadway LED modules 60W (3 modules 70 4300K Lighting Pole with 20 LEDs at 20W each) each BL1 Bikeway Bollard HPS 50W 22 2000K ( *1) Equipment designation is referenced on the Lighting Layout Plans and describes all components including the pole. 4. Operating voltage for lamps recommended in the Frontage Roads Lighting Master Plan are 1 20 -220V, and voltage will be verified with Town of Vail Public Works at the time of implementation. 5. LED lamps included in this specification are Generation C release product. At the time of implementation, the intent of the Frontage Roads Lighting Master Plan is to verify the most current LED product and modify the specification as required to compensate for improvements in technology. D. Fixture Selection 1 . Manufacturers' Technical Specification Sheets for all equipment identified in the Frontage Roads Lighting Master Plan are included in "Part 7: Appendix B ". 2. Fixture selection is manufacturer and product specific and may not be substituted. Where procurement of product is assigned to an exclusive supplier, the supplier and contact information is indicated on the Technical Manufacturers' Specification Sheet. 3. All fixtures selected and specified are UL and /or CUL listed. LED fixture selections are LM -80 -08 and LM -79- 08 tested (see Part 6:Appendix A for description of this test). Any modifications to the specification in the future will be listed and tested per these standards. 4. The Village Pedestrian Lantern (type P1) as presently specified and designed does not meet the full cutoff requirement of the Vail Outdoor Lighting Ordinance. The Frontage Roads Lighting Master Plan does not address re- design of this standard Vail product, although it is our understanding that efforts are underway to investigate modifications to the lantern design that will meet full cutoff criteria. Verify the status of the Village Lantern specification prior to implementation of the Frontage Roads Lighting Master Plan. E. Controls System Criteria 1 . The Frontage Roads Lighting Master Plan recommends both unitized (local at the fixture) and system approach to controlling the operations of the roadway lighting. 2. Unitized control is achieved with a multi -tap (350mA and 525mA) power supply integral with the LED street fixture. The benefit to this option is that on a fixture by fixture basis the light output can be adjusted to a higher or lower output to compensate for lumen depreciation over time and to set groups of fixtures for specific roadway conditions should that become desirable. With this control option, a multi -level control scheme can also be implemented wherein groups of lights can be switched between lower and higher output either automatically or manually. The multi -tap option is included in the Manufacturers' Technical Specifications for LED roadway fixture types P2, P3, P4, and P5, in "Part 7: Appendix B ", as well as the wiring diagram for the 350mA and 525mA driver settings. 3. System control is achieved with a programmable solid -state relay panel that automatically turns groups of lights on and off based on a programmed schedule or as a manual function through network technology. The Frontage Roads Lighting Master Plan recommends the following characteristics and requirements for the system controls: a. The Relay Panel will be pre - assembled, UL /CSA listed, and separate from the electrical distribution equipment utilized to power the frontage road lighting. Manufacturer for the equipment will be approved by Town of Vail. Frontage Road Lighting Master Plan b. Relays will be low voltage lighting control relays, fully rated for 20A and suitable for all lamp types. Each relay will have a molded case containing terminals for both low voltage signal wiring and line voltage power wiring. Each relay shall have an integral means for manual operation. Relays will be capable of being automatically controlled in groups and simultaneously controlled by individual override. Relays shall have a built in status indicator that can be monitored by a networking technology. Relay status shall be accomplished by the same signal wiring as is used to carry the on /off signal. C. Relay panels will have the capability to be networked to other relay panels and /or other programmable control systems supported by Town of Vail. The networking capabilities and preferences of Town of Vail will be coordinated with the networking capabilities of the specified Relay Panel. d. Relay groups (lights that operate together on a unique relay) shall be approved by Town of Vail Public Works prior to installation of circuiting for roadway lighting systems. General parameters for lighting group development are: • Distinct luminaire types - roadway poles, Village Lanterns, and bollards - shall be grouped independent of each other. • Relay groups shall be limited to their distinct Lighting Zone as illustrated in the Zone Strategy diagrams, Figure 4.1 through 4.4 above. • Roadway lighting for intersections (poles positioned in the intersection and including the turn lanes) within a distinct Lighting Zone shall be grouped independent of the remainder of the roadway lighting in the Lighting Zone, unless otherwise approved by Town of Vail Public Works. Frontage Road Lighting Master Plan PART 5: Frontage Road Lighting Master Plan Approval Documentation The Vail Frontage Road Master Lighting Plan as described herein is adopted by Resolution xxx, on xxx, 2010, 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. Frontage Road Lighting Master Plan PART 6: Appendix A A. Standards, Studies, and Guidelines Referenced IESNA RP -8 -00 /REAFFIRMED 2005 American National Standard Practice for Roadway Lighting • The Illuminating Engineering Society of North America ( www.iesna.org ) is a collegial national community with membership derived from diverse backgrounds including designers, manufacturing, contractors, distribution, utilities and energy services, government, and education. • The mission of IESNA is to improve the lighted environment through research and education. IESNA publications are developed through the consensus standards development process approved by the American National Standards Institute (ANSI). IESNA is not brand affiliated. • RP -8 -00 is prepared by the Standard Practice Subcommittee of the IESNA Roadway Lighting Committee. 2. ANSI C1 36.16 -2009 NEMA /ANSI Standard for Roadway and Area Lighting (www.nema.org /stds /C1 36.cfm) American National Standards Institute (ANSI) and National Electrical Manufacturers Association (NEMA) are both organizations engaged in developing technical standards for product development, production, distribution, and utilization to impact safety, economics, and performance. 3. IDA Lighting Code Handbook V1. 14 (www.darksky.org) International Dark -Sky Association (IDA) is a 501(c) (3) nonprofit organization engaged in education about and advocacy for the preservation of the nighttime environment specifically through utilization of quality outdoor lighting. IDA is considered a leading authority concerning problems and solutions related to light pollution. 4. IESNA LM -80 -08 Approved Method for the Electrical and Photometric Measurements of Solid State Lighting Products Specifies procedures for measuring total luminous flux, electrical power, luminous efficacy, and chromaticity of SSL luminaires and replacement lamp products. 5. IESNA LM -79 -08 Approved Method for Measuring Lumen Maintenance of LED Light Sources Specifies procedures for determining lumen maintenance of LEDs and LED modules (but not luminaires) related to effective useful life of the product. 6. U.S. DOE Gateway Program: Demonstration Assessment of Light- Emitting Diode (LED) Roadway Lighting. (http://wwwl.eere.energy.gov/buildings/ssl/gatewaydemos.html) DOE GATEWAY Demonstrations showcase high - performance LED products for general illumination in a variety of commercial and residential applications. Demonstration results provide real -world experience and data on state -of- the -art solid -state lighting (SSL) product performance and cost effectiveness. These results connect DOE technology procurement efforts with large- volume purchasers and provide buyers with reliable data on product performance 7. Lighting Research Center, Rennselaer Polytechnic Institute, "Mesopic Street Lighting Demonstration and Evaluation Final Report ", by Peter Morante, published December 2008 ( lighting .Irc.rpi.edu /researchAreas /pdf /Groton FinalReport.pdf) Standards and Guidelines applicable to Roadway Lighting and /or technologies specified within this master planning document that are forthcoming are listed as follows. Town of Vail is advised to review these documents as well as other technical papers generated in the future which may represent advancements in criteria and performance of roadway lighting systems. • NEMA SSL -1 Driver Performance Standard for Solid State Lighting • IESNA TM-21, Technical Memorandum regarding the method of estimation of LED Life • IESNA LM -XX1 , Approved method for the measurement of high power LEDs. B. Similar LED Roadway Lighting Applications Solid -state LED roadway lighting is a relatively new technology, gaining in effective performance and popularity. There are similar applications of LED roadway lighting installed nationwide by municipalities and the U.S. Frontage Road Lighting Master Plan Department of Energy to compare the LED and HPS sources for cost and quality of lighting. These applications are summarized below, and can be further reviewed by sourcing the web links identified. 1. Ouray, Colorado: i. LED retrofit of low- pressure sodium street lighting on Main Street to 80LED, 6000K, 30' -0" poles. Installed 06/2009. ii. Has been well received by retailers, residents, municipality, and guests. 50% energy savings anticipated, with a 2 year payback. iii. Comments: "Nighttime sky more visible "; New lights are "more pleasing to the eye ". iv. http : / /www.ledwaystreetlights.com /benefits - case- studies.htm1 2. Groton, Connecticut: i. Mesopic (night visual adaptation) Street Lighting Demonstration and Evaluation: study of white source (MH) versus yellow source (HPS), 25' -0" mounting height, residential neighborhood, 120'-140' spacing. ii. Based on survey including police personnel and residents with a 68% response, most respondents identified a noticeable improvement in security, visual clarity, aesthetic preference, natural look of vegetation for the white light source compared to the HPS yellow source. iii. Lighting. Irc. rpi. edu/ researchAreas /pdf /GrotonFinalReport.pdf 3. City of Ann Arbor, Michigan: i. Initial pedestrian pole retrofit (in 20070, followed by a 60LED replacement of roadway cobra -head lights ii. 4.4yr payback, 50 -80% less energy. iii. Response from the community has been overwhelmingly position. 81 of 83 positive responses identified improvement in light quality, reduced light trespass (better control). iv. http: / /www.a2dda.org /dda- achievements /led- street - lights/ 4. City of Greensburg, Kansas: i. Rural setting, replace all streetlighting (303 total fixtures) using 60LED and 80LED, completed Feb 2009. ii. Estimating 70% energy and maintenance savings iii. "Residents have all positive things to say about the LED fixtures. Quality of light on the roadways is greatly improved and people really like the sleek look of the fixtures." There is more night sky exposure. iv. http : / /www.ledwaystreetlights.com /benefits - case- studies.htm1 5. City of Anchorage, Alaska: i. Began in 2008 to replace HPS cobra heads. Anticipating 50% energy savings. ii. "We have conducted a conference and public survey that indicated that our residents overwhelmingly approve of the new white LED lighting." iii. http : / /www.ledwaystreetlights.com /benefits- case - studies.html 6. Lija Loop, Portland, OR: i. (DOE Gateway project) 100W HPS replaced with LED. Reduced horizontal photopic illuminance by 53% - this resulted in good payback and energy savings of 55 %. 30' poles, 125' - 150' spacing. Cobra heads. 40% less light with the LED than the HPS. ii. Anticipating 20yr payback for retrofit, 7.6 yr payback for new installations. iii. 36% response to survey, 90% of respondents to survey (residents) either recognized an improvement in quality of light or no difference - improved visibility and coverage. Negative responses identified issues with brightness and glare, source appeared too blue. iv. http: / /wwwl.eere.energy.gov/ buildings /ssl /gatewaydemos - results.html 7. City of San Fransisco, California: i. (DOE gateway project) Residential sunset District, replaced 100W HPS on 24' -34' poles with LED, 50% -70% energy savings over HPS (studied 4 different LED heads), 150'-200' spacing, 40% decrease in photopic illuminance. ii. Simple payback new installation 3.7 - 6.3 years iii. More uniform light - 30% better uniformity, and 30% less overall light. Lots of no opinion /do not know/ no change opinions which the district has interpolated as LED is an equal replacement to HPS. Good quantitative light performance resulted in positive customer perception of lighting performance. iv. http: / /wwwl.eere. energy. gov / buildings /ssl /gatewaydemos - results.html 8. City of Minneapolis, Minn, 1 -35 Bridge: Frontage Road Lighting Master Plan i. (DOE gateway project) Most comprehensive study of HPS and LED to date. Read reports available on website for further details. ii. http: / /wwwl.eere. energy. gov / buildings /ssl /gatewaydemos_results.html Frontage Road Lighting Master Plan PART 7: Appendix B 7. Manufacturer's Technical Specification Sheets Included in this Appendix are the most current Technical Specifications as of the date of Master Plan approval for each product specified as part of the Frontage Roads Lighting Master Plan. Prior to implementation, all Technical Specifications will be verified with Manufacturer and newer editions of the Specification submitted to Town of Vail, identifying updates and modifications, for review. There will be no substitutions for specified products, or any options and components included in the Technical Specification for the product. Material suppliers, where listed, are single source unless otherwise approved by Town of Vail. Frontage Road Lighting Master Plan Type P1 Notes: Banner Arms, Duplex Receptacle, and Irrigation Page 1 of 1 Provisions are options to review with TOV Supplier: U.S. Long Life USL440 DECORATIVE HEXAGON LANTERN FABRICATED FROM'HEAVY' GAUGE ALUMINUM SHEET METAL -(PLEASE SEE DETAIL DWG.) DR P U NE ACCESS DOOR (2 REQ. LOCATED 180') I II �I I IL All RUBBER GROMMET UPLEX "GFI" RECEPTACLE III III (2 REO.) I II II I I II II I A D� SEE DETAIL AO — DECORATIVE STEEL DUALARM ASSEMBLY HANGING PLANTER HOLDER SECURED WITH SIB EYE BOLT l / l l r -- � 011 013 1M" BASE PLATE 4 "0 X .125 STEEL TUBE �USL CS91 -CLAM SHELL BASE COVER CAST ALUMINUM _ - 3l4" BOLT X07 VG'_ DOOR revision #2 base cover date: 02104/2010 revision #1 pole ht. to 12' -0" date: 01/2612010 1 "ULLISTED Lon life Inc PROJECT# Town of Vail Colorado U Long 2021 Bridgetown Pike, PART# USL440 - 100HPS I USLCS91 (MODIFIED) E. Feasterville, PA 19053 — .. __ —: __ - ___ E .., - . 45'� ACCESS HDLE MOUNTING DETAIL MOUNTING SLOT FOR 314"0 ANCHOR BOLT 15 114 "0 X 5"H CAST ALUM. WITH NOMINAL RANGE 2 PC. BASE COVER 7 i!2" THRU 11 1!2" DIAMETER STEEL BASE PLATE BOLT CIRCLE (4 EQ. SPACED) GROUND LINE 3W"0 X 17 "L X 3 "LEG GALVAN RED STEEL ANCHOR BOLT - (4 REQUIRED) revision #2 base cover date: 02104/2010 revision #1 pole ht. to 12' -0" date: 01/2612010 1 "ULLISTED Lon life Inc PROJECT# Town of Vail Colorado U Long 2021 Bridgetown Pike, PART# USL440 - 100HPS I USLCS91 (MODIFIED) E. Feasterville, PA 19053 — .. __ —: __ - ___ E .., - . Frontage Road Lighting Master Plan Type P2 Notes: Page 1 of 2 Supplier: ANY Contact: N/A BetaLED Catalog #: STR - LVW - 4M - HT - 06 - C - LIL - BK - 43K - 350 - SC scat _�� Dgh[Engma Housing 3, puts Leone, (Tool Is. Eftry)) Cwar 22 0" [55gmmI 0 o u Notes: [ zsgmm ] 1. Mounted on a 3' -0" MastArm (by US Long Life) 2. Multi-tap Driver (wired for 350ndA initially) 3. Blackfinish 4.4300KCo for Temp 1 121 4.r In I 5. DoorSafety Tether 6. No Backlig ht Control Product Family Optic Mounting # of LEDs LED Voltage Color Facto rlInstalled Options (X10) Series Options Please type additional options in manuall on th line provided above_ STR LWY 15 4M' HT' 004 C [3 UL 0 Stilt 0350 350mA Drive Current' In 4MB 005 Universal Silveri ®43K 4300K Color Tom pal rep 006 120 -277V p BK [3 700 700rf Drive Current? 13UH Black ❑DIM 0-10V Dimmingas Universal 0 BZ ❑ F Fuse 347 -480V Bronze° ❑ HL Hi /Low 175/350/525, dual circuit input)' -1 a 0 PB ❑ N No Quick Disconnect Harness or Leveling Buhh1e Platinum ❑ PD Power Door"" Bronze' ❑ R NEMA Photocell Receptoo le ❑WH ❑ SC Door Safety Tether White Click here for Utility option For additional options, see IP66 spec sheet_ Footnotes 1.. IESNA Type iV Medium distribution 7. Driver operates at700mA instead of the standard 525mA 14. Standard product features unless N option is specified, scorches I IESNA Type 111 Medium distribution with backlight control providing a higherlumen output and a shorterlife not included 3_ Horizontal tenon mount 8. Control byothers la All connections between door and fixture are shipped unconnected 4. Light engine portion of extrusion is not painted and Will remain 9. Please consult factory forevailabdity from the factory, door release spring Included to open door natural aluminum regardless of color selection 10. Not available with G option when V voltage Is selected aumnratioallp Minn the laafles ate released 5. Driver operates at 350mA instead of the standard 525mAproviding 11. Not available when Avoltage is selected 16. Hinge retaining clips not Included as part of this option a l over lumen output and a lorwerllfe 12. Referno multi level spec sheet for more Information 17. Stainless steel aircraft cable 6. Color temperature par fixture minimum TO GRI 13. Sensor not included W 2010 BetaLED°, a division of Ruud Lighting • 1200 92nd Street • Sturtevant, WI 53177 • 800 - 236 -6800 • www.LEDwayStreetli(lhts.com . f� Made in the U.S.A. of U.S. and imported parts. X1 Meets Buy American requirements within theAlut I_EC -' LED PERFORMANCE SPECS ' r r:.iii'r ii r, III EIII ' 000 •�ii��� . 350el Fixture Operating 25° C F) �vvvI®vvuvv� at (77° ®vu�� ® ® ® ® ®® ® 000000 ®000000 ® ® ® ® ®® ® ® ©00 ®000 ®000 525mA (Standard) ®000 Fixture Operating 25 C (77 ® F) ® ® ® ® ®® at 700mA Fixture Operating at 25° C (77° F) W 2010 BetaLED°, a division of Ruud Lighting • 1200 92nd Street • Sturtevant, WI 53177 • 800 - 236 -6800 • www.LEDwayStreetli(lhts.com . f� Made in the U.S.A. of U.S. and imported parts. X1 Meets Buy American requirements within theAlut I_EC -' Frontage Road Lighting Master Plan Type P2 Notes: Page 2of2 Supplier: ANY Contact: N/A General Description Fixture housing is all aluminum construction Standard fixture utilizes terminal block for power input suitable for #2414 AWG wire and operates at 525mA. Drive current is field switchable on 40, 50 and 60 LED units (50 & 60 LED units require two drivers). Fixture is designed to mount on 1 25" IP (1 675" 0_D_) and /or 2" IP (2375° OD_) horizontal tenon and is adjustable +1- 5 to allow for fixture leveling (includes leveling bubble to aid in this process)_ Fixture carries limited five yearwarranty. Electrical Modular design accom mediates varied lighting output from high power, white, 6000K ( +/- 500K per In 11 fixture), minimum 70 CRI, long life LED sources, 120 -277V 50/60 Hz, Class 1 LED drivers are standard. 347 -480V 50160 Hz option is available.. LED drivers have power fa ot >90 %and THD <20% at full load_ Units provided with integral 9kV surge suppression protection star red arit Qmck disconnect harness suitable for mate and break under load provided on power feed to driver for ease of maintenance_ Surge protection tested in accordance with IEEE C62.41.2 and ANSI standard 62412 Finish Exclusive Colorfast DeltaGuard° finish features an E -Coat epoxy primer with an ultra - durable silver powd or topcoat, providing excel lent resistance to corrosion, ultraviolet degradation and abrasion. Bronze, black, white and platinum bronze powder topcoats are also available_ The finish is covered by our 10 year limited warranty_ Fixture and finish are endurance tested to withstand 5,000 hours of elevated ambient salt fog conditions as defined in ASTM Standard B 117. Testing & Compliance UL listed i n the U_S_ and Canada for wet locations. Consult factory for CE Certified products_ RoHS compliant_ Meets CALTrans 611 Vibral on Testing and GR -63 -CORE Section 4.41 /54.2 Earthquake Zone 4. International Dark Sky Association approved. Patents H _ and international patents granted and pending. BetaLED is a division of Ruud Lighting, Inc. For a listing of Ruud Lighting, Inc_ patents, visit www.r to. gore Bird Spikes for Light Engine Bird Spikes Kit for Housing [3 XA- BRDSPK60 OXA -BRDSP KHSG Photometrics uanorepewer irate: ve-an plane undergo ho ozonial angl s o f maximum can at spower. Independent Testing Laboratories certified test Report No ITL63175. Candlepowertmde of 6000K, 40 LED Type IV Medium streetlight lording re with 5,026 initial dalmred lumens operaling at 525mA. All published luminaire photometric testing performed to IESNA LM -79 -08 standards. 150:' 50 150, 44 120' / 120' 29� / 90 90° 60° 60° Candlep,,,, ace: Ve nical plane through 30 °���((( herhontal anle 4f maximum candlepower PRELIMINARY Candlepower trace of Type IV Medium LED luminaire with backlight control. ■■MNO ■1■ ■I�I� ■ ■i,7i■ ■I�I�I::�r:�l�l■ ■ /11 \TT�I �1r`J 244 183 122 61 am 61 122 183 244 LEDway" EPA & Weight Calculations or © 2010 Betal a division of Ruud Lighting • 1200 92nd Street • Sturtevant, WI 53177 • 800 - 236 - 6800 • www.LEDwayStreetlights.com v 1 Made in the. U. SA_ of U_.S_ and imported parts. I E� Meets guy American requirements within IheARRA. Isofootcandle plot of 6000 K, 60 LED Type 1V Medium streetlight luminaire at 25' A F.G. Lum'maire with 6,017 initial delivered lumens operating at 525mA- Initial FC.at grade. Approximate Weight 120 1 40-60 LLD fixture 16.01bs. EPA Horizontal Tenon 1 fixture Mount 0 685 EPA Round External Mount Horizontal Tenons PT /PD -111 / Square Internal with Fixture(s) Single Mount 0905 PT /PD- 21](90) 90' Twin 1.189 PT/PD- 21](180) 180' Twin 1590 PT/PD- 31](90) 90' Triple 1 774 PT /PD- 31](120) 120' Triple 1.590 PT /PD- 41](90) 90' Quad 2.178 "Add 51 as to r translermer in 347 -480V fixtures or © 2010 Betal a division of Ruud Lighting • 1200 92nd Street • Sturtevant, WI 53177 • 800 - 236 - 6800 • www.LEDwayStreetlights.com v 1 Made in the. U. SA_ of U_.S_ and imported parts. I E� Meets guy American requirements within IheARRA. Isofootcandle plot of 6000 K, 60 LED Type 1V Medium streetlight luminaire at 25' A F.G. Lum'maire with 6,017 initial delivered lumens operating at 525mA- Initial FC.at grade. Frontage Road Lighting Master Plan Type P3 Notes: Page 1 of 2 Supplier: ANY Contact: N/A BetaLED Catalog #: STR - LWY - 3MB - HT - 06 - C - LIL - BK - 43K - 350 - SC F Light Englite Housing By Others Leone, (iool Is. ER Cwer 22 0" [ 55gmm ] 0 u r Notes: [ zsgmm ] 1. Mounted on a 2' -0" Masul (by US Long Life) 2. Multi-tap driver (wired for 35OmA initially) 3. Blackfinish 4.r 4.4300KCo for Temp 1 121 mm I 5, Door Safety Tether 6. With Backlight Control Product Family Optic Mounting # of LEDs LED Voltage Color Facto rlInstalled Options ( x:10 ) Series Options Please type additional options in manuall on th line pmvidad above_ STR LWY 0 3M' HT' 004 C [3 ILL 0 SV 0350 350mA Drive Current' El 3MEl' 005 Universal Silver° ®43K 4300K Color Tom potato reo 006 120 -277V D BK [3 700 700mA Drive Current' 13UH B1ack ❑BIM 0-10V Dimmingas Universal 0 BZ ❑ F Fri 347 -480V Bronze° ❑ HL Hi /Low (175/350/525, dual circuit input)' *'a 0 PB ❑ N No Quick Disconnect Harness or Leveling Buhh1e Platinum ❑ PD Power Door"" Bronze' ❑ R NEMA Photocell Receptacle ❑WH ❑ SC Door Safety Tether" White Click here for Utility option For additional options, see IP66 spec sheet_ Footnotes I . ESNA Type 111 Medium distribution 7- Dryer ope rates at 700MA instead of the standard 525mA 14. Standard product features unless N option is specified, door clues 2. IESNA Type 111 M1 did m di stributlon with baold lgh t cont rol providing a higherlumen outpuland a shorterlife not included 3. Hohzontal tenon mount 8. Control by others 15. All connections between door and fixture are shipped unconnected 4. Light engine portion of extrusion is not painted and will remain @. Please consr k factory foravailability from the factory, door release spring included to open door nat irnd aluminum rea rdless of color ae.le:clum 10 Not mrallul lewith HI notion when HHvolage. is selected automatically when the latches are released 5. Dnver operates at 850dnA instead of the standard 525mA providing 11, Not available when UH voltage is selected 15. Hinge retaining clips not included as part of this option a l owerlumen output and a longerllfe 12. Referno multi level spec sheet per more information 17. Stainless steel aircraft cable 6. Color temperature per fixture minimum 70 CHI 18. Sensor not included 2010 BetaLED °, a division of Ruud Lighting • 1200 92nd Street • Sturtevant, WI 53177 • 800 - 236 -6800 • www.LEDwauStreetlights.com u Made in the U.S.A. of U.S. and imported parts. Meets Buy American requirements within theAful I EEI LED PERFORMANCE SPECS 350ml Fixture Operating at 25"C (77° F) 5251 (Standard) Fixture Operating at 25° C (77° F) 700mA Fixture Operating 25° C F) at (77° 2010 BetaLED °, a division of Ruud Lighting • 1200 92nd Street • Sturtevant, WI 53177 • 800 - 236 -6800 • www.LEDwauStreetlights.com u Made in the U.S.A. of U.S. and imported parts. Meets Buy American requirements within theAful I EEI Frontage Road Lighting Master Plan Type P3 Notes: Page 2of2 Supplier: ANY General Description Fixture housing is all aluminum construction. Standard fixture utilizes terminal block for power input suitable for #2-#14 AWG wire and operates at 525mA- Drive current is field switchable on 40, 50 and 60 LED units (50 & 60 LED units require two drivers). Fixture is designed to mount on 1.25" IP (1.675' O.D.) and/or 2' IP (2.375" O.D.) horizontal tenon and is adjustable of 5° to allow for fixture leveling (includes leveling bubble to aid in this process). Fixture carries limited five year warranty. Electrical Modular design accommodates varied lighting output from high power, white, 6000K ( +/- 500K per full fixture), minimum 70 CRI, long life LED sources- 120 -277V 50/60 Hz, Class 1 LED drivers are standard. 347 -480V 50 Hz option is available. LED drivers have power factor >90% and THD <20% at full load_ Units provided with integral 91kV surge suppression protection standard_ quick disconnect harness suitable for mate and break under load provided on power feed to driver for ease of maintenance. Surge protection Tested in accordance with IEEE C62 41.2 and ANSI standard 62 41.2. Finish Exclusive Colorfast Delta(arl^ finish features an E -Coat epoxy primer with an ultra - durable silver powder topcoat, providing excellentresistanceto corrosion, ultraviolet degradation and abrasion- Bronze, black, white and platinum bronze powder topcoats are also available. The finish is covered by our 10 year limited warranty_ Fixture and finishare endurancetested towithetand 5,000 hours of elevated ambient salt fog conditions as defined in ASTM Standard B 117. Testing & Compliance UL listed in the U.S. and Canada for wet locations_ Consult factory for CE Certified products. RoHS compliant Meets CALTrans 611 Vibration Testing and GR -63 -CORE Section 4.4.1 15 4.2 Earthquake Zone 4. International Dark Sky Association approved. Patents U _ and inlwoolearal patents granted and pending. BeWLED is a division of Ruud Lighting, Inc. For a listing of Ruud Lighting, Inc- patents, visit www. uspto.gov. Bird Spikes for Light Engine Bird Spikes Kit for Housing ❑XA- BRDSPK60 ❑XA- BRDSPKHSG Photometrics horizontal angle of maximum Independent Testing Laboratories certified test. Report No ITL63266- Candlepowertrace of 6000K, 40 LED Type III Medium streetlight luminaire with 4,696 initial delivered lumens operating at 525mA. All published luminaire photometric testing performed to IESNA LM -79 -pe standards. J' 244 183 122 b.1 NONE I J unrent operating at 525mA Initial FG at grade honzontal anoleof maximum Candlepower trace of Type III Medium LED luminairs with backlight control. It ■'' /.��l� ■Ill lil��!��.J111J tttl�I \�III� LEDway" EPA & Weight Calculations 244 lf33 122 6.1 On, 61 122 123 244 PRELIMINABY NININ010 © 2010 Befal-EP, a division of Ruud Lighting • 1200 92nd Street • Sturtevant, WI 53177 • 800 - 236 -6800 • www.LEDwayStreetlights.com �1 Made in the U.S.A. of U.S. and imported parts. �E� Meets Bay American requirements wdhiu iheARPA. Approximate Weight 1201 40 -60 LED fixture 16.0 Ids. EPA Horizontal Tenon Mount 1 fixture 0685 EPA Round External Mount Horizontal Tenons PT /PD -1H t Square Internal Mount with Fixtures) Single 0905 PT/PD- 2H(90) 91 1189 PT/PD- 2H(180) 180' Twin 1590 PT/PD-3H(90) 90 Triple 1.774 PT /PD- 31p](120) 120 °Triple 1.590 PT/PD- 4H(90) 90' Quad 2178 "Add it lbs. for transforme r in 347 -480V fixtures 244 lf33 122 6.1 On, 61 122 123 244 PRELIMINABY NININ010 © 2010 Befal-EP, a division of Ruud Lighting • 1200 92nd Street • Sturtevant, WI 53177 • 800 - 236 -6800 • www.LEDwayStreetlights.com �1 Made in the U.S.A. of U.S. and imported parts. �E� Meets Bay American requirements wdhiu iheARPA. Frontage Road Lighting Master Plan Type P4 Notes: Page 1 of 2 Supplier: ANY Contact: N/A BetaLED Catalog #: STR - LWY - 3MB - HT - 06 - C - LIL - BK - 43K - 350 - SC F Light Englite Housing By Others Lathes (iool Is. ER Cwer 22 0" [ 55gmm ] 0 u r Notes: [ zsgmm ] 1. Mounted on a 3' -0" MastArm (by US Long Life) 2. Multi-tap Driver (wired for 350nnA initially) 3. Black finish 4.r 4.4300KCo for Temp 1 121 mm I 5, Door Safety Tether 6. NO Backlight Control Product Family Optic Mounting # of LEDs LED Voltage Color Facto rlInstalled Options ( x:10 ) Series Options Please type additional options in manuall on th line pmvidad above_ STR LWY 0 3M' HT' 004 C [3 ILL 0 SV 0350 350mA Drive Current' El 3MEl 005 Universal Silver° ®43K 4300K Color Tom potato reo 006 120 -277V D BK [3 700 700mA Drive Current' 13UH Black ❑BIM 0-10V Dimmingas Universal 0 BZ ❑ F Fuse 347 -480V Bronze° ❑ HL Hi /Low (175/350/525, dual circuit input)' *'a 0 PB ❑ N No Quick Disconnect Harness or Leveling Bubblo Platinum ❑ PD Power Door"" Bronze' ❑ R NEMA Photocell Receptacle ❑WH ❑ SC Door Safety Tether" White Click here for Utility option For additional options, see IP66 spec sheet_ Footnotes I . ESNA Type 111 Medium distribution 7- Dryer ope rates at 700MA instead of the standard 525mA 14. Standard product features unless N option is specified, door clues 2. IESNA Type 111 M1 did m di stribdtlon with baold lgh t cont rol providing a higherlumen outpuland a shorterlife not included 3. Hohzontal tenon mount 8. Control by others 15. All connections between door and fixture are shipped unconnected 4. Light engine portion of extrusion is not painted and will remain @. Please consull factory foravailability from the factory, door release spring included to open door nat irnd aluminum rea rdless of color ae.le:clum 10 Not mrallul lewith HI notion when HHvoltae. is selected automatically when the latches are released 5. Dnver operates at 850dnA instead of the standard 525mA providing 11, Not available when UH voltage is selected 15. Hinge retaining clips not included as part of this option a l owerlumen output and a longerllfe 12. Referno multi level spec sheet per more information 17. Stainless steel aircraft cable 6. Color temperature per fixture minimum 70 CHI 18. Sensor not included 2010 BetaLED °, a division of Ruud Lighting • 1200 92nd Street • Sturtevant, WI 53177 • 800 - 236 -6800 • www.LEDwauStreetlights.com u Made in the U.S.A. of U.S. and imported parts. Meets Buy American requirements within W ARRA. I EEI LED PERFORMANCE SPECS ��� r I ii r'tr. III 1 .•tit' ® ® ®® •itr 350ml Fixture Operating at 25"C (77 F) 525mA (Standard) Fixture Operating at 25 C (77 F) 700mA Fixture Operating 25° C F) at (77° 2010 BetaLED °, a division of Ruud Lighting • 1200 92nd Street • Sturtevant, WI 53177 • 800 - 236 -6800 • www.LEDwauStreetlights.com u Made in the U.S.A. of U.S. and imported parts. Meets Buy American requirements within W ARRA. I EEI Frontage Road Lighting Master Plan Type P4 Supplier: ANY Contact: N/A General Description Fixture housing is all aluminum construction - Standard fixture utilizes terminal block for power input suitable for #2-#14 AWG wire and operates at 525mA_ Drive current is field switchable on 40, 50 and 60 LED units (50 & 60 LED units require two drivers). Fixture is designed to mount on 125'' IP T 675' 0 D -) and /or 2" IP (2375° 0 D -) horizontal tenon and is adjustable +/- 5 to allow for fixture leveling (includes leveling bubble to aid in this process)_ Fixture carries a limited five year warranty_ Electrical Modular design accommodates varied lighting output from high power, White, 600 OK ( +/- 500K per full fixture), minimum 70 CRI, long rife LED sources, 120-277V 50/60 Hz, Class 1 LED drivers are standard. 347 -480V 50/60 HE option is available- LED drivers have power factor >9D %and TIED <20% at full load_ Units provided with integral 9kV surge suppression protection standard. Quick disconnect harness suitable for mate and break under load provided on power feed to driver for ease of maintenance. Surge protection tested in accordance with IEEE C62.412 and ANSI standard 62412_ Field- Installed Accessories El Bird Spikes for Light Engine Bird Spikes Kit for Housing O E XA- BRDSPK60 pXA- BRDSPKHSG Photometrics honzorLd angle of maximum ■ 0 010 LJFA /0■ m . Notes: Finish Exclusive Colorfast DeltaGrl finish features an E -Goat epoxy primer with an ultra - durable silver powder topcoat, providing excellent resistance to corrosion, ultraviolet degradation and abrasion. Bronze, black, white and platinum bronze powder topcoats are also available. The finish is covered by our 10 year limited warranty_ Fixture and finish are endurance tested to withstand 5,000 hours of elevated ambient salt fog conditions as defined in ASTM Standard B 117 Testing & Compliance UL listed in the U . and Canada for wet locations. Consult factory for CE Certified products. RoHS compliant_ Meets CALTrans 611 Vibration Testing and GR -63 -CORE Section 4.4.1 15 4.2 Earthquake Zone 4. International Dark -Sky Association approved. Patents U_S_ and international patents granted and pending. Beta LED is adivision of Ruud Lighting, Inc_ Fora listing of Ruud Lighting, Inc_ patents, visit www- uspto -gov- of maxmum PRELIMINARY fiend lepowe r trace of Tpp e III Medium LED uminai re with backlight control. l ONRISE �W :Wy-il. tttt�� \�t� 24� f82 122 6.1 en 61 122 183 2a4 PRELIMINARY 5 1 2 3 initial delivered lumans operating at 525nnA Initial FG at g race LEDway" EPA & Weight Calculations . © 2010 BetaLEO°, a division of Ruud Lighting • 1200 92nd Street • Sturtevant, WI 53177 • 800- 236 -6800 • www.LEDwayStreetlights.com �t Made in the U.S.A. of U.S. and imported parts. I—EF�r Meets Buy American requirements within theARRA. Independent Testing Laboratories certified test. Report No ITL63266- Candlepowe r trace of 6000 K, 40 LED Type III Medium streetlight l umina a with 4.606 initial delivered lumens operating at 525nnA -All published luminaire photometric testing performed to IESNA LM -79 -0e standards. Approximate Weight 1201 40-60 LED future 16.01bs. EPA Horizontal Tenon 1 fixture Mount 0 685 EPA Round External Mount Horizontal Tenons PT /PD -1H / Square Internal Mound with Fixtures) Single 0905 PT/PD- 2H(90) 90 Twin 1189 PT /PD- 2111(180) 180' Twin 1.590 PT/PD- 3H(90) 90' Triple 1774 PT/PD- 3111(120) 120' Triple 1.590 PT/PD -cli 90' Quad 2178 ILd d 51 be to r tranefo rme r in 647 -400V fixtures. . © 2010 BetaLEO°, a division of Ruud Lighting • 1200 92nd Street • Sturtevant, WI 53177 • 800- 236 -6800 • www.LEDwayStreetlights.com �t Made in the U.S.A. of U.S. and imported parts. I—EF�r Meets Buy American requirements within theARRA. Independent Testing Laboratories certified test. Report No ITL63266- Candlepowe r trace of 6000 K, 40 LED Type III Medium streetlight l umina a with 4.606 initial delivered lumens operating at 525nnA -All published luminaire photometric testing performed to IESNA LM -79 -0e standards. Frontage Road Lighting Master Plan Type P5 Notes: Page 1 of 2 Supplier: ANY Contact: N/A BetaLED Catalog #: STR - LWY - 3MB - HT - 06 - C - LIL - BK - 43K - 350 - SC F Light Englite Housing By Others Lathes (iool Is. ER Cwer 22 0" [ 55gmm ] 0 u r Notes: [ zsgmm ] 1. Mounted on a 3' -0" MastArm (by US Long Life) 2. Multi-tap Driver (wired for 350nnA initially) 3. Black finish 4.r 4.4300KCo for Temp 1 121 mm I 5, Door Safety Tether 6. With Backlight Control Product Family Optic Mounting # of LEDs LED Voltage Color Facto rlInstalled Options ( x:10 ) Series Options Please type additional options in manuall on th line pmvidad above_ STR LWY 0 3M' HT' 004 C [3 ILL 0 SV 0350 350mA Drive Current' El 3MEl 005 Universal Silver° ®43K 4300K Color Tom potato reo 006 120 -277V D BK [3 700 700mA Drive Current' 13UH Black ❑BIM 0-10V Dimmingas Universal 0 BZ ❑ F Fuse 347 -480V Bronze° ❑ HL Hi /Low (175/350/525, dual circuit input)' *'a 0 PB ❑ N No Quick Disconnect Harness or Leveling Bubb1e Platinum ❑ PD Power Door"" Bronze' ❑ R NEMA Photocell Receptacle ❑WH ❑ SC Door Safety Tether" White Click here for Utility option For additional options, see IP66 spec sheet_ Footnotes I . ESNA Type 111 Medium distribution 7- Dryer ope rates at 700MA instead of the standard 525mA 14. Standard product features unless N option is specified, door clues 2. IESNA Type 111 M1 did m di stribdtlon with baold lgh t cont rol providing a higherlumen outpuland a shorterlife not included 3. Hohzontal tenon mount 8. Control by others 15. All connections between door and fixture are shipped unconnected 4. Light engine portion of extrusion is not painted and will remain @. Please consull factory foravailability from the factory, door release spring included to open door nat irnd aluminum rea rdless of color ae.le:clum 10 Not mrallul lewith HI notion when HHvoltae. is selected automatically when the latches are released 5. Dnver operates at 850dnA instead of the standard 525mA providing 11, Not available when UH voltage is selected 15. Hinge retaining clips not included as part of this option a l owerlumen output and a longerllfe 12. Referno multi level spec sheet per more information 17. Stainless steel aircraft cable 6. Color temperature per fixture minimum 70 CHI 18. Sensor not included 2010 BetaLED °, a division of Ruud Lighting • 1200 92nd Street • Sturtevant, WI 53177 • 800 - 236 -6800 • www.LEDwauStreetlights.com u Made in the U.S.A. of U.S. and imported parts. Meets Buy American requirements within W ARRA. I EEI LED PERFORMANCE SPECS ��� r I ii r'tr. III 1 .•tit' ® ® ®® •itr 350ml Fixture Operating at 25"C (77 F) 525mA (Standard) Fixture Operating at 25 C (77 F) 700mA Fixture Operating 25° C F) at (77° 2010 BetaLED °, a division of Ruud Lighting • 1200 92nd Street • Sturtevant, WI 53177 • 800 - 236 -6800 • www.LEDwauStreetlights.com u Made in the U.S.A. of U.S. and imported parts. Meets Buy American requirements within W ARRA. I EEI Frontage Road Lighting Master Plan Type P5 Notes: Page 2 of 2 Supplier: ANY Contact: N/A General Description Fixture housing is all aluminum construction. Standard fixture utilizes term final block for power input suitable for #2414 AWG wire and operates at 525mA_ Drive current is field switchable on 40, 50 and 60 LLD units (50 & 60 LED units require two drivers). Fixture is designed to mount on 1 25" IP (1675" 0_D_) and /or 2" Ito (2375'0 D_) horizontal tenon and is adjustable +/- 5 to allow for fixture leveling (includes leveling bubble to aid in this process). Fixture carries a limited five year warranty. Electrical Modular design accommodates varied lighting output from high power, white, 6000K ( +/- 500K per full fixture), minimum 70 CRI, long life LED sources_ 120 -277V 50160 Ftr, Class 1 LED drivers are standard. 347 50/60 Hz option is available_ LED drivers have power factor >90-1. and THD p20% at full load. Units . provided with integral 9kV surge suppression protection standard_ Ounck disconnect harness suitable for mate and break under load provided on power feed to driver for ease of maintenance. Surge protection tested in accordance with IEEE C62 41.2 and ANSI standard 62 412. Finish Exclusive Colorfast DeltaGuardw finish features an E -Coat epoxy primer with an ultra - durable silver powder topcoat, providing excellent resistance to corrosion, ultraviolet degradation and abrasion. Bronze, black, white and platinum bronze powder topcoats are also available. The finish is covered by our 10 year limited warranty. Fixture and finish are endurance tested to withstand 5,000 hours of elevated ambient It fog conditions as defined in ASTM Standard B 117. Testing & Compliance UL listed in the U.S_ and Canada for wet locations- Consult factory for CE Certified products. RoHS compliant_ Meets CALTrans 611 Vibration Testing and GR -63 -CORE Section 4.4.1 /5.4.2 Earthquake Zone 4_ International Dark -Sky Association approved. Patents U S. and international patents granted and pending- BetaLED is adivision of Ruud Lighting, Inc_ For a listing of Ruud Lighting, Inc patents, visit www_uspto_gov_ Bird Spikes for Light Engine Bird Spikes Kit for Housing XA- BRDSPK60 ❑XA- BRDSPKHSG Photometrics N Independent Loop ng Laboratories mrtidi ad test. Report No. ITL63266. Candlepower trace of 6000 K. 40 LED Type III Medium streetlight Iuminaire with 4,696 initial delivered lumens operating at 52594. All published luminaire photometric testing performed to IESNA LM -79 -08 standards. ■� ■lII ■11 ► \� \l■ E of hux rnum PRELIMINARY Candlepowertrace of Type III Medium LEO luminaire w backlight control. 244 183 122 6.1 him 61 122 183 244 PRELIMINARY Iml with packlight control at 25'A F G met with 5 1 2 p initial delivered lumens operating at 525mA Initial FC at g race LEDway'" EPA & Weight Calculations n minai re at 25 A F G Luminaire with 6,83L initial delivered opens operating at 525arA Initial FC at grade 244 183 122 6.1 him 61 122 183 244 PRELIMINARY Iml with packlight control at 25'A F G met with 5 1 2 p initial delivered lumens operating at 525mA Initial FC at g race © 2010 BetaLEF, a division of Ruud Lighting • 1200 g2nd Street • Sturtevant, WI 53177 • 800 -236 -6800 • www.LEDwayStreetlights.com �t Made in the U.S.A. or U.S. and imported parts. LEA Meets Buy American roquiremenIs within the ARRA. Approximate Weight 126-277V' 40 -60 LED fixture 16.01 b . EPA Horizontal Tenon Mount 1 fixture 0685 EPA Round External Mount Horizontal Tenons PT/PD -1H / Square with Fixtures) Single Internal Mount 0.905 PT /PD- 2H(90) 90' Twin 1.189 PT /PD- 2H(180) 180' Twin 1590 PT/PD- 31-1(90) 90' Triple 1_774 PT /PD- 3H(120) 12(1 Triple 1.590 PT/PD- 4H(90) 90' Quad 2178 'Add 5lbs. for transformer in 347 -480V fixtures. © 2010 BetaLEF, a division of Ruud Lighting • 1200 g2nd Street • Sturtevant, WI 53177 • 800 -236 -6800 • www.LEDwayStreetlights.com �t Made in the U.S.A. or U.S. and imported parts. LEA Meets Buy American roquiremenIs within the ARRA. Frontage Road Lighting Master Plan Type P2, P3, P4, P5 Pole and Mast Arm Notes: Refer to P2, P3, P4, and P5 technical specs for length of Page 1 of 1 mast arm Supplier: U.S. LongLife 151 )ECORATIVE ACORN FINIAL RTMR] q &10.7 W"M L SHAFT 112' /0"'", BASE PLATE )� 314" DOLT y0712' iHELL CAST IRON BASE DOOR 45^ ACCESS HOLE MOUNTINGDETAIL MOUNTINGSLOT-1 FOR 314'0 ANCHOR BOLT WITH NOMINAL RANGE 7 12' THRU 11 U2' DIAMETER BOLT CI RCLE (4 EO. SPACED) REEL BASE PLATE ED) LINE "L X 3 "LEG GALVANIZED STEEL ANCHOR BOLT ZED) U ■ ■ Longlife Inc 2021 Bridgetown Pike, Fea9terville, PA 19053 PROJECT' Town of Vail Colorado PART# USLCS 0099.25'1 FINIAL/ ARM - 24" TO 36" ' "„ N.T.S. "' T.B.D. °"'"''1115710 — X 1 of 1 Frontage Road Lighting Master Plan Type P2, P3, P4, P5 Multi —tap Driver Supplier: N/A Contact: N/A Notes: Technical Specifications Dimensions :..................................... ...........................9.5" x 2.3" x 1.6" — Weight :........................................................... ............................2.8 lbs. u Mounting: ................................................................ 2 tabs on each end Case Material ...................................... Steel Packaging: .............................................................. Silicone potted unit Input Voltage:......... ............................... .......................120 -277V +10 Input Frequency: .............................................................. 50160Ha -5°Io Input Current :.. ...........................1.9A max. at 120V. 0.9A max. at 230V Active Power Factor Correction (Vdc) Operating Temperature:......................... ...........................40 H +80 °C Isolated Output Rated Lifetime ......... ............ ......................................... Hours RoHS................................................................ ............................... Yes Output Power Output Output Current Max- THE Power Factor Efficiency at Line Lead (W) Voltage (W (11 °} at 120Vdc 21fIVdcOutput Regulation Regulation Blue (Vdc) Output ( °!o} ( °lo} 147 105 - 210 0.700 15 >_ 0.92 0.9 ±2 ±2 110 0.525 74 0.350 WIRING INPUT OUTPUT Black Line Bed Positive White Neutral Orange Negative 350mA Yellow Negative 525mA Blue Negative 700mA Protection Input High Voltage Surge ................. ............................... ...........................Yes InputOverload ....................._...._.. ......._....................... ............................Yes Output Short Circuit .............. ... I.................. Self- limited with Auto Recovery Output No -load .. ............................... ........................Output Voltage Limited Overheat.... ............ ................ Output Power is reduced with Auto Recovery LEE ACE ■a.irlei 0e m E333031 02010 BetaLED -800 -236 -6800 - www.betaLED.cam Frontage Road Lighting Master Plan Type P2, P3, P4, P5 Multi -tap Driver Page 2 of 2 Supplier: N/A Notes: This represents the wiring diagram for the multi -tap ballast. Connect Red lead for 350mA, Orange lead for 525mA, d Blue lead for 700mA. Can all unused leads. W I R I N G D I A G R A M S VOLTAGE(S) OPTION(S) i DRIVER LED'S DETAILS DOCUMENT REV DATE 525mA Drive Current U 50 -60 32V 10 LED, 64V 20 LED WIMF- LSL -WD -23 04 01113110 EleLEronic Series Boards A Notes: 1.) Terminal block and lead wires may be used. 2. Lever nuts may be used refer to BOM. M r J m m Yellow 525 8 M —i .•.•.►®i ; Black m J 0 M - ote: NOT used on 50 LED units � L1 G N w! 4 -5 d t Frontage Road Lighting Master Plan Type BA1 Notes: Reference for future installation of banner arm poles by Page 1 of 1 TOV. No BA1 pole locations shown. Supplier: U.S. Long Life Contact: Jack Mason, cupflyers@aol.com 1- 888 - 295 -2677 CAST ALUMINUM DECORATIVE ACORN FINIAL SECURED VIA (3) 1/4 -20 9/3 SET SCREWS STEEL COUPLING ALUMINUM HEXAGON BREAKAWAY BANNER ARM �1 "ALUMINUM PIPE _ REMOVABLE END CAP I I I I ' GRAL SAFETY CABLE I I I I T.B.D. BANNER BANNER I — — — — — — — — 011 17 — — — — 013 1M" BASE PLATE — — — — 314" BOLT 0917 TYP. 4 "0X.188 STEEL J SHAFT 45^ ACCESS HOLE USL CS05 MOUNTING DETAIL MOUNTINGSLOT 151/4 "0 X 5"H CAST ALUM. FOR 3/4"0 ANCHOR BOLT 2 C. BASE COVER WITH NOMINAL RANGE 7 10 THRU 11 112' DIAMETER ! STEEL BASE PLATE (G..Wd) BOLT CIRCLE 5" I (4 EQ. SPACED) GROUND LINE n 3M "0 X 17 'L X S "LEG GALVANIZED STEEL ANCHOR BOLT I L I A (4 REQUIRED) U Longlife Inc PROJECT # Town of Vail Colorado 2021 Bridgetown Pike, PART# UUSLCSI4'IFINU\LIBREAK-WAY BANNER " ■ ■ Feastarville, PA 19053 � ,,, ' N.T.S. "'' T.B.D. ° "' E ''11i5H0 °MEN 1 of 1 Type BL1 Notes: Frontage Road Lighting Master Plan Page 1 of 2 Supplier: ANY Contact: N/A VER. BY DATE DESCRIPTION 11.0" DIA (3) LOOSEN THREE HEXAGON SCREWS TO RE -LAMP FLARED LOUVER REFLECTOR SHADES ,F FABRICATED OF HEAVY GAUGE CAST IRON. INNER SURFACES COVERED BYA CLEAR 10.5" POLYCARBONATE ENCLOSURE WITH WHITE REFLECTIVE SURFACES AND WATERTIGHT SEALS LAMP: 1 135W/BF551HPS (S76) HIGH PRESSURE SODIUM (BY OTHERS) MEDIUM BASE PULSE RATED SOCKET (3) HEAVY GAUGE STAINLESS STEEL CONNECTING STRUTS 45.0" CORE & COIL BALLAST FOR 120V OPERATION ANSI CODE S76 8" DIA. COR -TEN STEEL POLE 12" DIA. CORTEN STEEL BASE PLATE SECURED WITH FOUR 112" DIA. X 15" HOT DIP GALVANIZED STEEL ANCHOR BOLTS FOR EMBEDDING IN 12.0" CONCRETE FOUNDATION AT 90° SPACING ON DIA 10" DIA. BOLT CIRCLE (CONTACT FACTORY FOR FULL SIZE BOLT LOCATION TEMPLATE) NOTE: COR -TEN STEEL CONTAINS COPPER AND CARBON STEEL. AFTER WEATHERING, A THIN, UNIFORM LAYER OF ° RUST APPEARS AND ACTS TO SELF - PROTECT THE SURFACE FROM FURTHER CORROSION THUS ° ELIMINATING THE NEED FOR FUTURE MAINTENANCE. - - THE PROCESS OF OXIDATION CAUSES THE SURFACE TO ° a BLEED. CARE MUST BE TAKEN TO INSTALL THE BYSTED ° FIXTURE IN A DRAINAGE PIT OR IN GRASS TO PREVENT SURFACE STAINING. WEATHERING: HOUSING 2TO3 ° YEARS, AND POST 1 TO 2 YEARS. TARGETTI JOB NAME TOWN OF VAIL POULSEN "A" TITLE: BYS /1135W /HPS(ED -17 medium1120V /COR -TEN MoD. BYS /1 1100W /MH/ED -17 medium/ oUOTENO.: FROM: 5YP02001385 NOTES: DRAWN By0/277 INCHES DA APPROVED Br: 1. FINISH: COR -TEN "�• ",�� _ I MATERIAL: VERSION: 11 -09-06 VERSION: 2. VOLTAGE: 120Vw „ ® „” AS NOTED 00 ci SCALE: SHEET: DWG. NO.: °° NTS 1 OF 1 j 131-12581-000 Frontage Road Lighting Master Plan PART 8: Appendix c A. Life Cycle Cost Analysis for five lamp sources studied follows on page 44, and is based on a sample layout for each luminaire /lamp source, from the Village roundabout to the Village parking garage. Target average illuminance and uniformity ratios are based on IESNA RP -8 -00, adjusted for rural conditions in Town of Vail. 1 . Although the anticipated lamp life for the LED 350mA source would indicate 0 lamp burnouts annually, we have included a single lamp burnout as a "worst case" factor. Real life conditions are likely to result in improved maintenance costs for the LED 350mA source resulting from fewer lamp burnouts. B. Life Cycle Cost Analysis for total LED 350mA roadway lighting system follows on page 45. This is an anaylsis of the legitimate roadway lighting system only, and does not include decorative lighting systems including the Village standard pedestrian lantern, the bike pathway bollard, and the non - illuminated banner arm pole. 1 . Although the anticipated lamp life for the LED 350mA source would indicate 0 lamp burnouts annually, we have included a single lamp burnout every 4 years (.25 avg burnout annually) as a "worst case" factor. Real life conditions are likely to result in improved maintenance costs for the LED 350mA source resulting from fewer lamp burnouts. C. Details 1 . Figure 8.1 illustrates pole setback relative to roadway edge. This is an approximate setback and must be verified with actual field conditions including underground utility placement 2. Figure 8.2 illustrates suggestion for placement of landscape material, particularly trees with mature height of crown at 20' -0" or less. 2 -LANE ROADWAY SHOWN, TYPICAL POLE PLACEMENT FOR 4 —LANE AND 5 —LANE ROADWAY. C -0" 6 ' -0 " SHOULDER/ 12' -0 LANE 12' -0 LANE SHOULDER/ BIKE BIKE u u u u CENTERLINE OF POLE AT ` 18" FROM EDGE OF SHOULDER, CURB, BIKE LANE, OR WALK. POLE PLACEMENT RELATIVE TO ROADWAY NO SCALE Figure 8.1 Frontage Road Lighting Master Plan MINIMUM 40' -0" MINIMUM 40' -0" FPIVJ P/ll FC POLE PLACEMENT RELATIVE TO ROADWAY NO SCALE 55 DEGREE ANGLE OF TYPE 3 BEAM LAN auo 1lIFN LPNE 55 DEGREE ANGLE OF TYPE 3 BEAM ttf —C i..r SMUER/ T mm rx CROWN OF MATURE TREES SHOULD BE MINIMUM 10' -0" ABOVE ROADWAY GRADE TO MINIMIZE OBSTRUCTIONS OF ROADWAY LIGHTING DISTRIBUTION TREE PLACEMENT RELATIVE TO LIGHT POLES NO WALE Figure 8.2 L BEGINNING OF TURN /DECEL /ACCEL LANE Frontage Road Lighting Master Plan rrn4TanFadcr 68N@ LED dWd525Adt (- 25'DOO 100EYFFS -25'" IWWW•25'" 7mOPt -25gak 3LED935MA Luohiftinmu4m LED0525MA FPS AH INUcaw LED 0350M, l.1an /baum Beta525 MA US An iticb. l U$A.uluatiunl 179 Leong Tom EMQ 5m5 I.bid t LED"v 1110 Daffy 400 WS QWMy 4011 NH' Mar LED TS LEDmay '102 tlrad4td Lurrmarva 22 23 25 27 22 LampsLum ora 1 I I I I SV2bim`hWh&urwwe 140 138 125 110 7$ Lprlfwo Wov*g $ 1, 4700 11,'1$ m $1. 11 loco SW W IudmaeLan MmjSAunmoP6 33 33 3.3 37.. 33 F1WVL"IrE.00U1On 1150M $000 8150co M m $P6 O If.lWahm CiMtnrAr. woo M010 Im co woo $lae 00 Clwlrp HUUi4, an 3$ 23 39 93 33 HoUrvLsWCkrllnrpCmal NOW $000 81'9404 3LW(r Moo Cka"CoKummm 14rsCO 849600 insce W CO woo b0pinlwrditis Lan*Mam9actuer Egli GE pWd CWa Lump MDM0 LED AM 1cc%"LWOOTE=5 Omni; PLOP. 91!9'1 b17OWON*W LEG} Lemq waM 90 1011 I* P0) 00 Larne JAP 75AW 40= XOM 1 OOM 131 000 Irm W L4-% � = 9)3 3' Wo 4 2 LerrQ lu»ntaPacdinrr 095 080 073 0:@5 095 araa,vr l»i 090 090 0 96 090 090 SkOW.Fador 1 00 10o Io6 1 94 100 F*mpK yo FrPOr P 14 1 00 1 00 1 cl) 1 no E9LV A f e61tr Y O13 f og I OD t oo 100 ToalLVLanFu;Pr 094 072 am 071' 044 Ir1141anF1lwMa $.493 6 -624 5.Ot5 5.5m 4 -24 Cog LWO WAO $3500 Soo ca $F30OO $94®D A*WpL4PwrFkwAarrp 33 33 a3 33 33 "LaWH*%rcpe G@S $15000 $15000 $15090 $MOD $Iwoct F14ggq L.9yer �9m49,t4rr a w oo as SW ap W IX BSS 00 Ea�F kil�w,trMFPFi BMW Typo Aare CNA SCWA NNW NOW B" W6VI 0 39 49 4 0 ElOntLle.t17 I%OW OROOO 69.009 WOW 150 -900 8OW Fatlor NA 1 0) I m fyk HF Pmlrpf FEd*r Polo D90 025 1 O 100 Eel OMiLumkrare $17500 $1200 $129 OD $0 OD $17500 R46F4W La1wH x)-- Lurrwwv 33 33 33 33 33 Hft*Lnw RotoFam74r QA $150 pmoo $15000 $MOD $k9 W AIOWPtri Qatumnsft 14N1x1 WOO t , " 98' to OD MOO IMN& CJaruaar01- vaWaa** L"ras+t�rSJkiaraU',�' 12 f2 f1 12 12 �4W!5.9P.rr'atw7Dfu" P^7l+brr Pt^ 112 Q 12 P2 +LIE Srr447a>r£y[eeaalt�TlAarls 12 P2 t2 12 12 Arra.•al0paam�rgffamr dkM 4390 OW 4,380 4.336 rclai�pmro 3 4 I 3 2 Eraarg76rdGJA0. *H 004 004 6(A poi 004 [UrAwkAm rtla If" O«a Lwlbv EOAPrle IGNI p-T,434 $29, 175 $77.'&0 $14.415 Sfl 5xO Ltp"iftwkwoxt $%1190 M375 $12X5 $13,35 f QW) WYYO'4M cm SA k A U." iawo $3 !$1.000 53.000 WWO Oxf U240 $11,500 ti PAM 1U91D $5,OM15 Smm&V&rL Mt111GW 1,SVA. $3 Ia" $3,000 SUM 13.000 $4 OW 15.24) $1'.900 811,989 ,x(6.910 S5.0P9 rmi'mfrt�arCat! r4fat $fi455o K;2e4 $4 &O $41,W IkWWEnerywGoss 5540 4 $54E $540 1�3 ✓ MA Pe911�iPnarlce L�113 tar6�pEailk{b' /AYE I I '2 1 I .4me14rRaYmfxp Qp9t $ $fJa50 ' E,yL&3f FA FjftS&4W 600 GOO 000 OW 060 d4raW9*bWW1vvGW $1 $1 $P $4 97 AWJAWCa9r09 t $49 M S$ W 340 rcrarArarmtl.lhWv*x'eCci:j $1 $r S 12-041 p.091 $1.094 Tdai Lie ti°3frilsC.0 LnwPtitlMdC+�6l+�$4#o1r.rT 35 25 25 25 rrn4TanFadcr 39F 394 3% 3R 3% GtfaCi3eia$+�YTC+7s1 8.21¢ - $3i;s35 r,a4 [y€199d9aparylrA $9�.7i� '63.7:28 f nlfa�C?a1' 'x.804 w5w OWN $45.KifA $41 eW tu4ltY4 ] $MAX 8 149,'01 $ 81$7 -$01 Slam $111.587 ArearaEa Nrad x 0973 x697 '87812 W 199 U se Cad Ribma l.fiC4c71frisgp'Caar X% 21% 14% 21% 134% 'L!9P GY4iFa44rr w { aif #!4 X% 54% 44% W% rr"Cr1 IDY 43% 3114 351► 377% TOW1. ckv W% 10 3% *3 KIA i0011 2.f25'1018 TQY lirscyua rM11Crl5asl 5 9aufrm R&06 2 Frontage Road Lighting Master Plan S LED @ 350mA OMr Luminalre Infonnatio.n LED @ 350mA Nhnulaclurer Beta 325mA fVbdel0 LEDway 102 Number of Luminaims 137 Lamps)Luminaire 1 item V+datls&umineire 7 Lumineire Cost (including lamps) $940.00 Installation Hours)Lumineire 3.3 Houdy Labor Insta Hat ion Grist $150.00 Installation Costkunr naire $495_CO Cleaning Hourskuminaire 3.3 Hourly Labor Cleaning Cost $15HO Cleaning Cost /Luminaire $495,00 Lamp Infonnabon Lamp Manulactu€er Beta Lamp fNlodel # LED Lamp Waits @o Lamp Life 131,000 Initial Lumens 4,472 Lamp Lumen Depiation 0.95 Dirt Depreciation 0.90 Ballast f=actor 1.00 Temperature Factor 1 10 Equipment Factor 1.00 Taal Light Loss Factor 0.94 Nkintained Lumens 4,204 Co3ftarrlp $94.00 Relamp Labor Hours)Lamp 33 Hourly Labor Relamping Coct WHO Relamp Labor CostlLamp $495.00 Ballast Information Ballast Type None Ballast 'Watts 0 Ballast Life, hrs 150,00I Bzillast Factor NA Power Factor 11.00 Ballast CostJLuminaire $175.00 Reballasl Labor HourstLumina re 3.3 Hourly Labor Reballasting Cosl $150.03 Reballasl CostiLuminaire $150_00 Frontage Road Lighting Master Plan Ener& Consumption: Aug Weekday Opp-rating HoursID ay 12 Avg Saturday Operating Hours 12 Avg Sunday OperaW Hours 12 Annual Operating Hours 4,380 Total Lighting Load, KVA 14 Energy Unit Cost $/K WH 0.04 Economic Analysis Initial Costs: LigffingEquipmert Cost $175,780 LigffingInstaUtion Cost $92,565 Wifing U0 Cost. $1KVA $3,000 Wiring Cost $42,636 Service6istribuion Unit Cost. $iKVA $3,000 ServkwD istribdion Cost $42,636 Total InNai Cost M,617 Annual En e rgy Costs: $2,490 Annual Nbintenance Costs: Lamp Bun7od,31 ear 0.25 A nAual P elam#ng Cost $147 BaLast FaMreslYear 0.00 Annual Reballasfing Cost $0 Annual Cleaning Cost $495 Total A nnaalMaintename Cost $642 Total Life Cycle Cost: UsAlLife ofbgffing System, yrs 25 inNalibn Factui 3% Life Cycle Energy Cost $130,335 Life Cycle Maintenarre C osts $33,619 Initial Cost W,617 Tolatbfe Cycle Cost $517,571 A md&ed Annual Cost $210,703 Cost Rahos. ble Cycle Energy Cost 25% Life Cycle Maintenarre Costs 6% Initial Cost 68% Focal Life Cycle C ost 100% Frontage Road Lighting Master Plan PART 9: Appendix D A. Photographs of Comparative Sites in Vail and metered footcandle measurements. 1. City Market February 9, 2010 2. Safeway Parking February9, 2010 Frontage Road Lighting Master Plan 4. West Vail Roundabout February 9, 2010 3. Off Ramp — West Vail Roundabout February 9, 2010 Frontage Road Lighting Master Plan 6. Donovan Park Lot February 9, 2010 5. Matterhorn Dr. and Frontage Rd. February 9, 2010 Frontage Road Lighting Master Plan 8. Village Roundabout February 9, 2010 7. Village Turnabout — Pedestrian Crosswalk February 9, 2010 Frontage Road Lighting Master Plan 10. Ford Park Test Site February 9, 2010 9. Village Roundabout 1 -70 Off Ramp February 9, 2010 11. Ford Park Test Site February 9, 2010 Frontage Road Lighting Master Plan Frontage Road Lighting Master Plan PART 10: Roadway Photometric Plans A. Application Notes 1 . Photometric plans are a point by point study of illuminance (light incident on the horizontal roadway surface). Study is limited to the roadway and adjacent shoulders and bike paths. 2. Backgrounds for the roadway have been provided by Town of Vail Public Works and incorporate future roadway configuration based on the Master Transportation Plan. 3. Calculation programs used in the photometric study are AG132, V1 .9, and Visual V2.6 Professional Edition. 4. IES files for calculation tools are the most current available in the industry, provided by product manufacturers. B. Lighting Photometric Plans included are: PP -1 West Vail Part 1 PP -2 West Vail Part 2 PP -3 West Vail Part 3 PP -4 Timber Ridge Part 1 PP -5 Timber Ridge Part 2 PP -6 Lionshead Part 1 PP -7 Lionshead Part 2 PP -8 Lionshead Part 3 PP -9 Vail Village Part 1 PP -10 Vail Village Part 2 PP -11 Vail Village Part 3 PP -1 2 Vail Village Part 4 C. Statistical Zones are identified on the photometric plans as "N -zone #" for North Frontage Road zones and "S- zone #" for South Frontage Road zones. Average footcandle (fc) and average /min footcandle (uniformity ration) represent the calculated values as compared to the target design values identified in Part 3 for medium, low, and intermitten intersection lighting zones. The high zones (proposed roundabouts at Simba Run) target the existing roundabout light levels. D. The proposed re- alignment of the South Frontage Road at EverVail (east of the proposed Simba Run underpass) is shown as statistical zone 7 -alt. The existing roadway configuration is shown as statistical zone 7. Frontage Road Lighting Master Plan North Frontage Road Statistical Zones: STATISTICS Description Symbol Avg Max Min Max /Min AvglMin N - zone 1 mid ;- 0.6 fc 1.4 fc 0.1 fc 14.01 6.01 N - zone 2 inter 1 0.4 fc 1.7 fc 0.1 fc 17.0:1 4.0:1 N - zone 3 inter + 0.6 fc 1.8 fc 0.1 fc 18.0:1 6.0:1 N - zone 6 inter + 0.6 fc 1.8 fc 0.1 fc 18.0:1 6.0:1 N -zone 7 med + 0.7 fc 2.7 fc 0.2 fc 13.5:1 3.51 N -zone 8 high + 2.2 fc 9.0 fc 0.6 fc 15.0:1 3.7:1 N -zone 9 med + 0.9 fc 5.0 fc 0.2 fc 25.0:1 4.5:1 N - zone 10 inter + 0.6 fc 1.8 fc 0.2 fc 9.0:1 3.0:1 N - zone 11 inter + 0.6 fc 1.8 fc 0.2 fc 9.0:1 3.0:1 N - zone 12 inter + 0.7 fc 1.8 fc 0.2 fc 9.0:1 3.5:1 South Frontage Road Statistsical Zones: STATISTICS Description Symbol Avg Max Min MaxlMin Avg/Min S -zone 1 med + 0.6 fc 1.8 fc 0.1 fc 18.0:1 6.0:1 S - zone 2 inter + 0.7 fc 1.8 fc 0.3 fc 6.0:1 2.3:1 S - zone 3 inter + 0.7 fo 1.7 fc 0.3 fc 5.7:1 2.3:1 S - zone 4 inter + 0.4 fc 1.7 fc 0.1 fc 17.0:1 4.0:1 S -zone 5 med + 0.7 fc 3.6 fc 0.2 fc 18.0:1 3.5:1 S -zone 6 high + 1.9 fc 6.3 fc 0.4 fc 15.8:1 4.8:1 S -zone 7 low + 0.5 fc 1.8 fc 0.1 fc 18.0:1 5.0:1 S- zone 7ALTmed + 0.8 fc 5.5 fc 0.0 fc N/A NIA S -zone 8 med + 0.8 fc 3.1 fc 0.2 fc 15.5:1 4.0:1 S -zone 9 high + 1.3 fc 4.9 fc 0.2 fc 24.5:1 6.5:1 S -zone 10 med + 0.7 fc 1.5 fc 0.2 fc 7.5:1 3.5:1 S - zone 11 inter + 0.9 fc 4.1 fc 0.2 fc 20.5:1 4.5:1 S -zone 12 med + 0.8 fc 4.8 fc 0.2 fc 24.0:1 4.0:1 S - zone 13 low + 0.6 fc 4.6 fc 0.1 fc 46.0:1 6.0:1 S - zone 14 med + 0.9 fc 8.7 fc 0.2 fc 43.5:1 4.5:1 S -zone 15 low + 0.5 fc 1.8 fc 0.1 fc 18.0:1 5.0:1 3 -zone 16 inter + 0.7 fc 1.8 fc 0.2 fc 9.0:1 3.5:1 OUYS010D 1IMA "OVOA 3DViNOJJ HinOS ®NV Hb"d ®N �.� AVMvj � � m NVId JNUHJIl N31SVW ® w s D z All �w °s a d a�a aa: J e � J d dg W 9 J J_ �S Y m� Q Y pg d p8 3 dC � d � 5 a s C s d m m i'k ♦ u%-A v -1 L z ® w ��/ 0 LU �/// n /i 1 0 it II Z 6i LU F z ' 03 Q Z o =$ ro A° ce=s m� eg 6� d� 8 d �n 3 OUYS010D _° esA« _ ma NVIdONLHOmN31SVW \ ( m \ — ® AV q vj \ I \} \ q / � � \ : z 2 \ \/ � \/ \ \ � \� w: R 9 A °: § / m \; = 2° \ � � :\}}} ( ) \ ) :< N u � \\\\\ \\ } NVId JNUHJIl N31SVW ® w s a _a z LU w= a p ° °Ud z w z o °N no a a e age w o -° m r = F � J �S m� eg �g m g OUYSI010D 1IYA "OVOA 3DViNO'dil HiAOS ®NY HiAON v� i6i Ln NVId JNUHJIl N31SVW ® w s AVAOVA W C 11 If ti e� 4A 0 I I I \\ N v 2 0 a LU z w z o °N no CD a a a ka a a e age L o z o'y N w o -° S m r = A °i ce=s F � J i 32 = m� 6� m s 8 a � i a... d.. .3a . AVAOVJ NMd JNUHJIl N31SVW ® w 5 c LL "0 \ d z k °m `\ W U. a „_ Z S Aff C7 g m� 2 a s� Z -- �' AVN O VJ m� _ °ma«_ma . }/) NVIdONLHOmN31SVW \ \ 9 'fr � � / � . � � \ E3 z� « z °\� All ( \ \/ \ \\ / % \\ I: P: A \\ \ (\ (} \ } \ } \ } \ ) ! ( I . 'k , " " T / `�— ..���� \ � v \. � > ^� \ x. 2► � )} � 2 \ /::: E= E L \ , m \ } \} \ q \ z °\� All ( \ \/ ( J \\ / \ \\ U) — a m on \ / { ) \ \ \ § ! § OUYS010D 1IMA "OVOA 3DViN JJ HinOS ®INV H idON � � m NVId JNUHJIl N31SVW ® w s AVMvj �y "" � . F �... ° ° - "• ° $ O UVSIO1OD 1IMA "OVO'A 3DViVNOdJ HiAOS ®INV HiAON } � NVId ONUHOIl N31SVW ® w s w CD Z JL j Q r a w a � vo w N � W � F- O a z U o W J M, a e age Ng J z oNY d' r H• O �oi q J u VV m� yd K O - x as� D s g g o� AVAOVJ P720 NVId JNUHJIl N31SVW U9 5 1 7,-- p �a ; AVNOVJ m NVId JNUHJIl N31SVW ® s LL ®i z F- w6 z - Ud a z W CD a <= a J J z °may / 0 = 4° J r PoF G Q 1 1 J I o � l \1 1\ I 32 - - i , ono =o- w ,e 6Viw!�isuou � o $ OUYS010D 1IMA "OVOA 3DViNOJJ HinOS ®NV Hb"d ®N p � A VM \ V / � m NVId JNUHJIl N31SVW ® w s I I � i Jx n I I I f 0 e . e e\ N I t� I V) Q W rz F- > Q of r A W w ._ Z W - LU � U Ga Go 4e bs M a - 7 I ," .F,. - "• P720 top OUYS010D 1IMA ° S ®N®'A 3DViNOdJ HiAOS ®NV Hb'A ®N y � NVId JNI1HJIl N31SVW AVAOVJ z ® w I o 0 ----------- -------- Z , --------------- I •, I �% w s z N Hna J Z „pd opS E_ - n Lu ti_ �� } NVId JNUHJIl N31SVW ® w s AVAOVJ `-11,J) I I / i _ Qe oa H „a w «s a I° o p s J Z i Q - _ - tee -�� - LLJ 0 a... d.. .3a , AVAOVJ t °� $ OUYS010D 1IMA ° i ®N®'A 3DViN dJ HiAOS ®INV Hb''dON Ile NVId JNUHJIl N31SVW ® L w y m U9 5 3 � I � oa a �o J a � i _ Qe d ti 6 LU w w Lu CO Z o �. . O �\ h I �A J 4e N o a a w r d' J � Q W LU m - ll. Gn G� W P720 to $ OUYS1610✓ 1IYA "OVOA 3DViNOdJ HiAOS ®NY HiAON NVId JNUHJIl N31SVW AVAOVJ o �. . O �\ h I �A J 4e N o a a w r d' J � Q W LU m - ll. Gn G� W a... d.. .3a . AVAOVJ LI � L f� \\ \' � q Y�\ NMd JNUHJIl N31SVW ® w Ll 0 1 3 P tj i J L \ H „a � e j ¢ w F a LU J z Lu 1 1 % li a... d.. .3a . AVAOVJ NMd JNUHJIl N31SVW ® w e C 4t O \/ J / r z J� _ Qe N r a < Lu a w� r � 0 0 z a a W J _ Q V> LL, - AVMvj NMd JNUHJIl N31SVW ® w go u a w w z a I CII i -- al �I � W � O z JL 8e W Ul Q N� a 0 des o o Z a „pa W J o 0 N a... d.. .3a . AVAOVJ A to $ OUYS010D 1IMA ° i ®N®'A 3DViN dJ HiAOS ®INV Hb''dON NVId JNUHJIl N31SVW ® w y m U9 5 0 W Q o / sa 7 4 e� Q � s ~ J AL _ Qe „S w r � J o � Lu z W > H C7 � � NMd JNUHJIl N31SVW ® w s {{ a. A -- �' AV q vj � \ , OUYS010D _° e»A« _ ma NVIdONLHOmN31SVW Ll \ ~ � _ \ OUYS010D 1IMA "OVOA 3DViNOJJ HinOS ®NV Hb"d ®N � AVNOVJ F�: � m NVId JNUHJIl N31SVW ® w s „a Attachment B PLANNING AND ENVIRONMENTAL COMMISSION RESULTS (IN PART) September 28, 2009 MEMBERS PRESENT MEMBERS ABSENT Rollie Kjesbo Michael Kurz Scott Lindall Bill Pierce Susie Tjossem David Viele Sarah Paladino A request for a final recommendation for the adoption of the Frontage Road Lighting Master Plan, an element of the Vail Transportation Master Plan, and setting forth details in regard thereto. (PEC090014) Applicant: Town of Vail, represented by Tom Kassmel Planner: Bill Gibson ACTION: Tabled to October 12, 2009 MOTION: Kjesbo SECOND: Kurz VOTE: 7 -0 -0 Bill Gibson gave an introduction to the item. Tom Kassmel, Town Engineer, explained the goals of the work session and the next steps. Nancy Johnson, lighting consultant, gave a power point presentation discussing several objectives of the work session. The presentation did an analysis of the LED compared to the high pressure sodium light source. Commissioner Kurz stated that he had visited the site and the on -site experience in much different than can be shown in photos. From a life cycle and energy efficiency stand point there are advantages to LED; however, he felt that the question being asked was whether or not this community wants to specifically identify this as a road and not a "part" of the overall warm experience of Vail. Commissioner Paladino felt the LED was a great improvement in visibility. She clarified that this lighting change was only being considered for the Frontage Roads not the villages. Commissioner Tjossem felt that Vail sells ambiance and warmth and feels that the LED source will only strengthens the fact that the highway runs through Vail. All the reports she has seen tell her that LED is the obvious choice from an environmental and maintenance standpoint; however, after seeing the lights first hand she feels that the lights are too bright and are too urban in appearance. She supports utilizing high pressure sodium light sources. Commissioner Pierce agreed with Commissioner Tjossem's comments. Commissioner Kjesbo drove around Town and saw that the vast majority of this Town utilizes high pressure sodium and he feels that to introduce a new brighter light at the "front door' would not be appropriate. He supports continuing with high pressure sodium lights. Commissioner Viele stated his belief that the LED light source may be too bright. He suggested that a colored lens could be placed over the LED light source in order to achieve a warmer color and maintain the benefits of LEDs. Page 1 Commissioner Lindall supports the utilization of a 20 foot pole not a 25 foot pole. The shorter pole keeps the scale of the Town at a level which is more comfortable. He is aware that it may mean more poles and some greater expense. He felt the clarity offered by LED was positive, but the LEDs will not be a positive for the character of the town. Jim Lamont, Vail Homeowners Association, asked several questions about the function of the lighting. Specifically, is the proposed lights can be dimmed or switched on/off as needed? Tom Kassmel, stated that the lowest level of LED is being proposed and that the lights can be installed with a programmable on/off system. Jim Lamont, feels the proposed light fixtures are too contemporary and do not fit the character of the villages. He does not support lighting the Frontage Road along its full extents. Tom Kassmel, stated that the light fixture that was installed was not the selected fixture. A presentation to the Design Review Board is scheduled to discuss specific fixtures and ornamental pole options. Jim Lamont cautioned against the trap of applying other communities' standards in Vail. Commissioner Tjossern expressed her support for an intermediate lighting approach at intersections. She further inquired as to why another arm could not be installed on the existing CDOT light poles instead of adding new poles along the Frontage Road. Nancy Johnson described the reasons why the addition of an arm on the existing interstate lighting poles is problematic. Commissioner Pierce suggested that additional lights near the intersections at Ford Park may be appropriate during events, but less light along the extent of the Frontage Road, Commissioner Tjossern stated that she felt the proposed 100 foot pole spacing was too urban and not appropriate for Vail, a small community. Commissioner Paladino noted that the true road lighting needs will be difficult to judge until projects like Solaris and Four Seasons are completed and operational, but recognized that a master plan would be beneficial in reviewing future development projects. Commissioner Pierce stated that he felt in conjunction with this lighting master plan there needs to be a change to the Town's street signage. Commissioner Viele noted that the Town Council will ultimately set the street lighting policy and recommended deferring to the Staff's and consultant's professional recommendations. Commissioner Kurz recommended only installing the minimum lighting necessary to address safety concerns while having the least amount of impact on the Town's character. The majority of the Commissioners recommended using high pressure sodium lights rather than LEDs lights, based upon concerns of maintaining Vail's character. Page 2 MEMORANDUM TO: Planning and Environmental Commission FROM: Community Development Department DATE: May 10, 2010 SUBJECT: A request for the review of a conditional use permit, pursuant to Section 12 -9C -3, Conditional Uses, Vail Town Code, for a public transportation terminal, to allow for the construction of skier drop -off and a bus stop associated with the Lionshead parking structure, located at 395 South Frontage Road West /Lot 1, Block 2, Vail Lionshead First Filing, Lot 3, A Resubdivision of Lot 1, Block 1, Vail Lionshead Second Filing, and part of the South Frontage Road West and East Lionshead Circle rights -of -way, and setting forth details in regard thereto. (PEC100020) Applicant: Town of Vail, represented by Tom Braun Planner: Warren Campbell SUMMARY The applicant, the Town of Vail, is requesting a review of a conditional use permit to facilitate the construction of a new public transportation terminal (bus stop and shelter) along the South Frontage Road to provide shelter and restroom facilities to riders of Eagle County Transit and to incorporated skier drop -off on the lowest level of the parking structure on the west end adjacent to East Lionshead Circle. Based upon the review of the criteria described in Section VII of this memorandum, the Community Development Department recommends the Planning and Environmental Commission approves, with conditions, this request for a conditional use permit. II. DESCRIPTION OF THE REQUEST The applicant, the Town of Vail, is proposing to construct a new public transportation terminal (bus stop and shelter) on the north side of the Lionshead parking structure. This proposed bus stop will remove ECO transportation from interacting with Town of Vail in -town and out -lying bus routes at the current Concert Hall Plaza bus stop which struggles to contain all these transit functions. In addition to the bus stop and shelter the Town is proposing to address the need for skier drop -off in close proximity to the Lionshead portal by incorporating an approximately 15 space facility on the lowest level of the parking structure on the west elevation. This is accomplished by creating an access pint for the facility off of East Lionshead Circle across from the parking structure for Vail 21 and the Lionshead Arcade buildings. This proposed use is a change to the operation of the existing conditional use for the Lionshead parking structure and thus requires review by the Planing and Environmental Commission. This property is located within the General Use (GU) District. Within the GU District a public transportation terminal is identified as a conditional use thus requiring review by the Planning and Environmental Commission. Pursuant to Section 12 -9C -5, Development Standards, Vail Town Code, the allowable development standards in the GU District are established by the Planning and Environmental Commission during the review of a conditional use permit application. The proposed bus stop and shelter will allow for up to four ECO transit buses to pull off of the South Frontage Road in order to drop -off and pick -up riders. In order to provide riders shelter and restrooms a structure measuring a total 1,250 square feet is being provided. In addition to the interior waiting area and restrooms there is covered outdoor waiting as well. There are pedestrian improvements proposed in conjunction with this bus stop in order to safely convey people to the southwest corner of the Lionshead parking structure down the stairs and into Lionshead. These pedestrian improvements are proposed to have radiant heat installed to provide safe pedestrian travel. There are several sustainable design elements that have been incorporated into the design to lower operation costs and in order to be stewards of the environment. Those elements are temperature and moisture sensors for each heat zone, a 95% efficient boiler, low -flow toilets, occupancy and ambient light sensors on the interior light fixtures, installation of a super insulated roof, energy efficient windows with some on temperature sensors to open or close based upon interior temperature needs. These are only a few of the sustainable design elements being incorporated. On May 19, the Town staff will be informing the Town Council of the cost of several solar options which could be installed on the facility to further improve the energy efficiency of the building. The Town Council will then decide whether or not to pursue a solar option on the structure. The proposed architectural and site plans dated April 12, 2010 (Attachment A) have been attached for reference. III. BACKGROUND Throughout 2009 and the early months of 2010 the Town of Vail Public Works Department has been working with a consultant team to identify the function and cost of various transit options in the vicinity of the Lionshead Parking Structure and the Concert Hall Plaza bus stop. This team has been interacting with the public and Town Council in developing the options which the property owner, Town of Vail, wishes to pursue. The proposed text amendments are a result of this process. To affect the conceptual ideas generated through this process amendments are necessary tot eh Master Plan prior to the design of the actual solutions. On April 12, 2010, the Planning and Environmental Commission unanimously forwarded a recommendation of approval for amendments to the Lionshead Redevelopment Master Plan to set the framework and guidelines for the incorporation of transit improvements to the Lionshead parking structure. On May 4, 2010, the Town Council unanimously approved Resolution No. 13, Series of 2010, adopting the amendments to the Lionshead Redevelopment Master Plan to allow for improvements to the Lionshead parking structure. 2 IV. APPLICABLE PLANNING DOCUMENTS Title 12, Zoning Regulations, Vail Town Code (in part) ARTICLE 12 -9C: GENERAL USE DISTRICT Section 12 -9C -1: PURPOSE: The general use district is intended to provide sites for public and quasi - public uses which, because of their special characteristics, cannot be appropriately regulated by the development standards prescribed for other zoning districts, and for which development standards especially prescribed for each particular development proposal or project are necessary to achieve the purposes prescribed in section 12 -1 -2 of this title and to provide for the public welfare. The general use district is intended to ensure that public buildings and grounds and certain types of quasi - public uses permitted in the district are appropriately located and designed to meet the needs of residents and visitors to Vail, to harmonize with surrounding uses, and, in the case of buildings and other structures, to ensure adequate light, air, open spaces, and other amenities appropriate to the permitted types of uses. Section 12 -9C -5: Development Standards: A. Prescribed by Planning and Environmental Commission: In the General Use District, development standards in each of the following categories shall be as prescribed by the planning and environmental commission: 1. Lot area and site dimensions. 2. Setbacks. 3. Building height. 4. Density control. 5. Site coverage. 6. Landscaping and site development. 7. Parking and loading. B. Reviewed by Planning and Environmental Commission: Development standards shall be proposed by the applicant as a part of a conditional use permit application. Site specific development standards shall then be determined by the planning and environmental commission during the review of the conditional use request in accordance with the provisions of chapter 16 of this title. CHAPTER 12 -16: CONDITIONAL USES PERMITS (in part) Section 12 -16 -1: Purpose; Limitations: In order to provide the flexibility necessary to achieve the objectives of this title, specified uses are permitted in certain districts subject to the granting of a conditional use permit. Because of their unusual or special characteristics, conditional uses require review so that they may be located properly with respect to the purposes of this title and with respect to their effects on surrounding properties. The review process prescribed in this chapter is intended to assure compatibility and harmonious development between conditional uses and surrounding properties in the Town at large. Uses listed as conditional uses in the various districts may be permitted subject to such conditions and limitations as the Town may prescribe to insure that the location and operation of the conditional uses will be in accordance with the development objectives of the Town and will not be detrimental to other uses or properties. Where conditions cannot be devised, to achieve these objectives, applications for conditional use permits shall be denied. 3 Lionshead Redevelopment Master Plan Resolution No. 13, Series of 2010, which applies to this application is attached for reference (Attachment B). Title 14, Development Standards 14 -6 -7: RETAINING WALLS: (in part) A. General: All retaining walls are reviewed by the design review board or the administrator to determine compatibility to the existing topography and the materials in use. Retaining walls shall not exceed an exposed face height of six feet (6). Within a front setback, retaining walls shall not exceed an exposed face height of three feet (3), unless related to access to a structure constructed on excessive slopes (in excess of 30 percent). Retaining walls associated with a street located within a public right of way or access to an underground covered parking structure are exempt from these height limits, but must be approved by the design review board. Retaining walls shall be located a minimum of two feet (2) from adjacent private property boundaries and should be ten feet (10) from the edge of a public street unless otherwise approved by the town engineer. V. SITE ANALYSIS The site specific development standards of the General Use District are not quantified by the Town's Zoning Regulations, but are instead prescribed by the Planning and Environmental Commission during the review of a conditional use permit application. Address: Legal Description Zoning: Land Use Plan Designation Current Land Use: Lot Size: Development Standard Setbacks (min): Front (North) Rear (South) Side (West): Side (East): Building Height (max) Site coverage (max.): Landscape area (min) Parking 395 South Frontage Road West Lot 1, Block 2, Vail Lionshead First Filing, Lot 3, A Resubdivision of Lot 1, Block 1, Vail Lionshead Second Filing, and part of the East Lionshead Circle rights -of -way General use District Lionshead Master Plan Public Parking 283,532 sq.ft. (6.509 acres) Allowed /Required Existin per PEC per PEC per PEC per PEC 30 ft. 30 ft. 30 ft. 180 ft. per PEC per PEC per PEC M Proposed 7 ft. No Change No Change No Change 24 feet 9 inches 130,233 s.f. (45.9 %) 132,058 s.f. (46.6 %) 49,160 s.f. (17.3 %) 46,730 s.f. (16.5 %) per PEC 1,112 structured No Change* 0 *There are four spaces which will be removed on the upper deck of the parking structure to accommodate the pedestrian circulation associated with the proposed public transportation terminal. These spaces will be incorporated into a portion of the charter bus lot in order to comply with the Master Plan requirement for no net loss of parking in Lionshead. VI. SURROUNDING LAND USES AND ZONING Existing Use Zoning District North: CDOT 1- 70 /HWY 6 Right -of -Way NA South: Multi- Family Residential Lionshead Mixed -Use 1 (LMU -1) East: Multi- Family and Public Use LMU -1 and GU West: Multi- Family Residential LMU -1 VII. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT REVIEW CRITERIA Before acting on a conditional use permit application, the Planning and Environmental Commission shall consider the following factors with respect to the proposed use: 1. Relationship and impact of the use on the development objectives of the Town. Staff believes the proposed public transportation terminal and skier drop -off furthers the purpose of the General Use District "to ensure that public buildings and grounds and certain quasi - public uses permitted in the district are appropriately located and designed to meet the needs of residents and visitors to Vail." There is a long documented need for public transit improvements in the Lionshead Redevelopment Master Plan. Initially the North Day Lot (north of the Landmark) was identified as the ideal location for a Lionshead public transit facility similar to that found in Vail Village. After a great deal of study it was determined that the North Day Lot would not be the location for the transit improvements in Lionshead. Subsequent to this decision the Town began exploring other opportunities to make transit improvements in Lionshead. Over a year of study and public process resulted in the amendments adopted by Resolution No. 13, Series of 2010, which set the framework and guidelines for the addition of a bus stop and shelter along the South Frontage Road West adjacent to the Lionshead parking structure. Therefore, Staff believes this proposed conditional use permit will have a positive relationship and impact on the development objectives of the Town. 2. The effect of the use on light and air, distribution of population, transportation facilities, utilities, schools, parks and recreation facilities, and other public facilities needs. There is a long documented need for a public transportation terminal and skier drop -off in Lionshead. The amendments adopted in Resolution No. 13, Series of 2010, provide the framework for these improvements as conditions within Lionshead had changed since the adoption of the Lionshead Redevelopment Master Plan. The proposed public transportation terminal will provide a greater level of transit service to users of the ECO transit system as it will not have to divert off the Frontage Road. Additionally, having skier drop -off in close proximity to the portal entrance to Lionshead will serve guests with a high level of service. 5 Therefore, Staff believes this proposed conditional use permit will have a positive effect of the use on light and air, distribution of population, transportation facilities, utilities, schools, parks and recreation facilities, and other public facilities needs. 3. Effect upon traffic with particular reference to congestion, automotive and pedestrian safety and convenience, traffic flow and control, access, maneuverability, and removal of snow from the street and parking areas. This proposal for a new public transportation terminal and skier drop -off have been specifically designed and located after input from the community and consultants. The Town has utilized skilled professionals to insure that traffic and pedestrian function, flows, and safety are at the forefront of the design. The Town has involved the Public Works crews responsible for snow removal to ensure the removal of snow is efficient. To ensure pedestrian safety separated heated pedestrian paths have been incorporated to for a connection between the new bus stop and the Lionshead portal. Therefore, Staff believes this proposed conditional use permit will have a positive effect on traffic with particular reference to congestion, automotive and pedestrian safety and convenience, traffic flow and control, access, maneuverability, and removal of snow from the street and parking areas. 4. Effect upon the character of the area in which the proposed use is to be located, including the scale and bulk of the proposed use in relation to surrounding uses. The proposed public transportation terminal is located upon property zoned General Use district. Within this zone district many of the zoning parameters are established by the Planning and Environmental Commission. As a comparison the properties surround the Lionshead parking structure are zoned Lionshead Mixed Use -1. The zoning regulations in this zone district allow for minimum setbacks of 10 feet off all property lines, heights of 82.5 feet maximum with an average of 71 feet, site coverage of 70 %, and a minimum of 20% landscaping on a site. The existing Lionshead parking structure in conjunction with the proposed changes would comply with the zoning requirements for the adjacent properties with the exception of the landscape area and the setback of the new bus stop structure from the South Frontage Road property line. Therefore, Staff believes this proposed conditional use permit will fit with the character of the area in terms of bulk, mass, setbacks, landscape area, and site coverage. VIII. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT STAFF RECOMMENDATION The Community Development Department recommends the Planning and Environmental Commission approves, with a condition, this request for a conditional use permit. This recommendation is based upon the review of the criteria described in Section VII of this memorandum and the evidence and testimony presented. Should the Planning and Environmental Commission choose to approve, with conditions, this conditional use permit request, the Community Development Department recommends the Commission pass the following motion: "The Planning and Environmental Commission approves this request for a conditional use permit, pursuant to Section 12 -9C -3, Conditional Uses, Vail Town Code, for a public transportation terminal, to allow for the construction of skier drop -off and a bus stop associated with the Lionshead parking structure, located 9 at 395 South Frontage Road West /Lot 1, Block 2, Vail Lionshead First Filing, Lot 3, A Resubdivision of Lot 1, Block 1, Vail Lionshead Second Filing, and part of the South Frontage Road West and East Lionshead Circle rights -of -way, and setting forth details in regard thereto. " Should the Planning and Environmental Commission choose to approve, with conditions, this conditional use permit request, the Community Development Department recommends the Commission applies the following conditions: "1. This conditional use permit approval is contingent upon the applicant obtaining Town of Vail approval of the associated design review new construction application. 2. The applicant must obtain CDOT approval of a Notice to Proceed set of plans prior to constructing the new access points. 3. Prior to the start of construction, the applicant must obtain a Town of Vail Public Way permit and comply with the Public Works General Conditions for construction. " Should the Planning and Environmental Commission choose to approve, with conditions, this conditional use permit request, the Community Development Department recommends the Commission makes the following findings: `Based upon the review of the criteria outlined in Section Vll of the Staff memorandum to the Planning and Environmental Commission dated May 10, 2010, and the evidence and testimony presented, the Planning and Environmental Commission finds: 1. The proposed conditional use permit is in accordance with the purposes of the Zoning Regulations and the General Use. 2. The proposed conditional use permit and the conditions under which it will be operated or maintained are not detrimental to the public health, safety, or welfare or materially injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity. 3. The proposed conditional use permit complies with each of the applicable provisions of Chapter 12 -16, Conditional Use Permit, Vail Town Code." IX. ATTACHMENTS A. Proposed Architectural and Site Plans dated April 12, 2010 B. Resolution No. 13, Series of 2010 as adopted May 4, 2010 C. Applicant responses to the CUP criteria dated April 12, 2010 7 0 i t N N t z Z W w W 0 a z O u U W V1 w W H Z_ p a 0 W W a F ~ z 0 Z LL 2 W F 7 N a Z w O a 0 F— o Q Y w a pw w x� 0 Z 0 :i (5 A �Y ii K K ' LL Na U' Z ZOW W z p U Z m F O y zz Z O LL K LL LL " g Q OOM Z 0 yp Q W U aWW W ~ `~ OUO 2 LL�O pUN Z p <� Z O C O 7 ] W CO F � J WWI 0 tD 0 � Q0 N Y� a) O E O Z U 0 a 0 J CD H CD CD N m J_ U Q w a� U Z (� Z U Z U ? _ O z H Z H j U z O Y 7 F W V) Z ? Z U - w U o Z Z �� ZZ > o Zs z w g ow °� „o ul a ¢0 w z �o_ >_ amw _ as >_ ��5_ mw 1 y yw 0 i t N N t z Z W w W 0 a z O u U W V1 w W H Z_ p a 0 W W a F ~ z 0 Z LL 2 W F 7 N a Z w O a 0 F— o Q Y w a pw w x� 0 Z 0 :i (5 A �Y ii K K ' LL Na U' Z ZOW W z p U Z m F O y zz Z O LL K LL LL " g Q OOM Z 0 yp Q W U aWW W ~ `~ OUO 2 LL�O pUN Z p <� Z O C O 7 ] W CO F � J WWI 0 tD 0 � Q0 N Y� a) O E O Z U 0 a 0 J CD H CD CD N m J_ U Q w a� ■ ml � ��= — I ?,� el cli Iq 7 Al � I I I �/� I �I j DT �" � � � � q II w mw �� � 7 L —9 � /fin= � I ` �� -- 9z Lg gig o OOVE010311VA F- CID CD - 06H] NIJJO /Mhild OHS W Pm S1N3IN3AOlJdV1I N0I103SIJ31NI JJS /013 cz M q Maim IISNVHI OVOH IOVINOHJ oNv sAn snu oji - o Z 2OiN30 i1SNV`di OV3HSNOI� k-- ■ ml � ��= — I ?,� el cli Iq 7 Al � I I I �/� I �I j DT �" � � � � q II w mw �� � 7 L —9 � /fin= � I ` �� -- 9z Lg gig o C) F- CID CD W Pm cz 0 k-- < It. co .12 0 Z �z 11 w < ir 11 D 0 D W z 0 J LU nee C) F- CID CD W Pm cz z ir D -------------- Z� F- CID W Pm It. co .12 7 -8170 < .4 w/ "I -------------- Z� _ v - - - oaVaoloO'IIVn T - - - 9dW Ni dd0 OHO / WH311HOHS ONV AH1N31S3M o J zo Q SAMIAMN N01103SH31NI HdS /9dHlBHdS /913 Maim 11SNVH1 aVOH 39V1NOHd 0NV SAVO 50O 093 - w ouz r w UliN30 NOliViUOdSNVUi OVIHSNM r "U 25 A - —o �JOao no, --- - - - - -- o <o a w J o = 0 o.w�w < o< 1 Ni �EOOm�. ¢am =g ao. I I C7 Q U W I O O 0 0 E a E O a CAP O U] a W 0 E-O O W O � ti � O r d � Q W Z C'J E - 0 ao 0. 6 n I + f I f - _ -__ I __ I , -- ,I 1 l sCS 3�F. - u = oases as ca..�sa eS¢ ® ° .s I I Ce aIF {�•P�a h•�-1D ,. O yyp L �� >u e` 2 g OMWO31IVA ° s o - OdHI NI ddO OHO/HUhii0HSONVAOiN31S3M 3 e - S1N3W3AOOdW1 NO1193SO31N1 HdS /OdHI'3 HdS / 9l3 - .�_;_ Maim lISNVHi OVOH 3OVilIOOd ONV SAVO SOO O93 o 0 U31N30 NOI1H1UOdSNVUi 0V3HSNW � w 4 z 4 $ 8 N 0 0 U �3 OM10103 11VA ° - 9dH1 1 SAIMAMMI N01193S831NI HdS /0dH1'd HdS / 013 - Wallne 11SNVa1 avow 3sVAM aNV sAva sne o03 - VW a W SW H31N30 NOliViHOdSNVUi OV3HSNM Z z9 8Z 8 M 0 O 0 OOVS OID 'IIVA h V 9dHl NI dd0 / VIUh i JOHS ONV AIJA31S3M z SAJNIAOSMl NOLOISUHNI HdS /9dHl$HdS /913 Maim iISNVUi OV08 39VAOUJ ONV SAV9 sne 093 w w H31N30 NOIIVIHOdSNdb1 OV3HSNOII o $ U it f fl 'i JZa o> I I I u I of e Ia a I j e II 0 I� ° 9 m ^ m ° I m z i °m e 8170 _ 8165 Lffi N J � t I I L Poi wYlarmo[Vtn aw.umWmimman�a Y Fe oavaoloJ'IroA v, L(7 9dHl Al dd0 / WH311HOHS ONH AH1N31S3M- Z S1NINIAOHdWI NDI103SHIINI HIS /OdHI V HIS / Ol3 - _ z C9 o o 9NIO110911SNVH1 OVOH 39tl1NOHd ONV SAtl9 SOA 003 w z w N HHN30 NOliViHOdSNVHi UV3HSN011 d o r $ U 0 � lo S� a , !;I 3 m 3 ' i iil�m ?> Ali 1611 — o R� MPS e o P mll �o�° - i1 =1 CD CD - ----------- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 1, V 11 I 3. � I I 4 �'j �I n 7 4- W z LU 0 -Hp J ....� 4 LL L E 0 ir 1, 1114414, g, j II \ --- --- --- --- co T: I n 0 LL ir 0 LL o IH lu I 11 1H C) 44 t 04 Z _j LLJ No < 0 ---------- O(IVUOIOO'IIVA P � 9dHl NI JJO-dOH(l / V48311HOHS (INV Ad1N3 1S3M - 'R S1N3VY3AOUdVgl NOL03SU31NI HJS/OdHI UJS /013 HN Maim ilSNVUl OVOU 19ViNOUJ ONV SAVq sno oo3 - HIINIO NOliVIHOdSNVHI OVIHISN011 W a o CD CD - ----------- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 1, V 11 I 3. � I I 4 �'j �I n 7 4- W z LU 0 -Hp J ....� 4 LL L E 0 ir 1, 1114414, g, j II \ --- --- --- --- co T: I n 0 LL ir 0 LL o IH lu I 11 1H C) 44 t 04 Z _j LLJ No < 0 ---------- OOVHOlOO `IIVA T d., - BdHI NI 3d0 / Wl1311HOHS ONV AM31S3M - J a� s - S1NMIAOIdWI NOIDISb31NI HJS/iOdHl'3 HJS /Ol3 ONIOlI0811SNVU OVOU 30VINOUJ ONV SAVE S08 003 HIINIO NOIIVIHOdSNVHI OVIHSNO11 o U I I A HS a 3S v� tiSH� ��\ Z6 � 3 3 S 33S I i 1 I Ir r3 hI-'.. f o 1 I � m a I 1 �� ♦ \ 1 @ d I � ; I I I i �"� I �J A 7 ,,,1. J �.— .a —, f •-- �r '" � m _ r`� -�.� I �'i 1 I I I _ ,•�.,L rd "� 1 k._ r � 7 ;d � z, t..` —Y° �� 1 � = — 1 I I I I i \ - `� I 1 1 I 1 I � 1 , - -� -- 1 I II III xA jl t I 1 1 I 1 1 11 1 1 1 I II NC, I 1 1 1 1 5 1 I g l 1 1 - 1 u xa 4 ���" I I ',� 6 ' r 0� 1 = 1 1 - - -- - --- - - ' — L_ 1 1 O -jo o < N O § - CE 0 1> 00VU0103 IVA < N OdHI NI JJO-dOHU / hEi iHDHS OIJV l iSJM -111 111111 Al vil 3 IA� SiN3[N3AGUdVJI NOUDISUHNI UJS/E)dHl'g UJS / 313 I -1 'A I I 0 P� M-2 WOMB _m m. AOVLNOHI (INV SAVfl e 001 HIINIO NOIIVIHOdSNVHI OVIHSNOP ES H O -jo o < N O § - CE 0 1> \ \ \ \ b §� b 1 12 0 4 No Uj y , � o o § �( 0 m N 1 > /�^ � t u: §§ j 71 , �� \ \ \ \ \/\ ( . \j[ }\ §( w > LU ■ b b �\ k . �§ 0 I t z 0 � £ � \ / ®: 8 z \ �� � � \\ -111 111111 Al vil 3 IA� I -1 'A I I 1111 11 �Al 11 \ \ \ \ b §� b 1 12 0 4 No Uj y , � o o § �( 0 m N 1 > /�^ � t u: §§ j 71 , �� \ \ \ \ \/\ ( . \j[ }\ §( w > LU ■ b b �\ k . �§ 0 I t z 0 � £ � \ / ®: 8 z \ �� � � \\ BdHI NI3d0 / ffih iHOHS ONV AM31S3M - J P - S1N3VJIAOl dWIN01103Sb31NIHJS /iOdHl'&HJS /Ol3- o - s m - ONI01I0811SNVU OVOU 30VINOUJ ONV SAVE S08 003 HIINIO NOIIVIHOdSNVHI OVIHSNO11 o U Jill I , ; art.- w i w 1 7i 5-- W :.� ti , , , � i y m I � (DV ' I ✓ / m � �� 1 � i I J -- -- -- I III `'- - - - - -- I I I�affie lii " i i 1 ° i i �a 3,- r• - ��� �dw�a F I I i,\ ' F �i, g a I I _ r I ; I O I I i I I „ kffi ,• � `h I I i II iso Z�' o LL I I j I' i i d =E6 I 1 - _ I 1 1 �`bol WIN � 4 I , I I 4' I I � I I �W t I I I - Z LU I - � I Y I �. f= 111 � I� 0 I J a ' J I I bb e� m £ i 14 RR w� x E �._. I I 1 I l cblgiS i I �� I `� �,•�!�......... \� _________ �[ a s��,v II II 1 i I Z[00133HS ]3S{ OMMODAVA 9dHl NI JJO-dDHO / ffili ADHS GNV AiN3 iS3AA SiNJAROHNI NOII HJS/OdH] 'R IhS / ME 9iiinno ilSNVU OVDU 39ViNOHJ oNv sas sno 003 URN30 NOIIVIHOdSNVHi GV3HSN01l n O K t (Z) LL 'F Z W A Z 0 D . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . cJ II I �2 i al n O K t (Z) LL 'F Z W A Z 0 D . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . OOVHOIOO'IIVA OdHI NI 330-doua WU31 IHOHS SIN3W3AOUdWi N01133SH31NI HJS / WHIT HJS / 313 Maims IISNvui avoU 39VINOu3 aNV sAva sne 033 URNIO NOliViHOdSNVHi GVIHSNOII 0 o. LLo Ka LLH 110 k � � a d e w d cq a� 0 a� Q Q m U = 111 III III III III =111 11 111 III III IIII 11� II I II III I I III III I III II I II 11 111 1/1 11 I 1 II II I IIIIIIII I I— �I III � 1 1 11 1 1 1 I I I III � 1 1 1 1 1 1 L� i '. i r I IIE I III III III I 1 — - - r I ' — I s i i 4 I 111111 tL 1 111 1 _ ... _ 111 III 111= 111111111111111 =111 11111 ': z 1. I IIIIIIII I I IIIIIIIII; 111111111IIIIIIIIIIII1111111111IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII�IIII1 {, - 4 _ = 11 IIIIIIII I1 ` II II11 1 1 1 1 1 11I III III III III III III I IIII= 111$111 i =� �I $ VI I� III ��l1j�11111�111111 !' w IIII III III I III III II � � 11 111 1 111 11 III 1 1 1 �o 11-111 1 111111-111�1111�111 II =1 H 11 N d 11- 111 1111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111 11 111 EIII 1E 1 1 1 1 1 1 —I I I I I I I I I 111 1 111 v l' � a - I =I Irtl l l IIII II I ., ll 11111 1 —I 11 l =111 =1 I III I III =III III1111II��II111 � 111 111 1 : 1 11 II 111 III �111111�111�11�111111111111�111�1111111111111111111�11�1 .' a I I� �I I I 11 111 III I I Ill III )ll� I I I I I I� i 111 -H II HII II HL II III_' r }: m I I III I ��� ���i 11111111 oh _ _ i — IIIIII�IVIIIIIVIII1111III111111II11111111I111VIII1111III111111III1111IIIII 1 1 1 11 ; 1 I M I — _ II I=1 =ll1 1 = I ll El 11-1111 El I El I El 1 -11 El 11-111 El 11-1 1 I I I L L, _1 1 1 _III 1 11 I .. 11 1 $— Ill�Ill lU U 1 �11� 1 1 111 11 111- 111 III 1 111 111 111 111 II - 1 11 11 1 111 111 111 11 I I I ll I I III f III I 1 1 1 1 111 I I IIIIIIII 1 I I I�$I 1 11 I 11 �III1111II �i111111 1 111111111111 4 — IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII111III III I I i s J1 111 11 �11�111 1 � 1 11�1� 1 1 I I-11111�111111�1I—I I I1111111� 1 II�• —111 1$11111 11 =III III III =III III III =1 � T 11 1 1 I $III 1 - - ` I I I I I I I I I I I II 1 111 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 11 ; — 111 11 1 1 oll I-I ME E-11 El MIEI MIEI ME-11 Emil Emil — 1111111 I a 1 1 1 1 1 1 ( I I I I =1 11 =1 11 =1 11 =1 11 =1 11 =1 11 =111 =I :' 1111iTii� , i i i W Z LU W Co. r u OOVHOIOO `IIVA dz near= .e w = - OdHI NI 330 WH311HOHS <��an �woa.�o,epeB pae p - - �. w= r. e F�F$' w�.m . = - S1N3W3AOHd WI N01103SH31NI HdS/ OdHITHdS/0I3 =6a _ MOI10811SNvui OtlOH 39VINOHd ONV SAVE S08 003 - "' URNIO NOIiViHOdSNVHi Od3HSNOII k � � a d e w d cq a� 0 a� Q Q m U = 111 III III III III =111 11 111 III III IIII 11� II I II III I I III III I III II I II 11 111 1/1 11 I 1 II II I IIIIIIII I I— �I III � 1 1 11 1 1 1 I I I III � 1 1 1 1 1 1 L� i '. i r I IIE I III III III I 1 — - - r I ' — I s i i 4 I 111111 tL 1 111 1 _ ... _ 111 III 111= 111111111111111 =111 11111 ': z 1. I IIIIIIII I I IIIIIIIII; 111111111IIIIIIIIIIII1111111111IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII�IIII1 {, - 4 _ = 11 IIIIIIII I1 ` II II11 1 1 1 1 1 11I III III III III III III I IIII= 111$111 i =� �I $ VI I� III ��l1j�11111�111111 !' w IIII III III I III III II � � 11 111 1 111 11 III 1 1 1 �o 11-111 1 111111-111�1111�111 II =1 H 11 N d 11- 111 1111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111 11 111 EIII 1E 1 1 1 1 1 1 —I I I I I I I I I 111 1 111 v l' � a - I =I Irtl l l IIII II I ., ll 11111 1 —I 11 l =111 =1 I III I III =III III1111II��II111 � 111 111 1 : 1 11 II 111 III �111111�111�11�111111111111�111�1111111111111111111�11�1 .' a I I� �I I I 11 111 III I I Ill III )ll� I I I I I I� i 111 -H II HII II HL II III_' r }: m I I III I ��� ���i 11111111 oh _ _ i — IIIIII�IVIIIIIVIII1111III111111II11111111I111VIII1111III111111III1111IIIII 1 1 1 11 ; 1 I M I — _ II I=1 =ll1 1 = I ll El 11-1111 El I El I El 1 -11 El 11-111 El 11-1 1 I I I L L, _1 1 1 _III 1 11 I .. 11 1 $— Ill�Ill lU U 1 �11� 1 1 111 11 111- 111 III 1 111 111 111 111 II - 1 11 11 1 111 111 111 11 I I I ll I I III f III I 1 1 1 1 111 I I IIIIIIII 1 I I I�$I 1 11 I 11 �III1111II �i111111 1 111111111111 4 — IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII111III III I I i s J1 111 11 �11�111 1 � 1 11�1� 1 1 I I-11111�111111�1I—I I I1111111� 1 II�• —111 1$11111 11 =III III III =III III III =1 � T 11 1 1 I $III 1 - - ` I I I I I I I I I I I II 1 111 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 11 ; — 111 11 1 1 oll I-I ME E-11 El MIEI MIEI ME-11 Emil Emil — 1111111 I a 1 1 1 1 1 1 ( I I I I =1 11 =1 11 =1 11 =1 11 =1 11 =1 11 =111 =I :' 1111iTii� , i i i W Z LU W Co. r u o = m_<�= ao8�f�mw°sm p e P ew OOVHOIOO `IIVA - OdHI N1330 WH311HOHS S1N3W3AOHdWIN01103SH31NIH3S /WHIT H3S /OI3 Maims 11SNtlH10tlOH 30tl1NOH3 ONV SAva SN8 003 - URN3O NOIiViHOdSNVHi Od3HSNOII k � � � a d e w a _ JIB 0 F,.b O I L H z 0 - 1 iI m , 4g Q - 111 - LL w o - Ha w > We W F K� I W 0 �N P N r LL 11� IIII 111V ���� III = I I I I I L III _I 1 11 1 — 1j ® I -�- - - - 1111111111 I I 11 111 1 + m III - m� - -� m IF 11 —III I III I 11 111 111 111 IIII = III III I I 1 1 1 = III = III = 111 1 = 1 — IF I i I I I I I III I I I I I I III I I II I III i 11 _ h ° 3 I ll ll l ll ro _ _ III — I I 1 111 111 111 111 l \ 1= 111= 111= 1111 —I 11 111 1 1 111 III a - � I I�1 1 1�1 1 � IkI 1 � - 11111 III = III III III III =IIII =III ,� I I I III III oa � II� 111= � —ILI= I I11 111 111 111 111 111 111 111 1HEM F ' ' I III = III III = III =1'11 =III r I I I � III — III III — ICI — F III o w a I III- III II11�111= _ _ w o0 o 111111 - 1 111 11 ��I — I — 1 � =p gz o � �� �� I „III, I e � I lll l i l i III I-I I III -i I I r I I I I I I p o p M k � � a d e w d a wlm old QI� �Y, o ;I o F w QI 0 a F w IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII a W III Da - II I I I —II 1 —+ Qa 1 I I N o � � I I I I� I I� I I� I I�I I I � LU III II 1� 111111_1 - Tlff Illlll lTlfl = I1 =I I I1 =I 1 11 II I I I I II I 1 L 1� 1 111 II 111 111 11 1 1 111 111 = 111111= IIIEIIIE IIIIII I 1 I II I I } I 11= 11111 I I 1 =1 I U I I = II I I I I II I I _ '1lflll I I I 1 —I o � _ dz near= .e w - OdHI NI ddO WH311HOHS - S1N3W3AOHd WI N01133SH31NI HdS /WHIT HdS /0I3 _ MOI10811SNvui OtlOH 39VINOHd ONV SAVE S08 003 - "' URNIO NOIiViHOdSNVHi Od3HSNOII k � � a d e w d a wlm old QI� �Y, o ;I o F w QI 0 a F w IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII a W III Da - II I I I —II 1 —+ Qa 1 I I N o � � I I I I� I I� I I� I I�I I I � LU III II 1� 111111_1 - Tlff Illlll lTlfl = I1 =I I I1 =I 1 11 II I I I I II I 1 L 1� 1 111 II 111 111 11 1 1 111 111 = 111111= IIIEIIIE IIIIII I 1 I II I I } I 11= 11111 I I 1 =1 I U I I = II I I I I II I I _ '1lflll I I I 1 —I o � _ — M\ u-\ \ j \\ :Dane wnA - m,m__,_!me- -__mm_m_m_: WHIT _:m- - Maims __m.__._m,_m- u#moNaAAmSN gggSNOn O : M( C14 M § ®t Q \j F� U ( \j N F� u ) {\ :Dane wnA - m,m__,_!me- -__mm_m_m_: WHIT _:m- - Maims __m.__._m,_m- u#moNaAAmSN gggSNOn C4 M § ®t Q � -- \( � U � e �w OOVHOIOO `IIVA - OdHl N1330 WH311HOHS S1N3W3AOHdWIN01133SH31NIH3S /WHIT H3S /OI3 - Maims 11SNvui avoH 30tl1NOH3 ONV sna SN8 003 - URN3O NOIiViHOdSNdal Od3SNOII k � � � a d e � M a wi wi � wi A op i i aop i i I I I�� i i IIIII� II I I II' I� ' i II - i i � I I I I III I I I I � i i l � , 11111111111 I i 1 I I I I I I I I I I � I II I �< a og � — I' _ _ � I I I I I II I1 1 1 I I I1 _' o am �g s ag ao no 11 I 11� T _ Hill� Z 0 a w w w 0 w �.e z a wN T" 1 L i =a a3 o I o IT II II i i moo. v ON _ I III III — II 11 III III III III -11— ' ' I I =I I III —I IIIIIIIIII �I I I III =III III III —I I I I � I I —III III III -I I 11� I I I I II I I I I II I I I I II I I I I I� _ III III — I I III —III III III — I I �_JI — III III 11 1 IIIIIIIIIII�I =III iii 11 IIII II III11 �IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII�� 11 8 »m�° e OOVHOIOO `IIVA OdHI NI dd0 WE1311HOHS - S1N3WHOHdWIN0I103SH31NItldS /0dH19 HdS /013 Maims 11SNtlH10tlOkl 30tl1NOHd ONY SAVO SN9 003 - URNIO NOIlViHOdSNVHi OVISN011 k � � � a d ew � ao M M a I O p it — a z 0 U co W co K W z Q F � Q' �a ►1 L o o -1> of wi� � wig w Q � U W co W co W z Q F � Fe �8 T— RESOLUTION NO. 13 Series of 2010 RESOLUTION NO. 13, SERIES OF 2010, A RESOLUTION TO AMEND CHAPTER 4, RECOMMENDATIONS - OVERALL STUDY AREA AND CHAPTER 5, DETAILED PLAN RECOMMENDATIONS, LIONSHEAD REDEVELOPMENT MASTER PLAN, PUSUANT TO SECTION 2.8, ADOPTION AND AMENDMENT OF THE MASTER PLAN, LIONSHEAD REDEVELOPMENT MASTER PLAN, TO AMEND THE RECOMMENDATIONS FOR TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENTS IN LIONSHEAD (GENERALLY LOCATED AT THE LIONSHEAD PARKING STRUCTURE AND THE CONCERT HALL PLAZA BUS STOP), AND SETTING FORTH DETAILS IN REGARD THERETO. WHEREAS, on December 15, 1998, the Vail Town Council adopted the Lionshead Redevelopment Master Plan; and WHEREAS, on April 6, 1999, the Vail Town Council adopted Ordinance 3, Series of 1999, which amended the Zoning Regulations and created Lionshead Mixed Use 1 and Lionshead Mixed Use 2 Districts; and WHEREAS, Section 2.8 of Master Plan outlines a procedure for amending the Master Plan; and WHEREAS, the Town of Vail Planning and Environmental Commission has held a public hearing on the proposed amendment on April 12, 2010, and has forwarded a recommendation of approval, of the amendment to the Town Council by a vote of 6 -0 -0; and WHEREAS, the purpose of this amendment is to provide detailed recommendations to improve transit functions and service in Lionshead and provide skier drop -off in close proximity to the portal; and WHEREAS, the Town Council finds that the proposed amendment improves and enhances the effectiveness of the Master Plan without negatively affecting the goals, objectives, and policies prescribed by the Master Plan. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE TOWN COUNCIL OF THE TOWN OF VAIL, COLORADO: The Town Council of the Town of Vail hereby amends the Lionshead Redevelopment Master Plan as follows: Resolution No. 13, Series of 2010 1 (in part) CHAPTER 4 Recommendations — Overall Study Area This section of the master plan addresses issues that affect Lionshead as a whole. These issues — and recommendations to address them - should be considered in all planning and policy decisions as Lionshead redevelops. 4.1.5 West Lionshead - Residential/ Mixed -Use Hub West Lionshead includes the Vail Associates Service Yard, Holy Cross site, Vail Professional Building site, Cascade Crossings site, Glen Lyon Office Building site, former gas station site and the Eagle River Water and Sanitation site. This area of Lionshead is generally under utilized and from an aesthetic standpoint is not in keeping with what the Town would like to see Lionshead become as it redevelops in the coming years. The Town of Vail does place a high value on maintaining the office and retail areas in West Lionshead and any redevelopment should reasonably increase the square footage of existing office and have "no net loss" of retail square footage in West Lionshead. With their recent acquisition of additional properties in this area, Vail Resorts has the opportunity to bring lift service to this part of Lionshead. Lift service brings with it great potential for the re- development of this area and in doing so expand all of Lionshead to the west with improved pedestrian connections, new retail and office activity and other improvements. While lift access will certainly energize this area during the winter months, attention should be given to creating a year - round attraction within this area of Lionshead (see detailed plan recommendations in Chapter 5) The master plan recommends that this hub become a residential/ mixed use area with an emphasis on meeting the needs of both the local community and our guests. Appropriate uses could include high density residential development, lodging, community and visitor based office and retail space, employee housing and parking, bus or transit functions and a ski lift connection to Vail Mountain. The catalyst for this mixed use hub is ski lift access to Vail Mountain. Consideration should be given to integrating employee housing into the redevelopment of West Lionshead in accordance with the Town's employee housing policies and regulations. To the extent possible development patterns in this area should reflect north -south orientation of buildings, visual penetrations to the mountain, and a pedestrian oriented environment. The degree of north -south building orientation may be difficult given the relatively narrow east -west orientation of this area. In addition, the introduction of ski lift access in this location creates a catalyst for a structured public parking facility. All service and delivery demands created by development in this area shall be accommodated on -site. Resolution No. 13, Series of 2010 1� The site will continue to accommodate the existing and potentially expanded functions of the Vail sanitation plant. The mountain service yard could be reduced in size, as some functions can be moved to less central locations. It may also be possible to relocate the entire mountain service yard to a new location in the West Lionshead area which would allow for greater flexibility in the redevelopment of this site. However as the area develops it is critical that new uses be connected to the primary pedestrian corridors and that they be served by the Town of Vail in -town transit system. 4.3 Connections to the Natural Environment One of the outstanding characteristics of Vail Village is its spectacular visual connection to Vail Mountain, particularly the protected view corridors up Bridge Street from the village parking structure and toward the Gore Range from East Meadow Drive. Over the years the village has also strengthened its physical connections to the natural environment by improving creek side parks and trails and by integrating landscape into the built environment at every opportunity. Lionshead has no similarly strong connection to the natural environment even though it is situated even closer to the base of the mountain. To remedy this critical deficiency, the following recommendations are made: 4.5 Public Transportation An efficient transit system is critical to the character and environmental quality of any pedestrian- oriented resort. It is also assumed that as growth and redevelopment continues in the Lionshead area an expansion of existing transit facilities will be necessary. In 2009 the Town of Vail completed the Lionshead Transit Station project. While this study address a number of transit, transit related functions (skier drop -off, loading, hotel shuttles, charter buses, etc.), and other related master plan goals (inviting portals, pedestrian experience, etc.), the focus of this effort was to define a solution for establishing a central transit station within the Lionshead area. A , 'model" for a central station would be the transportation center in Vail Village. By way of comparison, transit operations in Lionshead are dispersed throughout the area and lacking the efficiency's of the Vail Village center. Transit station facilities necessary to accommodate in -town shuttles, local buses and ECO buses were assessed based on both near term and long term needs. It was determined that over the near term between 9 and 11 bus bays will be needed and that in the long term up to 12 to 14 bus bays could be necessary (Lionshead Transit Study, LSC 2009). Given the existing "built condition" of Lionshead there are no perfect solutions for a transit station from either the standpoint of location or cost. For these reasons a phased approach for transit station improvements is appropriate. Resolution No. 13, Series of 2010 4.5.1 Connection to West Lionshead West Lionshead consists of the Vail Associates Service Yard, Holy Cross site, Vail Professional Building site, Cascade Crossings site, Glen Lyon Office Building site, former gas station site and the Eagle River Water and Sanitation site. Because it is an area of potentially significant growth, it is important that it be fully integrated into the Town of Vail transit system. The West Lionshead properties are at the outside edge of the acceptable walking distance to the ski yard (1200 feet). With a mixed use development in the area which integrates a ski portal, retail space, office space and residential development, transit service to this area and interconnections to other portals will be critical to develop in the future. In addition, the update of the Vail Transportation Master Plan and the 2009 Lionshead Transit Study shall provide direction on the ultimate location of a Lionshead Transit Facility along with needed interconnections between ski portals, regional transit stops, and other transportation modes. The addition of a ski lift in this area would make this area more viable to redevelopment as it would be within the acceptable walking distance of a lift (1,200 feet). 4.5.2 Maximum Efficiency and Utilization The following recommendations are made to enhance the efficiency and functionality of the Lionshead transit connections in anticipation of future redevelopment in the area: 4.5.2.1 Regional Transit Stop Alternative locations considered for a regional transit station include the North Day Lot, the West Lionshead area and the Lionshead Parking Structure. Of these alternatives the preferred location is the Lionshead Parking Structure. The Structure is well -sited from a locational standpoint, allows for convenient connections with shuttles, local and in -town bus routes, and may allow for the phased development of a transit station that can respond to Lionshead's transit needs over time. Affordable housing (in lieu of a transit center) was deemed to be the preferred use for the North Day lot and the west Lionshead area was considered too remote from the rest of Lionshead to be a suitable location for a centralized transit center. Notwithstanding the above, facilities for skier drop -off, private shuttle vans, regional buses (ECO), charter buses and the Vail In -Town bus, as defined by the West Lionshead Transit Study (LSC, 2009), should be included in the design of the ski lift and parking facility at West Lionshead. 4.5.2.2 Concert Hall Plaza Stop The elimination of the Concert Hall stop would free up space needed to implement a meaningful redevelopment of Concert Hall Plaza and create a better western portal to the Lionshead core (as more thoroughly described in section 5.10.2). However, the transit and loading /short -term parking provided in this location provide an important service to this part of Lionshead. Any Resolution No. 13, Series of 2010 4 redevelopment of the Concert Hall Plaza or Montaneros will need to address these transit and other related functions. 4.5.2.3 The North Day Lot The North Day lot presents a location for two important community -based uses — a transit center and affordable housing. It has been determined that this site is most suited for housing and transit related functions on this site should be limited to skier drop -off and potentially short -term parking /loading functions. 4.5.2.4 Transit Station at Lionshead Parking Structure /Frontage Road The "Lionshead Transit Center and Related Transportation Enhancement Improvements Design Study" completed in 2009 by the 4240 Architecture Design Team concluded that the Lionshead Parking Structure presents the most viable location for a centralized transit station in Lionshead. In order to address the near -term transit needs an initial phase is recommended that includes a transit stop along the Frontage Road immediately north of the structure. This solution has minimal impacts on the parking structure, can be implemented at a relatively low cost and will meet Lionshead's anticipated transit needs for the near term future. As a long term solution, the Transit Center should be integrated within the Lionshead Parking Structure site; either within a new redevelopment, as contemplated in the 2006 Lionshead Parking Structure Redevelopment Plan, or on top of a future reconstruction of a Lionshead Parking Structure. Transit requirements should be met as outlined within the 2009 Lionshead Transit Study. Resolution No. 13, Series of 2010 -- t C Fifflve 4-6- POWOW wrong "101"eme U al rntersrcPon of Ewt Lwns*eud Circle m"d -%wh Frolwage Road Resolution No. 13, Series of 2010 DEDICATED WESTHOUND LEFT TURN LANE Ibw 6* t dpw. . e 1� f ;. N Figure 4 -6a - Lionshead Transit Center on tour deck of Parking Stricture Resolution No. 13, Series of 2010 Art k� dw tea. ' _ � � : ` l y , v rt . • j r t�ir� ,"'. 9 -..� s �^ r- h L X � R 1 y ��• - UONSKEAD PAPJMNC � "�► � � �` � � °.'1 1..+ w} w: � � ti-r �� '' ` �-�ti k. * � �� fib. y K� 4 � r "�.' � Figure 4 -6b - Frontage road eco stop 4.5.3.3 East Lionshead Circle and South Frontage Road Intersection The intersection of the South Frontage Road and East Lionshead Circle is a severe problem for Lionshead transit service. The first problem with this intersection is the steep approach gradient, making it difficult in severe weather for the bus to turn onto the South Frontage Road. The second issue, often exacerbated by the first, is the left turn movement across traffic onto the frontage road. There is no easy solution to this problem. Reduction of vehicular traffic on East Lionshead Circle would decrease competition for openings in the frontage road traffic, but this is only a partial solution. Other mitigating measures could include the following: Resolution No. 13, Series of 2010 8 e. Removal of Transit from the Frontage Road The frontage road section between East and West Lionshead Circle is the only portion of the Town of Vail in -town transit route on the frontage road. Frontage road traffic and the difficulty in making left turns cause frequent delays in transit service. The route could be modified in several ways: Create a parallel transit lane on the south side of the South Frontage Road (see figure 4 -8). Although physically feasible, this alternative would require the acquisition of land from adjacent lodging properties currently used for parking, an action these property owners would likely resist. A dedicated transit lane would also exacerbate conflicts at intersections and lodging driveways. • Create a new underground transit corridor between the North Day Lot and East Lionshead Circle. This option should be pursued with the cooperation of property owners when and if the properties in this area redevelop. • Terminating the in -town shuttle bus route at the East Lionshead drop -off (see figure 4 -7) was suggested as an alternative to consider in the original Lionshead Redevelopment Master Plan. This idea was re- visited during the 2009 Lionshead Transit Station project. Due to strong public input to maintain in -town shuttle service to the western side of Lionshead this idea was not pursued. In the future it may be desirable to have the ability (for operational purposes) for buses to turn around on East Lionshead Circle at the east entry to Lionshead. The re- design of the east entry to Lionshead should not preclude the possibility of this turning movement being accommodated at some point in the future. 4.5.3.4 East Lionshead Circle Skier Drop Off Lionshead is lacking sufficient, well - located skier drop off facilities. For many years residents and guests have been using the East Lionshead Circle area at the pedestrian entry to Lionshead to drop off and pick up skiers. This "illegal" activity is cause for much of the congestion, confusion and pedestrian conflicts in this area. Efforts should be made to provide alternative locations for convenient and accessible skier drop off. Possibilities include the North Day Lot and the Lionshead Parking Structure. Resolution No. 13, Series of 2010 9 "'IN TOWN" TRANSIT ROUTE POTENTIAL TE LNWATION OF ROUTE AT EAST LiONSHEAD PEDESTRIAN PORTAL MV • ,[� dr ` ' � lb �� �■�� y�j�� • � I• �h`... 111 Tii� C` 4 L(*� La. �} ` � '4' � y'4. ..�.•a+r.�'�6 {Y • r ra�<�jrr r +. a � ` � i` s 4 L Figwv 4 -7 - Transit Rau& Termination at F«osi Lions Pedeso- mi Portal Note: The feasibility of terminating the In Town Transit route at the East Lionshead Portal was dis- cussed during the 200912010 Lionshead Transit Study. It was determined at that time that the In Town route should continue to service the Marriott and Concert Hall Plaza stops. Resolution No. 13, Series of 2010 10 WEST LIONSHEAD CIRCLE P p Zoo L EM L— V&N'TAGE POINT EAST LIONSHEAD CIRCLE %.Owl HIMM1.16 k - 01- Figure 4-A -,Potential Transit Point Parallel io South Fronrage Road tv Resolution No. 13, Series of 2010 11 4.6.3 Modification to East Lionshead Circle The overriding goal for East Lionshead Circle is to de- emphasize vehicular traffic and create a quality, safe, and vibrant pedestrian corridor. Specific recommendations are as follows: 4.6.3.1 Eastern Connection to South Frontage Road A prerequisite for improving safety in the pedestrian crossing between the Lionshead parking structure and the eastern entrance to the Lionshead retail core is a significant reduction in the volume of vehicular traffic (except for transit, emergency vehicles, and adjacent residents). It was initially thought that the most effective means to accomplish this would be to connect East Lionshead Circle back to the frontage road on the east end of the parking structure. However, there are several serious problems. c. Transit Conflicts Connection of the street to the frontage road could introduce a new point of conflict between cars and buses at the driveway down to the Library and Dobson Arena, especially if a vehicular drop -off point is introduced at the west end of Dobson. As an element of the 2009 Lionshead Transit Station Project the feasibility of creating an eastern connection of East Lionshead Circle to the Frontage Road was evaluated. The conclusion of this evaluation was that the existing gradient and land ownership patterns rendered this idea to be infeasible. The idea of an east connection could be reconsidered if ownership patterns changed or in conjunction with the redevelopment of Vail International. Resolution No. 13, Series of 2010 12 d * LIONSQUARE LODGE NORTH PROPERTY LIONSHEAD PLACE r WEST LIONSHEAD CIRCLE FR24AR.Y PEDESTRUN WALK 1340M10 1: Me) o. 7 -stI:lel REDEVELOPED CONCERT HALL PLAZA Figure 4 -IX Are"wHon of Lionshead Place and West ✓•:lon. headf'trcle Note: Potential redevelopment of the Concert Hall Plaza contemplates the removal of transit transit stop /short -term drop off and loading facilities and the use of Town -owned land to implement this redevel- opment. The feasibility of removing these facilities adjacent to the Concert Hall Plaza location was evalu- ated during the 2004/2010 Lionshead Transit Study and it was determined that these facilities should remain in place. Any redevelopment of Concert Hall Plaza will need to address these transit and loading uses. 4.6.6 Simba Run Underpass Currently the Town of Vail has only two north /south access points between the North Frontage Road and South Frontage Road between Main Vail and West Vail. It has been contemplated that an additional north /south connection be established west of Cascade Crossing. The need for this underpass will be accelerated as a result of the Town's redevelopment plans for Timber Ridge, West Vail and West Lionshead. The redevelopment of the West Lionshead area r Resolution No. 13, Series of 2010 13 should be done in a manner that encourages this new connection to be established in the future. It is recommended that the proposed amendments to the Vail Transportation Master Plan provide direction on when public improvements on the Frontage Road need to occur and how they are paid for between public and private funds. The current boundaries of the Lionshead Urban Renewal Authority should be amended to include the location of the Simba Run underpass. 4.7.3.1 West End of Lionshead Parking Structure The idea of a non - structured central loading facility at the west end of the Lionshead parking structure was presented in the original version of the Lionshead Redevelopment Master Plan. This idea was further evaluated as an element of the 2009 Lionshead Transit Station Project. Due primarily to the grade of East Lionshead Circle ( +8 %) as well as the visual impact of this use and conflicts with parking structure snow removal areas, this idea was deemed to be infeasible. The goal of removing loading from the east entry to Lionshead in order to improve safety and the overall pedestrian experience remains. Loading for businesses in the eastern end of Lionshead can be accommodated from the public loading spaces located within the Arrabelle project. 4.7.3.3 Vail Associates Core Site As the single largest service traffic generator in Lionshead, the Vail Associates core site redevelopment (Arrabelle) will provide for its own service and delivery needs. In addition, the project will provide a minimum of three loading spaces and up to six loading spaces available for public use. These spaces will provide loading facilities for properties in Lionshead that do not have on -site loading capabilities. 4.8 Parking Parking is a critical component in a mixed -use resort environment such as Lionshead, and any efforts to enhance this component should adhere to the following goals and guidelines: e. Parking requirements should not constitute an unnecessary disincentive to redevelopment. A thorough review of the current parking pay -in -lieu code and parking ratio requirements is recommended. Given the above discussions it is important that parking requirements accurately meet the true parking demand of new development and redevelopment. For example, a stated goal of the master plan is to encourage, facilitate, and provide incentives for the expansion of ground level retail in Lionshead. While this expanded retail will likely represent some level of incremental increase to public parking demand in Lionshead, this demand needs to be accurately understood so the parking pay -in -lieu fee does not make the retail expansion economically unfeasible. Resolution No. 13, Series of 2010 14 4.9.4.6 North Day Lot The North Day lot is considered to be the preferred location for a significant housing project in Lionshead to replace the Sunbird affordable housing project and provide housing for new employee generation. Additionally, it may be necessary to develop a higher revenue - generating product on a portion of the Vail Associates service yard, Holy Cross, Vail Professional Building, and Cascade Crossing sites in order to defray the cost of road and infrastructure improvements. In planning the site, the following issues need to be considered. While it is important that buildings here be visually consistent with the overall character of Lionshead, the desire to maximize the housing potential may make appropriate the following deviations from standard development parameters: (in part) CHAPTER 5 Detailed Plan Recommendations This section of the Lionshead Master plan examines individual parcels and groups of parcels within the Lionshead study area, excluding the residential properties on the south side of Gore Creek. The intent of this chapter — and the Master plan as a whole - is to identify important functional relationships and visual objectives within the district and to propose a framework for the long -term redevelopment of Lionshead. The document does not intend to limit or eliminate ideas relating to specific parcels; any proposals consistent with this framework should be considered even if they are not anticipated in this document. The parcels addressed here are organized generally from east to west, starting with the civic hub on the eastern end of the parking structure. 5.3 Lionshead Tourist Information Center The Lionshead Tourist Information Center is currently located just west of the entry to the Lionshead parking structure and is accessed directly off the frontage road. If the entrance to the Lionshead parking structure is relocated as shown in figure 5 -1 this existing facility will need to be relocated. Potential locations for the center include the Future Vail Civic Center and the parking structure. 5.5 East Lionshead Bus Drop -off Area This area is an essential pedestrian connection between the Lionshead parking structure and the Lionshead retail mall. The master plan recommends the removal of service and delivery activities, skier drop -off, and shuttle vans from this area in order to make pedestrian crossing safer. Other improvements include: Resolution No. 13, Series of 2010 15 5.5.2 Transit Stop The transit arrival and drop -off points should be re- designed to provide improved transit functions and a better pedestrian experience. While pedestrian and bus conflicts will always exist given the need for people to move between the parking garage and the east Lionshead portal, significant improvements can be made to landscaping, sight - lines, pavement surfaces, grades and the aesthetic quality of this area. 5.5.3 Potential Building Infill Site At one time the Master Plan contemplated that when the skier drop -off and service and delivery functions are removed from the east entry to Lionshead area that the transit stop may be reduced in size yielding a site suitable for infill development. This infill development would be associated with Vail 21 and /or Lionshead Center re- developments on property that functions as road right -of- way and is owned by the Town of Vail. Development of this area would potentially create a strong gateway into the retail core and better definition of the pedestrian corridor that connects it to the parking structure. During the 2009 Lionshead Transit Study there was discussion regarding the idea of the entry into Lionshead being a "softer" more landscaped environment similar in concept to Slifer Square. In addition, there is a need to maintain transit functions in this area. For these reasons, coupled with the limited space available in this area the "build to" lines depicted on Map S may not be feasible. Any necessary refinements to "build to" lines should be considered during subsequent detailed design of the east entry into Lionshead. 5.6 West Face of the Parking Structure This area had previously been contemplated as being used for loading and delivery. However as previously mentioned this is not feasible. This area should be preserved for snow storage and access into the Lionshead Parking Structure. Resolution No. 13, Series of 2010 16 VAIL PUBLIC L RARY 003SON ICE ARENA POTENTLAL DfE1EL.UHvII24T ON SOUTH FACE OF STRUCTURE .. ✓#` '''' fit +rte !t ti } -. ✓. L G IF r. f Vol �1*4 _ r - " 1 LIDNSR AD PARKING STRUMME •ms y � . L t i L — PC YTF.Nr A 1 _ CMC f'I:_7 lT--R C'OMPONEiIT CO NEC 110N BETWEEN DOBSON ICE ARENA AN-D PCTUf7`IAL CIVIC CL"I"PS - COM?ONE[+Tf V AIL NTERN ATION_J L EAST LION'SHEA D PEDESTRIAN POR ?AL F[iy,ura3 - - V ail Clvf.a C:emef and East Lkruhaad F6zu" 5 -6 -Ea3t LionAeod Pbiasolw Ac,rW Resolution No. 13, Series of 2010 17 ENFLkNCEII PEDESTRIAN ACCESS TO EXIeI.1T[NO EET AIL SPACE i TRAFFIC CONTROL STATION WEST IN 1 WEST OUT SKIER DROP OFF Y PEDESTRIAN ENTR! CORUDOR FY 5-3 -East LiomAead PEd4mww Asir I EXPANDEDA74 RETAIL Resolution No. 13, Series of 2010 18 L RETAIL DEVELOPMENT ON FACE OF PARKING STUC'IURE f L.IO1 SHERD ARCADE RETALL I XPANSION . it t i mm 1 L "OUST; t OWE 1 ow IM EIfELAPED U41V PKIDE. BUILLANU REDEVELOPED PARJUNU VECPL RETAIL. EXPANSION F1gwv S T- LLmuh ad Ammade. Pte!' 21. L[y'verse Lodge Liawridc and RedevL4nj�Palm De k Resolution No. 13, Series of 2010 19 ACCESS DRIV - EAST -WEST O RIE NTED DEVELOPMENT ON EX[STMWJ PARXJWG D NORTH -SC LMI O Rf'Fhi•Ti" D DEVELOPMENT SPANNI'4Cm ACCESS DRWE I i __ fl 1L 1 it f VANTAGE POiN'T i F I — l 4 ni] 54z, I LJONSI ARCADE VAII, 21 Rfi i`A L EXPAMION AND 74FMI Figum .ti • "::. Ahrmeave Redr,wlpMenr Oppornmty w L kmrpndc aitildmg Site Resolution No. 13, Series of 2010 20 A UONSHEAD ARCADE LIONSFMAD CENTTR A I P alk l.t�J. VAIL ASSOCIATES CORE SrrF LANDMARK RETAIL cGNCERT HALL PLAZA 1 i Syr ,r VAL Z1 T TFTMI NE T 11TW R Fgu a 54 - Lions*wd RmW Core Area Resolution No. 13, Series of 2010 21 P'RWXY I' DESTRMIN CORRMORs SWONDARY PE DESIRL N CORRIDORS SKI YARD PEDESTRIAN PORTAL f r UONS4 DARE LOWE PEDESTRIAN WAL" , 4 ' � L U' � 7' # �'• I _ - EAST LIGNaS PEDESTRIANS KAT'AL L LI O NSHEAD PARKWO MUCM WEST LICJNISNI ,AI7 P17-M ?SIRTAN K)R AL Fib 4.9 •East-Waxt w dNarrih --Sa wh Limshad Corr f rdzirfan C'orr dots Resolution No. 13, Series of 2010 22 ?WESTRIA"L - Y C[.E ACCESS a Jr 1 • b WEST LIONSHE PEDESTMAN PORULL NEW PEDESMAN 2ORRIDOR F(Swv 5 -11 -Wmi Li6ahwd M4UP&kMfmM CcMO WIftuis Note: Establishing the West Lionshead Pedestrian Portal was predicated on the removal of transit, drop -off and loading facilities. During the 200912010 Lionshead Transit Study and it was determined that these facilities should remain in place. A pedestrian portal in this location is still desired, but will need to be done in conjunction with maintaining transit, drop- -off and loading uses. Resolution No. 13, Series of 2010 23 L— LIONS11 -%D R.ETAM MALL PEDFSTR ANMICYCLE ACCESS WEST LIONSHEAD MONTANEROS _ - '' x ! 1 e e t e r REDEVF_LOPFDCON-_TRT Y M1 PI-47A FIRE LAME Figure 5 -L -We& Lsorc hwdMall Pedesftwn C4nrtei Jow Note: Establishing the West Lionshead Pedestrian Portal was predicated on the removal of transit, drop -off and loading facilities. Turing the 2009!2014 Lionshead Transit Study and it was determined that these facilities should remain in place. A pedestrian portal in this location is still desired, but will need to be done in conjunction with maintaining transit, drop -off and loading uses. Resolution No. 13, Series of 2010 24 5.9 North Day Lot At the time the Lionshead Redevelopment Master Plan was adopted the North Day Lot was identified as a potential location for a central transit facility. During subsequent study of the site in 2008 and 2009 it was determined that the Town would not pursue locating a transit center on this site. In lieu of a transit center the North Day Lot has been programmed to provide affordable housing along with a skier drop -off parking lot. PP T MAL C:ti IMMERCLAL SPACE DUELTABOVE NORTH DAY L,0T *WR T. CBWU NORTH DAY LOr TRANSPORTATION CET i7PR —4 PC[TENTIAL NORTH-SCUM COMPUTUNr OF RU2EYEU PL•D LAP;5D1AMX TOWVHOAl ES ?`Cn'BNT1AL COMMON LQB nY SPACE PSLCREAT ON h]r1ENVrY 002WOK N' 4F F,EPtVF 4FED 1—k? -D ARI TOWIR NES POTTCNTLAL EA.T - VkT4T (:4)MPUNENI L)F REDBWELUFF-F £ E`ffm CUL-DE-SAC DROFOFF AHD o GRAD. TRANSMON rqW RETAIL CORE REDE'e2W?'ED CONCERT HALLPlAZA WEST LJONSEEAD C.RU F— Node, TIC P©ianuai C]3ME3 Ld 0PMPMW, iit���i in grxpf:ic Will regli= nihe.r Kdnw VT ir. onintred r,ubn ar oE•xic aaAi0p_ Resolution No. 13, Series of 2010 25 ,F°i urr j -r3a_ BEd It frdckr.P+.F v r,.7 rYaenr±w f7�s �4'nrt4 l f T. ramtvJrtt WM.. CdiaWEEk 5.10.2 Concert Hall Plaza /Montaneros Concert Hall Plaza was intended to be the western portal into the Lionshead pedestrian core, but pedestrians can't see where it leads and don't use it. When this property is redeveloped, a priority will be to create a connection as direct as possible between the western terminus of the pedestrian core and the intersection of West Lionshead Circle and Lionshead Place. The concept illustrated in figure 5 -11 would require cooperation with the Town of Vail to remove the existing bus drop -off, as well as Montaneros and the Landmark Townhomes. (The scenario in figure 5 -11 would require a small property acquisition from the Landmark in the northeast corner of the redeveloped structure.) The redeveloped structure could accommodate a vertical residential component as well. This is the most feasible solution for a strong pedestrian connection, but the best solution would entail a cooperative redevelopment effort with the Montaneros. The Town of Vail should make all reasonable efforts to encourage and facilitate this redevelopment. However, the need to maintain a bus stop and some level of short -term parking and loading /delivery functions on Town -owned land adjacent to Concert Hall Plaza will be an important consideration in the re- development of these properties. INTRODUCED, READ, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 4th day of May, 2010. Richard D. Cleveland, Mayor, Town of Vail ATTEST: Lorelei Donaldson, Town Clerk Resolution No. 13, Series of 2010 26 Resolution No. 13, Series of 2010 27 Resolution No. 13, Series of 2010 28 LIONSHEAD TRANSIT PROJECT Conditional Use Permit April 12, 2010 Background on Project Growth and redevelopment in the Lionshead area has been significant in the past few years. In response to this growth an expansion of existing transit facilities will be necessary. In 2009 the Town of Vail initiated the Lionshead Transit Station project in order to develop plans for improving transit and transit related services in the Lionshead area. While this study addressed a number of transit, transit related functions (skier drop -off, loading, hotel shuttles, charter buses, etc.), and other related master plan goals (inviting portals, pedestrian experience, etc.), the focus of this effort was to define a solution for establishing a central transit station within the Lionshead area. A "model" for a central station is the transportation center in Vail Village. By way of comparison, transit operations in Lionshead are dispersed throughout the area and lacking the efficiency's of the Vail Village center. Transit station facilities necessary to accommodate in -town shuttles, local buses and ECO buses were assessed base on both near term and long term needs. It was determined that over the near term between 9 and 11 bus bays will be needed and that in the long term up to 12 to 14 bus bays could be necessary (Lionshead Transit Study, LSC 2009). Given the existing "built condition" of Lionshead there are no perfect solutions for a transit station from either the standpoint of location or cost. For these and other reasons a phased approach will be taken toward implementing transit station and related improvements in Lionshead. This Conditional Use Permit addresses the first phase of improvements. Project Components and Project Phasing Six major improvements have been identified by the 2009 Lionshead Transit Station project. These improvements have been divided into two phases. The first phase of improvements includes: • A 4 -bay Regional (ECO) Bus Stop a the Lionshead Parking Structure (along the South Frontage Road) • Skier Drop -off facility in the southwest corner of the Lionshead Parking Structure • A left -turn lane on East Lionshead Circle at the Frontage Road intersection. Plans are to begin construction of these three improvements in 2010 with project completion extending into 2011. Lionshead Transit Station CUP 1 April 12, 2010 Phase II improvements include: Redevelopment of the Auxiliary Building at the southwest corner of the Lionshead Parking Structure Landscape /streetscape improvements at the east entry to Lionshead (south side of East Lionshead Circle) Streetscape improvements to the existing bus stop at Concert Hall Plaza Construction schedules for these improvements have not yet been established by the Town Council. Work has begun on the design of the Auxiliary Building and plans are to submit a CUP application for PEC review later this year. Design work on streetscape /landscape work at the east entry to Lionshead and at the Concert Hall Plaza transit stop has not yet been initiated. Description of CUP Requests The Lionshead Parking Structure is zoned General Use (GU). The GU District is intended to provide sites for public and quasi - public uses and most uses in the District are allowed subject to approval of a condition use permit. Two of the improvements contemplated for 2010 construction require a CUP: The ECO bus stop would require approval of a CUP for a "public transportation terminal ", and The proposed "west in /west out" access to the parking structure is a modification to an existing public parking structure and as such a CUP will be necessary for a "public parking structure ". The addition of a left turn lane to East Lionshead Circle, while an element of the improvement package submitted to the Town, does not require approval of a CUP by the PEC. The following summarizes the two improvements addressed by this CUP request: ECO Bus Stop This "transit terminal" involves a four -bay bus pull -off lane along the South Frontage Road, a 1,200 square foot transit building, pedestrian circulation improvements and landscape improvements. A number of design alternatives for this stop were considered. The "pull -off bus lane" design has been proposed in order to minimize the loss of trees along the Frontage Road and to also avoid modifications to the existing parking structure. This terminal will allow ECO to discontinue service at the CUP stop. The 1,200 square foot transit building will provide rest rooms and a passenger waiting area. Pedestrian improvements include an outdoor waiting area and a walkway connecting the transit stop with the southeast corner of the Lionshead Parking Structure. Lionshead Transit Station CUP 2 April 12, 2010 This walkway runs along the western end of the structure such that pedestrians will not have to walk the structure's parking areas and drive aisles. The pedestrian walk will require the removal of four existing parking spaces. West In /West Out entrance to Lionshead Parking Structure The new entrance into the Lionshead Parking Structure will provide access for short term /skier drop -off parking. The goal of this improvement is to provide an easily accessible location for skier drop -off that is proximate to the Lionshead pedestrian area. One of the greatest challenges with the existing "east Lionshead entry area" is with the congestion and safety issues created by "illegal" skier drop -off. It is hoped that this new skier drop -off location will provide a workable solution to this problem. CUP Criteria The following criteria are to be used by the PEC in the review of a Conditional Use Permit request: Describe the precise nature of the proposed use and the measures proposed to make the proposed use compatible with other properties in the vicinity. The "precise nature of the proposed use" is described above. The most significant measure taken to ensure that the proposed use is compatible with properties in the vicinity is with regard to the location of the ECO stop. Locating the stop along the South Frontage Road has created a significant buffer from adjacent residential properties and is also a much more sensitive solution than a transit station on East Lionshead Circle. The proposed west entry to garage is intended to provide safe and convenient short-term parking /drop -off facility, thereby eliminating illegal parking on the street. This will ease safety and congestion issues that currently impact adjacent properties. The relationship and impact of the proposed use on the development obiectives of the Town. Transit is a key element in regards to how Vail functions and the overall experience guests, visitors and residents have while in Vail. Improvements to transit functions will inevitably improve these experiences and in doing so positively address the Town's development objectives. The effect of the use on light and air, distribution of population, transportation facilities, utilities, schools, park and recreation facilities, and other public facilities and public facility needs. Proposed improvements will have a number of direct positive impacts on the factors mentioned above. While technically not a part of this CUP application, the turn lane to Lionshead Transit Station CUP April 12, 2010 be added to the East Lionshead Circle/Frontage Road intersection will greatly improve vehicular circulation. The skier drop -off located within the parking structure is expected to ease congestion and safety issues caused by "illegal" on- street drop -offs. The ECO stop will improve service to this portion of Lionshead. The effect upon traffic, with particular reference to congestion, automotive and pedestrian safety and convenience, traffic flow and control, access, maneuverability, and removal of snow from streets and parking areas. Improvements to the transit system will hopefully promote ridership and in doing so reduce the number of cars on Vail roads. The skier drop -off located within the parking structure is expected to ease congestion and safety issues caused by "illegal" on- street drop -offs. This should greatly improve the pedestrian experience at the east entry to Lionshead. The effect upon the character of the area in which the proposed use is located, including the scale and bulk of the proposed use in relation to surrounding uses. The proposed transit station building is single story and only 1,200 square feet in size. The scale of the building will have no effect on the character of the area. Lionshead Transit Station CUP 4 April 12, 2010 TOWN OAIL'� MEMBERS PRESENT Michael Kurz Luke Cartin Henry Pratt Bill Pierce Sarah Paladino Tyler Schneidman MEMBERS ABSENT David Viele 10 minutes Swearing in of new member Tyler Schneidman Lorelei Donaldson Site Visits: 90 minutes 1. Ever Vail walking tour of pedestrian connections 2. Adam Residence — 765 Forest Road 3. Williams Residence — 1401 Lions Ridge Loop 15 minutes A request for a recommendation to the Vail Town Council for a major amendment to a Special Development District, pursuant to Section 12- 9A -10, Amendment Procedures, Vail Town Code, to amend Special Development District No. 37, Tivoli Lodge, to add one accommodation unit and remove meeting space, located at 386 Hanson Ranch Road/ Lot E, Block 2, Vail Village 5th Filing, and setting forth details in regard thereto. (PEC100013) Applicant: Robert Lazier Planner: Rachel Friede ACTION: Recommendation of approval MOTION: Kurz SECOND: Paladino VOTE: 6 -0 -0 Rachel Friede made a presentation per the Staff memorandum. There was no public comment. The Commissioners expressed their support for the application. 20 minutes 2. A request for the review of a conditional use permit, pursuant to Section 12 -6D -3, Conditional Uses, Vail Town Code, to allow for a Bed and Breakfast, located at 765 Forest Road, Unit A /Lot 8, Block 2, Vail Village Filing 6, and setting forth details in regard thereto. (PEC100016) Applicant: Nancy Adam Planner: Bill Gibson ACTION: Approved with condition(s) MOTION: Paladino SECOND: Cartin VOTE: 5 -0 -1 (Pierce recused) CONDITIONS: 1. The approval of this conditional use permit shall expire on April 26, 2012. Commissioner Pierce recused as he stated he had a conflict of interest on the application. Rachel Friede made a presentation per the Staff memorandum. PLANNING AND ENVIRONMENTAL COMMISSION April 26, 2010 1:00pm TOWN COUNCIL CHAMBERS / PUBLIC WELCOME 75 S. Frontage Road - Vail, Colorado, 81657 Page 1 Nancy Adam, applicant, added that the bed and breakfast use would have less impact than the short —term rental that was occurring on neighboring properties. Commissioner Pratt stated he had a concern with how the parking spaces are configured and the impact. He stated he lived in proximity to a short term rental and saw multiple cars at some of these locations. He suggested a one or two year time frame be placed upon the use so that any negative impacts could be used to evaluate the proposal moving forward. Commissioner Paladino believed that the parking would not be an issue as the Town does not permit parking in the street. Commissioner Kurz stated that a two year period would be appropriate. Nancy Adam clarified she didn't believe there would an increased likelihood for parking issues as she could have multiple guests over regardless of having a bed and breakfast. However, she added that parking on the street in not permitted under either circumstance as pointed out by Commissioner Paladino. Ms. Adam inquired as to the process for extending the use if a two year time period was imposed. Warren Campbell responded that at the conclusion of the two year period, the applicant could apply for an administrative extension of the conditional use permit. The application would be reviewed based upon the criteria and any negative impacts would be evaluated. He clarified for the Commission that any administrative extension would be presented to the Commission to affirm or call -up for review. 20 minutes 3. A request for the review of a final plat, pursuant to Chapter 13 -4, Minor Subdivision, Vail Town Code, to allow for the re- subdivision of Lot 4 into two lots, located at 1401 Lion's Ridge Loop /Lot 4, Lion's Ridge Filing 2, and setting forth details in regard thereto. (PEC100017) Applicant: Al and Suzan Williams, represented by Victor Mark Donaldson Architects Planner: Bill Gibson ACTION: Approved MOTION: Kurz SECOND: Paladino VOTE: 5 -1 -0 (Pierce opposed) Rachel Friede began by providing a letter from the Solar Crest property manager to the Commission which was provided after the memorandums were provided. She then gave a presentation per the staff memorandum. Commissioner Pratt inquired as to the number of units in the existing structure and the requirement for the 80 -foot by 80 -foot square and whether it needed to fit within the setbacks. Rachel Friede responded that the existing structure was single - family and the 80 -foot by 80 -foot square needed to fit within the lot and could extend into the setbacks. Commissioner Cartin inquired into the location and area of any 40% slopes on the site. Rachel Friede pointed out that on Attachment D the northwest corner was the location of area over 40% in slope which was minimal. Commissioner Pratt stated that the subdivision was creating lot sizes and GRFA consistent with the neighborhood. Commissioner Pierce suggested that a 800 square foot EHU be required on each lot as a benefit for the increase in GRFA created by dividing a larger lot into two smaller lots. Page 2 15 minutes 4. A request for a recommendation to the Vail Town Council for a prescribed regulations amendment, pursuant to Section 12 -3 -7, Amendment, Vail Town Code, to amend Section 12 -14- 20, Commercial Core Construction, Vail Town Code, to extend the Construction Mitigation Signage Program, and setting forth details in regard thereto. (PEC100015) Applicant: Town of Vail Planner: Rachel Friede ACTION: Recommendation of approval MOTION: Kurz SECOND: Paladino VOTE: 6 -0 -0 Rachel Friede made a presentation per the staff memorandum. There was no public input. The Commissioners expressed their support for the extension. 45 minutes 5. A request for a recommendation to the Vail Town Council on prescribed regulation amendments to Chapter 12 -6, Residential Districts, Vail Town Code, pursuant to Section 12 -3 -7, Amendment, Vail Town Code, to establish a new zone district, Townhouse and Row House District (TRH) District, and setting forth details in regard thereto. (PEC100011) Applicant: Chris Galvin, represented by K.H. Webb Architects /Mauriello Planning Group Planner: Bill Gibson ACTION: Tabled to May 10, 2010 MOTION: Kurz SECOND: Pratt VOTE: 6-0-0 Warren Campbell made a presentation per the Staff memorandum Dominic Mauriello, the representative of the applicant, made a presentation on the proposed new zone district. He further added that he had agreed to present only the power point he had prepared and postpone any discussion until such time as Mr. Bridgewater could be present at the following hearing at the request of Mr. Bridgewater's attorney John Dunn. John Dunn, legal counsel for Mr. Bridgewater, an owner of a Vail Row House unit, stated that he did not have notice of this issue and requested that it be tabled to the next meeting. Commissioner Pierce asked if the condominium association to the east (Vail Townhomes condominiums) could be included in this zone district. Dominic Mauriello responded that yes, both condominium associations and fee simple properties could both be rezoned to this proposed district. Commissioner Paladino said she thought that doubling the EHU mitigation rate would be an impediment to redevelopment as proposed and a new zone district seems to be a good idea to address the redevelopment needs of townhomes. Jim Lamont, Vail Village Homeowners Association, asked if there is a policy regarding staff time spent on projects that may have no buy -in from the Vail Town Council. He inquired as to the process for getting Town Council's pulse on the proposal. Warren Campbell responded that typically the Vail Town Council will provide input on the pursuit of a project when it is a staff /town initiated process. However, in this case, the application was made by a property owner, so the Vail Town Council does not typically provide input until such time as it is before the Town Council for adoption through an ordinance. Page 3 Dominic Mauriello added that any property owner can apply for a text amendment and is entitled to go through the process. Commissioner Pierce is concerned about doubling the square footage of GRFA on this and many other sites. He asked what the public gets out of this potential new zone district and subsequent rezoning. He said there are a lot of good questions posed in the memo y staff and at a future hearing they should be discussed. He said he had no problem with zero lot lines on interior townhouse units. Commissioner Cartin stated that this has a unique style of parking and he was interested in methods to remove the parking from being partial in the right -of -way. He said locations of landscaping may be able to take care of some pedestrian interaction. He is concerned about not having minimum lot sizes and said they are necessary in order to limit the amount of associations and other property owners that may wish to rezone to this district. Commissioner Pratt is concerned about doubling density, parking within the right -of -way, and that one zone district will not cover all variables within the Town. He is most in favor of a special development district which he realizes may not be plausible route if all property owners are not in agreement. Commissioner Schneidman said that a new district seems like a good idea, but there are many issues that need to be addressed as Commissioner Pratt elaborated. Commissioner Paladino asked if you can elect to not join a new zone district. She said there are other limiting factors besides GRFA that will limit the size of the units within this district. She stated that the issue of parking is huge and that people should be keep their on street parking if it currently exists. Commissioner Kurz stated that this item should be tabled at the request of the applicant and neighbor with no further discussion. Commissioner Pratt stated that he agrees with tabling, but feels that GRFA should be increased for these property owners similar to the bump in GRFA that was given a few years ago to other properties. He asked that an analysis be provide regarding the percentage increase in GRFA for other districts as compared to what is being requested by the applicant. Dominic Mauriello stated that the biggest benefit to a new zone district is that the applicants can properly demolish a unit and redevelop instead of having to keep at least 50% of the structure intact to maintain any non - conformities. 60 minutes 6. A request for a work session on a major exterior alteration, 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, office, and commercial /retail uses, located at 862, 923, 934, 953, and 1031 South Frontage Road West, and the South Frontage Road West rig ht -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: Tabled to May 10, 2010 MOTION: Kurz SECOND: Paladino VOTE: 5- 0- 1(Cartin Recused) Page 4 Luke Cartin recused himself due to conflicts as the applicant is his employer Warren Campbell made a presentation per the Staff memorandum. Dominic Mauriello made a presentation on the transit facilities and the connection between Ever Vail, Lionshead and cascade Village. Tom Kassmel, Town Engineer, stated that the Lionshead Redevelopment Master Plan calls for new transit services based upon transit and development growth. He stated his hope for a future in Ever Vail that required additional bus bays as it would likely be indicative of the success of mass transit as an alternative mode of transportation and success for Vail and Ever Vail. He added that as more people opt out of 1 -70 travel and regional driving, and charter buses use expands as in other regions more bus bays would be a welcome addition. Commissioner Pierce asked what Tom Kassmel's thoughts were regarding the provision of passenger amenities. Tom Kassmel responded that the passenger amenities are appropriate except the Town staff would prefer adequate indoor seating area for 40 passengers. Commissioner Pierce asked if there is a backup plan for losing short - term /skier parking when the additional bus bays were put into use. Tom Kassmel responded that the plan would be to utilize the angled parking on Market Street as skier drop -off during the winter at peak times. The spaces could be used for short -term parking during not peak times for skier drop -off potentially. Commissioner Kurz asked how many buses are on the streets at peak times in Vail. Greg Hall, Director of Public Works, stated that 20 -25 Town buses are out at during peak, plus the same for ECO Transit spread out throughout the valley. At the main Vail Transportation Center, the greatest number of buses present is twenty, with some active and others inactive. He said the concern is to free up some space for a potential Summit County connection in the future. Commissioner Kurz stated that there needs to be a enclosed warm area for bus users, especially in bad weather. Dominic Mauriello responded that the facility is under cover. Commissioner Kurz responded that it is the temperature that is of concern in additon to the shelter. Commissioner Pratt asked how people will find certain locations of the transit facility, including short -term parking. Dominic Mauriello responded that this area is viewed as short term parking and will have to be managed as such. Commissioner Pratt added that he is concerned about the potential for a port authority experience where it is cold and miserable. He reminded the applicant that this facility may be the first and last of the Vail experience for some guests. Page 5 Dominic Mauriello continued his presentation with review of connections between Lionshead and Ever Vail and then Cascade and Ever Vail. Commissioner Kurz asked about connections between the eastern end of Lionshead (Ritz - Carlton) and the gondola. Dominic Mauriello reviewed the numerous options for pedestrian connections. Commissioner Pierce stated an idea that perhaps West Lionshead Circle could be one -way to allow for a greater emphasis on the pedestrian nature of the street. Tom Kassmel responded that this was discussed and from Staff's perspective, the walkway should be 10 feet wide minimum. He said there area few options that have not been fully vetted out. He said there needs to be some vehicular circulation on site. Commissioner Pierce added that in the past, housing and other uses have been converted to commercial uses as circulation and needs change. If West Lionshead Circle became one -way it could help create more of a pedestrian village. He noted his concern that Ever Vail may not be pedestrian friendly enough. Tom Kassmel stated that in the summer months, Meadow Drive is crowded, thus the need for a wider pedestrian pathway. Nick Buchanan, of Vail Resorts, stated that a challenge for a one -way drive lane on West Lionshead Circle would be the impact to the valet service offered by the Marriott and the Ritz - Carlton, both of which had parking under the Ritz - Carlton. Jim Lamont, Vail Village Homeowners Association, stated that West Meadow Drive is very busy. He said that people wonder in the street but when you make improvements such as walkways, people are no longer walking in the middle of the street and drivers slow down. He stated qualitative experiences help us to understand how future development will flow. He said we have done well with not putting commercial along every single pedestrian walkway. Commissioner Pierce stated that at the intersection of Forest Rd and the access road there is potential for people to see the gondola and try to cut through. He asked if there a way to reduce this by guiding people to the pedestrian walkway. Commissioner Pierce said he wanted more information that this is a viable option. Commissioner Pratt stated that if you're headed for skiing, you might see the lift and try to head toward it, which will be a dead end if you went down the road between the sewer plant at the proposed hotel. He stated that some people will not want to walk up stairs and around to get to the gondola. He said a minimal pedestrian link is needed across the south side of the proposed hotel. Commissioner Kurz does would not want to walk between the sewer plant and loading docks. He said he hopes way- finding signage will lead people to the right locations. Warren Campbell gave an example of the space between Arrabelle and Garfinkels as a pedestrian connection which provides more direct access. Dominic Mauriello stated that you don't want pedestrians walking through back of house areas such as loading docks. He said the main focus is how to get people to the street. While some Page 6 people want to take shortcuts, it is in everyone's best interest to encourage people towards commercial areas. Commissioner Kurz asked how far it is from the Ritz - Carlton to the gondola. Dominic Mauriello responded approximately 500 -600 feet in distance. Nick Buchanan stated that the Ritz - Carlton members are getting an Arrabelle ski club membership with their purchase. He said the Ritz - Carlton members will get likely be going to Lionshead where they have a locker. He said there will be a 35 -foot grade separation between the loading and delivery road and the gondola plaza elevation. 5 minutes 7. A request for an amendment to an Approved Development Plan, pursuant to Section 12- 61 -11, Development Plan Required, Housing Zone District, Vail Town Code, to allow for revisions to the required landscape plan and geologic hazard mitigation plan for the redevelopment of the easternmost 5.24 acres of the Timber Ridge Village Apartments; and a request for the review of a variance, from Section 14 -5 -1, Minimum Standards, Parking Lot and Parking Structure Design Standards for All Uses, Vail Town Code, pursuant to Chapter 12 -17, Variances, Vail Town Code, to allow for a crossover drive aisle width of less than thirty -feet (30') within the required parking structure, located at 1280 North Frontage Road /Lots 1 -5, Block C, Lions Ridge Subdivision Filing 1,and setting forth details in regard thereto. (PEC100018 /PEC100019) Applicant: Vail Timber Ridge L.L.C. Planner: George Ruther ACTION: Tabled to May 10, 2010 MOTION: Kurz SECOND: Paladino VOTE: 5 -0 -0 5 minutes 8. 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: Tabled to May 10, 2010 MOTION: Kurz SECOND: Paladino VOTE: 5 -0 -0 5 minutes 9. A request for a final recommendation to the Vail Town Council for a zone district boundary amendment, pursuant to 12 -3 -7, Amendment, 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: Tabled to May 10, 2010 MOTION: Kurz SECOND: Paladino VOTE: 5 -0 -0 5 minutes 10. A request for a final review of a variance from 12- 71 -14, Site Coverage, Vail Town Code, pursuant to Chapter 12 -17, Variances, to allow for additional site coverage below grade, within Page 7 Applicant: Vail Resorts, represented by Mauriello Planning Group, LLC Planner: Warren Campbell ACTION: Tabled to May 10, 2010 MOTION: Kurz SECOND: Paladino VOTE: 5 -0 -0 5 minutes 11. A request for a final recommendation to the Vail Town Council for a proposed major amendment to Special Development District No. 4, Cascade Village, pursuant to Article 12 -9A, Special Development District, Vail Town Code, to allow for the removal of the Glen Lyon Commercial Site, Development Area D, (Glen Lyon Office Building) from the District for incorporation into the properties known as "Ever Vail" (West Lionshead), located at 1000 S. Frontage Road West/Lot 54 Glen Lyon Subdivision, and setting forth details in regard thereto. (PEC090036) Applicant: Vail Resorts, represented by Mauriello Planning Group, LLC Planner: Warren Campbell ACTION: Tabled to May 10, 2010 MOTION: Kurz SECOND: Paladino VOTE: 5 -0 -0 5 minutes 12. A request for a final recommendation to the Vail Town Council for prescribed regulations amendments to Title 12, Zoning Regulations and Title 14, Development Standards, Vail Town Code, pursuant to Section 12 -3 -7, Amendment, Vail Town Code, to provide regulations that will implement sustainable building and planning standards, and setting forth details in regard thereto. (PEC090028) Applicant: Town of Vail Planner: Rachel Friede ACTION: Tabled to May 10, 2010 MOTION: Kurz SECOND: Paladino VOTE: 5 -0 -0 5 minutes 13. A request for a work session to discuss prescribed regulations amendments, pursuant to Section 12 -3 -7, Amendment, Vail Town Code, to Title 12, Zoning Regulations, Vail Town Code, and setting forth details in regard thereto. (PEC090017) Applicant: Town of Vail Planner: Rachel Friede ACTION: Tabled to May 10, 2010 MOTION: Kurz SECOND: Paladino VOTE: 5 -0 -0 5 minutes 14. A request for a final recommendation for the adoption of the Frontage Road Lighting Master Plan, an element of the Vail Transportation Master Plan, and setting forth details in regard thereto. (PEC090014) Applicant: Town of Vail, represented by Tom Kassmel Planner: Bill Gibson ACTION: Tabled to May 10, 2010 MOTION: Kurz SECOND: Paladino VOTE: 5 -0 -0 15. Approval of April 12, 2010 minutes MOTION: Kurz SECOND: Paladino VOTE: 5 -0 -0 Page 8 16. Information Update A draft copy of the Frontage Road Lighting Master Plan was provided to each member of the Commission in preparation of the hearing on May 10, 2010. 17. Adjournment MOTION: Paladino SECOND: Pratt VOTE: 5 -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 April 23, 2010, in the Vail Daily. Page 9