Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2016-1128 PECTOWN OF VA10 PLANNING AND ENVIRONMENTAL COMMISSION November28, 2016, 1:00 PM Vail Town Council Chambers 75S. Frontage Road -Vail, Colorado, 81657 Call to Order Members Present: Brian Gillette, Kirk Hansen, Ludwig Kurz, Henry Pratt, John Rediker, John Ryan Lockman and Brian Stockmar Absent: None Site Visits - 30 min. 1. Marriott Residence Inn - 1783 North Frontage Road West 3. A request for recommendation to the Vail Town Council of an application to establish Special Development District No. 41 (Marriott Residence Inn), pursuant to Section 12-9(A), Special Development Districts, Vail Town Code, to allow for the development of a limited service lodge and deed restricted employee housing units and a conditional use permit for public or commercial parking facilities or structures, located at 1783 North Frontage Road West/Lot 9, Buffehr Creek Resubdivision, and setting forth details in regard thereto. (PEC16-0030). Applicant: Vail Hotel Owner ESHV, LLC, represented by Mauriello Planning Group Planner: Matt Panfil Chairman Rediker opened the item Matt Panfil, Planner, introduced the project. Matt ran through a list of terms that are used both in the staff report and staff's presentation. He discussed the objective of Special Development Districts and how they are reviewed. Matt added emphasis that at times there may be competing public interests. Panfil summarized the application, including its components and the relationship of these components to the town code. He presented the changes to the plans that have occurred over the three meetings and plan sets. Commissioner Hansen asked about the color coding shown for parking. Commissioner Gillette asked about the parking requirement and allowable deductions for multi—use facilities. Panfil provided answers to these two questions. Matt stated that staff has concerns about the multi -use parking credit but the code does not provide further clarification regarding the parking reduction. Commissioner Stockmar asked about parking requirements and the possibility that the demand will be lower. Panfil discussed the possibility of more spaces being available for public parking if future demand from the residential uses does not meet the spaces provided. He closed out his presentation with a discussion of the proposed deviations from the underlying zone district. Chairman Rediker requested that staff discuss the proposed conditions of approval. Panfil provided the Commission with the proposed conditions of approval. Chairman Rediker opened up for Commissioner's question. Chairman Rediker asked about the acceptability of the conditions to the applicant and a greater explanation of the LEED condition. Chairman Rediker asked about the location of the retaining walls and the need to move them 2' from the property line. Commissioner Hansen asked about the needed easement for Meadow Ridge Road. Commissioner Hansen asked about the shading of the road and if a plan for this was needed. Panfil provided greater details on what was being requested and indicated that no mitigation for the shading is proposed. Commissioner Kurz asked for clarification related to building height and how the building height was able to be reduced by more than 12 feet without removing any floors to the building. Panfil discussed the changes in the building height. Chairman Rediker asked about the height allowances over the limit. Panfil discussed architectural projections and their allowance. Commissioner Lockman asked about site coverage and how it is calculated. Commissioner Lockman also asked about the availability of water service. Panfil discussed these items and how the water service comment was meant as an advisory alert to the applicant. Commissioner Lockman asked about the applicability of an Environmental Impact Report for this project. Panfil stated that it had been discussed but had not been requested for previous projects. Commissioner Hansen expressed concern with the traffic flow on the frontage road Commissioner Kurz asked if any of the technical aspects will result in a return to either the PEC or Town Council. Panfil stated that with the exception of CDOT technical issues, other items have been addressed or are conditioned to do so. Applicant presentation. Dominic Mauriello made a PowerPoint presentation on behalf of the applicant. Chairman Rediker asked the Commission if they have questions for the applicant. Chairman Rediker asked about the step between the apartment units and the lodging units. Mauriello responded that it is partially due to a change in grade and also in response to comments received that height is more acceptable along the eastern end. Panfil and Mauriello reviewed some building sections that help to illustrate the proposed height. Chairman Rediker asked for clarification regarding the landscape plan at the rear of the building (north side). Mauriello responded that is was principally evergreen trees with some aspens. Chairman Rediker asked if there was sufficient sunlight for the landscaping proposed Mauriello responded that the plan has been prepared by a landscape architect and reviewed by the Town's landscape architect. Public Comment Randy Guerriero — Stated that the third plan is an improvement. Expressed concern with the evergreens along the north side. He asked about improvements to the frontage road such as deceleration or turn lanes. He asked a question about the deed restrictions. He expressed concern with snow storage. Ted Steers — Supportive of the proposed underground component. Rooftop landscaping will require attention for detail. He expressed concern that Marriott would co-opt all of the employee housing units for its own employee use. He is also concerned with the size of the building and wondered why it is not broken into two or three buildings. Molly Murphy — Vail Valley Medical Center (VVMC) fully supports the project. No public money subsidy is being requested. In her experience, the rent would be ok. The lodge units help serve a demand that is not being met. VVMC currently send people to Hawthorne Suites in Eagle. Chris Burns — He believes the revised plan is much better. He is concerned with possible effects on the sanitary sewer system, the removal of existing old growth trees, the proposed zero setback construction and the effects of the zero setback construction on existing buildings. He is also concerned with the rooftop proposal and potential noise affecting nearby properties. He expressed concern with the level of public amenities, and that a bus shelter is not public art. He concluded by stating that the project is just too big for the neighborhood and 150 units per acre is inconsistent with the area. Steve Lindstrom — Vail Local Housing Authority (VLHA) supports the project. Vail is landlocked and does not have room to sprawl in order to grow. Vail has to look inward at what we have to solve our problems. Density is the solution, not the problem. The 1970's and 80's way of solving problems will not work. Lion's Ridge is a missed opportunity. This project is a project that works towards a solution. There is not a better site or a better project. We need private sector help to solve our housing problems. Jason Cowles — Eagle River Water and Sanitation District (ERWSD) is working with the applicant and looking at capacity issues. No answers at this time but the existing water and sewer infrastructure will need to be upsized and loop up to Buffehr Creek Road. Mike Brumbaugh — He is strongly in favor of this. Project addresses three important issues in community: housing, lodging and parking. He is unable to expand business opportunities because of employee housing issues. Vail Valley Partnership is also supportive of the proposal. This project is part of the solution. Jill Klosterman, Eagle County Housing — Addressed the county needs assessment and how the need is growing. She spoke to the limited supply of land and how this may be part of the solution. Mary McDougall, VLHA — She supports the project as a board member and as a citizen. The project is a great compromise between staff and developer. Lori Johnson — Spoke to change in Vail, and Vail will continue to change. People who are opposed are concerned about views. The Town needs to look at the sustainability and growth of the community. Families with children are moving down valley. If we don't figure out these community issues we won't have a community. We need to think about solutions. Greg Bemis — Stated that it is a massive, very tall building; twice the size of Vail Run. Employee housing may be supportive but what about the effects on the character of West Vail. Zoning is there for a reason. There are a lot of places to put this type of housing that will have fewer effects on the character of the area. As a resident of West Vail, this may not be what we are looking for. Asked where is the West Vail plan? Asked the PEC to consider the massiveness of this building. Questioned the project's sense of scale. Commissioner Comments Commissioner Stockmar — Stated that this is a challenging decision. This is a proposal that solves a lot of problems, but it is not perfect. He is concerned about the loss of mid- level lodging in town. There are downsides but there are upsides to solving our needs. We need to use the land we have well. Overall, with the conditions and constraints placed, he is supportive. Commissioner Gillette — Stated his support. This is a massive building but the architectural treatment breaking it into different fagades helps. He feels that this project is on the right track. He is concerned the project will run into budget constraints, and there is an expectation that the level of architectural detail will not be compromised. He is concerned that some of the conditions placed may affect the architectural details. Commissioner Pratt — Supports the overall project, but feels that this proposal is 13 pounds in a 10 pound bag and is just too much for the site. Commissioner Kurz — Supports the project. Our needs speak to our previous successes and our future success is dependent upon employees. He feels the project meets the criteria for SDD approval, but recognizes that this is 12 pounds in the 10 pound bag. He is not concerned with height. He feels the technical aspects will be taken care of and the building will be a positive mark on the neighborhood. The benefits outweigh the negatives. Commissioner Hansen — Supports the project. It is time for larger steps. He has never seen a presentation that so well covered all the bases. This is a private sector project with significant public benefits. Commissioner Lockman — Concurs with the quality of the presentation by staff and the applicant, and thankful for the public comment. In thinking about competing interests he feels the benefits outweigh the possible negatives. He still struggles with the proposed density of use and he still questions why an EIS was not required. Chairman Rediker — Asked about the impact on groundwater drainage with the proposed lot line to lot line development. Mauriello — Prior to building permit application, a groundwater study will be necessary. Chairman Rediker — Asked if the applicant will be required to install drainage. Tom Kassmel, Town Engineer — A drainage study will be required and an analysis will be needed. Water flows to the southwest corner of site. A de -watering system will be needed. Chairman Rediker — Echoed Commissioner Pratt's comments. This was a well prepared application and presentation. He is thankful for the public comment. This is a very difficult decision if not the hardest decision with his time on the PEC. He is supportive of the hot beds and the affordable housing, which are big pluses for the project. He stated that unfortunately he does not feel the criteria are met, specifically concerning compatibility, relationship and design features. The lack of a master plan needs to be looked at. Commissioner Gillette — This project meets one-tenth of the Town's housing goal. If the frontage road location does not work, the housing plan will not work. Closed commissioner comments Special Development District Motion Action: Approve with Conditions on page 23-24 of packet, and Findings on page 24 Conditions: 1. Approval of Special Development District No. 41, Marriott Residence Inn, is contingent upon the applicant obtaining Town of Vail approval of an associated design review application; 2. The applicant shall obtain Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED) certification for the structure within one (1) year of issuance of the first Certificate of Occupancy. Failure to obtain the certification within the identified time -frame will necessitate a return to the Planning and Environmental Commission and/or Town Council for an evaluation of a suitable, replacement public benefit, 3. Prior to submitting any building permit application, the applicant shall identify the six (6) unrestricted, rental dwelling units and provide documentation that the units shall have the right -of -use to the lodge's service and facilities under the same rules and regulations as the lodge guests.; 4. Prior to submitting any building permit application, the applicant shall submit revised plans relocating the proposed retaining walls at least two feet (2) from adjacent property lines; 5. Should the Colorado Department of Transportation (CDOT) not approve the proposed landscaping in the North Frontage Road right-of-way, the applicant shall submit a revised landscape plan, for review and approval, prior to submitting any building permit application, subject to Design Review, 6. Prior to submitting any building permit application, the applicant shall submit revised plans that clearly illustrate signage and striping of the fire staging area; 7. Prior to submitting any building permit application, the applicant shall submit revised plans that illustrate the continuation of the proposed sidewalk to the intersection with Buffehr Creek Road, 8. Prior to submitting any building permit application, the applicant shall submit approval from CDOT related to all proposed work within the CDOT right -of way, 9. The applicant shall mitigate system wide pedestrian and traffic impacts through the payment of a Transportation Impact Fee that shall not be offset by the project level improvements. This payment shall be made prior to requesting any Certificate of Occupancy for the project. The fee shall be determined through the ongoing update and codification to the Impact Fee as approved by the Town Council. In the event that the updated fee is not adopted by the Town Council prior to July 1, 2017, the applicant shall provide a payment, prior to requesting any Certificate of Occupancy, based upon net new PM Peak Hour vehicle trips generated by the development. The amount per trip shall be assessed at the established rate as of July 1, 2017, and 10. Prior to submitting any building permit application, the applicant shall provide roadway and snow storage easements for the portion of Meadow Ridge Road that encroaches onto the subject property in a format acceptable to the Town's Attorney. Findings: Based upon the review of the criteria outlined in Section Vlll of the Staff memorandum to the Planning and Environmental Commission dated November 28, 2016, and the evidence and testimony presented, the Planning and Environmental Commission finds: 1. The SDD complies with the standards listed in Section Vlll of this memorandum, or the applicant has demonstrated that one or more of the standards is not applicable; 2. The SDD is consistent with the adopted goals, objectives and policies outlined in the Vail comprehensive plan and compatible with the development objectives of the town; 3. The SDD is compatible with and suitable to adjacent uses and appropriate for the surrounding areas; and 4. The SDD promotes the health, safety, morals, and general welfare of the town and promotes the coordinated and harmonious development of the town in a manner that conserves and enhances its natural environment and its established character as a resort and residential community of the highest quality. Motion: Stockmar Second: Hansen Vote: 5-2-0 (Pratt and Rediker opposed) Conditional Use Permit Motion Action: Approve with Condition as listed on page 25 of packet Motion: Stockmar Second: Kurz Vote: 6-1-0 (Rediker opposed) Condition 1. The conditional use permit for a commercial parking facility shall lapse and become void if a building permit is not obtained and diligently pursued toward completion or the approved use has not commenced within two (2) years from the date of approval. Any conditional use which is discontinued for a period of two (2) years, regardless of any intent to resume operation, shall not be resumed thereafter, any future use of the site or structures thereon shall conform to the provisions of Title 12, Vail Town Code. Findings Based upon the review of the criteria outlined in Section IX of the Staff memorandum to the Planning and Environmental Commission dated November 28, 2016, and the evidence and testimony presented, the Planning and Environmental Commission finds: 1. The proposed location of the use is in accordance with the purposes of this title and the purposes of the Public Accommodation -2 (PA -2) zone district, 2. The proposed location of the use and the conditions under which it would be operated or maintained will not be detrimental to the public health, safety, and welfare, or materially injurious to the properties or improvements in the vicinity, and 3. The proposed use complies with each of the applicable provisions of this title. 4. A report to the Planning and Environmental Commission of an administrative action approving a request for a minor amendment to Special Development District No. 6 (Vail Village Inn), pursuant to section 12-9A-10, Amendment Procedures, Vail Town Code, to allow for the construction of an approximately sixty (60) square foot addition (glass display case) located at 100 East Meadow Drive, Units 7A, 8, 21 and 22 (Vail Village Plaza Condos)/Lot O, Block 5D, Vail Village Filing 1, and setting forth details in regard thereto. (PEC16-0035) Applicant: AJW Properties II, LLC, represented by Current Architects Planner: Matt Panfil Matt Panfil stated that the applicant is proposing to build a glass display case underneath a building overhang at the southeast corner of the structure that will help bring attention to the structure from pedestrians on Meadow Drive. The glass display case counts as commercial floor area and therefore requires a minor amendment to the Special Development District (SDD). Commissioner Gillette asked about the purpose of the display case. Michael Current of Current Architects, representing the applicant, stated that the display case is part of other improvements that will help connect the structure to the plaza area and bring attention to an unidentified future business. There were no other questions or comments from the Commissioners Action: None 5. A request for a variance from Section 14-6-7, Vail Town Code, pursuant to Section 14-1-5, Variances, Vail Town Code, and in accordance with Section 12-17, Variances, Vail Town Code, to allow for retaining walls with an exposed face height greater than three feet (3') in the front setback, located at 1255 Westhaven Circle/Lot 45, Glen Lyon Subdivision and setting forth details in regard thereto. (PEC16-0036) Table to December 12, 2016 Applicant: Westhaven LLC and Jamie Lipnick, represented by KH Webb Architects Planner: Matt Panfil Action: Table to December 12, 2016 Motion: Hansen Second: Kurz Vote: 7-0-0 6. A request for final review of a Development Plan, pursuant to Section 12-61- 11, Vail Town Code, to allow for the future development of Employee Housing Units on the Chamonix parcel located at 2310 Chamonix Road, Parcel B, Resubdivision of Tract D, Vail Das Schone Filing 1, and setting forth details in regard thereto. (PEC150019) Table to December 12, 2016 Applicant: Town of Vail Planner: Jonathan Spence Action: Table to December 12, 2016 Motion: Hansen Second: Kurz Vote: 7-0-0 Approval of Minutes November 14, 2016 PEC Meeting Results Action: Approve Motion: Kurz Second: Stockmar Vote: 7-0-0 Informational Update Environmental Sustainability- Storm Water Education To be heard at a later date. Adjournment Action: Adjourn Motion: Stockmar Second: Kurz Vote: 6-0-0 The applications and information about the proposals are available for public inspection during regular office hours at the Town of Vail Community Development Department, 75 South Frontage Road. The public is invited to attend the project orientation and the site visits that precede the public hearing in the Town of Vail Community Development Department. 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 48-hour notification. Please call (970) 479-2356, Telecommunication Device for the Deaf (TDD), for information. Community Development Department TOWN OF VA110 VAI LTOWN PLANNINGAND ENVI RONMENTAL AGENDA MEMO MEETING DATE: November28, 2016 ITEM/TOPIC: A request for recommendation to the Vail Town Council of an application to establish Special Development District No. 41 (Marriott Residence Inn), pursuant to Section 12-9(A), Special Development Districts, Vail Town Code, to allow for the development of a limited service lodge and deed restricted employee housing units and a conditional use permit for public or commercial parking facilities or structures, located at 1783 North Frontage Road West/Lot 9, Buffehr Creek Resubdivision, and setting forth details in regard thereto. (PEC16-0030). ATTACHMENTS: File Name PEC16- 0030_SDD_No._41_MarriottResidence Inn_Memo #4_112816.pdf Attachment A-_Vicinity_Map.pdf Attachment B_-_Project_Narrative 11-2-16.pdf Attachment C_- Transportation_I mpact_Study. pdf Attachment D_-_Plan_Set_11-28-16_(1_of_6).pdf Attachment D_-_Plan_Set_11-28-16_(2_of_6).pdf Attachment D_-_Plan_Set_11-28-16_(3_of_6).pdf Attachment D_-_Plan_Set_11-28-16_(4_of_6).pdf Attachment D_-_Plan_Set_11-28-16_(5_of_6).pdf Attachment D_-_Plan_Set_11-28-16_(6_of_6).pdf Attachment E_-_Summary_of_Changes_from MPG 11-2-16.pdf Description Staff Memo to PEC Attachment A - Vicinity Map Attachment B - Project Narrative Attachment C - Transportation Impact Study Attachment D - Plan Set (1 of 6) Attachment D - Plan Set (2 of 6) Attachment D - Plan Set (3 of 6) Attachment D - Plan Set (4 of 6) Attachment D - Plan Set (5 of 6) Attachment D - Plan Set (6 of 6) Attachment E - Summary of Changes from MPG Attachment F_-_Public_Comments Received_by_11-23-16.pdf Attachment F - Public Comments Received by 11-23-16 Attachment G -_Relevant Planning_Documents.pdf Attachment G - Relevant Planning Documents Attachment _H - Attachment H - Draft CUP _MarriottResidence Inn_Commercial_Parking_Facility_Draft CUP.pdf Attachment I_-_Lion_s Ridge_Parking_Information.pdf Attachment I - Lion's Ridge Parking I nformation 0) TOWN OF VAIL Memorandum TO: Planning and Environmental Commission FROM: Community Development Department DATE: November 28, 2016 SUBJECT: A request for a recommendation to the Vail Town Council of an application to establish Special Development District No. 41 (Marriott Residence Inn), pursuant to Section 12-9(A), Special Development Districts, Vail Town Code, to allow for the development of a limited service lodge and deed restricted employee housing units and a conditional use permit for public or commercial parking facilities or structures, located at 1783 North Frontage Road West/Lots 9-12, Buffehr Creek Resubdivision, and setting forth details in regard thereto. (PEC16-0030) Applicant: Vail Hotel Owner ESHV, LLC, represented by Mauriello Planning Group Planner: Matt Panfil I. SUMMARY The applicant, Vail Hotel Owner ESHV, LLC, represented by Mauriello Planning Group, is requesting a recommendation to the Vail Town Council to establish Special Development District No. 41, pursuant to Section 12-9(A), Special Development Districts, Vail Town Code, to allow for the development of a 170 unit limited service lodge (LSLU) Marriott Residence Inn, 107 Type III deed -restricted employee housing units (EHUs), six (6) unrestricted rental dwelling units, and a conditional use permit for a public commercial parking facility at 1783 North Frontage Road West. This item was first heard by the Planning and Environmental Commission (PEC) on September 12, 2016. In order to allow the applicant time to respond to questions and comments from the Commissioners and public the item was continued to the October 10, 2016 meeting. At the October 10, 2016 meeting, the PEC and members of the public provided additional comments on the proposal. The comments were generally related to the following topics: • Neighborhood Compatibility in regards to Building Height, Bulk, and Mass • Parking Management • Drive Aisle Usage and Conflicts • Pedestrian Connectivity • Employee Housing Deed Restriction Language • Location of Mechanical Equipment and Venting • Traffic on North Frontage Road The applicant is requesting a final recommendation from the PEC to the Town Council at this meeting. The PEC may recommend the Town Council approve, approve with modifications, or deny the applicant's request. Per Section 12-9A-1, Vail Town Code, the purpose of an SDD is: To encourage flexibility and creativity in the development of land in order to promote its most appropriate use, to facilitate the adequate and economical provision of streets and utilities; to preserve the natural and scenic features of open space areas,- and reas,and to further the overall goals of the community as stated in the Vail comprehensive plan. The PEC shall review the proposed application and plans, and evaluate the merits of the proposed Special Development District (SDD) based on the criteria in Section VIII of this memo, the impact of the proposal, and the public benefits in regards to furthering overall goals of the community. Based upon staff's review of the revised plans and the criteria outlined in Section VIII and Section IX of this memorandum and the evidence and testimony presented, the Community Development Department recommends the PEC forward a recommendation of approval, with conditions, of this application subject to the findings in Section X of this memorandum. Staff also recommends the PEC approve, with one condition, the request for a conditional use permit to allow for a commercial parking facility. II. DESCRIPTION OF REQUEST The applicant, Vail Hotel Owner ESHV, LLC, represented by Mauriello Planning Group, is proposing the following as part of this SDD: • 170 limited service lodge units (LSLUs) within the west side of the structure; • 107 Type III deed -restricted employee housing units (EHUs) within the east side of the structure; • Six (6) unrestricted rental dwelling units within the east side of the structure; and • A two-story, below grade, 360 space parking facility, of which there are 40 surplus parking spaces available for public use. Town of Vail Page 2 A vicinity map (Attachment A), revised project narrative (Attachment B), transportation impact study (Attachment C), revised plan set dated November 28, 2016 (Attachment D), summary of changes to the previous plans (Attachment E), all public comments received prior to November 23, 2016 (Attachment F), an appendix of related planning documents (Attachment G), a draft Conditional Use Permit (Attachment H), and information about Lion's Ridge parking (Attachment 1) are attached for review. III. BACKGROUND The site is the former location of The Roost Lodge, which was built in the early 1970s. The Roost Lodge featured 72 hotel rooms, one (1) dwelling unit, and a paved surface parking lot. All structures associated with The Roost Lodge were demolished in 2015. Dating back to 2006, several different redevelopment scenarios have been proposed or approved for this location. Using the table provided by the applicant on page nine (9) of the project narrative, the different redevelopment scenarios are summarized as follows: PA -2 Standard 2006 Approval 2012 Approval 2013 Proposal 2016 Proposal Density 49 DUs 28 DUs 0 DUs 6 DUs LSLUs 101 152 176 170 GRFA 75,842 sq. ft. 75,031 sq. ft. 82,485 sq. ft. 89,466* Building Height 48' 48' 48' 59.5' Site Coverage 51% 51% 51% 95%** Landscape 44% 44% 44% 31% Setbacks Front 20' 20' 20' 0'*** Side (East) 15' 20' 20' 0' Side (West) 20' 20' 20' 0' Rear 20' 20' 20' 0' Parking 128 spaces 169 spaces 165 spaces 360 spaces Loading 1 berth 1 berth 1 berth 3 berths EHUs 3 Type III 1 Type IV 213R, 2 Type IV Dorm, 107 Type III 1 Type IV Dorm, and off-site and off-site housing for 6.56 housing for 4.95 employees employees * The LSLUs account for 84,466 square feet of GRFA and the six (6) multi -family dwelling units will account for no more than 4, 000 square feet of GRFA for a maximum total of 89,466 square feet. The applicant has not yet identified the specific six (6) multi -family dwelling units, but once identified they will not exceed a combined GRFA of 4,000 square feet. The EHUs account for 94,410 square feet, but they do not count towards GRFA or density per Vail Town Code. ** The site coverage is 55%; the site coverage including the below grade parking facility is 95%. *** The above grade setbacks are all at least 20 feet; the setbacks for the below grade parking facility are zero feet (0). Town of Vail Page 3 IV. APPLICABLE PLANNING DOCUMENTS For applicable planning documents please refer to Attachment G. In regards to this memorandum, specific references to sections of Vail Town Code have been made when necessary. V. SURROUNDING LAND USES AND ZONING Existing Land Use North: Medium Density Residential East: Interstate -70 South: Interstate -70 / Med. Dens. Res. West: Medium Density Residential Zoning District Two -Family Primary/Secondary Res. & SDD No. 22, Grand Traverse General Use General Use, Res. Cluster, & Two -Family Primary / Secondary Res. Res. Cluster & Two -Family Primary / Secondary Res. VI. ZONING ANALYSIS / SDD NO. 41, MARRIOTT RESIDENCE INN Address: 1783 N Frontage Road W Legal Description: Buffehr Creek Resubdivision Lots 9-12 Existing Zoning: Public Accommodation -2 (PA -2) Existing Land Use Designation: Medium Density Residential Mapped Geological Hazards: Steep Slope > 40% Underlying Standard Allowed / Required Proposed Site Area Min. 10,000 sq. ft. 86,597 sq. ft. 1.98 acres Front — 20' Front — 0'* Setbacks Side — 20' Side — 0' Rear — 20' Rear — 0' Height Flat or Mansard Roof — 45' Sloping Roof — 59.7' (Max.) Sloping Roof — 48' 25 DUs/ per acre of 170 LSLUs Density buildable site area but 107 EHUs LSLUs and EHUs are not 6 Unrestricted DUs counted towards density. GRFA** Max. 129,896 sq. ft. 89,466 sq. ft. Site Coverage Max. 65% of total site area 95%*** (81,834 sq. ft.) (56,288 sq. ft.) Landscaping Min. 30% of total site area 31% (26,726 sq. ft.) (25,979 sq. ft.) 338 single spaces Parking &Loading Min. 320 parking spaces 14 tandem spaces+ 8 ADA spaces 360 total spaces Town of Vail Page 4 * The above grade setbacks are all at least 20 feet; the setbacks for the below grade parking facility are zero feet (0'). ** The LSLUs account for 84,466 square feet of GRFA and the six (6) multi -family dwelling units will account for no more than 4, 000 square feet of GRFA for a maximum total of 89,466 square feet. The applicant has not yet identified the specific six (6) multi -family dwelling units, but once identified they will not exceed a combined GRFA of 4,000 square feet. The EHUs account for 94,410 square feet, but they do not count towards GRFA or density per Vail Town Code. *** The site coverage is 55%; the site coverage including the below grade parking facility is 95%. Deviations from the Underlyinq PA -2 Zoning District: Setbacks: Section 12-7J-6, Vail Town Code, requires minimum front, side, and rear setbacks of 20 feet within the PA -2 zone district. Above grade the proposal meets these criteria; however, the below grade parking results in zero foot (0') front, side, and rear setbacks. Section 12-7J-6, Vail Town Code, allows the PEC to approve variations to the setback standards subject to applicant demonstrating the proposed setbacks will result in creative design solutions or other public benefits that could not otherwise be achieved by conformance with the prescribed standards. There are no changes to the proposed setbacks since the October 10, 2016 PEC meeting. The proposed setbacks are zero feet (0'). Therefore, due to the below grade parking facility, the proposed deviation for the front, side, and rear setbacks is 20 feet. 2. Building Height: Section 12-7J-7, Vail Town Code, establishes a maximum height of 48 feet for buildings with sloping roofs located within the PA -2 zoning district. The applicant has reduced the building height from the previously submitted maximum building height of 72 feet to a maximum building height of 59.5 feet. Therefore, the proposed deviation is 11.5 feet. 3. Site Coverage: Section 12-7J-9, Vail Town Code, allows a maximum of 65% site coverage. At the request of staff, the applicant recalculated the site coverage which resulted in an increase from 87% to 95% due to the below grade parking facility having zero foot (0') setbacks. Therefore, the proposed deviation is 30%. The above grade site coverage is 55%. 4. Loadina and Deliveries: Section 12-10-9-B, Vail Town Code, requires that enclosed and/or covered loading berths be a minimum of 14 feet high. The proposed height of the two (2) loading berths within the garage facility is ten feet (10'), including the slope of the driveway. Therefore, the proposed deviation is four feet (4'). Town of Vail Page 5 Section 12-10-9-(B) allows the PEC to grant variations to the minimum loading berth dimension when they are deemed necessary to prevent negative impact on to the public right of way. 5. Retaining Walls: Section 14-6-7, Vail Town Code, states that retaining walls shall not exceed an exposed face height of six feet (6'). There are multiple sections of the proposed retaining walls that exceed six feet (6') and range up to approximately 20' 8" in height. Therefore, the proposed maximum deviation is approximately 14' 8". Section 14-6-7, Vail Town Code, requires retaining walls to be located a minimum of two feet (2') from adjacent private property boundaries. As proposed, there is only eight inches (8") between the proposed retaining wall and the property line. Therefore, the proposed deviation is 1' 4". VII. DISCUSSION ITEMS Due to its complexity, the request has been broken down into categories. Where a category is associated with an identified deviation, additional discussion regarding the merits of the deviation is provided: Building Height, Bulk, Mass, and Architectural Design: Significant changes have been made to the building height and the architectural design. The building was lowered and the floor to floor dimension was reduced in order to minimize the requested deviation from the maximum building height of 48 feet, the maximum building height allowed by the underlying Public Accommodation -2 (PA -2) zoning district. Specific changes include: • The entry to the garage was lowered by ten feet (10') and is now located below grade; • The height of the tower at the east end of the building was reduced by 13' 9" to a height of 59.7'. Per Section 14-10-4-F, such architectural projections are permitted to extend above the height limit of the underlying zone district by not more than 25% nor more than 15 feet. Based on this formula, 60 feet is the maximum height for architectural features within the PA -2 zone district. • The height of the tower at the west end of the building was reduced by approximately 13'6"-, • An increase in depth of architectural relief from two feet (2') to between six feet (6') to ten feet (10'); Town of Vail Page 6 • The use of four (4) building material and color palettes to break up the visual mass, scale, and bulk of the structure and create a rhythm of different building facades; • The addition of a shed roof porte-cochere; and • The applicant intends to pursue Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED) certification for the structure. Staff commends the applicant for their revisions, especially in attempting to address concerns regarding building height and the scale, mass, and bulk of the structure. Sheets R1 a and R1 b depict that the great majority of living area is below the 48 foot maximum allowed by the underlying PA -2 zone district. The tallest parts of the structure are architectural projections that do not have habitable floor area (GRFA). The use of building material and color palettes significantly addresses staff concerns with bulk, mass, and scale. Rather than one (1) relatively monolithic facade, the structure has been broken up into multiple facades, all of which are balanced to be unique individually, but complementary as a whole. The rhythrr of facade changes is maintained on all sides of the structure. As a result, the proposed building materials and color palettes are more characteristic of Vail's mountain resort character than previous proposals. Building Height Deviation: Based on the plan revisions that place a majority of habitable area below 48 feet in height, as seen through Sheets A401 through A409, Sections along the North Frontage Road, and Sheets R1 a through R8b, Historic Grade Diagrams, staff supports the requested building height deviation. 2. Setbacks: In order to maximize the availability of parking, the below grade parking facility extends to the property lines. Setback Deviation: Staff supports the requested zero foot (0') setbacks as the encroachments are located below grade, but the portion of the building above grade respects the 20 foot minimum setbacks. 3. Site Coverage: The definition of site coverage includes any building area constructed at, below, or above grade. As the below grade parking facility extends to the property lines, as discussed in Item 2 — Setbacks above, the proposed site coverage is 95%. Town of Vail Page 7 Site Coverage Deviation: Staff supports the requested site coverage. The additional site coverage is driven largely by the additional below grade parking. The Vail 20/20 Strategic Action Plan identifies the need for additional parking options. Creative parking solutions are encouraged within the Town and the below grade facility meets this goal. 4. Employee Housing Units: Of the 113 rental dwelling units, 107 are proposed as deed -restricted Type III EHUs, as defined in Section 12-13-4, Vail Town Code. A Type III EHU deed - restriction requires the unit be rented to residents working at least thirty (30) hours per week in Eagle County. The remaining six (6) units, which are intended to be unrestricted rental dwelling units, are considered multiple -family dwellings, which are permitted in the PA -2 zoning district, provided that LSLUs, accommodation units, and/or fractional fee units are equal to or greater than 70% of the total GRFA on the site and the dwelling units are operated under a single management and provided with customary lodge services and facilities. In order to fulfill all of the above criteria to allow multi -family dwelling units as part of the proposal, the six (6) proposed dwelling units will require deed language, or another regulatory tool, to the effect that said units, although located within the EHU section of the structure, will have the right to use the services and facilities with the limited service lodge. 5. Parking & Loading: The parking spaces, shuttle parking, and loading berths are as follows: • 338 single -loaded standard parking spaces; • Eight (8) Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) accessible parking spaces; • 14 tandem parking spaces; • Four (4) shuttle parking spaces; • A dedicated hotel loading area; and • A dedicated EHU loading area. Updated parking plans (Sheets LL -1 and LL -2) depict significant changes, including a reconfiguration of the parking facility from one-way angled parking to two-way ninety degree (900) parking. Most notably, the change allowed for a decrease in proposed tandem parking spaces and an overall increase in the number of parking spaces. The table below depicts the specific changes associated with the updated parking plans: Town of Vail Page 8 October 4, 2016 Plans November 28, 2016 Plans Lower Level Single 98 172 Tandem 1 82 14 Upper Level Single 83 152 Tandem 34 0 Ram Single 24 22 ADA Accessible Singlel 8 8 Total 1 329 360 The application of the 7.5% credit for multiple use parking facilities established in Section 12-10-12, Vail Town Code, would result in a reduction of parking demand from 360 parking spaces to 320 parking spaces. If the reduction is allowed, there would be forty (40) surplus parking spaces available for lease by the general public. A conditional use permit is required for "public or commercial parking facilities or structures." The criteria for a conditional use permit are discussed in Section IX of this memo. While staff has previously expressed concerns that the proposal is not a true multiple use project as LSLUs and EHUs do not have different peak parking periods, Section 12-10-12, Vail Town Code, does not regulate the use of the credit by shared or unshared peak parking hours. LSLUs and EHUs are listed as separate and distinct uses in Section 12-7J-2, Permitted Uses, Vail Town Code and as such qualify for the 7.5% credit. The number of parking spaces between hotel guests, EHU residents, multiple - family dwelling units, and the general public is as follows: There are four (4) ADA accessible parking spaces closest to the LSLU elevator and four (4) ADA parking spaces closest to the EHU elevator. Town of Vail Page 9 LSLU EHU/ Multi -Family DU Parking Club Lower Level Single 0 154 18 Tandem 0 14 0 Upper Level Single 110 42 0 Tandem 0 0 0 Ramp Single 0 0 22 Tandem 0 0 0 Totals 110 210 40 There are four (4) ADA accessible parking spaces closest to the LSLU elevator and four (4) ADA parking spaces closest to the EHU elevator. Town of Vail Page 9 As proposed, with the 7.5% reduction, the updated parking demand is as follows: Loading Berth Clearance Deviation: Staff supports the requested deviation to the minimum 14 foot loading berth height based on the availability of a temporary loading area in the drive aisle with a sufficient width of 26 feet that allows for a delivery truck greater than ten feet (10') in height without impeding other vehicles. 6. Access & Vehicular Circulation: The revised site plan depicts several changes to site access and vehicular circulation. These changes include a second full access driveway just west of the hotel entry. This access point provides a separation between vehicles entering or exiting the garage at the west end of the drive aisle and vehicles using the eastern portion of the drive aisle for temporary loading, resident pick- up/drop-off, and guest check-in. At the hotel entrance, the drive aisle has been widened from 20 feet to 26 feet to allow for temporary parking and loading during guest check-in. In compliance with the Fire Department's fire staging requirement, Sheet A010 — Proposed Site Plan depicts a 20' x 40' dedicated fire staging area at the east end of the drive aisle. The Fire Department will require direct access from the fire staging area to the building's fire command center. 7. Retaining Walls: The retaining walls located behind the building have been revised to allow for wider planting areas for trees and shrubs. In order to ensure that no easements would be required from adjacent properties for the construction of the retaining walls, staff requested, and received, stamped preliminary engineering plans for the retaining walls. Retaining Wall Height Deviation: Staff supports the requested deviation to the maximum six foot (6') retaining wall height as there are several projects in the surrounding area with similar topographical conditions that required retaining walls in excess of six feet (6') in height. Town of Vail Page 10 Minimum Required by Code Nov. 28, 2016 Plans LSLU 0.7 spaces per unit (9 space deduction) = 110 110 EHU 2.0 spaces per unit (16 space deduction) = 198 210 DUs 2.0 spaces per unit (0 space deduction) = 12 Identified w/ EHUs Total 320 360 Loading Berth Clearance Deviation: Staff supports the requested deviation to the minimum 14 foot loading berth height based on the availability of a temporary loading area in the drive aisle with a sufficient width of 26 feet that allows for a delivery truck greater than ten feet (10') in height without impeding other vehicles. 6. Access & Vehicular Circulation: The revised site plan depicts several changes to site access and vehicular circulation. These changes include a second full access driveway just west of the hotel entry. This access point provides a separation between vehicles entering or exiting the garage at the west end of the drive aisle and vehicles using the eastern portion of the drive aisle for temporary loading, resident pick- up/drop-off, and guest check-in. At the hotel entrance, the drive aisle has been widened from 20 feet to 26 feet to allow for temporary parking and loading during guest check-in. In compliance with the Fire Department's fire staging requirement, Sheet A010 — Proposed Site Plan depicts a 20' x 40' dedicated fire staging area at the east end of the drive aisle. The Fire Department will require direct access from the fire staging area to the building's fire command center. 7. Retaining Walls: The retaining walls located behind the building have been revised to allow for wider planting areas for trees and shrubs. In order to ensure that no easements would be required from adjacent properties for the construction of the retaining walls, staff requested, and received, stamped preliminary engineering plans for the retaining walls. Retaining Wall Height Deviation: Staff supports the requested deviation to the maximum six foot (6') retaining wall height as there are several projects in the surrounding area with similar topographical conditions that required retaining walls in excess of six feet (6') in height. Town of Vail Page 10 Retaining Wall Location Deviation: As the applicant has not indicated any hardship that would prevent the retaining walls from being constructed the minimum two feet (2') from adjacent property lines, staff does not support the requested deviation. 8. Landscaping: Along the property frontage, the proposed landscaping includes shade trees between the sidewalk and front drive aisle and foundation plantings between the drive aisle and structure. Toward the rear of the building, the landscape plan transitions to native vegetation and grasses as the slope connects to Meadow Ridge Road. Trees and other plantings are depicted in the terraced areas of the retaining walls. The applicant is working with the Colorado Department of Transportation (CDOT) to secure permits for planting the proposed trees in the North Frontage Road right-of-way. The applicant has indicated that it will be possible to plant the trees in the right-of-way and avoid the existing sewer line. Sheet L1.1 was updated to identify the existing trees that the applicant will try to preserve. However, the applicant has indicated preservation may not be possible. It shall be presumed that the trees will be removed. All other existing trees will be removed. Per the request of staff and the PEC, Sheet L1.1 and 1-1.2 now include a full plant schedule, including the specific species of evergreen and shade trees proposed. Also per the request of staff, Sheet L1.1 depicts the incorporation of Saskatoon serviceberry, tall western sage, and Shubert chokecherry into this area of the site. Gregg Barrie, Senior Landscape Architect with the Town of Vail, is generally receptive of the proposed landscape plan. Mr. Barrie's comments include: Due to the site's elevation exceeding 7,500 feet, consider replacing the White Spruce with Blue Spruce and finding a suitable replacement for the Red Barron Crabapple; and 2. Lanceleaf Cottonwoods require more than six feet (6') of planting area width and may eventually lead to buckling of the sidewalk. A BioBarrier system along the north edge of the sidewalk may help protect the sidewalk from the root system. Also, the applicant has attempted to address the provision of additional landscaping and open space through the green roof, though it does not meet the Town of Vail Page 11 definition of landscaping or open space. The outdoor space and plantings on the roof provide guests and residents an opportunity for fresh air and recreation. 9. Pedestrian & Transit: At the request of Public Works, Sheet A010 — Proposed Site Plan shows that the sidewalk has been adjusted to provide opportunities for snow storage from Town plowing operations. Sheet A010 —Proposed Site Plan also depicts sidewalk connections from the main sidewalk to crosswalks at the building's two (2) entrances. Due to the addition of the second access point, the bus stop has been relocated from the center of the site to the west end of the site. Similar to the previously approved project for the site, the applicant proposes a bus stop enclosure that will be designed to meet any public art requirement. A shuttle system for guests and residents is also proposed that will help alleviate demand on the bus system. 10. Mechanical Equipment: In response to PEC and neighbor concerns, the garage venting has been relocated from the west side of the building to the north side of the building (below the elevation of the existing roadway) and the southeast corner of the building. There is no HVAC equipment proposed on the roof. Laundry and other mechanical equipment have been relocated to the lowest level of the structure. 11. Lot Configuration: The applicant will plat the property as a single parcel. No condominium plat is proposed. Several easements will be vacated and several utility easements will need to be relocated. All easements will be vacated or established on the plat or by separate legal instrument. 12. Rooftop: The applicant is proposing a change from a simple green roof to an amenity complete with seating areas, swimming pool, and hot tubs for hotel guests and a grade -separated rooftop area for EHU residents with seating areas and hot tubs. 13. Sun -Shade Analysis: The applicant has provided an updated sun -shade analysis, Sheets R5 and R6, which depict the shadow caused by the building on an hourly basis on the winter solstice and the spring and fall equinoxes. The sun -shade analysis indicates some shadow on Meadow Ridge Road until 1:00 PM on the winter solstice and until 11:00 AM on the spring equinox. 14. Exterior Lighting: The applicant has provided a lighting plan featuring dark sky compliant bollards. There are no other outdoor light fixtures proposed on the site. Town of Vail Page 12 15. Signage: There is no specific signage included with this application. Signage, including signage for the parking facility, will be reviewed under a separate permit subsequent to approval of zoning and design review of the structure. 16. Water Service: While approval from the Eagle River Water and Sanitation District (ERWSD) is not specifically required by the SDD application, the ERWSD has informed staff of their concern of the increased density on their ability to adequately service the site. Given the existing water and sewer service lines and infrastructure, the ERWSD encourages the applicant to submit plans sufficient to allow a water rights and capacity analysis. VIII. SPECIAL DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT DESIGN CRITERIA Before acting on an SDD application, the Planning and Environmental Commission and Town Council shall consider the following factors with respect to the proposed SDD: 1. Compatibility: Design compatibility and sensitivity to the immediate environment, neighborhood and adjacent properties relative to architectural design, scale, bulk, building height, buffer zones, identity, character, visual integrity and orientation. Each series of revisions have brought the proposal more in line with the character of the neighborhood and Vail in general. The mass, scale, and bulk of the structure is larger than that of the surrounding structures; however, the newly proposed architectural treatments such as a variety of roof forms and increased horizontal and vertical articulation serve to visually break up the mass, bulk, and scale of the building. The proposed building material and color palettes are consistent with the identity and character of Vail as a mountain community. As a result, the structure now appears as an assemblage of buildings, often seen throughout the Town. Staff finds that the changes to the building elevations and materials are a significant improvement from the previous plan. The subject property is located on a development site in the PA -2 zone district, which allows for a maximum 48 foot building height, but it is surrounded by residential zone districts where 33 feet is the maximum building height. Therefore, based upon the zoning of the subject property, there is to be a difference in building height between the subject property and surrounding area. Many of the Town's taller buildings are located along the frontage road as they buffer surrounding area from the noise and aesthetics of the highway. Though the proposed building height is greater than those in the surrounding area, the applicant has demonstrated that the majority of habitable area is consistent with the underlying zone district. Town of Vail Page 13 The shape of the subject property leaves little room for a buffer zone between the structure and adjacent properties. Therefore staff encourages the use of high quality landscape materials suitable to the environment and root space available. Staff finds the proposal meets this criterion. 2. Relationship: Uses, activity and density which provide a compatible, efficient and workable relationship with surrounding uses and activity. The PA -2 zone district is intended to provide sites for lodges, LSLUs, and residential accommodations outside of the periphery of the Vail Village and Lionshead commercial core areas. The proposed LSLUs, EHUs, and commercial parking facility are either permitted by right or conditional uses within the underlying PA -2 zone district. Per Town Code, up to 150 square feet of GRFA may be permitted for each 100 square feet of buildable site area, though final determination of allowable GRFA shall be made by the PEC. The total density allowed by the underlying PA -2 zone district is not to exceed 25 dwelling units per acre of buildable site area, although LSLUs and EHUs do not count toward density within the PA -2 zone district. This is due to the fact that the PA -2 zone district is specifically intended to accommodate higher densities that contribute to a critical mass where a population is able to access transit and services. This site is situated to take advantage of commercial services located in the nearby West Vail Mall commercial area, offering a variety of services from groceries to restaurants and drying cleaning that are typically used by residents. There is a strong relationship between the establishment of the uses located in the Commercial Core 3 (CC3) zone of the West Vail area and the original intent of the subject site being zoned PA -2 so that the commercial services could be easily accessed. The site also offers immediate access to the North Frontage Road bicycle and pedestrian trail to allow residents and guests the opportunity to move about Vail without a vehicle, which is a public benefit. The new 1-70 underpass is less than a mile away from the proposed project and, upon completion in 2017, will facilitate direct bicycle and pedestrian access to Lionshead and Vail Villages, which is another benefit of allowing additional density at this location. As the site is immediately adjacent to the 1-70 corridor, the site is also ideally located as a place to transition residential density from higher density to lower as you move further from the 1-70 corridor. Higher density projects are typically located adjacent to higher -volume roadways to help provide a visual and noise buffer for lower density properties located further from those roadways. The proposed project is primarily residential in nature, similar to surrounding uses which are also residential. The residential properties adjacent to the site range from low density single family homes and duplexes in the Grand Traverse SDD north of the subject property to as much as 29 dwelling units per acre in the Town of Vail Page 14 Buffehr Creek Condos adjacent to the west side of the subject property. As a result of the proposed residential use, there should be less land use conflict from what could otherwise be impacted by traffic, noise and light that would result from more intense uses. Staff finds that the proposal meets this criterion. 3. Parking and Loading: Compliance with parking and loading requirements as outlined in chapter 10 of this title. The parking dimensions and number of parking spaces provided comply with Vail Town Code. Parking provides a critical function in Vail and opportunities to increase the number of parking spaces available should be regarded favorably. As the applicant is proposing parking in excess of the minimum requirements, public parking with direct access to transit will be made available, taking some pressure off the frontage road parking, which is a public benefit. While the height of the loading berths within the garage facility does not meet code, there is an opportunity for temporary loading within the area of the drive aisle that is 26 feet wide, thereby meeting the intent of the code. Staff finds the proposal meets this criterion. 4. Comprehensive Plan: Conformity with applicable elements of the Vail comprehensive plan, town policies and urban design plans. Staff has reviewed the Vail Comprehensive Plan and found the following documents and associated goals, objectives, statements applicable to this proposal: Vail Land Use Plan (in part) 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. 1.12 Vail should accommodate most of the additional growth in existing developed areas (infill areas). 3.1 The hotel bed base should be preserved and used more efficiently. 3.3 Hotels are important to the continued success of the Town of Vail, therefore conversion to condominiums should be discouraged. Town of Vail Page 15 3.4 Commercial growth should be concentrated in existing commercial areas to accommodate both local and visitor needs. 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. 5.3 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. Vail 20/20 Strategic Action Plan (in part) Land Use and Development.- Goal evelopment: Goal #4: Provide for enough deed -restricted housing for at least 30 percent of the workforce through policies, regulations and public initiated development. Housing-- Goal- ousing: Goal: The Town of Vail recognizes the need for housing as infrastructure that promotes community, reduces transit needs and keeps more employees living in the town, and will provide for enough deed -restricted housing for at least 30 percent of the workforce through policies, regulations and publicly initiated development. Actions / Strategies: Research parking requirements for employee housing and consider reducing requirements for employee housing developments. • Expand the number of employee beds in the Town of Vail. o Consider increasing incentives in performance zoning for property owners who build EHUs. Town of Vail Page 16 Vail Economic Development Strategic Plan (in part) Policies.- Goal olicies: Goal #4: Provide support for a quality workforce delivering world-class service to positively impact Vail's economy. Objective 4.1: Work with the business community, Eagle County and other municipalities to address future workforce housing needs. Objective 4.3: Work with the business community and Eagle County to address parking and transportation issues for workers and guests. Chapter Vll. Evaluation and Analysis, Weaknesses.- Inefficient eaknesses: Inefficient Facilities: Older lodging accommodations Vail Housing 2027 (in part) Mission.- We ission: We create, provide, and retain high quality, affordable, and diverse housing opportunities for Vail residents to support a sustainable year round economy and build a vibrant, inclusive and resilient community. We do this through acquiring deed restrictions on homes so that our residents have a place to live in Vail. Policy Statement.- We tatement: We acknowledge that the acquisition of deed restrictions on homes for Vail residents is critical to maintaining community. Therefore, we ensure an adequate supply and availability of homes for residents and recognize housing as infrastructure in the Town of Vail; a community support system not unlike roads, bridges, water and sewer systems, fire, police, and other services of the municipal government. Ten Year Goal: The Town of Vail will acquire 1,000 additional resident housing unit deed restrictions by the year 2027. These new deed restrictions will be acquired for both existing homes as well as for homes that are newly constructed by both the Town of Vail and private sector developers. LSLUs provide an important link in Vail's lodging industry by offering short term accommodations in the mid -price range that is more attainable to the middle Town of Vail Page 17 class demographic. There are limited locations within Vail where this accommodation type may be located and the subject site was specifically zoned PA -2 to accommodate this type of use. Close proximity to the services available in West Vail was a key consideration of the zoning of this site since it allows easy access to those businesses by residents and guests. The proposed development of EHUs realizes several community goals, especially the Vail Housing 2027 Ten Year Goal of acquiring 1,000 deed restrictions. It is important to note that the requirements of inclusionary zoning and commercial linkage are not enough to close the gap in the employee housing deficit in Vail. The proposal to add 107 Type III deed -restricted EHUs will make a significant contribution toward the goals of providing workforce housing in the town. The significance of providing local workforce housing is critical to reduce the number of employees driving to and parking in town as well as adding to the fabric of the resort community and adding to the critical mass that helps support the West Vail business community. By doing so, numerous policies of the Vail Economic Development Strategic Plan are realized, such as Goal Number 4, "Provide support for a quality workforce delivering world-class service to positively impact Vail's economy." The proposal specifically addresses Goals 1. 1, 1. 12, 3.3, 5.4, and 5.5 in the Vail Land Use Plan in that they speak to the importance of infill redevelopment and meeting visitor and employee lodging and housing demands. The proposal also speaks to the Vail 20/20 Strategic Action Plan's statement that the Town recognizes the need for housing as infrastructure that promotes community, reduces transit needs and keeps more employees living in the town. The proposal is representative of a rare infill -development opportunity in Vail that will accommodate two critical uses in high demand that would otherwise be relegated to a location outside the town boundary. The infill site provides a public benefit by allowing these high demand uses in a location within Vail that would minimize car -dependency and contribute economically to businesses in the West Vail commercial district. Staff finds that the proposal meets this criterion. 5. Natural and/or Geologic Hazard: Identification and mitigation of natural and/or geologic hazards that affect the property on which the special development district is proposed. The northeast portion of the site is located in a steep slope zone. The applicant has provided a subsurface conditions report, geotechnical report, and bedrock evaluation letter for review by the Public Works Department. Staff finds that the proposal meets this criterion. Town of Vail Page 18 6. Design Features: Site plan, building design and location and open space provisions designed to produce a functional development responsive and sensitive to natural features, vegetation and overall aesthetic quality of the community. The revisions to the architectural design contribute positively to the overall aesthetic quality of the community. While open space is minimal, the applicant has attempted to provide creative solutions such as the green roof amenity to help address this issue. The applicant has provided a high quality design in regards to the site plan and building appearance and has attempted to balance elements such as open space and landscaping with other important community goals that would help improve the overall quality of the community. LEED certification also helps mitigate some of the impact on the natural features and landscaping on site. Also, LEED certification of such a structure is a public benefit in that it raises the bar for future construction in the Town. Staff finds the proposal meets this criterion. 7. Traffic: A circulation system designed for both vehicles and pedestrians addressing on and off site traffic circulation. Staff finds that the addition of a second access point will help separate vehicles using the garage from those vehicles associated with hotel check-in, EHU pick- up/drop-off, and other assorted deliveries. The expansion of the drive aisle to 26 feet in width near the hotel entrance will help ensure vehicles can circulate along the drive aisle without being blocked by guests checking into the hotel. The sidewalk connections and crosswalks will help mitigate vehicle -pedestrian conflicts. For improved vehicular circulation, the applicant could provide EHU access via Meadow Ridge Road, but is providing access via the North Frontage Road to minimize the impact to the residences on Meadow Ridge Road. The Traffic Impact Study anticipates a maximum of 238 Saturday peak hour trips, 178 morning peak hour trips, and 207 evening peak hour trips, including all modes of travel. The Traffic Impact study also anticipates an even 50/50 split between trips traveling from the east and west on the North Frontage Road under short-term conditions. Staff finds the proposal meets this criterion. Town of Vail Page 19 8. Landscaping: Functional and aesthetic landscaping and open space in order to optimize and preserve natural features, recreation, views and function. The applicant has attempted to provide creative landscaping solutions by landscaping the retaining wall terraces and planting trees along North Frontage Road. As indicated in Item 6, the applicant has attempted to provide a creative solution to the lack of open space by providing a green roof area with amenities available to both hotel guests and EHU residents. Staff finds the proposal meets this criterion. 9. Workable Plan: Phasing plan or subdivision plan that will maintain a workable, functional and efficient relationship throughout the development of the special development district. The proposal is intended to be constructed in one phase. Staging for any construction related activity will be reviewed by staff to ensure impacts to public rights-of-way and adjacent properties are minimized. It is anticipated that the use of the North Frontage Road West right-of-way will be necessary. This right-of- way is controlled by the Colorado Department of Transportation (CDOT) and will require all appropriate review and permits from CDOT prior to the start of construction. Staff finds the proposal meets this criterion. IX. CRITERIA FOR A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT A conditional use permit is requested for a commercial parking facility in this zone district. The following criteria are specific to the commercial parking facility: 1. Relationship and impact of the use on development objectives of the town. The Vail Land Use Plan identifies the need for parking and access that should be accommodated through creative solutions and a stated goal that surface parking should be reduced and provided underground where possible. The Vail Land Use Plan also expresses a goal that parking be improved and adequate parking should be provided to accommodate day skier growth. The addition of the commercial parking facility will reduce some of the demand for parking within the town parking structures or along the North Frontage Road. Staff finds the proposal meets this criterion. Town of Vail Page 20 2. Effect of the use on light and air, distribution of population, transportation facilities, utilities, schools, parks and recreation facilities, and other public facilities and public facilities needs. As the commercial parking facility will be located below grade there should be minimal, if any, impact on light and air. The parking spaces will remove some demand from the town's parking facilities and may lesson the traffic on streets that serve and the demand for parking at parks and recreation facilities due to their frequent use as overflow skier parking. The proposal will have no impact on the distribution of population, utilities, schools and other public facilities and public facilities needs. The proximity to a bus stop will also lessen the demand for parking in the Town's garages and remove more vehicles from congested roads. Staff finds the proposal meets this criterion. 3. Effect upon traffic, with particular reference to congestion, automotive and pedestrian safety and convenience, traffic flow and control, access, maneuverability, and removal of snow from the streets and parking areas The proposed commercial parking facility will result in increased traffic along the North Frontage Road, but the applicant has submitted a Transportation Impact Study that demonstrates the impact from the commercial parking facility portion of the project will be minimal. The Traffic Impact Study was completed when the applicant anticipated 100 surplus parking spaces. While the specific number of trips generated is no longer valid, the overall percent of total trips generated by the surplus parking spaces accounted for 21 % of Saturday peak hour trips, 20% of morning peak hour trips, and 23% of evening peak hour trips. As the commercial parking facility is located below grade, the proposed facility will not impact the removal of snow from the streets and parking area. Staff finds the proposal meets this criterion. 4. Effect upon the character of the area in which the proposed use is to be located, including the scale and bulk of the proposed use in relation to surrounding uses. As the proposed commercial parking facility will be incorporated into the new structure and located below grade the scale and bulk of the facility will have no impact on the character of the area or its surrounding uses. Staff finds the proposal meets this criterion. Town of Vail Page 21 5. Such other factors and criteria as the commission deems applicable to the proposed use. 6. The environmental impact report concerning the proposed use, if an environmental impact report is required by chapter 12 of this title. An environmental impact report was not required for the proposed commercial parking facility. X. STAFF RECOMMENDATION SDDs are an opportunity to allow flexibility in design to a property owner while advancing the goals and objectives of the Town comprehensive plan. Balancing the impact of the development on the surrounding area with benefits to the broader community through the achievement of said goals and objectives is an extremely difficult task. Based on the most recent revisions, staff finds that the proposal has successfully balanced these oftentimes competing interests and that the public benefit outweighs the deviations. Based upon the review of the criteria outlined in Section VIII and Section IX of this memorandum and the evidence and testimony presented, the Community Development Department recommends the Planning and Environmental Commission forwards a recommendation of approval, with conditions, to the Town Council for the applicant's request to establish Special Development District No. 41, Marriott Residence Inn and associated conditional use permit for a commercial parking facility. A separate motion is required for the request to establish the SDD and to grant a conditional use permit for a commercial parking facility. Motion for Approval — Special Development District: Should the Planning and Environmental Commission choose to forward a recommendation of approval, with conditions, to the Vail Town Council for the establishment of Special Development District No. 41, Marriott Residence Inn, the Community Development Department recommends the Commission passes the following motion: "The Planning and Environmental Commission forwards the Vail Town Council a recommendation of approval for an application to establish Special Development District No. 41, Marriott Residence Inn, pursuant to Section 12-9(A), Vail Town Code, to allow for the development of a limited service lodge and deed restricted employee housing units, located at 1783 North Frontage Road West/Lots 9-12, Buffehr Creek Resubdivision, and setting forth details in regard thereto." Should the Planning and Environmental Commission choose to forward a recommendation of approval, with conditions, to the Vail Town Council for the Town of Vail Page 22 establishment of Special Development District No. 41, Marriott Residence Inn, the Community Development Department recommends the following conditions: Approval of Special Development District No. 41, Marriott Residence Inn, is contingent upon the applicant obtaining Town of Vail approval of an associated design review application,- 2. pplication, 2. The applicant shall obtain Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED) certification for the structure within one (1) year of issuance of the first Certificate of Occupancy. Failure to obtain the certification within the identified time -frame will necessitate a return to the Planning and Environmental Commission and/or Town Council for an evaluation of a suitable, replacement public benefit; 3. Prior to submitting any building permit application, the applicant shall identify the six (6) unrestricted, rental dwelling units and provide documentation that the units shall have the right -of -use to the lodge's service and facilities under the same rules and regulations as the lodge guests.,- 4. uests., 4. Prior to submitting any building permit application, the applicant shall submit revised plans relocating the proposed retaining walls at least two feet (2) from adjacent property lines,- 5. ines, 5. Should the Colorado Department of Transportation (CDOT) not approve the proposed landscaping in the North Frontage Road right-of-way, the applicant shall submit a revised landscape plan, for review and approval, prior to submitting any building permit application, subject to Design Review; 6. Prior to submitting any building permit application, the applicant shall submit revised plans that clearly illustrate signage and striping of the fire staging area, 7. Prior to submitting any building permit application, the applicant shall submit revised plans that illustrate the continuation of the proposed sidewalk to the intersection with Buffehr Creek Road; 8. Prior to submitting any building permit application, the applicant shall submit approval from CDOT related to all proposed work within the CDOT right -of way; 9. The applicant shall mitigate system wide pedestrian and traffic impacts through the payment of a Transportation Impact Fee that shall not be offset by the project level improvements. This payment shall be made prior to requesting any Certificate of Occupancy for the project. The fee shall be determined through the ongoing update and codification to the Impact Fee as approved by the Town Council. In the event that the updated fee is not Town of Vail Page 23 adopted by the Town Council prior to July 1, 2017, the applicant shall provide a payment, prior to requesting any Certificate of Occupancy, based upon net new PM Peak Hour vehicle trips generated by the development. The amount per trip shall be assessed at the established rate as of July 1, 2017; and 10. Prior to submitting any building permit application, the applicant shall provide roadway and snow storage easements for the portion of Meadow Ridge Road that encroaches onto the subject property in a format acceptable to the Town's Attorney. Should the Planning and Environmental Commission choose to forward a recommendation of approval, with conditions, to the Vail Town Council for the establishment of Special Development District No. 41, Marriott Residence Inn, the Community Development Department recommends the Commission makes the following findings: 'Based upon the review of the criteria outlined in Section Vlll of the Staff memorandum to the Planning and Environmental Commission dated November 287 2016, and the evidence and testimony presented, the Planning and Environmental Commission finds.- The inds: The SDD complies with the standards listed in Section Vlll of this memorandum, or the applicant has demonstrated that one or more of the standards is not applicable,- 2. pplicable, 2. The SDD is consistent with the adopted goals, objectives and policies outlined in the Vail comprehensive plan and compatible with the development objectives of the town,- 3. own, 3. The SDD is compatible with and suitable to adjacent uses and appropriate for the surrounding areas, and 4. The SDD promotes the health, safety, morals, and general welfare of the town and promotes the coordinated and harmonious development of the town in a manner that conserves and enhances its natural environment and its established character as a resort and residential community of the highest quality. Motion for Approval — Commercial Parkinq Facility Conditional Use Permit Should the Planning and Environmental Commission choose to approve, with one condition, the request for a conditional use permit for a commercial parking facility, the Community Development Department recommends the Commission passes the following motion: Town of Vail Page 24 "The Planning and Environmental approves this request for a conditional use permit, pursuant to Section 12-7J-3, Conditional Uses, Vail Town Code, to allow for a commercial parking facility, located at 1783 North Frontage Road West/Lots 9-12, Buffehr Creek Resubdivision, and setting forth details in regard thereto." Should the Planning and Environmental Commission choose to approve, with one condition, the request for a conditional use permit for a commercial parking facility, the Community Development Department recommends the Commission recommends the following condition: "The conditional use permit for a commercial parking facility shall lapse and become void if a building permit is not obtained and diligently pursued toward completion or the approved use has not commenced within two (2) years from the date of approval. Any conditional use which is discontinued for a period of two (2) years, regardless of any intent to resume operation, shall not be resumed thereafter; any future use of the site or structures thereon shall conform to the provisions of Title 12, Vail Town Code." Should the Planning and Environmental Commission choose to approve, with one condition, the request for a conditional use permit for a commercial parking facility, the Community Development Department recommends the Commission makes the following findings: "Based upon the review of the criteria outlined in Section IX of the Staff memorandum to the Planning and Environmental Commission dated November 287 2016, and the evidence and testimony presented, the Planning and Environmental Commission finds.- 1. inds: 1. The proposed location of the use is in accordance with the purposes of this title and the purposes of the Public Accommodation -2 (PA -2) zone district; 2. The proposed location of the use and the conditions under which it would be operated or maintained will not be detrimental to the public health, safety, and welfare, or materially injurious to the properties or improvements in the vicinity; and 3. The proposed use complies with each of the applicable provisions of this title. " XI. ATTACHMENTS A. Vicinity Map B. Project Narrative, dated November 2, 2016 Town of Vail Page 25 C. Transportation Impact Study, prepared by McDowell Engineering LLC and dated August 5, 2016 D. Plan Set, dated November 28, 2016 E. Summary of Changes to Previously Submitted Plans, dated November 2, 2016 F. Public Comments received by November 23, 2016 G. Relevant Planning Documents H. Draft Conditional Use Permit I. Information about Lion's Ridge parking Town of Vail Page 26 tp MARRIOTT RESIDENCE INN CREATION OF A NEW SPECIAL DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT APARTMENTS +HOTEL To allow for the construction of a limited service lodge and rental apartments Submitted to the Town of Vail: August 15, 2016 Revised August 31, 2016 Revised November 2, 2016 - WRICHT HEEREMA I ARCHITECTS Zei Mouriello Planning Group the harp group I. Consultant Directory Owner and Applicant Peter Dumon, President The Harp Group 601 Oakmont Lane, Suite 420 Westmont, IL 60559 pgdumon@theharpgroup.com 630-366-2010 Planning and Entitlements Dominic Mauriello, Principal Mauriello Planning Group PO Box 4777 Eagle, CO 81631 dominic@mpgvail.com 970-376-3318 Architecture Richard Fawell Wright Heerema Architects 140 S. Dearborn St. Chicago, IL 60603 312.913.1010 Landscape Architecture Jamie McCluskie MacDesign PO Box 6446 Avon, CO 81620 970.977.0016 Civil Engineering Gary Brooks Alpine Engineering 34510 US 6 No. 9 Edwards, CO 81632 970.926.3373 Traffic Engineering Kari J. McDowell Schroeder, PE, PTOE McDowell Engineering PO. Box 4259 Eagle, CO 81631 I<ari@mcdowelleng.com 970.623.0788 Fire Protection Deborah Shaner Shaner Life Safety PO Box 1073 Frisco, CO 80443 shanerls@comcast.net 970.409.9082 2 II. Introduction The applicant, The Harp Group, represented by Mauriello Planning Group, is requesting the establishment of a new Special Development District, to allow for a Marriott Residence Inn and rental housing project, located at 1783 N. Frontage Road West / Lots 9-12, Buffehr Creek Subdivision. This submittal has been revised and updated following input from the community, town staff, the Planning and Environmental Commission, and the Design Review Board. Changes include a significant reduction in height, changes to the vehicular access and circulation, clarification of the deed restriction, modifications to the landscape plan and retaining walls, and other modifications. The Town of Vail has approved a Marriott Residence Inn at the site in various forms in the past. The most recent approval consisted of 176 limited service lodge units and 2 employee housing units. This approval has since lapsed because the applicant was encouraged to bring forward r a significant employee housing project. Thego applicant had intended to submit for building permit in March of this year. In 2016, the Town of Vail Housing Authority members approached the current ownersSig of the property, looking for opportunities. for employee housing to be incorporated into the project. As a result of these discussions and meetings with the Town of Vail staff, the current project was conceived, combining the Marriott Residence Inn and a substantial employee apartment project. As currently proposed, the project consists of 170 limited service lodge units and 113 rental units. Of the 113 rental units, 107 units will be deed -restricted as Type 3 Employee Housing Units. The remaining 6 units will be still be rental units and are NOT available for sale and they will not be condominiumized. The project is served by 360 parking spaces in an underground parking structure. A hotel shuttle program will also be provided to improve guest and resident access to the Town Core and Beaver Creek Resort. The project is generally a five story building, with the rental units on the eastern end of the property, and the limited service lodge units (LSLU) on the western portion of the property, with a flag of the Marriott Residence Inn. A smaller portion of the building is 6 stories placed against the hillside and away from the primary views of neighbors. The Marriott Residence Inn consists of 170 LSLU. A LSLU is generally a hotel room with kitchen facilities, or more specifically, it is defined by Chapter 12-2 of the Vail Town Code as follows: LODGE UNIT LIMITED SERVICE:Any room or group of rooms with "kitchen facilities", as defined herein, in a limited service lodge which are designed for temporary occupancy by visitors, guests, individuals, or families on a short term rental basis, and accessible from common corridors, walks, or balconies without passing through another accommodation unit, limited service lodge unit, fractional fee club unit or dwelling unit. A limited service lodge unit is not intended for permanent residency and shall not be q subdivided into an individual condominium unit, pursuant to title 13, "Subdivision Regulations", of this code. The hotel rooms range from _ 495 sq. ft. to 641 sq. ft., fora ••° °• •• total of approximately 91,000 sq. ft. of LSLU on-site. The Marriott Residence Inn will include a fitness center, hot K tub, and pool thus providing recreational amenities onsite.�� There is also a breakfast room. and a small meeting room/ overflow breakfast room. The business model for this type of units does not include a full-service restaurant. Marriott Residence Inn is known for the extended stay lodging category, which recognizes the need and are designed for longer stays with separate living, working, and sleeping areas, making it appealing for family leisure travelers as well as business travelers. There are over 700 locations and over 85,000 rooms of Marriott Residence Inns worldwide. They average an occupancy rate of 79.7% and are one of the more affordable upscale offerings of the Marriott portfolio. The project also includes 113 rental apartment units, with 107 units deed restricted as Type 3 EHUs, generally occupying the eastern half of the building. The developer was approached by the Vail Local Housing Authority members and members of town staff with the idea of encouraging private developers to work with both the Town of Vail and the Vail Local Housing Authority to construct employee housing on sites that may be appropriate for additional development. At the time of being approached The Harp Group was in the process of submitting building permit plans to the Town to construct the approved Marriott Residence Inn. The developer recognized the opportunity and the previously approved plans were modified to maximize the potential for rental employee housing. The 113 rental units (with 107 deed restricted units) will be the third largest employee housing development in the Town of Vail, behind only Middle Creek and Timber Ridge. The units are a mix of one -bedroom and two-bedroom units, ranging in size from 602 sq. ft. to 1,173 sq. ft., with a total of approximately 95,000 sq. ft. of rental units. The units include a full kitchen, dining area, living room, and washer/dryer, and each bedroom has its own bathroom. Amenities include a fitness room, theater, lounge area, outdoor courtyard, and great room for use of the residents, separate from the facilities offered to hotel guests. The project is served by an underground parking structure with 360 parking spaces. The project maximizes use of the site, with the two levels of underground parking occurring beyond the setbacks. This allows the project to have 14 tandem parking spaces and 346 single -loaded parking spaces. This meets the parking requirements of Chapter 10-12. The parking structure is served by two elevator towers, one serving the hotel uses, and the other serving the apartments. In the earlier submittal, the applicant was seeking a reduced parking requirement (one space for a one bedroom and two spaces for a two bedroom) but based on concerns of the PEC the applicant is now proposing parking that complies with codified standards. Excess parking will be available to public or area employers for lease, similar to the Town's program of selling seasonal passes for parking such as that in front of Safeway and the West Vail Mall. There are 40 excess spaces available for this leasing program. 4 The design of the project was inspired by the existing architecture of Vail, the predominant picturesque nature of Vail, and its immediate environment. The design of the building is predominantly five stories in height, with a smaller area of six stories, and nestled into the sloping landscape of the neighborhood so that from the South Frontage Road it appears to be stepping downhill. The roof has been designed as a green roof to fit into the landscape and provide visual relief for those looking down on the roof. The design of the facade has been broken down both horizontally and vertically stepping up and down as well as in and out with roof forms developed to give the impression that the building is not one structure but a series of smaller scaled building forms that have grown and been built more organically. The height of the building is broken down with steps in roof design, balconies, materials, along with shifts in the elevation as it ascends. This creates an identity and visual character that is not an imposing straight facade but a rich woven tapestry of movement along the facade. The proposed project has two site access points. The western access point is a full movement access, with two out -bound lanes and one in -bound lane. The access and drive are similar to the previously approved design. The structure is shared between both uses with the separation of parking for each use occurring within the structure. The eastern access is in -bound only and is used to access the front doors for both uses. Generally, the employee housing units will not use the eastern access, as they will access the parking structure via the western access. Arriving guests of the hotel can check in, valet their cars or self park without returning onto the Frontage Road. This allows the primary circulation for the uses to occur on-site. The site design provides for all required turn lanes, a transit stop, the continuation of the 10 ft. bike path which is now separated from the road when possible, then separated by a landscape area before the internal 20 ft. drive aisle occurs. There is additional landscape area between the drive aisle and the building. The project maintains the previously approved sidewalk connection from Meadow Ridge Road through the property along the western property line allowing for easy transit access to those in the neighborhood. There is an internal courtyard with outdoor planting area within the apartment building. Because the site is steep along the north and western property lines, there is a significant retaining wall needed. These walls, though taller than the 6 ft. allowed by the Town, are similar to those that were constructed at the new Lion's Ridge project. The retaining walls are screened from the view of the public by the apartment building itself, those only visually impacting the sites residents. 5 III. Zoning The project is proposed as a Special Development District (SDD), with the existing underlying zoning of Public Accommodation - 2 (PA -2). The PA -2 zone district purpose statement states (I 2-7J-1): The public accommodation -2 district is intended to provide sites for lodges, limited service lodges, and residential accommodations on a short term basis, for visitors and guests, together with such public and semipublic facilities and commercial/retail and related visitor oriented uses as may be appropriately located within the same zone district and compatible with adjacent land uses. This district is intended to provide for lodging sites located outside the periphery of the town's Vail Village and Lionshead commercial core areas. The public accommodation -2 district is intended to ensure adequate light, air, open space, and other amenities commensurate with lodge uses, and to maintain the desirable resort qualities of the zone district by establishing appropriate site development standards. Additional nonresidential uses are allowed as conditional uses which enhance the nature of Vail as a vacation community, and where permitted uses are intended to function compatibly with the high density lodging character of the zone district. The PA -2 zone district allows for the following permitted and conditional uses: 12-7J-2: PERMITTED USES: The following uses shall be permitted in the PA -2 district: Employee housing units, as further regulated by chapter 13 of this title. Limited service lodge, including accessory eating, drinking, or retail establishments located within the principal use and not occupying more than ten percent (10%) of the total gross residential floor area of the main structure or structures on the site, additional accessory dining areas may be located on an outdoor deck, porch, or terrace. Lodges, including accessory eating, drinking, or retail establishments located within the principal use and not occupying more than ten percent (10%) of the total gross residential floor area of the main structure or structures on the site; additional accessory dining areas may be located on an outdoor deck, porch, or terrace. 12-7J-3: CONDITIONAL USES: The following conditional uses shall be permitted in the PA -2 district, subject to issuance of a conditional use permit in accordance with the provisions of chapter 16 of this title: Bed and breakfasts, as further regulated by section 12-14-18 of this title. Fractional fee club units, as further regulated by subsection 12-16-7A8 of this title. Lodges, including accessory eating, drinking, or retail establishments located within the principal use and occupying between ten percent (10%) and fifteen percent (15%) of the total gross residential floor area of the buildings, grounds and facilities. Public or commercial parking facilities or structures. Public transportation terminals. Public utility and public service uses. Religious institutions. Theaters and convention facilities. SDDs allow for flexibility from the underlying zoning. The purpose of the SDD is provided as follows (I 2-9A- I): The purpose of the special development district is to encourage flexibility and creativity in the development of land in order to promote its most appropriate use; to improve the design character and quality of the new development with the town; to facilitate the adequate and economical provision of streets and utilities; to preserve the natural and scenic features of open space areas; and to further the overall goals of the community as stated in the Vail comprehensive plan. An approved development plan for a special development district, in conjunction with the property's underlying zone district, shall establish the requirements for guiding development and uses of property included in the special development district. Uses within an SDD are determined by the Planning and Environmental Commission and Town Council as part of the review of the development plan, but are limited to those listed as permitted, conditional and accessory uses of the underlying zone district. The uses included in the proposal include a limited service lodge and employee housing units. The following section provides a general overview of the development plan by providing a zoning analysis and summary of the project. Development standards that deviate from the underlying zoning have been high -lighted in yellow. For reference, a comparison of the previous approvals on the property have been provided. 7 IV. Development Standards Address/Legal Description: 1783 North Frontage Road / Lots 9-12, Buffehr Creek Sub Existing Zoning: PA -2 Proposed Zoning: SDD with underlying zoning of PA -2 Land Use Designation: Medium Density Residential Standard Table I: Analysis of Proposed Development Plan Allowed/Required Lot Area 10,000 sq. ft. min Density LSLU EHU G RFA LSLU DU EHU (EHUs do not count as GRFA) Building H Site Coverage 49 DU unlimited unlimited 129,896 sq. ft. 45 ft. for flat / 48 ft. for sloping 56,288 sq. ft. (65%) a mA Landscape Area 25,979 sq. ft. (30%) Softscape min of 20,783 sq. ft. Hardscape max of 5,196 sq. ft. / up to 20% of softscape Setbacks* Loading North 0 ft. - 20 ft. West 0 ft. - 20 ft. East 0 ft. - 20 ft. South 0 ft. - 20 ft. Proposed 86,597 sq. ft. / 1.98 acres 0 DU 170 LSLU 113 EHU 95,198 sq. ft. 91,198 sq. ft. 4,000 sq. ft. (95,784 sq. ft.) 58.4 ft. max 81,834 sq. ft. (94.5%) - underground 47,974 sq. ft. (55.4%) - above grade 26,726 sq. ft. 24,510 sq. ft. 2,216 sq. ft. 0 ft. (underground) 20 ft. 0 ft. (underground) 0 ft. (underground) Above grade 20 ft. setbacks maintained 2 berths 2 berths Employee Housing Housing for 13.72 employees+350 sq. ft. 107 EHUs inclu�sionary requirement Retaining Walls �:ay height 24 ft. (at road easement) *Variations to setbacks are permitted in the PA -2 zone district 8 Table 2: Analysis of Previous Approvals for Site Standard Allowed/2006 Approval 2012 Approval Required Lot Area 10,000 sq. ft. 86,597 sq. ft. 86,597 sq. ft. min Density 49 DU 28 du 1 0 du Limited Service Unlimited 101 LSLU 152 LSLU Lodge Units (LSLU) G RFA 129,896 sq. ft. 75,842 sq. ft. 75,031 sq. ft. Building Height 48 ft. 48 ft. 48 ft. Site Coverage 56,288 sq. ft. 44,376 sq. ft. 44,376 sq. ft. (51 %) (65%) (51%) Landscape Area 25,979 sq. ft. 38,698 sq. ft. 38,698 sq. ft. (44%) (30%) (44%) Setbacks* North 0 ft. - 20 ft. 20 ft. 20 ft. (above -grade) West 0 ft. - 20 ft. 15 ft. 20 ft. (above -grade) East 0 ft. - 20 ft. 20 ft. 20 ft. (above -grade) South 0 ft. - 20 ft. 20 ft. 20 ft. (above -grade) Parking 128 spaces 169 spaces 165 spaces Loading I berth I berth I berth Employee Housing for 3 Type III EHU I Type IV CL 2 - Housing 14.56 bedroom unit = 2.25 employees employees Type IV CL dorm unit = 4 employees Housing for 4.95 additional employees off-site 2013 Proposal 86,597 sq. ft. 0 du 176 LSLU 82,485 sq. ft. 48 ft. 44,376 sq. ft. (51 %) 38,698 sq. ft. (44%) i 20 ft. (above -grade) 20 ft. (above -grade) 20 ft. (above -grade) 20 ft. (above -grade) 165 spaces berth 2 Type IV CL dorm units = 8 employees. Housing for 6.56 additional employees off-site 9 V. Employee Housing Plan Section 12-23-8: Administration, of the Vail Town Code requires the submittal of an Employee Housing Plan for all projects subject to development review. This application is unique in that a significant portion of the project is employee housing. However, for the purposes of meeting the requirement of an Employee Housing Plan, it is provided below: A. Calculation Method: The calculation of employee generation, including credits if applicable, and the mitigation method by which the applicant proposes to meet the requirements of this chapter; Applicant Analysis: The existing Roost Lodge consists of 72 accommodation units and I dwelling unit. The proposed Marriott Residence Inn includes 170 limited service lodge units, for a total of 98 net new limited service lodge units (accommodation units and limited service lodge units are treated the same for employee generation rates). There are 6 free-market rental dwelling units proposed (not for -sale condos), which have an inclusionary zoning requirement. Table 3a: Commercial Linkage Calculation Use Calculation Total Employees Generated 98 net new limited service lodge units 0.7 employees per new unit 68.6 Mitigation Rate 20% Total Commercial Linkage Requirement 13.72 Table 3b: Inclusionary Zoning Calculation Use Credit for Existing DU Calculation Total EHU Sq. Ft. Required __ 6 dwelling units at 4,000 sq. ft. 500 sq. ft. 3,500 * 10% 350* I *equates to approximately I employee Therefore, the proposed project will need to provide employee housing for 14.72 employees. The entire requirement will be met on-site. The applicant is proposing a total of 107 employee housing units, far in excess of requirements. Table 4: Employees Housed Use Size (Typ) Number Formula from Table 23-2 Number of Employees Housed One -bedroom Units 600 sq. ft. 67 1.75 employees per unit 117.25 Two-bedroom Units 950 sq. ft. 40 2.25 employees per unit 90 Total Employees Housed 207.25 Requirement of Project 14.72 Use Size (Typ) Number Formula from Table 23-2 Number of Employees Housed Excess of Requirements 192.53 B. Plans: A dimensioned site plan and architectural floor plan that demonstrates compliance with section 12-23-3, "Size And Building Requirements", of this chapter; Applicant Analysis: A dimensioned site plan and architectural floor plan has been provided with this submittal. The employee housing units are provided as follows: C. Lot Size: The average lot size of the proposed EHUs and the average lot size of other dwelling units in the commercial development or redevelopment, if any, Applicant Analysis: This is not applicable to this application. D. Schedules:A time line for the provision of any off site EHUs; Applicant Analysis: This is not applicable to this application. E. Off Site Units: A proposal for the provision of any off site EHUs shall include a brief statement explaining the basis of the proposal, Applicant Analysis: This is no applicable to this application. F. Off f Site Conveyance Request: A request for an off site conveyance shall include a brief statement explaining the basis for the request, Applicant Analysis: This is not applicable to this application. G. Fees In Lieu: A proposal to pay fees in lieu shall include a brief statement explaining the basis of the proposal, and Applicant Analysis: This is not applicable to this application. H. Written Narrative: A written narrative explaining how the employee housing plan meets the purposes of this chapter and complies with the town's comprehensive plan. Applicant Analysis: Section 12-23-1: Purpose and Applicability, of the Vail Town Code provides the purpose of the Commercial Linkage Requirements: The purpose of this chapter is to ensure that new commercial development and redevelopment in the town provide for a reasonable amount of employee housing to mitigate the impact on employee housing caused by such commercial development and redevelopment. The mitigation rates were established by the Town of Vail Employee Housing Nexus study. These rates are based on a survey of various properties in mountain communities. The Town Vail Land Use Plan offers the following goals with regard to employee housing: 5.3 Affordable employee housing should be made available through private efforts, assisted by limited incentives, provided by the Town o f Vail, with appropriate restrictions. 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. In 2008, the Town of Vail established the Employee Housing Strategic Plan, which brought together all of the Town's goals on employee housing into a single plan. It provides the following: 12 In 2006, through the Vail 20/20 Focus on the Future process the community established a housing goal. It is as follows: "The Town of Vail recognizes the need for housing as infrastructure that promotes community, reduces transit needs and keeps more employees living in the town, and will provide enough deed -restricted housing for at least 30 percent of the workforce through policies, regulations and publicly initiated development." Based upon the community's work, the Vail Town Council has confirmed the Town of Vail recognizes deed restricted employee housing as basic infrastructure. This type of housing allows employees to live within the town, promoting community, and improving the quality of our local workforce, thereby supporting the local economy, and reducing regional transit needs. The Employee Housing Strategic Plan (EHSP) seeks to meet the expectations established by the community and confirmed by the Town Council and provide enough deed -restricted housing for at least 30 percent of the community's workforce to live in the Town of Vail through a variety of policies, regulations and publicly initiated development projects. The Employee Housing Strategic Plan then outlines the various objectives and policies for implementing the plan. It provides a list of Town Initiatives, one of which is specifically applicable to this project: Incentive Zoning and Density Bonuses The Town will consider workforce housing objectives in all review processes that permit discretion. This means that the Town will work actively with developers as a part of the Housing District, Special Development District review processes and requested changes in zoning to not only meet the requirements of existing code, but to look for opportunities to go beyond code requirements to encourage additional workforce housing to be created. As a part of these review processes the Town will work actively with developers to create incentives to develop housing that exceeds the minimal requirements contained in the code. Additional density may be granted in selected locations through the appropriate review processes, and fee waivers and subsidies may be considered. The Incentives Zoning and Density Bonuses help Vail to "catch up" with existing deficiencies and add to the overall percent of employees living within the Town o f Vail. As indicated in this submittal, the proposal complies with and furthers the purposes and goals of the Town's employee housing requirements and master plans. The project provides housing for 206 employees beyond the requirements. 13 A. Criteria for Review Section 12-9A-8: DESIGN CRITERIA AND NECESSARY FINDINGS,Vail Town Code, then provides the criteria for review of the establishment of a Special Development District. These criteria have been provided below, along with an analysis of how this proposal complies with these criteria: I. Compatibility. Design compatibility and sensitivity to the immediate environment, neighborhood and adjacent properties relative to architectural design, scale, bulk, building height, buffer zones, identity, character, visual integrity and orientation. Applicant Response: The design of the project was inspired by the existing architecture of Vail and the predominant picturesque nature of Vail and its immediate environment. The design of the building is predominantly five stories in height, with smaller areas of six stories, and nestled into the sloping landscape of the neighborhood so that from the Frontage Road it appears to be stepping downhill. The roof has been designed as a green roof to fit into the landscape. The building is nestled into the site and serves to block significant traffic noise and the view of the frontage road and 1-70. Because of its lower elevation and separation from adjacent condominium units, the views to the mountain are not blocked. With the changes to the plans, the height of the project has been reduced dramatically, as indicated in the following height diagram: 14 The design of the facade has been broken down both horizontally and vertically stepping up and down as well as in and out with roof forms developed to give the impression that the building is not one structure but a series of smaller scaled buildings that have grown and built more organically. The height of the building is broken down with steps in roof design, balconies, materials, along with shifts in the elevation as it ascends. This creates an identity and visual character that is not an imposing straight facade but a rich woven tapestry of movement along the facade. The entry to the employee housing units is more restrained but easy to access from the same entry drive, though it is likely that residents will access their units from the garage. 2. Relationship: Uses, activity and density which provide a compatible, efficient and workable relationship with surrounding uses and activity. Applicant Response: The site is surrounded by residential uses to the east, west and north, and 1-70 right-of-way to the south. Buffehr Creek Condominiums are located directly to the west. Hillside Condominiums and Mustang Condominiums are located directly to the north. The Grand Traverse neighborhood is located to the east, with Tract A (Open Space Parcel) directly adjacent to the property. Across 1-70 is Donovan Park, along with a single-family and duplex home. Is The character of the neighborhood should be viewed in the context of what is currently present on and around the subject site. The Roost Lodge has been in existence since the early 1970s and proven to be compatible with adjacent land uses. Considering the various multi- family buildings in the immediate vicinity of the previous Roost Lodge property, to the west and north, a structure which accommodates multiple -family and limited service lodge units is in keeping with the existing surrounding uses. The size of the proposed building is in direct proportion with the size of the development site, which encompasses approximately two acres. Considering the physical state of the previous Roost Lodge, the proposal will have a significant, positive effect on the character of the neighborhood because it will be a new, state of the art (metal and concrete structural system) aesthetically pleasing structure placed on a well landscaped site. 3. Parking And Loading: Compliance with parking and loading requirements as outlined in chapter 10 of this title. Applicant Response: The Marriott Residence Inn complies with the parking requirements of Chapter 12-10. The parking analysis is provided in the tables below: Table 5: Parking as Required by Chapter 12-10 Use Requirement Formula Parking Required Limited Service Lodge .7 spaces per unit .7 spaces * 170 units = 119 Units Dwelling Units If a dwelling unit's gross residential 2 spaces * 113 units = 226 floor area is more than 500 square feet, but less than 2,000 square feet: 2 spaces Total Requirement 345 With Multiple Use 301-400 spaces is 319.125 Parking Reduction 7.5% Total Parking Proposed 360 Tandem Spaces 14 Single Spaces 346 In excess of 40.875 requirements The applicant is proposing the excess spaces be available to the public, local employers, and tenants for either annual or monthly parking passes. Users of the parking can then utilize the hotel shuttle or the Town's transit system to access other areas of town. The applicant is proposing that a maximum of 40 spaces be available to the public for this use. Because the operator will have control over this use, if parking is ever problematic for either the hotel or the apartments, they can adjust this number to meet the demand. The applicant reserves the right to apply for right to lease additional parking spaces should the applicant be able to show there is a greater surplus of parking spaces available. 16 Loading for the project will primarily occur in the 20 ft. access in front of the building. There is adequate room for two loading areas. Because the hotel does not have a full service restaurant, there is a limited need for loading facilities. This is consistent with the three previous approvals for the hotel project. Table 6: Loading Analysis Use JMETLoadinZ R Wement LSLUs I loading berth for uses up to 75,000 square feet total floor area, plus I additional berth for each 25,000 square feet total floor area in excess of 75,000 square feet DUs I loading berth for uses up to 100,000 square feet gross residential floor area, plus I additional berth for each 50,000 square feet gross residential floor area in excess of 100,000 square feet Total Credit for Multiple Use Loading Requirement 2 3 Reduction from 3 to 2 berth Total Requirement 1 2 As proposed, the project complies with the Loading Requirements outlined in Chapter 12-10. There is a requirement that loading and delivery not occur within the front setback. However, due to the limited need for loading and delivery for the project, the applicant is requesting a deviation from this requirement. Due to the linear nature of the site and the large turning radii needed for large vehicles, it is least impactful to the site to utilize the 20 ft. wide driveway for this use. 4. Comprehensive Plan: Conformity with applicable elements of the Vail comprehensive plan, town policies and urban design plans. Applicant Response: According to the Official Land Use Plan for the Town of Vail, the development site has a land use designation of Medium Density Residential. Pursuant to the Vail Land Use Plan: The Medium Density Residential land use designation includes sites for housing which would typically be designed as attached units with common walls. Densities in this category would range from 3 to 14 dwelling units per buildable acre. Additional types of uses in this category would include private recreation facilities, private parking facilities and institutional/public uses such as churches, fire stations, and parks and open space facilities. The project also complies with the relevant elements of the Vail Comprehensive Plan including the following policies: I. I - 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. 17 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). 3.1 - The hotel bed base should be preserved and use more efficiently. 3.3 - Hotels are important to the continued success of the Town of Vail, therefore conversion to condominiums should be discouraged. 3.4 - Commercial growth should be concentrated in existing commercial areas to accommodate both local and visitor needs. S. I - Additional residential growth should continue to occur primarily in existing, platted areas and as appropriate in new areas where high hazards do not exist. 5.3 -Affordable employee housing should be made available through private efforts, assisted by limited incentives, provided by the Town o fVail, 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. The project is consistent with the Town's stated goal of increasing hotel beds and the provision of employee housing within the Town. The Town of Vail Community Survey of 2016 noted that when asked to list the top two priorities, the most frequently mentioned actions were: • Focus on housing for middle income and service worker households in vital support roles • Economic vitality • Budget and capital management • Actions to protect and enhance Gore Creek • Environmental sustainability Respondents identified housing as their top priority among all of the community issues and also allocated the most funding towards it in a monetary exercise designed to determine top financial priorities. Housing emerged prominently from the open-ended comments as well, many respondents are concerned about the issue and feel it needs to be addressed by the Town. The 2016 Community Survey also states the following with regard to employee housing: Affordable and adequate housing for employees in the Town of Vail was one of the top issues that came up repeatedly throughout the survey results. Respondents identified housing as their top priority among all of the community issues and also allocated the most funding towards it in a monetary exercise designed to determine top financial priorities (discussed below). Housing emerged prominently from the open-ended comments as well, many respondents are concerned about the issue and feel it needs to be addressed by the Town. Techniques to expand workforce housing opportunities were examined thoroughly this year in a new series of questions. Respondents are highly supportive of various techniques to address the 18 housing problems present in Vail. On a scale from I to 4 where I is "not at all supportive" and 4 is "very supportive," respondents rated four proposed techniques to expand workforce housing. Increasing the requirement for contributing to workforce housing among developers (77 percent gave ratings of 3 or 4), permitting required housing to be built down -valley (75 percent), requiring a contribution to workforce housing for residential development (68 percent), and permitting increased density in limited locations or circumstances (5 7 percent) all received larger shares of supportive respondents than unsupportive respondents. Respondents prioritized employee housing and parking, as further explained by the 2016 Community Survey: Financial Prioritization. A new question this year had respondents prioritize five improvements for the Vail community relative to one another by allocating $100 across the various categories to best reflect their priorities. Housing emerged at the top of the list, with respondents allocating the most on average towards expanded housing opportunities for middle income and service worker households ($2 7). Parking improvements to add capacity at peak times, actions to protect and enhance Gore Creek (each $20), and transportation improvements ($18) followed closely. The creation of a sizable enclosed space to support cultural and community activities and events was the lowest priority, with an average allocation of $ I /.The dominance of housing, parking, and the environment in this financial exercise is consistent with top priorities noted throughout the survey. The 2007 Vail 20/20 Strategic Action Plan was adopted with the goal to create a clear vision for Vail. It provides the following vision statement: We are the "Premier Mountain Resort Community" by providing high quality of life and experiences for both residents and visitors. This is achieved through environmental stewardship, world-class recreational, cultural and educational opportunities, a strong year-round economy, diversity of housing, and superior infrastructure. The town actively seeks input and cooperation from the community and its neighbors to ensure fulfillment of its vision. It specifically provides goals and action strategies specific to employee housing, with the following: Goal: The Town of Vail recognizes the need for housing as infrastructure that promotes community, reduces transit needs and keeps more employees living in the town, and will provide for enough deed -restricted housing for at least 30 percent of the workforce through policies, regulations and publicly initiated development. • Research parking requirements for employee housing and consider reducing requirements for employee housing developments. • Expand the number of employee beds in the Town o f Vail. As indicated in the above analysis, the Town of Vail has continually identified increasing the hotel bed base, the provision of employee housing, and additional parking as top priorities in the Town. These are reoccurring themes throughout various master planning documents, Town surveys, and strategic plans. It is a unique project that can bring all three to the table. As a result, the proposed project complies with the comprehensive plans and Town policies. 19 5. Natural And/Or Geologic Hazard: Identification and mitigation of natural and/or geologic hazards that affect the property on which the special development district is proposed. Applicant Response: The proposed amendment has has no effect on the above criterion. There are no natural or geologic hazards that affect the property. Soils and geotechnical reports have been included with the submittal. 6. Design Features: Site plan, building design and location and open space provisions designed to produce a functional development responsive and sensitive to natural features, vegetation and overall aesthetic quality of the community. Applicant Response: The site design provides for all required turn lanes, a transit stop, the continuation of the 10 ft. bike path, then a landscape area before the internal 20 ft. drive aisle. There is additional landscape area between the drive aisle and the building. The project maintains the previously approved sidewalk connection from Meadow Ridge Road through the property along the western property line. There is an internal courtyard with outdoor planting area. Because the site is steep along the north and western property lines, there is significant retaining walls needed. This has been sensitively designed area between each wall to allow for landscaping. These walls, though taller than the 6 ft. allowed by the Town, are similar to those that were constructed at the new Lion's Ridge project. The walls are not largely visible to the general public being hidden by the apartment building itself. The building has been broken down both horizontally and vertically stepping up and down as well as in and out with roof forms developed to give the impression that the building is not one structure but a series of smaller buildings constructed over time. The building steps down with the natural grade, creating movement of the roof forms along with the slope. The project has been designed to create a functional development, that is responsive to the site, and is sensitive to the natural features of the site. 7. Traffic: A circulation system designed for both vehicles and pedestrians addressing on and off site traffic circulation. Applicant Response: The proposed project has two site access points: western access and eastern access. The western access point is a full movement access, with two out -bound lanes and one in -bound lane. The structure is shared between both uses (hotel and employee housing units) with the separation of parking for each use occurring within the structure. The eastern access is in -bound only, and is used to access the front doors for both uses. Generally, the employee housing units will not use the eastern access, as they will access the parking structure via the western access. Arriving guests of the hotel can check in, valet their cars or self park without returning onto the Frontage Road. This allows the primary circulation for the uses to occur on-site. ATraffic Study, prepared by McDowell Engineering has been included with this submittal. Using the information provided by the Traffic Study,Alpine Engineering provided the civil plans showing the necessary improvements to the North Frontage Road. 20 M The circulation system has been design to the Town's specifications and addresses all modes of transportation. Landscaping: Functional and aesthetic landscaping and open space in order to optimize and preserve natural features, recreation, views and function. Applicant Response: The site is generally flat along, with the steeper slopes along the north and east property lines. Because it was a previous development site, there is not significant vegetation on the site following the demolition of the Roost Lodge. The current design maximizes the site, with the underground parking structure abutting the property lines. The structure was designed to allow adequate depth and soil for plantings to occur along the building. This creates a design opportunity for the landscape architect, MacDesign. The landscape has been designed to compliment the structure, creating a building that sits within the landscape. Shade trees are shown between the bike path and the access drive, creating a natural landscape buffer between these uses. Shrubs and ornamental grasses are shown adjacent to the building, creating the more formal landscape along the entries to the building. The following photos show the general concept for the landscaping adjacent to the building: The sidewalk shown from the rear of the building and connecting to the sidewalk connection from Meadow Ridge Road is landscaped with native species and continues some of the more formal landscape from the front entries. The landscape transitions to more native vegetation FA and grasses as the slope connects to Meadow Ridge Road. Where the property is adjacent to the Grand Traverse open space, the retaining walls are softened with plantings, creating a visually pleasing view for the residents, as these walls are are largely invisible to the general public. 9. Workable Plan: Phasing plan or subdivision plan that will maintain a workable, functional and efficient relationship throughout the development of the special development district. Applicant Response: The proposed amendment has no effect on the above criterion. The project will be constructed in one phase. Construction is estimated to take 18 months to complete. 22 VII. Adjacent Addresses 23 Transportation Impact Study for Vail Marriott Residence Inn Redevelopment August 5, 2016 Revised September 30, 2016 PREPARED FOR: The Harp Group 601 Oakmont Lane, Suite 420 Westmont, IL 60559 Contact: Peter Dumon, President PREPARED BY: McDowell Engineering, LLC 936 Chambers Court, B4 PO Box 4259 Eagle, CO 81631 970.623.078 Contact: Kari J. McDowell Schroeder, PE, PTOE Project Number: M1234 Statement of Engineering Qualifications Kari J. McDowell Schroeder, PE, PTOE is a Transportation and Traffic Engineer for McDowell Engineering, LLC. Ms. McDowell Schroeder has over nineteen years of extensive traffic and transportation engineering experience. She has completed numerous transportation studies and roadway design projects throughout the State of Colorado. Ms. McDowell Schroeder is a licensed Professional Engineer in the State of Colorado and has her certification as a Professional Traffic Operations Engineer from the Institute of Transportation Engineers. M1234 Vail Marriott Residence Inn Redevelopment August 5, 2016 Page 2 Transportation Impact Study for Vail Marriott Residence Inn Redevelopment Table of Contents 1.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION............................................................................................................................ 4 1.1 PREVIOUS TRAFFIC ANALYSIS................................................................................................................................ S 2.0 EXISTING CONDITIONS............................................................................................................................ 7 2.1 DESCRIPTION OF EXISTING TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM................................................................................................7 3.0 FUTURE TRAFFIC PROJECTIONS..............................................................................................................10 3.1 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS.......................................................................................................................10 3.2 BACKGROUND TRAFFIC GROWTH.........................................................................................................................10 4.0 PROJECT TRAFFIC...................................................................................................................................12 4.1 TRIP GENERATION.............................................................................................................................................12 4.2 TRIP DISTRIBUTION...........................................................................................................................................14 4.3 SITE CIRCULATION.............................................................................................................................................14 4.4 TRIP MODE SPLIT AND ASSIGNMENT....................................................................................................................17 5.0 TRANSPORTATION IMPACT ANALYSIS....................................................................................................21 5.1 SITE ACCESS AUXILIARYTURN LANES....................................................................................................................21 5.2 LEVEL OF SERVICE ANALYSIS................................................................................................................................23 5.3 ENTERING SIGHT DISTANCE................................................................................................................................24 5.4 ACCESS PERMITTING.........................................................................................................................................25 5.5 MULTIMODAL PEDESTRIAN AND BICYCLE FACILITIES................................................................................................25 6.0 RECOMMENDATIONS AND CONCLUSIONS..............................................................................................26 7.0 APPENDIX..............................................................................................................................................27 Tables and Figures FIGURE1: AREA MAP......................................................................................................................................... 4 FIGURE 2: CONCEPTUAL SITE PLAN..................................................................................................................... 6 FIGURE 3: YEAR 2018 BACKGROUND TRAFFIC VOLUMES..................................................................................... 9 FIGURE 4: YEAR 2040 BACKGROUND TRAFFIC VOLUMES....................................................................................11 TABLE 1: TRIP GENERATION...............................................................................................................................13 FIGURE 5: DIRECTIONAL DISTRIBUTION.............................................................................................................16 FIGURE 6: ASSIGNED PROJECT GENERATED TRAFFIC..........................................................................................18 FIGURE 7: YEAR 2018 TOTAL TRAFFIC VOLUMES................................................................................................19 FIGURE 8: YEAR 2040 TOTAL TRAFFIC VOLUMES................................................................................................20 TABLE 2: AUXILIARY TURN LANE REQUIREMENTS: ............................................................................................. 22 TABLE 4: TOTAL TRAFFIC LEVEL OF SERVICE.......................................................................................................23 M1234 Vail Marriott Residence Inn Redevelopment August 5, 2016 Page 3 1.0 Project Description The Vail Marriott Residence Inn, a proposed 1.9 acre redevelopment, is located near the intersection of the Interstate 70 North Frontage Road and Buffehr Creek Road within the Town of Vail. The proposed project will replace the former Roost Lodge that was located on the property. The southern boundary of the property abuts the Frontage Road and starts approximately 250 feet north east of the Buffehr Creek Road intersection with the Frontage Road. The property is also bordered on the north by Meadow Ridge Road, but is does not and is not anticipated to take access from it due to the grade differential. The location of this property in relation to the surrounding area can be seen in Figure 1. This site was previously approved for redevelopment. Figure 1: Area Map SITE 6 0� j, West Vail 173 r � e' � 0 173, tea lie Stephens Park 0 2012 Nokia iD20t2 Mieroaoft Corporation M1234 Vail Marriott Residence Inn Redevelopment August 5, 2016 Page 4 The proposed redevelopment is expected to include a Marriott Residence Inn, it's associated support facilities and deed restricted, local employee, long-term rental units. Specifically, the Vail Marriott Residence Inn project is currently anticipated to consist of: • 170 Hotel Rooms • Lobby, Library, Lounge and Associated Guest Facilities • 113 Long -Term Rental Local Employee Housing Units A concept plan of the proposed development can be seen in Figure 2. The site was formerly occupied by the Roost Lodge, which included a 72 -room hotel and 1 employee housing unit. The Roost Lodge was demolished in 2014 and the site is now vacant. The Vail Marriott Residence Inn redevelopment has an assumed build out completion year of 2018. Analysis has been performed for existing conditions, background and total conditions for short-term Year 2018 as well as for the long-range planning Year 2040. 1.1 Previous Traffic Analysis This site has been previously proposed for redevelopment that was not constructed. In 2013, The Vail Marriott Residence Inn was planned to include 176 Hotel Suite Rooms and 2 Employee Housing Units. This development was studied in McDowell Engineering's Transportation Impact Study for Marriott Residence Inn Redevelopment dated May 21, 2013. This study was previously approved by CDOT and the Town of Vail. M1234 Vail Marriott Residence Inn Redevelopment August 5, 2016 Page 5 3NI ONIJ33NION3xxx Nb' -1d :311S -1-1v�J3no oadro�o0 `�Idn aN e °� wM �� NNI ��NadIS�3U xxx °'a""' xxx cn U 1 SNo�IA3a 311a 3NId7Vd xxx a3N 1— / / / / / ✓/,// /� I f a° I 1 j 1 Figure 2 a / / / -/ /a� / / / /// / fit;: I /�1 ❑ tr 1.I /IIII IIII t / i 1' I I 1 o / •�` ® � j• I I I �' � s � I I/ 1 1 Sia' { II x 9N II I IIII, / IIII I 1 I 9 III 1 % IIII l a 2.0 Existing Conditions 2.1 Description of Existing Transportation System Interstate 70 North Frontage Road: The 1-70 North Frontage Road provides the primary local connection along the north side of Interstate 70 between the West Vail and Vail Village Interchanges. :.. In the vicinity of the project site, this two-lane facility is classified as Access Category F -R, Frontage Road by the Colorado Department of Transportation (CDOT) and has a posted speed limit of 35 mph. There,w are no existing auxiliary turn lanes at the two accesses to the property. CDOT and the Town of Vail completed an Access Management Plan Map for this roadway as part of their Vail Transportation Master Plan Update in 2009. Buffehr Creek Road: Buffehr Creek Road is a local two-lane roadway providing access to Chamonix Lane and residential development north of the development property. Buffehr Creek Intersects the North Frontage Road 250 feet to the southwest of the development property. The posted speed limit on this roadway is 25 mph. Meadow Ridge Road: Meadow Ridge Road is a short, cul-de-sac roadway that forms the northwest boundary of the proposed redevelopment. The subject property does not take access from Meadow Ridge Road, nor is it expected to do so in the future due to the grade differential between the property and the road. Pedestrian, Transit and Bicycle Facilities: The sole existing bicycle/ pedestrian facility in the vicinity of the Vail Marriott Residence Inn redevelopment is the North Recreation Path, which connects the Vail Village and West Vail Interchanges along the north side of the North Frontage Road. The path is contiguous across the frontage of the site and consists of a widened asphalt shoulder. A concrete path with curb and gutter exists to the east of the project site and west of Buffehr Creek Road. M1234 Vail Marriott Residence Inn Redevelopment August 5, 2016 Page 7 Both the Red and Green West Vail bus routes travel along the North Frontage Road adjacent to the redevelopment site. There is a bus stop for the westbound routes at the southwest corner of the property. :1 Year 2018 Background Traffic Volumes: Year 2018 traffic conditions are based on 2013 traffic counts provided by the Town taken at the intersection of the North Frontage Road and Buffehr Creek Road. These 2013 counts were compared to the from Figure 15: Year 2025 Peak Hour Projections of the Vail Transportation Master Plan Update, 2009 at the intersection of the North Frontage Road with Buffehr Creek Road (Intersection Number 22). Refer to the Appendix for this data and correspondence with CDOT and the Town of Vail. The assumed Year 2018 Background Volumes were derived from a linear interpolation between Years 2013 and 2025 as the starting and finishing years, respectively. Per Town staff, there are no other development projects that should impact these volumes. Background evening volume projections for Year 2018 can be seen in Figure 3. M1234 Vail Marriott Residence Inn Redevelopment August 5, 2016 Page 8 Fiaure 3: Year 2018 Backaround Traffic -f4 t' ACDOWELL LEGEND: ENGINEERING. L1-CPM Volumes= XX TRANSPORTATION ENri HEERINO CONSULTANTS Project Number: M1234 (NTS) Turning Movements Prepared by: BBG Marriott Residence Inn Redevelopment August 5, 2013 Vail, Colorado 3.0 Future Traffic Projections 3.1 Capital Improvement Projects Per the Vail Transportation Master Plan Update, 2009 (Master Plan Update), the North Frontage Road is anticipated to remain a two-lane facility through the longterm planning horizon. However, the Master Plan Update anticipates the construction of an eastbound left turn deceleration lane to Buffehr Creek Road prior to Year 2035. The Town of Vail and CDOT have begun construction on the Simba Run Underpass of 1-70 as anticipated by the Master Plan Update. The project is anticipated to be completed by December 2017. This underpass, is located to the west of the Lionshead Village and will provide an additional connection between the parts of Vail north of I- 70 and those south of the interstate. Per the Master Plan Update, the likely result of this underpass on project -generated traffic would be to increase the portion of traffic headed to or from the east on the North Frontage Road. 3.2 Background Traffic Growth Long-term background growth along the North Frontage Road is based on the Year 2025 volume projections provided in the Master Plan Update. Correspondence with Town staff regarding the anticipated growth rates can be found in the Appendix. Per Town staff, ...these projections represent a build out scenario study with 2025 selected as full build out. This was done during the boom in Vail and a lot of large developments were on the table going thru the process. Many of those have been stopped or delayed. We suggest using the 2025 data with a modest growth rate of 0.5% from 2025 to 2035. This methodology was used for Year 2040 conditions. The resulting projected Year 2040 background traffic volumes with the addition of the Simba Run underpass volumes can be seen in Figure 4. M1234 Vail Marriott Residence Inn Redevelopment August 5, 2016 Page 10 Fiaure 4: Year 2040 Backaround Traffic 14W 44 r it ^4% r -f4 t' ACDOWELL LEGEND: ENGINEERING. L1-CPM Volumes= XX TRANSPORTATION ENri HEERINO CONSULTANTS Project Number: M1234 (NTS) Turning Movements Prepared by: BBG Marriott Residence Inn Redevelopment August 5, 2013 Vail, Colorado 4.0 Project Traffic 4.1 Trip Generation The proposed Marriott Residence Inn is anticipated to consist of: • 170 Hotel Rooms (all with kitchens) o Lobby, Library, Lounge and Associated Guest Facilities • 113 Long -Term Rental Local Employee Housing Units • 10 Condos located on adjacent parcel • 100 Space Parking Club (leased parking spaces) A trip generation analysis was prepared based on ITE's Trip Generation Manual data for the following land uses: • #310, Hotel • #223, Mid -Rise Apartment • #230, Residential Condo/Townhome The Parking Club use does not fit into an established trip generation land use within the ITE Trip Generation Manual The proposed additional parking spaces are anticipated to generate additional vehicle trips to and from the parking structure. ITE publishes national parking rates and trip generation rates for specific land uses. These rates were used to compare the number of parking spaces to the associated number of additional vehicle trips. Per their 2010 Parking Generation Manual, 4th Edition'; a hotel requires 1.54 parking spaces per hotel room. Working backwards from the 85th percentile parking rate, the additional 100 parking spaces would adequately serve 65 hotel rooms. ITE's anticipated trip generation rates (per ITE's 2012 Trip Generation Manual, 9th Edition) for 65 rooms is 0.52 trips per room in the morning peak hour, 0.40 trips per room in the evening peak hour, and 0.47 trips per room during the Saturday peak hour. Because it is anticipated that these leased parking spaces would primarily be used for skier parking the Inbound / Outbound distribution from Land Use #466, Snow Ski Area was used for trip distribution. The hotel land use also accounts for ancillary land uses such as the lobby, library and lounge for guests. Based on the Trip Generation Manual and the assumptions made, this site would be expected to generate a total of 228 Saturday peak hour trips, 196 morning peak hour trips, and 200 evening peak hour trips, including all modes of travel. Refer to Table 1 for trip generation calculations and further breakdown of these trips. M1234 Vail Marriott Residence Inn Redevelopment August 5, 2016 Page 12 Mss FN N N N F V m V v v m 0 F N ^ m m v F' N m tp 0 'F F 0 F N ^ N N m F v v N F' o 0 o m v 0 EE EE Q m h m vt vt vt 3 a� m h m vt vt vt N w w w � w 4 x o 0 0 0 0 0 o � o d a E E F W o � 4.2 Trip Distribution The distribution of project -generated vehicular traffic on adjacent roadways is influenced by several factors including the following: • The location of the site relative to other commercial facilities and the roadway network. • The configuration of the existing and proposed adjacent roadway network • Relative location of neighboring population centers Based upon the above factors and the current completion date of December 2017 for the Simba Run underpass, it is assumed that approximately fifty percent (50%) of site generated traffic will travel to or from the east on the North Frontage Road and fifty percent (50%) will travel to or from the west on the North Frontage Road under short term conditions. The anticipated directional distribution of project -generated traffic is depicted in Figure 5. Distribution is not anticipated to change from Year 2020 to Year 2040. 4.3 Site Circulation The Transportation Master Plan and Access Management Plan Map provide guidance for the access points to the subject property. These documents specify that the easternmost access will be ingress only and the westernmost access will be egress only. As designed, the site is anticipated to operate most effectively with the easternmost access as ingress only and the westernmost access as a full movement. Because the site will include hotel as well as long-term rental housing it is believed that site access would operate most efficiently with this configuration. The easternmost access would be used for hotel check-in, shuttles, and deliveries. The westernmost access would be the primary access for the apartments, parking garage, and hotel guests after check-in. The Town of Vail has indicated that they would support this change from the Access Management Plan if the access points operate adequately as proposed. It is understood that CDOT would need to also support this change and that the Access Management Plan would need to be updated to reflect the change. Per Section 4.4(1) of the State Highway Access Code, 2002, (Access Code) the minimum distance between access points should be at a minimum equal to the design sight distance along the highway. Given a 35 mph posted speed limit on the North Frontage Road, the access points should be a minimum of 250 feet apart. Access to the adjacent parcel is approximately 120 -feet west of the proposed westernmost access to the site. The Access Management Plan anticipates that the adjacent access to the North Frontage Road would be closed when this parcel is redeveloped in the future and access would be from Meadow Ridge Road. Alternately, if acceptable the adjacent property owners, access to the site could be M1234 Vail Marriott Residence Inn Redevelopment August 5, 2016 Page 14 from the westernmost access to the Vail Marriott site allowing closure of the existing access. If the accesses are not combined, a CDOT Design Waiver would be required for the Access Spacing. M1234 Vail Marriott Residence Inn Redevelopment August 5, 2016 Page 15 Figure 5: Directional Distribution of Project Generated Traffic r' r a�4e � •. — 4W ! � At -�-Ve i 40 • q4 '_;moi • � t ,�s � • IN, A CDOWELL ENGINEERING.u.c T n.•HUPonT'.T—N E—H—PHO C—MUL—TO Project Number: M1234 Prepared by: BBG Date: 8/5/2016 (NTS) Vail Marriott Residence Inn Vail, Colorado "Itr 4.4 Trip Mode Split and Assignment Given the available bicycle/pedestrian routes and adjacent transit stop for the local bus system, it can be assumed that a portion of site generated trips will be made by modes other than passenger car. The limited parking in Vail also encourages people to use alternative modes of transportation. An assumed multimodal reduction of ten percent (10%) would result in the reduction of the volume automobile trips by 18 trips during the Saturday peak hour, 14 trips during the weekday morning peak hour and 16 trips during the weekday evening peak hour. The multi -modal reduction was not applied to the trips generated by the parking club. Following the removal of non -vehicular trips from the project generated traffic, the anticipated volume of vehicular trips at each site access can be calculated. The anticipated assignment of trips on the roadway system is determined by applying the external trip generation expected for this site and its corresponding mode split to the estimated trip distribution. The resulting projections of site generated traffic with the Simba Run underpass can be seen in Figure 6. The Year 2018 total traffic anticipated at each intersection in question is the sum of the estimated Year 2018 background traffic (Figure 3) traffic with Figure 6, and can be seen in Figure 7. Similarly, Year 2040 total traffic is the sum of Year 2018 background traffic (Figure 3) traffic with Figure 4, and can be seen in Figure 8. As only evening peak hour data was available from the Master Plan Update, all volumes in Figures 7 and 8 only represent the evening peak hour. M1234 Vail Marriott Residence Inn Redevelopment August 5, 2016 Page 17 Figure 6: Assianed Proiect Generated Traffic 48/40/41 21/17/18 y f 21/17/18 36/34/33 EMO `'fir-�_� �� _ } - L yi *'!Ti ..-- -- {• F -, a I +".. ■ A +� �r t :ice ' f itis _ a S w Aft - 1 1 i ` r i 42 f C D OW E L L LEGEND: -.LE N G I N E E RI N G.SAT/AM/PM Volumes = XX/XX/XX y TRn.NB PaR TATION ENa1NEE RIND CON9u LT ANTE Project Number: M1234 (NTS) Turning Movements "I I ro Prepared by: BBG Marriott Residence Inn Redevelopment May 21, 2013 Vail, Colorado Fiaure 7: Year 2018 Total Traffic -f4 t' ACDOWELL LEGEND: ENGINEERING.L1-C PM Volumes= XX TRANSPORTATION ENBINEERIN CI CONSULTANTS "I I ro Project Number: M1234 (NTS) Turning Movements Prepared by: BBG Marriott Residence Inn Redevelopment August 5, 2013 Vail, Colorado Fiaure 8: Year 2040 Total Traffic 14W 44 r _ { ^4% r -f4 t' ACDOWELL LEGEND: ENGINEERING.L1-C PM Volumes= XX TRANSPORTATION ENBINEERIN CI CONSULTANTS "I I ro Project Number: M1234 (NTS) Turning Movements Prepared by: BBG Marriott Residence Inn Redevelopment August 5, 2016 Vail, Colorado 5.0 Transportation Impact Analysis 5.1 Site Access Auxiliary Turn Lanes As the North Frontage Road is a State Highway facility of Access Category F -R, Frontage Road (Speed Limit 35 mph), the need for auxiliary turn lanes to and from the site should be addressed. Per Section 3.13(4)(c -d) of the State Highway Access Code, 2002 (Access Code), as the North Frontage road has a posted speed less than 45 mph, acceleration lanes are generally not required and were not assessed further. At the proposed eastern and western site accesses there is the potential for two auxiliary deceleration lanes, the eastbound left and westbound right movements. Neither lane currently exists at either access location. Right Turn Deceleration: A westbound right turn deceleration lane is required on a facility of this type when the anticipated peak hour volumes exceed 50vph. Anticipated right turn volumes entering the eastern and western site accesses range from 17-21vph and 40-48vph respectively. The volume range is given because the traffic volume is expected to vary over the morning, evening and Saturday peak hour traffic. The Saturday peak hour volume for the western site access is on the threshold of the CDOT warrant but does not exceed the requirement. The AM and PM peak hour volumes do not CDOT's threshold at either location. Based on these volumes no westbound right turn lane should be required at either site access. Left Turn Deceleration: An eastbound left turn deceleration lane would be required if peak hour volumes expected to use this movement exceed 25vph. Anticipated left turn volumes entering the eastern and western site accesses range from 17-21vph and 40-48vph respectively. Peak hour volumes for the AM, PM, and Saturday are projected to exceed the CDOT threshold and at the eastbound left ingress movement at the western site access. Adeceleration lane will be required at this location. RefertoTable 2, Auxiliary Turn Lane Requirements for a breakdown of expected conditions. M1234 Vail Marriott Residence Inn Redevelopment August 5, 2016 Page 21 Table 2: Auxiliary Turn Lane Requirements: The Access Code also details the required auxiliary turn lane lengths. Per Section 4, the auxiliary eastbound left lane should consist of a 10:1 taper and 48 feet of storage, for a total distance of 168 feet. M1234 Vail Marriott Residence Inn Redevelopment August 5, 2016 Page 22 Maximum Peak Hour Turning Turning Volume Lane Turn Lane Length Movement Required? (from Figure 6) Eastern Site Access No Westbound Right 21 vph <50vph N/A turning No Eastbound Left 10 vph >25vph N/A turning Western Site Access No Westbound Right 48 vph <50vph N/A turning Yes 48' Storage, 10:1 Eastbound Left 48 vph >25vph Taper turning The Access Code also details the required auxiliary turn lane lengths. Per Section 4, the auxiliary eastbound left lane should consist of a 10:1 taper and 48 feet of storage, for a total distance of 168 feet. M1234 Vail Marriott Residence Inn Redevelopment August 5, 2016 Page 22 5.2 Level of Service Analysis An HCM 2010 site access analysis was performed for both short term Year 2018 and long term Year 2040 conditions. This analysis assumes that the single deceleration lane explored as part of Section 5.1 will be constructed. The western full -movement access was anticipated to have both left and right turn lanes. Table 4 summarizes the total level of service (LOS) and delays. Table 4: Total Traffic Level of Service As can be seen in Table 4, the eastern site access is anticipated to operate satisfactorily following the completion of the redevelopment through the long term planning horizon. The western site access is anticipated to operate at an acceptable LOS through the Year 2018. By Year 2040 evening peak hour traffic volumes will deteriorate to unacceptable levels of service for the southbound left turn movement due to high volumes on the North Frontage Road. This condition will occur for all accesses along the Frontage Road with or without the Vail Marriott Residence Inn project. Delays at stop control side street accesses with arterials is normal and expected in peak hours. However, even underthese conditions, the ninety-five percentile queues at the access are anticipated to remain less than three vehicles in length. M1234 Vail Marriott Residence Inn Redevelopment August 5, 2016 Page 23 Intersection Control Movement PM Level of Service (Seconds of Delay) 2018 2040 West Site Access and N Frontage Road (Full Movement) No Control EBL EBT A (9) B (11) A (0) A (0) No Control WBR/T A (0) A (0) SB Stop SB SBL SBR C (23) F (96) D (33) F (163) B (14) C (21) East Site Access and (Ingress Only) No Control EBL/T A (0) A (0) No Control WBR/T A (0) A (0) As can be seen in Table 4, the eastern site access is anticipated to operate satisfactorily following the completion of the redevelopment through the long term planning horizon. The western site access is anticipated to operate at an acceptable LOS through the Year 2018. By Year 2040 evening peak hour traffic volumes will deteriorate to unacceptable levels of service for the southbound left turn movement due to high volumes on the North Frontage Road. This condition will occur for all accesses along the Frontage Road with or without the Vail Marriott Residence Inn project. Delays at stop control side street accesses with arterials is normal and expected in peak hours. However, even underthese conditions, the ninety-five percentile queues at the access are anticipated to remain less than three vehicles in length. M1234 Vail Marriott Residence Inn Redevelopment August 5, 2016 Page 23 5.3 Entering Sight Distance As the redeveloped site is expected to be a commercial facility with minimal multi- unit truck trips, Per Table 4-3 of the Access Code, the appropriate design vehicle for entering sight distance is a single -unit truck. Per Table 4-2 of the Access Code, the entering sight distance at the western access should be greater than 455 feet. From the existing western access there appears to be in excess of 500 feet to the west of the access and in excess of 700 feet east of the access. Entering sight distance exceeds Access Code requirements. r Eastbound sight distance at the western site (egress) access Westbound sight distance at the western site (egress) access M1234 Vail Marriott Residence Inn Redevelopment August 5, 2016 Page 24 5.4 Access Permitting Given that estimated traffic volumes at the site are expected to increase in excess of twenty percent over the existing volumes and the existing accesses will be reconstructed, revised State Highway Access Permits will be required for the two site accesses. 5.5 Multimodal Pedestrian and Bicycle Facilities The applicant shall incorporate multimodal facilities in the site design as the project progresses in the Town's review and entitlement process. These plans shall be coordinated for connectivity with the North Frontage Road bicycle and pedestrian route, as well as the transit system. M1234 Vail Marriott Residence Inn Redevelopment August 5, 2016 Page 25 6.0 Recommendations and Conclusions The Marriott Residence Inn redevelopment anticipates replacing the existing Roost Lodge, adjacent to the Interstate 70 North Frontage Road in Vail, with a 170 -room hotel; 113 long-term, local employee, rental apartments; and 100 leased parking spaces. As part of this effort, it is expected that the two existing site accesses will be reconstructed and reconfigured. The Transportation Master Plan and Access Management Plan Map provide guidance for the access points to the subject property. These documents specify that the easternmost access will be ingress only and the westernmost access will be egress only. As designed, the site is anticipated to operate most effectively with the easternmost access as ingress only and the westernmost access as a full movement. Because the site will include hotel as well as long-term rental housing it is believed that site access would operate most efficiently with this configuration. The easternmost access would be used for hotel check-in, shuttles, and deliveries. The westernmost access would be the primary access for the apartments, parking garage, and hotel guests after check-in. The Town of Vail has indicated that they would support this change from the Access Management Plan if the access points operate adequately as proposed. It is understood that CDOT would need to also support this change and that the Access Management Plan would need to be updated to reflect the change. The proposed access spacing between the western site access and the adjacent property access is approximately 120 -feet. The Access Management Plan Map anticipates that the adjacent access will be closed and the property will gain access from Meadow Ridge Road at the time of redevelopment. Per the Access Code, A minimum distance of 250 feet between access points is required by the Access Code along the Frontage Road. The anticipated volumes turning left into the site are projected to exceed the requirements set forth by the Access Code for the construction of an eastbound left turn deceleration lane at the eastern site access. This lane should have 48 feet of storage space and a 120 foot, 10:1 transition taper. The expected increase in vehicular demand upon the two site accesses as well as the proposed change in access design will necessitate the need for revised State Highway Access Permits at both site accesses. Pedestrian/bicycle connectivity via the North Recreation Path, as well as transit access, should be maintained or enhanced in conformance with Town of Vail criteria. M1234 Vail Marriott Residence Inn Redevelopment August 5, 2016 Page 26 7.0 Appendix Reference Documents 1. 8t" Edition Trip Generation Manual. Institute of Transportation Engineers, 2008. 2. Trip Generation Handbook, An ITE Recommended Practice. Institute of Transportation Engineers, 2001. 3. Manual of Uniform Traffic Control Devices. US Department of Transportation Federal Highway Administration, 2009. 4. Highway Capacity Manual. Transportation Research Board, 2010. 5. Vail Transportation Master Plan Update and Access Management Map. Felsburg Holt & Ullevig and Town of Vail, 2009 6. State of Colorado State Highway Access Code. CDOT, Rev. 2002 7. 4111 Edition Parking Generation Manual. Institute of Transportation Engineers, 2010. Included Documents 1.TIS Assumptions - Correspondence with Town of Vail and CDOT 2.Vail Transportation Master Plan Update Volume Projections 3.HCM 2010 Level of Service Calculations i. West Site Access ii. East Site Access M1234 Vail Marriott Residence Inn Redevelopment August 5, 2016 Page 27 ININIiN1111 G(mail Vail Marriott McDowell Engineering Mail - Vail Marriott Tom Kassmel <TKassmel@vailgov.com> To: Ben Gerdes <ben@mcdowelleng.com> Cc: Kari McDowell Schroeder <kari@mcdowelleng.com> Tom Kassmel Town Engineer Public Works Department TOWN OF VAIL 970.479.2235 vailgov.com twitter.com/vailgov From: Ben Gerdes [mailto:ben@mcdowelleng.com] Sent: Thursday, July 21, 2016 1:59 PM To: Tom Kassmel Cc: Kari McDowell Schroeder Subject: Vail Marriott Tom, Ben Gerdes <ben@mcdowelleng.com> Tue, Jul 26, 2016 at 9:08 AM I am working on updating the traffic study for the Vail Marriott project and had a few questions for you: 1. The previous study assumed that the directional distribution with the Simba Run underpass would be 50% west / 50% east. Does this distribution still seem reasonable or should it be adjusted? This seems to be a reasonable distribution 2. A 10% multi -modal reduction was applied previously. The project as now proposed would include a significant amount of long-term rental housing that will be deed restricted to local employees. Do you think 10% still applies or could the reduction be increased slightly to account for the employee housing? We would recommend maintaining the 10% reduction. We have only used a larger reduction in the Vail and Lionshead Village areas that are on the High Frequency In Town Route. 3. A 0.5% growth rate was used to project the 2025 Master Plan traffic volumes to 2035 volumes. Should the 0.5% https://mai 1.googl e.com/mai 1/u/1 /?ui=2&i k=fc4c29c5l 7&view= pt&search=i nbox&m sg=15627cO5cd79fcc8&si m 1=15627cO5cd79fcc8 1/2 7/26/2016 McDowell Engineering Mail - Vail Marriott be used to project 2025 Master Plan volumes to 2040? Yes, though we are in the process of updating our VTMP. The numbers we will be using come from the 1-70 Underpass Traffic Study. See attached. 4. Do you have updated traffic counts for this location? We previously used 2013 counts provided. The 2012/13 counts are the latest we have. Thanks, Ben Ben Gerdes, PE Traffic / Transportation Engineer CDOWELL ENGINEERING.LtiC Eagle • Broomfield • Grand Junction Phone: 970.366.9502 email: ben@mcdowelleng.com www,mcdowelleng.com 13-164 Traffic Report FINAL Stamped 08.11.15.pdf 1696K https://m ai l.googl e.com/m ai I/u/1 /?ui=2&i k=fc4c29c5l 7&view= pt&search=i nbox&m sg= l5627cO5cd79fcc8&si m l=15627cO5cd79fcc8 2/2 Kari McDowell Schroeder From: Tom Kassmel Sent: Thursday, October 11, 2012 2:45 PM To: 'Kari McDowell Schroeder'; Babler, Alisa Subject: RE: Roost Lodge redevelopment in Vail (Traffic Methodology) Thanks, that works for the Town. From: Kari McDowell Schroeder [mailto:kari@mcdowelleng.com] Sent: Thursday, October 11, 2012 2:10 PM To: Tom Kassmel; Babler, Alisa Subject: RE: Roost Lodge redevelopment in Vail (Traffic Methodology) a-�ue Alisa is out of the office until the 16th. Therefore, we went ahead and included two alternatives in the traffic report — with and without the Simba Run underpass. Hopefully this satisfies both CDOT and the Town's requests. Thanks! Kari From: Tom Kassmel [mailto:TKassmel(a)vailaov.com] Sent: Friday, October 05, 2012 1:15 PM To: 'Babler, Alisa'; Kari McDowell Schroeder (kari(a)mcdowellena.com) Subject: RE: Roost Lodge redevelopment in Vail (Traffic Methodology) It may seem counterintuitive, but the more conservative approach would be to use the numbers with Simba Run. Simba Run actually pushes more traffic to this particular section of Frontage Rd. 2025 Peak Hr PM with Simba at the Roost: 905 (WB) 795 (EB) 2025 Peak Hr PM no Simba: 555 (WB) 630 (EB) The Town would agree with the conservative approach and ask for volumes with Simba Run. Sorry to keep batting this back and forth, I just now looked as the numbers. From: Babler, Alisa[ma ilto:Alisa.Babler(a)DOT. STATE.CO.US] Sent: Friday, October 05, 2012 11:17 AM To: Tom Kassmel Subject: RE: Roost Lodge redevelopment in Vail (Traffic Methodology) I'd say we stick to not assuming Simba Run is funded for the study. It's the more conservative approach. Otherwise, I don't have any other comments. Alisa Babler Permit Unit Engineer Please note, effective October 8, 2012, 1 will have a new email address: alisa. babler0state. co. us CDOT, Region 3 Traffic & Safety Section 970-683-6287 970-683-6290 (fax) Alisa.babler@dot.state.co.us From: Tom Kassmel fmailto:TKassmel(a)vailgov.com] Sent: Thursday, October 04, 2012 10:47 AM To: Babler, Alisa Subject: FW: Roost Lodge redevelopment in Vail (Traffic Methodology) From: Tom Kassmel Sent: Thursday, October 04, 2012 10:44 AM To: 'Babler, Alisa'; Kari McDowell Schroeder; alisa.babler(a)state.co.us Cc: Blender, Emmalee Subject: RE: Roost Lodge redevelopment in Vail (Traffic Methodology) Few comments below in red. From: Babler, Alisa fmailto:Alisa.Babler(a)DOT.STATE.CO.US] Sent: Thursday, October 04, 2012 8:30 AM To: Kari McDowell Schroeder; alisa.babler(a)state.co.us Cc: Tom Kassmel; Blender, Emmalee Subject: RE: Roost Lodge redevelopment in Vail (Traffic Methodology) Kari, I'm good with this approach. I would not include Simba Run in the study. I don't think it is funded, in which case it shouldn't be included in the study. Thanks Alisa Alisa Babler Permit Unit Engineer Please note, effective October 8, 2012, 1 will have a new email address: alisa. babler0state. co. us CDOT, Region 3 Traffic & Safety Section 970-683-6287 970-683-6290 (fax) Alisa.babler@dot.state.co.us From: Kari McDowell Schroeder fmailto:kari(a)mcdowellena.coml Sent: Wednesday, October 03, 2012 1:26 PM To: alisa.babler(a)state.co.us; Babler, Alisa Cc: Tom Kassmel Subject: Roost Lodge redevelopment in Vail (Traffic Methodology) Alisa, The Roost Lodge is looking to redevelop in Vail. The site currently has a 72 -room hotel with one employee housing unit. The site is to remain generally the same, but be remodeled to an Marriott Residence Inn with 152 all -suite hotel rooms and four on-site employee housing apartments. This yields almost 1,000 vpd and 80+/- vph. These volumes will require a CDOT Level 2 Traffic Study on the 1-70 Frontage Road. I do not have a proposed site plan to share with you yet. The site was previously studied in 2006 by Fox Higgins. Per conversations with Dan Roussin, I believe that an access permit was issued. The project was not constructed. I am proposing the following methodology for this analysis: Traffic counts and projections: • Vail's 2009 Access Management Plan (AMP) and Transportation Master Plan (TMP) have traffic volumes for the frontage road and projections to Year 2025. 1 would like to use these volumes for the study, as the project - generated traffic is going to determine the need for auxiliary lane improvements, not the through traffic on the frontage road. • The Town of Vail is going to be obtaining new traffic counts in January 2013. We would propose to do a quick comparison of the frontage road traffic volumes at that time to determine if there have been major impacts to the transportation system. • The traffic growth rate for the frontage road is not available on CDOT's website. I would propose that we use the growth rate from the TMP and apply it forward to Year 2035. The growth rate from 2009 to 2025 is very high since the study was developed as a build out scenario study with 2025 selected as full build out. This was done during the boom in Vail and a lot of large developments were on the table going thru the process. Many of those have been stopped or delayed. We suggest using the 2025 data with a modest growth rate of 0.5% from 2025 to 2035. Once we have updated traffic numbers over this winter we can re assess the projection as needed. Background infrastructure improvements and future development: • The Town of Vail has identified the Simba Run underpass as a future $20 Million infrastructure project. Their 2011 CIP classifies this project as a low priority. I would like to know if we should include this connection under I-70 in our long term analysis. Tom — Do you have input on this issue? Simba Run is moving forward (slowly), CDOT and the Town are about to release a joint RFP for a PEL within the next couple months for completion next year. • There are no know developments that are going to impact the Roost Lodge site. Trip generation: • We are proposing to use ITE Land Use Code #311— All Suites Hotel for the weekday/am/pm analysis. This land use does not have Saturday data. Therefore, we are proposing to use #310 — Hotel for the weekend analysis. In addition, the four employee units would be analyzed as #220 — Apartments. Can you confirm what Hotel and EHU rates were used in the approved Fox Higgins study, we should be consistent with those. Trip distribution: • The previous study identified approximately 60% of traffic from the west and 40% of traffic from the east. We would propose to use the same trip distribution for our analysis. • The AMP identifies that the site's eastern access is a one-way in and the western access is a one-way out. See attached. • We are anticipating that the site traffic will trigger the need for an eastbound left deceleration lane at the eastern site access. Please confirm that this approach looks acceptable. I would appreciate any feedback before we start the analysis. Thanks! Kari Kari I McDowell Schroeder, PE, PTOE Transportation / Traffic Engineer WELL CDO a ERNSOOOINGINFEF ING.�.I.C. TAPfITATdN ENM£ER040 GGNMI.iLTANi$ Eagle • Broomfield • Grand Junction 970.623.0788 0 303.949.4748 0 303.845.9541 fax kari@mcdowelleng.com www.mcdowelieng.com 0 Please consider the environment before printing this email. P,oj 7 6w�red �� / e Py aa7Ua� asa/¢n a ©PH IIUA PaaSa�aS o�aPa. S o $ C�� j 6, 0e o 0 O �2 °E,�e alo,iG Pea4 suoil'3 y 55 o�o S 0 Je��c Oast' � 0� a e ai U ®Pa o ew oo m O 1p SO ad a Rqq �S� O 0,'9�� \d h o ",p 5a{0 55 e o ss -16' °mss 00 I 41 GO oc°fociLooe06bh IOE/j00911911 a 01 [06]O m m � °� N E N E _ 0 U 0 U a N N a aoa ca F > ca F m jrn U m o > _ =ca m U C Y N Y U o N N O (6 F a ¢R 0 N v C3 Z W W J u X X u X X u u 55 o�o S 0 Je��c Oast' � 0� a e ai U ®Pa o ew oo m O 1p SO ad a Rqq �S� O 0,'9�� \d h o ",p 5a{0 55 e o ss -16' °mss 00 I 41 GO oc°fociLooe06bh IOE/j00911911 a 01 [06]O N U 7 Oi � LL a C ca 0 cn C,5 d I, C .n w N 1Go V,��1O _pNp� °� a aoa wx� K;. N U 7 Oi � LL a C ca 0 cn C,5 d I, C .n w N n � d � 0 O1 U LL ,� O CL U cC H cz O x cz 0 m CL Lo N O N 00 ro SO L0L �� .BOLL OEC r OEZ Sal .r mm \b 71� s s�6s ����o 00 1 S SSS!\ rS! 2��� Soar 01 p��+� S 25 s�! °! U C7 \ 3 p�'p! pSS S Cb 2�0 /O 9 y S2 PCO �y .a wx� s s�6s ����o 00 1 S SSS!\ rS! 2��� Soar 01 p��+� S 25 s�! °! U C7 \ 3 p�'p! pSS S Cb /O \yam y S2 PCO �y IfJ fA C N Ccu e� N N LL J E _ U J _ N OJ > U LL 0 a C U or d OJ O W 6 9 U C-) E L 099 F E s E fr, N cC O ® a z > o CL) n = m o 0 o� t m O L mm 0 F- a- w N m n N u W � sA CL A—ObA u u u u � } N ®R��,: Z X OW X X . J Xczcz P,oj 4/1"l lte^ 5w,,'cl S6� 6 SSO op O S'os� I e Py aa7Ua� ase/¢n e\ �PFi I!eA PoaSa�aSto�oPd. I O SSS S 20 SSS R/ 0 r ghOh r'm .j.,.0 Pea4 suoil'3 'Y5 O O W o OS ® G`oo� 'oS 411 S r peaysuoil'M 1 OS /PSTN %N� 6 h 'ph (S) o x-088 (06L) n N 0 �SL8 (098) �� LSBb l—OAZ �a � � 2 (OS) �5L (55) (go')SLZ � X90 L (58) (S8L)SBL� 0 90,(5o[) (OSE) SSE �r %5L (OW Pa Fot05t � �O 0O{ s� e oys Spry ® S, S O 00,s, p5 srO{ �S 2 01 ,00t yde5 OSS eQ•a' e S U m S6, ® acY`ot °s SS S o 95 Z�l ok, 190 00 ^Opp inoin in —rm S 20 SSS R/ 0 r ghOh r'm y o� s°(o �� .-1 W wx� 95 Z�l ok, 190 c^/ SSSS, y o� s°(o SZ��SJL) ,Awe } r HATCHLINE SEE SHT. 3 U% F� w �20 .I� ..1 �~r� RM 1 :r: tl • K�ou 1 X jsh " IL T '1HS 33S 3NI-IH31dW -0 9 ra.klomu rrr Et+,1 2018 Total PM.syn Intersection Intersection Delay, s/veh 0.1 Movement SEL SER NEL NET SWT SWR Vol, veh/h 0 0 18 529 600 18 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Free Free RT Channelized - None None None Storage Length 0 - Veh in Median Storage, # 0 0 0 Grade, % 0 - 0 0 - Peak Hour Factor 92 92 92 92 92 92 Heavy Vehicles, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 Mvmt Flow 0 0 20 575 652 20 Major/Minor Minor2 Major1 Major2 Conflicting Flow All 1276 662 672 0 0 Stage 1 662 - - - - Stage 2 614 - - Follow-up Headway 3.518 3.318 2.218 Pot Capacity -1 Maneuver 184 462 919 Stage 1 513 - - Stage 2 540 - - Time blocked -Platoon, % Mov Capacity -1 Maneuver 178 462 919 Mov Capacity -2 Maneuver 178 - - Stage 1 513 Stage 2 523 Approach SE NE SW HCM Control Delay, s 0 0 0 Minor Lane / Major Mvmt NEL NET SEW SWT SWR Capacity (veh/h) 919 0 HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.021 - + HCM Control Delay (s) 9.002 0 0 HCM Lane LOS A A A HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0.065 + Notes : Volume Exceeds Capacity; $ : Delay Exceeds 300 Seconds; Error: Computation Not Defined Vail Marriott Residence Inn McDowell Engineering Vail, CO Page 1 HCM 2010 TWSC 2040 Total PM.syn Intersection Intersection Delay, s/veh 0.1 Movement SEL SER NEL NET SWT SWR Vol, veh/h 0 0 18 890 975 18 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Free Free RT Channelized - None None None Storage Length 0 - Veh in Median Storage, # 0 0 0 Grade, % 0 - 0 0 - Peak Hour Factor 92 92 92 92 92 92 Heavy Vehicles, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 Mvmt Flow 0 0 20 967 1060 20 Major/Minor Minor2 Major1 Major2 Conflicting Flow All 2077 1070 1079 0 0 Stage 1 1070 - - - - Stage 2 1007 - - Follow-up Headway 3.518 3.318 2.218 Pot Capacity -1 Maneuver 59 269 646 Stage 1 329 - - Stage 2 353 - - Time blocked -Platoon, % Mov Capacity -1 Maneuver 55 269 646 Mov Capacity -2 Maneuver 55 - - Stage 1 329 Stage 2 329 Approach SE NE SW HCM Control Delay, s 0 0 0 Minor Lane / Major Mvmt NEL NET SELn1 SWT SWR Capacity (veh/h) 646 0 HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.03 - + HCM Control Delay (s) 10.747 0 0 HCM Lane LOS B A A HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0.094 + Notes : Volume Exceeds Capacity; $ : Delay Exceeds 300 Seconds; Error: Computation Not Defined Vail Marriott Residence Inn McDowell Engineering Vail, CO Page 1 2018 Total PM.syn Intersection Intersection Delay, s/veh 1.5 Movement SEL SER NEL NET SWT SWR Vol, veh/h 33 33 42 514 600 42 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Free Free RT Channelized - None - None None Storage Length 0 0 47 - Veh in Median Storage, # 0 - - 0 0 Grade, % 0 - - 0 0 - Peak Hour Factor 92 92 92 92 92 92 Heavy Vehicles, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 Mvmt Flow 36 36 46 559 652 46 Major/Minor Minor2 Major1 Major2 Conflicting Flow All 1325 675 698 0 0 Stage 1 675 - - - - Stage 2 650 - - Follow-up Headway 3.518 3.318 2.218 Pot Capacity -1 Maneuver 172 454 898 Stage 1 506 - - Stage 2 520 - - Time blocked -Platoon, % Mov Capacity -1 Maneuver 163 454 898 Mov Capacity -2 Maneuver 163 - - Stage 1 506 Stage 2 493 Approach SE NE SW HCM Control Delay, s 23 1 0 Minor Lane / Major Mvmt NEL NET SEW SELn2 SWT SWR Capacity (veh/h) 898 163 454 HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.051 0.22 0.079 HCM Control Delay (s) 9.224 33.2 13.6 HCM Lane LOS A D B HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0.16 0.806 0.256 Notes : Volume Exceeds Capacity; $ : Delay Exceeds 300 Seconds; Error: Computation Not Defined Vail Marriott Residence Inn McDowell Engineering Vail, CO Page 1 HCM 2010 TWSC 2040 Total PM.syn Intersection Intersection Delay, s/veh 3.4 Movement SEL SER NEL NET SWT SWR Vol, veh/h 33 33 42 875 975 42 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Free Free RT Channelized - None - None None Storage Length 0 0 47 - Veh in Median Storage, # 0 - - 0 0 Grade, % 0 - - 0 0 - Peak Hour Factor 92 92 92 92 92 92 Heavy Vehicles, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 Mvmt Flow 36 36 46 951 1060 46 Major/Minor Minor2 Major1 Major2 Conflicting Flow All 2125 1083 1105 0 0 Stage 1 1083 - - - - Stage 2 1042 - - Follow-up Headway 3.518 3.318 2.218 Pot Capacity -1 Maneuver 55 264 632 Stage 1 325 - - Stage 2 340 - - Time blocked -Platoon, % Mov Capacity -1 Maneuver 51 264 632 Mov Capacity -2 Maneuver 51 - - Stage 1 325 Stage 2 315 Approach SE NE SW HCM Control Delay, s 97 0 0 Minor Lane / Major Mvmt NEL NET SELn1 SELn2 SWT SWR Capacity (veh/h) 632 51 264 HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.072 0.703 0.136 HCM Control Delay (s) 11.139 172.5 20.8 HCM Lane LOS B F C HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0.233 2.842 0.464 Notes : Volume Exceeds Capacity; $ : Delay Exceeds 300 Seconds; Error: Computation Not Defined Vail Marriott Residence Inn McDowell Engineering Vail, CO Page 1 all EEMN- .dor rm 7ff -T . � � � JIB * ' � , i iLU o i i0 „o -,o7 1 0�,0-,9Z za YW Of ry � Q CD Z_ Q � � Q 00 0- 22 r co ti J >- LU Oz ~ I W i iLU o i i0 „o -,o7 1 0�,0-,9Z za YW Of ry � Q CD Z_ Q � � Q 00 0- 22 r co ti „o -,o7 /Q I / %- It /r / ,o -,9z / z �w / / Q Q �z / 00 �� w/ LU � / = w /Q I / %- It IN N 912[11 M I- LO 0 v ' Ili➢[��Ivlffl DIVIN o co Q�9 C? 0) C=I) LO M ..O-.t7Z ih C? ZY) 00 CY) C? O 110-12 4 CY) 00 LO w O m CO 1 l31 Ola r OME al of a C7 MEN WZ DO 0 J Oo O U) X z 2 U w z w 5 O O w CO O 0 w Q O F- CO W Q d' O H C0 f I T U) w z,(\:/� F-1 w IL£ JI Y O U U I LU C� CD co W _❑-❑ O 00 co x I � coI< c W ❑ x Iw � I� z is x IO J I I I I� I I 0000000000000000000000000000 000000000000000000000000000 I I OI WIIUII1 CO k�> wI I I I I YI�I I I W bL.j WCO�O0 �O O❑ W L 1 I❑o ��m a Co I „ o 04 - r - H I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 11 11 I w O m CO 1 l31 Ola r OME al of a C7 MEN WZ DO 0 J Oo O U) X z 2 U w z w 5 O O w CO O 0 w Q O F- CO W Q d' O H C0 f I T U) w z,(\:/� F-1 w IL£ JI Y O U U I LU C� CD co W _❑-❑ O 00 co x I � coI< c W ❑ x Iw � I� z is x IO J I I I I� I I 0000000000000000000000000000 000000000000000000000000000 I I OI WIIUII1 CO k�> wI I I I I YI�I I I W bL.j WCO�O0 �O O❑ W L 1 I❑o ��m a Co I „ o 04 - r - H I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 11 11 Co 0 0� 1 ___ U z w _ z J � i z r a mw Y w CO 0 7F I r jc,5n l0❑ 0,❑ l0❑ 0,❑ pil'umm i'l ai 0 0 1 I I ___ U z w _ z J � i z r a mw Y w CO 0 7F I r jc,5n l0❑ 0,❑ l0❑ 0,❑ pil'umm i'l ai 0 0 --- 1 \ m 1 I Z W O� ❑ IO❑ O,❑ IO❑ O,❑ IO❑ EEI❑ U 0 0 0 0 1 U -RFS, F -IIP UZ COz -.PIS+ �- O (� J Z w ❑o� Z� LU o � � ❑�� Y I I U -RFS, F -IIP UZ COz -.PIS+ �- O (� J Z w ❑o� Z� LU o � � ❑�� Y � W CO O ❑ - O C�l I{1UH Lkm—m - - 7F❑ ❑ o M F--4) - _ co AV H ❑ FA7 O - _ L�j ': � ;ri o❑hN El 7�7 o F - DF-LEl1H�1 �0�O coJ161- ❑ � _ O I� fh'I'NI El1H�1 - - - LJ � ❑ o HFH AV H ❑ FA71 O - _ o❑ I K? - - O N imMi® 1"I'VIlm 1 I IMMIA v 0 rK Q 0 U ❑ 0 O z7 o 1 I I I I 0 rK Q 0 U ❑ 0 O z7 o J� F -I 1 11 11 1 4-1 III III uTE 0 LO :rD C) C) 0\ 0 7 0 !;4 NN� ; po may. p &, oi, ::ma I;:MI 0 0 4 0 m 1WON SEE _311 -. ::ma I;:MI 0 0 4 0 SEE _311 -. ::ma I;:MI 0 0 4 0 1� mm Mml=: � I mm..m .— .01-1 roanmm I= Im M t SII� 1 1 Rup v wmtm- -I I Sam mm NS am ON. M OIL MIR m 'no AM 0 iii-wj � is main::]I m M�m i MIMI Mo Mm '�'�'��� ��II O L=_J�I ❑■ �l�l ILII :ISI 01_I�I 0 �I�1 ISI �I :ISI❑■ IEI�I O �I�I ,lam Kh 5 OMNI ■1 ai;�l ■� MM� a! ■1 3 � mp== M1 n: ism d. -. Y:r 10=11MUM.1 �Y ti ti Slr w 7 ,L 1 . •/ Ferri}' - �.7 _ F , . �• " ' •f x VHF'•" V##M F//'••• r� � - �i � - S ti 4 ■ 1 761. ' u AL i MFww� R !F wPll■■17!!!41 I� Y i 1■ii.flif Myi� � 111E ■�� Poo_.�._ s RV7-7 � 111E ■�� Poo_.�._ ddmdkb- i. _ = � i � 111E ■�� rr . ■ _ = � i -I L [fl MA' I— W6 24 dd— - — dh— .77 ;m f , 4A -9-M I .I son �h I' I - IF 40 4 j=a Jr � I m biz! C. L' - I I=, MEN m q4m fir► � �r'���: �� � :��.�� .- �� !IPM , _ a �. ko 17 I&= am amm IBM MIM U ftp IN A7= sm am am S� am .� Mom om ' If ti _ I, LL lam,. v, --� - - ` -3q� � f W Awl.. tl IWr ' 'u +k� wl jj *,., 7Rlw AV IiR TAP db.- \7,.., *7.d a i isms Nd .. lk. -NY, hlL . OW io k m !,.r OA I 7- A V -11%1* Y M.-C..L�w um- " a7iillFllld i' Iii ■I � r:..} �I !R =I 1i �Mlmi !F, A ro fit . moor1i. OF PF Ir ll � , -•. •. I IMO n.!' INV liSEI ll F r =+_ r 1 r r. c•.. � � � � r� r r f� P' NW .Y•F++�'+'saF_s"'T�s III Jll TIM- I ;m t4it "IP 10 OR UP j SAME" �d M M MLlim LIMM LMM m v—, wo m 63 Rol IMEMAN.1001 fli 4 r1film - V:m M M MLlim LIMM LMM i i+ Ii, Z M +17 tea- 1Al y r Hoo w■ �r it -01W 0.- .t i I �';'�� �I,�S #�iAlllF��l4 rl 1. Or, i "NowIF Us 1 11 r mommommow ITM r, I 4-.. f r I �. MIN, I IJ. � �`•. p "'Xi. of 5 , is ;xt .1 06 "N 11114.1m C TY, 0 < � LU -j . \ uj � M \ LLJ � !\ Z k & $ I �. ® O\ 4 I /§ /b �LU �& > k\ \2 �\ 77 (4\ _ Nu LLP eQ � M a I Wti :Mem In 1-7 P, vplpl�� VI -A Bm Law =ate eol ?m _ • a .aai .?I _aa■ Hm RMI --Mll viol= _:lim' 'Waif= Hm row77 AM& APR AMMOF - -�------�C� /W -2/j f ; jAOL41 41 Air �r � f fffi' � • !a Y � AV Awl ENO -L�-� -r 7 ...,C R4 AP OR ":, I -%ft -A F cro r%*4ml Awl Smil - OIL- w� co co C) 0) C) 0) co ti i N E C :(Y)::: c Ir 0l CN, m CY) 6 CD 8j 0 0) 00 Cf) ti T 0 r 1. CO CO 00 0 E E �W) mqT Ce) C\L -91 I 5 * 3 J, •+�{ f - r 1 ,.".a .".a t * 1 s "k 1 l 71 low 'G ' 1 VOL -- a.a . � i !r ::�•, - iii' - _�' .' 1 , ,.".a .".a %im-Man, M7124 17 Ad= ..Agin V.N 1-2 %im-Man, M7124 17 Ad= ..Agin V.N ,77. lk, -OMSK TM m, IL -7a .. p -P NOV :-LAY ZA ORE "MIMC, lil IL mW AM -7a .. p -P NOV ORE "MIMC, :-LAY ZA 41� \�r -7a .. p -P NOV :-LAY ZA ORE "MIMC, Pt 04� ik t4P 414 A, U4� sL pW7!R"ll` 40 Aft" �tg' -A 'A OR Tog aer "P. ti I I I 14 l 1 I I l' I - *.=•ter, .JL-rl!dr k�. •. L rel �...–�.61 .�. 4 � '� M } • a ` �ryr � �' �. 444 r' t —I— JYJk}� l + f } of 1 M T _ 5 T i r moi'CO-4Lr + J r, a.ipod + 1 SV. + f } of 1 M bw I F # Imo, t ; ' -P.1 i f J ' y irp do ar q5—�— .4 ; a. �F41 R• + •� w - P. r .' ' kd, t, r it �� - �•� �1 - � 1 � ' ���F4�al -•may' - � 5 Ok�4 �`� III INTI SII I � TA z M J 75 rm OR OR pq 0 rm 0 _o 07 U) co u LL 0 0 ry Z LU LU ry CD H U - d O d co d cn LON r O "i O r tD co O r I` m r N N r J O J Q O Z J = U-ui U F w o Lu N �QQ O U J n'0w Z Q�� ci U)Z>LU � ~OwQ � w w a Q Q Q J :::) J F Q O Q U U) H U - d d d d d Un Un Un Un N Cfl N I` O I�07 r N r Co 'IT O co LO r N � N N J Q U Z Q 2 U O w 75 O w o J U Q LL w �w ci � o OQ CO U) --V U) w � jo = a O LU w"Q = C�QU �F- � rl ISI a lol � ohow 0 lolo ,. I�w I/ I X oz / �w �z / 00 �061 w� . LU / / = w .D -,Z L .D -,Z l O N:) :Qcq a: 100 Q "'<Z> % D C> Qa P� O C: U) Q O U (1) -0 C O c U) ° An ?� -c- CL c: nC= N CZc )'T L o (15 � g c _o m 0 0 0 a) Co U_ a) coO U) p U C ~ C (6 E L E U L C L 0 c6 O M a •� o �� > L a) ccO L O p C CL _ cu co � .� C> co L o0 o a) c 0 a3 E o 0 (D n o m p ��U U) ° �� U l6 N O �' O a) C > > -r-c ui CL > E Un m C ° 0 U) ca o L > c ° c 0�� i��� 0Eo0 rz 0� m 41� i U�L — a) ,� L U p (6 Q a) a) C3 (0 i •U L N lA p C 0 U 7 L U L C U L 'X — p M a) U O a) n3 p L U p U U) O C a) a) C a) L C E > U> p L Fu —_ p L Q O U a) L CO U U V) U "o 'cn 'M O U C a) L C C C C N N— '� C N U— C Q a) C c E C ?j lA •� Q) O0 0.Fu p p vm en s " U c 0 E ~ L o 0 c 4)U C L L N C• � O U L U O ff~ ?j 7 U j 0 •X L— U W a Co ° > � � U) L ai o) a) L Z) a)U).- a) O a) a) O C X C E a) U> Z °(z m _0-t6 0n m E ° U) ° L ui up C (� •iZ N -0 -0 u) a) u] u) �� �� m L Z p N M m C a) O m O p p O> L O Oco U p � t� v Cu> � 0 CL !E � p U U) v Fn rzL) 0oAEmU ac U) O o E o a) WU� o o �� C c o L° c� c=o�� 70 Mn o o ° lA >1 p O a) b p cUa U� - 0 > N L ai ° o v 0 0-2 c(i ZL m C U i > a) a) C t6 c6 O L C >p C (6 •O N L O a) Q) •0 L C U U c6 Q c6 p U) "O C n a m o> a C 'C L 0 c Q c 0 Q a�0 oa =� 0 a cLg� U�~>, 0) E cc L) o p co E 0 0 .0 p ° c U u, �Q > =3 -0 °LU in z O m 0 CM— >;cz E Q Eo �E = 0) cu WLacoa p a) 0 O°_ " U)U)Q OC�E` 6O (DQ N Q u] co C13U) a) o—C L`fo nm . =3 CU E U 0 mc �co a ) O to n O p Q U L c OsmC0CO U N p ui p ui >% a QC QLLO co N30_u°LL E aN ~ U u)pU co O -C 0 C p aO 7 co ONOS p L-0 Ucc6pc6> 23 a O� ° m c nU) cn °E'°c0 o�MU)�<0co 0 Z) -0 Uao) ca = Q OL6 CO 6 O c'7 Cl) M Cl) C7 co 1� 1� C _ p U Q) Q (06 C N N — (6 U N > N p (0 _ to n3 ui U z Q Q z_ U) O 2 00 H U) Q w J H Q } W J O O Q U) J J Q U z O U LU 0- U) U) z_ J Q z LL J Q z O LL M l6 Lf) •� �_ L CO CO O art n W .. •� .�. Al L A� I'►I'�IIII►�'I�I II II IIII I I I IIII I II II IIII I I IIII I I I►I IIII II IIII II ► I� II II �I IIII I IIIUs 0001 IIII I IIIA I I IIS IIII I II III II I II I IIII I I I II III I I III I II I II I I II III I I III I II I II I I II III I I III I (IIII II II III II III I II I II I II III II III I II I III I II III I I ► II I II I III I II III I I SII I II I III II III I I II I II I III � II III I I I ► II I III II III I I IIII �� I I II � l 11 � III I I I 111 I II� JAI 11 l 1 1 I I 1 IIII I dol I IIII SLI / IIS II // 111 II 0 1Z F �. S2 W bi Y ^� o ow 0 Z in 6 -1t1 \-801 I 1 11) ItA CO h' (5Za V0C Q MQ(! JUC Q� �CZ O 6Z'266L = A3�3 Ind a z 28'2Z+O = ViS IAd co N 3NIl 2131! V8 — X W AS IDOL I OO p z OD O O C9 C9 z � q F X W 0'866/ O O + 0 0 N LL Z a� gU O W' O 0 r W ry co (n O W p: Ua U ry as Za �w N (n UII a'. (n r .m i U m 2.0' a w = H w J W U M U W m W 6.0' I a(n > z a- a w < ow w � m 0 Q CD uj CO LU Im I J LL Q Z W a Z J M CD 0 M W > CD _ O CL r } W >aQ m J O > U) O .m i U m 2.0' a w = H w J W U M W a W W LL ~1 6.0' I a(n > z a- a m < ow � 1.0' 30.8' w z W G O Q CD uj CO O Im N W U' W 00 CD .m i U m w M z M J ~1 W m co coco W' � II a CD I SECTION At in m W W < O w LLI 0 Lu 80 �z C/) W cD C) V w 0- C) O T 77 N Cl M Lot M N M M ~1 co co coco �1co �1 co M TIM O ti N Q•p adid t,/L •Uiw „Z L Cfl (A O zm U p 2 Q U� 1 v N� a' Z o 00 O V CL (31 rnN W CL (n C W N a CL CL CL Y J Q LU W r) Z O (D Z 0 Z m W Z a O w Q U V z 0 0 LU m N� L.L LU J D U o F 2 N QQQY LCHN wz W Z Q mU 0 OOZ m L,, W U 0 O zm U p 2 Q U� n O vCj Q. J Q¢ w W �_ H K v a' LLJ V p p. a p. V v 'O U a LLIa 2 a- J Oa. CC) (jam. LLI a p fG 2 Z a. Q o a. ¢'n 0 ¢ r to 0: p ' o v:• o �n >' .p a. Z p ... a A a 2 v O L) p Q' : p v p.to O Y U O 0 C9 2 00 U J dwns 0 0 Z „Z l iv O_ U W O) ',Z O bi dWns "Z L N uj w of m O Ln LO m Ld U) U 0 U U F a aLLJ a L Z O w Dor W O O- Of N Of o<0 W 0 H O NaF- U p O w J (n ofW W amof N>- < Z p w a mE= Z_ Y U Z U i-- W W 0 z a r xN N N 00 F� ww J > Z Q w = F-0 w F- L) Z O x U J J a W Z cm ry U M X N Hzilt 0 0 C�OM W CO 00 0) � N Of UJ w PO F O U N U N m N m W 2 uj w of m O Ln LO m Ld U) U 0 U U F a aLLJ a L Z O w Dor W O O- Of N Of o<0 W 0 H O NaF- U p O w J (n ofW W amof N>- < Z p w a mE= Z_ Y U Z U i-- W W 0 z a r xN N N 00 F� ww J > Z Q w = F-0 w F- L) Z O x U J J a W Z cm ry U M X N )F !z |z |2 ;§ k !L '� Ldk �k § .§ \ O a w \_ < 0 » \ E ~ 3 8 I �LLJ 2 ƒ Cf)< D\ b k .. c o B \ z On E \ k < z § » § d § § d b b b \ � LLI � R § § § o ■ Im it § § 0 0 o R §� In § § �k / ® ^ m Ln §� 0 G - £ £ � -i C \- g q m- C4 o V) CAz C, m 7 _ � C14 n ) ( - � R }wwwwww� a. §0— IC 0 - o4 Q � z § CN ) ) §P � § N§ / §§ z o� 2 2 2 O N z U 2 ƒ w e PO o k 2 ® k) `^ � o / / \ §b� k/ 22 R�� 3 a p ± wo. \A k F- ® Ld �o E � u § \} E 2 }} k § 0 I / §■G§ w k z 2 / 0z0 0 )) 00 at m §_j§ sew &k _2LLo § ALL, inw /\0. �j— LLd L z §� In . �k / «k §� �z \ o� 2 2 2 O N z U 2 ƒ w e PO o k 2 ® k) `^ � o / / \ §b� k/ 22 R�� 3 a p ± wo. \A k F- ® Ld �o E � u § \} E 2 }} k § 0 I / §■G§ w k z 2 / 0z0 0 )) 00 at m §_j§ sew &k _2LLo § ALL, inw /\0. �j— LLd L I� I 0 N �0 w O° O �3�d D0 0 T- Doo �I w cu 1 r INTI — iD �P rn m � 0 FTIz 0�b ��� l l �— — ° 0 00. 00 I I �I lw� ly m N Oo Do o N� a � o loo 0° blootll � ob 0 �c° °�oo � J 0 �,o°do �o e \ / 1 0 1� (� 0\ r7Wrn o��°° 0000 T�II //oo o Oo �o / OoOo �I 71 � 0O 00o / 00x000 0 qI / 0000 b oo O000°Q� o Co� o �� Doo_o • ���� ��� i � 10 iPo oo oo °o �N O OooC o (l / o/ Q000� ri a -a o > / /��/��j //�/ // (1 �� / o°°�°°0 N r // �/ Tz/ i CP / / oo / �O /M / oo /Z / oo o 0 3� Ul rn �z �zO �� rno O O rn rn z > 3� r�-iCj Nzul dd DO O O rn DO > AO �� 4O =n' DO z3DU, rn� rui x► � rn OZ —n r> Ci rn z Dz rn� rn O q, NZZ Orn >zz>r U � 3 rn N N — — cn Ctr cn cn rn � � cn rn yr DDDDDDDDDDDD rrrrrrrrrrrr 00000060 0000 zzzzzzzzzzzz D -0 U) ���ZrrnDXIx>�l; -a0m> p>(i yrQcClDrnzXl�Mt-n�m pr ter; n r�Z-QC1�i-ttC7�.(� �NNpppcnppcnpNrn r rnuJu>=!rcnyz N�3rn—rno�Noi�c�No�c�o�OSc� dr XOMZZ>C%-jz-i -jDNOrn oe oP opcN rnrAt70ZD—DO�OcrnzClNCp0-a�NN <�a ZC1NU'O-nMZr pz�tXlC�rnzOyn�1 0 rnpD rttNC�-n0 -nmw DzOC1 � DO Zcr�d XIMD rnNrDrnCA z ����-7C rn a NrInrnN�NO ;aD x �imtitr-Ofn,3rny� rXtC� QrnXlCprn� 3��—NDC O Ommzrn rmmr-> i N D z �OzOCi 3N G�CpXtr N ccs rn U3 rn UJrnZZ— N U3 U3 U) Z7C3: rn� --n :K >rnNOr�r-�rnmrn-�yAdNu DN rC��DA�yrn-aN >IrnNcrn D -i 3 -ct0 �trA�DCi uA-a z:m i 5�rn�'>Zrn(�i 3—�� orQrnCbNfTt,�0��rAIty�IcC��(DP�tD �xpa AZ OO rn' �-1 >Az Nrn� Np7C ONQ N—DDDC -n:2 NN n'� Nni N§O rn� rn00 0zzr-t1�C��2-N 2N 0iaNNZ - d�n�>Oz7Dr-i--a-10i�rr y�N rn U) Nip% �U3OANQr�rn U0rMi l�i-on rD =00r r�0N-n-adzNNz ZOO G� mrrnnC zCln' p�rZDD-a> x 0 A � rnVmG d�ZrnONDN� O N rnA N 0 u D- ay��ix rn zD<��1r�tD O rn-1 O rn Z D�rp�r>n nrA z� N _N D OO nQ%lznmyrnzrz Xr= 3c zzrnQQilNr,ilDrn _Zr xn r�NDzr�NODO20 —z r O O D Z O N; Q rn .rndrA6Au-j-iA yxlrn A1C) D,S�zOrnU OQ%-n j rrN -a Z O D N r -a Cil N" > rn U) �) 2 3 -j > m�1OBD -tl D „mr >-DNp o 0 �> u Mauriello Planning Group November 2, 2016 Planning and Environmental Commission Y. Matt Panfil , AICP Town Planner Town of Vail Community Development Department Re: Marriott Residence Inn and Employee Apartments Dear Matt and PEC Members: This letter is intended to provide you with a summary of the changes we have made to the plan based on comments we received from staff, heard from the PEC and the public at the hearing held on October 10, input we received at the open house we held on October 17 with the neighbors and public, and comments we received from CDOT staff regarding our access. A revised submittal document has been provided reflecting the changes. We requested this application be tabled from the October 24 PEC hearing date and rescheduled to the November 14 hearing date in order to afford our team more time to appropriately address comments and revise the plans. We believe that the revised plans address all of the comments we heard in a meaningful and significant manner and hope that you will agree. We did this without losing any apartments or hotel rooms. Building Height. Mass. and Architecture You will note some dramatic changes to the proposal. The building was lowered and the floor to floor dimension was reduced in order to significantly reduce the height of the building much closer to 48' in height. The garage level was lowered 10' to assist in the reduction of building height. The tower on the west west of the building was also lowered resulting in a reduction in height of 13' - 9" on the west end of the building. The reduction in overall building height on the west side of the building is equal to approximately one story of the building. The building was essentially pushed down into the ground. Some of the areas that exceed 48' in height tend to be architectural elements which in many cases code allows to exceed building height up to 15'. The bulk and mass and the facade of the building have been broken up significantly with 6', 8' and 10' changes in the facade. The roof forms have been revised to also lessens the scale of the building. Additionally, a more formal porte cochere has been provided at the hotel entrance to enhance the architecture of the building and improve the arrival experience. We believe these efforts have addressed the comments we received from the PEC and the public in a genuine and significant way. Vehicular Access and Fire Staging You will also notice changes to the vehicular access to the site as well as the front driveway and entrance to the garage. These changes are the result of three considerations: the need to provide the Vail Fire Department with a dedicated fire staging area (20' x 40'), the lowering of the building height which lowered the elevation of the garage floor level, and based on comments provided to us by CDOT and the neighbors regarding the location of the western access to the property. The west access has been relocated to the east and a new ramp is provided to the below grade parking and loading facility. Fire staging will now occur on the far east end of the driveway with direct access to a fire command center for the building. With this dedicated staging area, the remainder of the driveway is no longer designated as a fire lane. Parking and Loading The parking garage has been modified as to provide 360 parking spaces, 14 of which are tandem spaces (7 spaces used by 14 cars). One of the concerns of the PEC was how the tandem parking would operate. We have addressed this concern by eliminating the bulk of the tandem parking. The 14 spaces are designated as apartment spaces. While the applicant believes that the apartment parking will be over parked using the Town's codified formula for parking requirements, the applicant is proposing parking in strict compliance with Town Code including the non -discretionary multiple use credit of 7.5%. As a result of using the Town's parking formula and credit the parking will be utilized as follows: • Apartments - 210 spaces (for 113 units) • Hotel - 110 spaces (for 170 hotel rooms) • Leased Parking/Surplus —40 spaces Level one of the parking garage will have a clear height of 10' minimum as will the entrance with consideration for the slope of the driveway. Provided are four shuttle bus parking spaces as well as two generous loading spaces: one for the hotel and one for the apartments. There will remain a loading space for larger delivery trucks in the front F, Iulld driveway. This project will have very limited need for day to day loading and delivery given the limited food and beverage services or lack of retail uses provided onsite. Apartment Deed Restrictions The proposed deed restriction for workforce housing has been modified to simplify the process and enforcement. Originally, the applicant was proposing to mirror the deed restriction for the Lion's Ridge project. However, that restriction only provides that 70% of the units be deed restricted and allows the operator to dip below the 70% limit under certain circumstances. The Lion's Ridge deed restriction does not translate well to this project. Instead, the applicant is now proposing that 107 of the 113 units be deed restricted as a Type 3 EHU using the Town's standard deed restriction without modifications. That leaves only 6 apartments that will be unrestricted yet they will still limited as rental units (i.e., not condominium units for sale). The 107 units to be restricted will be indicated in a final plan at building permit. This puts the percentage of deed restricted units at 95% of the apartments available. The applicant believes this approach to be the cleanest approach and allows 6 units to be leased to non -locals or those working less than 30 hours a week should the need arise. None of these deed restricted units are being "banked" to sell to other developers. A type 3 deed restriction has been provided by staff. Venting and Mechanical The venting and mechanical facilities have been modified based upon PEC and neighbor concerns. The garage venting previously located on the west side of the building has been relocated. That venting is now located on the north side (well below the elevation of the roadway) and the south side of the building at the far east end of the building. The HVAC mechanical equipment and laundry has been relocated to the lowest level of the garage and there is no HVAC equipment proposed for the roof of the structure. Landscape Plan and Retaining Walls The retaining walls located behind the building have been revised to provide larger planting zones for trees and shrubs. The landscape plan has been updated to provide specific plant species and the detail desired by staff and the PEC. It should be noted that modifications to the landscape plan could occur during formal DRB process after the SDD approval occurs. CDOT allows trees to be planted in the right-of-way subject to approval of a special use permit (staff approval). This is not uncommon along the frontage roads as evidenced by the existing trees located in the right-of-way on the subject property. A similar approval was given by CDOT for the West Day Lot parking lot in Lionshead. There is an existing sewer line in this area that can easily be avoided with the planting of trees. Stamped preliminary engineering designs for the retaining walls and shoring have been included in the submittal. Iulld M, -A. Platting and Easements The applicant intends to plat the property as a single parcel of land. There is no condominium map proposed. There are several easements that will be vacated and several utilities that will be relocated. We don't expect any issues with utility providers in this regard and they are aware of our plans. All easements will be vacated or established on the plat or by separate legal instrument. The project is located within the area served ERWSD. The District has a process that requires payment of connection fees and payments for water rights that will occur prior to a building permit being issued for the project, no different than all other redevelopment projects within the Town. Exterior Lighting An exterior lighting plan has been provided. All light fixtures are proposed to be dark sky compliant bollards and there is no proposed light fixtures on the exterior building facades. Public Art As was the case with the previous project, the applicant proposes a bus stop enclosure that will be designed to meet any public art requirement. Site Coverage The site coverage calculation has been verified by the applicant. The below grade site coverage (parking structure) is 94.5% and the above grade site coverage is 55.4%. Sun Shade Analysis A revised sun shade analysis has been provided showing the shadow caused by this building on an hourly basis throughout the day on the winter solstice and the spring/fall equinoxes. The analysis shows very little impact to neighboring properties or Meadow Ridge Road throughout the course of the day. By 1:00 pm during the winter solstice, the most extreme day of the year for shadows, there is no shadows on Meadow Ridge Road. During the equinoxes, by 11:00 am there is little to no shadow on Meadow Ridge Road. Sidewalks The sidewalk along the North Frontage Road has been adjusted to provided opportunities for snow storage from community plowing. All of the internal sidewalks and the driveway on the subject property will be heated. Crosswalks and sidewalk connectors have been provided as suggested by staff. Vail Local Housing Authority Endorsement The Vail Local Housing Authority formally voted to endorsed the project (see endorsement letter). The Authority made the following findings in its motion: • The proposed project meets the strategic goals of the adopted housing plan; and • It furthers the policy objectives of the Deed Restriction Purchase Program; and 4 Iulld M, -A. The development of this project will add at least 107 employee housing rental units to the inventory of EHUs in the Town of Vail. We hope that you will recognize the substantial efforts taken to address the comments of the PEC and the neighbors. We are hopeful for a recommendation of approval to the Town Council. If the PEC has some element it wishes to disagree with (we hope there are none) we suggest that be handled with a condition of the approval. Sincerely, Dominic F. Mauriello, AICP Principal Iulld M, -A. Matt Panfil From: hmpiii@atlanticbb.net Sent: Tuesday, August 30, 2016 11:55 AM To: George Ruther Subject: New Proposed "Roost" Building Project Attachments: HillsideCondo20l6VailCityLtr.pdf George I am attaching a letter from Adelle regarding the "new" project. By the way, Adelle was a very successful real estate agent for years selling,in the main, residential properties in a borough of Johnstown,Pa that had its "we do not have enough commercial property to subsidize our school taxes,etc." problem.The straight up answer was consolidation with neighboring entities.That was turned down by the residents in a referendum vote.. So, in a democratic way. taxes on a fixed amount of residential real estate had to increase for schools, roads, etc, and we ALL have had to live with it; and we do. In my opinion,that is the way it is supposed to be handled.,not to renege on a "promise" [zoning] that is so necessary in a community as Adelle points out in her letter. I know Vail has this problem of maturity and success. Some states [Col??] make annexation much easier than Pennsyvania's requiring a vote. In addition, I am somewhat concerned about the value of the Hillside condos should this proposed building come into being. Does anybody have a feel for that or have concerns for the effected residents? Stay in touch.please, The sacrifice should be shared by the whole community somehow,not just a few. Thx for your time: Howard[Skip]Picking Hillside "C" pf 30/F4 �� s -t -7-6 rArn U�:e -tom u ' a�a� G�7 0l f —A,, a -a �-c�� ,vtv rd -r7 12'UtAj V-aZt U a -o qlLo -we e fl 7'r re. ? r�Q scrn %-C oeo T t 1 i 5att ; ro�nS�cf b u i ld r i s -f�ac� a 0 d-{ f7" T5 !nCal? 5�5 tonr CUi�-�L¢C.h�C� le bjbarharx . i Ke fia 1 f s t f e -ra+!F '' d. fa4Gl LGe�5 tGl �©rxi 5�i'75e f �; 9 �e -jccze C1t o gvt cry}, l! 1 r1 ap a -:t' r 5 rT r -lie l C h,bo r h ©od 6r - re S oon � 5 u4 -Le c �a -AD Vag I . �.7 A e-7 jt:�e1( jn LoV6 '5<1inj t?ndljAe V-ry _-YAE-era( rtalpioe- be v,e un a o ;%44ary� 6r=4+1 i 5 ir) &en Wi di1 n \(ar t K(1 vw oa * z#- `SGL& -d r i Yl (les ri7- MQ,y be aT f -e SK �� �, s e c� � ``fin �'r � co � � ►'s � �n� � � <. From: Kathryn H Schofield [mai Ito: kathryn.schofield@vvmc.com] Sent: Thursday, September 01, 2016 5:27 PM To: George Ruther Subject: uphold zoning laws Mr. Ruther, I am writing in opposition of the new proposed development on the site of the old Roost Lodge in West Vail. I think this project is way to big and doesn't fit with the neighborhood plans. Also, the zoning regulations would need to be changed to accommodate this development. What is the point of having zoning regulations if they are so easy to change? There must be a better idea of what to put on that land that fits with the current regulations and neighborhood plan. Thank you for your time, Katie Schofield From: rein karp [mailto:reinkarp(ayahoo.com] Sent: Thursday, September 01, 2016 5:32 PM To: George Ruther Subject: Building in west Vail Sirs; I visit resident relatives in Vail. I do not think the area should be spoiled by a new 6 story hotel. Rein Karp , Seattle From: Diane P[ma iIto: rockhound1962Cilamai1.com] Sent: Thursday, September 01, 2016 6:45 PM To: George Ruther Subject: Roost Lodge Lot Mr. Ruther, I am writing to oppose the proposed development of the 100 condos on this proprty! ! ! I oppose any variance to the current zoning! Please keep the charm of the community in tact. This proposal to change the character of the community is unacceptable to tell members of our community, the ones in which your office serves. Your support to our community is critical and very much appreciated. Please do not sell us out to the highest bidder. Thank you. Respectfully, Diane Pu From: Andy Gunion[mailto:aaunion(aewpartners.com] Sent: Friday, September 02, 2016 5:08 PM To: George Ruther Subject: Thoughts on the New Roost Lodge Redevelopment Application George, Please share these thoughts with the appropriate members of your team and with the PEC Commissioners. Thank you and have a good weekend. -Andy- I am writing in regards to the latest development application for the old Roost Lodge site in West Vail, now referred to as the Marriott Residence Inn. My father and I own a condominium in the Hillside complex directly north of the site. My wife and I lived in this condo for approximately ten years and we have been renting this unit to full-time vail employees since we moved to east vail in 2014. Being in the development business myself it is interesting being on the "other side" of the zoning process (developer karma I suppose) and I am highly sensitive to not being an irrational NIMBY or a hypocrite. I have watched my fellow Hillside owners and other neighbors who are not in the development business struggle to understand this seemingly endless stream of reapplications on this site and have seen them become fatigued by what feels like death by a thousand cuts — with each proposal coming back larger and taller. Until this point I have not voiced any serious concern, but the scale of this current proposal is really quite shocking. Increases in density are often an economic necessity to allow redevelopment, but in this case heights are increasing from what was a two and three story building in the Roost Lodge to a five and six story one. Has a tripling of height ever been approved in Vail outside of the village core? I am willing to bet that the consensus among a series of independent, objective planners focused solely on the context of the existing neighborhood would be that the appropriate height on this site is 3 —4 stories. The Town's staff and elected and appointed officials really need to take a step back and think about what type of precedent something of this scale would set for Vail's peripheral neighborhoods. Buildings of this scale, and larger, have certainly become commonplace in Vail's purposely dense village core, but this application is a dramatic departure from the existing tone and scale of the much less dense neighborhood of West Vail. West Vail is an existing neighborhood where, for the most part, the scale and layout of buildings generally respects neighboring properties, allowing most homes to enjoy a view of the mountains — one of the primary reasons people live in Vail. I believe the scale of this proposed building is similar to that of the large projects recently constructed in the village core (Solaris, Four Seasons, etc.) from the 1-70 side (5-6 stories). We all remember the incredible scrutiny that these projects went though and the extensive public benefits that had to be provided in exchange for their approved mass and scale — and these buildings are located in a much denser, commercial -oriented neighborhood than this Roost site. In the example of Solaris, the public benefits that this project provided were extremely beneficial to the immediate neighborhood within which the project is located — new plaza, entertainment amenities, retail, etc. It is unclear to me if this Roost redevelopment proposal provides any benefit to the surrounding neighborhood and will obviously have an extreme negative impact on views, character, traffic, etc. In addition, thanks to the high sales prices possible in the village these large buildings in the village core were able to afford expensive architectural features that help greatly to mitigate their scale. Unfortunately, at the end of the day, a limited service hotel or local housing project will not be able to afford such rich facades and run the risk of looking very generic and cheap at this large scale. I understand that the proposed project is comprised of components that the Town desires — Full Time Local Housing, Limited Service Hotel and Parking but why do all of these desires need to be jammed together into one massive project that is out of scale for this location? Why has nothing been constructed under the prior three approvals on this site and why does this building keep growing and growing with every revised application? I believe that the out-of-town developer dramatically overpaid for the property and underestimated the costs of construction in the mountains. This is unfortunate, but should this neighborhood be compromised to mitigate these private economic mistakes? I fully appreciate the economic challenges of building a hotel or locals housing in our marketplace. In the case of a hotel I would fully expect the project to require some residential component to reduce the hotel basis, but applying the local deed restriction to the residential units no -doubt reduces the incremental value of each residential unit. This then requires a dramatic increase the number of residential units. In the case of full time locals housing I would expect the developer to require some type of significant public subsidy and/or include a more profitable component — such as a limited service hotel. Combining these two economically difficult uses together has created a beast that smacks of desperation and a project that I'm not sure would be economically viable for the developer even if the Town approves the application as is. I think we'd all prefer not to be back here reviewing a 5th proposal in two years. This application should be rejected wholesale and the Town and the developer should decide what use they want to pursue on this site that is viable for the developer at a scale appropriate for this site. A limited service hotel with some residential units to buy down the basis or a full-time locals housing complex. Not both. In my personal opinion, if the Town is serious about increasing the stock of locals housing in Vail and willing to utilize town funds to that end then this is an ideal opportunity to provide significant subsidies to the developer to allow the site to be developed in that manner at an appropriate scale. On this note, the Timber Ridge redevelopment is only three stories. It could have been built at a larger scale without impacting any neighbors. The Chamonix site is much lower density as well — respecting the existing character of the neighborhood. If the Town is going to seriously consider this proposal then there are a whole slew of questions and concerns to be addressed. These include: • How does this proposal fit into the big picture of existing master plans and the long-term desire of the Town and the neighborhood residents for the character of this area? • Does the Town envision this neighborhood becoming a series of dense, large-scale apartment buildings, with the two and three story structures that exist today redeveloping into 5-6 story complexes over time? • Is the plan to have a row of large scale buildings flanking 1-70 with smaller buildings behind? • Or is this just a one-off spot zoning exercise for this site? • View impact analysis for the neighbors. • Sunshade studies—the access road to our complex is steep and will ice up if shaded. • Renderings and sections that show this building relative to neighboring properties Fagade would really need to be improved with much more variation in and out and up and down. I have seen very few projects that have successfully executed on making one long building really look like an eclectic row of buildings developed over time — as proposed. Most look contrived and cheap. A lot to think about here as you consider this proposal to build "The Great Wall of West Vail". Thank you for considering these thoughts and I appreciate all of your work and public service that helps to keep Vail such a special place to live in and visit. -Andy Gunion- Received Sun 09/04/2016 9:03 PM Roost Lodge Expansion The new proposal to expand the already approved large building size to an even bigger building is not what Vail needs. Just because this pushes buttons on Vail needs list — employee housing, parking, motel beds this is not the way to do it. To create an SDD [ special development district] and change the zoning on a site that already has more than generous zoning to something that creates a humongous building that not only over powers the site, but also the neighborhood and all of West Vail. To try and fit a size 12 building into a size 9 lot defies the character of West Vail. To change the zoning on this site will have repercussions now and in the future. If this done there surely be more pressure in the future to up zone other sites in West Vail. This site already has a large building plan that has been approved. But apparently is not financially feasible. So to enable a developer that cannot make his first 2-3 plans work, to a multi use building that of has to be even larger, unlike anything in West Vail is not a good plan for Vail. As you know Vail Resorts has recently committed to building employee housing and parking. Probably on the Ever Vail site, the Simba ski run site, or somewhere else where a building of this magnitude might be more suitable thus relieving these pressures. So I would humbly suggest that this proposal be tabled until we know what future more suitable proposals will surely come to meet these needs. To commit to a huge mixed use building that over powers all of West Vail. With tiny setbacks, pushing the building into the hillside and wanting exemptions from various codes, taxes and zoning etc. in what are essentially a residential neighborhood seems to be rushed at best. do not think that this proposal is clear to the residents of Vail. Pushing this through without careful consideration of the effects now and in the future by all needs to be done. Is this what we are crying out for? It would be good to put some sort of representation of the true size of this building on site. Maybe using power poles of the appropriate height at the corners with a bright cable between them to show the outline of this building. This would give all Vail residents a true representation of what will go here and maybe increase discussion about these subjects of what is going to happen to West Vail. I do not think an image on a screen would truly show the scale of this massive building on a 2 acre lot. The drawings they show now have the building disappearing off the page in a haze it's so big. This is not the solution or location to Vails housing, parking and motel problems by piggy backing onto an already approved building. Are there other proposals in the works such as the tear down of the West Vail Sports Authority Building and replacing it with apartments or the Holiday Inn back lot and what is Vail Resorts going to do? There does not seem to be a long term plan for West Vail. We do not need to be changing zoning until we have an idea what else may be coming. Give it some time to see. The Town of Vail does not build housing on its own sites of this magnitude why should we allow it here? I wish I could attend the various meetings on this but with such a short notice unfortunately have to be out of state. Like many neighbors in West Vail who are unable to attend. So I am relying on your discretion to slow this down and give it a good think. This can wait. It is August 28 if I get the zoning notice tomorrow it will be the minimum notice length for the PEC meeting on September 12! Sincerely, Greg Bemis QXP,.,.��7- : J ■ HOSPITALITY GROUP September 8, 2016 Planning & Environmental Commission Town Council Town of Vail 75 S. Frontage Road Vail, CO 81657 Dear PEC & Town Council Members: Like many business owners in the Vail Valley, I am constantly faced with the struggle of finding quality managers and professional staff for my restaurants in Beaver Creek and Eagle. I believe one of the major contributing factors for the shortage of a qualified workforce is the lack of reasonably priced housing. I have recently had to relocate management staff from Summit County to fill a void in Eagle County. I saw a presentation regarding the proposed Marriott Residence Inn hotel and apartment project proposed for West Vail. I urge the PEC and town council to approve this project so that construction can begin in a timely manner and we can start to address the very critical housing shortage in Eagle County. Best regards, e Jo n Shipp Owner, Roadhouse Hospitality Group Dusty Boot — Beaver Creek; Dusty Boot — Eagle; The Metropolitan, Beaver Creek; Luigi's Pastahouse, Eagle On Sep 8, 2016, at 4:50 PM, wendy erb <wen50nycgyahoo.com> wrote: George Thanks for the time you spent with me I will not be able to attend the next Monday, September 12 Meeting of the PEC at 1 PM. Please distribute my following comments addressed to the PEC Committee Members which partially articulates my strong opposition to the current request to establish a new Special Development District and further upzoning of the old Roost site, the newly proposed Marriott, apartments, and parking. Please confirm to me that you have gotten this. Thanks Wendy Erb to the PEC Committee Members Re: Proposal to create a Special Development District for a Marriott Note: I added 2 footnotes *1 & **2 which are at the end, but I couldn't get this to make a superscripts. Regretfully, I will not be able to attend the PEC Meeting on this coming Monday September 12, 2016, but i wanted to comment on the proposal to create a Special Development District for the old Roost site, where there is a proposal to build a Marriott Residence Inn, market rate employee housing and parking. I am not a developer, I am merely a concerned long time resident of West Vail. I have owned my place since 1999. I appreciate the town's desire to have more hot beds to add to its tax base, although arguably the increasing spread of airbnb and similar accommodations could be tapped for this tax revenue. In recent years I seem to run into an increasing number of foreign visitors who are staying in a "holiday house" that provides them with accommodations and partial board during their vacations in Vail. Needless to say I also run into people staying at various airbnb places, and know some people who rent out their places on airbnb. As a long time resident of Vail I am well aware of the need for additional parking and housing for employees Both of these are important goals and issues for the town to address which it has been trying to address for many years, perhaps almost since it became a town 50 years ago. (Yes I remember the old dirt parking lot where the Village parking structure now exists.) In fact, town council has in recent years shown its view of appropriate employee housing in West Vail by the development of the Commons, followed by the North Trail Townhouses, the redevelopment of part of Timber Ridge, now called Lion's Ridge Village and the proposed Chamonix project. What do all of these developments have in common beyond being on the North side of I-70 and west of the main tourist and commercial center of Vail and Lionshead, "the town core"? They all have a relatively low density. The newest project in the works, the much anticipated Chamonix project proposes to put about 50 units on the 3.5 acre site, or just under 14.3 units per acre. If the same metrics were applied to the former Roost site, now being proposed to be a special development district for a Marriott Residence Inn, parking and market rate housing then less than 29 units could be built on the less than 2 acre site (ie 4/7 the size of the Chamonix site and only 1/3 the size of the Lion's Ridge Village site). Instead the developer seeks to build a massive structure, and seeks to have its property declared a special development district so that it can build significantly taller and larger in terms of square footage GRFA than it is currently allowed to build. In fact the proposed structure seeks to have 283 market rate apartments and hotel apartments built on the less than 2 acre site (a residence inn is designed to be like and function like a residence, not just a sleep for a night place, or it would not have the cooking facilities). {Although the largest piece of land the town has built workforce housing on is Middle Creek which is different from the West Vail projects mentioned above because it is walking distance to the Village core, right opposite the village core, and truly nestled into a hillside; the height of the building does not cast a shadow on any town roads or other residences, but rather merely on the hillside above it, which I believe is Forest Service land.} It is important to bear in mind that this site which seeks to become a special development district has already been up -zoned in this century when over 10 years ago it was given the newly created zoning of PA -2 , so that they could put kitchens facilities in hotel suites (after all a residence inn is a hotel suite that is a mini apartment with kitchen facilities, a living room and a separate bedroom or bedrooms suites.) Now if this was being built as part of or adjacent to Vail's commercial core, the Town Core, then the density would be in keeping with the character of the Village, but instead it is proposed to be placed where it will overwhelm the surrounding residential neighborhood. This is the type of development that would make good sense to be built on part of the old proposed Ever Vail site, next to Lionshead. Vail Resorts has even said that it will work with the town to help achieve the workforce housing goals and alleviate the parking problems that Vail has. It should not be for the town to change its zoning to accommodate a developer who paid too much for a property with an existing hotel business on it, and then discovered that it costs more to build in the mountain region than they expected it would cost.* 1 (below ) Similarly I find that it is disingenuous to state that the part of the Marriott Residence Inn building that will be 72 feet tall will be placed against the hillside. Yes there is a hillside on the east side of the lot, and Meadow Ridge Road rises on the north side of the property enough that a retaining wall will need to be built to accommodate the large footprint proposed, but the height of the building will far exceed the hillside behind the building, blocking sunlight and views for the surrounding area. The steep road behind will be made icy and dangerous to walk and drive on due to the absence of sunlight hitting the road. Another indicia of the massiveness of the proposed building is the fact that the employee housing units will have a GRFA equivalent size that is greater than the GRFA for the Residence Inn part of the building. Currently, after the last rezoning the property can have a maximum GRFA of 129,896 square feet. However, the building that was last approved was for less than 58 of the maximum GRFA, and even the 2013 proposal was for less than 2/3 of the maximum GRFA. The newly proposed building would have a GRFA of only 70.2 % of the maximum allowable, thus making it "only 91,198 square feet", but only because the additional 95,785 square feet for the 113 employee housing units are not counted in the GRFA calculation. In reality this would be the equivalent of a 186,982 square foot building, 143 % of what is permissible on the site and almost 2.5 times what was approved in the most recent approval. **2 (below) Sadly I fear that an approval of another bigger spot rezoning again for this site has a long term detrimental effect for all of Vail which far outweighs the laudable objectives that the developer has set forth. It raises the question of what's to stop the same thing from happening in any other neighborhood in Vail? Although one might argue that there are not other slightly less than 2 acre lots, but that is not for the town to solve by rezoning this property. A developer can buy up a block of adjacent lots, or I would point to all the parks in east and west Vail. Yes they were bought to be permanently open space with RETT funds, but action could be taken to change the restrictions on the park land and make some or all of them available for sale to developers to build similar projects in the future, perhaps even taller to fit future economic needs. There are properties with aging buildings that might be likewise ripe for similar over development. The nature and spirit of any neighborhood should not be so easily cast aside. Bottom line I am opposed to spot zoning particularly in the absence of a well developed plan for all of West Vail that has been discussed with the neighborhood groups in the same way that comment was solicited for the Chamonix development, the underpass and similar large impact projects. Zoning should not be changed merely to meet the financial needs of each new developer who comes to town even if they "started coming to Vail on road trips while they were in school" and are not just showing up for the first time with a piece of real estate they bought which may have had some homes or existing businesses on it. I strongly urge that the PEC refuse to recommend doing any spot zoning by creating a special development district for this or any other site in West Vail, particularly before there is a well thought out and discussed with the community plan for all of West Vail. It is silly to rush into making such a significant change merely because a developer has a new idea of what to do with a property they acquired, or might want to acquire.. Further they should recommend that the developer go away and not come back until they have a proposal that is smaller, less than or at most equal to what was approved in the past, not greater than the past. That was already a building too large for the area. ***3 ( below) It is not for the town to approve anything a developer wants to build in order to make it attractive for them, especially if they have perhaps overpaid to acquire a property to begin with. The town has a duty to think about the residential property owners in the whole greater area. We should bear in mind that the developer bought an existing business and chose to tear it down, but did not have to destroy their business when they were lacking the financing to build a new project. There is no guarantee that approving anything larger for this property won't just further let the camel's nose under the tent as they seek to further enlarge the project and perhaps then not even build what they propose because their financing falls through again, even if the town waives all of its fees to help a private developer build. The developers request to be exempt from the customary fees and certain other requirements raises an interesting question. If a person wants to build a new house in Vail and build an extra employee housing unit or two as part of it will the town waive all of its fees and allow the house to greatly exceed what otherwise could be built on the site ? Can they also get their taxes reduced by having the Vail Housing authority take a minuscule ownership interest? If it can not be done for a private home, it does not make sense to allow that to be done here to profit an out of town developer. I am Wendy Erb and I live in West Vail and care about West Vail and the environment of the neighborhood. I also care about the overall effect each development had on Vail as a whole and the perception of it that our visitors have. I do not think tis is a good idea. Thanks for your consideration. Footnotes: *1. This would be the equivalent of the town rezoning a lot on Mill Creek Circle, Meadow Drive or Forest road if someone buys a house there intending to renovate and rent it out and make money from their purchase. Perhaps the owners of Hobart House would sell to a new owner who wants to keep renting it out for a profit. If they discover they can't get the rate of return they seek should the town let a new owner build a large than currently allowed 6 story house because the new owner bought a house they intended to fix up and rent out, but discovered it was going to cost too much to make enough money. I think the town would and should deny a request of "please let me build a 5 to 6 story tall house so I can rent it out and make money on my development, oh and by the way I'll throw in some market rate employee housing in the monolith I want to build, but it will be nestled into the hillside if I am building on Forest Road." The same should be true in this case. **2. The failure to count the square footage of employee housing units in calculating GRFA is a curious and arguably wrong decision. This illustrates how one can get around building limits and construct a building well out of proportion to what would or should be allowable on a site. Using the hypothetical example of rebuilding on Forest Road or in a similar area, perhaps a developer would like to tear down Hobart House and build employee housing for hospital employees and build 7 or 8 stories tall for that? Or, eventually Cathie Douglas will leave her house just opposite the hospital, part of which will be tall. Her cute house built in the early 1960's could be replaced by 6 to 8 stories of hospital housing and have extra parking created that would be conveniently located between the 2 gondolas. Would the town approve a special development district for her site. ***3. The inappropriateness and undesirability of such a large mixed project in this area is perhaps best indicated by the disinterest in the prior proposal of the buying public, the potential residents (or owners with an intent to rent out at presumably market rate). Specifically we can look to when the previous owners could not sell enough apartments in 2006 through 2008 to develop their planned large residence inn and apartments for purchase {albeit that project was smaller than what is currently proposed}. Although in the end the economy turned down, in the 2006 - 2007 ski season the economy was very robust, even overheated as illustrated by the flipping of pre -construction contracts for units at what became the Arrabelle. In contrast here in West Vail the developers could not sell even a significant number of the apartments they offered to the public. I am sure there were a variety of reasons, but I would guess part was that it was not a good fit with the neighborhood. Too big and not attractive. Matt Panfil From: Jorge Duyos <jduyos@jrdandassociates.com> Sent: Friday, September 9, 2016 2:13 PM To: George Ruther Subject: Comments for PEC re Marriott Residence Inn - Proposal to create a Special Development District Mr. Ruther — I am an owner of a townhouse at 1839 Meadowridge Road, behind the old Roost Lodge. I have owned my property since 2005, and although I split my time between Florida, Washington, DC and Vail, my family has spent many wonderful moments in our Vail home. My children have had so many memorable experiences there throughout the years, and we sit many a night on the deck looking towards the mountains and enjoying the great views that we currently are afforded. You have received letters of concern from my neighbors and I want to echo their concerns and request that the proposal to create a Special Development District for the old Roost site, where there is a proposal to build a Marriott Residence Inn, market rate employee housing and parking, be denied for all of the sound, logical reasons they have presented. Unfortunately, I will not be able to attend the meeting on September 12th, but I ask you to share our concerns with the PEC and hope that you will make the right decision. Thank you. Jorge Duyos 786-205-2735 Jorge R. Duyos, P.E., PMP President JRD & Associates, Inc. 5001 SW 74th Court, Suite 207 Miami, FL 33155 Phone 305-662-7288 Cell 786-205-2735 Fax 305-662-7281 iduyos(a)_irdand associates. com 1 From: K K <xneraghotmail.com> Date: September 9, 2016 at 4:04:55 PM MDT To: " _ rug ther9vailgov. com" < _ rug ther9vailgov. com> Subject: Comments on ReZoning Roost Lot in West Vail George, Can you please pass this letter on to the members of the PEC? Thank you! To the PEC Committee Members I am writing comment on the recent proposal to create a Special Development Distinct in West Vail, at the site of the Roost Lodge. I want to say this is a bad idea. I understand the need to create more employee housing, more hotel beds for guests, and more parking. However it is not a good idea to do this all in a spot that would require special zoning to do so! Such a large building would be out of character with the rest of West Vail. It would ruin the alpine 'ski town' ambience that we all know and love. West Vail is a mainly residential area and all the buildings in the area reflect that. All the buildings are blend into the hillside, it is a mountain town and looks like it. Approving such a large structure will make West Vail feel more urban and that doesn't fit at all. The PEC should represent and make decisions for the greater Vail community, not for an out of town developer who obviously doesn't care about ambience and fitting in. Everyone who lives here enjoys living in a small mountain town. I don't see how re -zoning a small lot to cram a lot more people in fits our philosophy in anyway. I would like to see the lot developed, but in a way that fits the rest of the area. It seems to me that other projects in the area (such as the rebuilding of Timber Ridge) have followed the original zoning rules and those new buildings fit in with the rest of the area. Why can't that be done with the Roost Lodge lot? Thank you, Karen Karp West Vail Homeowner John Carney �s September 12, 2016 Dear George, George Ruther CC: Mayor Chapin CC: Vail Town Council Regretfully, I will not be able to attend the PEC Meeting on this coming Monday, September 12, 2016, but I wanted to comment on the proposal to create a Special Development District for the old Roost site, where there is a proposal by Dominic Mauriello and the Mauriello Planning Group (MPG) to build a 170 Marriott Residence Inn, 113 unit multifamily housing and underground parking. Please print the attached letter and circulate among the PEC Commissioners. I have owned 1839 Meadow Ridge Rd, Unit B since and was a permanent West Vail resident between November 1998 and July 2009. In 2009 1 moved overseas and have just returned to the US with my family. We intend to move back to West Vail in 2020 after my current projects in Ohio are complete. In the mean time we will enjoy our West Vail property when time permits. I am currently working on two real estate development projects that are ground up. I understand the importance of new development in communities and the benefits that result. However, the proposed plan by the MPG for a 170 room Marriott and 113 unit apartment project is out of character for the neighborhood. The scale of the project does not reflect the three-story standard that is prominent surrounding Buffer Creek to the east or west. The current render that I received in the mail reflects a built up, five story building at the west end of the development site and six on the east side. It is common knowledge that developers will ask for more than they want in order to find the "acceptable middle ground" with the municipality. Dominic Mauriello has influence with the Town of Vail and community outside of the impacted West Vail neighborhood due to his previous public service as a Vail town planner and local for profit planning projects. Unfortunately neither the owners of the site or Mr. Mauriello have called upon the West Vail residents in the impact zone for support or input. I find this course of action peculiar for a developer who truly hopes to deliver a positive impact on community. The developers who I work with engage the Mayor, city law director, City Council, Panning Commission and surrounding neighbors prior to proceeding with public hearings. Has this process already taken place? The proposal as it stands should be rejected outright and the Town of Vail should put forth the effort to provide a vision for the future of the site that is inline with both neighborhood and future need. I am asking that the neighborhood residents are engaged and that the Town Council addresses height restrictions, scale, set back perimeters and traffic impact for the old Roost Lodge site to establish a new build envelope to guide potential developers for the Roost Lodge site that is inline with the neighborhood character and suitable use for the property. Kind regards, John Carney 2001 Crocker Road, Suite 420 Phone: +1 (440) 8924900 Email:jc@johncarneyonline.com johncarneyonline.com Westlake, Ohio 44145 From: Coco Turnipseed <cocoturnipseedggmail.com> Date: September 13, 2016 at 7:15:15 AM MDT To: < _ rug thergvailgov. com> Cc: <wen50nycgyahoo.com>, "To: K K" <xneraghotmail.com>, Andy Gunion <agunionewpartners.com>, Greg Bemis <greg bemisgcomcast.net>, John Kirschner <j kvail 9comcast. net>, Jorge Duyos <jdu osgjrdandassociates.com>, "Deena DiCorpo" <thepetboutiqueofvailggmail.com>, Clint Peterson <tearentinogyahoo.com>, Skip Picking <hmpiii gatl anti cbb. net>, Turnipseed Coco <cocoturnipseed a,gmail.com>, John Carney <iohnm carnevavahoo.com> Subject: ROOST DEVELOPMENT My husband Jason and I have owned a property at 1839 Meadow Ridge Road unit D for more than ten years. I am sorry that we were unable to attend the meeting on this past Monday, and that this letter is past the meeting date. But, I still wanted to express our concerns about the development at the old Roost site. We have loved the West Vail community, for many reasons. But, the reason that we have enjoyed it the most is because of the neighborhood feel, and the feel of Vail as it used to be, without the overdevelopment of buildings that are too tall and too dense in population - both of which the new proposed Roost Development are. Therefore, we are again writing to strongly opposed the development in West Vail at the old Roost Lodge (we wrote an email a few weeks ago). I have continued to hear many good and detailed arguments as to why this development is not good for the West Vail community, and we are writing to support these arguments. It is our opinion that without question, the new development is a montrosity of a building that does not fit in with the beauty, character and neighborhood feel of what West Vail has always provided and currently offers. I have grown up coming to Vail my entire life, and I am so hopeful that some parts of the vail Valley will preserve it's original character. Thanks Coco and Jason Turnipseed Matt Panfil From: E Karp <eakarp2@gmail.com> Sent: Tuesday, September 13, 2016 9:00 AM To: George Ruther Subject: new building at the site of the old Roost Lodge I just read where a builder is proposing to build a very large building at the site of the Roost Lodge. Please do not allow a 5 story building. This will destroy the views of the longtime residents who like behind the building. The current building was already taller then what is zoned for that location. The new building, even taller, would not benefit to the neighbor. It will decrease the property value of the surrounding lots. The only advantage will be for the builder to make more money off it, then move one leaving the residents of Vale to deal with their greed. Please do not approve the building. Eric Karp Matt Panfil From: Richard Sletvold <rsletvol@hotmail.com> Sent: Tuesday, September 13, 2016 10:43 AM To: George Ruther Subject: Fw: Building across the street THIS IS AN EXTREMELY BAD IDEAI I I I urge the counsel to not think about the $$, but keeping Vail from becoming a overcrowded, Corporate skiing town. It's hard enough for us full time residents to live here. We dont' need another hotel blocking our beautiful views, and crowding our streets just to make another profit. Thannk you for reading, Richard Sletvold From: Karen Karp <karen@upstairsweb.com> Sent: Thursday, September 1, 2016 9:02 PM To: rsletvol@hotmail.com Subject: Building across the street Hi! Just sending this to see if you will send an email or something to help oppose the massive thing they want to build across the street. Please email to say this is a bad idea: George Ruther, Community Development GRuther@vaileov.com Or if possible, go to the PEC meeting, Monday September 12th at 1:00 pm in the Vail Municipal Building. I am going to try to go. Or write to the Vail Daily. Of course we don't want a massive hotel/apartment building there, though something would be nice to block some of the noise. They are trying to rush this project through the approval process to make it harder for anyone to oppose. The building they want to build requires exceptions to the existing zoning laws and they are requesting exceptions to paying any taxes as well. The building they are proposing is much larger than anything in residential West Vail. It rivals the size of the larger hotels in Vail Village or Lionshead. It just does not fit in. The current zoning law states 25 residential units per acre, yet they want to cram 100 units on less than a 2 acre lot, as well as 150+ hotel units. There is no sense of neighborhood planning for this project. Just the developer trying to include in as much as possible to make as much money as possible. (Am quoting one of my neighbors on a few of the points here) - a few years ago they finagled the rules/zoning laws and height restrictions to get about 30 apts built on the site in addition to the new hotel. They are trying this again to get even more - why were not other sites in the area (such as Timber Ridge rebuild) not maxed in height and building size ? Yes they could have build more there if there was such an urgent need for housing! - Vail's residential neighborhoods were generally originally laid out so that each property respects the scale of its neighbors - Approving this project would be further evidence that the town is not actually being run for the benefit of residents, but rather as some strange hybrid government business. More hotel rooms to generate more tax revenues for the town - creating the need for more housing - which means a huge, ugly, cheap building - to the detriment of a neighborhood of long term locals who the town allegedly wants to retain and embrace. If you need more details - please let me know! -----Original Message ----- From: Sorce Family [mailto:sorcefamilv@me.com] Sent: Thursday, September 15, 2016 1:28 PM To: Council Dist List Subject: West Vail Development Hi - My husband and I own on Buffehr Creek, in the Grouse Glenn at Vail Association (1480 Buffehr unit 1a). We are writing with concerns about the magnitude/size of the proposed west vail development. We are not writing in against development. We live in Denver and understand the need for growth and density within growth. We are writing in, however, to express a real concern about ensuring that the look/feel of Vail/Lionshead is pulled through to this development at West Vail. As Denverites we are personally affected by the mistakes of poor development. But we also know the thrill of good development too. Development that accounts for the beauty of its surrounding neighborhoods. That is progressive in its accommodation of the resources people need when living in dense urban locations - such as parking, and pedestrian -friendly pathways and bus routes. Spaces that foster community are vitally important, particularly in this "global small town." We truly hope that as we drive to our "heart's home" in West Vail that we won't pass East Vail, Vail, Lionshead and think - I wish I lived there as opposed to living in the "motel 6 area" of West Vail. Please ensure that the continuity of the character of this special place is of upmost importance. Because it can be done. If it isn't, then it most certainly is a choice of being too cheap to care. And that would just be more than sad, when it is well within everyone's ability to create something fantastic. With hope, Erin and Damian Sorce Sorce Family sorcefamily@me.com H: 303-322-3988 C: 303-819-4303 Note: After 4pm on weekdays and during weekends we will not be checking emails. October 6, 2016 Town of Vail Planning & Environmental Commission Town Council 75 S. Frontage Road Vail, CO 81657 Dear PEC & Town Council Members: Members of the Vail Chamber and Business Association board of directors recently attended a presentation by the Mauriello Planning Group of the proposed Marriott Residence Inn and apartment project planned for the former Roost property. We were impressed with this ambitious project and its plan to address several critical issues facing business owners and the community in Vail: 1. Deed restricted, affordable workforce housing, especially for mid-level management and professional employees 2. Public parking 3. Mid-range, nationally branded hotel rooms or suites Additionally, we felt the size and scope of the project is appropriate for its proposed location in West Vail. On behalf of our board, I urge you to consider the many public benefits of this project as it moves through the Town of Vail approval process. Respectfully, Alison Wadey Executive Director Vail Chamber and Business Association Matt Panfil From: Dan Bacon <bacondan22@gmail.com> Sent: Monday, October 17, 2016 8:07 AM To: Matt Panfil; George Ruther Subject: West Vail Marriott Development Letter To whom it may concern: My name is Dan Bacon and I am writing this letter to let you know how the new Marriott Residence Inn as currently designed would affect our property and also our view on what Vail is becoming. I have been coming to Vail for my entire life and my family has been coming since January 1963. 1 have worked for Vail Resorts since 2009 and love to call Vail home. I happen to own the second floor unit on the east side of the 1860 Meadow Ridge Rd building directly next to the vacant lot which once was The Roost. First I am not against having a hotel/condo units built next to our building or selling to make the proper amount of room for the development currently slated for The Roost lot. What I am against is the density of the building for the size lot it is on and the size compared to other buildings in the neighborhood. They will be using every square inch of the property to build a large out of place hotel and plan to vent their Carbon Dioxide on my front door step. I am also concerned that how deep they will be digging will affect the well being of our building's foundation, sewage lines, etc. I feel if the current development goes thru my condo will loose value and become a less desirable place to stay. Another major issue is the light and noise pollution this hotel will create. Being the closest neighbor, this is a huge concern of mine. Also, the only green space in the immediate area is in front of our building and I am worried it would become the number one area for Marriott guests to let their pets go to the restroom. Our building would also be loosing views of the Gore Range and morning sunlight, which in this valley is a valuable asset. In the end, I love seeing Vail grow and want it to continue to be the best ski town and resort on the planet. However, I do not like to see that happen at the expense of long time residents. I think that the current plan is too dense and needs more room; the developer should buy more land or settle for fewer units within a smaller development. Thank you for taking the time to read this and please consider the affect the proposed development will have on the immediate and long time neighbors. Thanks, Dan and Dana Bacon i Council Meinbers: le to the list of supporters of the Marriott Residence Inn and I u posed for Wet Vail. I fully support di -is project 'Its pl n to a, ig businessowners and the community in Vail: ted } affordable workforce ho u i rl o ,.1n nationally branded hotel ems or suites der the many public benefits of this project as it moves throe; :s. Title }nipa --i n� Matt Panfil From: David Brown <email4davebrown@gmail.com> Sent: Saturday, November 12, 2016 11:42 AM To: Matt Panfil Subject: Re: Fwd: Attachments: Shadowing Pic.JPG; Shadowing Pic2.JPG Hi Matt, Thank you for getting back to me. Yes, I am aware of the most recent revisions to the plan and my comments were based upon the changes that have been put forth. Please feel free to pass along my email below. Thanks, David Brown Matt/ Vail Planning Commission, My name is David Brown, and I live in Buffer Creek Condo Complex, 1860 Meadow Ridge Road, Unit A9. I am writing to voice my opinion on the proposed development next door at the old Roost Motel location. I have been able to attend most of the town meetings regarding the proposed development as well. I, along with every other member of this neighborhood, have voiced our concerns and objectives to various components of the new development plan. However, the plan has somehow gained steam within the planning commission and town council which is very puzzling to understand. What else do you need to hear from us?? The proposed development is way too large and does not fit in with this neighborhood. The side effects of this project would directly/ negatively impact our neighborhood. What is the plan for West Vail? Should we be looking for more 5-6 story hotel/ housing complexes in the future, or is this the only one? Or due to the lack of having a long term plan in place for West Vail will every proposal be handled on a case by case basis ... that doesn't make sense? Do you truly believe these proposed deed restricted units will help out Vail/ Eagle County employees who most need the assistance, or will it mainly help generate more revenue to improve on the bottom line figures to offset the developers large purchase price? I actually may be the most recent person to purchase a home in this neighborhood, having bought my unit last fall at above asking price. I remember the old Roost and I was familiar with other proposals for that site that were approved, and not approved. Had I known that this monstrous development was going to erected next door then I would not have gone through with my purchase last year. I understand there is a need for employee housing and that has been the case for years in Eagle County. I am not entirely sold that this development truly benefits the 'employees' who have been displaced in Vail. However, beyond that, I am definitely not sold on adding a 5-6 level building to this neighborhood in Vail. How is it that everyone from the neighborhood has voiced their objections yet this project somehow appears to be picking up steam? Sure the developer has made some concessions in an attempt to show effort on their side. However their concessions have been minor and were so predictable based on their first presentation, you don't have to be in career sales job to see how they have played this. Most importantly they have not addressed the main concern over this project being way to large in scale. By no means am I saying that lot has to remain dormant, I completely understand the business side of this situation; I know that they made an investment and need to develop on that land. Wether they overpaid for that land, or not, is definitely not my/ our issue. Nor should their ROI take precedent over this entire neighborhood in West Vail. We were comfortable with the plans that were approved a few years back for a new hotel that was slightly larger than the old Roost. However, trying to jam a large 'deed restricted' housing complex on top of a much larger hotel is down right wrong. This lacks any resemblance of respect for our neighborhood, and all of us who have paid a fair amount to live here. I strongly encourage the town to consider the affect this has on the people who are already living here and not stay 100% focused on a quick fix for a long standing issue with employee housing in Vail. Nor should you be swayed by the 'promises' of a developer. Some of the concerns I have outside of how ridiculous the optics of this large building will be: - Increased traffic and noise due to vehicles along with the large influx of people. - The congestion that will result of people and vehicles constantly going in and out. - The impact it will make on a the TOV busing system which is already an issue during peak season. Now our bus route will constantly be at peak season. They can say they will be offering a shuttle service, but let us not kid ourselves into believing all these hotel guests and renters will not be using the town bus as well. - They claim their shadow analysis shows little impact on the neighborhood. If that is not instantly laughable to everyone then I encourage you to come out in person and visit the neighborhood to see first hand. Please don't fall for statistics and charts that can easily be manipulated or saying at a certain window during the day there will be no shadows as if the shadowing from morning until l lam should not be taking into consideration! I have attached couple pies for your reference to show the shadowing as a result of our building which is a 3 story building.... they are talking 5-6 six stories. You can attempt to feed us a lot of objections but do not tell us that the shadowing, and increased icing will not be drastically affected! - My understanding is that voters just rejected the towns proposed tax increase to support the latest deed restricted initiative. Now many in this community are voicing their disapproval of this large of a development, both on its size and true benefit to 'real employees' seeking housing options in vail. I hope the town is listening to the people living here! I look forward to hearing all the feedback at the next meeting Monday. Thank you for your time and understanding! -David Brown On Fri, Nov 11, 2016 at 5:50 PM, Matt Panfil <MPanfi1gvai1gov.com> wrote: Mr. Brown Thank you for sharing your comments regarding the proposed Marriott Residence Inn project. With your approval, I will share a copy of your email with the Planning and Environmental Commission (PEC). Please be aware that just today the applicant requested the item be continued until the November 28, 2016 meeting. Second, I am not sure if the revisions you are referring to are the most recent plan set dated November 2, 2016 which is available at http://www.vailgov.com/departments/community-development/planning#1030268-marriott-residence-inn. I am available via phone, email, or in-person meeting if you would like to discuss the project further. As always, the public is encouraged to attend the PEC meeting. Should you have any additional comments or concerns that you would like to share with the PEC electronically or via letter prior to the November 28, 2016 PEC meeting, please forward them to me by Wednesday, November 23, 2016. Thank you, Matt Panfil, AICP Town Planner Community Development 0 TOWN OF VA 970.477.3459 vailgov.com twitter.com/vailgov 0 I v yz «« «? A § am . a• .tea- - \�\ yz «« «? A § am Matt Panfil From: Bob Boselli <bob@obosent.com> Sent: Wednesday, November 16, 2016 2:11 PM To: I nfo Cc: George Ruther Subject: Marriott Residence Inn and Workforce Housing project TOV- Please forward this email to the PEC & Town Council: PEC & Town Council - As a business owner in the Town of Vail for over 25 years please accept this letter in strong support of the proposed Marriott Residence Inn and Workforce Housing project in West Vail. This is the perfect opportunity for the Town to help solve 2 of our biggest challenges — employee housing and affordable short term lodging for our guests. I'm sure you're aware of the huge challenge businesses are having to fulfill employees needs especially with the challenge in finding affordable housing. I've had multiple employees leave the Valley because of this with no end in sight. Anytime the Town can work with a developer to add housing they should have only one focus — how can we get this done. Additionally, we've heard from multiple guests comments concerning the base cost to stay overnight in Vail — the average daily rate of our lodges has skyrocketed in recent years — good for them — but we need additional options for those not able to afford $1,000 per night during the winter. Thank you for considering my comments — let me know if I can be of any further assistance, Bob Boselli - Owner O'Bos Enterprises, LLC Vail Style Covered Bridge Store Vail T-shirt company Generation Vail 970-926-9300 x2 Matt Panfil From: Margaret Briggs <marymbriggsl @gmail.com> Sent: Monday, November 21, 2016 5:23 PM To: Matt Panfil; George Ruther Subject: Marriott redevelopment - Roost Lodge Attachments: PastedGraphic-1.pdf, ATT00001.htm To George Ruther and Matt Panfil Vail Planning Commission November 20, 2016 Dear Mr. Ruther and Mr. Panfil, We are writing with regard to the development application for the old Roost Lodge site in West Vail. We are a husband and wife, who own a condominium in the Buffer Creek condo building adjacent to the site. When we purchased our condo in 2007, it was at the height of the market, and at the time, the Roost was supposed to be developed into a reasonably sized development of hotel rooms and condos, by Timberline Roost LLC (no deed restrictions). Perhaps the article from the Vail Daily in August 2006 (pasted below) will refresh your memory? 28 condos and 101 hotel rooms, 3 employee housing units, and 169 parking spots. It was apparently scaled back from 129 hotel rooms and 39 condos and its height was reduced, as the planning commission (wisely at the time) said its size did not fit with the neighborhood. When we bought our condo, we were satisfied this plan was reasonable (or we would NOT have purchased). What exactly has changed since then? The neighborhood has not changed. But the plans for this building keep getting bigger and bigger. The 2006 plan evolved into a 176 unit hotel with 2 employee housing units that was approved but is now expired. Which, by the way, we still do not understand why or how the commission thought this more recent size increase was OK. Now the developer wants to develop this property into 170 hotel rooms (an increase of 69 units) and 113 employee "upscale" deed restricted RENTAL units (an increase of 82 units) for Vail's professionals — units that won't even benefit the employees who really need them (those with more modest incomes). Parking has increased by 191 parking spots (from 169 to 360). The current plan (dated November 2, 2016) is clearly still designed to benefit the developer — not Vail's residents. Who's kidding who? Enough already! The first developer made a bad investment, and now the second has done the same. Why must the neighborhood suffer from their bad business decisions? The neighborhood character should be respected and this latest development change should be flatly and emphatically rejected by the planning commission. Why? Here are neighborhood concerns. - Too big. - Too high — NOTE: We recognize the height decreased from the summer 2016 proposal, but we feel the building is still is much too large for the neighborhood. - There may still not be enough parking for the volume of units who will use parking. - Although exhaust from the garage is now moved to the east, the volume of fumes from 360 potential cars driving in the garage daily will be significant; has the exhaust and ventilation system been fully vetted and the impact on the environment studied? I believe there may be wildlife, on endangered species lists, in our neighborhood (e.g. bats). - Traffic and unloading issues in the neighborhood; although the access is now moved to the east, we still have concerns about traffic and unloading for the volume of residents and hotel rooms in this project. - Impact on the TOV bus routes and capacity. - No real benefit to the Vail employees who need reasonable rental units. Add to these neighborhood concerns, the very real concerns for our Buffer Creek building — - Potentially destabilizing our building's foundation with a parking garage that is far too deep into the ground and too close to the property line. - Residents walking their dogs on our property, leaving feces behind —the developer does not appear to have made accommodation for pet walking on their property. - Residents parking in our lot. - Having to look at a ridiculous monstrosity of a building every day. Please reject this plan. It is unacceptable to us, and should be to the commission if it really cares about the character of West Vail and Vail's residents, as it did ten years ago, in 2006. Sincerely, Mary Margaret Briggs and Robert Byrne Buffer Creek Condos Pleas for Boost Lodge approved Ick - Mare VI.a�J $D acia] to the D i'Tlmberllne Most QOle LL in a c a W%I a 1arr1a� encs o% A WL " A scaled -hack version of tt* Roast Lodge rede•. cpm d was approved Tuesday. The project, first submitted to the tern 12 month ago, was reduced in size after the plenr*i g commission and neighbors said it didn't fit in with the rvekfi-borhand. Nearby residents said it was taxa big and tall. The project will be a fox -story Maniott Residence turn and have 101 hotel rooms. 28 oondcs, three ernplyyee homing units and 169 padding spas_ The p4anning commission appmwed the omiect. 7-0, 'The deve4opmem has tere a tremarid owily long way tram what we first satire a yaw ago." siaid cornmimioner Role Kjosbo. Last Nbvember, the developer vms proposing 128 ho rooms ar�d 39 condos.. The proposal's height was also reduced. The project IDund its way into the debate ovef the Solaris redevelapmant, which was uftirr.atelyr approved in a tow wide alecton Iasi month_ Friends of lel Village, which opposed 'overdevetpment, m Vail, said the RoDa Lodge proposal vans evidence a# iredevelopnxint that is too big and tall. The deyekpar of the site, Timberline Roost Lodge ILLC. filed sprit against the grafi, aitirg misirFarmetion in its campaign rnalleHals. 'Wye had chacusskms mgarcWQ the setlierrient of the lawsuit." Kevin Doran. one of the members of the development team. said atkw tha project was approved Monday. 'I think it's s sFrame we had to fide a lawsuit to get this group to act veim integHty and Vis." A couple residers wtro live new the Roost Lodge said %6arxfsy they arse still carrcerned ahaut the size of the projct_ 'To me, it still seeing Wke a ver} large building and it alfects a targe area.* said West Vail resident Gmg Bem is- Dernallid on of the list Lodge. which arras bu& in the ead y 70s. is schedu d for May. The naw builifing is scheduled to be completed by the fat of 20D& The Roost Lodge has 77 hatet room and has long been one of the most inexpensive k dger> in Mail_ Staff Writer Edward Stoner can be reached st 74a-2929 car 9s,,age aikiaily.cofn. Hail_ CrDlGrado Matt Panfil From: Lance Thompson <Ithompson@timbersresorts.com> Sent: Thursday, November 17, 2016 9:09 AM To: Matt Panfil; Council Dist List Subject: Support for Marriott Project It is rare that a developer/operator would reach out on behalf of another project that will inherently become a competitor. However, I feel compelled to write to those in charge of making this decision to express my support for this particular property. I was very impressed by the track record of the developer, the thoughtfulness of the design and the overall concept of the project. I was the General Manager of the Sebastian Vail for three years and now this area very well. I enjoyed being a board member of the VCBA and had two kids go through the Children's Garden of Learning where my wife served as President of their board. This level of development on the north side of the highway will be a great improvement for this town. I think it will bolster the small businesses on that side and add a very comfortable mid-level ADR for the destination. It should be noted that my support is personal and I can't speak directly for Timbers Resorts or the owners of the Sebastian Vail, Timbers Bachelor Gulch or any of our other projects. Lance Thompson Managing Director — Resort Operations TIMBERS RsSORTS Timbers Resorts Direct: 970.704.4271 Mobile: 415.259.1719 Fax: 970.963.4616 www.timbersresorts.com TIMBERS COLLECTION Aspen I Bachelor Gulch I Cabo San Lucas I Jupiter I Kaua'i I Maui I Napa I Scottsdale I Snowmass Sonoma I Southern California I Steamboat I Tuscany I U.S. Virgin Islands I Vail The contents of this e-mail message and any attachments are confidential and directed to the intended recipient. Ifyou have received this transmission in error, any use, reproduction or dissemination of this transmission is strictly prohibited and violators hill be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law. Ifyou are not the intended recpient, please immediately notift the sender by redly e-mail orpbone and delete this message and its attachments, if any. ATTACHMENT G — APPLICABLE PLANNING DOCUMENTS Staff finds that the following provisions of the Vail Town Code are relevant to the review of this proposal: Title 11 — Sign Regulations, Vail Town Code Chapter 8 — Sign Programs (in part) 11-8-2: CRITERIA.- Sign RITERIA: Sign programs shall be required for all new or demolished/rebuilt multi -family residential projects and for new or demolished/rebuilt commercial projects. Title 12 — Zoning Regulations, Vail Town Code Chapter 1— Title, Purpose, and Applicability (in part) 12-1-2: PURPOSE.- A. URPOSE: A. General: These regulations are enacted for the purpose of promoting the health, safety, morals, and general welfare of the town, and to promote the coordinated and harmonious development of the town in a manner that will conserve and enhance its natural environment and its established character as a resort and residential community of high quality. B. Specific: These regulations are intended to achieve the following more specific purposes.- 1. urposes: 1. To provide for adequate light, air, sanitation, drainage, and public facilities. 2. To secure safety from fire, panic, flood, avalanche, accumulation of snow, and other dangerous conditions. 3. To promote safe and efficient pedestrian and vehicular traffic circulation and to lessen congestion in the streets. 4. To promote adequate and appropriately located off street parking and loading facilities. 5. To conserve and maintain established community qualities and economic values. 6. To encourage a harmonious, convenient, workable relationship among land uses, consistent with municipal development objectives. 7. To prevent excessive population densities and overcrowding of the land with structures. 8. To safeguard and enhance the appearance of the town. 9. To conserve and protect wildlife, streams, woods, hillsides, and other desirable natural features. 10. To assure adequate open space, recreation opportunities, and other amenities and facilities conducive to desired living quarters. 11. To otherwise provide for the growth of an orderly and viable community. Chapter 2, Definitions (in part) EMPLOYEE HOUSING UNIT (EHU): A dwelling unit which shall not be leased or rented for any period less than thirty (30) consecutive days, and shall be occupied by at least one person who is an employee. For the purposes of this definition "employee" shall mean a person who works an average of thirty (30) hours per week or more on a year round basis in Eagle County, Colorado. LODGE UNIT, LIMITED SERVICE.- Any ERVICE:Any room or group of rooms with "kitchen facilities", as defined herein, in a limited service lodge which are designed for temporary occupancy by visitors, guests, individuals, or families on a short term rental basis, and accessible from common corridors, walks, or balconies without passing through another accommodation unit, limited service lodge unit, fractional fee club unit or dwelling unit. A limited service lodge unit is not intended for permanent residency and shall not be subdivided into an individual condominium unit, pursuant to title 13, "Subdivision Regulations", of this code. RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT: A development that includes at least one dwelling unit, including single-family dwellings, two-family dwellings, multiple -family dwellings, fractional fee club units, lodge dwellings units, attached accommodation units, and timeshare units. Chapter 7, Commercial and Business Districts, Article J. Public Accommodation - 2 (PA -2) District (in part) Town of Vail Page 2 12-7J-1: PURPOSE The public accommodation -2 district is intended to provide sites for lodges, limited service lodges, and residential accommodations on a short term basis, for visitors and guests, together with such public and semipublic facilities and commercial/retail and related visitor oriented uses as may be appropriately located within the same zone district and compatible with adjacent land uses. This district is intended to provide for lodging sites located outside the periphery of the town's Vail Village and Lionshead commercial core areas. The public accommodation -2 district is intended to ensure adequate light, air, open space, and other amenities commensurate with lodge uses, and to maintain the desirable resort qualities of the zone district by establishing appropriate site development standards. Additional nonresidential uses are allowed as conditional uses which enhance the nature of Vail as a vacation community, and where permitted uses are intended to function compatibly with the high density lodging character of the zone district. 12-7J-2: PERMITTED USES: The following uses shall be permitted in the PA -2 district: Employee housing units, as further regulated by chapter 12 of this title. Limited service lodge, including accessory eating, drinking, or retail establishments located within the principal use and not occupying more than ten percent (10%) of the total gross residential floor area of the main structure or structures on the site, additional accessory dining areas may be located on an outdoor deck, porch, or terrace. 12-7J-3: CONDITIONAL USES: Public or commercial parking facilities or structures. 12-7J-6: SETBACKS: In the PA -2 district, the minimum front setback shall be twenty feet (20'), the minimum side setback shall be twenty feet (20), and the minimum rear setback shall be twenty feet (20). At the discretion of the planning and environmental commission and/or the design review board, variations to the setback standards outlined above may be approved during the review of exterior alterations or modifications (section 12-7J-12 of this article) subject to the applicant demonstrating compliance with the following criteria: A. Proposed building setbacks provide necessary separation between buildings and riparian areas, geologically sensitive areas and other environmentally sensitive areas. Town of Vail Page 3 B. The proposed building setbacks will provide adequate availability of light, air and open space. C. Proposed building setbacks will provide a compatible relationship with buildings and uses on adjacent properties. D. Proposed building setbacks will result in creative design solutions or other public benefits that could not otherwise be achieved by conformance with prescribed setback standards. 12-7J-7: HEIGHT. For a flat or mansard roof, the height of buildings shall not exceed forty five feet (45). For a sloping roof, the height of buildings shall not exceed forty eight feet (48). 12-7J-9: SITE COVERAGE.- Site OVERAGE: Site coverage shall not exceed sixty five percent (65%) of the total site area. Final determination of allowable site coverage shall be made by the planning and environmental commission and/or the design review board in accordance with section 12-7J-12 of this article. Specifically, in determining allowable site coverage the planning and environmental commission and/or the design review board shall make a finding that proposed site coverage is in conformance with applicable elements of the Vail comprehensive plan. 12-7J-11: PARKING AND LOADING.- Off OADING: Off street parking and loading shall be provided in accordance with chapter 10 of this title. At least seventy five percent (75%) of the required parking shall be located within the main building or buildings and hidden from public view. No at grade or above grade surface parking or loading area shall be located in any required front setback area. Below grade underground structured parking and short term guest loading and drop off shall be permitted in the required front setback subject to the approval of the planning and environmental commission and/or the design review board. 12-7J-14: MITIGATION OF DEVELOPMENT IMPACTS.- Property MPACTS: Property owners/developers shall also be responsible for mitigating direct impacts of their development on public infrastructure and in all cases mitigation shall bear a reasonable relation to the development impacts. Impacts may be determined based on reports prepared by qualified consultants. The extent of mitigation and public amenity improvements shall be balanced with the goals of redevelopment and will be determined by the Town of Vail Page 4 planning and environmental commission in review of development projects and conditional use permits. Substantial off site impacts may include, but are not limited to, the following: deed restricted employee housing, roadway improvements, pedestrian walkway improvements, streetscape improvements, stream tract/bank restoration, loading/delivery, public art improvements, and similar improvements. The intent of this section is to only require mitigation for large scale redevelopment / development projects which produce substantial off site impacts. Chapter 9 — Special and Miscellaneous Districts (in part) 12-9A-1: PURPOSE AND APPLICABILITY. A. Purpose: The purpose of the special development district is to encourage flexibility and creativity in the development of land in order to promote its most appropriate use, to improve the design character and quality of the new development with the town; to facilitate the adequate and economical provision of streets and utilities, to preserve the natural and scenic features of open space areas, and to further the overall goals of the community as stated in the Vail comprehensive plan. An approved development plan for a special development district, in conjunction with the property's underlying zone district, shall establish the requirements for guiding development and uses of property included in the special development district. 12-9A-4: DEVELOPMENT REVIEW PROCEDURES.- A. ROCEDURES: A. Approval Of Plan Required: Prior to site preparation, building construction, or other improvements to land within a special development district, there shall be an approved development plan for said district. The approved development plan shall establish requirements regulating development, uses and activity within a special development district. B. Preapplication Conference: Prior to submittal of a formal application for a special development district, the applicant shall hold a preapplication conference with the department of community development. The purpose of this meeting shall be to discuss the goals of the proposed special development district, the relationship of the proposal to applicable elements of the town's comprehensive plan, and the review procedure that will be followed for the application. C. PEC Conducts Initial Review: The initial review of a proposed special development district shall be held by the planning and environmental commission at a regularly scheduled meeting. Prior to this meeting, and at the discretion of the administrator, a work session may be held Town of Vail Page 5 with the applicant, staff and the planning and environmental commission to discuss special development district. A report of the department of community development staffs findings and recommendations shall be made at the initial formal hearing before the planning and environmental commission. Within twenty (20) days of the closing of a public hearing on a proposed amendment, the planning and environmental commission shall act on the petition or proposal. The commission may recommend approval of the petition or proposal as initiated, may recommend approval with such modifications as it deems necessary to accomplish the purposes of this title, or may recommend denial of the petition or rejection of the proposal. The commission shall transmit its recommendation, together with a report on the public hearing and its deliberations and findings, to the town council. D. Town Council Review: A report of the planning and environmental commission stating its findings and recommendations, and the staff report shall then be transmitted to the town council. Upon receipt of the report and recommendation of the planning and environmental commission, the town council shall set a date for hearing within the following thirty (30) days. Within twenty (20) days of the closing of a public hearing on a proposed SDD, the town council shall act on the petition or proposal. The town council shall consider but shall not be bound by the recommendation of the planning and environmental commission. The town council may cause an ordinance to be introduced to create or amend a special development district, either in accordance with the recommendation of the planning and environmental commission or in modified form, or the council may deny the petition. If the council elects to proceed with an ordinance adopting an SDD, the ordinance shall be considered as prescribed by the Vail town charter. 12-9A-6: DEVELOPMENT PLAN: An approved development plan is the principal document in guiding the development, uses and activities of special development districts. A development plan shall be approved by ordinance by the town council in conjunction with the review and approval of any special development district. The development plan shall be comprised of materials submitted in accordance with section 12-9A-5 of this article. The development plan shall contain all relevant material and information necessary to establish the parameters with which the special development district shall develop. The development plan may consist of, but not be limited to, the approved site plan, floor plans, building sections and elevations, vicinity plan, parking plan, preliminary open space/landscape plan, densities and permitted, conditional and accessory uses. Town of Vail Page 6 12-9A-9: DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS.- Development TANDARDS: Development standards including lot area, site dimensions, setbacks, height, density control, site coverage, landscaping and parking shall be determined by the town council as part of the approved development plan with consideration of the recommendations of the planning and environmental commission. Before the town council approves development standards that deviate from the underlying zone district, it should be determined that such deviation provides benefits to the town that outweigh the adverse effects of such deviation. This determination is to be made based on evaluation of the proposed special development district's compliance with the design criteria outlined in section 12-9A-8 of this article. 12-9A-11: RECREATION AMENITIES TAX: A recreation amenities tax shall be assessed on all special development districts in accordance with title 2, chapter 5 of this code at a rate to be determined by the town council. This rate shall be based on the rate of the underlying zone district or the rate which most closely resembles the density plan for the zone district, whichever is greater. Chapter 10 — Off Street Parking and Loading (in part) 12-10-1: PURPOSE.- In URPOSE: In order to alleviate progressively or to prevent traffic congestion and shortage of on street parking areas, off street parking and loading facilities shall be provided incidental to new structures, enlargements of existing structures or a conversion to a new use which requires additional parking under this chapter. The number of parking spaces and loading berths prescribed in this chapter shall be in proportion to the need for such facilities created by the particular type of use. Off street parking and loading areas are to be designed, maintained and operated in a manner that will ensure their usefulness, protect the public safety, and, where appropriate, insulate surrounding land uses from their impact. In certain districts, all or a portion of the parking spaces prescribed by this chapter are required to be within the main building in order to avoid or to minimize the adverse visual impact of large concentrations or exposed parking and of separate garage or carport structures. 12-10-2: APPLICABILITY. Off street parking and loading space shall be provided for any new building, for any addition or enlargement of an existing building or for any conversion of uses which requires additional parking under this chapter. Town of Vail Page 7 12-10-9: LOADING STANDARDS.- Standards TANDARDS: Standards for off street loading shall be as follows.- A. ollows: A. Location: All off street loading berths shall be located on the same lot as the use served, but not in the required front setback. Off street loading berths shall be provided in addition to required off street parking and shall not be located within accessways. B. Size: Each required loading berth shall be not less than twelve feet (12) wide, thirty five feet (35) long, and if enclosed and/or covered, fourteen feet (14) high. Adequate turning and maneuvering space shall be provided within the lot lines. At the planning and environmental commission's discretion, variations to the minimum loading berth dimension standards outlined above may be approved or required, subject to the planning and environmental commission finding that such variation is necessary to prevent negative impacts to the public right of way. 12-10-10: PARKING REQUIREMENTS SCHEDULES.- Off CHEDULES: Off street parking requirements shall be determined in accordance with the following schedules.- B. chedules: 8. Schedule 8 applies to all properties outside Vail's "commercial core areas" (as defined in the town of Vail core area parking maps I and 11 incorporated by reference and available for inspection in the office of the town clerk).- Limited lerk): Limited service lodge unit 0.7 spaces per limited service lodge unit Multiple -family dwellings If a dwelling unit's gross residential floor area is more than 500 square feet, but less than 2,000 square feet: 2 spaces 12-10-12: CREDIT FOR MULTIPLE USE PARKING FACILITIES.- Where ACILITIES: Where a single parking facility serves more than one use, the total parking requirement for all uses may be reduced in accordance with the following schedule.- 301-400 chedule: 301-400 spaces 7.5 percent Chapter 13 — Employee Housing (in part) Town of Vail Page 8 12-13-1: PURPOSE.- The URPOSE: The town's economy is largely tourist based and the health of this economy is premised on exemplary service for Vail's guests. Vail's ability to provide such service is dependent upon a strong, high quality and consistently available work force. To achieve such a work force, the community must work to provide quality living and working conditions. Availability and affordability of housing plays a critical role in creating quality living and working conditions for the community's work force. The town recognizes a permanent, year round population plays an important role in sustaining a healthy, viable community. Further, the town recognizes its role in conjunction with the private sector in ensuring housing is available. 12-13-3: GENERAL REQUIREMENTS.- A. EQUIREMENTS: A. Deed Restriction, Occupancy Limitations, And Reporting Requirements - Types I, 11, III, And V.- No : No EHU shall be subdivided or divided into any form of timeshare, interval ownerships, or fractional fee. 2. For EHUs which are required to be leased, they shall only be leased to and occupied by tenants who are full time employees who work in Eagle County. An EHU shall not be leased for a period less than thirty (30) consecutive days. An EHU shall be continuously rented and shall not remain vacant for a period to exceed three (3) consecutive months. 3. Thirty (30) days prior to the transfer of a deed for an EHU, the prospective purchaser shall submit an application to the administrator documenting that the prospective purchaser meets the criteria set forth herein and shall include an affidavit affirming that he/she meets these criteria. 4. No later than February 1 of each year, the owner of an EHU shall submit a sworn affidavit on a form provided by the town to the community development department containing the following information.- a. nformation: a. Evidence to establish that the EHU has been occupied throughout the year by an employee,- b. mployee, b. The rental rate,- c. ate, c. The employer; and Town of Vail Page 9 d. Evidence to demonstrate that at least one tenant residing in the EHU is an employee. 5. The deed restriction setting forth the provisions of this subsection A shall be provided by the town. Said deed restriction shall run with the land and shall not be amended or terminated without the written approval of the Vail town council. Said restriction shall be recorded by the town at the Eagle County clerk and recorder's office prior to the issuance of a certificate of occupancy. B. Development Standards.- No tandards: No structure containing an EHU shall exceed the maximum GRFA permitted in this title except as specifically provided herein. 2. All trash facilities shall be enclosed. 3. All surface parking shall comply with chapter 11 of this title. 4. Each EHU shall have its own entrance. There shall be no interior access from any EHU to any dwelling unit it may be attached to. 5. An EHU may be located in, or attached to, an existing garage (existing on or before April 18, 2000, and whether located in a required setback or not), provided that no existing parking required by this code is reduced or eliminated. A type 1 EHU of five hundred (500) square feet or less of GRFA may be considered for physical separation from the primary unit, if it is constructed in conjunction with a two (2) car garage and is otherwise compatible with the surrounding properties, does not have an adverse impact on vegetation, and does not dominate the street. The design review board shall review such requests for separation. 6. All EHUs must contain a kitchen or kitchenette and a bathroom. 7. Occupancy of an EHU shall be limited to the maximum of two (2) persons per bedroom. Chapter 23 — Commercial Linkage (in part) 12-23-1: PURPOSE AND APPLICABILITY. Town of Vail Page 10 A. The purpose of this chapter is to ensure that new commercial development and redevelopment in the town provide for a reasonable amount of employee housing to mitigate the impact on employee housing caused by such commercial development and redevelopment. B. Except as provided in section 12-23-5 of this chapter, this chapter shall apply to all new commercial development and redevelopment located within the following zone districts.- 3. istricts: 3. Public Accommodation 2 (PA -2) 12-23-2: EMPLOYEE GENERATION AND MITIGATION RATES: A. The employee generation rates found in table 23-1, "Employee Generation Rates By Type Of Commercial Use", of this section, shall be applied to each type of use in a commercial development. For any use not listed, the administrator shall determine the applicable employee generation rate by consulting the town's current nexus study. TABLE 23-1 EMPLOYEE GENERATION RATES BY TYPE OF COMMERCIAL USE Type of Use Employee Generation Rate Accommodation unit / 0.7 employee per net new units limited service lodge unit C. Each commercial development or redevelopment shall mitigate its impact on employee housing by providing EHUs for twenty percent (20%) of the employees generated, pursuant to table 23-1 of this section, or the nexus study, in accordance with the requirements of this chapter. 12-23-3: SIZE AND BUILDING REQUIREMENTS.- A. EQUIREMENTS: A. Table 23-2, "Size of Employee Housing Units'; of this section, establishes the minimum size of EHUs and the number of employees that can be housed in each. All EHUs shall meet or exceed the minimum size requirements. TABLE 23-2 SIZE OF EMPLOYEE HOUSING UNITS Type of Unit Minimum Size (GRFA) # of Employees Housed 1 bedroom 613 1.75 2 bedroom 788 2.25 D. Parking shall be provided in accordance with chapter 10 of this title. Town of Vail Page 11 Exception For On Site Units: At the discretion of the applicable governing body, variations to the parking standards outlined in chapter 10 of this title may be approved during the review of an employee housing plan subject to a parking management plan. The parking management plan may be approved by the applicable governing body and may provide for a reduction in the parking requirements for on site units based on a demonstrated need for fewer parking spaces than chapter 10 of this title would require. For example, a demonstrated need for a reduction in the required parking could include.- a. nclude: a. Proximity or availability of alternative modes of transportation including, but not limited to, public transit or shuttle services. b. A limitation placed in the deed restrictions limiting the number of cars for each unit. c. A demonstrated permanent program including, but not limited to, rideshare programs, car share programs, shuttle service, or staggered work shifts. 12-23-9: OCCUPANCY AND DEED RESTRICTIONS.- A. ESTRICTIONS: A. No EHU shall be subdivided or divided into any form of timeshare unit or fractional fee club unit. B. EHUs shall not be leased for a period less than thirty (30) consecutive days. C. An EHU may be sold or transferred as a separate unit on the site. D. An EHU shall be continuously occupied by an employee and shall not remain vacant for a period in excess of three (3) consecutive months unless, despite reasonable and documented efforts to occupy the EHU, efforts are unsuccessful. E. No later than February 1 of each year, the owner of an EHU shall submit a sworn affidavit on a form provided by the town to the town of Vail community development department containing the following information.- 1. nformation: 1. Evidence to establish that the EHU has been occupied throughout the year by an employee,- Town mployee, Town of Vail Page 12 2. The rental rate (unless owner occupied), 3. The employee's employer; and 4. Evidence to demonstrate that at least one person residing in the EHU is an employee. Chapter 25 — Public Art (in part) 12-25-1: PURPOSE.- The URPOSE: The purpose of this chapter is to establish guidelines, procedures and standards for the integration of public art into development projects in the town. The enhancement of public places by integrating the creative work of artists improves the pedestrian experience and promotes vibrancy, creativity and livelihood in the community. The presence of and access to public art enlivens the public areas of buildings and their grounds and makes them more welcoming. It creates a deeper interaction with the places where we live, work, and visit. Public art illuminates the diversity and history of a community, and points to its aspirations for the future. A wealth of art and culture in the public realm will foster the economic development of the community. 12-25-2: APPLICABILITY. This chapter shall apply to projects that have a public art component in the approved development plan, as part of a special development district or an exterior alteration or modification in the public accommodation (PA), public accommodation -2 (PA -2), Lionshead mixed use 1 (LMU-1), Lionshead mixed use 2 (LMU-2) and ski base/recreation 2 (SBR2) districts. Title 14 — Development Standards, Vail Town Code Chapter 3 — Residential and Commercial Access, Driveway and Parking Standards (in part) 14-3-2: OTHER REQUIREMENTS.- A. EQUIREMENTS: A. Vehicular Maneuverability: Parking required for each dwelling unit must be independently accessible (i.e., required parking for 1 unit cannot block access for parking for another unit on site). Chapter 10 — Design Review Standards (in part) 14-10-4: ARCHITECTURAL PROJECTIONS, DECKS, BALCONIES, STEPS, BAY WINDOWS, ETC..- Town TC.: Town of Vail Page 13 Towers, spires, cupolas, chimneys, flagpoles, and similar architectural features not usable as habitable floor area may extend above the height limit a distance of not more than twenty five percent (25%) of the height limit nor more than fifteen feet (15'). Town of Vail Page 14 z 0 p _ � z 0 � 2 m / E E 0 C 0 c .0 k00 0 70 @ .� » � � [ » � » D E § k 0 U E 0 E 0 C 0 g 0 0 ¥ U ± 0- 2 0 ± » 9 / ± g c � w + 0 ra \ /2 / B » E E 0 U E 2 E » 0- a) D E 0 k 0 U § » L I E E o > eC4 0LL % � 2 � � E » 0 / 2 75 'o .. > 0 @ 0 4 0 e » $ 7 m�Fff im % 0 Q 0 0 k 0 m 0 0 �� k ¥ E = U E 2 cn \E¥ o t E 2�0 § k .@ E � fkk ®» > E 02» f Ef§ 9®0 0 � / �E / E 0 0 7 0 cu Lu .2 0 � 6 0)f - E m ® E cl » 'k / E®o E £ o cn \ol a E � 3 0 6 > e U E o LU ± E %% - t »_ § \ E CU 0) Z § § > k $ E > LU LU a) 02 k E 0- 3 E .%-J) ƒ § G / f t § » cu o C2J .. y=� > 0 '\ G 3 / » q 2 » Q = �E o3®£ k E — ¥ E @ 7f a) Z 0- o m o U) U t § E ¥ 0 L) 2 J E k� �2/E 0 0 q § 0% 2000 cu 4 > w \ E @ w & a) 0 4- a) a) ° ca ca �_ O N 4—O 0 _ U) 0 >, a) c �, � cB , L N L a) cu cB 0 to L) cu a) o p o a) Q 0 L N c 0 0)cu cu cu 0 ,�_ LL N= >+ n LO cn E N Li 0 O U >, cB a) " s Q a) Q a) O � "- O O U Qcu � d 0 a) a) L p U� _ O O-0 cu O � Z Z) �L cu 0 ° O Q cu a) 0 cNL>a ' L L cu cu 0 QC: -0 CU _r E a) to c 0 Q cu to D 0O a) L O _0 y--+-' cn O 0 cu +� = O cu Q cB CU cu cu 0 O Q _ U ° cu ° -75 cu 0 U Q U� U > U to to Q L V L U y� y� C: L Q CU cu cB cB cB U Z) 0 70 70 B a) C >+ U cu u �ccu cuX �> _ ?� t°n 0 cOn cOn L cu U a) 70 E cu "' O a) Q N a) 0 Q a) (a ° c: -0 E O oorE r' > ° a) O a) � 0 �- �) 0 ca 0 a) 0 cn > cn cn u) 0 0 Q a) 0- � � a- >N CU CU 0 0 cu 0- cu o cu cu cu E cu U) Q 0 cno U) ca a) U) cnca U) �ca�.a)°Q oZ) 0 ^� 0 ate) CU � 0� CU 0 o a) -0a) .0 Z) 0 CU cu 0 c� 0 cu c� U cU 0Q cu U 0 a) a) a) ca a) a) Z) 0) O a) O a) 00 0 cu CU a) o om ZZ o o 000 o o CU L))0 L) 0- o � 0 0� 0 ��� ami~_ vv ca Q� Q� QE,� Q Q� Q � � O 0 0 QCU Q� c� a) Q Q� Q a) a)_ >�- a) QL Q CU ca c� ca ca O ca > a) L E cB U Q cn L to 0 �. O Q cu ° ate) `nom �° o CU o �. L E a) a) a) CU Q� - Q� ate) Q Q� Q� o � aa)) Q v) a) v) a) v) v) .� v) U Q a) • a) v) O � cn �E Ev: �a) �0 cn ��Eo �� ' a) -0� a) cu ° °0) n a) U cam 0) ��o cu ° � cu cu cu cu~O �u0)Q��� cu 0 a) O > ca -0 �� a) cm`— CU >;Q 0� 0) 0)0 o off o L 0) 3: ca Q C: C: c oc�c� �� ��_ �Ua)Q� c Ocn E u) O �. `� to L — a) ca L L °Uc.) ) L) >, - Q OO0p0) -0 O cn O cn C: N O C OCU '� O O OQ cCU O, CU O > ) O C: _ oOU O cuL cZ) _ > � O O cu OQ O U L -EO L L OO0 (B O (U U O QQN O i Uofn aa m m> a Q a) criUci Ti ti ao ° z 0 a) cu 0 Iff 0) TOWN OF VAIL Memorandum TO: Planning and Environmental Commission FROM: Community Development Department DATE: November 14, 2016 SUBJECT: Lion's Ridge Parking Information In response to the request for information regarding parking at the Lion's Ridge development, staff has identified the following: Unit Type Number of Units Parking Ratio per Unit Parking Spaces Required One Bedroom 29 1 29 Two Bedroom 84 1.47 123 Total 113 --- 153 TOWN OF VA10 VAI LTOWN PLANNINGAND ENVI RONMENTAL AGENDA MEMO MEETING DATE: November28, 2016 ITEM/TOPIC: A report to the Planning and Environmental Commission of an administrative action approving a request for a minor amendment to Special Development District No. 6 (Vail Village I nn), pursuant to section 12-9A-10, Amendment Procedures, Vail Town Code, to allow for the construction of an approximately sixty (60) square foot addition (glass display case) located at 100 East Meadow Drive, Units 7A, 8, 21 and 22 (Vail Village Plaza Condos)/Lot O, Block 5D, Vail Village Filing 1, and setting forth details in regard thereto. (PEC16-0035) ATTACHMENTS: File Name Description PEC16- Staff Administrative Action 0035_SDD_No._6 Approval_Letter 100 E_Meadow Dr.pdf PEC16-0035_Plans.pdf Plans TOWN OF 75 South Frontage Road West Community Development Departmen# Vail, Colorado 81657 970.479.2138 vailgov.com November 11, 2016 Town of Vail Planning and Environmental Commission Current Architects c/o Michael Current PO Box 5293 Vail, CO 81657-5293 Re: Report to the Planning and Environmental Commission of an administrative action approving a request for a minor amendment to SDD No. 6, Vail Village Inn, pursuant to Section 12-9A-10, Amendment Procedures, Vail Town Code, to allow for modifications to the approved development plans to allow for the addition of a mechanical chase and for the construction of an approximately sixty (60) square foot addition (glass display case) located at 100 East Meadow Drive, Units 7A, 8, 21 and 22 (Vail Village Plaza Condos)/Lot O, Block 5D, Vail Village Filing 1, and setting forth details in regard thereto (PEC16-0035). Applicant: AJW Properties II LLC, Represented by Current Architects Planner: Matt Panfil Dear PEC members, AJW Properties II, LLC, Current Architects, and adjacent property owners: The purpose of this letter is to inform you that Town of Vail Staff has approved a minor amendment to Special Development District No. 6, Vail Village Inn. This approval allows for the addition of a mechanical chase at the west facade and for the construction of an approximately sixty (60) square foot addition (glass display case) at the east facade. The mechanical chase will have the appearance of a chimney and will match the structure's existing materials and surfaces. The glass display case will be located underneath the second floor overhang on the east end of the structure. The display will add visual interest to an area that is currently a blank stucco wall. The project also includes the renovation of the plaza level and lower level interior space, new windows and doors, and a new main entry roof. The attached plans, dated October 31, 2016, demonstrate the approved improvements. Staff finds that approval of this minor amendment request meets the criteria in Section 12-9A-8, Vail Town Code. The amendment does not alter the basic intent and character of Special Development District No. 6, Vail Village Inn. The amendment will continue to be compatible with the neighborhood and other uses. Staff's approval of this minor special development district amendment will be reported at a public hearing before the Town of Vail Planning and Environmental Commission at 1:00 PM on Monday, November 28, 2016 in the Vail Town Council Chambers, located at 75 South Frontage Road. Should you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact me at 970-477- 3459, or mpanfil(a)vailgov.com Sincerely, Matt Panfil, AICP Town Planner Attachment: Approved site plans and elevations, dated 11-14-2016 LU I tiL/•� VJ 0 00 00 Q Q W 20 m 0 r' ry Q 0 z 0 U W ry U� C/) 0- � J G LL a0 O� J � UJ W0 0 Z J } ~ CD Z} LU Q U J LL O � U Z Z W 00 Q 0 W Q 2 W W Q CD Z D W Q Z W W U J Q W a LLI J J Q QU �W J 0 U a W Q W >2z 0- W W W U J Q W a LLI J J Q �U W J O U It O 0 Z W (D C J z W W Q W >2z 0- W W01-1 a IlLmr . 0, 0, :1—QL a ou oP9F-- 0 0 aF- ow o Z Q LU w ♦ ) WSW CD O Q m 01-1 LLJ~ o J ZOO O W H (n ry In 111 Z . W J W LU d� r Y X11 I C 7A !pis A mm 11111, A L M. M... i O�WQ�pp�t Lo� o vW't i +o QvE'c IIIIIIIIIIII IIIIIIIII IIIII1IIIIII IIIIIIIII1 pYp= ouo° e UO�OYa�w0z U) -0(° o°E ' N zZ oo�oa -0 Q) ° °0�' °pOwoa T°o a� oOp Q mmQ z6 � °-° � a– EUeLoW o m zm�WWzzo ooz–t�rno 0) s° ° v "a)p � ai r.°L3 .ELoW cDrzz– C)UJ 0°� L a'a °v ° a o o G QW WWm0O000inW' N=aaWarnrnYa °Lc UvL�a oo� `� U �/l�Ocqrn 'W^^ Li ° po ��a ° ^'W> . °aa 3m N U o ��Z-CI�mcq o�O 0 U)°° -°) a °00 a� aaa�p�Qz UOE – E°ozZ N >U zQ t"?0wL-0 c aa) E o aL'-L�o °Nor ° I IIIIIIIIIIIIIII WQI1I111 Jo�Ln�Z 3: E Oo,ai ai T + O 00 a O . r7 1IIIII1II1 O >� md 00W W 0-0 o � Q) c p> ° po a) — a > O �-' U � ` O CD L ° a) �p �'��� 00 ° ° OIIIIIIIIIIII m I'M. a)IIIIIIIIIIII Q) U) WUYW 0000 � a�p �a�– –ao I 0 ° vMMMfi -MQ ac �. in°>v m - I- (DDMZO c >< a) 00 u° W m N Q � o a U)i Q N g CLU) o m ZD 92 G L -O (p 'W^^ Li ° M V Q C N E N rn p Z J Q E cQ co a° W >U '1%W C O O °' N O a 0 C3 L o o ° Lo o ° W K) Z a U CO + O 00 a O . r7 U o O �-' U � ` O CD L ° a) �p �'��� 00 ° ° I'M. 0 O C � 3 0 N � � N � � N � a) pe) M 0 a) � .- o') a) 00 u° W m N Z � o L E ° a) 00 O M 00 0C nPO SN OO U N O O O z J ) O O °1 c n O U \W O N c ° 0 0 Oct> OW E � -° O E m 2Ul O > OT Q) H to a U 0°o ,c C ° m o U D o za O U- �g• T o +' O U —O —O 'O c> N ai N a) 0> N .0 ++ a) C yi -0 U N c ° Q° .a) o 0 3 U (DL N Q I OD O o W U 2,2 N E 3 p O° L° w O �, O Q-> -0 c L o O O)L O\ � p o E N �!�1�3to E a 0o N oV) N W \ 2 3 -0 O iN O rn Q) a ON 3 i L U 0 0-°E� - N p 0) Ez °U E O oz Q= Q) U O C C U 'c a) C a) a) C U to 10 w U Z N � +, C N 3 L O 6p N o N T 'n 'o mo w� y E C �W ° a� c— N 2 O` �m D C- 0 30 ° N i N° 0-0 ,� v O ` U° ° ° N v O N O m cV °° o T O a°j O -L m U c 0 a a 0 O I 5.7 L)i 3 N c a E a E O O c O O 0 O C � O 0 00 0 .� N O ,+0� 0 T p > T O o� (n �� nUl E ON z a �O a>cvv�vi>0C V)+ m 0) � H O ipU+ Co 0_ W w m rm 4.5' TOWN OF VA10 VAI LTOWN PLANNINGAND ENVI RONMENTAL AGENDA MEMO MEETING DATE: November28, 2016 ITEM/TOPIC: November 14, 2016 PEC Meeting Results ATTACHMENTS: File Name pec results 111416.pdf Description November 14, 2016 PEC Meeting Results TOWN OF VA10 PLANNING AND ENVIRONMENTAL COMMISSION November 14, 2016, 1:00 PM Vail Town Council Chambers 75 S. Frontage Road - Vail, Colorado, 81657 Call to Order Members Present: Chairman Rediker, Brian Gillette, Kirk Hansen, John Ryan Lockman, Ludwig Kurz, Henry Pratt, and Brian Stockmar Absent: 2. A request for recommendation to the Vail Town Council of an application to establish Special Development District No. 41 (Marriott Residence I nn), pursuant to Section 12- 9(A), Special Development Districts, Vail Town Code, to allow for the development of a limited service lodge and deed restricted employee housing units and a conditional use permit for public or commercial parking facilities or structures, located at 1783 North Frontage Road West/Lot 9, Buffehr Creek Resubdivision, and setting forth details in regard thereto. (PEC16-0030). — 90 min. Applicant: Vail Hotel Owner ESHV, LLC, represented by Mauriello Planning Group Planner: Matt Panfi I Action: Continue to November 28, 2016 Motion: Hansen Second: Kurz Vote: 7-0-0 Approval of Minutes October 24, 2016 PEC Meeting Results Action: Approve Motion: Gillette Second: Stockmar Vote: (4-0-3, Hansen, Kurz, and Pratt Abstained) I nformational Update Adjournment Action: Adjourn Motion: Gillette Second: Stockmar 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 48-hour notification. Please call (970) 479-2356, Telecommunication Device for the Deaf (TDD), for information. Community Development Department Published in the Vail Daily November 11, 2016 TOWN OF VA110 VAI LTOWN PLANNINGAND ENVI RONMENTAL AGENDA MEMO MEETING DATE: November28, 2016 ITEM/TOPIC: Environmental Sustainability- Storm Water Education ATTACHMENTS: File Name Description PEC_Information_Update11-28-16.pdf Staff Presentation m i m E O W LIEN 'i7 No v W \ 00 N -I -I 4- C: w E O C: LU fa O C: H ra c w E 0 .5 C: LU fu 0 c � •� Air O i r- — %Pl } c N v (v 6 _ N N ca cn O bn �_ •� • � YI i = M +-+ O�1 N O Q l0 L ca p— O ca O w +� O U `~ b.0 vii `~ .� U L7 O Ou `~ � 1• C 0 � .EL E 0. g ` Y µ OA L ra c w E 0 .5 C: LU fu 0 c � •� O O N N v (v 6 _ N N ca cn O bn �_ •� = M +-+ O�1 N O Q l0 L ca p— O ca O w +� O U `~ b.0 vii `~ .� U L7 O Ou `~ � ra c w E 0 .5 C: LU fu 0 c a-- u c w E 0 .; LU fu l� 0 W '^�� V! m E cn O � J cli U � Q N .0 N O H C: _r__ N� O m E m cn Co cn cn CL Co cn 3: m E O.0 c Co U cn Co O N4-0cn4-0 2 O � 0 N N U bD O O N O 4-J 4-j 4-J O N O �CL o � � N CL 4- 0 (3) O ca _0 •O M 0 .5 C: LU fu 0 . _ Me E 0 LU fu 0 c N� bD v N U OO O N O • Q ' 1-0 E O O E r -i U U 0 � O L Me E 0 LU fu 0 c LWS low tr. c H L O ^W^ E Q 0 ON E U N bA 0 0 � _0 0 0 r U 0 N = O N W N 0 0 0 low tr. c H . _ . _ Im, v c w E C: 0 .5 C: LU fu 0 c H L O � N E 0 Q ON0 U N bDU 0 0 O O O N E O N N N L C� O c w E C: 0 .5 C: LU fu 0 c H . _ . _ Im, W c w E C: 0 C: LU fa 0 c � N .N E N _0 cin N ca N ca ca N L L � � N O � � O O U U N O � L W c w E C: 0 C: LU fa 0 c . _ . _ Im, Y W sA* a C N E C O .; C W fu O c H L E Q ON0 U N bDU 0 0 O 0 O 0 N E O N N L C� O a C N E C O .; C W fu O c H c w E C: 0 .5 C: LU fu 0 c H L O � N E 0 Q ON0 U N bDU 0 0 O O O N E O N N N L C� O c w E C: 0 .5 C: LU fu 0 c H �: L (D -1--i .3: C/) aD C: 0 CL C: 0 0 ca ca 0 a) CL E m x w Ahk N r -I 0 0 LU fu 0 rI__ O N O E E I cn O cn .cn cn ^O n m 4- w O .5 C: LU fu O C H � 4b 0 L:7 \ . � / h � ClA .O U U C6 bD _0 � C6 N � L � C6 � N � N i � � O O 41 N cr _0 0 L U 0 ca O i N 4-J L CoU U = =3 CO a--+ -0 _0 _0 W C6 C: CO C6 • 0 Alu c w E O C: LU fa O c H Ad Name: 12481069A Customer: TOWN OF VAIL/PLAN DEPT/COMM Your account number is- 1 OP2P 33 MW nay PROOF OF PUBLICATION STATE OF COLORADO } }ss. COUNTY OF EAGLE } I, Mark Wurzer, 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 11/11/2016 and that the last publication of said notice was dated 11/11/2016 in the issue of said newspaper. In witness whereof, I have here unto set my hand this day, 11/13/2016. 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 11/13/2016. ( �L-& 9. -V-� Pamela J. Schultz, Notary Public My Commission expires: November 1, 2019 r 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 November 28, 2016 at 1:00 pm in the Town of Vail Municipal Building. A report to the Planning and Environmental Com- mission of an administrative action approving a re- quest for a minor amendment to Special Develop- ment District No. 6 (Vail Village Inn), pursuant to section 12-9A-10, Amendment Procedures, Vail Town Code, to allow for the construction of an ap- proximately sixty (60) square foot addition (glass display case) located at 100 East Meadow Drive, Units 7A, 8, 21 and 22 (Vail Village Plaza Condos)/Lot O, Block 5D, Vail Village Filing 1, and setting forth details in regard thereto. (PEC16-0035) Applicant: AJW Properties II, LLC, represented by Current Architects Planner: Matt Panfil A request for a variance from Section 14-6-7, Vail Town Code, pursuant to Section 14-1-5, Variances, VailTown Code, and in accordance with Section 12-17, Variances, Vail Town Code, to allow for re- taining walls withan exposed face height greater than three feet (3') in the front setback, located at 1255 Westhaven Circle/Lot 45, Glen Lyon Subdivi- sion and setting forth details in regard thereto. (PEC16-0036) Applicant: Westhaven LLC and Jamie Lipnick, rep- resented by KH Webb Architects Planner: Matt Panfil 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 November 11, 2016 in the Vail Daily. (12481069) Ad Name: 12512120A Customer: TOWN OF VAIL/PLAN DEPT/COMM Your account number is- 1 OP2P 33 MW nay PROOF OF PUBLICATION STATE OF COLORADO } }ss. COUNTY OF EAGLE } I, Mark Wurzer, 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 11/26/2016 and that the last publication of said notice was dated 11/26/2016 in the issue of said newspaper. In witness whereof, I have here unto set my hand this day, 11/28/2016. 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 11/28/2016. ( �L-& 9. -V-� Pamela J. Schultz, Notary Public My Commission expires: November 1, 2019 r PLANNING AND ENVIRONMENTAL COMMISSION November 28, 2016, 1:00 PM Vail Town Council Chambers 75 S. Frontage Road - Vail, Colorado, 81657 1.Call to Order 2.Site Visits - 30 min. 1.Marriott Residence Inn - 1783 North Frontage Road West 3.A request for recommendation to the Vail Town Council of an application to establish Special De- velopment District No. 41 (Marriott Residence Inn), pursuant to Section 12- 9(A), Special Development Districts, Vail Town Code, to allow for the devel- opment of a limited service lodge and deed re- stricted employee housing units and a conditional use permit for public or commercial parking facili- ties or structures, located at 1783 North Frontage Road West/Lot 9, Buffehr Creek Resubdivision, and setting forth details in regard thereto. (PEC16-0030). - 90 min. Applicant:Vail Hotel Owner ESHV, LLC, repre- sented by Mauriello Planning Group Planner: Matt Panfil 4.A report to the Planning and Environmental Commission of an administrative action approving a request for a minor amendment to Special De- velopment District No. 6 (Vail Village Inn), pursu- ant to section 12-9A-10, Amendment Procedures, Vail Town Code, to allow for the construction of an approximately sixty (60) square foot addition (glass display case) located at 100 East Meadow Drive, Units 7A, 8, 21 and 22 (Vail Village Plaza Condos)/Lot O, Block 5D, Vail Village Filing 1, and setting forth details in regard thereto. (PEC16-0035) - 10 min. Applicant:AJW Properties 11, LLC, represented by Current Architects Planner: Matt Panfil 5.A request for a variance from Section 14-6-7, Vail Town Code, pursuant to Section 14-1-5, Variances, Vail Town Code, and in accordance with Section 12-17, Variances, Vail Town Code, to allow for re- taining walls with an exposed face height greater than three feet (3) in the front setback, located at 1255 Westhaven Circle/Lot 45, Glen Lyon Subdivi- sion and setting forth details in regard thereto. (PEC16-0036)- 5 min. Table to December 12, 2016 Applicant:Westhaven LLC and Jamie Lipnick, represented by KH Webb Architects Planner: Matt Panfil 6.A request for final review of a Development Plan, pursuant to Section 12-61-11, Vail Town Code, to allow for the future development of Employee Housing Units on the Chamonix parcel located at 2310 Chamonix Road, Parcel B, Resubdivision of Tract D, Vail Das Schone Filing 1, and setting forth details in regard thereto. (PEC150019) - 5 min. Table to December 12, 2016 Applicant:Town of Vail Community Development Department Planner: Jonathan Spence 7.Approval of Minutes November 14, 2016 PEC Meeting Results 8. Informational Update Environmental Sustainability- Storm Water Educa- tion - 15 min. 9.Adjournment The applications and information about the propos- als are available for public inspection during regu- laroffice hours at the Town of Vail Community De- velopment Department, 75 South Frontage Road. The public is invited to attend the project orienta- tion and the site visits that precede the public hearing in the Town of Vail Community Develop- ment Department. Times and order of items are approximate, subject to change, and cannot be re- lied upon to determine at what time the Planning and Environmental Commission will consider an item. Please call (970) 479-2138 for additional in- formation. Sign language interpretation is available upon request with 48-hour notification. Please call (970) 479-2356, Telecommunication Device for the Deaf (TDD), for information. Community Development Department Published in the Vail Daily November 25, 2016 (12512120)