Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2014-0512 PECTOWN OF VAIL9 PLANNING AND ENVIRONMENTAL COMMISSION May 12, 2014 at 1:OOpm TOWN COUNCIL CHAMBERS / PUBLIC WELCOME 75 S. Frontage Road - Vail, Colorado, 81657 MEMBERS PRESENT Henry Pratt Michael Kurz John Rediker Webb Martin Pam Hopkins Luke Cartin Dick Cleveland MEMBERS ABSENT Site Visits: 1. Wall Street Building — 225 Wall Street 2. Vail Valley Medical Center - 181 and 281 West Meadow Drive and 108 South Frontage Road West 15 minutes A request for the review of a variance from Section 12 -6E -6, Setbacks, Vail Town Code, pursuant to Chapter 12 -17, Variances, Vail Town Code, to allow for the construction of an addition within the side setback area, located at 2785 Bald Mountain Road /Lot 3 Block 2, Vail Village Filing 13, and setting forth details in regard thereto. (PEC140009) Applicant: 2002 Carey Family Trust, Michael J. & Wendy M. Carey Trustees, represented by Peel /Langenwalter Architects Planner: Jonathan Spence ACTION: Approved with a condition MOTION: Kurz SECOND: Rediker VOTE: 6 -0 -1 (Cleveland recused) CONDITION(S): 1. Approval of this variance is contingent upon the applicants obtaining Town of Vail design review approval for this proposal. Commissioner Cleveland recused himself due to a conflict of interest. Jonathan Spence gave a presentation pursuant to the staff memorandum. Commissioner Cartin inquired as to any site coverage credit. Jonathan Spence responded that he garage credit did not include a site coverage credit. The project as proposed was compliant with the maximum allowable site coverage for the site. Kathy Lagenwalter, representing the applicant, had no further presentation and was available for questions. There was no public comment The Commissioners expressed their support of the proposal as it complied with the criteria. Page 1 25 minutes 2. A request for the review of a major exterior alteration or modification, pursuant to Section 12 -76- 7, Exterior Alterations and Modifications, Vail Town Code, to allow for the construction of additions to the Northeast corner of Wall Street Building, located at 225 Wall Street, Lots B & C, Block 5C, Vail Village Filing 1, and setting forth details in regard thereto. (PEC140010) Applicant: MECO LLP, represented by Suman Architects Planner: Warren Campbell ACTION: Denied MOTION: Kurz SECOND: Cleveland VOTE: 4 -3 -0 (Hopkins, Rediker, Martin opposed) Chief of Planning, Warren Campbell, introduced the project and walked the Commission through the history of the application. He discussed the previous approval and concerns that were expressed during its review. This discussion included the expansions in site coverage that have been approved. Campbell identified concerns and inconsistencies with the application and the governing documents including the Vail Village Master Plan. The corner in question has been the subject of considerable interest by both staff and the Commission. Campbell highlighted specific concerns with the proposal and how they relate to existing buildings and views. Staff points to the behavior of pedestrians in the area observed on multiple occasions. Campbell concluded by stating that as the scope for the exterior improvements have increased due to the involvement of the upper level condominiums that all elevations of the building should be reexamined if the proposed change was deemed in compliance. Michael Suman, architect and applicant's representative, walked the Commission through the history of the project and the amendments to the approval proposed. Suman briefed the Commission on the pedestrian experiences in the area. Meg Hanlon, representing MECO LLP, presented the scenario existing between the building owners (in general) and the owner of the retail space in question. Hanlon discussed the challenges of multiple owners and the challenges with the retail and the location of the columns. Hanlon discussed alternatives that were explored concerning the necessary square footage. She concluded by pointing out this is not an application for the whole building but rather the specific retail tenant (owner). Bill Hanlon, a member of MECO LLP, talked of his experience with the store and pedestrian traffic in the last 43 years. He talked about the loss of storage space and how the loss cannot be acceptable. Hanlon talked about the column and the passageway and its unsuitability. John Dunn, attorney representing the building's HOA, spoke to the association's support of the application. Dunn discussed the history of the buildings ownership and the declarations and condominium map. He discussed the necessary approval of the members of the association and the diverse make up of the land uses. The final review and approval of the plans by the HOA could not occur until there was an approved plan by the town. That review occurred on March 30 of this year at the annual meeting where mr. Hanlon expressed his inability to support the changes to Retail Unit 101. At a later time, the membership met to support the application that has been presented by MECO, LLP. Dunn spoke to how, if this is not approved, the application for the rest of the building may not move forward. Alyn Parks, owners of a residential condominium in building, spoke to the owners support of what has been proposed and its necessity if the building is to be renovated. Parks commented on the columns and how the application enhances the building and the pedestrian experience. Page 2 Jay Parks talked about the columns and his impression of their lack of positive contributions to the area. Parks spoke to how what is being proposed enhances the pedestrian experience. Jay strongly urged the Commission to remove the columns and support the application. Axel Wilhelmsen, retailer in the Bell Tower building spoke of his support for the project and the necessity of the renovation. He felt the proposal will be an asset to the town. Commissioner Hopkins asked a question about landscaping planters. Warren Campbell responded with a description of the previous conversation and outcomes with regard to the planter on the east elevation. The result was that it would remain in an organic configuration with a slight increase in size. Commissioner Hopkins stated her approval of the proposal and hopes some softening will occur though hanging baskets that might be installed. Commissioner Cleveland spoke to his support for the approved plan as opposed to the proposed change included with this application. He stated his belief that the column was important in terms of architectural interest, visual connection, and pedestrian access to Wall Street. He added comments regarding the uncomfortable feeling created by enclosing the building to the corner and the privatization of the perceived space. Cleveland felt it did not comply with the guidelines. He concluded by adding that the internal arrangements between the owners is not an issue for the Commission. Commissioner Cartin spoke to the mass of the building and the perceived bulk that would be added through this proposal. He felt it would be a negative change to the overall design and not in compliance with the criteria. Commissioner Webb spoke to how the colonnade is being infilled and how the remaining column was problematic. He concluded by stating that the large retail store front windows would provide views up Wall Street and supports the application. Commissioner Rediker spoke to the previous approval and how it took away a lot of the interest and how the proposal was in compliance with the criteria. Commissioner Kurz discussed his support for the previous approval and challenges it went through to achieve approval. He spoke to pedestrian sight lines, reverence to chamfered corners in the area, and loss of village character. He did not believe the proposal complied with the criteria. Commissioner Pratt felt the proposed change completes the destruction of the character of the Wall Street building. He added that the approved plan does not necessarily do great job of addressing the corner and the proposal was not positive. Pratt stated that he was not a fan of the approved plan or the proposed plan. He suggested the the corner could be infilled if it there was a proposal to create a form of shelter such as a covering or recess at the corner. 40 minutes 3. A request for a recommendation to the Vail Town Council on the adoption of the Vail Valley Medical Center Master Plan, to establish a comprehensive redevelopment plan for the Vail Valley Medical Center, Lot 10 (Town of Vail parking lot), and US Bank Building, located at 181 and 281 West Meadow Drive and 108 South Frontage Road West/ Lots E, F, and 10 Vail Village Filing 2, and Lot D -2, A Resubdivision of Lot D Vail Village Filing 2, and setting forth details in regard thereto. (PEC140011) Page 3 Applicant: Vail Valley Medical Center, represented by Braun and Associates Planner: George Ruther ACTION: Tabled to June 9, 2014 MOTION: Kurz SECOND: Cleveland VOTE: 7 -0 -0 George Ruther, Director of Community Development, gave a presentation, sharing the background of the VVMC master plan process, the significance of the VVMC, the need for a master plan, and the options moving forward. Doris Kirchner, VVMC CEO, explained the background of the VVMC and the need for a master plan. The hospital has gone through a number of iterations since adding a third floor for the Steadman Clinic in the 1990's. The master plan will bring the VVMC's growth objectives into alignment with the Town of Vail's growth objectives for this part of Town. Russ Segnacht, representative of the firm preparing the master plan, presented a more in -depth background as to the significance and the basis of the VVMC's master plan. The hospital is finalizing a strategic operations plan. This operations plan was necessary to complete in order to move forward with the master plan for the facility and area. He then described the process of the strategic operations plan process. Some key objectives were identified, such as re- orienting the pedestrian, vehicular, and emergency access. Adaptability and economics were also key considerations. The top internal goal was to decompress and resituate the emergency room services. Commissioner Kurz asked about the medical services that might be outsourced to satellite facilities in the valley. Russ Segnacht explained it would back of the house operations – IT, admin, etc. Tom Braun, planning consultant for the VVMC, presented the context of the master plan on behalf of the applicant. The master plan process will deal with the larger factors that impact the community. The hospital fits into area that is bookended by the Lionshead Redevelopment Master Plan and the Vail Village Master Plan. The plan will offer highly detailed elements, similar to that within the aforementioned master plans. Braun then laid out the time frame. Commissioner Kurz asked if construction in the Summer of 2015 is needed and realistic. Tom Braun said yes it is. There was no public comment. Commissioner Kurz commented on the importance of the partnership between the Town and VVMC and was happy to see the progress thus far. Commissioner Hopkins asked if the Heli -pad site has been located. Tom Braun stated that the proposed location would be shared at a future meeting. Commissioner Cartin commented on the many challenges – parking, loading and delivery, employee housing, covenants, Lot 10, etc. —and that he looks forward to seeing how these challenges will be addressed. Commissioner Cleveland mentioned the coupling of the municipal site with VVMC and the opportunities and challenges that go along with it. Page 4 Commissioner Webb mentioned his general support and need for the project. Chairman Pratt alluded to the need for appropriate design. His desire is to not be asked to go above and beyond what the PEC is authorized to do. 20 minutes 4. A request for a work session to update the Planning and Environmental Commission on the progress of the Vail Village Character Area Preservation project, an initiative to examine the Town's current regulations, design standards and guidelines applicable to Vail Village to determine whether they are sufficient to ensure the special character of Vail Village is not just maintained but also enhanced. Applicant: Town of Vail, represented by Braun Associates, Inc. Planner: Warren Campbell ACTION: Tabled to July 14, 2014 MOTION: Kurz SECOND: Cleveland VOTE: 7 -0 -0 Warren Campbell, Chief of Planning, spoke to the project and the timing. He spoke to the existing Vail Village Master Plan. Tom Braun, consultant working on the project, gave a power point presentation recapping the work that had been completed and the next steps. Commissioner Pratt asked a question about the incorporation of comparable ski towns. Commissioner Kurz spoke to the challenges of development review in the Village. Commissioner Cleveland added his insights about comparable communities and referred to Carmel, California. Cleveland spoke to incentives of development and how it relates to regulations. Commissioner Hopkins spoke the need to look at Disney because Vail is becoming a corporate town. Hopkins feels that it is deeper than just design and details. Commissioner Cartin spoke to the idea of landmarks and the challenges of development review. What does make place? 5. A request for the review of a conditional use permit, pursuant to 12 -9C -3, Conditional Uses, Vail Town Code, for a public and quasi - public indoor community facilities (education center), to allow for the construction of the Betty Ford Alpine Gardens Education Center, located 530 South Frontage Road /Unplatted, and setting forth details in regard thereto. (PEC140005) Applicant: Betty Ford Alpine Gardens, represented by Jack Hunn Planner: Jonathan Spence ACTION: Table to June 9, 2014 MOTION: Cartin SECOND: Cleveland VOTE: 7 -0 -0 6. A request for a variance from Section 14 -3 -1, Table 1, Minimum Standards, Vail Town Code, pursuant to Section 14 -1 -5, Variances, Vail Town Code, to allow for a residential driveway to exceed the permitted maximum centerline grade, located at 2754 Snowberry Drive / Lot 15, Block, 9, Vail Intermountain and setting forth details in regard thereto. (PEC140007) Applicant: Mike Dantas, represented by Mauriello Planning Group Planner: Joe Batcheller ACTION: Table to June 9, 2014 MOTION: Cartin SECOND: Cleveland VOTE: 7 -0 -0 Page 5 7. Approval of April 28, 2014 minutes MOTION: Kurz SECOND: Martin 8. Information Update VOTE: 5 -0 -2 (Rediker and Cleveland recused) An update was provided on the forthcoming recreational marijuana discussion on the May 19, 2014. 9. Adjournment MOTION: Cartin SECOND: Cleveland VOTE: 7 -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. Times and order of items are approximate, subject to change, and cannot be relied upon to determine at what time the Planning and Environmental Commission will consider an item. 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 9, 2014 in the Vail Daily. Page 6 r l o TOWN OF ILI'' r $ TO: Planning and Environmental Commission FROM: Community Development Department DATE: May 12, 2014 SUBJECT: A request for a variance from Section 12 -6E -6, Setbacks, Vail Town Code pursuant to Chapter 12 -17, Variances, Vail Town Code, to allow for an addition within the side setback area, located at 2785 Bald Mountain Road/Vail Village Filing 13, Lot 3, Block 1, and setting forth details in regard thereto. (PEC14009) Applicant: 2002 Carey Family Trust, represented by Peel /Langenwalter Architects, LLC Planner: Jonathan Spence I. SUMMARY The applicant, 2002 Carey Family Trust, represented by Peel /Langenwalter Architects, LLC, is requesting a setback variance to allow for an addition into the side setback area at 2785 Bald Mountain Road. Based upon Staff's review of the criteria outlined in Section VII of this memorandum and the evidence and testimony presented, the Community Development Department recommends approval, with a condition, of this application, subject to the findings noted in Section VIII of this memorandum. A vicinity map (Attachment A), photographs (Attachment B) the applicants' request (Attachment C), and proposed architectural plans (Attachment D) are attached for review. II. DESCRIPTION OF REQUEST The applicant, 2002 Carey Family Trust, represented by Peel /Langenwalter Architects, LLC, is requesting a setback variance to allow for an addition into the side setback area at 2785 Bald Mountain Road. The subject property is a two -story single family home built in 1977 and is located in the Two - Family Residential (R) Zone District. The applicant is proposing to extend the existing garage 3' -4" to the south resulting in an addition of 32 gross square feet to both the garage and the living space above. The proposed 64 square foot addition encroaches 3' -6" into the required 15' side setback. Approximately 12 square feet of GRFA is proposed within the required 15' side setback on each floor. The addition is an increase in GRFA and site coverage and meets the requirements of the Two - Family Residential (R) Zone District. The proposed addition will utilize the same IV. materials and architectural style of the exiting home to not appear distinct. BACKGROUND The Vail Village Filing 13 subdivision was approved by the Town of Vail and recorded with Eagle County in 1972. The residence was approved by the Town of Vail and constructed in 1977. At that time, the required side setback was 10' in the two - family Residential (R) Zone District and the home was constructed 11' -6" from the west property line. Subsequent to the construction of the home, Ordinance No. 50, Series 1978, increased the required side setback in the Two - Family Residential (R) Zone District to 15'. This ordinance increased setback requirements in all residential zone districts existing at that time. The property is generally rectangular in shape and slopes moderately from front to back. The home shares a common access drive with the property immediately to the west, Lot 4, that was also built in 1977. According to the building permit documents, the owners at that time desired a common driveway to minimize the impacts to the site and to preserve the natural ground cover. In 2013 the property received DRB approval for a 214 square foot exercise room addition to the rear of the stricture. This addition utilized the one time exemption for structures with nonconforming roofs (wood shake). On August 26, 2013, the property received both DRB and PEC approval for a 183 square foot bathroom /office addition. This addition, above the existing garage, was granted a variance to encroach 3' -7" into the required side setback of 15. The amount of relief granted is identical to that being requested with this application. APPLICABLE PLANNING DOCUMENTS Staff believes that following provisions of the Vail Land Use Plan and the Vail Town Code are relevant to the review of this proposal: Vail Land Use Plan (in part) CHAPTER II: LAND USE PLAN GOALS / POLICIES (in part) The goals articulated here reflect the desires of the citizenry as expressed through the series of public meetings that were held throughout the project. A set of initial goals were developed which were then substantially revised after different types of opinions were brought out in the second meeting. The goal statements were developed to reflect a general consensus once the public had had the opportunity to reflect on the concepts and ideas initially presented. The goal statements were then revised through the review process with the Task Force, the Planning and Environmental Commission and Town Council and now represent policy guidelines in the review process for new development proposals. These goal statements should be used in conjunction with the adopted Land Use Plan map, in the evaluation of any development proposal. Town of Vail Page 2 The goal statements which are reflected in the design of the proposed Plan are as follows: General Growth / Development 1.1. Vail 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. 1.2. The quality of the environment including air, water and other natural resources should be protected as the Town grows. 1.3. The quality of development should be maintained and upgraded whenever possible. 1.4. The original theme of the old Village Core should be carried into new development in the Village Core through continued implementation of the Urban Design Guide Plan. 1.5. Commercial strip development of the Valley should be avoided. 1.6. Development proposals on the hillsides should be evaluated on a case by case basis. Limited development maybe permitted for some low intensity uses in areas that are not highly visible from the Valley floor. New projects should be carefully controlled and developed with sensitivity to the environment. 1.7. New subdivisions should not be permitted in high geologic hazard areas. 1.8. Recreational and public facility development on National Forest lands may be permitted where no high hazards exist if: a. Community objectives are met as articulated in the Comprehensive Plan. b. The parcel is adjacent to the Town boundaries, with good access. c. The affected neighborhood can be involved in the decision - making process. 1.9. The existing condition and use of National Forest Land (USFS) which is exchanged, sold, or otherwise falls into private ownership should remain unchanged. A change in the existing condition and use may be considered if the change substantially complies with the Vail Comprehensive Plan and achieves a compelling public benefit which furthers the public interest, as determined by the Town Council. 1.10. Development of Town owned open space) maybe permitted wher e public use. lands by the Town of Vail (other than parks and no high hazards exist, if such development is for Town of Vail Page 3 1.11. Town owned lands shall not be sold to a private entity, long term leased to a private entity or converted to a private use without a public hearing process. 1.12. Vail should accommodate most of the additional growth in existing developed areas (infill areas). 1.13. Vail recognizes its stream tract as being a desirable land feature as well as its potential for public use. 5. Residential 5.1. Additional residential growth should continue to occur primarily in existing, platted areas and as appropriate in new areas where high hazards do not exist. 5.2. Quality time share units should be accommodated to help keep occupancy rates up. 5.3. Affordable employee housing should be made available through private efforts, assisted by limited incentives, provided by the Town of Vail, with appropriate restrictions. 5.4. Residential growth should keep pace with the market place 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. CHAPTER VI, SECTION 4, PROPOSED LAND USE CATEGORIES (in part) LDR Low Density Residential This category includes single - family detached homes and two - family dwelling units. Density of development within this category would typically not exceed 3 structures per buildable acres. Also within this area would be private recreation facilities such as tennis courts, swimming pools and club houses for the use of residents of the area. Institutional /public uses permitted would include churches, fire stations, and parks and open space related facilities. Title 12, Zoning Regulations, Vail Town Code (in part) ARTICLE 12 -6C: TWO- FAMILY RESIDENTIAL (R) DISTRICT (in part) 12 -6C -1: The two - family residential district is intended to provide sites for low density single - family or two - family residential uses, together with such public facilities as may be appropriately located in the same zone district. The two - family residential district is intended to ensure adequate light, air, privacy and open space for each dwelling, commensurate with single - family and two- family occupancy, and to maintain the desirable Town of Vail Page 4 residential qualities of such sites by establishing appropriate site development standards. 12 -6C -6: Setbacks: In the R district, the minimum front setback shall be twenty feet (20), the minimum side setback shall be fifteen feet (15), and the minimum rear setback shall be fifteen feet (15). CHAPTER 12 -17: VARIANCES (in part) 12 -17 -1: Purpose: A. Reasons for Seeking Variance: In order to prevent or to lessen such practical difficulties and unnecessary physical hardships inconsistent with the objectives of this title as would result from strict or literal interpretation and enforcement, variances from certain regulations may be granted. A practical difficulty or unnecessary physical hardship may result from the size, shape, or dimensions of a site or the location of existing structures thereon; from topographic or physical conditions on the site or in the immediate vicinity; or from other physical limitations, street locations or conditions in the immediate vicinity. Cost or inconvenience to the applicant of strict or literal compliance with a regulation shall not be a reason for granting a variance. V. SITE ANALYSIS Address: 2785 Bald Mountain Road Legal Description: Lot 3, Block 2, Vail Village Filing 13 Zoning: Two - family Residential District Land Use Plan Designation: Low Density Residential Current Land Use: Single Family Residential Geological Hazards: None Density: (max GRFA) 6,797 sq. ft. 2,626 2,657 sq. ft. Building Height: 33 ft. 24 ft. 24 ft. for addition Site Coverage: 3,458 sq. ft. 2,416 sq. ft. 2,448 sq. ft. Parking >_2,000 GRFA, 3 spaces 4 spaces 4 spaces Setbacks: North: 15 ft. (rear 16.3 ft. No change West: 15 ft. (side) 11.5 ft. 11.5 ft. East: 15 ft. (side) 16.8 ft. No change South: 20ft. (front) 113 ft. No change VI. SURROUNDING LAND USES AND ZONING Existing Use North: Open Space South: Open Space East: Single- family Residential Town of Vail Zoning District Natural Area Preservation District Outdoor Recreation District Two - family Residential District Page 5 West: Single- family Residential Two - family Residential District VII. REVIEW CRITERIA The review criteria for a variance request are prescribed in Chapter 12 -17, Variances, Vail Town Code. 1. The relationship of the requested variance to other existing or potential uses and structures in the vicinity. The subject property, Lot 3, is located within a residential neighborhood bordered on the east and west by other single family homes and on the north and south by open space. The proposed addition would occur on both the garage and second levels. The existing 371 square foot garage, with interior dimensions of approximately 18' by 21' is undersized by modern standards. This is evidenced by the garage area being significantly less than the allowable GRFA deduction of 600 square feet for a two - vehicle -space garage. The proposed addition will increase the functionality of the garage space, is designed to blend seamlessly into the existing structure architecturally and will have little effect on the building's perceived mass and scale. Therefore, Staff believes this proposal will not negatively affect the other existing or potential uses and structures in the vicinity in comparison to existing conditions. 2. The degree to which relief from the strict and literal interpretation and enforcement of a specified regulation is necessary to achieve compatibility and uniformity of treatment among sites in the vicinity or to attain the objectives of this title without a grant of special privilege. The original home was constructed within the Town of Vail in 1977 under the Two - family Residential (R) Zone District regulations. The setback regulations at that time required a 10 foot side setback that the building design and construction complied with. The home subsequently became legal nonconforming in 1978 when the side setback was increased in the Two - family Residential (R) Zone District to 15 feet. Property owners in the vicinity whose original homes were built prior to 1978, but meeting the 1978 15 feet setback regulation, are able to pursue building additions utilizing the existing built to line. Unlike other properties in the vicinity, a variance is necessary to pursue similar building improvements on the subject property. The applicant is proposing to extend the existing garage 3' -4" to the south resulting in an addition of 32 gross square feet to both the garage and the living space above. The proposed 64 square foot addition encroaches 3' -6" into the required 15' side setback. Approximately 12 square feet of GRFA is proposed within the required 15' side setback on each floor. The proposed garage and office addition will improve the functionality and value of the home, an upgrade supported by Land Use Plan Goal 1.3. Staff believes the proposed variance is consistent with the goals of the Town of Vail Land Town of Vail Page 6 Use Plan and purposes of the Two - family Residential District as identified in Section IV of this memorandum. Therefore, Staff believes the proposed relief from the setback regulations is necessary to achieve compatibility and uniformity of treatment among sites in the vicinity and to attain the objectives of this title without a grant of special privilege. 3. The effect of the requested variance on light and air, distribution of population, transportation and traffic facilities, public facilities and utilities, and public safety. The proposed variance will facilitate an addition in the side setback area that will not alter population; will not increase the required number of parking spaces; will not affect any existing transportation or traffic facilities, public facilities, or utilities; and will not affect public safety in comparison to existing conditions. Therefore, Staff believes the proposed variance conforms to this criterion. 4. Such other factors and criteria as the commission deems applicable to the proposed variance. VIII. STAFF RECOMMENDATION The Community Development Department recommends approval, with a condition, of a variance from Section 12 -6C -6, Setbacks, Vail Town Code, pursuant to Chapter 12- 17, Variances, Vail Town Code, to allow for an addition within the side setback area, located at 2785 Bald Mountain Road /Vail Village Filing 13, Lot 3, Block 1, and setting forth details in regard thereto. This recommendation is based upon the review of the criteria outlined in Section VII of this memorandum and the evidence and testimony presented. Should the Planning and Environmental Commission choose to approve this variance request, the Community Development Department recommends the Commission pass the following motion: Town of Vail Page 7 "The Planning and Environmental Commission approves the applicants' request for a variance from Section 12 -6C -6, Setbacks, Vail Town Code, pursuant to Chapter 12 -17, Variances, Vail Town Code, to allow for an addition within the side setback area, located at 2785 Bald Mountain Road/Vail Village Filing 13, Lot 3, Block 1, and setting forth details in regard thereto" Should the Planning and Environmental Commission choose to approve this variance request, the Community Development Department recommends the Commission applies the following condition: 1. Approval of this variance is contingent upon the applicants obtaining Town of Vail design review approval for this proposal. Should the Planning and Environmental Commission choose to approve this variance request, the Community Development Department recommends the Commission makes the following findings: 'Based upon a review of Section VII of the May 12, 2014 staff memorandum to the Planning and Environmental Commission, and the evidence and testimony presented, the Planning and Environmental Commission finds: 1. The granting of this variance will not constitute a granting of special privilege inconsistent with the limitations on other properties classified in the Two - family Residential District. 2. The granting of this variance will not be detrimental to the public health, safety, or welfare, or materially injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity. 3. This variance is warranted for the following reasons: a. The strict literal interpretation or enforcement of the specified regulation will result in practical difficulty or unnecessary physical hardship inconsistent with the objectives of Title 12, Zoning Regulations, Vail Town Code. b. There are exceptions or extraordinary circumstances or conditions applicable to the same site of the variance that do not apply generally to other properties in the Two - family Residential District. C. The strict or literal interpretation and enforcement of the specified regulation would deprive the applicant of privileges enjoyed by the owners of other properties in the Two - family Residential District Town of Vail Page 8 IX. ATTACHMENTS A. Vicinity Map B. Photographs C. Applicants' Request D. Architectural Plans Town of Vail Page 9 Vail Village Filing 13, Block 2, Lot 3 (2785 Bald Mountain Road) a "S Subject Property - - - - - - - Feet 0 50 100 200 Last Modified August 8, 2013 TOWN OF MAIL Department of Community Development 75 South Frontage Road TOWN OF VAIL9 Vail, CO 81667 Tel: 970-479-2128 www.vailgov.com Development Review Coordinator Variance Request Application for Review by the Planning and Environmental Commission General Information: Variances may be granted in order to prevent or to lessen such practical difficulties and unnecessary physical hardships as would result from the strict interpretation and/or enforcement of the zoning regulations inconsistent with the development objectives of the Town of Vail. A practical difficulty or unnecessary physical hardship may result from the size, shape, or dimensions of a site or the location of existing structures thereon; from topographic or physical conditions on the site or in the immediate vicinity; or from other physical limitations, street locations or conditions in the immediate vicinity. Cost or inconvenience to the applicant of strict or literal compliance with a regulation shall not be a reason for granting a variance. The Vail Town Code can be found on the Town's website at The proposed project may also require other permits or applications and/or review by the Design Review boardand /or Town Council, Fee: $500 Description of the Request: Request of a side setback variance of 3' -7' to construct a small storage area W the existing two car garage with a small expansion to the previously approved office above. The total area of the addition to the garage is 311 square feet, of which 11.9 square feet fall within the 15' side setback. The total area of the office addition is 31.7 square feet, of which 11.9 square feet fall within the 15' side setback. Physical Address: 2785 Bald Mountain Road Parcel Number: 2101-034-01-019 (Contact Eagle Co. Assessor at 970-328-8640 for parcel no.) Property Owner: Michael J. Carey & Wendy M. Garey - Trustees of the 2002 Carey Family Trust Mailing Address: 6817 Elaine way Can Siege, CA Owner's Primary Contact/ Owner MallingAddress: P-0- Box 1202 Architects, L.L.C., Kathy Vail, co 81658 Phone: 9704764506 E-Mail: piarchval@-gmaii.com Fax: For Office Use Only: Cash CC: Visa/ MC Fee Paid: Meeting Date: Planner: Zoning: Location of the Proposal: Last 4 CC # Exp. Date: Received From: PEC No.: Project No: Land Use: Lot: Block: Subdivision:— Auth # Check # _a�d�anAaoaa ' - - - - - -- -- � III LOT 4 LOT 3 3 nl - on APP tlAdtlitiony abeVe � II T C G g Mudro. Ford Residence Povea �sF I_ com n or vewaY Dori car. uo� R sidenee � — Ic � eme i,sc � i Mech VIII P eI tl � ,I�� BaM rI� n� �aiei,e,aa 2 PARTIAL SITE PLAN LOTS A & 3 1 No e No Porch �, Y a na,aaazo,a a�a I � i � Entry Library NI� IIF VICINITY MAP rvrs ' –�—Pl.posetl Addrt on'I - 1 MAIN LEVEL PLAN 1/a " -1'0° NoM1 INDEX OF DRAWINGS 1 4, VICINITY MAP, 2. UPPER LEVELELOORPLAN3& MAIN LEVEL PIN 3. EXTERIOR 4. ] ELIPS LOTS 38 a, ' - NIT' MAP MAN LEVEL PLAN S. 7 15 13 PED SUBMITILAL UPPER LEVEL FLOG' 8. LEVnTIONE. TOPOGRAPRIC SURVEY T. GRIGINALSaE DID LGrs asaG 8. ORIRIGINAL MA NLEVELANOUPPE EVIL FLOOR 9. OGINAL BUILDING ELEVATIONB R L LA PNS t� Patio stor. Kitchen Living Dining r— Deck Carey Residence `,", nW „�, m, a _ Garage & Office Addition 111, co elese 2785 Bald Mountain Road ai n ®veil net Lo[ 3, Bl"'2'V. I Village FIIng 13 -- -- �� PIT Town I Vell, Coloratlo ene Uircrenet �I 1�L IvJI/il / — s�ruamg Balrnv UPPER LEVEL PLAN Nom` Carey Residence n°a'e s L 1c Garage & Office Addition core 2185 Bald Mountain Roatl alaan@vauneei e Lot 3. Block 2, Vall Vllage Frlrng 13 Town of Verl, Colorado �aM��,rail8ce °�,� , I I Closet��'J HILL - a. N A a6 °a l l bath �eoce Atldrtio. ' b c.� II Prop os tl Atltlrtfon 1�L IvJI/il / — s�ruamg Balrnv UPPER LEVEL PLAN Nom` Carey Residence n°a'e s L 1c Garage & Office Addition core 2185 Bald Mountain Roatl alaan@vauneei e Lot 3. Block 2, Vall Vllage Frlrng 13 Town of Verl, Colorado �aM��,rail8ce °�,� , _ App—d Andit- -A—c Garage III CiassA C"mpasieon sl g NORTH ELEVATION = o, w,a. III / Carey Residence A� 4 Iw 6"�Sf11lEYORB CEii`iCATC- r .a.rt.: Mw.wnrrtoe � rammw mr mr��n". > ne eom w rc. m t T m r G i va.zsy .Wm m�ra ev. .,nr mn�^w nr , 2 SOUTH ELEVATION //a ^_ " Proposed v I Addition Matr i N bon 1 � s 9ji;l�oi n {• ir _ -1 �If;alr - 1 3 WEST ELEVATION aas nl P Carey Residence Gamge & Office Addition °lBfOn�°na�aaa a 2]85 bald Mountain Road p 3 Lot 3, Block2. Vail Village Filing 13 Town of Veil, Colorado ev>e=miir� "er 2 , PARTIAL SITE PLAN LOTS 4 & 3 i "= -o^ Na Nok' VICINITY MAP NTs I Ii UPPER LEVEL PLAN va " =r -g" Carey Residence Peel /Canoe Waller AicM1iteds LLC Garage & Office Addition ; ° s, �6ASOe��Via,lan��euesi n d 2]85 Bo,, Mountam Road Lot 3, Block 2. Vail Village Filing 13 7-15 -t PEC Submittal Town of Vail, Colorado Upper Level Plan Carey Residence n ",dte °a L gc a�em��n -1513 - Office & Bath Addition � wses 2]85 Bald Mountain Road o. T. 1—h@­1 Lot 3, Block 2, Vatl Village Filing 13 ` v co s Town of Vail, celorado �o,'o � esmn�ce gat s 1 I NORTH ELEVATION 1/a' =1' -p" I 2 SOUTH PLEVATION Additi.n _ / muamn Hsu "a @Existing neck / _nxiz edam enaa.Tm y f a3 e, i �a� sung j n / —P Carey Residence Garage & Office Addition 2785 Bed Mountain —d Lot 3, Bbck 2, Vail Village RI,ng 13 Town of Vall, Coloratlo WEST ELEVATION va st eel Lenaenweitern m _ ao eox i2o2 va'cic1 etssp Tela7easpa @a,lne, 6 B.i'di.. CElevatic.., Top. eneei a or a Carey Residence Office & Bath Addition vau�co mesa 2785 Baltl Mounta,n Roatl plercry ®�eu nel Lot 3, Block 2, Vatl VJlage F,I,ng 13 "c Town of Val, Coloratlo a o a/szi7o ooyleena®awe Mrep n eI a or W P I I, d, as , a / I / j ? EI Y= Y^K1`r ,UVS x'Gi� I Yb� aI- prrwlN�s I SITF' P✓'�N 'nh` bYp `ENb`J -L "FS'b�NC�S & F I b °}'i0 �. P7.y Alvp Pirf.^il�Lj I°dHNS' Y' Fn P�'ll":M1CC E- GF -LAN �I - ry.tif -�: L — rr _ f TI T � tr��:rox x III I� Carey Residence - m o x a� I„ d Garage 8 GtFice Addition --t Iran 2]85 Bald Mounts r Road o-afb os pa ran @.a � nw Lot 3 Bl-2 Va l V liege F l ng 13 T— of Calo edo Original Site Plan - z YI-icr rTIlJHMN F —P tr��:rox �m 1 / Y o r�i J I i I I _ " � n ro I l�_ \ e e y Carey Residence � m , Garage &07Fice Addf4lon 1.1 Co e e wo 4764506 arch va ne1 FFFyyy M-r c 2785 Bald k 2, Vl, n Roe' n KL !. k —^14J �' TOW fV.I Ve l Vllega Flling 13 Original FlOOrP ans 214$ �. �. Town of Vall C. ,.d. vd I v sneer a o! 9 � s p �_•,2 .i � 9 ' it a 14 -i I c 'H.HI f Q w�T =tip rrr G� ` =Yr, F �-nr II ear a II , r— q —Hi rl YY � Y I � JF r c I�G FF I eoerl i.���� IL l- -.— n co IF J U, ti.l-o nu- IVIHC /rr-Y �nz� -� I J. eu Ids, .Ld r~hY� � _ _ - �_ I of I Y �- JG Carey Residence � 7r _ — I Garage & Office Addition z] as B M t a s Lt 3, 31 ock2 V.11 V111 g FIng 13 cl(F=y E T'cIG - U Town of Ve C d C�" I pol Original Elevations et a�u, \ YY �kw P lo�rio� �� 4 �lar r, ✓�,oaL- ; ". C, I Vr-TTTF ., �I r-c o � Q w�T =tip rrr G� ` =Yr, F �-nr II ear a II , r— q —Hi rl YY � Y I � JF r c I�G FF I eoerl i.���� IL l- -.— n co IF J U, ti.l-o nu- IVIHC /rr-Y �nz� -� I J. eu Ids, .Ld r~hY� � _ _ - �_ I of I Y �- JG Carey Residence � 7r _ — I Garage & Office Addition z] as B M t a s Lt 3, 31 ock2 V.11 V111 g FIng 13 cl(F=y E T'cIG - U Town of Ve C d C�" I pol Original Elevations et a�u, \ YY �kw P lo�rio� �� 4 �lar r, ✓�,oaL- ; ". o � Y Q w�T =tip rrr G� ` =Yr, F �-nr II ear a II , r— q —Hi rl YY � Y I � JF r c I�G FF I eoerl i.���� IL l- -.— n co IF J U, ti.l-o nu- IVIHC /rr-Y �nz� -� I J. eu Ids, .Ld r~hY� � _ _ - �_ I of I Y �- JG Carey Residence � 7r _ — I Garage & Office Addition z] as B M t a s Lt 3, 31 ock2 V.11 V111 g FIng 13 cl(F=y E T'cIG - U Town of Ve C d C�" I pol Original Elevations et a�u, \ YY �kw P lo�rio� �� 4 �lar r, ✓�,oaL- ; ". TOWN OF VAIL'� PLANNING AND ENVIRONMENTAL COMMISSION May 12, 2014 at 1:OOpm TOWN COUNCIL CHAMBERS / PUBLIC WELCOME 75 S. Frontage Road - Vail, Colorado, 81657 MEMBERS PRESENT MEMBERS ABSENT Site Visits: 1. Wall Street Building — 225 Wall Street 2. Vail Valley Medical Center - 181 and 281 West Meadow Drive and 108 South Frontage Road West 15 minutes 1. A request for the review of a variance from Section 12 -6E -6, Setbacks, Vail Town Code, pursuant to Chapter 12 -17, Variances, Vail Town Code, to allow for the construction of an addition within the side setback area, located at 2785 Bald Mountain Road /Lot 3 Block 2, Vail Village Filing 13, and setting forth details in regard thereto. (PEC140009) Applicant: 2002 Carey Family Trust, Michael J. & Wendy M. Carey Trustees, represented by Peel /Langenwalter Architects Planner: Jonathan Spence ACTION: MOTION: SECOND: VOTE: CONDITION(S): 25 minutes 2. A request for the review of a major exterior alteration or modification, pursuant to Section 12 -76- 7, Exterior Alterations and Modifications, Vail Town Code, to allow for the construction of additions to the Northeast corner of Wall Street Building, located at 225 Wall Street, Lots B & C, Block 5C, Vail Village Filing 1, and setting forth details in regard thereto. (PEC140010) Applicant: MECO LLP, represented by Suman Architects Planner: Warren Campbell ACTION: MOTION: SECOND: VOTE: CONDITION(S): 40 minutes 3. A request for a recommendation to the Vail Town Council on the adoption of the Vail Valley Medical Center Master Plan, to establish a comprehensive redevelopment plan for the Vail Valley Medical Center, Lot 10 (Town of Vail parking lot), and US Bank Building, located at 181 and 281 West Meadow Drive and 108 South Frontage Road West/ Lots E, F, and 10 Vail Village Filing 2, and Lot D -2, A Resubdivision of Lot D Vail Village Filing 2, and setting forth details in regard thereto. (PEC140011) Applicant: Vail Valley Medical Center, represented by Braun and Associates Planner: George Ruther ACTION: MOTION: SECOND: VOTE: CONDITION(S): Page 1 20 minutes 4. A request for a work session to update the Planning and Environmental Commission on the progress of the Vail Village Character Area Preservation project, an initiative to examine the Town's current regulations, design standards and guidelines applicable to Vail Village to determine whether they are sufficient to ensure the special character of Vail Village is not just maintained but also enhanced. Applicant: Town of Vail, represented by Braun Associates, Inc. Planner: Warren Campbell ACTION: MOTION: SECOND: VOTE: CONDITION(S): 5. A request for the review of a conditional use permit, pursuant to 12 -9C -3, Conditional Uses, Vail Town Code, for a public and quasi - public indoor community facilities (education center), to allow for the construction of the Betty Ford Alpine Gardens Education Center, located 530 South Frontage Road /Unplatted, and setting forth details in regard thereto. (PEC140005) Applicant: Betty Ford Alpine Gardens, represented by Jack Hunn Planner: Jonathan Spence ACTION: Table to June 9, 2014 MOTION: SECOND: VOTE: 6. A request for a variance from Section 14 -3 -1, Table 1, Minimum Standards, Vail Town Code, pursuant to Section 14 -1 -5, Variances, Vail Town Code, to allow for a residential driveway to exceed the permitted maximum centerline grade, located at 2754 Snowberry Drive / Lot 15, Block, 9, Vail Intermountain and setting forth details in regard thereto. (PEC140007) Applicant: Mike Dantas, represented by Mauriello Planning Group Planner: Joe Batcheller ACTION: Table to June 9, 2014 MOTION: SECOND: VOTE: 7. Approval of April 28, 2014 minutes MOTION: SECOND: VOTE: 8. Information Update 9. Adjournment MOTION: SECOND: VOTE: The applications and information about the proposals are available for public inspection during regular office hours at the Town of Vail Community Development Department, 75 South Frontage Road. The public is invited to attend the project orientation and the site visits that precede the public hearing in the Town of Vail Community Development Department. Times and order of items are approximate, subject to change, and cannot be relied upon to determine at what time the Planning and Environmental Commission will consider an item. 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 9, 2014 in the Vail Daily. Page 2 Memorandum TO: Planning and Environmental Commission FROM: Community Development Department DATE: May 12, 2014 SUBJECT: A request for a work session to discuss the initial steps in the planning process for the Vail Valley Medical Center Facilities Master Plan project, located at 181 West Meadow Drive, Lots E & F, Vail Village 2nd Filing. Applicant: Vail Valley Medical Center, represented by Tom Braun, Braun Associates, Inc. Planner: George Ruther I. DESCRIPTION OF REQUEST The applicant, Vail Valley Medical Center (VVMC), represented by Tom Braun, is requesting a work session with the Planning and Environmental Commission (PEC). The purpose the worksession is to re- engage the PEC in the planning process for the Vail Valley Medical Center Facilities Master Plan. The worksession meeting will focus on • the planning process, • background work that has been completed to date, • planning considerations • the format of the master plan document, • opportunities for public participation, and • a schedule of next steps. The intended outcome of the master planning process is the creation a facilities master plan for the existing medical campus. As such, the plan will be used to help guide and direct future decisions for infill development, growth and expansion of the VVMC campus. As this remains a worksession in the early stages of the planning process, neither the staff nor the applicant intend to present a master plan document or planned design solutions at this time. A master plan document with proposed design solutions will be presented at a later date. II. BACKGROUND The idea for a facilities master plan for the VVMC campus rose out of the municipal site redevelopment project. During discussions regarding the municipal site project, a number of land planning opportunities and facility improvement needs were identified. While the municipal site redevelopment project is no longer being actively pursued by the VVMC and the Town of Vail, the need for certain facility improvements on the VVMC campus remains and opportunities for better land planning still exists. Through previous communications with the Town, VVMC has been given conceptual approval to explore master planning options and ideas which may include the use of certain town owned lands. More specifically, those lands include the town's municipal site located at 75 South Frontage Road and 281 West Meadow Drive, library parking lot (Lot 10, Vail Village Filing 2). No final decisions on that matter, however, have been reached. The applicant last appeared before the Planning and Environmental Commission on April 8, 2013. At that time, the applicant had presented conceptual ideas for the creation of the master plan and received input from the Commission on the types of issues which needed to be addressed by the Plan. Since last April, the applicant has been working with their master planning consultant team to prepare the initial elements of the Plan. To that end, a significant amount of time and thought has gone into addressing on -site and off -site traffic circulation, determining the parking need, options for addressing the parking need (both on -site and off - site), loading and delivery options, and construction sequencing. Additionally, further investigation has gone into the potential use of the municipal site and /or Lot 10 to help address the physical and spatial needs of the Vail Valley Medical Center. More discussion, design work and analysis is needed to fully understand the issues and opportunities, however. III. APPLICABLE PLANNING DOCUMENTS The following planning documents are applicable to the review of this application: ZONING CODE General Use District 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. VAIL LAND USE PLAN The Vail Land Use Plan contains multiple goal statements placed into six different categories. Staff believes the following goal statements are applicable to the effort to master plan the WMC campus. 1. General Growth/ Development 1.1. Vail 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. Town of Vail Page 2 1.2. The quality of the environment including air, water and other natural resources should be protected as the Town grows. 1.3. The quality of development should be maintained and upgraded whenever possible. 1.12 Vail should accommodate most of the additional growth in existing developed areas (infill areas). 6. Community Services 6.1. Services should keep pace with increased growth. 6.2. The Town of Vail should play a role in future development through balancing growth with services. 6.3. Services should be adjusted to keep pace with the needs of peak periods. The Land Use Plan designates the desired Land Use Category of all properties in the Town. The WMC is comprised of several properties with differing land use designations. Resort Accommodations and Service (US Bank Building) This area includes activities aimed at accommodating the overnight and short -term visitor to the area. Primary uses include hotels, lodges, service stations, and parking structures (with densities up to 25 dwelling units or 50 accommodation units per buildable acre). Transition (WMC Campus) The transition designation applies to the area between Lionshead and the Vail Village. The activities and site design of this area is aimed at encouraging pedestrian flow through the area and strengthening the connection between the two commercial cores. Appropriate activities include hotels, lodging and other tourist oriented residential units, ancillary retail and restaurant uses, museums, areas of public art, nature exhibits, gardens, pedestrian plazas, and other types of civic and culturally oriented uses, and the adjacent properties to the north. This designation would include the right -of -way of West Meadow Drive and the adjacent properties to the north. IV. SURROUNDING LAND USES AND ZONING North: South: East: West: Town of Vail Land Use Zoninq Lodging /Municipal Lionshead Mixed Use 1 /General Use Residential Primary Secondary Residential Multifamily Residential High Density Multiple Family Municipal General Use Page 3 V. DISCUSSION ITEMS Process The end result of the master planning process is to create a facilities master plan for the VVMC campus. As such, the plan will be used primarily by VVMC to help guide and direct the future decisions for development on the VVMC campus. While many aspects and elements of the plan have little, or no relevance, on the Town of Vail or the immediate neighborhood (i.e., interior layout of the buildings, sequencing of construction, size of the emergency generator, etc.), there are many other aspects or elements of the plan which will. For example, elements such as parking; pedestrian circulation; loading and delivery; bulk, mass and scale; vehicular access, etc. For that reason, it is imperative that input from the community and other potentially impacted parties is taken throughout the master planning process. These design solutions a options for the implementation of these elements will become part of the master plan. Once incorporated into the master plan, the master plan will be used as a benchmark for evaluating more detailed development plan proposals provided as part of a conditional use permit application. Further, portions of the master plan should be created with the expressed intent and goal of its inclusion in the Vail's Comprehensive Plan. Through its inclusion in Vail's Comprehensive Plan, the master plan becomes pertinent and relevant to future development review processes and actions by the Town. In order to achieve this goal, the Vail Land Use Plan should be amended to include those aspects or elements of the master facilities plan which bear relevance on the Town of Vail and the immediate neighborhood. WMC /TOV Forum Notes The Town of Vail and the Vail Valley Medical Center hosted a community forum on the proposed master plan and process. What follows is a series of questions raised by community members in attendance. It remains the intent of the ToV and VVMC to address each of the questions during the course of the master planning process. Site Plan -- Primary concern: Frontage Rd. access for emergency vehicles. - -How high up will VVMC be building? - -Will there be underground parking? - -Can VVMC continue to use current helicopter pad? Will it be moved? - -Will the community be able to provide feedback re: helicopter pad before final decisions are made? - -Have we brought in FAA consultants? -- Assuming Evergreen Lodge remains hotel, it would be better to have mechanical on the ground. - -Will VVMC incorporate employee housing on site? - -What does VVMC anticipate the growth of the hospital to be in the next 10 years? - -With growth, does VVMC anticipate complementary parking? - -The scope of the plan should be as large as possible geographically. - -Would US Bank Building and VVMC be the same height? Or, if US Bank Building is torn down, will there be one building? - -The puzzle pieces don't fit together. Traffic needs to be routed off Meadow Drive. We need a grand entrance. - -How do we manage emergency traffic? - -Small footprint. Given our demographics, does it make sense to have a satellite location in Vail and main location down valley? Town of Vail Page 4 - -Would the municipal site be included in the master plan? It seemed to be a "magical" solution with a lot of flexibility. We will decide re: municipal building within next 2 years? Yes? - -How big is the site? - -How soon do I have to worry about my property getting eaten up? - -Is there any land the hospital can swap with the Evergreen to make Frontage Road access better? -- You've decided landing a helicopter on the campus is safe? - -Has TOV determined there will be a helicopter pad on main campus? - -Has CDOT reversed its demand that the helipad be removed? - -Is it too dangerous to have helipad near a highway? Why is it safer in a residential neighborhood and in a hospital facility? - -The non - patient/non -sick community - what facilities will be available to them? Wellness Centers, etc. - -Do you take economics into account, Re: services on this campus? - -This hospital does not receive emergency patients via helicopter. We are sending patients out via helicopter. We do not need to do that. - -How much usage, critical transport vs. daily use? - -How does the patient transfer process work (clinical /amb.) --If it's too dangerous to have helipad near a highway, why is it safer in a residential neighborhood and in a hospital facility? - -When a patient is flown out, the patient has been stabilized and is on their way out for further care. - -Three top plans in other communities that are similar to ours? Traffic & Patient Flow - -What % of VVMC patients are residents of Vail & area? - -What is the % income breakdown of residents vs. non? - -I'd like to see the TOV order /request directing the helipad to be moved to VVMC property. - -What will the process be to determine the location of the helipad, including the TOV involvement and FAA involvement? -- Pay - patient parking is undersized. -- Traffic on Meadow Drive is dangerous, especially in summer. -- Lab /pharmacy /PT and other quick services need to be more accessible. -- Negotiate improved access points to the hospital campus from the Frontage Rd. -- Suggest a rooftop helipad. -- Prefer location of helipad next to 1 -70, across from VVMC (Noise, dust, view) -- Factor in weather and location for safety of helipad and residents. -- Minutes matter. Patient transfer time is critical for patients. -- Traffic off East Meadow - patient, delivery, trash, emergency -- Campus lots of buildings can be connected under "campus" concept and even off site. -- Footprint - think big /broaden boundary. -- Parking underground - buildable space -- Helipad - off site - West Vail -- Phasing to keep hospital operational during construction - -How does projected population growth influence the plan? - -With this development, will it increase the levels within the hospital (level III trauma, level 11 building) - -TOV must support with better bus stops nearer to entrance. Schedule & Process - -Have a working committee and high -level vision for health and wellness. Town of Vail Page 5 -- Enlarge yellow box, even if it doesn't happen now. Inclusive of Lot 10, Evergreen & Town municipal site. - -If you are going to build a tall building, better to build it on municipal site and not block views. -- Residential noise related to emergency vehicles. Sound barriers, underground ER patient unload. -- Concern about helicopter noise /location. - -Is the Town of Vail helping with planning of the medical campus? - -What is the economic driver? For VVMC? For TOV? - -Is the municipal site /building off the table? - -Have you discussed moving the frontage road? - -Does the town own the frontage road? -- Municipal site and hospital site are underutilized. - -Could municipal site be doc offices? - -Could municipal site be the E.D? Helipad atop E.D. with tunnel under road for access to the medical campus? Planning Considerations There are many planning considerations that will go into the creation of the VVMC Master Facilities Plan. As previously stated, many of those considerations will be relevant to VVMC only and bear little, if any, relevance on the Town of Vail. In an effort to begin discussions with VVMC's master planners, a preliminary list of planning considerations or external factors or considerations relevant to the Town of Vail and the immediate neighborhood has been developed. The preliminary list includes: • Provide for a future emergency air ambulance helipad on the hospital site. • Provide for adequate on site loading and delivery services which minimizes negative impacts on the neighborhood. Special consideration should be given to relocating this use to gain access to the VVMC Campus from the South Frontage Road. • Address emergency vehicle circulation to and from the site. • Address patient and employee vehicle circulation with an emphasis on use of the South Frontage Road for primary access. • Minimize the number of vehicle trips on West Meadow Drive to improve the pedestrian experience along the street • Provide for pedestrian circulation N/S through the hospital site to connect the South Frontage Road with West Meadow Drive. • Reduce the negative impacts of the hospital surface parking lot on the Middle Creek riparian corridor. • The hospital use is currently non - conforming with regard to minimum parking requirements. All future planning should ensure full compliance with the parking requirements. • Work with the Town of Vail and neighboring property owners to identify the most appropriate location of vehicle access off of the South Frontage Road. This shall also take design options into consideration. • The Town of Vail is willing to consider design and master plan options which include the use of Lot 10 and the Town's municipal center site. • Address the existing zone district designation of the US Bank Building. • Provide opportunities for growth and expansion of the VVMC Campus to ensure the growing health care needs of the community are met. • Ensure that the mechanical equipment needs of medical center are met on site and seek to minimize any unintended consequences. Town of Vail Page 6 What additional planning considerations, if any, does the Planning and Environmental Commission have at this time to share with the master planners for the WMC campus? Additional opportunities for input will be available as the master planning effort proceeds through a more formal public hearing review process. Town of Vail Page 7 Memorandum TO: Planning and Environmental Commission FROM: Community Development Department DATE: May 13, 2013 SUBJECT: A request for the review of a major exterior alteration or modification, pursuant to Section 12 -713-7, Exterior Alterations and Modifications, Vail Town Code, to allow for the construction of additions to the Northeast corner of Wall Street Building, located at 225 Wall Street, Lots B & C, Block 5C, Vail Village Filing 1, and setting forth details in regard thereto. (PEC140010) Applicant: MECO LLP, represented by Suman Architects Planner: Warren Campbell SUMMARY The applicant, MECO LLP, represented by Suman Architects, is requesting the review of an exterior alteration or modification, pursuant to Section 12 -713-7, Exterior Alterations and Modifications, Vail Town Code, to the facilitate the construction of a commercial addition at 225 Wall Street (Wall Street Building). Based upon Staff's review of the criteria outlined in Section VII of this memorandum and the evidence and testimony presented, the Community Development Department recommends denial of the proposed exterior alteration or modification subject to the findings noted in Section VIII of this memorandum. II. DESCRIPTION OF REQUEST The applicant, MECO LLP, represented by Suman Architects, is requesting the review of a major exterior alteration: • To facilitate the expansion and reconfiguration of the commercial floor area in Retail Unit 101 by 40 square feet. • To increase the size of the entry lobby to the upper floors by 14 square feet. The applicant, in their written request, elaborates on the reasons for the proposed changes included in this application. It is stated that there is a loss of retail square footage created by the proposal and a negative impact created by the column at the northeast corner which is approximately four (4) feet from the corner of the enclosed retail space. Additionally, the functionality of the pedestrian way between the new retail store facade and the column is questioned and identified as a deterrent to pedestrians. The applicant's written request (Attachments A), the proposed site and architectural plans (Attachment B), and two memorandums from Jeff Winston, Town of Vail consultant, (Attachment C) are attached for review. III. BACKGROUND The subject property was a part of the original Town of Vail which became effective by the election of August 23, 1966, and the court order of August 26, 1966. The existing Wall Street Building was completed in 1968 prior to zoning in Vail. The property was subsequently zone Commercial Core I District and in 1980 became subject to the Vail Village Design Considerations of the Vail Village Master Plan which rendered the structure legally non - conforming in regards to site coverage. On September 10, 1990, the Planning and Environmental Commission approved a major exterior alteration was approved to increase the American Ski Exchange commercial space by 96 square feet. This approval facilitated the reconfiguration of the entry and a bay window. On December 16, 1991, the Planning and Environmental Commission approved a major exterior alteration was approved to increase the Rightfit Sports (currently Jewels of the West) commercial space by 10 square feet and a second floor office space by 5 square feet. On April 12, 1993, the Planning and Environmental Commission approved a major exterior alteration to add 35 square feet of commercial floor area to the American Ski Exchange tenant space. On April 10, 2000, the Planning and Environmental Commission approved a conditional use permit to eliminate a dwelling unit through the combination of Units 301 and 303. The result was a decrease in the number of dwelling units on the site from 9 to 8. NO exterior alterations were proposed. On June 24, 2002, the Planning and Environmental Commission approved a major exterior alteration and height variance request for the consolidation of Units 301 and 303 resulting in the addition of to dormers on the west elevation. On March 11 and 25, 2013, the Planning and Environmental Commission tabled this request without discussion. On April 8, 2013, the Planning and Environmental Commission held a public hearing on the proposal and tabled it after discussion. The Commission identified a need for a site Town of Vail Page 2 plan which shows the buildings on the east side of Wall Street to establish context, an increase in the landscaping on the west elevation of the Wall Street Building, a change to the first floor commercial infill at the northeast corner to open up site lines into Wall Street, and the need for a pedestrian easement. On May 13, 2013, the Planning and Environmental Commission approved the following with regard to the Wall Street Building. • A site coverage variance to expand the footprint of the building by 228 square feet resulting in an increase in site coverage from 80.3% to 83.4% (80% permitted). The area on top of the commercial expansion would replace and become the deck for the unit above. • A major exterior alteration to facilitate the expansion of the first floor retail area by 840 square feet and the second floor office by 459 square feet. On August 12, 2014, the Planning and Environmental Commission approved the following at 227 Wall Street Building (Hong Kong Building) to facilitate the Wall Street Building's Major Exterior Alteration. A site coverage variance to expand the footprint of the Wall Street Building by 28 square feet onto the property of the Hong Kong Building, resulting in an increase in site coverage from 92.3% (1,489 square feet) to 94.1% (1,517 square feet) (80% permitted). The area on top of the commercial expansion would become the deck for the residential unit above. IV. APPLICABLE PLANNING DOCUMENTS Staff believes that the following provisions of the Vail Town Code are relevant to the review of this proposal: TITLE 12: ZONING REGULATIONS Article 12 -7B Commercial Core 1 (CC1) District (in part) 12 -7B -1: PURPOSE: The commercial core 1 district is intended to provide sites and to maintain the unique character of the Vail Village commercial area, with its mixture of lodges and commercial establishments in a predominantly pedestrian environment. The commercial core 1 district is intended to ensure adequate light, air, open space, and other amenities appropriate to the permitted types of buildings and uses. The zoning regulations in accordance with the Vail Village urban design guide plan and design considerations prescribe site development standards that are intended to ensure the maintenance and preservation of the tightly clustered arrangements of buildings fronting on pedestrianways and public greenways, and to ensure continuation of the building scale and architectural qualities that distinguish the village. Town of Vail Page 3 VAIL LAND USE PLAN CHAPTER II — LAND USE PLAN GOALS / POLICIES: The goals articulated here reflect the desires of the citizenry as expressed through the series of public meetings that were held throughout the project. A set of initial goals were developed which were then substantially revised after different types of opinions were brought out in the second meeting. The goal statements were developed to reflect a general consensus once the public had had the opportunity to reflect on the concepts and ideas initially presented. The goal statements were then revised through the review process with the Task Force, the Planning and Environmental Commission and Town Council and now represent policy guidelines in the review process for new development proposals. These goal statements should be used in conjunction with the adopted Land Use Plan map, in the evaluation of any development proposal. The goal statements which are reflected in the design of the proposed Plan are as follows: 1. General Growth/ Development 1.1. Vail 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. 1.3. The quality of development should be maintained and upgraded whenever possible. 1.4. The original theme of the old Village Core should be carried into new development in the Village Core through continued implementation of the Urban Design Guide Plan. 1.12. Vail should accommodate most of the additional growth in existing developed areas (infill areas). 4. Village Core/ Lionshead 4.2. Increased density in the Core areas is acceptable so long as the existing character of each area is preserved through implementation of the Urban Design Guide Plan and the Vail Village Master Plan. 4.3. The ambiance of the Village is important to the identity of Vail and should be preserved. (Scale, alpine character, small town feeling, mountains, natural settings, intimate size, cosmopolitan feeling, environmental quality.) 5. Residential 5.1. Additional residential growth should continue to occur primarily in existing, platted areas and as appropriate in new areas where high hazards do not exist. Town of Vail Page 4 5.4. Residential growth should keep pace with the market place demands for a full range of housing types. VAIL VILLAGE MASTER PLAN Vail Village Master Plan VAIL VILLAGE DESIGN CONSIDERATIONS Vail Village esign Considerations V. SITE ANALYSIS Address: Legal Description- Zoning- Land Use Plan Designation Current Land Use: Lot Size: Geological Hazards: 225 Wall Street Lot B, Block 5C, Vail Village Filing 1 Commercial Core I (CC1) Village Master Plan Mixed Use 7,301 sq.ft. (0.1676 acre) None Standard Allowed /Required Existing Proposed Lot Area 5,000 sf 7,301 sf no change Setback West per VVDG* 4 feet no change East per VVDG 0 feet no change North per VVDG 0 feet no change South per VVDG 0 feet no change Height 60% less than 33 ft. 100% no change 40% from 33 ft. to 43 ft. 91% no change 0% over 43 ft. 9% no change Site Coverage 5,840.8 sf 6,092 sf no change 80% 83.4% no change Landscaping no net loss softscape 132 sf no change (0.02 %) no change Density (GRFA) 5,840 sf n/a no change Town of Vail Page 5 Density DUs 4 DUs 8 DUs no change (25 DUs /acre) Parking 12 DUs 13 required no change (1.4 /DU) 0 provided Commercial 0 required no change *Vail Village Design Plan VI. SURROUNDING LAND USES AND ZONING Land Use Zoning North: Children's Fountain No zoning South: Commercial (Hong Kong Building) Commercial Core I East: Mixed Use (Casino Building) Commercial Core I West: Mixed Use (Lodge at Vail) Commercial Core I VII. REVIEW CRITERIA EXTERIOR ALTERATION OR MODIFICATION A major exterior alteration with the CC1 district requires review and compliance with the Vail Village Master Plan, the Vail Village Urban Design Guide Plan, the Vail Village Design Considerations, and the zone district. The review criteria for an exterior alteration or modification request of this nature are prescribed by Section 12 -713-7, Exterior Alterations or Modifications, Vail Town Code, as follows: 1. The proposed exterior alteration is in compliance with the purposes of the CC1 district as specified in Section 12 -7B -1, Vail Town Code. Staff finds that the proposal is not in compliance with the purposes of the CC1 district since it will not "maintain the unique character of the Vail Village Commercial Area ", will not provide "adequate light, air, open space, and other amenities appropriate to the permitted types of buildings and uses ", will negatively influence the "maintenance and preservation of the tightly clustered arrangements of buildings fronting on pedestrianways and public greenways" and will negatively influence the "building scale and architectural qualities that distinguish the Village." The expansion of commercial floor area would be required to mitigate the employee generation caused by the expansion. The previously approved expansion of office and retail resulted in 0.7 employees needing to be mitigated. If this application were approved mitigation would be required pursuant to Chapter 12 -23, Commercial Linkage, Vail Town Code. Staff believes the proposal does not comply with this criterion. Town of Vail Page 6 2. The proposal is consistent with applicable elements of the Vail Village Master Plan, Vail Village Urban Design Guide Plan, Vail Village Design Considerations, Streetscape Master Plan, and the Vail Comprehensive Plan. The Vail Village Master Plan identifies the purpose of the plan as follows: "This Plan is based on the premise that the Village can be planned and designed as a whole. It is intended to guide the Town in developing land use laws and policies for coordinating development by the public and private sectors in Vail Village and in implementing community goals for public improvements. It is intended to result in ordinances and policies that will preserve and improve the unified and attractive appearance of Vail Village. This Plan emphasizes the critical need to balance and coordinate parking and transportation systems with future improvements to Vail Mountain that will increase the "in and out of Valley" lift capacity. Most importantly, this Master Plan shall serve as a guide to the staff, review boards, and Town Council in analyzing future proposals for development in Vail Village and in legislating effective ordinances to deal with such development. Furthermore, the Master Plan provides valuable information for a wide variety of people and interests. For the citizens and guests of Vail, the Master Plan provides a clearly stated set of goals and objectives outlining how the Village will grow in the future." The Vail Village Master Plan established six goals containing objectives, policies and action steps. Staff believes the following goals, objectives and policies are applicable to the this major exterior alteration proposal. "GOAL #1 ENCOURAGE HIGH QUALITY, REDEVELOPMENT WHILE PRESERVING UNIQUE ARCHITECTURAL SCALE OF THE VILLAGE IN ORDER TO SUSTAIN ITS SENSE OF COMMUNITY AND IDENTITY. Objective 1.1: Implement a consistent development review process to reinforce the character of the Village. Policy 1.1.1: Development and improvement projects approved in the Village shall be consistent with the goals, objectives, policies and design considerations as outlined in the Vail Village Master Plan and Urban Design Guide Plan. Objective 1.2: Encourage the upgrading and redevelopment of residential and commercial facilities. Policy 1.2.1: Additional development may be allowed as identified by the Action Plan and as is consistent with the Vail Village Master Plan and Urban Design Guide Plan. Objective 1.4: Recognize the "historic" importance of the architecture, structures, landmarks, plazas and features in preserving the character of Vail Village. Town of Vail Page 7 Policy 1.4.1: The historical importance of structures, landmarks, plazas and other similar features shall be taken into consideration in the development review process. Policy 1.4.2: The Town may grant flexibility in the interpretation and implementation of its regulations and design guidelines to help protect and maintain the existing character of Vail Village. Policy 1.4.3: Identification of "historic" importance shall not be used as the sole means of preventing or prohibiting development in Vail Village. GOAL #2 TO FOSTER A STRONG TOURIST INDUSTRY AND PROMOTE YEAR - AROUND ECONOMIC HEALTH AND VIABILITY FOR THE VILLAGE AND FOR THE COMMUNITY AS A WHOLE. Objective 2.1: Recognize the variety of land uses found in the 11 sub -areas throughout the Village and allow for development that is compatible with these established land use patterns. Policy 2.1.1: The zoning code and development review criteria shall be consistent with the overall goals and objectives- of the Vail Village Master Plan. Objective 2.2: Recognize the importance of Vail Village as a mixed use center of activities for our guests, visitors and residents. Policy 2.2.1: The design criteria in the Vail Village Urban Design Guide Plan shall be the primary guiding document to preserve the existing architectural scale and character of the core area of Vail Village. Objective 2.4: Encourage the development of a variety of new commercial activity where compatible with existing land uses. Policy 2.4.1: Commercial infill development consistent with established horizontal zoning regulations shall be encouraged to provide activity generators, accessible greenspaces, public plazas, and streetscape improvements to the pedestrian network throughout the Village. Policy 2.4.2: Activity that provides night life and evening entertainment for both the guest and the community shall be encouraged. Objective 2.5: Encourage the continued upgrading, renovation and maintenance of existing lodging and commercial facilities to better serve the needs of our guests. Policy 2.5.2: The town will use the maximum flexibility possible in the interpretation of building and fire codes in order to facilitate budding renovations without compromising life, health and safety considerations. Town of Vail Page 8 GOAL #3 TO RECOGNIZE AS A TOP PRIOTITY THE ENHANCEMENT OF THE WALKING EXPERIENCE THROUGHOUT THE VILLAGE Objective 3.1: Physically improve the existing pedestrian ways by landscaping and other improvements. Policy 3.1.1: Private development projects shall incorporate streetscape improvements (such as paver treatments, landscaping, lighting and seating areas), along adjacent pedestrian ways. Policy 3.1.2: Public art and other similar landmark features shall be encouraged at appropriate locations throughout the Town. Policy 3.1.3: Flowers, trees, water features, and other landscaping shall be encouraged throughout the Town in locations adjacent to, or visible from, public areas." Chapter 7 of the Vail Village Master Plan identifies ten Vail Village Sub - Areas. Within each sub -areas concepts are described which are meant to serve as "advisory guidelines for future land use decisions by the Planning and Environmental Commission ". The Wall Street Building is located within Sub -Area #3. Sub -Area 3# is as follows: VA6v Tai 4W$44 "This pedestrianized area of the Village represents the traditional image of Vail. A mixture of residential and commercial uses, limited vehicular access, and inter- connected pedestrian ways are some of the characteristics that distinguish this Town of Vail Page 9 area from other portions of the Village. With the exception of embellishing pedestrian walkways, developing plazas with greenspace, and adding a number of infill developments, it is a goal of the community to preserve the character of the Village as it is today. The core area, with its predominantly Tyrolean architecture; is the site of the earliest development in Vail. Over time, a need to upgrade and improve infrastructure such as loading and delivery facilities, drainage, paved surfaces and other landscape features has become apparent. Many improvements to public spaces will be addressed as part of an overall streetscape improvement project. There is also the potential to initiate a number of these improvements in conjunction with private sector development projects. Although it is a goal to maintain design continuity in the Village core, there will be change in the, core area's built environment. This is mostly due to the number of properties that have not exercised their full development rights. Most notable among these properties are the Red Lion Building, the Cyranos Building, the Lodge at Vail, and the Covered Bridge Building. If each of these and other properties develop to their full potential, there will undoubtedly be a significant increase in the level of development in the Village core. The Vail Village Urban Design Guide Plan has been the primary tool in guiding private development proposals in the core area since 1980. The Guide Plan will continue to be used in conjunction with the goals and design criteria outlined in the Vail Village Master Plan. Infill and redevelopment proposals shall be reviewed for compliance with the design criteria, goals, objectives and policies established in these respective plans." The Vail Village Design Considerations are a critical element of the Urban Design Guide Plan. Staff enlisted the architectural design review services of Jeff Winston to aid in the review of the previously approved major exterior alteration application for the Wall Street Building (PEC130009) for compliance with the Vail Village Design Considerations. One of the primary areas of focus with regard to the previously submitted and approved application was the northeast corner of the Wall Street Building and the appropriate configuration and extent of infill that would be in compliance with the review criteria. The approved design allowed for a 98 square foot increase in the at- grade retail floor area for Retail Unit 101, while balancing the view and pedestrian ization concerns of staff and the Commission. Staff has included the previous memorandums from Jeff Winston (Attachment C). The Vail Village Design Considerations identify the key physical characteristics of the Village and provide the tools to assure that new development is consistent with this established character. These considerations include the following: Town of Vail Page 10 A. Pedestrian ization A primary characteristic and significant reason for the success of Vail Village is the pedestrian experience. The pedestrian experience is comprised of numerous elements including but not limited to architecture, building scale, material use, vitality and activity created by the permitted uses on the first floor, connectivity of pedestrian ways, and landscaping. Wall Street is unique in the Vail pedestrian experience. It is the one area in the Village in which there is never vehicular travel or loading and delivery occurring. This factor allowed for a more intimate streetscape design and increased landscaping. The commercial expansion of Retail Unit 101, approved in conjunction with the review of the major exterior alteration in May of 2013, was the result of an identified need to balance pedestrian circulation, views into Wall Street from Gore Creek Drive, and an increase in floor area. The approved 4 foot 7 inch opening on the corner of the building provides for unique views up Wall Street with regard to the pedestrian experience. Staff continues to believe these views serve to draw pedestrians into Wall Street which is positive to the overall experience. Additionally, the open arcade at the corner allows for pedestrians to cut through to Wall Street. The applicant states in their written request that the 4 foot 7 inch gap will not be inviting and will serve as a deterrent to pedestrians. It is further stated that the proposed glass facade on the north and east facades of the commercial expansion to Retail Unit 101 will allow for the pedestrian to visual see up into Wall Street prior to reaching the intersection and thus will draw people up the street. Staff disagrees with the applicant's assertion that pedestrians would be deterred as pedestrians have been witnessed using the gap to access Wall Street when the previous mock -up was in place as well as the t -shirt rack placed as to create a narrowing effect in the arcade. Furthermore, while the east and north facades will be largely glass the walls will present a physical barrier and it is likely that retail products will be display reducing the transparency up into Wall Street. In conclusion staff believes the proposed change to the approved design (Attachment D) will result in the complete loss of a unique architectural element of the structure and the pedestrian environment of discovery and exploration. B. Vehicular penetration As stated above, Wall Street is unique and benefits from the inability for any vehicular traffic to enter the street. The proposal does not result in any change to the ability of vehicles to access the street. C. Streetscape Framework The Vail Village Design Considerations identify two methods for improving the pedestrian experience through the streetscape framework. They include the inclusion of open space and landscaping to establish a "soft, colorful framework Town of Vail Page 11 linkage along pedestrian routes" and the infill of commercial storefronts and infill development to create "new commercial activity generators to give street life and visual interest'. There is no change to the approved landscaping which resulted in a 69 square foot increase in area and the maintenance of a 65 square foot landscape bed along the east facade of the Wall Street Building. D. Street Enclosure Street enclosure is the term used to define how the built environment should be design to create a "comfortable" enclosure of the street. Pedestrian streets are outdoor rooms which need to have specific characteristics to create a comfortable pedestrian experience. The Vail Village Design Considerations identify an appropriate width to height ratio for pedestrian ways and adjacent building forms. The applicant was conditionally required in the previous approval to establish a pedestrian easement along the east facade to ensure that the outdoor display of goods would not negatively affect the pedestrian circulation on wall Street. E. Street Edge The Vail Village Design Considerations identify the need for a "strong but irregular edge to the street' in the Village Core. There are no standard setback requirements in Vail Village in order to achieve an "intimate pedestrian scale, placement of portions of a building at or near the property line is allowed and encouraged to give a strong definition to the pedestrian street." The Street Edge design consideration further describes that it should not be implied that a continuous building frontage along a property line is appropriate. It states the following: ;4 strong street edge is important for continuity, but perfectly aligned facades over too long a distance tends to be monotonous. With only a few exceptions in the Village, slightly irregular facade lines, building jogs, and landscape areas, give life to the street and visual interest for pedestrian travel." Staff believes that the proposed infill of the entirety of the at -grade portion of Retail Unit 101 at the northeast corner of the structure is contrary to the goal of this consideration. The arcade at the northeast corner serves as an inset to the structure at the pedestrian level which provides views into Wall Street, shelter, and an element of a unique architectural landmark. F. Building Height The proposed major exterior alteration does not affect building height. Town of Vail Page 12 G. View and Focal Points The Vail Village Design Considerations recognize the need for visual orientation and connectivity to the mountain and landmarks. The consideration identifies the importance of view corridors and view connections for pedestrians through out the Village. The Wall Street Building is not a part of any adopted view corridor as found in Chapter 12 -22, View Corridors, Vail Town Code. As noted in the above considerations the proposal to completely infill the northeast corner of the structure at -grade will negatively affect pedestrian views and focal points from Gore Creek Drive into Wall Street. H. Service and Delivery The proposed major exterior alteration does not affect service and delivery to the site. I. Sun /shade The proposed major exterior alteration does not affect the sun /shade aspects of the adjacent buildings and pedestrian ways. J. Architecture /Landscaping Considerations The Vail Village Design Considerations identify the importance of many elements of architecture in creating, establishing, and continuing Vail Village as a special place. Staff has taken the review by Jeff Winston with regard to this consideration and included it below. Staff agrees with Jeff Winston's findings and recommends they be considered by the Design Review Board. Two memorandums from Jeff Winston have been attached for reference (Attachment D). 3. The proposal does not otherwise negatively alter the character of the neighborhood. As stated in the criteria above staff finds the proposed at -grade commercial infill of the northeast corner proposal will negatively alter the character of the neighborhood. VIII. RECOMMENDATION The Community Development Department recommends denial, of this request for an exterior alteration or modification pursuant to Section 12 -7B -7, Exterior Alterations and Modifications, Vail Town Code, to allow for the construction of additions to the northeast corner of the Wall Street Building, located at 225 Wall Street, Lots B & C, Block 5C, Vail Village Filing 1, and setting forth details in regard thereto. (PEC140010) Staff's recommendation is based upon the criteria outlined in Section VII of this memorandum and the evidence and testimony presented. Town of Vail Page 13 Should the Planning and Environmental Commission choose to deny this exterior alteration or modification request, the Community Development Department recommends the Commission pass the following motion: "The Planning and Environmental Commission denies the applicant's request for an exterior alteration or modification pursuant to Section 12 -7B -7, Exterior Alterations and Modifications, Vail Town Code, to allow for the construction of additions to the northeast corner of Wall Street Building, located at 225 Wall Street, Lots B & C, Block 5C, Vail Village Filing 1, and setting forth details in regard thereto. (PEC140010)" Should the Planning and Environmental Commission choose to deny the exterior alteration request, the Community Development Department recommends the Commission makes the following findings: 'Based upon the review of the criteria outlined in Section VII of the Staff memorandums to the Planning and Environmental Commission dated May 12, 2014, and the evidence and testimony presented, the Planning and Environmental Commission finds: That the proposed exterior alteration is not in compliance with the purposes of the CC1 district as specified in section 12 -7B -1 of the Zoning Regulations, and 2. That the proposal is not consistent with applicable elements of the Vail Comprehensive Plan, and 3. That the proposal does otherwise negatively alter the character of the neighborhood." IX. ATTACHMENTS A. Applicant's request for a major exterior alteration B. Proposed architectural plans C. Memorandums from Jeff Winston dated March 4 and 26, 2013 D. Approved floor plan for Retail Unit 101 Town of Vail Page 14 April 25, 2014 To: Planning and Environmental Commission From: MECO, LLP, Bill Hanlon, Managing Partner RE: Applicant Statement for Modification of North East Corner of Wall Street Building This proposal arises out of the plans submitted by Wall Street Commercial, LLC, and subsequently modified and approved by the Town of Vail for a renovation of the Wall Street Building (Lazier Arcade). We own Unit 101, and have been asked to cooperate in the renovation of the larger building by contributing our interior, deeded space to make the project economically feasible. Contribution of this kind has not been requested of any other owner in the Association, and there is no abutting interior area that can be accessed for replacement. Modifications to the original plans submitted reduced the space designed for Lazier Arcade Unit 101 by roughly 40 square feet and require the maintenance of a substantial stone column approximately four feet away from the redesigned windows and entry. Our application is for the approval of the originally submitted Space 101 that extends fully to the northeast corner column. Process In order for the redeveloper of the Lazier Arcade Building to pursue his proposal and accomplish a second floor renovation (which he has identified as a principal reason for the project and substantial benefit thereof), Unit 101 would have to relinquish approximately 130 square feet (measurement average between available architectural plans and condominium map) of interior space currently used as inventory storage. As modified in the Town of Vail review, the renovation would provide a reshaped first floor space featuring 98 new square feet of space, obviously a meaningful net loss to Unit 101. Equally (if not more) problematic, the conditions of the current approval place a large stone column in front of the most important visual aspect of the revised space 101. This column would result in a defacto "doorway" of approximately 4 feet in width from one direction, and a visual block from the other exposure. Basis for Application and Nature of Proposed Use The pedestrian "way" envisioned in the approved plan is impractical and will not be successful. A gap of this size is much too small to invite pedestrian traffic through (being narrower than many interior hallways) and the column will create both a shadow and a visual barrier to the renovated retail space, which is a serious problem for any retail operation in Unit 101. While an "arcade" path has historically served all of the spaces in the building well, the newly envisioned column is less than half of the existing distance from its building, and frames not an inviting arcade or through -way, but a stone wall ending the space in under 20 feet. As the Applicant in this project, operator of the space for more than 46 years, and owner of the space for the last 3 years, we wish to continue to use the space as a family friendly retail hat shop and gift location, but to do so in a manner more in keeping with the new luxury expectations of our guests. We do not believe it is possible for us to accomplish this with a net loss of retail space and a visual and traffic barrier placed at our front door. Design Directives, Traffic and Pedestrian Flow The 1980 Design Guidelines, which we helped to develop and which we still support, contemplated truck delivery at the Wall Street and Gore Creek Drive intersection. Further, when Lazier Arcade was built, auto traffic was permitted onto Wall Street itself (it was, in fact, the bus station for the town). Following the extensive renovation of Gore Creek Drive, the Children's Fountain area, and Wall Street in 2006 -7, delivery trucks no longer block this immediate area, auto traffic is prohibited, and the pedestrian experience has been altered and improved substantially. Further, there is a large height differential between the Lazier Arcade and the Casino Vail building, which eliminates the concern of a single plane "canyon" effect. Additionally, there is no building at all opposite the Lazier Arcade to the north, so similarly, no "canyon" effect from the other direction. Absent a true arcade (that stretches for substantially more than 5 or 6 yards) inviting passersby to walk in the Lazier Arcade building, there is no draw to walk through a four foot gap; as such, it will function not as the intended attractive feature but as a deterrent to pedestrians. These exact types of barriers have been removed from other locations (i.e. One Willow Bridge commercial space and the Gore Creek Plaza retail space formerly housing Krismar, now LuLu Lemon) after retail operations had failed in them. Moreover, the Wall Street /Gore Creek intersection will be visible and inviting through clear windows proposed on both elevations at the proposed corner. This application strongly supports criteria number 15 of the Sub -Area Concepts, "eyesores removed, facade transparency, entries simplified and oriented to intersection," and does so with a truly negligible effect on pedestrian flow. The modification contained in this application does not increase the height or site coverage of the building from approved plans, nor will it meaningfully change the density of the Children's Fountain or Wall Street areas from their current configuration. It does not impose onto the street with any new light or with shadow, nor does it "choke down" on any viable pedestrian path; it will not (in keeping with the guidelines) block any view of a mountain, ski slope, stream, park, sculpture, or architectural focal point (Urban Design Paragraph G). We are mindful of the Town of Vail goals related to preservation of unique architecture, a distinct atmosphere signifying Vail's history and values, and in particular an exceptional pedestrian experience along Gore Creek Drive. As long term residents and business people, we agree completely that an inviting commercial core is critical to our long term success both individually and as a town. However, we are also aware that progress is desirable, and that ongoing improvement is required to meet heightened and refined guest expectations. We believe that this proposal is a reasonable and creative alternative in keeping with both the letter and spirit of the Town of Vail code. The goal of our application is not to make our individual unit bigger; we are entirely prepared to continue to operate on our current basis and space. The point of this application is to help Unit 101 cooperate in a broader effort to make the entire condominium building, and by extension our immediate neighborhood, better. We sincerely appreciate your time and attention to our application. SUMAN d NCNI'rrcis 4.14.14 Wall Street Building SCHEMATIC DESIGN - PEC EXTERIOR MODIFICATION REVIEW EXISTING NORTHEAST VIEW 141 East Meadow Drive, Suite 211 Vail, CO 81657 970.471.6122 SUMAN d NCNI'rrcis 4.14.14 Wall Street Building SCHEMATIC DESIGN - PEC EXTERIOR MODIFICATION REVIEW DRB APPROVED NORTHEAST VIEW 2 141 East Meadow Drive, Suite 211 Vail, CO 81657 970.471.6122 SUMAN d NCNI'rrcis 4.14.14 Wall Street Building SCHEMATIC DESIGN - PEC EXTERIOR MODIFICATION REVIEW m PROPOSED NORTHEAST VIEW 141 East Meadow Drive, Suite 211 Vail, CO 81657 970.471.6122 SUMAN d NCNI'rrcis 4.14.14 Wall Street Building SCHEMATIC DESIGN - PEC EXTERIOR MODIFICATION REVIEW EXISTING NORTHEAST CORNER VIEW 3 141 East Meadow Drive, Suite 211 Vail, CO 81657 970.471.6122 SUMAN d NCNI'rrcis 4.14.14 Wall Street Building SCHEMATIC DESIGN - PEC EXTERIOR MODIFICATION REVIEW DRB APPROVED NORTHEAST CORNER VIEW 0 141 East Meadow Drive, Suite 211 Vail, CO 81657 970.471.6122 SUMAN d NCNI'rrcis 4.14.14 Wall Street Building SCHEMATIC DESIGN - PEC EXTERIOR MODIFICATION REVIEW PROPOSED NORTHEAST CORNER VIEW m 141 East Meadow Drive, Suite 211 Vail, CO 81657 970.471.6122 SUMAN d NCNI'rrcis 4.14.14 Wall Street Building SCHEMATIC DESIGN - PEC EXTERIOR MODIFICATION REVIEW EXISTING BUILDING ENTRY VIEW 5 141 East Meadow Drive, Suite 211 Vail, CO 81657 970.471.6122 SUMAN d NCNI'rrcis 4.14.14 Wall Street Building SCHEMATIC DESIGN - PEC EXTERIOR MODIFICATION REVIEW DRB APPROVED BUILDING ENTRY VIEW n 141 East Meadow Drive, Suite 211 Vail, CO 81657 970.471.6122 SUMAN d NCNI'rrcis 4.14.14 Wall Street Building SCHEMATIC DESIGN - PEC EXTERIOR MODIFICATION REVIEW PROPOSED BUILDING ENTRY VIEW .• 141 East Meadow Drive, Suite 211 Vail, CO 81657 970.471.6122 SUMAN d NCNI'rrcis 4.14.14 Wall Street Building 7 SCHEMATIC DESIGN - PEC EXTERIOR MODIFICATION REVIEW EXISTING EAST VIEW 141 East Meadow Drive, Suite 211 Vail, CO 81657 970.471.6122 SUMAN d NCNI'rrcis 4.14.14 Wall Street Building SCHEMATIC DESIGN - PEC EXTERIOR MODIFICATION REVIEW DRB APPROVED EAST VIEW 141 East Meadow Drive, Suite 211 Vail, CO 81657 970.471.6122 SUMAN d NCNI'rrcis 4.14.14 Wall Street Building SCHEMATIC DESIGN - PEC EXTERIOR MODIFICATION REVIEW • PROPOSED EAST VIEW 141 East Meadow Drive, Suite 211 Vail, CO 81657 970.471.6122 SUMAN d NCNI'rrcis 4.14.14 Wall Street Building SCHEMATIC DESIGN - PEC EXTERIOR MODIFICATION REVIEW EXISTING SOUTHEAST VIEW 141 East Meadow Drive, Suite 211 Vail, CO 81657 970.471.6122 SUMAN d NCNI'rrcis 4.14.14 Wall Street Building SCHEMATIC DESIGN - PEC EXTERIOR MODIFICATION REVIEW DRB APPROVED SOUTHEAST VIEW W 141 East Meadow Drive, Suite 211 Vail, CO 81657 970.471.6122 SUMAN d NCNI'rrcis ME M _ II �� 4.14.14 Wall Street Building SCHEMATIC DESIGN - PEC EXTERIOR MODIFICATION REVIEW i• PROPOSED SOUTHEAST VIEW 141 East Meadow Drive, Suite 211 Vail, CO 81657 970.471.6122 SUMAN d NCNI'rrcis 4.14.14 Wall Street Building SCHEMATIC DESIGN - PEC EXTERIOR MODIFICATION REVIEW EXISTING SOUTHEAST RETAIL VIEW It 141 East Meadow Drive, Suite 211 Vail, CO 81657 970.471.6122 SUMAN d NCNI'rrcis 4.14.14 Wall Street Building SCHEMATIC DESIGN - PEC EXTERIOR MODIFICATION REVIEW DRB APPROVED SOUTHEAST RETAIL VIEW 12 141 East Meadow Drive, Suite 211 Vail, CO 81657 970.471.6122 SUMAN d NCNI'rrcis 4.14.14 Wall Street Building SCHEMATIC DESIGN - PEC EXTERIOR MODIFICATION REVIEW PROPOSED SOUTHEAST RETAIL VIEW Im 141 East Meadow Drive, Suite 211 Vail, CO 81657 970.471.6122 SUMAN d NCNI'rrcis I nill", 4.14.14 Wall Street Building SCHEMATIC DESIGN - PEC EXTERIOR MODIFICATION REVIEW 13 EXISTING NORTH VIEW 141 East Meadow Drive, Suite 211 Vail, CO 81657 970.471.6122 SUMAN d NCNI'rrcis 4.14.14 Wall Street Building SCHEMATIC DESIGN - PEC EXTERIOR MODIFICATION REVIEW lI:-i PROPOSED NORTH VIEW 141 East Meadow Drive, Suite 211 Vail, CO 81657 970.471.6122 SUMAN d NCNI'rrcis 4.14.14 Wall Street Building SCHEMATIC DESIGN - PEC EXTERIOR MODIFICATION REVIEW .• PROPOSED NORTH VIEW 141 East Meadow Drive, Suite 211 Vail, CO 81657 970.471.6122 SUMAN d NCNI'rrcis 4.14.14 Wall Street Building SCHEMATIC DESIGN - PEC EXTERIOR MODIFICATION REVIEW 15 EXISTING NORTHWEST VIEW 141 East Meadow Drive, Suite 211 Vail, CO 81657 970.471.6122 SUMAN d NCNI'rrcis 4.14.14 Wall Street Building SCHEMATIC DESIGN - PEC EXTERIOR MODIFICATION REVIEW DRB APPROVED NORTHWEST VIEW Ir. 141 East Meadow Drive, Suite 211 Vail, CO 81657 970.471.6122 SUMAN d NCNI'rrcis 4.14.14 Wall Street Building SCHEMATIC DESIGN - PEC EXTERIOR MODIFICATION REVIEW .• PROPOSED NORTHWEST VIEW 141 East Meadow Drive, Suite 211 Vail, CO 81657 970.471.6122 WALL STREET BUILDING LOT 1, BLOCK 5 -C, VAIL VILLAGE FIRST FILING, VAIL COLORADO 81657 MATERIAL SYMBOLS: ABBREVIATIONS: GENERAL NOTES: DRAWING AO.O INDEX: GENERAL COVER -- DRAWING INDEX: ARCHITECTURAL A0.1 X2.0 ARCHITECTURAL SITE PLAN EXISTING BASEMENT LEVEL PLAN A1.0 EXISTING FIRST FLOOR PLAN EXISTING SECOND FLOOR PLAN EXISTING THIRD FLOO PLAN BASEMENT IMO PLAN AS FIRST FLOOR DEMO PLAN I— (v-S A- A1.3 SECOND FLOOR DEMO PLAN THIRD FLOOR DEMO PLAN C , - „aG — ­3 X3.1 PROPOSED FIRST FLOOR PLAN PROPOSED SECOND FLOOR PLAN PROPOSED THIRD FLOOR PLAN EXISTING EAST ELEVATION _ X3.2 X3.3 EXISTING NORTH AND SOUTH ELEVATIONS EXISTING WEST ELEVATION A3.1 A A3.3 PROPOSED EAST ELEVATION PROPOSED NORTH AND SOUTH ELEVATIONS PR DPOSED WEST ELEVATION _ m M.1 E2.1 BUILDING SECTIONS PROPOSED RETAIL LIGHTING PLAN ro � i � O cc y3 PROJECT SUMMARY: o ray COPY RIGHT RESERVATION -- DE ° a i o 00 E = ao =o cc W CA DEED 3 4 I I I I I I .A0.1 z 0 �m me Wa IT 1 c m F. F U) J A 3 BASEMENT BASEMENT DEMO PLAN A1.0 -------------- ------- IT I'll TV ------ ------ ------ ------ ----- - ------ - - - - - - - - - - - - - L F-1 4 -------------- -------------- El FIRST FLOOR DEMO PLAN z N @ullll� i cc i- 1 W a LLI�RROOa c a /� SECOND FLOOR DEMO PLAN A1.2 ____ _ ___ ____ -_ r ___ --------- r ___ _ I L-___ cc � I W I I Fa CA3 � J A THIRD FLOOR DEMO PLAN A1.3 i�� 0 a �� uwo'.0 �a,a a r; .. �'` �� I I I o o � .,G, aw. F�� �r IF sou. II ., .._ anmewi IM I I Pi 11 CC oFFwE worv.., o o Fa 0 o y3 J J k..ua. PROPOSED SECOND FLOOR PLAN U ------------------ --------------- ------------ �M cc mo I I Fa y3 a PROPOSED THIRD FLOOR PLAN U o o 0 �� 0 ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑❑ 0 0 0� 0 ❑ I f ❑ �� 00 - F==-]0 Ba Ea- -FI 0 - -- -- y.. ❑�, LU0 - a ❑" o +r � ° E: E ®�. � El o �. cc a o CA 01 PROPOSED EAST ELEVATION El All Wa 3: ]A3.3 El El Wa 3: ]A3.3 ... -� rte... m n SECTION @ UNITS 305 & 306 Wa W� cc Fa a y3 J o m J ❑ SECTION @ UNITS 301 & 302 A4.1 K5 - ❑ l �r ------------ -- � o ELECTRICAL KEY: GENERAL ELECTRICAL NOTES: o � %1 FIRST FLOOR POWER PLAN �,. W LU ca U) 3 J J a �oo� s oo�ot 0 0 :. °E2..1. ELECTRICAL KEY: GENERAL ELECTRICAL NOTES: o � %1 FIRST FLOOR POWER PLAN �,. W LU ca U) 3 J J a �oo� s oo�ot 0 0 :. °E2..1. -02 34 GE, ,46 N, ss�-s zx SEE 61 111, 51 3E-E E-11IDE GIN. ED I III �NIDMENI,�MIFEI DIPLI WNG k I III LODGE APARIMENI ,DND.G N 0 --------------- —29 4� E I.G ------------ F F 17-1 1� 31 3 2 7 1 L.D.E NE-3 �2 ,FL 'LLOGE AN AEI LNG INE, "I L NO 0- III IF 44 4� 1� IPES,AL. WmAR aANN DEER A-LEGLEDIVIDION OF LIT I I FALL 01 111 .I. VlLCVIL'LAGCE LIPS' FILING TOPOGRAPHIC SURVEY LOTS I & I, BLOCK E C VAIL VILLAGE FIRST FILING TOWN OF VAIL EAGLE COUNTY, COLORADO F__ IFB N., 1111 z �m me Wa W'. cc Fa U) J 3 EXISTING BASEMENT PLAN X2.0 1 S 1 1 °0700' 49.79 Z_ S 11 °07'00 'E 51.24' 1 _ -- - - / ------------ - ---- F� HH I� F-1 i i i =i I 1 1� 1� i u E o ,\ ❑1 IT — I � z 0 -- � me W� IT o o IT a F a � y3 ------- - - - - -- i a 3 u 1:1 El /�) EXISTING FIRST FLOOR PLAN ;4X2.1 -_ -_ -_ -_ - - ---- - - -_ --- _ ❑i ❑ LL i Fo o o c„ CA3 3 �- -- - - - - - -- - - - -- - - - - -- - - - - -- - - - - -- EXISTING SECOND FLOOR PLAN X2.2 -_ -_ -_ -_ --------------------------------------------------- - Z -- -- - - - - -- -- - - - -- - - - -- - - -- J ° m Wa ° c„ �° a EXISTING THIRD FLOOR PLAN 41 X2.3 II FETE-11 00 00 00 ❑ 0 M m I IT o W ° 0 a W'. EL Fa L y3 J J EXISTINGNORTH ELEVATION a �2 a Z 3 A me LLH LLI'. Fa cc U) A A 49 3: X3.3 Design Review Memorandum Project: Wall Street Building, Vail Village, Vail CO Date: March 4, 2013 Materials reviewed: Wall Street Building drawing set by Suman Architects PEC 130008 PEC 13009 Wall Street Building Variance Request PEC 120008 PEC 130009 Building and Model Images (3D perspectives) by Suman Architects Relevant Standards and Guidelines: Vail Village Master Plan Vail Village Urban Design Guide Plan aflII VllIage Vlasteir IIII')IIIIaiiin Goal 1: Encourage high quality redevelopment while preserving unique architectural scale of the village in order to sustain its sense of community and identity. This goal suggests careful attention to the unique scale and character of Wall Street and always striving for high quality development. Policy 1.1.1: Development and improvement projects approved the Village shall be consistent with the goals, objectives, policies and design considerations as outline in the Vail Village Master Plan and Urban Design Guide Plan. This policy supports this review. Policy 2.4.1: Commercial infill development consistent with established horizontal zoning regulations shall be encouraged to provide activity generators, accessible green spaces, public plazas, and streetscape improvements to the pedestrian network through the Village. This policy generally supports the proposed project. Objective 4.1: ... Recognize the different roles of each type of open space in forming the overall fabric of the Village. The arcade is one of the unique types of pedestrian experiences in the Village. If it is to be eliminated, it should be with development that contributes to the pedestrian experience. afiullll Vlllage Uufrllllsain Ilil esfiugffrml Guide IIII')Illlafin Urban Design Considerations 1. Pedestrian ization Filling in the ground floor module of the arcade on Gore Creek Drive cuts off views and a passageway for some, that entices people into Wall Street. Otherwise, not significantly affected. 2. Vehicle Penetration PIANINIING / D F SIGI'J C0 M MlJINICAf40N`> MAI`JA(:a1MI.I'vI_f. / fFC;IiN010tov` Name Date Page 2 No significant impact. 3. Streetscape Framework The "22' reconfigured landscape" adjacent to the stairs is a significant loss of the informal character of the planting beds on Wall Street and should not be accepted. 4. Street Enclosure Does tend to narrow down the width of the pedestrian walkway, but the overall enclosure (upper part of the building) is not affected. 5. Street Edge Enclosing the two -story arcade on the corner of GCD removes a significant inset and landmark condition in the Village. We recommend not fully enclosing the Gore Creek Drive corner, but rather leaving at least a portion of the two -story space as a covered entry way and even pass- through. An alternative would be to at least not fill in the entire ground floor of this corner. Further south, the proposed fagade removes some of the variability of the street edge, but may have a beneficial effect of making those store fronts more visible. 6. Building Height No impact. 7. Views Slight impact on views of the stairwell at the south end of Wall Street. 8. Sun /shade No impact. Architectural Considerations Facades Materials Removing or covering the stucco on the central portion of the East View removes a significant presence of stucco in Wall Street —with no apparent benefit. We understand the challenge in trying to match the existing one -of -a -kind texture, if there were significant changes in the wall plane. However, in our opinion it is not essential to match it. In fact, the guidelines suggest flat stucco (see Color section) to avoid too many fanciful textures. In some places in the Village different textures, and colors, of stucco are juxtaposed next to each other. As long as the change occurs at a vertical change in plane (inside corner) it will give the impression of separate buildings, or an addition at a different time. The veneer stone material conveyed in the Schematic Design images suggests a very rectilinear, block -like character, rather than the more natural looking stone (rougher surface, not straight unbroken horizontal joints, greater variability in stone sizes) found elsewhere in the Village. Macintosh HD: Users :jtwinston:Documents:ACTIVE PROJECTS:Vail Design Review: The Wall Street Building:Wall Street DesRevMeml.docx Name Date Page 3 Lastly with regard to materials, one of the objectives for the Village is to maintain the adapted image of a "quaint European alpine village." One of the ways that is accomplished is to use materials in a traditional way. For example, stone would typically be used as a foundation, or a short wall below a wall of lighter material (stucco, wood). Often, larger stones would be used as a base, with smaller stones as the wall or column rises. Stone columns would often also have a wider base. Stone masonry would not be used over an opening except as an arch or over a very strong, short lintel. The way the stone veneer is proposed to be used in this project is not consistent with any of these general conventions. The tall, slender stone columns, the stone above long lintels over the windows (and no lintel over the corner infill) will clearly give a "false stone" appearance. Colors The intent of the color guideline is to "provide greater latitude in the use of color in Vail Village in or der to create visual interest and enliven the area." Shifting from a warm brown siding to a more gray siding has the opposite effect. Similarly, the somber color of the stone also takes away some of the vitality of the building. Transparency A high % of ground level transparency is maintained, in fact too high. The large, continuous, typical commercial glass storefront system is exactly what the guidelines intend to discourage. Windows The ground floor windows shown appear to be a metal -clad commercial storefront system. Missing elements suggested in the guidelines include: • Solid knee wall below the windows • A significant portion of building wall (wider than the column widths shown) that breaks the windows into discrete grouped segments • Separate doorways • Within an overall band of windows, wood members that divide the windows into vertically proportioned windows. • Mullions that further subdivide the windows into smaller panes The second floor windows appear to be a continuous box - window extension virtually the length of the east - facing fagade. This is inconsistent with several of the guidelines: • The upper floors should be predominantly solid (building wall), punctured by windows. • Avoid extensive horizontal repetition • Avoid long continuous glass areas Macintosh HD: Users :jtwinston:Documents:ACTIVE PROJECTS:Vail Design Review: The Wall Street Building:Wall Street DesRevMeml.docx Name Date Page 4 • Bay, bow, and box window extensions are consistent with the guidelines, but as individual elements rather than a long, continuous mass. Doors The doors shown in the Schematic Design also appear to be the doors specifically discouraged in the Guidelines —metal clad with large single pane windows. Many other door options are suggested in the guidelines. Also, not reflected is any sense of a covered entry for doorways —a strong lintel, recess, or even a canopy. The canopy over the doorway for Wild Bill's is missing an opportunity to call more attention to itself. Trim There is a broad lintel above the window systems on the ground floor, but no indication of wide wood trim that is characteristic of the Village and strongly encouraged in the guidelines. Signage The applicant is missing an opportunity to do creative signage, such as wall graphics on stucco, signs that extend perpendicular to the building. fiiiiscussiiii iiin This building was one of the early buildings in Vail, built before the Design Guidelines were created. Therefore there are aspects of the existing building are not consistent with the Guidelines (e.g. box balconies, windows without wide trim, etc.). Obviously, if some portions of the building are not modified, they will still be inconsistent with the Guidelines. That being said however, there are significant aspects of the proposed improvements that are not consistent with the guidelines, especially the Architectural Guidelines. While we generally support the concept of filling in a significant portion of the arcade, accepting this proposal in its current form would have a significant negative impact on the character of one of the charming passageways in Vail Village. Macintosh HD: Users :jtwinston:Documents:ACTIVE PROJECTS:Vail Design Review: The Wall Street Building:Wall Street DesRevMeml.docx Design Review Memorandum Project: Wall Street Building, Vail Village, Vail CO Date: March 26, 2013 This memorandum builds on the March 4 memorandum, and is pursuant to a site visit with the applicant. The proposed building infill is generally consistent with the guidelines, with several reservations and suggestions: if Given the gradually descending grade of Wall Street to the north, filling in the second floor of the corner module, as proposed, will still leave a generous ground floor height. The second floor area can obviously be put to better use than it is currently. (not very many arcades), but will make the windows more visible and the stores somewhat more accessible. The negative aspect of this infill is that it removes an area that is now heavily used for outdoor displays. If the displays are then moved into Wall Street, there will be a significant narrowing of the corridor. Since the Wall Street Building property apparently extends about 3' beyond the column line, this would be legally possible. As a condition PL AICININ(:a / DI5IGN / CtoIVIIVIL.1NIC;AIIC)NS / V1ANAE`,INIIINI / II:C:;IIICIC)L0Ca`( Wall Street Building Design Review Memorandum 2 March 28, 2013 Page 2 of expansion, the Town may wish to consider being granted an easement over the additional property so that it's use can be regulated appropriately. 4. The ground floor windows that fill in the arcade appear to be a metal -clad commercial storefront system. A stroll around Vail Village reveals that there are a number of installations that differ from the guidelines, and in fact have metal frames, and large windows. The difference however, is two key features of these Vail Village applications: a. most of these installations are embedded in a wall rather than continuous windows separated by narrow columns (that is, there is a more significant amount of wall separating the windows than in the Wall St. Bldg proposal). b. the frames make either square or verticle rectangle patterns (not the horizontal rectangles in the proposal). To be consistent with the guidelines the vertical columns should be made wider, and the horizontal stucco beam should be made thicker (vertical dimension) to give more of a sense of a solid, load- bearing building wall, into which windows have been inserted. Wall Street Building Design Review Memorandum 2 March 28, 2013 Page 3 5. With regard to the second floor of the corner, the narrow stucco beam and columns also give a modern, non -Vail Village, character. The use of storefront windows on the second floor are not consistent with the guidelines, and are not even actually practical. (In contemporary glass -wall buildings, office uses usually dictate putting desks or filing cabinets next to the windows, which gives an unsightly appearance —or opaque glass is used — neither of which is desired here.) 11 An approach more consistent with the guidelines would be: smaller windows inserted into a solid wC71ll (e.g. wider horizontal stucco beam, wider columns, solid wall between banks of windows, taller wall beneath the windows windows could even be bay windows for interest.) (The \ I �n 1 V> w11 T"T'!f '"1 W Vd 1..,,�...�. "VII,` I "I. ..w i hPdV P w w h1 "I if 01':�'.bd Iv� dVP 1AV ............................. ....r"..."..........,.."...""7. .,...., On n u V � 0 ]� � H I ° ° ; " ". WW El D `ca aax F a ° wu IF I «ax I= r ,w 3 '� ; � III i- - - -- - - -- , - -- ° 3 - -- -I- -�- _� - -- -- �_ _ PROPOSED FIRST FLOOR PLAN _ U hRE N MMMU t PND;nC "AI "I... A21 f?estc)ur(,."]nt/Bar/Pi77a Dear Planning and Environmental Commissioners: Based on my years of working on Wall Street, I think that the proposed bUilding improvements will be a benefit to the streetscape, and l don't think that pedestrians will be Point off by the enCIOSUre of the arc de at the north east corner, I think that the changes will be an improvement to the area generally, and to Wall Street in parfiWlar, and ask YOU to support the application. Sincerely, John Brennen Bridge Street Restaurant Association d/b/a Vendetta's 291 B,ridge Street M,:M, Cc)brado 816'57 970/476-507'0 111 • .11 + c, 1=M1 TO: Planning and Environmental Commission and Design Review Board FROM: Community Development Department DATE: May 12, 2014 SUBJECT: A request for a work session to update the Planning and Environmental Commission on the progress of the Vail Village Character Area Preservation project, an initiative to examine the Town's current regulations, design standards and guidelines applicable to Vail Village to determine whether they are sufficient to ensure the special character of Vail Village is not just maintained but also enhanced. Applicant: Town of Vail, represented by Braun Associates, Inc. Planner: Warren Campbell SUMMARY The purpose of this work session is to update the Planning and Environmental Commission on the progress of the Vail Village Character Area Preservation project. The Vail Village Character Area Preservation project is reviewing the Vail Village Master Plan and Vail Village Urban Design Guide Plan to address the adopted problem statement. The following problem statement was developed in conjunction with the Vail Town Council and is intended to guide the process, discussion and outcomes. As buildings in the Village continue to redevelop or as other changes occur to the physical features of Vail Village, are the Town's current regulations, design standards and guidelines sufficient to ensure that the special character of Vail Village is not just maintained but also enhanced. This update will set the stage for a public hearing on June 9, 2014, where a recommendation to the Vail Town Council will be sought on proposed alternatives /solutions to address identified topics which need to be potentially amendments in order to improve the existing development review process and further the overall design goals for the Village. Staff and the consultant will present amendment alternatives for the topics identified at the March 11, 2013 public hearing on June 9, 2014. Staff has provided links to the Vail Village Master Plan and the Vail Village Urban Design Guide Plan. II. BACKGROUND On February 18, 2009, the Vail Town Council adopted Resolution No. 23, Series of 2008, a resolution that provided for certain updates to the Vail Village Master Plan. One of the more significant updates to the plan was the addition of an objective recognizing the "historic" importance of architecture, structures, landmarks, plazas and features with the goal of preserving the existing character of Vail Village. In addition, one new policy statement was added to the plan to further the newly stated objective. The policy statement was developed to guide the Town's decision - making in achieving each of the stated objectives, whether it be through the review of private sector development proposals or in implementing capital improvement projects. Finally, action steps were suggested as immediate follow -up actions necessary to implement the goals of this Plan. To that end, the Vail Village Master Plan was updated to include the following language: GOAL #1 ENCOURAGE HIGH QUALITY, REDEVELOPMENT WHILE PRESERVING UNIQUE ARCHITECTURAL SCALE OF THE VILLAGE IN ORDER TO SUSTAIN ITS SENSE OF COMMUNITY AND IDENTITY. 1.4 Objective: (in part) Recognize the "historic" importance of the architecture, structures, landmarks, plazas and features in preserving the character of Vail Village. 1.4.1 Policy: The historical importance of other similar features shall development review process. structures, landmarks, plazas and e taken into consideration in the 1.4.2 Policy: The town should grant flexibility in the interpretation and implementation of its regulations and design guidelines to help protect and maintain the existing character of Vail Village. 1.4.3 Policy: Identification of "historic" importance shall not be used as the sole means of preventing or prohibiting development in Vail Village. GOAL #1 Action Steps: (in part) 6. Compile a list and develop a map identifying the location of potential structures, landmarks, plazas and other similar features that may be of historical importance. On October 18, 2011 the Vail Town Council discussed Vail Village Historic Preservation and Landmark Designation. As a part of the discussion information was provided on Town of Vail Page 2 historic preservation, preservation programs, creation of historic districts, common property owner concerns regarding historic designation, possible benefits of a historic district, etc. At the public hearing the Vail town Council was asked to respond to the following question: Should Town staff pursue a public process with the community to discuss preserving and protecting historic structures and landmarks in Vail Village and implementing any regulatory tools that may be necessary to carry out the Town's development objectives? The Vail Town Council directed staff to pursue an initiative to preserve and protect historic structures and landmarks in Vail Village. On November 20, 2012 the Vail Town Council was introduced to the Vail Village Character Study that staff and Tom Braun of Braun and Associates was beginning. At the hearing The Vail Town Council was asked to affirm "The Question at Hand" (question provide under summary section of this memorandum). The Vail Town Council affirmed the direction that the project would take and the question it would seek to answer. On February 7, 2013 several focus group sessions were conducted to obtain input and feedback on the initiative. Staff and the consultant have placed the comments heard from the focus groups into the following categories: Near Unanimous Consensus The character of the Village is important to Vail's identity, it sets Vail apart, makes Vail unique. It is important to maintain this, to hold onto, reinforce the original vision for the Village. The Village is great, by and large the regulations /guidelines we have in place are working, with only a very few exceptions the new buildings have added /strengthened /reinforced the Village's character The Village core is distinct from the rest of the Village, "character' is strongest in this area. Some variation to the literal interpretation of the "Swiss Alpine village" is OK, not all buildings will be perfect and not all buildings need to be, an anomaly here and there is OK. With regard to buildings, maintaining existing scale of the Village core is critically. There is no one single building in the Village that would rise to "landmark status" rather it is the scale of buildings, the views, the plazas and public spaces, the pedestrian flow, dining decks are what set the Village apart. Town of Vail Page 3 Iconic improvements — Covered Bridge. The Clock Tower (albeit no clear consensus as to whether the existing clock tower is worthy of preservation or whether having a clock tower in this location is important) Guidelines may need a refinement here or there, but no major overhaul of system is needed. General sense of what is most important — 1. Building scale 2. Public spaces /pedestrian flow /vitality and street life 3. Quality of design /construction /materials 4. Architecture Widely Held Consensus Some modest degree of additional height in Core might be acceptable (to address floor to ceiling "expectations" of guests) Greater building scale is acceptable outside of the Core (within reason) Design controls (UDGP) to further reinforce the Village's establish character should be expanded to area outside of the Core (East Village, Meadow Drive) Street life, vitality, activity ... specifically outdoor dining decks are critical to the character of the Village. Some Degree of Consensus The most important change needed to design guidelines for the Village is to allow for /encourage the use of high quality materials (code talk for materials other than stucco). Guidelines need to encourage creativity /broader expression (while still respecting "alpine" character) More flexibility is needed with regard to window treatments (don't mandate divided panes, allow for larger glass). Need to resolve conflict in Guidelines that require landscaping that blocks visibility of store fronts. Other Pertinent Comments When do you stop using increased levels of development as an incentive for redevelopment? The physical area of "the Village" is considered to extend from Vail Road to Vail Valley Drive, maybe to Manor Vail. Water is very important — both Gore Creek and the water features in the Village. Town of Vail Page 4 Every site /building is unique, has its own characteristics /considerations that will influence review process. Mechanical — needs to be requirement to screen. What to do with non - conforming buildings — how will they ever have motivation to re- develop? Lodge at Vail, Sitzmark, etc. On February 11, 2013, the Planning and Environmental Commission was introduced to the project and the desired outcomes upon completion. On March 11, 2013, the Planning and Environmental Commission held a work session to begin discussion on elements of the Vail Village Master Plan, Vail Village Urban Design Guide Plan, and the Vail Village Design Considerations which may need to be reexamined to address the project's problem statement. The reults from this hearing are attached (Attachment C). The five following topical areas of the Vail Village Master Plan and Vail Village Urban Design Guide were discussed. The topical areas were developed through the focus group participation, staff's, and consultant's experience and observations. The five topics area were as follows: Architectural Character — Vail Village was "originally conceived as a mountain resort in the pattern of a quaint European alpine Village. Do the Town's guidelines further this goal, what types of architectural expression, use of materials, etc. may be appropriate while still holding true to this vision? • The Urban Design Guide Plan and Design and Design Considerations — Where do these guidelines currently apply, where should they apply? Future re- development potential of properties that currently exceed allowable height, GRFA, etc. — A number of properties in VV that currently exceed zoning standards are considered potential candidates for redevelopment. Historically, properties in Vail have increased in size when re- developed. How can Town encourage re- development while at same time maintain the scale of buildings in the Village? • Landmark Designation —Are there improvements in the Village that warrant designation of "landmark" status? Specific Elements of Urban Design Guide Plan and Design Considerations — Eleven specific elements of the UDGP have been identified that may warrant refinement/clarification. On April 1, 2014, the Vail Town Council received and update on the progress of the project and directed staff to move forward and complete Phase 1 of the project. Town of Vail Page 5 III. RECOMMENDATION The Community Development Department recommends the Planning and Environmental Commission listens to the applicant's presentation, asks questions, and provides feedback. IV. ATTACHMENTS A. Vail Village Master Plan B. Vail Villa e Urban Desiqn Guide Plan C. PEC Hearing results March 11, 2013 Town of Vail Page 6 TOWN OF VAR' PLANNING AND ENVIRONMENTAL COMMISSION March 11, 2013 at 1:00pm TOWN COUNCIL CHAMBERS / PUBLIC WELCOME 75 S. Frontage Road - Vail, Colorado, 81657 MEMBERS PRESENT MEMBERS ABSENT Bill Pierce Pam Hopkins Henry Pratt Luke Cartin Michael Kurz Susan Bird John Rediker 2. A request for a work session to discuss the Vail Village Character Study, an initiative to examine the Town's current regulations, design standards and guidelines applicable to Vail Village to determine whether they are sufficient to ensure the special character of Vail Village is not just maintained but also enhanced. Applicant: Town of Vail, represented by Braun Associates, Inc. Planner: Warren Campbell Warren Campbell gave a presentation focused on the steps taken thus far on the project and the goals of public hearing. Tom Braun gave a presentation per a power point. He spoke to each slide's topic with the goal of obtaining feedback from the Commission. Landmarks: Tom Braun spoke to what the focus groups identified as landmarks. The groups identified the Covered Bridge, the Gorsuch Clock Tower, public plaza spaces, and pedestrian streets. The power point included several questions about the current ownership and protection of the public spaces and plaza. Commissioner Kurz spoke to the previous applications for development on the south side of the Village parking structure and the Gorsuch clock tower redevelopment proposal. He questioned whether landmark status should be applied to the identified features as they may not be timeless. He believes the curve in the street, layout of the town, and the environment around the town is timeless. Roof forms will change; architecture will change through redevelopment, etc. He spoke to the interpretation that occurs when evaluating compliance with the Vail Village Urban Design Guidelines. Commissioner Pierce spoke to the Wildflower (Elway's) walkway between the Lodge at Vail and the Wall Street Building. He spoke to the benefits if the west side of the Wall Street Building were to open up onto the existing walkway. He added that Meadow Drive has become too wide. Commissioner Cartin spoke to the fact that as the town continues to develop a four season economy there is needed improvement on the incorporation of landscaping throughout the Village. He recognized landscaping will need to take into account cyclist flow and special events such as farmers market. The existing landscaping seems piecemeal. Page 1 Commissioner Pierce believes there is a need to create a logical comprehensive plan for landscaping including trees in the Village. There needs to be a compromise to balance the location of trees and retail store fronts. Commissioner Bird stated that she felt that the Vail Interfaith Chapel should be considered a landmark and worth preserving. Commissioner Cartin spoke to the Vail Rowhouses which allows for a difference in development style and interest in the Village. Gorsuch clock tower: Tom Braun spoke to the discussion around the clock tower. Is the tower itself important or the architecture of the tower that is important? Commissioner Bird spoke to Jeff Winston's presentation and his highlighting of the importance of stucco. Commissioner Pratt spoke to the clock tower not being of architectural interest, but it is the location of the tower at the intersection at the center of town. Some significant vertical element needs to be there and represents Vail. It should not be all glass and stone. He suggested the tower needs to be taller in the future. Commissioner Cartin spoke to the tower's simplicity as being what is special Jim Lamont, Vail Village Homeowners, suggested going to Google to find images of Vail to see what the world thinks is special about Vail. He felt it would be a barometer of what others think is special. He added that we locals get tired of things and want to see change, but it is the consumer /guest that tells us what we need to provide. Currently, the Latin culture is coming to Vail. As we are considering changes maybe we should focus on Barcelona verses Zermat. He added that we are struggling to recognize that Vail is a city. The market and the human soul are saying the Village is not broken, and there is no need to make significant changes. He spoke to the need to evaluate any proposal and change with regard to the ability to park the proposal. He feels that the clock tower is important and how it gets remade is a very important issue and how do you keep the corridors open around the Village in order to view the clock tower. He looks at landmarks more so as the bus stop with the children's art, the berm on the south side of the Village Parking structure, Children's Fountain, etc. Commissioner Kurz stated that he is aware Vail is a city, but he believes this task is an examination of how to keep a unique Village core protected. He spoke to the plaza east of Campo DiFiori and the ability to redesign and redevelop the plaza to continue the character of the Village core onto Meadow Drive. Commissioner Rediker spoke to his belief that the simplicity of the clock tower is what is special. He spoke to a concern about going to far in the imposition of the requirement for a tower on a specific property. Commissioner Bird spoke to other communities which regulate architectural design and features. Vail Village Urban Design Guide Plan (UDGP) Applicability: Tom Braun spoke to the current applicability of the UDGP. He added that the focus groups spoke to the expansion of the UDGP to the greater Village. Page 2 Commissioner Kurz spoke to the successes of the Austria Haus and Sonnenalp redevelopments and the benefits of expanding the UDGP application. Commissioner Pratt spoke to a need to expand the UDGP east to include Manor Vail. He spoke to how the implementation of the UDGP, or version thereof, would help to tie it all together. Commissioner Pierce spoke to conversations on how to improve the pedestrian experience from the Village to Ford Park. It was suggested that tying the Village to Golden Peak to a greater degree. Can there be a retail link created? Is there an ability to expand our retail shopping experience? Include an art walk? Jim Lamont spoke to the conversation in conjunction with Ever Vail about how to connect Lionshead to Ever Vail along West Lionshead Circle through the incorporation of retail. The discussion focused on making the pedestrian experience more interesting verse the sterility that is currently present. The area to the east of the Village core is missing pedestrianization to make it feel like a part of the Village core. Non - conforming properties: Tom Braun identified several properties which exceed their development allowance (height, site coverage). How do these properties redevelop? Should incentives be provided to encourage redevelopment? Commissioner Pierce gave an example of Villa Valhalla being over on number of dwelling units but having remaining Gross Residential Floor Area that they cannot use because of the non- conformity. Commissioner Kurz spoke to changing demographics and future property owners wanting dwelling units to be larger to accommodate families. Jim Lamont spoke to what he heard in the focus groups. He heard the buildings will tend to be rehabilitated verses complete redevelopment. At what point do we limit the number of dwelling units and eliminate the ability to live for a day, week, month, or permanently in the Village. Commissioner Pratt stated that he felt redevelopment incentives over the last ten years have been handled poorly. There are many projects which are too tall. Height is key in the Village. He suggested potentially relaxing the 60/40 roof height split. The limited availability of properties will cause values to increase to allow for redevelopment. Michael Kurz suggested that the taller the building is permitted that there may be increased architectural detailing requirements. Commissioner Pierce spoke to his ideas on how buildings might redevelop. He spoke to the fact that each property has an individual and unique circumstances which might need to be addressed. Commissioner Cartin spoke to a need to control the hop scotching of development which has resulted in each subsequent project being larger than the previous. He used height as an example. Development seems to want an extra floor if the buildings adjacent are of a certain height. Page 3 There was conversation by the Commissioners generally agreeing to allow existing development to maintain what they have if they are already in excess. Architectural Character: Tom Braun spoke to the comments heard from the focus groups. Commissioner Pierce spoke to the Pepi's Sports wing which is new and in contrast with the hotel as being appropriate. He spoke to the spaces between buildings which are special not necessarily the architecture. Commissioner Kurz spoke to the great architecture of the Bell Tower Building and the Gasthof Gramshammer as being special, but there are other expressions of alpine architecture which may be appropriate. Commissioner Pratt departed at 2:48 pm. Jim Lamont spoke to have buildings which all looked like the Bell Tower Building would be too much. He agrees that some diversity is appropriate. Commissioner Kurz spoke to a blend of Austria Haus, Sonnenalp, Bell Tower Building, as being appropriate with regard to architecture. Commissioner Kurz stated that if a building were to be big in the Village the Ritz - Carlton is an example of how to do big and beautiful. He added that rooflines and materials would be a good place to begin in defining the character. Commissioner Pierce spoke to his interactions with retailers and their thoughts around the need for windows and doors. Commissioner Cartin spoke to his disbelieve that planters and some landscaping prevent patrons from entering restaurants and retail. Retail storefront: Jim Lamont spoke to the European direction of store fronts, which is larger panes of glass and reduced divisions (mullions). Commissioner Cartin spoke to the variety of the window types being appropriate but the need for retailers to display goods in an attractive manner is important as well. Commissioner Pierce spoke to the use of glass types which significantly reduces reflectance to allow for pedestrians to see in. There needs to be detailing of handles, etc. Tom Braun stated that maybe a building needs to be reviewed in whole with regard to store fronts. Allowing for differing windows in various tenant spaces based upon the compilation of the whole. Commissioner Pierce spoke to the need to balance landscaping with retail store fronts. Jim Lamont spoke to a need to find 4 to 5 locations where specimen trees could be installed so as to get the canopy up above the retail storefront level. Page 4 Commissioners Pierce and Kurz spoke to a need to look at Meadow Drive and to reevaluate the ability for buses to pass each other along the extent of the road. This causes an expanse of pavers that may not be desirable. Building height and sun /shade Commissioner Pierce spoke to the need to provide height to accommodate floor plates of approximately 11 feet. Retail floor levels should be between 12 and 14 feet. Jim Lamont suggested using 3D modeling tools to examine the Village if height were to be increased. Commissioner Pierce inquired as to how the sun /shade analysis is used. If a project complies with height what comment is there regarding sun /shade? Are we going to tell someone no? Page 5 Vail Village Character Study AWB RA L I N TOWN OF VAID Vail Village Character Study AWB RA L I N TOWN OF VAID Vail Village Character Study AWB RA L I N TOWN OF VAID VAIL VILLAGE Vail Village Character Study AWB RA L I N TOWN OF VAID ..... to identify aspects of the physical character of the Village and to assure as far as possible ffiat fu tu re changes will be consistent w[th the established Vail Village Urban Design Guide Plan 1980 Vail Village Character Study B RA I TOWN OF VAID � GOLDEN PEAK HOUSE/BRIDGE STREET LODGE KIANDRA LODGE/ONE WILLOW PLACE Vail Village Character Study AWB RA L I N TOWN OF VAID PEPPS MILL CREEK COURT BUILDING Vail Village Character Study AWB RA L I N TOWN OF VAID GORE CREEK DRIVE BELL TOWER BUILDING Vail Village Character Study AWB RA L I N TOWN OF VAID THE QUESTION AT HAND As buildings in the Village continue to re- develop or other changes occur in the Village, are the Town's current regulations, design standards and guidelines sufficient to ensure that the special character of Vail Village is not just maintained but also enhanced? Vail Village Character Study B RA I TOWN OF VAID � Catalyst for Project Vail Village Master Plan Goal #1 Encourage high quality redevelopment while preserving the architectural scale of the Village in order to sustain its sense of community and identity. Objective 1.4 Recognize the "historic" importance of the architecture, structures, landmarks, plazas and features in preserving the character of Vail Village. Policy 1.4.1 The historical importance of structures, landmarks, plazas and other similar features shall be taken into consideration in the development review process. Policy 1.4.2 The town shall grant flexibility in the interpretation and implementation of its regulations and guidelines to help protect and maintain the existing character of the Vail Village Policy 1.4.3 Identification of "historic" importance shall not be used as the sole means of preventing or prohibiting development in Vail Village. Vail Village Character Study B Kt" L I TOWN OF VAID � PROJECT GOALS /OBJECTIVES • Identify buildings, structures, landmarks, plazas and other features that define or contribute to the character of Vail Village. • Re- evaluate regulatory tools with respect to how they can preserve the unique architectural scale of Vail Village in order to sustain its sense of place. • Assess potential refinements to regulatory tools and potential alternatives to regulatory tools • Determine strategy /steps for implementation Vail Village Character Study B Kt" L I TOWN OF VAID � PROJECT OUTCOME • Define the features that contribute to the character of Vail Village • Answer the question — Are the Town's current regulations, design standards and guidelines sufficient to ensure that the special character of Vail Village is not just maintained but also enhanced? • If the answer is "yes ", the project is complete. • If the answer is "no ", we will have defined through the course of this initial phase of work a strategy /work program for specific amendments to the Town review process. A second phase of work will then be initiated to implement these amendments. Vail Village Character Study B Kt" L I TOWN OF VAID � APPROACH TO PROJECT Step 1 Identify buildings, structures, landmarks, plazas and other features that define or contribute to the Village's character. Ste 2 - Evaluate current regulatory tools with respect to their effectiveness in preserving the Village's character. Step 3 - Review urban design /character preservation programs in other comparable communities. Step 4 - to h Identify potential refinements /alternatives to existing guidelines, development standards and review procedures. Step 5 — to h Define a specific strategy /work program for implementation (if any) of new and /or refined guidelines. Vail Village Character Study B Kt" L I TOWN OF VAID � APPROACH TO PROJECT Ste 1- dill Identify buildings, structures, landmarks, plazas and other features that define or contribute to the Village's character. ekdsb dng ddd dill 'iians dill ddddddd Midi af eklstkng ddd dddd r Vail Village Character Study B RA I TOWN OF VAID � THE BUILDINGS Vail Village Character Study AWB RA L I N TOWN OF VAID PLACES AND SPACES Vail Village Character Study TOWN OF�DAIC` "' PLACES AND SPACES Vail Village Character Study AWB RA L I N TOWN OF VAID STREETS AND CORRIDORS Vail Village Character Study TOWN OF UAIC` � VIEWS Vail Village Character Study AWB RA L I N TOWN OF VAID WINDOWS AND DOORS Vail Village Character Study AWB Kt" A L I N TOWN OF VAID DETAILING Ow fqq Vail Village Character Study AWB RA L I N TOWN OF VAID Ste 1 - iiii. Identify buildings, structures, landmarks, plazas and other features that define or contribute to the Village's character. iii giii M 'iiii iii iii i r t a iii 'i iiits i ire a "I gLiardtnew gLiaii �y, ind owners, iii iii iii , 'iiii ilia iii iiii iii iii iiri a iii ii ri ien ts genei iii i iii Vail Village Character Study B RA I TOWN OF VAID � Ste 1 - Identify buildings, structures, landmarks, plazas and other features that define or contribute to the Village's character. Vail Village Character Study B RA I TOWN OF VAID � Ste 1 - Identify buildings, structures, landmarks, plazas and other features that define or contribute to the Village's character. Ste 2 - IIII. Evaluate current regulatory tools with respect to their effectiveness in preserving the Village's character. IIII iii 'iiii iii iii iiii iii IIII iii ,iii iiii iii IIII , IIII iii , tql-.)IIIcs far IIII IIII 'a ii iii iii n d a i1 iii 'IIII b LI 'liii ng sti q iiii iii iii IIII iii irac teir IIIIi ii iii Ilf ° �� IIII iii Iii Ilf �� iii iii viii iii III iii IIII Iii h&i a�tdabans i Sun/§hade IIIaviii Vail Village Character Study B RA I TOWN OF VAID �� �� Sa v a e, ����"�ew Mekto Vail Village Character Study AWB RA L I N TOWN OF VAID Vail Village Character Study AWB RA L I N TOWN OF VAID Step 5 Define next steps /potential strategy for implementation (if any) of new or refined guidelines. Vail Village Character Study B RA I TOWN OF VAID � Next Steps iii iiii Vail Village Character Study B RA I TOWN OF VAID � Vail Village Character Study AWB RA L I N TOWN OF VAID Ad Name: 10134066A Customer: TOWN OF VAIL /PLAN DEPT /COMM Your account number is- 1 OP2P 33 Vaff Daily PROOF OF PUBLICATION STATE OF COLORADO I Iss. COUNTY OF EAGLE I I, Don Rogers, do solemnly swear that I am a qualified representative ofthe Vail Daily. That the same Daily newspaper printed, in whole or in part and published in the County of Eagle, State of Colorado, and has a general circulation therein; that said newspaper has been published continuously and uninterruptedly in said County of Eagle for a period of more than fifty -two consecutive weeks next prior to the first publication of the annexed legal notice or advertisement and that said newspaper has published the requested legal notice and advertisement as requested. The Vail Daily is an accepted legal advertising medium, only for jurisdictions operating under Colorado's Home Rule provision. That the annexed legal notice or advertisement was published in the regular and entire issue of every number of said daily newspaper for the period of 1 consecutive insertions; and that the first publication of said notice was in the issue of said newspaper dated 4/25/2014 and that the last publication of said notice was dated 4/25/2014 in the issue of said newspaper. In witness whereof, I have here unto set my hand this day, 05/02/2014. General Manager/Publisher/Editor Vail Daily Subscribed and sworn to before me, a notary public in and for the County of Eagle, State of Colorado this day 05/02/2014. Pamela J. Schultz, Notary Public My Commission expires: November 1, 2015 �pRY PUe/ ' PAMELA J. SCHULTZ 9�� COt -ARP$ My Commismn Expires 1110112015 THIS ITEM MAY AFFECT YOUR PROPERTY PUBLIC NOTICE NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the Planning and Environmental Commission of the Town of Vail will hold a public hearing in accordance with section 12 -3 -6, Vail Town Code, on May 12, 2014 at 1:00 pm in the Town of Vail Municipal Building. A request for the review of a variance from Section 12 -6E -6, Setbacks, Vail Town Code, pursuant to Chapter 12 -17, Variances, Vail Town Code, to al- low for the construction of an addition within the side setback area, located at 2785 Bald Mountain Road /Lot 3 Block 2, Vail Village Filing 13, and set- ting forth details in regard thereto. (PEC140009) Applicant: 2002 Carey Family Trust, Michael J. & Wendy M. Carey Trustees, represented by Peel /Langenwalter Architects Planner: Jonathan Spence A request for the review of a major exterior alter- ation or modification, pursuant to Section 12 -713-7, Exterior Alterations and Modifications, Vail Town Code, to allow for the construction of additions to the Northeast corner of Wall Street Building, locat- ed at 225 Wall Street, Lots B & C, Block 5C, Vail Village Filing 1, and setting forth details in regard thereto. (PEC140010) Applicant: MECO LLP, represented by Suman Ar- chitects Planner: Warren Campbell A request for a recommendation to the Vail Town Council on the adoption of the Vail Valley Medical Center Master Plan, to establish a comprehensive redevelopment plan for the Vail Valley Medical Center, Lot 10 (Town of Vail parking lot), and US Bank Building, located at 181 and 281 West Mead- ow Drive and 108 South Frontage Road West/ Lots E, F, and 10 Vail Village Filing 2, and Lot D -2, A Resubdivision of Lot D Vail Village Filing 2, and setting forth details in regard thereto. (PEC140011) Applicant: Vail Valley Medical Center, represented by Braun and Associates Planner: George Ruther The applications and information about the propos- als are available for public inspection during office hours at the Town of Vail Community Develop- ment Department, 75 South Frontage Road. The public is invited to attend site visits. Please call 970 - 479 -2138 for additional information. Sign language interpretation is available upon re- quest, with 24 -hour notification. Please call 970 - 479 -2356, Telephone for the Hearing Im- paired, for information. Published April 25, 2014 in the Vail Daily. (10134066) Ad Name: 10176125A PLANNING AND ENVIRONMENTAL COMMISSION Customer: TOWN OF VAIL /PLAN DEPT /COMM May CO NCI at CHAMBERS TOWN COUNCIL CHAMBERS Your account number is- 1 OP2P 33 /PUBLIC WELCOME 75 S. Frontage Road -Vail, Colorado, 81657 PRESENT MEMBERS ABSENT �� DailyMEMBERS Site Visit: 1. Wall Street Building - 225 Wall Street 2. Vail Valley Medical Center - 181 and 281 West PROOF OF PUBLICATION Meadow Drive and 108 South Frontage Road 5 West 1. A request for the review of a variance from Sec- tion 12 -6E -6, Setbacks, Vail Town Code, pursuant to Chapter 12 -17, Variances, Vail Town Code, to STATE OF COLORADO } allow for the construction of an addition within the side setback area, located at 2785 Bald Mountain Road /Lot 3 Block 2, Vail Village Filing 13, and set - }SS. ting forth details in regard thereto. (PEC140009) COUNTY OF EAGLE } Applicant: 2002 Carey Family Trust, Michael J. & Wendy M. Carey Trustees, represented by Peel /Langenwalter Architects Planner: Jonathan Spence ACTION: I, Don Rogers, do solemnly swear that I am a qualified MOTION: SECOND:VOTE: CONDITION(S): pn representative ofthe Vail Daily. That the same Dail newspaper Y Y 25 minutes 2. A request for the review of a major exterior al- Y Y Y printed, in whole or in part and published in the County teration or modification, pursuant to Section 12 -7B -7, Exterior Alterations and Modifications, Vail Town Code, to allow for the construction of of Eagle, State of Colorado, and has a general circulation additions to the Northeast corner of Wall Street Building, located at 225 Wall street, Lots B & C, therein; that said newspapner has been continuously Block 5C, Vail Village Filing 1, and setting forth in t published paper Y Y Applicant: : MEC LLP,. represented b Applicant: MECO LLP, represented by Suman Ar- and uninterruptedly in said County of Eagle for a period of chitects Planner: Warren Campbell 7' more than fifty -two consecutive weeks next prior to the first ACTION: SECOND:VOTE: COTTON: publication of the annexed legal notice or advertisement and g 40 minutes 3. A for to the Vail that said newspaper has published the requested legal notice request a recommendation Town Council on the adoption of the Vail Valley Medical Center Master Plan, to establish a com- and advertisement as requested. prehensive redevelopment plan for the Vail Valley Medical Center, Lot 10 (Town of Vail parking lot), and US Bank Building, located at 181 and 281 West Meadow Drive and 108 South Frontage Road West/ Lots E, F, and 10 Vail Village Filing 2, and The Vail Daily is an accepted legal advertising medium, Lot D -2, A Resubdivision of Lot D Vail Village Fil- ing 2, and setting forth details in regard thereto. (PEC140011) only or jurisdictions operating d Colorado's H Y J p g uner ora s ome Applicant: Vail Valley Medical Center, represented Rule provision. by Braun and Associates Planner: George Ruther ACTION: MOTION: SECOND:VOTE: CONDITION(S): 20 minutes That the annexed legal notice or advertisement was g 4. A request for ir work session to update the published in the regular and entire issue of every Planning and Environmental Commission on the progress of the Vail Village Character Area Preservation project, an initiative to examine the 1 number of said daily newspaper for the period of 1 Town's current regulations, design standards and guidelines applicable to Vail Village to determine whether they are sufficient to ensure the special consecutive insertions; and that the first publication of said character of Vail Village is not just maintained but also enhanced. � notice was in the issue of said newspaper dated 5/9/2014 and Applicant: Town of Vail, represented by Braun Associates, Inc. that the last of said notice was dated 5/9/2014 in Planner: Warren Campbell publication ACTION: SECOND:VOTE: the issue of said newspaper. CONDITION(S): 5. A request for the review of a conditional use permit, pursuant to 12 -9C -3, Conditional Uses, Vail Town Code, for a public and quasi - public indoor In witness whereof, I have here unto set ffi hand this day, community facilities (education center), allow for y y the construction of the Betty Ford Alpine e Gardens 05/19/2014. Education Center, located 530 South Frontage Road /Unplatted, and setting forth details in regard thereto. (PEC140005) Applicant: Betty Ford Alpine Gardens, represented by Jack Hunn Planner: Jonathan Spence ACTION: Table to June 9, 2014 MOTION: SECOND:VOTE: 6. A request for a variance from Section 14 -3 -1, General Man ager/Pu blisher/Editor Table 1, Minimum Standards, Vail Town Code, Vail Daily pursuant to Section 14 -1 -5, Variances, Vail Town Code, to allow for a residential driveway to exceed the permitted maximum centerline grade, located at Subscribed and sworn to before me, a notary public in and for 2754 Sn0wberry Drive / Lot 15, Block, 9, Vail Intermountain and setting forth details in regard the County of Eagle, State of Colorado this day 05/19/2014. thereto. (PEC140007) Applic nGroup Dantas, represented by Mauriello Planner: Joe Batcheller ACTION: Table to June 9, 2014 MOTION: SECOND:VOTE: 7. Approval April 2014 minutes VOTE: MOTION: SECOND: VOTE: a 8. Information Update Pamela J. Schultz, Notary Public 9. Adjournment MOTION: SECOND: VOTE: My Commission November 1 2015 The applications and information about the expires: , 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. Times and order of RY PUe items are approximate, subject to change, and cannot be relied upon to determine at what time the (P ,...., O_: •• ••, (� Planning and Environmental Commission will consider an item. Please call (970) 479 -2138 for PAMELA J. •: additional information. Sign language interpretation SCHULTZ is available upon request with 24 -hour notification. y •,. :P$ Please call (970) 479 -2356, Telephone for the Hearing Impaired, for information. ��COy -OR Community Development Department My Commission Expires 111012015 Published May 9, 2014 in the Vail Daily. (10176125)