HomeMy WebLinkAbout2020-06-02 Agenda and Supporting Documentation Town Council Evening Meeting Agenda
VAIL TO W N C O U N C IL R E G U L AR ME E TIN G
Evening Agenda
Town C ouncil Chambers and Virtual
6:00 P M, June 2, 2020
Meeting to be held in C ouncil Chambers and Virtually (access
High Five Access Media livestream day of the meeting)
Notes:
Times of items are approximate, subject to c hange, and cannot be relied upon to determine what time C ounc il will
consider an item.
Public comment will be taken on each agenda item.
Citizen participation offers an opportunity for citizens to express opinions or ask questions regarding town
services, policies or other matters of community conc ern, and any items that are not on the agenda. Please
attempt to keep c omments to three minutes; time limits established are to provide efficienc y in the c onduct of the
meeting and to allow equal opportunity for everyone wishing to speak.
1.Citizen Participation (10 min.)
2.Consent Agenda (5 min.)
2.1.Resolution No. 20, Series of 2020, A Resolution approving a Care Act
Grant, Phase I Contract with the Colorado Department of Transportation
Background: This is the first of two C D OT grants that are a part of the
Federal C A RE S Act. I t is designed to help fund transit operating and
administrative costs to mitigate the impact of the C OV I D 19 response
2.2.Resolution No. 21, Series 2020, A Resolution approving a Contract Letter, a
Trench, Conduit, and Vault Agreement, and an Underground Right-of-Way
Easement with Holy Cross Energy
Background: The Town received a federal grant to upgrade the power at the
Public Works facilities in order to accommodate the power needs of
charging stations for electric buses. I n order to move forward with the work
the town must contract with Holy Cross Energy (HC E), expand the existing
Holy Cross Energy easement, and enter into a Trench, Vault, and Conduit
Agreement with HC E.
Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends that the Town Council approves
the Town Manger to enter into a contract with HC E, approves the expansion
of the HC E easement, and approves the Holy Cross Energy Trench,
Conduit and Vault Agreement by approving Resolution No. 21 Series 2020
2.3.Resolution No. 22, Series of 2020 , A Resolution Approving an Amended
Operating Plan and Budget of the Vail Local Marketing District for its Fiscal
Year J anuary 1, 2020 Through December 31, 2020.
Background: See attached memo.
Staff Recommendation: Approve, approved with amendments or
deny Resolution No. 22, Series of 2020.
June 2, 2020 - Page 1 of 772
2.4.Resolution No. 23, Series 2020, a Resolution approving a Revocable
License Agreement with the Colorado Department of Transportation for the
Construction and Maintenance of a Deer Fence
Background: C D OT is in the process of improving the wildlife fence in
Dowd J unction as a part of the on-going asphalt overlay project. I n order to
make these wildlife fence improvements C D OT is requesting to install wildlife
fence within town property in Dowd J unction and receive a Revocable
License Agreement to install and maintain it.
Staff Recommendation: Approve Resolution No. 23, Series 2020 - C D OT
W ildlife fencing Revocable License Agreement
2.5.Resolution No. 24, Series of 2020, A Resolution of the Town Council
Extending the Declaration of a Local Disaster Emergency
2.6.Forethought Fiber Optic Utility Easement
Background: Forethought, a fiber optic network provider, is requesting to
install underground fiber optic cable to the Antler ’s Hotel across town
property in Lionshead.
Staff Recommendation: Approve Fiber Optic Utility Easement
2.7.Vail America Days Agreement for Event Funding
Background: Highline Sports and Entertainment has been awarded $67,500
to produce the Vail America Days activities including the American Days
Parade. This years parade will be operated in a new and creative way to
support social distancing practices. Highline Sports and Entertainment has
already been working in good faith on the planning of the annual J uly 4th
event.
Staff Recommendation: Approve the Town Manager to enter into an
agreement on a form approved by the Town Attorney, with Highline Sports
and Entertainment for the production of Vail America Days in an amount not
to exceed $67,500.
3.Town Manager Report (10 min.)
4.Action Items
4.1.First Reading of Ordinance No. 7, Series 2020, an Ordinance making
adjustments to the Town of Vail General Fund, Capital Projects Fund, Real
Estate Transfer Tax Fund, Marketing Fund, Dispatch Services Fund,
and Heavy Equipment Fund
30 min,
Presenter(s): Carlie Smith, Financial Service Manager
Action Requested of Council: Approve or approve with amendments
Ordinance No. 7, Series 2020.
Background: Please see attached memo.
Staff Recommendation: Approve or approve with amendments Ordinance
No. 7, Series 2020.
5.Public Hearings
5.1.Ordinance No. 2, Series of 2020, First Reading, An ordinance for the
rezoning of a portion of the property located at 366 Hanson Ranch
Road/Lot 1, 366 Hanson Ranch Road Subdivision. The proposed rezoning
would change the Zone District from Agriculture and Open Space (A)
District to the Public Accommodation (PA) District and setting forth details
60 min.
June 2, 2020 - Page 2 of 772
in regard thereto. (P E C19-0022)
Presenter(s): J onathan Spence, Planning Manager
Action Requested of Council: The Vail Town Council shall approve, approve
with modifications, or deny Ordinance No. 2, Series of 2020, upon first
reading.
Background: The applicant, VailPoint LLC, represented by Sarah J Baker
P C., is requesting a zone district boundary amendment, pursuant to
Section 12-3-7, Amendment, Vail Town Code, to allow for the rezoning of a
portion of the property located at 366 Hanson Ranch Road/Lot 1, 366
Hanson Ranch Road Subdivision. The proposed rezoning would change the
Zone District from Agriculture and Open Space (A) District to the Public
Accommodation (PA) District.
Staff Recommendation: The Planning and Environmental Commission held
a public hearing on the zone district boundary amendment on March 9,
2020 where a recommendation for approval was forwarded to the Vail Town
Council by a vote of 4-2 (Gillette and Perez opposed).
5.2.Ordinance No. 3, Series of 2020, First Reading, An Ordinance for a Zone
District Boundary Amendment, Pursuant to Section 12-3-7, Amendment
Vail Town Code, to Allow for a Rezoning of Tract C, Lot 1, Lot 2, and Lot
Vail Das Schone Filing No.. 1 and Lot 1, Vail Das Schone Filing 3; The
Rezoning will Change the Zone District from Commercial Core 3 (C C3) to
the Public Accommodation 2 (PA-2) District
30 min.
Presenter(s): Greg Roy, Planner
Action Requested of Council: Approve, Approve with Conditions, or Deny
Ordinance No. 3, Series of 2020 - First Reading
Background: The applicant, TNFRE F lll Bravo Vail L L C, represented by
Mauriello Planning Group and Triumph Development, is requesting approval
of Ordinance No. 3, Series of 2020 an ordinance for a zone district
boundary amendment, pursuant to Section12-3-7, Amendment, Vail Town
code, to allow for a rezoning for Tract C, Lot 1, Lot 2, and Lot 3 Vail Das
Schone Filing No. 1 and Lot 1, Vail Das Schone Filing 3; The rezoning will
change the zone district from Community Commercial 3 (C C3) to the
Public Accommodation 2 (PA-2) District.
Staff Recommendation: The Planning and Environmental Commission held
a public hearing on the proposed Zone District Boundary Amendment on
April 13, 2020 where a recommendation for approval was forwarded to the
Vail Town Council by a vote of 6-1-0 (Gillette opposed).
5.3.Ordinance No. 4, Series of 2020, First Reading, An Ordinance Creating
Special Development District No, 42, Highline Doubletree, Pursuant to
Article A, Special Development District, Chapter 9, Title 12, Zoning
Regulations, Vail Town Code, and Setting Forth Details in Regard Thereto.
30 min.
Presenter(s): Greg Roy, Planner
Action Requested of Council: Approve, Approve with Conditions, or Deny
Ordinance No. 4, Series of 2020 - First Reading
Background: The applicant, TNFRE F lll Bravo Vail L L C, represented by
Mauriello Planning Group and Triumph Development, is requesting a
recommendation to the Vail Town Council for approval of a Special
Development District, pursuant to Section 12-9-A, Special Development
(S D D) District, Vail Town Code, located at the property of 2211 N.
Frontage Road West, which is comprised of Tract C, Lot 1, Lot 2, and Lot
3 Vail Das Schone Filing No. 1 and Lot 1, Vail Das Schone Filing 3.
Staff Recommendation: The Planning and Environmental Commission held
a public hearing on the proposed S D D on April 13, 2020 where a
June 2, 2020 - Page 3 of 772
recommendation for approval was forwarded to the Vail Town Council by a
vote of 4-3 (Gillette, Kjesbo, and Pratt opposed).
6.Adjournment
6.1.Adjournment at 8:55 pm (estimate)
Meeting agendas and materials can be acc es s ed prior to meeting day on the Town of Vail webs ite
www.vailgov.com. All town c ouncil meetings will be streamed live by High F ive Ac cess Media and available
for public viewing as the meeting is happening. T he meeting videos are als o posted to High F ive Ac cess Media
website the week following meeting day, www.highfivemedia.org.
P leas e c all 970-479-2136 for additional information. S ign language interpretation is available upon reques t with
48 hour notification dial 711.
June 2, 2020 - Page 4 of 772
VA I L TO W N C O UNC I L A G E ND A ME MO
I T E M /T O P I C: Resolution No. 20, S eries of 2020, A Resolution approving a Care Act Grant,
P hase I Contract with the Colorado Department of Transportation
B AC K G RO UND: This is the first of two C D O T grants that are a part of the Federal C A R E S Act.
I t is designed to help fund transit operating and administrative costs to mitigate the impact of the
C O V I D 19 response
AT TAC H ME N TS:
Description
Resolution No. 20 of 2020
C AR E S Act
June 2, 2020 - Page 5 of 772
RESOLUTION NO. 20
Series of 2020
A RESOLUTION APPROVING A CARES ACT GRANT, PHASE I CONTRACT WITH
THE COLORADO DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
WHEREAS, the Town and the Colorado Department of Transportation wish to
enter into the agreement set forth in Exhibit A, attached hereto and incorporated herein
by this reference (the "Agreement"), to facilitate the CARES Act Grant the Town is
receiving.
NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE TOWN COUNCIL OF THE
TOWN OF VAIL, COLORADO THAT:
Section 1. The Town Council hereby approves the Agreement in substantially
the same form as attached hereto as Exhibit A, and in a form approved by the Town
attorney, and authorizes the Town Manager to execute the Agreement on behalf of the
Town.
Section 2. This Resolution shall take effect immediately upon its passage.
INTRODUCED, PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Town
Council of the Town of Vail held this 2nd day of June 2020.
_________________________
Dave Chapin, Town Mayor
ATTEST:
_____________________________
Tammy Nagel, Town Clerk
June 2, 2020 - Page 6 of 772
VA I L TO W N C O UNC I L A G E ND A ME MO
I T E M /T O P I C: Resolution No. 21, S eries 2020, A Resolution approving a Contract L etter, a
Trench, Conduit, and Vault A greement, and an Underground Right-of-Way Easement with Holy
Cross Energy
AC T IO N RE Q UE S T E D O F C O UNC I L: A pprove Resolution No. 21, 2020 - Holy Cross
A greement
B AC K G RO UND: The Town received a federal grant to upgrade the power at the P ublic Works
facilities in order to accommodate the power needs of charging stations for electric buses. I n
order to move forward with the work the town must contract with Holy Cross Energy (HC E ), expand
the existing Holy Cross E nergy easement, and enter into a Trench, Vault, and Conduit A greement
with HC E .
S TAF F RE C O M M E ND AT IO N: Staff recommends that the Town Council approves the Town
Manger to enter into a contract with HC E , approves the expansion of the HC E easement, and
approves the Holy Cross Energy Trench, Conduit and Vault A greement by approving Resolution
No. 21 S eries 2020
AT TAC H ME N TS:
Description
Memo
Resolution No. 21 of 2020
Contract Letter
T C V Agreement
Easement
June 2, 2020 - Page 7 of 772
To: Town Council
From: Public Works Department
Date: June 2, 2020
Subject: Resolution No. 21 Series 2020 - Holy Cross Energy Trench, Conduit and Vault
Agreement at PW Facility
I. SUMMARY
The Town received a federal grant to upgrade the power at the Public Works facilities in
order to accommodate the power needs of charging stations for electric buses. In order
to move forward with the work the town must contract with Holy Cross Energy (HCE) to
provide the necessary conduit and electric vaults, as well as for its design and
inspection, in the amount of $55,000, of which $37,000 is refundable to the Town over a
10 year period from Holy Cross Energy. The HCE costs are budgeted within the project
costs in the 2020 budget. In addition, the town must also expand the existing Holy
Cross Energy easement to include the proposed HCE utility equipment and enter into a
Trench, Vault, and Conduit Agreement with HCE.
II. STAFF RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that the Town Council approves the Town Manger to enter into a
contract, in a form approved by the Town Attorney, with HCE in the amount of $55,000;
approves the expansion of the HCE easement, in a form approved by the Town
Attorney, to accommodate the HCE equipment; and approves the Holy Cross Energy
Trench, Conduit and Vault Agreement by approving Resolution No. 21 Series 2020.
III. ATTACHMENTS
Resolution No. 21 Series 2020
Holy Cross Energy Trench, Conduit and Vault Agreement
Holy Cross Energy Underground Right of Way Easement
Holy Cross Energy Contract Letter
June 2, 2020 - Page 8 of 772
RESOLUTION NO. 21
Series of 2020
A RESOLUTION APPROVING A CONTRACT LETTER; A TRENCH, CONDUIT, AND
VAULT AGREEMENT; AND AN UNDERGROUND RIGHT-OF-WAY EASEMENT
WITH HOLY CROSS ENERGY
WHEREAS, the Town and Holy Cross Energy wish to enter into the agreements
set forth in Exhibit A, attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference (the
"Agreements") to facilitate the Public Works electric bus upgrade.
NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE TOWN COUNCIL OF THE
TOWN OF VAIL, COLORADO THAT:
Section 1. The Town Council hereby approves the Agreements in substantially
the same form as attached hereto as Exhibit A, and in a form approved by the Town
attorney, and authorizes the Town Manager to execute the Agreements on behalf of the
Town.
Section 2. This Resolution shall take effect immediately upon its passage.
INTRODUCED, PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Town
Council of the Town of Vail held this 2nd day of June 2020.
_________________________
Dave Chapin, Town Mayor
ATTEST:
_____________________________
Tammy Nagel, Town Clerk
June 2, 2020 - Page 9 of 772
3799 HIGHWAY 82∙P.O. DRAWER 3350
GLENWOOD SPRINGS, COLORADO 81602
(970)945-5491∙FAX (970) 945-4081
A Touchstone Energy Cooperative
May 7, 2020
Town of Vail
Attn: Greg Hall
1309 Elkhorn Drive
Vail, Colorado 81657
RE: Vail - Town Shop Electric Bus Upgrade
Dear Greg,
Holy Cross Energy has completed a design and cost estimate for providing electric service to the above
referenced project, hereinafter the “Project”. Our facilities will be installed as shown on the attached
sketch. The owner or developer of the subject Project is hereinafter referred to as the “Owner”.
The estimated cost of construction is as follows:
Total estimated cost of underground
construction $56,000.00
Construction deposit consisting of
equivalent overhead credits (refundable) $37,000.00
Standard Construction Allowance $(1,000)
Contribution in aid of construction
(non-recoverable) $ 19,000.00
Total estimated cost of underground
construction after Allowance $55,000.00
The above figures are only estimates. After the job has been completed, the actual cost of construction
will be determined. The Owner’s deposit and contribution will be adjusted accordingly. Execution of this
document constitutes the Owner’s agreement to pay the full amount of the actual cost of construction in a
timely manner.
Our power facilities must be installed on an easement. Please execute and return the enclosed document.
The following conditions are hereby noted:
1.A Load Form must be submitted for this project. These forms are available on-line and can be
found by visiting www.holycross.com.
2.Lot corners or other locations will be provided by the Owner as needed to ensure that our facilities
are installed as shown on the attached sketch.
3.Holy Cross Energy has implemented a policy which requires that the Owner provide all excavation,
backfill, compaction and cleanup needed for installation of the underground power system
extension to serve the Project. The Owner must also set all vaults and install all conduits as
specified by Holy Cross Energy’s design for the Project and the enclosed construction
specifications. Holy Cross Energy will supply all material which can be picked up by the Owner at
the appropriate storage yard. The cost of this material is included in the job cost estimate. The
June 2, 2020 - Page 10 of 772
Hall
April 21, 2020
Page Two
attached Trench, Conduit, and Vault Agreement must be properly executed by the Owner and
returned prior to the start of excavation.
4. No excavation will be undertaken within five (5) feet of existing underground power lines except
under the onsite supervision of a Holy Cross Energy employee.
5. It shall be the Owner’s responsibility to ensure that splice vaults, switchgear vaults and
transformer vaults installed hereunder for the Project are accessible by Holy Cross boom trucks
and other necessary equipment and personnel at all times. The use of such access by Holy Cross
shall not require removal or alteration of any improvements, landscaping, or other obstructions.
The ground surface grade shall not be altered within ten (10) feet of said splice, switchgear and
transformer vaults, nor along the power line route between the vaults. The ground surface grade
at said transformer and switchgear vaults shall be six (6) inches below the top of the pad. The
ground surface grade at said splice vaults shall be even with the top of the pad. The manhole
opening of said splice vaults shall be uncovered (excluding snow) and accessible at all times.
Improvements, landscaping or any other objects placed in the vicinity of said transformers and
switchgear shall be located so as not to hinder complete opening of the equipment doors. The
ground surface within ten (10) feet of said transformer and switchgear doors shall be flat, level
and free of improvements, landscaping, and other obstructions. Improvements, landscaping and
other objects will be kept a minimum of four (4) feet from non-opening sides and backs of said
transformers and switchgear. Owner hereby agrees to maintain the requirements of this
paragraph and further agrees to correct any violations which may occur as soon as notified by
Holy Cross Energy. Said corrections will be made at the sole cost and expense of Owner.
6. Secondary voltage available will be 480Y/277, three-phase.
7. Secondary facilities shall be installed in accordance with National Electrical Code and Holy Cross
Energy specifications. All meter locations must be approved. Any service over 200 amps or 240
volts must have prior written approval from Holy Cross Energy.
8. It will be the Owner’s responsibility to extend underground secondary entrance conductors from
the pad-mounted transformer, or junction box, to points of power usage.
9. All underground services shall be installed in conduit ahead of the meter. All underground
services must be in conduit beneath roads, driveways, and other areas of difficult excavation.
10. Low voltage starting will be required on all three-phase motors larger than 25 HP and all single-
phase motors larger than 10 HP.
11. Motor protection from phase loss and other voltage problems should be provided. This
equipment shall be installed and maintained at the expense of the Owner.
12. It shall be the Owner’s responsibility to protect their electric equipment from temporary over
voltage or under voltage situations resulting from causes beyond the control of Holy Cross
Energy.
13. The above-mentioned cost estimate does not include connect fees or meter deposits, if required.
Arrangements for payment of these items and for scheduling the actual meter installation should
be made through the local Holy Cross Energy office.
14. We attempt to complete all projects in a timely manner. However, highest priority is given to
maintaining service to our existing consumers. This fact, along with inevitable construction
delays, will not allow us to guarantee a project completion date.
June 2, 2020 - Page 11 of 772
Hall
April 21, 2020
Page Three
15. All Holy Cross Energy rules and regulations will be followed.
16. When Holy Cross Energy is in receipt of all necessary executed easements, other permits, if
required, the executed trench agreement, and the signed original of this letter agreement (below),
the job can be scheduled for construction.
Sincerely,
HOLY CROSS ENERGY
Jeffrey P. Vroom,
Engineering Department
jvroom@holycross.com
(970) 947-5425
JPV:MM
Enclosure
The above terms and conditions
are hereby agreed to and accepted
By:
Title:
Date:
W/O#20-23773:52-66:Vail – Town Shop Electric Bus Upgrade
20-23773 Contract Letter
June 2, 2020 - Page 12 of 772
June 2, 2020 - Page 13 of 772
TRENCH, CONDUIT, AND VAULT AGREEMENT
This agreement is made and entered into this day of , 20 ,
between TOWN OF VAIL, a Colorado municipal corporation, whose mailing address is 75 S Frontage Road, Vail, CO 81657 ,
hereinafter called "Owner", and Holy Cross Energy, a Colorado corporation whose mailing address is P. O. Box 2150,
Glenwood Springs, Colorado 81602, hereafter called "Holy Cross".
WHEREAS, Holy Cross has been requested by Owner to provide underground electric facilities, hereinafter called “Facilities”,
to serve a project known as VAIL – TOWN SHOP ELECTRIC BUS UPGRADE, hereinafter called “Project”; and,
WHEREAS, Owner is required to provide all excavation, conduit and vault installation, backfill, compaction and cleanup
needed to construct said requested Facilities; and,
WHEREAS, Owner owns real property described as follows: A parcel of land situate in Section 9, Township 5 South, Range
80 West of the 6th P.M., as more fully described at Reception Numbers 162500 and 200709523 in the records of the Eagle
County Clerk and Recorder’s Office, Eagle, Colorado, hereinafter called “Property”, which Property is the real property
where the Project is being developed; and,
WHEREAS, installation of Facilities to serve the Project may require trenching or other excavation on certain real property
adjacent to the Project described as follows: N/A, hereinafter called “Adjacent Land”.
NOW, THEREFORE, Owner and Holy Cross agree as follows:
1. Owner shall provide all excavation, conduit and vault installation, backfill, compaction and cleanup necessary for
installation of Facilities to serve the Project. Such excavation shall be located as shown on the construction plans
approved by Holy Cross, and performed in accordance with Holy Cross Vault Installation Specifications, Construction
Specifications and inspector requirements. Any deviation from the approved construction plans will not be made unless
approved by Holy Cross in advance. All Facilities installed hereunder shall be inspected during construction by Holy
Cross and shall meet all Holy Cross requirements prior to acceptance of such Facilities by Holy Cross.
a. Prior to commencement of any work hereunder, Holy Cross shall furnish to Owner its Vault Installation Specifications
and Construction Specifications and such specifications are made a part hereof by reference.
b. All Facilities installed within the Property and Adjacent Land shall be within dedicated or conveyed and recorded
utility easements.
c. The top of all conduits installed hereunder shall be located a minimum of 48” below the final grade of the ground
surface.
d. A twelve -inch (12”) minimum separation will be maintained between conduits installed for the Facilities and all other
new or existing underground utilities. Wherever possible, this separation will be horizontal. The Facilities conduit
separation from plastic gas lines shall be greater than this minimum wherever practicable.
e. Holy Cross will supply the necessary conduit and vaults for installation by the Owner upon completion of contractual
arrangements. Owner assumes responsibility for all material lost or damaged after such material has been issued
to and signed for by Owner or by an agent of Owner. Alternatively, Owner may provide its own conduit and vaults
meeting Holy Cross specifications for use on the Project and convey such provided material to Holy Cross with an
acceptable Bill of Sale. After installation by the Owner and acceptance by Holy Cross, Holy Cross shall continue as
the owner of the conduit, vaults and related structures and facilities.
f. If conduit and/or vault installation provided by Owner for the Project are found to be unusable or improperly
constructed, irrespective of whether such discovery is made during or after installation, Owner will be responsible
for correcting said problems at its expense as specified by Holy Cross and Owner shall reimburse Holy Cross for all
additional costs resulting from conduit and/or vault installation being unusable or improperly constructed.
2. Despite the fact that Holy Cross reserves the right to specify acceptable work performed hereunder, Owner shall perform
work hereunder as an independent contractor, including, but not limited to, the hiring and firing of its own employees,
providing its own tools and equipment, payment of all wages, taxes, insurance, employee withholdings, and fees
connected with its work on the Project.
3. Owner shall obtain all necessary digging permits and utility locations prior to excavation for work performed hereunder.
Owner shall repair all damage caused during excavation promptly and at its expense. No excavation will be undertaken
within five (5) feet of existing underground electric facilities except under the on site supervision of a Holy Cross
employee.
W/O#20-23773:52-66:Vail – Town Shop Electric Bus Upgrade 5/7/2020 20-23773 JV Page 1 of 3 Revised 12/18/15
June 2, 2020 - Page 14 of 772
4. Owner shall indemnify, save, and hold harmless Holy Cross, its employees and agents, against any and all loss, liability,
claims, expense, suits, causes of action, or judgments for damages to property or injury or death to persons that may
arise out of work performed hereunder, or because of a breach of any of the promises, covenants and agreements herein
made by the Owner. Owner shall promptly defend Holy Cross whenever legal proceedings of any kind are brought
against it arising out of work performed hereunder by the Owner and/or work performed at the direction of the Owner.
In the event Owner shall fail to promptly defend Holy Cross, it shall be liable to Holy Cross, and shall reimburse it, for
all costs, expenses and attorney fees incurred in defending any such legal proceeding. Owner agrees to satisfy, pay,
and discharge any and all judgments and fines rendered against Holy Cross arising out of any such proceedings. Owner
also agrees to promptly satisfy and pay any monetary settlements of disputes that arise hereunder, provided Owner has
been given the opportunity to join in such settlement agreements. The above indemnification clause shall not apply to
state and local governments or local service districts. In lieu thereof, whenever Owner is a government or district it shall
procure and maintain in effect at least $1,000,000 of public liability insurance covering the acts, damages and expenses
described in the above indemnification clause. Upon Holy Cross’ request, such an Owner shall furnish a Certificate of
Insurance verifying the existence of such insurance coverage.
5. Owner shall repair, at its expense, any excavation settlement and damage to asphalt paving or other surface
improvements caused by such settlement resulting from work performed hereunder within the Property and Adjacent
Land for a period of two (2) years beginning on the date backfill and cleanup are completed.
6. Owner, at its expense, shall stop the growth of thistles and/or other noxious weeds in all areas disturbed by excavation
performed hereunder for a period of two (2) years beginning on the date backfill and cleanup are completed.
7. In the event Owner shall not promptly complete all of the obligations hereinabove agreed to be performed by Owner,
Holy Cross may give written notice by registered or certified mail demanding Owner to complete the work and obligations
undertaken by Owner herein, and if such is not completed within 30 days after receipt of such notice by Owner, Holy
Cross may complete the work and obligations hereof. If Holy Cross shall be required to complete the work, all costs of
completion shall be chargeable to and collectible from Owner.
8. As set forth in paragraph 1 above, Owner covenants that the trench, and all Facilities within the trench installed hereunder
shall be located within dedicated or conveyed and recorded utility easements and at the proper depth below finished
grade. It shall be the obligation of Owner to properly locate and construct the Facilities within the easement. Should it
ever be discovered that such Facilities have not been properly located within dedicated or conveyed and recorded utility
easements, or at the proper depth, it shall be the obligation of Owner to provide new easements for the actual location
of the Facilities, or to relocate the Facilities within the easement, all of which shall be at the sole cost and expense of
Owner.
9. It shall be Owner’s responsibility to ensure that splice vaults, switchgear vaults and transformer vaults installed
hereunder on the Property are accessible by Holy Cross boom trucks and other necessary equipment and personnel at
all times. The use of such access by Holy Cross shall not require removal or alteration of any improvements, landscaping,
or other obstructions. The ground surface grade shall not be altered within ten (10) feet of said splice, switchgear and
transformer vaults, nor along the power line route between the vaults. The ground surface grade at said transformer
and switchgear vaults shall be six (6) inches below the top of the pad. The ground surface grade at said splice vaults
shall be even with the top of the pad. The manhole opening of said splice vaults shall be uncovered (excluding snow)
and accessible at all times. Improvements, landscaping or any other objects placed in the vicinity of said transformers
and switchgear shall be located so as not to hinder complete opening of the equipment doors. The ground surface
within ten (10) feet of said transformer and switchgear doors shall be flat, level and free of improvements, landscaping,
and other obstructions. Improvements, landscaping and other objects will be kept a minimum of four (4) feet from non-
opening sides and backs of said transformers and switchgear. Owner hereby agrees to maintain the requirements of
this paragraph and further agrees to correct any violations that may occur as soon as notified by Holy Cross. Said
corrections will be made at the sole cost and expense of Owner.
10. All Holy Cross meter locations must be approved in advance. Notwithstanding such advance approval, it shall be the
Owner’s responsibility to maintain acceptable access, as determined solely by Holy Cross, to all Holy Cross meters at all
times. At any time in the future, should access to any Holy Cross meters be determined by Holy Cross to be unacceptable,
then it shall be the Owner’s responsibility, at the Owner’s sole cost, to correct the access and make it acceptable, as
determined solely by Holy Cross.
11. Owner covenants that it is the owner of the above described Property and that said Property is free and clear of
encumbrances and liens of any character, except those held by the following: All those of Record.
W/O#20-23773:52-66:Vail – Town Shop Electric Bus Upgrade 5/7/2020 20-23773 JV Page 2 of 3 Revised 12/18/15
June 2, 2020 - Page 15 of 772
The promises, agreements and representations made by Owner herein shall be covenants that run with the Property and
shall be binding upon the successors in interest, and assigns, of the Property.
The individual signing this Trench, Conduit and Vault Agreement hereby represents that he/she has full power and
authority to sign, execute, and deliver this instrument.
Holy Cross Energy, a Colorado corporation TOWN OF VAIL, a Colorado municipal corporation
By: By:
David Bleakley – Vice President, Engineering Mayor
STATE OF )
) ss.
COUNTY OF )
The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this day of , 20 ,
by as Mayor of the TOWN OF VAIL, a Colorado municipal corporation.
WITNESS my hand and official seal.
My commission expires:
Notary Public
Address:
STATE OF )
) ss.
COUNTY OF )
The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this day of , 20 ,
by David Bleakley – Vice President, Engineering, Holy Cross Energy, a Colorado corporation.
WITNESS my hand and official seal.
My commission expires:
Notary Public
Address:
W/O#20-23773:52-66:Vail – Town Shop Electric Bus Upgrage 5/7/2020 20-23773 JV Page 3 of 3 Revised 12/18/15
Trench, Conduit and Vault Agreement
Holy Cross Energy
June 2, 2020 - Page 16 of 772
HOLY CROSS ENERGY
UNDERGROUND RIGHT-OF-WAY EASEMENT
KNOW ALL MEN BY THESE PRESENTS, that the undersigned,
TOWN OF VAIL, a Colorado municipal corporation
(hereinafter called "Grantor"), for a good and valuable consideration, the receipt whereof is hereby acknowledged, does
hereby grant unto Holy Cross Energy, a Colorado corporation whose post office address is P. O. Box 2150, Glenwood
Springs, Colorado (hereinafter called "Grantee") and to its successors and assigns, the right of ingress and egress across
lands of Grantor, situate in the County of Eagle, State of Colorado, described as follows:
A parcel of land situate in Section 9, Township 5 South, Range 80 West of the 6th P.M., as more fully
described at Reception Numbers 162500 and 200709523 in the records of the Eagle County Clerk and
Recorder’s Office, Eagle, Colorado, hereinafter called “Property”, which Property is the real property where
the Project is being developed.
And, to construct, reconstruct, repair, change, enlarge, re-phase, operate, and maintain an underground electric
transmission or distribution line, or both, with the underground vaults, conduit, fixtures and equipment used or useable in
connection therewith, together with associated equipment required above ground, within the above mentioned lands, upon
an easement described as follows:
An easement ten (10) feet in width, the centerline for said easement being an underground power line as constructed, the
approximate location of which upon the above described property is shown on Exhibit A attached hereto and made a part
hereof by reference.
The rights herein granted specifically allow Grantee to install additional underground and/or pad-mounted facilities within
the easement described herein.
It shall be the Grantor’s responsibility to ensure that splice vaults, switchgear vaults and transformer vaults installed
hereunder on said real property are accessible by Grantee’s boom trucks and other necessary equipment and personnel at
all times. The use of such access by Grantee shall not require removal or alteration of any improvements, landscaping, or
other obstructions. The ground surface grade shall not be altered within ten (10) feet of said splice, switchgear and
transformer vaults, nor along the power line route between the vaults. The ground surface grade at said transformer and
switchgear vaults shall be six (6) inches below the top of the pad. The ground surface grade at said splice vaults shall be
even with the top of the pad. The manhole opening of said splice vaults shall be uncovered (excluding snow) and
accessible at all times. Improvements, landscaping or any other objects placed in the vicinity of said transformers and
switchgear shall be located so as not to hinder complete opening of the equipment doors. The ground surface within ten
(10) feet of said transformer and switchgear doors shall be flat, level and free of improvements, landscaping, and other
obstructions. Improvements, landscaping and other objects will be kept a minimum of four (4) feet from non-opening
sides and backs of said transformers and switchgear. Grantor hereby agrees to maintain the requirements of this
paragraph and further agrees to correct any violations which may occur as soon as notified by Grantee. Said corrections
will be made at the sole cost and expense of Grantor.
Together with the right to remove any and all trees, brush, vegetation and obstructions within said easement and the right
to pile spoils outside said easement during construction and maintenance, when such is reasonably necessary for the
implementation and use of the rights hereinabove granted. In areas where vegetation is disturbed by the above described
use of the easement, the ground surface shall be seeded using a standard native mix by Grantee. Grantor agrees that
landscaping or other surface improvements added on said easement after the date of execution hereof will be minimized
and that Grantee will not be responsible for damage to said additional landscaping or surface improvements caused by
exercise of its rights granted by this easement.
Grantor agrees that all facilities installed by Grantee on the above described lands, shall remain the property of Grantee,
and shall be removable at the option of Grantee.
Grantor covenants that they are the owner of the above described lands and that the said lands are free and clear of
encumbrances and liens of whatsoever character, except those held by the following: All those of Record.
W/O#20-23773:52-66:Vail – Town Shop Electric Bus Upgrade 5/7/2020 20-23773 JV Page 1 of 2 Revised 12/18/15
June 2, 2020 - Page 17 of 772
TO HAVE AND TO HOLD, said right-of-way and easement, together with all and singular, the rights and privileges
appertaining thereto, unto Grantee, its successors and assigns, forever.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, Grantor has caused these presents to be duly executed on this day of
, 20 .
The individual signing this Holy Cross Energy Underground Right-of-Way Easement hereby represents that he/she has full
power and authority to sign, execute, and deliver this instrument.
TOWN OF VAIL, a Colorado municipal corporation
By:
Mayor
STATE OF )
) ss.
COUNTY OF )
The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this day of ,
20 , by as Mayor of the TOWN OF VAIL, a Colorado municipal corporation.
WITNESS my hand and official seal.
My commission expires:
Notary Public
Address:
W/O#20-23773:52-66:Vail – Town Shop Electric Bus Upgrade 5/7/2020 20-23773 JV Page 2 of 2 Revised 12/18/15
June 2, 2020 - Page 18 of 772
June 2, 2020 - Page 19 of 772
VA I L TO W N C O UNC I L A G E ND A ME MO
I T E M /T O P I C: Resolution No. 22, S eries of 2020 , A Resolution A pproving an A mended
Operating Plan and B udget of the Vail L ocal Marketing District for its Fiscal Year J anuary 1, 2020
Through December 31, 2020.
AC T IO N RE Q UE S T E D O F C O UNC I L: A pprove, approved with amendments or
deny Resolution No. 22, Series of 2020.
B AC K G RO UND: S ee attached memo.
S TAF F RE C O M M E ND AT IO N: A pprove, approved with amendments or deny Resolution No.
22, S eries of 2020.
AT TAC H ME N TS:
Description
V L MD 2nd Supplemental of 2020- TO V
June 2, 2020 - Page 20 of 772
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
Town Council
Vail Local Marketing District
June 2, 2020
SUBJECT: Vail Local Marketing District Second Supplemental
I.SUMMARY
This supplemental proposes budget adjustments needed for the “Crisis” phase of the
recession plan in response to the economic impacts of COVID-19 public health crisis. In
this phase, lodging tax revenues of $3.75 million are reduced nearly 50% ($1.85M)
to$1.9M for 2020. To make up for the short fall in revenue, the VLMDAC is proposing
to reduce expenditures by $1,115,000 or 30% from amended budget and use $704,160
of reserves. This will result in an ending fund balance of $645,948 or 18% of a normal
year of lodging tax revenues and below Council’s 25% directive.
Year to date lodging tax collections (January through March) total $1.5M, down 18% from
prior. April sales tax collections for accommodation services totaled $14,980, down
95.7% down from prior year.
II.BUDGET REDUCTIONS
•23% reduction in Paid Media (digital, television and print) in Destination markets.
•100% reduction in EGE air marketing.
•92% reduction in Mexico efforts including PR, sales and advertising.
•69% reduction in Video and Photo brand and tactical asset capture.
•12% reduction in Partners’ Professional Fees.
•63% reduction in Organic Social Media and influencer efforts.
•19% reduction Group Sales travel trade efforts.
•100% reduction in Contingency funds ($70K).
•Re-branding and associated production increase by 3%;
offset by above expense and fee reductions.
June 2, 2020 - Page 21 of 772
-2 -
III.ADJUSTED MARKETING PLAN
Given the current situation with COVID -19, the VLMDAC has shifted our strategy and many
of our Marketing, Public Relations and Group Sales tactics, along with our overall Brand
messaging. Below outlines our adjusted plan:
•New brand creative campaign “Find What You’ve Been Missing” developed including
video, print and digital executions.
•Media focus is on the Front Range, with digital efforts extending to short-haul drive
markets with all efforts driving to DiscoverVail.com where images, video and
messages on Vail being open and unique offerings are featured.
•Short-haul markets are those within a 500-mile radius and that research has shown
travel to Vail and/or Colorado.
•Messaging delayed from late March to launch June 1, with flexibility and fluidity to
stop/start as needed.
•Social videos showcasing Vail’s offerings and unique experiences in this new
situation.
•Public Relations focused on Front Range and long lead publications.
•Group Sales effort focusing on longer leads.
•Event messaging eliminated with potential to market late summer/fall events as
appropriate/to be determined.
IV.ACTION REQUESTED OF VAIL LOCAL MARKETING DISCTRICT
The Vail Local Marketing District recommends that the Town Council approve the 2020
second supplemental budget, resulting in an ending fund balance equal to 18% of
annual revenues and below the 25% minimum.
June 2, 2020 - Page 22 of 772
2020 Budget
1st
Supplemental
2020 Amended
Budget Crisis
2020
Amended
Budget
Income
Lodging Tax 3,590,000 3,590,000 (1,724,160) 1,865,840
Interest Income 2,000 2,000 2,000
Total Income 3,592,000 - 3,592,000 (1,724,160) 1,867,840
Expense
Destination 1,014,512 (15,000)999,512 (347,603)651,909
International 205,000 205,000 (189,832)15,168
Front Range 223,000 223,000 (21,500)201,500
Groups and Meetings 680,738 680,738 (132,148)548,590
Public Relations Expenses 92,500 92,500 (19,550)72,950
Content/Influencer Strategy 83,750 10,850 94,600 (26,350)68,250
Photography / Video 218,000 25,014 243,014 (169,000)74,014
Research 85,000 85,000 (10,000)75,000
Web Site 17,000 17,000 (17,000)-
Admin Miscellaneous 8,000 8,000 (3,000)5,000
Email Marketing - - -
Branding 249,500 249,500 (2,000)247,500
Professional Fees
Database Warehousing and Research 112,500 72,000 184,500 184,500
Discover Vail professional Fees 60,295 60,295 60,295
Website Marketing - 10,000 10,000 10,000
Vail App 10,000 10,000 (4,501)5,499
Legal and Accounting 25,000 25,000 25,000
Contingency 50,000 20,000 70,000 (70,000)-
Advertising 86,000 86,000 86,000
Advertising Agent Fees 62,000 62,000 (44,875)17,125
Marketing Coordination-TOV 95,000 95,000 (14,500)80,500
Marketing Coordination-VVP 40,000 40,000 (24,000)16,000
Professional Fees - MYPR 117,500 117,500 (15,300)102,200
Total Professional Fees 598,000 162,295 760,295 (173,176)587,119
Special Event Funding
Special Event Funding - 3,841 3,841 (3,841) -
Event Liaison 25,000 25,000 25,000
Total Special Events 25,000 3,841 28,841 25,000
Total Expense 3,500,000 187,000 3,687,000 (1,115,000) 2,572,000
Revenue over (Under) Expenditures 92,000 (187,000) (95,000) (704,160)
Beginning Fund Balance 962,453 1,350,108 1,350,108
Ending Fund Balance 1,054,453 1,255,108 645,948
Fund Balance (25% required)29%35%18%
VAIL LOCAL MARKETING DISTRICT 2020 AMENDED BUDGET
SUMMARY OF REVENUE EXPENDITURES AND CHANGES IN FUND BALANCE
June 2, 2020 - Page 23 of 772
Resolution No. 22, Series of 2020
RESOLUTION NO. 22
SERIES OF 2020
A RESOLUTION APPROVING AN AMENDED OPERATING PLAN AND
BUDGET OF THE VAIL LOCAL MARKETING DISTRICT, FOR ITS FISCAL
YEAR JANUARY 1, 2020 THROUGH DECEMBER 31, 2020
WHEREAS, the Town of Vail (the “Town”), in the County of Eagle and State of
Colorado is a home rule municipal corporation duly organized and existing under the
laws of the State of Colorado and the Town Charter (the “Charter”); and
WHEREAS, the members of the Town Council of the Town (the “Council”) have
been duly elected and qualified; and
WHEREAS, C.R.S. §29-25-110 requires the Council’s annual approval of the
operating plan the Vail Local Marketing District (the “VLMD”).
NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE TOWN COUNCIL OF THE
TOWN OF VAIL, COLORADO THAT:
Section 1. The Council approves the operating plan and budget of the VLMD
for marketing related expenditures beginning on the first day of January, 2020, and
ending on the 31st day of December, 2020.
Section 2. This Resolution shall take effect immediately upon its passage.
INTRODUCED, PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Town Council of
the Town of Vail held this 2nd day of June, 2020.
___________________________________
Dave Chapin, Town Mayor
Attested:
_________________________
Tammy Nagel, Town Clerk
June 2, 2020 - Page 24 of 772
VA I L TO W N C O UNC I L A G E ND A ME MO
I T E M /T O P I C: Resolution No. 23, S eries 2020, a Resolution approving a Revocable L icense
A greement with the Colorado Department of Transportation for the Construction and Maintenance
of a Deer F ence
AC T IO N RE Q UE S T E D O F C O UNC I L: A pprove Resolution No. 23, Series 2020 - C D O T
W ildlife fencing Revocable L icense Agreement
B AC K G RO UND: C D O T is in the process of improving the wildlife fence in Dowd J unction as a
part of the on-going asphalt overlay project. I n order to make these wildlife fence improvements
C D O T is requesting to install wildlife fence within town property in Dowd J unction and receive a
Revocable L icense Agreement to install and maintain it.
S TAF F RE C O M M E ND AT IO N: A pprove Resolution No. 23, Series 2020 - C D O T W ildlife
fencing Revocable L icense A greement
AT TAC H ME N TS:
Description
Memo
Resolution No 23, 2020
Revocable License Agreement
Revocable License Exhibit
June 2, 2020 - Page 25 of 772
To: Town Council
From: Public Works Department
Date: June 2, 2020
Subject: Resolution No. 23, Series 2020 - CDOT Revocable License Agreement for
Wildlife Fence in Dowd Junction
I. SUMMARY
CDOT is in the process of improving the wildlife fence in Dowd Junction as a part of the
on-going asphalt overlay project. In order to make these wildlife fence improvements
CDOT is requesting to install wildlife fence within town property in Dowd Junction and
receive a Revocable License Agreement to install and maintain it.
II. STAFF RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that the Town Council approves the CDOT Revocable License
Agreement for the wildlife fencing.
III. ATTACHMENTS
Resolution No. 23, Series 2020
Revocable License Agreement
June 2, 2020 - Page 26 of 772
RESOLUTION NO. 23
Series of 2020
A RESOLUTION APPROVING A REVOCABLE LICENSE AGREEMENT WITH THE
COLORADO DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION FOR THE CONSTRUCTION
AND MAINTENANCE OF A DEER FENCE
WHEREAS, the Town is the owner of certain real property more particularly
described in Exhibit A, attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference (the
"Property"); and
WHEREAS, the Town the Colorado Department of Transportation (“CDOT”) wish
to enter into a revocable license agreement (the “Agreement”) for the purpose of
constructing and maintaining a deer fence.
NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE TOWN COUNCIL OF THE
TOWN OF VAIL, COLORADO THAT:
Section 1. The Town Council hereby approves the Agreement in substantially
the same form as attached hereto as Exhibit A, and in a form approved by the Town
attorney, and authorizes the Town Manager to execute the Agreement on behalf of the
Town.
Section 2. This Resolution shall take effect immediately upon its passage.
INTRODUCED, PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Town
Council of the Town of Vail held this 2nd day of June 2020.
_________________________
Dave Chapin, Town Mayor
ATTEST:
_____________________________
Tammy Nagel, Town Clerk
June 2, 2020 - Page 27 of 772
05/28/20
C:\PROGRAM FILES (X86)\NEEVIA.COM\DOCCONVERTERPRO\TEMP\NVDC\880D8F11-99CC-4810-952B-1620C1ADD018\VAIL
GOV.14614.1.REVOCABLE_LICENSE_FINALDRAFT.DOC
REVOCABLE LICENSE AGREEMENT
THIS REVOCABLE LICENSE AGREEMENT (the "Agreement") is made this ____ day
of _____________, 2020, by and between the Town of Vail, COLORADO, a Colorado home
rule municipality with a legal address of 75 South Frontage Road, Vail, Colorado 81657 (the
"Town"), and the Department of Transportation, State of Colorado with a legal address of
2829 W. Howard Place, Denver CO 80204 ("Licensee").
For and in consideration of the sum of ten dollars ($10.00) paid by the Licensee to the
Town, the covenants herein contained and other good and valuable consideration, the receipt and
sufficiency of which are hereby acknowledged, the parties agree as follows:
SECTION 1. LICENSE
Licensee desires to obtain a License to occupy and use the property more particularly
described and depicted in Exhibit A, attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference
(the "Property"). Subject to all the terms and conditions hereto, the Town hereby grants to
Licensee a license to occupy and use the Property for the purpose set forth in Section 2 hereof.
SECTION 2. PURPOSE
The Property may be used and occupied by the Licensee for the purpose of constructing
and maintaining a deer fence as described and depicted in Exhibit A, attached hereto and
incorporated herein by this reference (the “Deer Fence”).
SECTION 3. TERMINATION
Either party may terminate this Agreement by giving written notice to the other party
specifying the date of termination, such notice to be given not less than thirty (30) days prior to
the date specified therein. Licensee shall make reasonable efforts to return the Property in a
similar condition as it existed as of the date this Revocable License Agreement is executed.
SECTION 4. MAINTENANCE
Licensee shall, at its own expense, keep and maintain in good repair any fixtures or
structures constructed, placed, operated or maintained on the Property and, within thirty (30)
days of termination of this Agreement, shall remove such fixtures.
SECTION 5. DAMAGE TO PROPERTY
Licensee shall be responsible for all damage to the Property arising out of or resulting
from the use of the Property by the Licensee, its agents, employees, visitors, patrons and invitees.
The Town shall notify Licensee immediately upon discovery of any damage to the Property.
Licensee shall correct and repair the damage within sixty (60) days of notification or knowledge
of the damage unless otherwise directed by the Town.
June 2, 2020 - Page 28 of 772
05/28/20
C:\PROGRAM FILES (X86)\NEEVIA.COM\DOCCONVERTERPRO\TEMP\NVDC\880D8F11-99CC-4810-952B-1620C1ADD018\VAIL
GOV.14614.1.REVOCABLE_LICENSE_FINALDRAFT.DOC
2
SECTION 6. INSURANCE
At all times during the term of this Agreement, including any renewals or extensions,
Licensee shall maintain such insurance, by commercial policy or self-insurance, as is necessary
to meet its liabilities under the Colorado Governmental Immunity Act, C.R.S. § 24-10-101, et.
seq (“CGIA”). If Licensee utilizes contractors to perform any activities permitted by this
Revocable License Agreement, Licensee shall require its contractors performing work in the
Property to obtain insurance appropriate for the work being performed on a public project. For
Commercial General Liability, the Licensee’s contractors shall name the Town as an additional
insured.
SECTION 7. NOTICES
Any notice given pursuant to this Agreement by either party to the other shall be in
writing and mailed by certified mail, return receipt requested, postage prepaid, and addressed as
follows:
To the Town: Town of Vail
75 S. Frontage Road
Vail, CO 81657
To Licensee: Colorado Department of Transportation
Region 3 Right of Way
222 S. 6th St., Room 317
Grand Junction CO 81501
SECTION 8. MISCELLANEOUS
A. Agreement Binding. This Agreement shall inure to the benefit of and be binding
upon the heirs, successors and assigns of the parties hereto, subject to any other conditions and
covenants contained herein.
B. Applicable Law and Venue. The laws of the State of Colorado and applicable
federal, state and local laws, rules, regulations and guidelines shall govern this Agreement, and
the venue for any legal proceeding arising out of this Agreement shall be Eagle County,
Colorado.
C. Amendment. This Agreement may not be amended except in writing by mutual
agreement of the parties, nor may rights be waived except by an instrument in writing signed by
the party charged with such waiver.
D. Headings. The headings of the sections of this Agreement are inserted for
reference purposes only and are not restrictive as to content.
E. Assignment. Licensee may not assign or transfer this Agreement, except upon the
express written authorization of the Town.
June 2, 2020 - Page 29 of 772
05/28/20
C:\PROGRAM FILES (X86)\NEEVIA.COM\DOCCONVERTERPRO\TEMP\NVDC\880D8F11-99CC-4810-952B-1620C1ADD018\VAIL
GOV.14614.1.REVOCABLE_LICENSE_FINALDRAFT.DOC
3
F. No Third-Party Beneficiaries. Except as expressly provided herein, there are no
intended third-party beneficiaries to this Agreement.
G. Severability. If any provision of this Agreement is found by a court of competent
jurisdiction to be unlawful or unenforceable for any reason, the remaining provisions hereof shall
remain in full force and effect.
H. Governmental Immunity. Nothing herein shall be construed as a waiver of any
protections or immunities either party may have under the Colorado Governmental Immunity Act,
C.R.S. § 24-10-101, et seq., as amended.
I. Integration. The foregoing constitutes the entire agreement between the parties and
no additional or different oral representation, promise, or agreement shall be binding on any of the
parties hereto with respect to the subject matter of this Agreement.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have duly executed this Agreement effective the
day and year first above written.
TOWN OF VAIL
By: ____________________________________
Scott Robson, Town Manager
ATTEST:
________________________________
Patty McKenny, Town Clerk:
June 2, 2020 - Page 30 of 772
05/28/20
C:\PROGRAM FILES (X86)\NEEVIA.COM\DOCCONVERTERPRO\TEMP\NVDC\880D8F11-99CC-4810-952B-1620C1ADD018\VAIL
GOV.14614.1.REVOCABLE_LICENSE_FINALDRAFT.DOC
4
LICENSEE:
By: ________________________________
Michael B. Goolsby, Regional Transportation Director
STATE OF COLORADO )
) ss.
COUNTY OF MESA )
Subscribed, sworn to and acknowledged before me this _____ day of _______________,
2020, by Michael B. Goolsby, as Regional Transportation Director, Colorado Department of
Transportation.
My Commission expires _______________.
(SEAL) ____________________________________
Notary Public
June 2, 2020 - Page 31 of 772
June 2, 2020 - Page 32 of 772
June 2, 2020 - Page 33 of 772
VA I L TO W N C O UNC I L A G E ND A ME MO
I T E M /T O P I C: Resolution No. 24, S eries of 2020, A Resolution of the Town Council E xtending
the Declaration of a L ocal Disaster E mergency
AT TAC H ME N TS:
Description
Resolution No. 24 of 2020
June 2, 2020 - Page 34 of 772
1
RESOLUTION NO. 24
SERIES 2020
A RESOLUTION OF THE VAIL TOWN COUNCIL EXTENDING THE
DECLARATION OF A LOCAL DISASTER EMERGENCY
WHEREAS, on March 10, 2020, the Governor of the State of Colorado recognized
the COVID-19 pandemic and declared a state of emergency;
WHEREAS, on March 13, 2020, the Town Manager declared a disaster
emergency in and for the Town of Vail, Colorado, pursuant to the Colorado Disaster
Emergency Act, C.R.S. § 24-33.5-701, et seq. (the "Act"), and Section 13.5 of the Town's
Home Rule Charter;
WHEREAS, on March 17, 2020, the Town Council ratified the Town Manager’s
Declaration and extended it for 30 days;
WHEREAS, on April 7, 2020 and on May 5, 2020, the Town Council further
extended the Town Manager’s Declaration which is now set to expire on June 2, 2020;
and
WHEREAS, the emergency conditions caused by the COVID-19 pandemic, as
defined by C.R.S. § 24-33.5-702 and the Charter, persist and require additional and
sustained action by the Town.
NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE TOWN COUNCIL OF THE
TOWN OF VAIL:
Section 1. The Declaration of a Disaster Emergency in and for the Town of Vail,
a copy of which is attached, is hereby extended to July 2, 2020.
Section 2. This Resolution shall take effect immediately upon its passage.
INTRODUCED, READ, APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 2nd DAY OF JUNE
2020.
______________________________
Dave Chapin, Mayor
ATTEST:
____________________________
Tammy Nagel, Town Clerk
June 2, 2020 - Page 35 of 772
VA I L TO W N C O UNC I L A G E ND A ME MO
I T E M /T O P I C: F orethought F iber Optic Utility E asement
AC T IO N RE Q UE S T E D O F C O UNC I L: A pprove F iber Optic Utility E asement
B AC K G RO UND: Forethought, a fiber optic network provider, is requesting to install underground
fiber optic cable to the Antler’s Hotel across town property in L ionshead.
S TAF F RE C O M M E ND AT IO N: A pprove Fiber Optic Utility Easement
AT TAC H ME N TS:
Description
Memo
Easement
June 2, 2020 - Page 36 of 772
To: Town Council
From: Public Works Department
Date: June 2, 2020
Subject: Forethought Fiber Optic Utility Easement
I. SUMMARY
Forethought, a fiber optic network provider, is requesting to install underground fiber
optic cable to the Antler’s Hotel from the existing Crown Castle Node that is within the
town’s Tract A in Lionshead. In order to do so the town will need to grant a non-
exclusive utility easement to Forethought for the purposes of running fiber optic cable.
II. STAFF RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that the Town Council approves the utility easement so that the
Antler’s hotel can gain access to fiber optic networks.
III. ATTACHMENTS
Utility Easement
June 2, 2020 - Page 37 of 772
1
5/28/20
\\FILESERVER2019\REDIRECTED$\TKASSMEL\DESKTOP\UTILITY EASEMENT-FORETHOUGHT.DOCX
UTILITY EASEMENT AGREEMENT
THIS EASEMENT AGREEMENT (the "Agreement") is dated this ______ day of
____________________, 2020, by and between the Town of Vail, Colorado, a Colorado home
rule municipality (the "Town"), and ______________________________ ("Grantee").
WHEREAS, Grantee desires to acquire an easement for the purpose of the installation
and operation of utility facilities upon and beneath the surface of the property described in
Exhibit A, attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference (the "Easement Property");
and
WHEREAS, the Town is willing to convey an easement to Grantee for the aforesaid
purposes on the terms and conditions set forth below.
NOW, THEREFORE, for and in consideration of the sum of $10 paid by Grantee to the
Town, the covenants of Grantee herein contained, and other good and valuable consideration, the
receipt, adequacy, and sufficiency of which are hereby acknowledged, the parties hereto
covenant and agree as follows:
Section 1. Conveyance of Easement. The Town does hereby grant and convey unto
Grantee, it successors, assigns, lessees, licensees, and agents, an easement upon and beneath the
surface of the Easement Property for the installation and operation of utility facilities consisting
of wires, underground conduits, cables, pedestals, vaults, above-ground enclosures, markers,
concrete pads and other appurtenant fixtures and equipment necessary or useful for distributing
broadband services and other like communications. Grantee shall have the right of ingress and
egress, consistent with this Agreement, upon the Easement Property for the construction,
reconstruction, operation, maintenance and removal of the utility facilities.
Section 2. Use of Easement Property. Grantee shall be solely responsible for
installation and maintaining the utility facilities. In making any excavation on the Easement
Property, Grantee shall make the same in such manner as will cause the least injury to the surface
of the ground around such excavation, and shall replace the earth so removed by it and restore
the area to as near the same condition as it was prior to such excavation as is practical.
Section 3. Relocation. Within 60 days of receipt of written notice from the Town,
Grantee shall relocate the utility facilities within the Easement Property at Grantee's sole cost
and expense.
Section 4. Retained Rights. The Town shall have all rights to the Easement Property
not expressly granted hereby, including the right to construct structure(s) over the Easement
Property, so long as such structures do not interfere with Grantee's rights under this Agreement.
Section 5. Miscellaneous.
a. All provisions herein contained, including the benefits, burdens and
covenants, are intended to run with the land and shall be binding upon and inure to the
benefit of the respective successors and assigns of the parties hereto.
June 2, 2020 - Page 38 of 772
2
5/28/20
\\FILESERVER2019\REDIRECTED$\TKASSMEL\DESKTOP\UTILITY EASEMENT-FORETHOUGHT.DOCX
b. Grantee shall insure itself against liability, loss, or damages arising out of
the construction, existence, use, operation or maintenance of the utility facilities.
c. This Agreement constitutes all of the agreements, understandings, and
promises between the parties hereto with respect to the subject matter hereof.
d. The Town and its officers, attorneys and employees are relying on, and do
not waive or intend to waive by any provision of this Agreement, the monetary
limitations or any other rights, immunities, and protections provided by the Colorado
Governmental Immunity Act, C.R.S. § 24-10-101, et seq., as amended, or otherwise
available to the Town and its officers, attorneys or employees.
e. Grantee agrees to indemnify and hold harmless the Town and its officers,
insurers, volunteers, representative, agents, employees, heirs and assigns from and against
all claims, liability, damages, losses, expenses and demands, including attorney fees, on
account of injury, loss, or damage, including without limitation claims arising from
bodily injury, personal injury, sickness, disease, death, property loss or damage, or any
other loss of any kind whatsoever, which arise out of or are in any manner connected
with this Agreement or the Easement Property if such injury, loss, or damage is caused in
whole or in part by, the act, omission, error, professional error, mistake, negligence, or
other fault of Grantee, any subcontractor of Grantee, or any officer, employee,
representative, or agent of Grantee, or which arise out of a worker's compensation claim
of any employee of Grantee or of any employee of any subcontractor of Grantee.
f. There are no third-party beneficiaries to this Agreement.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed this Agreement by their
respective duly authorized officers as of the date and year first above written.
TOWN OF VAIL, COLORADO
______________________________
Scott Robson, Town Manager
ATTEST:
______________________________
Tammy Nagel, Town Clerk
June 2, 2020 - Page 39 of 772
3
5/28/20
\\FILESERVER2019\REDIRECTED$\TKASSMEL\DESKTOP\UTILITY EASEMENT-FORETHOUGHT.DOCX
GRANTEE
By: ______________________________
STATE OF COLORADO )
) ss.
COUNTY OF _________________ )
The foregoing instrument was subscribed, sworn to, and acknowledged before me this
______ day of ______________, 2020, by _________________________________________.
My commission expires: ______________________________
(S E A L)
______________________________
Notary Public
June 2, 2020 - Page 40 of 772
Utility Easement Location for Forethought Fiber
June 2, 2020 - Page 41 of 772
VA I L TO W N C O UNC I L A G E ND A ME MO
I T E M /T O P I C: Vail America Days Agreement for Event F unding
B AC K G RO UND: Highline Sports and Entertainment has been awarded $67,500 to produce the
Vail A merica Days activities including the American Days P arade. T his years parade will be
operated in a new and creative way to support social distancing practices. Highline Sports and
E ntertainment has already been working in good faith on the planning of the annual J uly 4th event.
S TAF F RE C O M M E ND AT IO N: A pprove the Town Manager to enter into an agreement on a
form approved by the Town A ttorney, with Highline S ports and E ntertainment for the production of
Vail A merica Days in an amount not to exceed $67,500.
AT TAC H ME N TS:
Description
Vail America Days Funding Agreement
June 2, 2020 - Page 42 of 772
1
5/28/2020
HTTPS://VAILCOGOV.SHAREPOINT.COM/SITES/ECONDEV/SHARED DOCUMENTS/CSE/2020 EVENTS/VAIL AMERICA
DAYS/VAD FUNDING-FOR REVIEW - 05282020.DOCX
AGREEMENT FOR FUNDING CONTRIBUTION
THIS AGREEMENT FOR FUNDING CONTRIBUTION (the "Agreement") is made
and entered into this 28 day of May, 2020 (the "Effective Date"), by and between the
Town of Vail, 75 South Frontage Road, Vail, CO 81657, a Colorado home rule municipal
corporation (the "Town"), and Highline Sports and Entertainment, an independent
contractor with a principal place of business at 12 Vail Road, Suite 500, Vail, CO 81657,
("Recipient") (each a "Party" and collectively the "Parties").
WHEREAS, the Town encourages and supports community events, because such
events promote the public health, safety and welfare;
WHEREAS, Recipient is producing an event in the Town on or about July 4, 2020;
WHEREAS, the Town's Commission on Special Events (the "CSE") has agreed to
provide funding to Recipient to assist in the Vail America Days (the "Event");
WHEREAS, the Event has been designated by the Town as a Cultural,
Recreational and Community Event; and
WHEREAS, in exchange for Town funding, Recipient is willing to comply with the
terms and conditions set forth in this Agreement.
NOW, THEREFORE, for the consideration hereinafter set forth, the receipt and
sufficiency of which are hereby acknowledged, the Parties agree as follows:
I. RECIPIENT'S DUTIES
A. Recipient shall plan, organize, promote and carry out the Event as
described in Event Description set forth in Exhibit A, attached hereto and incorporated
herein by this reference.
B. At least 30 days prior to the start of the Event, Recipient shall complete and
submit all permits that may be required for the Event by use of the Town special event
permits website: www.vailpermits.com. All such applications shall be submitted under
the name of Recipient.
C. Recipient shall comply with all applicable regulations pertaining to the
production of special events in the Town, including without limitation: the special event
permit application; ; the Town Logo Standards, Vail Mountain Brand and Logo Guidelines,
found at http://bit.ly/2hnGZ8f; and the Town's marketing checklist, attached hereto as
Exhibit B and incorporated herein by this reference.
D. If required by the CSE Recipient shall allow the Town to perform market
research and attendee surveys during or after the Event by an independent, third-party
June 2, 2020 - Page 43 of 772
2
5/28/2020
HTTPS://VAILCOGOV.SHAREPOINT.COM/SITES/ECONDEV/SHARED DOCUMENTS/CSE/2020 EVENTS/VAIL AMERICA
DAYS/VAD FUNDING-FOR REVIEW - 05282020.DOCX
economic impact research firm hired by the Town. Further, Recipient shall share
attendee contact information with the research firm, or send a web survey link provided
by said firm to its participant/ticket sales database as directed by the Town. The Town
shall share survey data and analysis with Recipient for its use and inclusion in the post-
event report.
E. Recipient shall schedule and complete a post-event report and meeting with
the CSE within 60 days following the close of the Event. Recipient shall include in its
report any non-confidential data from the Event it deems relevant to the Town's review
and assessment of the Event. The Town will provide a PowerPoint template for
Recipient's use in preparing the report, and the finished PowerPoint shall be submitted to
the Town a minimum of 7 days prior to the date scheduled for the post-event meeting.
F. Following the event, Recipient agrees to e-mail Event attendees and, in
such e-mail, provide a link and invitation to connect with the Town's marketing website.
G. Prior to the final payment being issued, recipient shall provide the Town
Finance Director with actual results from the event including all sources of revenue and
event expenditures according to the form attached hereto as Exhibit D. Supporting
records may be requested by the town.
H. The Town shall be entitled to complimentary advertising, photography, and
other exposure as part of any of the promotional or informational material Recipient
causes to be prepared for the Event.
I. Recipient shall ensure that all lodging marketing and lodging inquiries
relating to the Event are directed to properties within the Town whenever reasonably
possible.
J. The Town may download video or photographs of the Event for promotional
or editorial purposes (the "Event Media") at no charge, as follows:
1. As part of Recipient's post-event report, Recipient shall provide the Town
with a link for the download location for the Event Media.
2. Recipient hereby transfers, sells, and assigns to the Town all of its right,
title, and interest in the Event Media. The Town may, with respect to all or any
portion of the Event Media, use, publish, display, reproduce, distribute, destroy,
alter, retouch, modify, adapt, translate, or change the Event Media without
providing notice to or receiving consent from Recipient.
K. If applicable, any additional sponsor benefits required to be provided by
Recipient to the Town pursuant to this Agreement shall be set forth in Exhibit C,
attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference.
June 2, 2020 - Page 44 of 772
3
5/28/2020
HTTPS://VAILCOGOV.SHAREPOINT.COM/SITES/ECONDEV/SHARED DOCUMENTS/CSE/2020 EVENTS/VAIL AMERICA
DAYS/VAD FUNDING-FOR REVIEW - 05282020.DOCX
II. TERM AND TERMINATION
A. This Agreement shall commence on the Effective Date, and shall continue
until Recipient completes the Event and all responsibilities imposed by this Agreement
unless sooner terminated as provided herein.
B. Either Party may terminate this Agreement upon 30 days advance written
notice. If Recipient terminates this Agreement prior to Recipient's completion of the
Event, Recipient shall refund all portions of the Total Contribution already paid. If the
Town terminates this Agreement due to Recipient's breach of this Agreement, the Town
is not obligated to make any additional payments and may seek repayment by Recipient
of any portion of the Total Contribution already paid.
III. CONTRIBUTION
A. If Recipient satisfies the conditions of this Agreement, the Town will pay
Recipient $67,500 (the "Total Contribution") in three payments, as set forth below.
1. Payment One: 33% of the Total Contribution ($22,275), payable upon
Recipient executing this Agreement and receipt of Recipient’s first invoice.
2. Payment Two: 33% of the Total Contribution ($22,275), payable after
submittal of a complete special event permit application and receipt of Recipient's
second invoice.
3. Payment Three: 34% of the Total Contribution ($22,950), payable following:
the presentation of a post-event report in compliance with this Agreement;
approval by the CSE affirming that all requested information has been provided
and that Recipient and the Event have met all conditions for funding; and receipt
of Recipient's third invoice. Payment Three may be reduced or eliminated by the
CSE if Recipient's post-event report does not include all required information or if
Recipient has failed to meet all conditions of this Agreement.
B. Recipient expressly acknowledges that the Total Contribution may be
reduced if Recipient fails to produce satisfactory evidence that Recipient has fully
complied with all conditions of this Agreement and all other applicable conditions of the
permit. Recipient further acknowledges that the Total Contribution may be reduced by
the Town as compensation for any outstanding debt Recipient owes the Town including
without limitation unpaid contracts for service or unpaid taxes.
IV. RESPONSIBILITY
A. Recipient hereby warrants that it is qualified to assume the responsibilities
to carry out the Event and has all requisite corporate authority and licenses in good
June 2, 2020 - Page 45 of 772
4
5/28/2020
HTTPS://VAILCOGOV.SHAREPOINT.COM/SITES/ECONDEV/SHARED DOCUMENTS/CSE/2020 EVENTS/VAIL AMERICA
DAYS/VAD FUNDING-FOR REVIEW - 05282020.DOCX
standing, required by law. The Event shall comply with all applicable laws, ordinances,
rules and regulations.
B. The Town's review, approval or acceptance of, or payment for any portion
of the Event shall not be construed to operate as a waiver of any rights under this
Agreement or as a waiver of any cause of action arising out of the performance of this
Agreement.
C. Recipient may employ subcontractors to plan, organize, promote or carry
out all or portions of the Event, provided that Recipient shall ensure that all such
subcontractors comply with the terms and conditions of this Agreement.
V. INDEPENDENT CONTRACTOR
Recipient is an independent contractor. Notwithstanding any other provision of
this Agreement, all personnel assigned by Recipient to perform work on the Event under
the terms of this Agreement shall be, and remain at all times, employees or agents of
Recipient for all purposes. Recipient shall make no representation that it is a Town
employee for any purpose.
VI. INSURANCE
A. Recipient agrees to procure and maintain, at its own cost, a policy or
policies of insurance sufficient to insure against all liability, claims, demands, and other
obligations of or related to the Event. At a minimum, Recipient shall procure and maintain,
and shall cause any subcontractor to procure and maintain, the insurance coverages
listed below, with forms and insurers acceptable to the Town.
1. Worker's Compensation insurance as required by law.
2. Commercial General Liability insurance with minimum combined single
limits of $2,000,000 each occurrence and $2,000,000 general aggregate. The
policy shall be applicable to all premises and operations, and shall include
coverage for bodily injury, broad form property damage, personal injury (including
coverage for contractual and employee acts), blanket contractual, products, and
completed operations. The policy shall contain a severability of interests provision,
and shall include the Town and the Town's officers, employees, and contractors
as additional insureds. No additional insured endorsement shall contain any
exclusion for bodily injury or property damage arising from completed operations.
B. Such insurance shall be in addition to any other insurance requirements
imposed by law. The coverages afforded under the policies shall not be canceled,
terminated or materially changed without at least 30 days prior written notice to the Town.
In the case of any claims-made policy, the necessary retroactive dates and extended
June 2, 2020 - Page 46 of 772
5
5/28/2020
HTTPS://VAILCOGOV.SHAREPOINT.COM/SITES/ECONDEV/SHARED DOCUMENTS/CSE/2020 EVENTS/VAIL AMERICA
DAYS/VAD FUNDING-FOR REVIEW - 05282020.DOCX
reporting periods shall be procured to maintain such continuous coverage. Any insurance
carried by the Town, its officers, its employees or its contractors shall be excess and not
contributory insurance to that provided by Recipient. Recipient shall be solely responsible
for any deductible losses under any policy.
C. Recipient shall provide to the Town a certificate of insurance as evidence
that the required policies are in full force and effect. The certificate shall identify this
Agreement.
VII. INDEMNIFICATION
Recipient agrees to indemnify and hold harmless the Town and its officers, insurers,
volunteers, representative, agents, employees, heirs and assigns from and against all
claims, liability, damages, losses, expenses and demands, including attorney fees, on
account of injury, loss, or damage, including without limitation claims arising from bodily
injury, personal injury, sickness, disease, death, property loss or damage, or any other
loss of any kind whatsoever, which arise out of or are in any manner connected with the
Event or this Agreement if such injury, loss, or damage is caused in whole or in part by,
the act, omission, error, professional error, mistake, negligence, or other fault of
Recipient, any subcontractor of Recipient, or any officer, employee, representative, or
agent of Recipient, or which arise out of a worker's compensation claim of any employee
of Recipient or of any employee of any subcontractor of Recipient.
VIII. ILLEGAL ALIENS
A. Certification. By entering into this Agreement, Recipient hereby certifies
that, at the time of this certification, it does not knowingly employ or contract with an illegal
alien who will perform work under this Agreement and that Recipient will participate in
either the E-Verify Program administered by the United States Department of Homeland
Security and Social Security Administration or the Department Program administered by
the Colorado Department of Labor and Employment to confirm the employment eligibility
of all employees who are newly hired to perform work under this Agreement.
B. Prohibited Acts. Recipient shall not knowingly employ or contract with an
illegal alien to perform work under this Agreement, or enter into a contract with a
subcontractor that fails to certify to Recipient that the subcontractor shall not knowingly
employ or contract with an illegal alien to perform work under this Agreement.
C. Verification.
1. If Recipient has employees, Recipient has confirmed the employment
eligibility of all employees who are newly hired to perform work under this
Agreement through participation in either the E-Verify Program or the Department
Program.
June 2, 2020 - Page 47 of 772
6
5/28/2020
HTTPS://VAILCOGOV.SHAREPOINT.COM/SITES/ECONDEV/SHARED DOCUMENTS/CSE/2020 EVENTS/VAIL AMERICA
DAYS/VAD FUNDING-FOR REVIEW - 05282020.DOCX
2. Recipient shall not use the E-Verify Program or Department Program
procedures to undertake pre-employment screening of job applicants while this
Agreement is being performed.
3. If Recipient obtains actual knowledge that a subcontractor performing work
under this Agreement knowingly employs or contracts with an illegal alien who is
performing work under this Agreement, Recipient shall: notify the subcontractor
and the Town within 3 days that Recipient has actual knowledge that the
subcontractor is employing or contracting with an illegal alien who is performing
work under this Agreement; and terminate the subcontract with the subcontractor
if within 3 days of receiving the notice required pursuant to subsection 1 hereof,
the subcontractor does not stop employing or contracting with the illegal alien who
is performing work under this Agreement; except that Recipient shall not terminate
the subcontract if during such 3 days the subcontractor provides information to
establish that the subcontractor has not knowingly employed or contracted with an
illegal alien who is performing work under this Agreement.
D. Duty to Comply with Investigations. Recipient shall comply with any
reasonable request by the Colorado Department of Labor and Employment made in the
course of an investigation conducted pursuant to C.R.S. § 8-17.5-102(5)(a) to ensure that
Recipient is complying with the terms of this Agreement.
E. Affidavits. If Recipient does not have employees, Recipient shall sign the
"No Employee Affidavit" attached hereto. If Recipient wishes to verify the lawful presence
of newly hired employees who perform work under the Agreement via the Department
Program, Recipient shall sign the "Department Program Affidavit" attached hereto.
IX. FORCE MAJEURE
If performance or completion of the Event is rendered impossible by an act or
regulation of any public authority, an act of God, strike, civil tumult, war, pandemic,
interruption of transportation services, or any other proven cause beyond Recipient's
control other than inclement weather, it is understood and agreed to by Recipient and the
Town that there shall be no claim for damages by either Party and all monies advanced
to Recipient will be returned to the Town. Notwithstanding the foregoing, if the Event is
canceled because of the COVID-19 pandemic, Recipient may retain sufficient funds to
reimburse Recipient for labor, materials, marketing and other reasonable expenses
incurred by Recipient up to the date of cancellation.
X. WEATHER
June 2, 2020 - Page 48 of 772
7
5/28/2020
HTTPS://VAILCOGOV.SHAREPOINT.COM/SITES/ECONDEV/SHARED DOCUMENTS/CSE/2020 EVENTS/VAIL AMERICA
DAYS/VAD FUNDING-FOR REVIEW - 05282020.DOCX
The Town shall determine in its sole discretion if the Event should be cancelled
due to inclement weather. If the Event is cancelled prior to its commencement due to
inclement weather and Recipient is present and able to perform, or if the Event begins
and is subsequently cancelled by the Town due solely to inclement weather, and
Recipient has otherwise complied with this Agreement, Recipient shall receive the Total
Contribution.
XI. MISCELLANEOUS
A. Governing Law and Venue. This Agreement shall be governed by the laws
of the State of Colorado, and any legal action concerning the provisions hereof shall be
brought in Eagle County, Colorado.
B. No Waiver. Delays in enforcement or the waiver of any one or more defaults
or breaches of this Agreement by the Town shall not constitute a waiver of any of the
other terms or obligation of this Agreement.
C. Integration. This Agreement constitutes the entire agreement between the
Parties, superseding all prior oral or written communications.
D. Third Parties. There are no intended third-party beneficiaries to this
Agreement.
E. Notice. Any notice under this Agreement shall be in writing, and shall be
deemed sufficient when directly presented or sent pre-paid, first class United States Mail
to the Party at the address set forth on the first page of this Agreement.
F. Severability. If any provision of this Agreement is found by a court of
competent jurisdiction to be unlawful or unenforceable for any reason, the remaining
provisions hereof shall remain in full force and effect.
G. Modification. This Agreement may only be modified upon written
agreement of the Parties.
H. Assignment. Neither this Agreement nor any of the rights or obligations of
the Parties hereto, shall be assigned by either Party without the written consent of the
other.
I. Governmental Immunity. The Town and its officers, attorneys and
employees, are relying on, and do not waive or intend to waive by any provision of this
Agreement, the monetary limitations or any other rights, immunities or protections
provided by the Colorado Governmental Immunity Act, C.R.S. § 24-10-101, et seq., as
amended, or otherwise available to the Town and its officers, attorneys or employees.
June 2, 2020 - Page 49 of 772
8
5/28/2020
HTTPS://VAILCOGOV.SHAREPOINT.COM/SITES/ECONDEV/SHARED DOCUMENTS/CSE/2020 EVENTS/VAIL AMERICA
DAYS/VAD FUNDING-FOR REVIEW - 05282020.DOCX
J. Rights and Remedies. The rights and remedies of the Town under this
Agreement are in addition to any other rights and remedies provided by law. The
expiration of this Agreement shall in no way limit the Town's legal or equitable remedies,
or the period in which such remedies may be asserted, for work negligently or defectively
performed.
K. Subject to Annual Appropriation. Consistent with Article X, § 20, of the
Colorado Constitution, any financial obligation of the Town not performed during the
current fiscal year is subject to annual appropriation, shall extend only to monies currently
appropriated, and shall not constitute a mandatory charge, requirement, debt or liability
beyond the current fiscal year.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Parties have executed this Agreement as of the
Effective Date.
TOWN OF VAIL, COLORADO
________________________________
Scott Robson, Town Manager
ATTEST:
__________________________________
Tammy Nagel, Town Clerk
RECIPIENT
By: ________________________________
STATE OF COLORADO )
) ss.
COUNTY OF )
The foregoing instrument was subscribed, sworn to and acknowledged before me
this ___ day of ________________, 2020, by ____________________________ as
_________________ of ________________________.
My commission expires:
(S E A L) ________________________________
Notary Public
June 2, 2020 - Page 50 of 772
9
5/28/2020
HTTPS://VAILCOGOV.SHAREPOINT.COM/SITES/ECONDEV/SHARED DOCUMENTS/CSE/2020 EVENTS/VAIL AMERICA
DAYS/VAD FUNDING-FOR REVIEW - 05282020.DOCX
EXHIBIT A
EVENT DESCRIPTION
Vail America Days™ is the annual 4th of July Celebration in beautiful Vail,
Colorado. This year's Vail America Days™ will look different without the iconic
parade however Vail is open and the patriotic spirit is stronger than ever! A
traditional parade is not possible for 2020, but the Town of Vail will feature some
incredible exhibits and surprises from Vail Village to Lionshead. While visiting
Vail's shops and restaurants, take time to stroll through town and enjoy the
curated displays embracing this year's theme: Stronger Together. The event also
includes the Fireworks Show which is also produced by Highline Sports and
Entertainment with support of Vail Mountain. The Fireworks display is separately
funded though the production fees are incorporated into the America Days
agreement.
June 2, 2020 - Page 51 of 772
10
5/28/2020
HTTPS://VAILCOGOV.SHAREPOINT.COM/SITES/ECONDEV/SHARED DOCUMENTS/CSE/2020 EVENTS/VAIL AMERICA
DAYS/VAD FUNDING-FOR REVIEW - 05282020.DOCX
EXHIBIT B
MARKETING CHECKLIST
Recipient agrees to the placement of the Town logo on marketing and promotional
materials it produces or causes to be produced for the Event as appropriate to the Town's
level of sponsorship. Recipient shall complete the checklist and upload here:
https://webportalapp.com/sp/home/2020events.
Recipient also agrees to the following provisions:
• Town approval is required for all Event marketing materials for publication
regardless of medium.
• Town approval is required for any proofs that include the Town or Vail
Mountain logo.
• Items requiring Town approval must be submitted to the Town a minimum
of 14 days prior to publication.
• The Town may reduce its Total Contribution for marketing items that
Recipient fails to submit properly and in a timely manner.
• Recipient shall use the Town logo and shall make Town social media
mentions and hashtags wherever reasonably possible. In doing so, Recipient shall
comply with the Town's exact usage guidelines.
June 2, 2020 - Page 52 of 772
11
5/28/2020
HTTPS://VAILCOGOV.SHAREPOINT.COM/SITES/ECONDEV/SHARED DOCUMENTS/CSE/2020 EVENTS/VAIL AMERICA
DAYS/VAD FUNDING-FOR REVIEW - 05282020.DOCX
EXHIBIT C
SPONSOR BENEFITS FORM
The following additional benefits are due to the Town of Vail in consideration of
the event funding:
The Vail America Days event is underwritten by the Town of Vail. The Town of
Vail will receive naming rights to all marketing and media elements. Additional
sponsors of the event must be approved by the Town of Vail.
June 2, 2020 - Page 53 of 772
12
5/28/2020
HTTPS://VAILCOGOV.SHAREPOINT.COM/SITES/ECONDEV/SHARED DOCUMENTS/CSE/2020 EVENTS/VAIL AMERICA
DAYS/VAD FUNDING-FOR REVIEW - 05282020.DOCX
Estimated Actual
Total Expenses $0.00 $0.00
Site/Location/Operations Estimated Actual Food & Beverage Estimated Actual
Rental fees $0.00 Social food + Beverage $0.00
Insurance $0.00 Non-social food + Beverage $0.00
Sound/AV $0.00 <insert Other>$0.00
Construction or Equipment $0.00 <insert Other>$0.00
Trash/Composting $0.00 Total $0.00 $0.00
Utilities $0.00
Labor $0.00 Program/Lodging Estimated Actual
Traffic Control $0.00 Entertainment $0.00
Banners - Printing & $0.00 Speakers $0.00
Signage $0.00 Travel $0.00
<insert Other>$0.00 Hotel $0.00
<insert Other>$0.00 <insert Other>$0.00
<insert Other>$0.00 <insert Other>$0.00
<insert Other>$0.00 <insert Other>$0.00
<insert Other>$0.00 <insert Other>$0.00
Total $0.00 $0.00 Total $0.00 $0.00
Marketing Estimated Actual Prizes Estimated Actual
Advertising - Radio $0.00 Prizes $0.00
Advertising - Print $0.00 Cash Purse $0.00
Advertising - Social Media $0.00 Total $0.00 $0.00
Public Relations $0.00
Sales Team Expenses $0.00
Media TV, Production & Distribution $0.00
Graphic Design $0.00
Website $0.00
Collateral Materials $0.00
Printing $0.00
<insert Other>$0.00
<insert Other>$0.00
<insert Other>$0.00
<insert Other>$0.00
<insert Other>$0.00
Total $0.00 $0.00
Marketing Estimated Actual
Telephone/Internet $0.00
Photography $0.00
Transportation $0.00
Permit Fees $0.00
Postage/Shipping $0.00
In Kind Trades $0.00
Supplies-Office or Other $0.00
Demographic Survey $0.00
Sales Tax $0.00
<insert Other>$0.00
<insert Other>$0.00
<insert Other>$0.00
Total $0.00 $0.00
Event/Program Budget for [Event Name]
> Expenses
June 2, 2020 - Page 54 of 772
13
5/28/2020
HTTPS://VAILCOGOV.SHAREPOINT.COM/SITES/ECONDEV/SHARED DOCUMENTS/CSE/2020 EVENTS/VAIL AMERICA
DAYS/VAD FUNDING-FOR REVIEW - 05282020.DOCX
Estimated Actual
Total Income $0.00 $0.00
Tickets/Admissions
Estimated Actual Estimated Actual
0 Adults @ $5.00 $0.00
0 Children @ $2.00 $0.00
0 Other @ $1.00 $0.00
0 <Insert Other> @ $0.00 $0.00
$0.00 $0.00
Programs/Advertising
Estimated Actual Estimated Actual
0 Covers @ $0.00 $0.00
0 Half-pages @ $0.00 $0.00
0 Quarter-pages @ $0.00 $0.00
0 <Insert Other> @ $0.00 $0.00
0 <Insert Other> @ $0.00 $0.00
0 <Insert Other> @ $0.00 $0.00
$0.00 $0.00
Exhibitors/vendors
Estimated Actual Estimated Actual
0 Large booths @ $0.00 $0.00
0 Med. booths @ $0.00 $0.00
Small booths @ $0.00 $0.00
0 <Insert Other> @ $0.00 $0.00
<Insert Other> @ $0.00 $0.00
0 <Insert Other> @ $0.00 $0.00
$0.00 $0.00
Revenue from other items
Estimated Actual Estimated Actual
0 Cash Sponsorships @ $0.00 $0.00
0 In Kind Sponsorships @ $0.00 $0.00
0 Donations @ $0.00 $0.00
0 CSE Funding @ $0.00 $0.00
0 Grants @ $0.00 $0.00
0 <Insert Other> @ $0.00 $0.00
0 <Insert Other> @ $0.00 $0.00
0 <Insert Other> @ $0.00 $0.00
$0.00 $0.00
Event/Program Budget for [Event Name]
> Income
June 2, 2020 - Page 55 of 772
14
5/28/2020
HTTPS://VAILCOGOV.SHAREPOINT.COM/SITES/ECONDEV/SHARED DOCUMENTS/CSE/2020 EVENTS/VAIL AMERICA
DAYS/VAD FUNDING-FOR REVIEW - 05282020.DOCX
Estimated Actual
Total income $0.00 $0.00
Total expenses $0.00 $0.00
Total profit (or loss)$0.00 $0.00
Event/Program Budget for [Event Name]
> Profit - Loss Summary
$0.00
$0.10
$0.20
$0.30
$0.40
$0.50
$0.60
$0.70
$0.80
$0.90
$1.00
Estimated Actual
Total income
Total expenses
June 2, 2020 - Page 56 of 772
15
5/28/2020
HTTPS://VAILCOGOV.SHAREPOINT.COM/SITES/ECONDEV/SHARED DOCUMENTS/CSE/2020 EVENTS/VAIL AMERICA
DAYS/VAD FUNDING-FOR REVIEW - 05282020.DOCX
NO EMPLOYEE AFFIDAVIT
[To be completed only if Recipient has no employees]
1. Check and complete one:
I, _______________________________, am a sole proprietor doing business as
__________________________. I do not currently employ any individuals. Should I
employ any employees during the term of my Agreement with the Town of Vail (the
"Town"), I certify that I will comply with the lawful presence verification requirements
outlined in that Agreement.
OR
I, ______________________________, am the sole owner/member/shareholder
of ___________________________, a ______________________________ [specify
type of entity – i.e., corporation, limited liability company], that does not currently employ
any individuals. Should I employ any individuals during the term of my Agreement with
the Town, I certify that I will comply with the lawful presence verification requirements
outlined in that Agreement.
2. Check one.
I am a United States citizen or legal permanent resident.
The Town must verify this statement by reviewing one of the following items:
A valid Colorado driver's license or a Colorado identification card;
A United States military card or a military dependent's identification card;
A United States Coast Guard Merchant Mariner card;
A Native American tribal document;
In the case of a resident of another state, the driver’s license or state-issued
identification card from the state of residence, if that state requires the
applicant to prove lawful presence prior to the issuance of the identification
card; or
Any other documents or combination of documents listed in the Town’s
“Acceptable Documents for Lawful Presence Verification” chart that prove
both Recipient’s citizenship/lawful presence and identity.
OR
I am otherwise lawfully present in the United States pursuant to federal law.
Recipient must verify this statement through the federal Systematic Alien
Verification of Entitlement ("SAVE”) program, and provide such verification to the
Town.
____________________________________ __________________________
June 2, 2020 - Page 57 of 772
16
5/28/2020
HTTPS://VAILCOGOV.SHAREPOINT.COM/SITES/ECONDEV/SHARED DOCUMENTS/CSE/2020 EVENTS/VAIL AMERICA
DAYS/VAD FUNDING-FOR REVIEW - 05282020.DOCX
Signature Date
June 2, 2020 - Page 58 of 772
17
5/28/2020
HTTPS://VAILCOGOV.SHAREPOINT.COM/SITES/ECONDEV/SHARED DOCUMENTS/CSE/2020 EVENTS/VAIL AMERICA
DAYS/VAD FUNDING-FOR REVIEW - 05282020.DOCX
DEPARTMENT PROGRAM AFFIDAVIT
[To be completed only if Recipient participates in the
Department of Labor Lawful Presence Verification Program]
I, ________________________, as a public contractor under contract with the
Town of Vail (the "Town"), hereby affirm that:
1. I have examined or will examine the legal work status of all employees who
are newly hired for employment to perform work under this public contract for services
("Agreement") with the Town within 20 days after such hiring date;
2. I have retained or will retain file copies of all documents required by 8 U.S.C.
§ 1324a, which verify the employment eligibility and identity of newly hired employees
who perform work under this Agreement; and
3. I have not and will not alter or falsify the identification documents for my
newly hired employees who perform work under this Agreement.
____________________________________ ________________________
Signature Date
STATE OF COLORADO )
) ss.
COUNTY OF _____________ )
The foregoing instrument was subscribed, sworn to and acknowledged before me
this ___ day of __________, 2018, by _______________________ as
_________________ of ________________________.
My commission expires:
(S E A L) ________________________________
Notary Public
June 2, 2020 - Page 59 of 772
VA I L TO W N C O UNC I L A G E ND A ME MO
I T E M /T O P I C: F irst Reading of Ordinance No. 7, S eries 2020, an Ordinance making
adjustments to the Town of Vail General F und, Capital Projects F und, Real E state Transfer Tax
Fund, Marketing F und, Dispatch Services F und, and Heavy Equipment Fund
P RE S E NT E R(S ): Carlie Smith, Financial S ervice Manager
AC T IO N RE Q UE S T E D O F C O UNC I L: A pprove or approve with amendments Ordinance No.
7, Series 2020.
B AC K G RO UND: P lease see attached memo.
S TAF F RE C O M M E ND AT IO N: A pprove or approve with amendments Ordinance No. 7, Series
2020.
AT TAC H ME N TS:
Description
Ordinance 7. 2nd Budget Supplemental of 2020
June 2, 2020 - Page 60 of 772
TO: Vail Town Council
FROM: Finance Department
DATE: June 2, 2020
SUBJECT: 2020 2nd Supplemental Appropriation and COVID response
I. SUMMARY
This majority of this supplemental is a reflection of budget impacts for the “Crisis” phase of the
town’s recession plan in response to COVID-19 as outlined in the Public Health Crisis budget
update. That presentation proposes a 21% decrease in budgeted revenue, or $15.3M from
the 2020 original budget. Based on these estimates staff has recommended a reduction in
expenditures based on the “Crisis” level within the town’s recession plan. The reduction in
budgeted expenditures is detailed by fund below and includes additional savings in personnel
expenditures, decreases in department operating expenditures, savings in capital projects as
well as deferrals of capital projects.
II. DISCUSSION
At the time of the first budget supplemental, the budget was adjusted to reflect the “significant”
phase of town’s recession plan. This second supplemental proposes revenue and expenditure
reductions that incorporate both the “Major” and “Crisis” phases of the town’s recession plan.
“Crisis” Recession Phase: In this phase the town’s revenues are projected to drop a
total of $15.3 million, or a 21% percent reduction from the original budget. Again, a
majority of the decrease relates to sales tax, with collections estimated at $16.8 million, a
41% drop from budget and 43% from prior year. Additional reductions were also made to
the other major revenue sources such as lift tax, parking and construction related revenues.
Details of impacts to both revenue and expenditures are outline below by fund:
General Fund
General Fund budgeted revenue will be adjusted by a decrease of $5,101,319, offset by
$1,347,000 in Transit CARES grant proceeds and expenditure reductions of $1,895,319. Staff is
also proposing to use $2.0M of reserves.
The majority of the revenue reduction is from sales tax collections, reflecting a decrease of
$2.7M. Other significant revenue reductions include lift tax collections ($360K), parking
June 2, 2020 - Page 61 of 772
- 2 -
revenues ($1.1M), construction licensing and permits ($579K), and intergovernmental revenues
($251K).
Also reflected in COVID related revenue adjustments is a $1,347,000 Transit Cares grant from
the Federal Transit Administration to help the town’s transportation department’s response to
the COVID-19 pandemic.
To offset the revenue shortfall, expenditures are proposed at a total reduction of $1,895,319
from amended budget. This will come from personnel savings from vacancies, wage freezes,
hiring freezes, and furloughs of summer season employees ($665K), operational cuts ($366K),
and a 30% reduction in special event funding ($864.4K).
As a result of the public health crisis, the town has incurred increased expenses for personal
protective equipment, cleaning supplies, janitorial services, public messaging/signage, office
supplies, legal fees, etc. To date the town has incurred $64,907 of expenses related to COVID-
19 and is estimating to spend an additional $76,000. Staff has included $141,000 in this
supplemental for COVID related expenses. Staff is estimating that 50% of these costs will be
eligible for reimbursement by FEMA.
Aside from the COVID-19 budget adjustments listed above; the General Fund will reflect
$53,662 in grant proceeds which will be directly offset by corresponding expenditures. This
includes:
• $3,345 state grant to cover administrative work performed by the town for the Northwest
Incident Management Team
• $1,915 state grant for travel costs for two Northwest Incident Management team
members to attend a training.
• $23,250 state grant to be used towards purchasing laptops for patrol vehicles
• $5,500 state library grant to be used towards children’s library programs and expenses.
• $2,000 of grants from First Bank and the Education Foundation of Eagle County for the
library’s One Book One Valley program.
• $2,000 Friends of the Library grant restricted for children’s’ library programs and
expenses.
• $2,000 grant from the American Library Association and a $450 grant from Eagle County
for Census expenditures.
• $13,202 use of Friends of the Library grant funds for the libraries Annual Champagne
Celebration that was held in February ($5,034), a plaque for the literacy bench ($550),
author honorarium program expenses ($1,435), and the digitization of the Vail Trail for
the Colorado Historic Newspaper Collection ($6,183) to support Council’s cultural
preservation initiative and as a requirement for the Sustainable
Destination designation.
The above adjustments will result in net deficit of $6.5 million and an estimated ending fund
balance of $29.8 million, or 68% of normal annual revenue streams. Council’s directive is a
minimum of 35% reserve balance.
Marketing Fund
Due to COVID-19, town sponsored special events have either been delayed until 2021, or
reimagined. To coincide with these recent developments staff is proposing an estimated 30%
($864,365) reduction in spending on special events across both the Commission on Special
June 2, 2020 - Page 62 of 772
- 3 -
Events and Council funded events. Staff is working with event producers to reassess
opportunities for newly-imagined ways to draw visitation within the guidelines of public health
orders. Events will be reassessed based on estimated in-town visitation, enhanced guest
experience, surprise and delight, and the projected sales and lodging tax revenue to be
generated.
Staff will come back during the on the June 16th meeting with recommendations for Council
Contribution funding.
Capital Projects Fund
The Capital Projects Fund reflects a decrease in sales tax of $1,888,000 from the amended
budget. This is a total decrease in sales tax revenue of $5,463,000 under the “Crisis” level of the
town’s recession plan.
The Capital Projects Fund also reflects additional capital expense savings and project deferrals
of $4,614,300. This includes:
• $14,400 in savings for two new vehicles that were originally budgeted at $85,000 but
were purchased for $70,700 earlier this year.
• $4,600,000 to defer the Public Works streets building reconstruction as directed by
Council during the May 19th Council meeting.
Aside from COVID related adjustments, staff is requesting to increase budgeted expenditures
by $20,000 to complete the Bridge Rd. Bridge project. During the first supplemental to much
was cut from this project which did not leave enough to complete landscape and grading.
The above adjustments will result in an estimated ending fund balance of $23.8 million.
Real Estate Transfer Tax Fund
Expenditure reductions in the RETT fund include $195,848 in salary and benefits in the
environmental and parks departments for staffing vacancies and reduced summer seasonal
services.
Staff is requesting to increase budgeted expenditures by $209,900 for the following:
• $4,000 to purchase two more e-bikes to the 2020 Vail Trail Host program. The host
program will then have a total of 4 bikes to get to and from trailheads.
• Bring forward $200,000 originally budgeted in 2021 for design of the Gore Valley Trail
Realignment project as approved by Council on 4/21. This will allow the project to be
ready for construction in 2021. The total cost of this project is estimated to be $1.95M.
The RETT Fund also reflects the transfer of $161K of savings from the East Vail Interchange
project to the Stephen’s Park playground budget approved by Council on May 19th.
The above adjustments will result in an estimated ending fund balance of $11.5 million.
Heavy Equipment Fund
The Heavy Equipment Fund will reflect fuel savings of $17,050 from the reduction of summer
bus service. These savings will be offset by a decrease in the interfund agency transfer from
the General Fund.
June 2, 2020 - Page 63 of 772
- 4 -
The Heavy Equipment Fund will also reflect savings of $83,135 from vehicle purchases
($20,835) and deferring the replacement of trailer ($62,300) until 2021.
The above adjustments will result in an estimated ending fund balance of $1.8 million.
Dispatch Services Fund
During the first supplemental, staff proposed a 10% operating expense reduction of $49,700 in
the Dispatch Services Fund with a corresponding decrease of $66,119 in the Town’s
interagency fee. After further discussion, staff recommends that the reductions be covered by
the police department operating expenditures in the General Fund.
The above adjustments will result in an estimated ending fund balance of $1.4 million.
June 2, 2020 - Page 64 of 772
Significant Major CrisisProposed2020 1st COVID-19 2020 2nd COVID-19 COVID-19 2020Budget Supplemental Adjustments Amended Supplemental Adjustments Adjustments AmendedRevenueLocal Taxes:28,524,000$ (7,150,000)$ 21,374,000$ (2,174,000)$ (2,400,000)$ 16,800,000$ Sales Tax Split b/t Gen'l Fund & Capital Fund 62/38 66/34 Sales Tax 17,685,000 - (3,575,000) 14,110,000 (1,054,000) (1,632,000) 11,424,000 Property and Ownership 5,900,000 - - 5,900,000 - - 5,900,000 Ski Lift Tax 5,300,000 - (1,060,000) 4,240,000 (90,000) (270,000) 3,880,000 Franchise Fees, Penalties, and Other Taxes 1,175,440 400,000 - 1,575,440 - - 1,575,440 Licenses & Permits2,400,000 - - 2,400,000 (579,500) - 1,820,500 Intergovernmental Revenue 2,075,088 250,000 (198,400) 2,126,688 36,460 (175,088) (76,800) 1,911,260 CARES Transit Grant - - - - 916,000 431,000 1,347,000 Transportation Centers 6,360,000 - (1,029,600) 5,330,400 (416,000) (650,000) 4,264,400 Charges for Services 1,025,918 - - 1,025,918 (30,931) - 994,987 Fines & Forfeitures 250,476 - - 250,476 - - 250,476 Earnings on Investments 500,000 - (300,000) 200,000 - - 200,000 Rental Revenue 1,093,178 4,080 (90,000) 1,007,258 (112,000) (15,000) 880,258 Miscellaneous and Project Reimbursements 251,000 - (120,000) 131,000 17,202 - - 148,202 Total Revenue 44,016,100 654,080 (6,373,000) 38,297,180 53,662 (1,541,519) (2,212,800) 34,596,523 ExpendituresSalaries 20,499,231 22,857 (568,590) 19,953,498 3,345 (160,000) (483,000) 19,313,843 Benefits 7,377,769 9,143 (204,909) 7,182,003 (22,000) - 7,160,003 Subtotal Compensation and Benefits 27,877,000 32,000 (773,499) 27,135,501 3,345 (182,000) (483,000) 26,473,846 Contributions and Welcome Centers 289,626 - (6,161) 283,465 - - 283,465 All Other Operating Expenses 8,194,158 406,080 (810,363) 7,789,875 50,317 (237,517) (177,506) 7,425,169 Heavy Equipment Operating Charges2,530,419 - (253,042) 2,277,377 - (17,050) 2,260,327 Heavy Equipment Replacement Charges845,122 - - 845,122 - - 845,122 Dispatch Services 661,194 - (66,119) 595,075 66,119 - 661,194 Total Expenditures 40,397,519 438,080 (1,909,184) 38,926,415 53,662 (353,398) (677,556) 37,949,123 Transfer to Marketing & Special Events Fund (2,866,211) (65,000) 50,000 (2,881,211) 288,121 576,244 (2,016,845) Transfer to Other Funds - - - - - Total Transfers (2,866,211) (65,000) 50,000 (2,881,211) - 288,121 576,244 (2,016,845) Planning ProjectsVail 2030(300,000) - 300,000 - - - - Civic Area/Dobson Master Plan(250,000) - 50,000 (200,000) - - (200,000) West Vail Master Plan(325,000) - - (325,000) - - (325,000) COVID-19 Vail Community Relief Fund- (500,000) - (500,000) - - (500,000) COVID-19 operating expenses- - - - - 141,000 141,000 Total Expenditures 44,138,730 1,003,080 (2,309,184) 42,832,626 53,662 (641,519) (1,112,800) 41,131,968 Surplus (Deficit) Net of Transfers & New Programs(122,630) (4,535,446) - (900,000) (1,100,000) (6,535,445) Beginning Fund Balance 32,144,411 4,162,253 36,306,665 (900,000) (1,100,000) 36,306,665 Ending Fund Balance 32,021,782$ 31,771,219$ 29,771,219$ As % of Annual Revenues73% 72% 68%TOWN OF VAIL 2020 AMENDED BUDGET SUMMARY OF REVENUE, EXPENDITURES AND CHANGES IN FUND BALANCEGENERAL FUND 5June 2, 2020 - Page 65 of 772
Proposed
2020 1st COVID-19 2020 COVID-19 2020
Budget Supplemental Adjustments Amended Adjustments Amended
Revenue
Business Licenses 325,000$ 325,000$ 325,000$
Transfer in from General Fund 2,866,211 65,000 (50,000) 2,881,211 (864,365) 2,016,846
Earnings on Investments 3,000 3,000 3,000
Total Revenue 3,194,211 65,000 (50,000) 3,209,211 (864,365) 2,344,846
Expenditures
Commission on Special Events (CSE) 893,648 893,648 (268,094) 625,554
Education & Enrichment 154,530 154,530 154,530
Signature Events:
Bravo! 296,934 296,934 296,934
Vail Jazz Festival 76,400 76,400 76,400
Vail Valley Foundation - Mountain Games 140,000 140,000 140,000
Vail Valley Foundation - Hot Summer Nights 28,050 28,050 28,050
Vail Valley Foundation - Dance Festival 54,633 54,633 54,633
Burton US Open 490,000 490,000 490,000
Fireworks 52,015 52,015 52,015
Destination Events:
Snow Days 550,000 550,000 550,000
Spring Back to Vail 300,000 300,000 300,000
Other Event Funding:
Revely Vail 155,000 50,000 (50,000) 155,000 155,000
Vail Holidays Funding - 15,000 15,000 15,000
Global Solutions Forum - - -
30% reduction across all signature events: - - (596,271) (596,271)
Collection Fee - General Fund 16,250 16,250 16,250
Total Expenditures 3,207,461 65,000 (50,000) 3,222,461 (864,365) 2,358,096
Revenue Over (Under) Expenditures (13,250) (13,250) (13,250)
Beginning Fund Balance 274,288 386,837 386,837
Ending Fund Balance 261,038$ 373,587$ 373,587$
TOWN OF VAIL 2020 AMENDED BUDGET
SUMMARY OF REVENUE, EXPENDITURES AND CHANGES IN FUND BALANCE
VAIL MARKETING & SPECIAL EVENTS FUND
6
June 2, 2020 - Page 66 of 772
New Request/AdjustmentProposed1st COVID-19 2020 2nd COVID-19 20202020 Supplemental Adjustments Amended Supplemental Adjustments AmendedRevenue2%Total Sales Tax Revenue: 28,524,000$ (7,150,000)$ 21,374,000$ (4,574,000)$ 16,800,000$ 2020 proposed 2% from 2019 forecast and 1.8% from 2018 actuals Sales Tax Split between General Fund & Capital Fund62/38 66/34 68/32Sales Tax - Capital Projects Fund 10,839,000$ (3,575,000)$ 7,264,000$ (1,888,000)$ 5,376,000$ 2020: Reduction of sales tax of for economic impacts of COVID-19 Use Tax 2,220,000 2,220,000 2,220,000 2020 flat with 2019 and based on 5 year averageFranchise Fee 190,000 190,000 190,000 1% Holy Cross Franchise Fee approved in 2019Federal Grant Revenue 700,000 (700,000) - - 2020: Reduce Federal grant reimbursement for Bridge Rd Bridge. This grant was originally schduled to be received in two partial payments ($300K in 2019 and $700K in 2020);Other State Revenue 1,617,287 350,000 1,967,287 1,967,287 2020: $350K CDOT 50% grant for bus transportation management system (see corresponding expenditure for $700K below); 1.09M FASTER grant for electric bus charges; $525,287 CDOT bus grant; 2019: $135K public works water quality grant; $33K grant for Police Intel Sharing platform- project expenditures included in the 2019 budget and re-appropriated below.Lease Revenue 164,067 164,067 164,067 Per Vail Commons commercial (incr. every 5 years); adjusted to remove residential lease revenue ($38K)Project Reimbursement - 79,676 79,676 79,676 2020: Re-appropriate $29,676 for traffic impact fee reimbursement from VVMC/Frontage Rd projects, $50K use of Holy Cross funds for Big Horn Rd Intermountain project; $20K Vail Trail condo association; reimbursement for sidewalk; $200K reimbursement from Holy Cross for 2019/2020 Big Horn Rd and Intermountain project; $20.7K traffic impact reimbursement for VVMC/Frontage Rd. project; $50K use of community enhancement funds for Liftside to Glen Lyon underground utility project; $50K additional use of traffic impact fees for VVMC/Frontage Rd (see corresponding expenditures below)Timber Ridge Loan repayment 460,842 460,842 460,842 $28.5K interest on $1.9M loan to TR; Principal and interest on $8M loan to Timber Ridge FundEarnings on Investments and Other 368,970 368,970 368,970 2020: 1.8% returns assumed on available fund balanceTotal Revenue 16,370,166 (80,324) (3,575,000) 12,714,842 - (1,888,000) 10,826,842 ExpendituresFacilitiesFacilities Capital Maintenance 372,500 130,417 502,917 502,917 2020: Re-appropriate $133.4K to complete TM residence upgrades; PW garage door replacements ($50K), transit station skylight replacement ($50K); In general this line item covers various repairs to town buildings including the upkeep of exterior (roofing, siding surfaces, windows, doors), interior finishes (paint, carpet, etc.), and mechanical equipment (boilers, air handlers, etc.). 2019: Re-appropriate for TM residence upgrades including solar panels when replacing 40 year old roof and electrical car charger, Admin remodel, PD garage ventilation project ($276K); PW admin heated walkway repair ($50K), PW admin kitchen update ($15K), PW shops and bus barn maintenance including wood siding maintenance and exhaust system replacement ($130K), TM residence roof, skylight, and solar panel ($70K); Municipal Complex Maintenance 873,000 138,750 1,011,750 1,011,750 2020: Re-appropriate $138.8K for municipal building upgrades, repairs, and maintenance; Comm Dec Remodel ($75K); Replace Admin building air handlers ($250K), Comm Dev roof replacement ($125K), Comm Dev interior flooring replacement ($25K), PD balcony repairs ($50K), PD boiler replacement ($45K), replace PD air handling units ($75K), replace PD rooftop units ($125K); '2019: PD window replacement ($80K), PD circulation pump repairs and replacement ($15K), PD elevator drive controls ($44K); Welcome Center/Grandview Capital Maintenance 38,000 56,704 94,704 94,704 2020: Re-appropriate $56.7K for final bills for furniture replacement at the Grandview Donovan Pavilion 120,000 5,000 125,000 125,000 2020: Re-appropriate $5K to be used towards HVAC relocation design; 2020 includes $75K for design & planning of HVAC Replacement and relocation at Donovan PavilionSnowmelt Boilers 500,000 500,000 500,000 Replacement of TRC 8 boilers (2 per year)Public Works Shops Expansion 9,500,000 11,603,325 (14,100,000) 7,003,325 (4,600,000) 2,403,325 Expansion and remodel of the Public Works shop complex as outlined in an updated public works master plan (previously completed in 1994). The plan will ensure shop expansions will meet the needs of the department and changing operations; 2019-2020: Phase I includes demo and reconstruction of a two story streets building; retaining wall construction, new cinder building, relocation of the green house building, and a vertical expansion allowance for future building options. Reflect actual cash needed in 2020; savings of $1.4M; Per Council on May 19, defer Phase 1 to 2021Public Works Building Maintenance - 300,000 300,000 300,000 2020: Re-appropriate $300K to replace two HVAC units at Public WorksPublic Works Equipment Wash Down/WQ Improvements - - - 2019: Improvements to exterior wash area for large trucks to include small heated area to prevent ice buildup (safety issue ) and filtration of waste water 11,403,500 12,234,196 (14,100,000) 9,537,696 - (4,600,000) 4,937,696 ParkingTOWN OF VAIL 2020 AMENDED BUDGETSUMMARY OF REVENUE, EXPENDITURES, AND CHANGES IN FUND BALANCECAPITAL PROJECTS FUND 7 June 2, 2020 - Page 67 of 772
New Request/AdjustmentProposed1st COVID-19 2020 2nd COVID-19 20202020 Supplemental Adjustments Amended Supplemental Adjustments AmendedTOWN OF VAIL 2020 AMENDED BUDGETSUMMARY OF REVENUE, EXPENDITURES, AND CHANGES IN FUND BALANCECAPITAL PROJECTS FUNDParking Structures 697,000 697,000 697,000 2020 Various repairs including deck topping replacement, expansion joint repairs, ventilation, HVAC, plumbing and other structural repairs; 2019: Re-appropriate for structural repairs to LHTRC, roofing repairs at VTRC, and elevator repairs;Parking Entry System / Equipment - 125,148 125,148 125,148 2020: Re-appropriate $125K for additional on-foot parking payment kiosks; 2019: Spare parking system equipment including ticket creator, ticket processor, ticket feeder, circuit boards, power supply modules, print heads ($93K); Red Sandstone Parking Structure (VRA) - 1,308,936 1,308,936 1,308,936 2020: Re-appropriate $1.3M to complete New Red Sandstone Parking Strucuture. This project includes all landscaping and parking space monitoring system; Construction of 4 level parking structure at Red Sandstone Elementary school, with contributions from Vail Resorts ($4.3M) and Eagle County School District ($1.5M); Remainder to be reimbursed by VRAParking Structure Camera systems 1,000,000 (1,000,000) - - Installation of camera systems for both safety and vehicle counts at Vail Village and Lionshead to mirror new system at Red Sandstone; Defer to 2021Lionshead Parking Structure Landscape Renovations (VRA) - 30,291 30,291 30,291 2019: Re-appropriate to complete landscaping ($30.3K);Total Facilities1,697,000 1,464,375 (1,000,000) 2,161,375 - - 2,161,375 TransportationBus Shelters 230,000 230,000 230,000 Bus shelter annual maintenance; 2020 Lionshead transit center Westbound Bus shelterReplace Buses 6,900,000 (88,358) 6,811,642 6,811,642 2020: Transfer total of $350K of savings (2019savings of $261.6K and 2020 savings of $88.4K) to be used towards the town's portion of the bus transit management system; 7 buses for replacement at $905K each, plus 5 charging stations at $50K each, and $30K for additional power chargers; 2019: $165K for spare bus part (included in original 2018 budget); Upgrade Nextbus transponders to 4G required for Nextbus software upgradeBus Transportation Management System - 700,000 700,000 700,000 2020: $700K for a new bus transportation mgmt sytem. This includes a $350K 50% CDOT grant and $350K savings from "Replace Buses" project to upgrade bus transportation system; $350K CDOT grant. Traffic Impact Fee and Transportation Master Plan Updates - 30,000 30,000 30,000 2020: Re-appropriate $30K to perform traffic countsHybrid Bus Battery Replacement - 388,716 (388,716) - - 2020: Scheduled replacement placeholder; Estimated life of 6 years; While batteries are passed their lifecycle replacement has not been needed as of yet; Buses will be replaced in 2-3 yearsElectric bus chargers and electrical service rebuild 1,375,000 1,375,000 1,375,000 2020: To construct electric bus charging station and electrical service infrastructure at Lionshead and Vail Village Transit centers; $1.1M in grant revenue will offset cost of this projectTotal Transportation8,505,000 1,030,358 (388,716) 9,146,642 - - 9,146,642 Road and BridgesCapital Street Maintenance 1,345,000 1,345,000 1,345,000 On-going maintenance to roads and bridges including asphalt overlays, patching and repairs; culverts; 2022/2023 includes asphalt and mill overlay ($575K); 2024 includes surface seal ($190K); asphalt mill overlay ($565K)Street Light Improvements 75,000 69,945 144,945 144,945 Re-appropriate for town-wide street light replacement; Slifer Plaza/ Fountain/Storm Sewer - 156,593 156,593 156,593 2020: Re-appropriate to continue repairs to Silfer Plaza fountain reconstruction and storm sewers ($157K)Neighborhood Bridge Reconstruction 350,000 428,186 (750,000) 28,186 20,000 48,186 2020: Re-appropriate for Lupine Bridge repairs and final bridge road bridge repair bills; Defer bridge improvements. Nugget Lane Bridge Repairs ($350K); 2019: Bridge Road Bridge replacement ($1.7M), Lupine Bridge Repair ($350K); Vail Health / TOV Frontage Road improvements - 30,131 30,131 30,131 2020: Complete design phase of Frontage Rd. improvements ($30.1K)Seibert Fountain Improvements - 358,000 358,000 358,000 2020: Re-appropriate for Fountain software system and valve upgrades at Seibert FountainNeighborhood Road Reconstruction - 321,840 321,840 321,840 2020:Re-appropriate for East Vail major drainage improvements ($400K)West Lionshead Circle Crosswalks (VRA) - 75,000 75,000 75,000 2020: Re-appropriate for crosswalk at Lionshead placeMill Creek Heated Walk - 100,580 100,580 100,580 2020: Re-appropriate for final project bills; TOV portion of 50/50 shared project with homeowners for heated sidewalk at Kendell Park/Mill Creek ($125K). This project will be managed by the HOA at an estimated total cost of $150K. East Vail Interchange Underpass Sidewalk 500,000 (500,000) - - 2020: Request from the Planning and Environmental Commission to construct a pedestrian sidewalk beneath the East Vail interchange; pedestrian count study at the underpass is recommended to be completed before the start of this project. Defer projectTotal Road and Bridge2,270,000 1,540,275 (1,250,000) 2,560,275 20,000 - 2,580,275 8 June 2, 2020 - Page 68 of 772
New Request/AdjustmentProposed1st COVID-19 2020 2nd COVID-19 20202020 Supplemental Adjustments Amended Supplemental Adjustments AmendedTOWN OF VAIL 2020 AMENDED BUDGETSUMMARY OF REVENUE, EXPENDITURES, AND CHANGES IN FUND BALANCECAPITAL PROJECTS FUNDContributionsChildren's Garden of Learning-Capital 20,000 32,500 52,500 52,500 2020: Annual contribution for capital maintenance and improvements; Re-appropriate $32.5K 2019 annual contribution for fence around front yard due to delays in CDOT easement; 2019: Council contribution to build a fence around front yard.;Total Contributions20,000 32,500 - 52,500 - - 52,500 TechnologyTown-wide camera system 22,000 22,000 22,000 2019 replace Bosch system(30 cameras); $22K Annual maintenanceAudio-Visual capital maintenance 118,000 118,000 118,000 $18K annual maintenance / replacement of audio-visual equipment in town buildings such as Donovan, Municipal building, Grand View, LH Welcome Center; 2020: $100K Welcome Center video wall replacementDocument Imaging 50,000 50,000 50,000 Annual maintenance, software licensing, and replacement schedule for scanners and servers includes $2.5K for LaserficheSoftware Licensing 496,123 70,278 566,401 566,401 2020: Re-appropriate $70.3K to complete asset mgmt. system; Annual software licensing and support for town wide systems; 2019-2020: Upgrade Microsoft products on all equipment; renewal of licenses; $3K per year increase from original 5 year plan due to additional software products; 2019: virtual desktop replacement ($239K); Asset Mgmt. System ($75K); Asset Mgmt. annual maintenance and licensing agreement ($50K); Hardware Purchases 175,000 12,723 187,723 187,723 2020: Re-appropriate $12.7K for final workstation replacement bills; 2020: Time Clock Replacement ($125K); 2019: Replacement of 20-25 workstations per year per scheduleWebsite and e-commerce 86,500 50,000 136,500 136,500 2020: $50K for new Vailgov.com website framework and website upgrades; Internet security & application interfaces; website maintenance $12K; Vail calendar $24K; domain hosting $15K; web camera streaming service $24KFiber Optics / Cabling Systems in Buildings 150,000 150,000 150,000 2019: NWCOG Project THOR Broadband project Meet Me Center $75K; 2020: Fiber Optics Connection from Muni Building to West Vail fire station ($150K) ; 2021-2023: Repair, maintain & upgrade cabling/network Infrastructure $50KNetwork upgrades 200,000 20,256 220,256 220,256 Computer network systems - replacement cycle every 3-5 years; 2020 Firewalls ($60K), External Wireless System ($50K), TOV Switches and Router Replacements/Upgrades ($90K)Data Center (Computer Rooms) 30,000 1,058,840 1,088,840 1,088,840 2020: Re-appropriate for Data Center Remodel at Station 3 includes hyper-converged infrastructure (HCI) equipment $750K, Cooling/UPS system upgrade for data center in Muni building $128KData Center equipment replacement and generator - 159,406 159,406 159,406 2020: Final bills to replace data center server infrastructure; upgrade and replace emergency generator to increase capacity Broadband (THOR) 94,800 94,800 94,800 2019: $35K for fiber from West Vail fire station to CDOT I-70 fiber connection for Project THOR; 2020-2024: annual broadband expenses, potential future revenuesBus Camera System 15,000 15,000 15,000 Installation of software and cameras in buses; 2019/20 annual capital maintenance of camera replacement, etc.Business Systems Replacement 120,000 110,509 (50,509) 180,000 180,000 2020: Re-appropriate $110.5K for short term renal software and final sales tax software upgrades less $50K savings; Energy Mgmt. Software ($25K); Housing Database software ($40K); HR Performance mgmt. system ($55K); 2019: Re-appropriate for sales tax software ($134K), and new bus scheduling software ($8K); $30K every other year for parking system upgrades; Total Technology1,557,423 1,482,012 (50,509) 2,988,926 - - 2,988,926 Public SafetyPublic Safety System / Records Mgmt. System (RMS) 50,000 63,000 113,000 113,000 2020: Re-appropriate $53K for remaining two payments for PD SQL licensing; $50K Annual capital maintenance of "County-wide "Computer Aided Dispatch/Records Mgmt. System"; includes patrol car and fire truck laptops and software used to push information to TOV and other agencies; TOV portion of annual Intergraph software maintenance; 2019: Police Department Records Mgmt. system SQL licensing ($91K)Public Safety Equipment 58,831 58,831 58,831 2020: $26K bullet proof vests (8) for Special Ops Unit (SOU); $5.8K replace handheld citation device with in car computer interface; $4.6K for "Stop Stick" tire deflation devices for patrol cars; $22.2K for an unmanned aircraft system (UAS), or drone with thermal detection for use by both police and fire. The cost also covers "pilot" training and maintenance; 2019: Intel Sharing Platform ($33K) covered by grant; Speed Signs ($7.8K), Rifle noise suppressors ($23.1K), pole camera ($8.6K)Fire Safety Equipment 40,000 2,802 (32,002) 10,800 10,800 2020: Re-appropriate $2.8K for final equipment dryer bills; Defer Wildland Personal Protection Equipment (PPE) to 2021; Reduce confined space equipment ($15K) to $8K; 2019: Long Range acoustical device ($50K), personal protective equipment dryer ($9K); Extrication Equipment - - - 2019: Re-appropriate for final billsThermal Imaging Cameras 12,000 5,245 (9,245) 8,000 8,000 For the purchase of 3 cameras (2019,2020,2022) which will allow firefighters to see through areas of smoke, darkness, or heat barriers; Reduce to $8K 9 June 2, 2020 - Page 69 of 772
New Request/AdjustmentProposed1st COVID-19 2020 2nd COVID-19 20202020 Supplemental Adjustments Amended Supplemental Adjustments AmendedTOWN OF VAIL 2020 AMENDED BUDGETSUMMARY OF REVENUE, EXPENDITURES, AND CHANGES IN FUND BALANCECAPITAL PROJECTS FUNDFire Station Alert System 198,000 (198,000) - - 2020: Fire Station Alerting System to improve response times. This system will work with the Dispatch system and the timing is being coordinated with Eagle River Fire. Defer $198K to 2021Total Public Safety358,831 71,047 (239,247) 190,631 - - 190,631 Community and Guest Service Energy Enhancements - 223,847 223,847 223,847 2020: Electric car charges at various town locations ($73.8K)Pedestrian Safety Enhancements - 1,471,769 1,471,769 1,471,769 2020: Continue replacement of 40+ year old overhead lighting for Main Vail roundabouts and West Vail Roundabouts (approved by council on 7/5/16); project includes underground electrical enhancements for lightingCivic Area Redevelopment 1,000,000 1,000,000 1,000,000 2019: Preliminary design plans to vet broader master plan concepts; 2020 Placeholder to explore outcomes of the Civic Center Master Plan such as feasibility studies / design Underground Utility improvements - 496,670 496,670 496,670 2020: Re-appropriate $302K plus additional $50K for Bighorn Rd and Intermountain project; 2019: $50K for undergrounding electric between Glen Lyon office building and Liftside- see reimbursement above; $71K for CDOT project at I-70 underpass; $2.1M for Big Horn Rd and Intermountain Eastern portion projects to be completed in 2018 using Community Enhancement Funds ($1.1M reimbursement from the Holy Cross enhancement funds)Guest Services Enhancements/Wayfinding - 36,120 36,120 36,120 2020: Final bills for new street signs and accompanying light poles town-wideRockfall Mitigation near Timber Ridge - 42,568 42,568 42,568 2020: Final Rock fall mitigation near Timber RidgeVehicle Expansion 85,000 85,000 (14,300) 70,700 2020: Reflect savings of $14.3K from the commander vehicle purchases: 2 commander vehicles ($80K); Trailer for event cattle guards ($5K);Total Community and Guest Service1,085,000 2,270,974 - 3,355,974 - (14,300) 3,341,674 Total Expenditures 26,896,754 20,125,737 (17,028,472) 29,994,019 20,000 (4,614,300) 25,399,719 Other Financing Sources (Uses)Transfer from Vail Reinvestment Authority 2,550,000 (894,709) 1,655,291 1,655,291 2020: LH landscape improvements ($30.3K), LH place crosswalk ($75K), Lionshead parking structure ($50K), Red Sandstone parking garage reimbursement ($1.5M)Transfer to RETT Fund - (3,000) (3,000) (3,000) Use of faculty capital savings for Sunbird park contractTransfer to Housing Fund (2,500,000) (2,500,000) (2,500,000) Transfer to Housing Fund; 1.5M per year; Revenue Over (Under) Expenditures (10,476,588) (21,103,770) 13,453,472 (18,126,886) (20,000) 2,726,300 (15,420,586) Beginning Fund Balance 16,414,887 39,215,082 39,215,082Ending Fund Balance 5,938,299 21,088,196 23,794,496 10 June 2, 2020 - Page 70 of 772
New Request/AdjustmentProposed 1st COVID-19 2020 2nd COVID-19 20202020 Supplemental Adjustments Amended Supplemental Adjustments AmendedRevenueReal Estate Transfer Tax 6,300,000$ 6,300,000$ 6,300,000$ 2020: flat with 2019 budget and 17.6% decrease from 2018Golf Course Lease 168,317 168,317 168,317 Annual lease payment from Vail Recreation District; annual increase will be based on CPI; New rate effective 2020 with lease signed in 2019; Rent income funds the "Recreation Enhancement Account" belowIntergovernmental Revenue 20,000 1,180,000 (700,000) 500,000 500,000 2020: Re-appropriate $150K reimbursement from Eagle County and $1M from ERWSD (less $700K for cost savings) for the restabilization of Dowd Junction; Re-appropriate $30K fishing is fun grant; $20K lottery proceeds; 2019: $300K Eagle County reimbursement for Lupine open space parcel; $5K grant for curbside recycling programs- See corresponding expenditure below; $24.3K reimbursement from ERWS for the Dowd Junction retaining wall- See corresponding expenditure below; $30K Fishing is fun grant (carryforward from 2018); $39K GoCo grant (carryforward from 2018); $150K reimbursement from ERWSC and $1M from Eagle County for restabilization of Down Junction; $20K lottery proceeds Project Reimbursements - 20,000 20,000 20,000 2020: Re-appropriate $20K reimbursement for WestHaven stormwater filtration upgrades from Grand HyattDonations - 37,544 37,544 37,544 2020: Re-appropriate $37.5K unused donation from East West partners for Ford Park art space; 2019: $169.4K community funding for the Seibert Memorial- See corresponding expenditure below; $50K revenue recognition from East West Partners for Ford Park art space- See corresponding expenditure belowRecreation Amenity Fees 10,000 10,000 10,000 Earnings on Investments and Other 100,849 2,000 102,849 102,849 2020: 1.8% rate assumed; $32K bag fee reimbursement for Clean-Up Day and America Recycles Day; '2019:$32K Reimbursement from bag fee collections for Clean-Up Day and America Recycles Day. Total Revenue 6,599,166 1,239,544 (700,000) 7,138,710 - - 7,138,710 ExpendituresManagement Fee to General Fund (5%) 315,000 315,000 315,000 5% of RETT Collections - fee remitted to the General Fund for administrationWildlandForest Health Management 298,733 (12,665) 286,068 286,068 Operating budget for Wildland Fire crew; 2019 Added .5 FTE for wildland lead; Extra month of wildland crew to facilitate bighorn sheet habitat improvement project ($12.9K); 10% operating reductionIntermountain Fuels Reduction - - - 2019: Intermountain Fuels Project $42.4K Total Wildland298,733 - (12,665) 286,068 - - 286,068 ParksAnnual Park and Landscape Maintenance 1,816,014 (91,971) 1,724,043 4,000 (195,848) 1,532,195 Ongoing path, park and open space maintenance, project mgmt.; $4,000 for two new e-bikes for the trail host program; Town Trail Host volunteer program ($16,000), “Clean-up after your K-9” media campaign ($2,000), and a planning effort with the USFS to generate long-term solutions ($30,000). 2020 includes $43K for replacement of 27 year old large flower containers; 10% operating cuts and 0% merit remainder of yearPark / Playground Capital Maintenance 125,000 50,108 175,108 175,108 2020: Re-appropriate $50.1K for small park projects; 2019 included $10K to replace and add additional drinking fountains and bottle filling stations at Vail parks; Annual maintenance items include projects such as playground surface refurbishing, replacing bear-proof trash cans, painting/staining of play structures, picnic shelter additions/repairs, and fence maintenance; Rec. Path Capital Maint 140,000 140,000 140,000 Capital maintenance of the town's recreation path system; 2020: includes $50K replacement of wood slats on Nature Center/Ford Park bridgeTree Maintenance 65,000 65,000 65,000 On going pest control, tree removal and replacements in stream tract, open space, and park areasStreet Furniture Replacement 120,000 32,469 152,469 152,469 2020: Re-appropriate $32.5K for summer bike coral in parking structure; 2020 includes contract to assess pedestrian bridge ($15K); Additional 12 space bike racks near Amphitheater restroom/concessions building, school house and fields/concessions ($30K); '2019 includes pedestrian bridge inspection report ($25K), additional benches in Vail Village and bike racks ($7.3K); Annual replacement or capital repairs, benches, recycling and bike racksFord Park Landscape Enhancement: Parking Lot / Sport Central Portal- - - 2019: DRB req'd parking lot plantings and landscape enhancements at Central Portal Pilot Project to reduce turf grass - - - 2019: Turf grass reduction project at Buffehr Creek. This project will be a pilot example of ways to reduce turf grass in areas across town resulting in water and maintenance savingsCovered Bridge Pocket Park Rehabilitation - 82,088 82,088 82,088 2020: Re-appropriate $82.1K to complete Pocket Park rehabilitation; 2019: Streambank stabilization, riparian enhancements, walking surface replacement Stephens Park Safety Improvements - 292,306 292,306 161,000 453,306 2020: Transfer from East Vail Interchange for safety improvements; Re-appropriate Stephens Park safety improvements; 2019: Access improvements to include extended sidewalk, new stairs and other site improvements; playground was built in 1990'sFord Park: Softball Weather Shelter - - - 2019: Shelter at the Ford Park softball fields to provide weather and lighting protection for spectators and players ($645K); Add'l $60K requested for contingency onlyFord Park Improvements & Fields - 54,636 54,636 54,636 2020: Re-appropriate a portion of remaining funds to complete Ford Park landscaping improvementsVail Transit Center Landscape - 107,133 107,133 107,133 2020: Completion of landscaping at Vail transit centerTOWN OF VAIL 2020 AMENDED BUDGETSUMMARY OF REVENUE, EXPENDITURES, AND CHANGES IN FUND BALANCEREAL ESTATE TRANSFER TAX 11 June 2, 2020 - Page 71 of 772
New Request/AdjustmentProposed 1st COVID-19 2020 2nd COVID-19 20202020 Supplemental Adjustments Amended Supplemental Adjustments AmendedTOWN OF VAIL 2020 AMENDED BUDGETSUMMARY OF REVENUE, EXPENDITURES, AND CHANGES IN FUND BALANCEREAL ESTATE TRANSFER TAX Ford Park Portal Improvements - - - 2019:Final bills for improvements to Ford Park entry points ($2.5K)Sunbird Park Fountain Repairs 120,000 3,000 123,000 123,000 2020: Repairs to fountain feature; requires excavation to get to leaking pipe; currently unable to run main center fountainFord Park Enhancement: Priority 3 Landscape area 75,000 75,000 75,000 2020: Landscape playground/basketball berm, softball area, frontage rd. & east berms, below tennis courtsTotal Parks2,461,014 621,740 (91,971) 2,990,783 165,000 (195,848) 2,959,935 Rec Paths and TrailsVail Valley Drive Path Extension: Ford Park to Ptarmigan - 375,389 (325,389) 50,000 50,000 2020: Defer Vail Valley Drive path extension; $50K to strip and design future improvementVail Valley Drive Path Extension: Ptarmigan West to GC Mtn Building- 375,389 (325,389) 50,000 50,000 2020: Defer Vail Valley Drive path extension; $50K to strip and design future improvementGore Valley Trail Bridge Replacement - 10,000 10,000 10,000 2020: Re-appropriate $10K for final design bills for Gore Valley Trail realignment; 2019: Reconstruction of south bridge abutment due to significant scour and replacement of bridge structureGore Valley Trail Realignment - 67,182 67,182 200,000 267,182 2020: Bring forward 2021 budget for design work; Re-appropriate $67.2K for Gore Valley trail re-alignment design; 2019: Design feasibility study for Gore Valley Trail Realignment at Lionshead gondola ($50K) East Vail Interchange Improvements - 451,284 451,284 (161,000) 290,284 2020: Transfer $161K to Stephen's Park safety improvements; Re-appropriate $451.3K to continue East Vail interchange project; 2019: $793.6K for landscaping, design, and construction of the interchangeDowd Junction repairs and improvements - 2,101,437 (1,400,000) 701,437 701,437 2020: Continue Re-stabilization of Dowd Junction path ($2.1M); Repairs to culverts, drainage, and preventative improvements; project in cooperation with Eagle River Water and Sand (ERWSC); offset with reimbursement of $150K reimbursement from Eagle County and $300K reimbursement from ERWSD; $1.4M cost reductionGore Valley Trail Reconstruction (Conoco to Donovan) - 25,000 25,000 25,000 2020: Re-appropriate to complete Gore Valley Trail Reconstruction between W. Vail Conoco and Donovan Pavilion includes revegetation along West trail near Donovan PavilionNorth Recreation Path- Sun Vail to Pedestrian Bridge - 233,380 233,380 233,380 2020: $235K for North Recreation Bike Path reconstruction on North Frontage road between Sun Vail and the pedestrian Bridge to coincide with the Red Sandstone parking garage projectTotal Rec Paths and Trails- 3,639,061 (2,050,778) 1,588,283 39,000 - 1,627,283 Recreational FacilitiesNature Center Operations 90,000 90,000 90,000 Nature Center operating costs including $75K Walking Mountains contract and $15K for maintenance and utilitiesNature Center Capital Maintenance 145,292 145,292 145,292 2020: Wood siding and trim ($9.5K), window replacement ($10.3K), exterior door repairs ($7.6K); steep slope roofing replacement ($27.5K); signage ($17.2K), paths and walkways ($6.9K), timber stairway ($12.2K), shade structure reconstruction ($36.0K)Nature Center Redevelopment - 383,522 383,522 383,522 2020: Re-appropriate $383.5K for further planning and design for a nature center remodel; 2019: $434K Design new Nature Center Remodel/StructureRecreation Facility Maintenance - 25,000 25,000 25,000 $25K for general RETT facility maintenanceGolf Clubhouse & Nordic Center - 33,824 33,824 33,824 2020: Final art purchases for Clubhouse and Nordic Center; art budget was 1% of original project budgetTotal Recreational Facilities235,292 442,346 - 677,638 - - 677,638 EnvironmentalEnvironmental Sustainability 523,736 (18,289) 505,447 (37,440) 468,007 Annual operating expenditures for Environmental department (4 FTEs); includes $40K for Clean up day, professional dues to organizations such as CC4CA, Climate Action Collaborative, etc. 2020 Energy Coordinator FTE requested; 10% reduction in operating expense and 0% merit impactRecycling and Waste Reduction Programs 152,500 73,000 225,500 225,500 2020: Re-appropriate $55K for Love Vail website; $10K to continue recycled art project; Reclass $7.5 Recycling Education from energy and transportation to Recycling Programs project code, new request $10K for single haul consultant; 2020: Love Vail website improvement ($30K); ; Annual expenditures: Green Team ($2.5K); Eagle County recycling hauls (reimbursed) $(25K); Zero Hero recycling at events ($25K); Actively Green contract ($40K); Recycling compliance, education, public art and compost pilot ($30K); 2019: Love Vail Phase I $20K, Waste Education $34.5K, Green Team $2.5K, Love Vail Phase II $25K, Recycling and Compost $25K, Zero Hero $25K;Ecosystem Health 233,500 44,413 (52,000) 225,913 225,913 2020: Re-appropriate $45.9K for NEPA contract for bighorn sheep improvement project (Defer to 2021); Annual wildlife forum ($2.5K) cancelled in 2020; CC4CA Retreat - host community ($3K); Sustainable Destination contract ($30K); Trees for Vail $5K; Strategic Plan completion and phase I rollout ($10K); Biodiversity study as outcome of open lands plan ($50K); Forest Ranger program ($33K); wildlife habitat improvements ($100K); 2019: Wildlife habitat program (NEPA study, field work) ($75K); Front Range Program $33K, Trees for Vail $5K, Sustainable Destination Contract $30k, CC4C Retreat $2.5K, Annual Wildlife Forum $2K Energy & Transportation 72,500 72,500 72,500 2019: Energy Smart $40k, Sole Power sponsorships $7.5K, Energy Program $57K; 1.3K Sole Power prizes; 2020: E-bike pilot program research ($25K); Annual expenditures: Energy Smart Colorado partnership contract ($40K); Sole Power coordination ($7.5K); Streamtract Education/Mitigation 50,000 31,800 81,800 81,800 2020: Re-appropriate $31.8K for project Re-wild; 2019: Includes water quality and streamtract education, outreach, signage and marketing; private streambank funding; 2020-2021: Ongoing streamtract education programming such as "Lunch with Locals", landscape workshops, City Nature Challenge and storm drain art12 June 2, 2020 - Page 72 of 772
New Request/AdjustmentProposed 1st COVID-19 2020 2nd COVID-19 20202020 Supplemental Adjustments Amended Supplemental Adjustments AmendedTOWN OF VAIL 2020 AMENDED BUDGETSUMMARY OF REVENUE, EXPENDITURES, AND CHANGES IN FUND BALANCEREAL ESTATE TRANSFER TAX Water Quality Infrastructure 1,000,000 (750,000) 250,000 250,000 2019: Continuation of water quality improvement to Gore Creek; Stormwater site specific water and water quality construction projects as part of "Restore the Gore" includes $135K for water mitigation roof runoff grant at PW; 2019-2021 funds to continue water quality improvement to Gore Creek; Stormwater site specific water and water quality construction projects as part of "Restore the Gore"; Defer $750K to 2021; 2020 project will be design of West Vail water quality Streambank Mitigation 400,000 280,782 680,782 680,782 2019-2021 Continuation of Riparian Site specific construction projects for Water Quality Strategic Action Plan ($648.3K) includes 2018 grant awards continued in 2019 for GoCo grant ($39K) and Fishing is Fun grant ($30K)- See carryforward of grant revenue above East Vail Water Quality TAPS - - - 2019: Completion of East Vail Water Quality ImprovementsGore Creek Interpretive Signage 81,000 71,450 152,450 152,450 2020: Re-appropriate $71.5K for Phase I of Gore Greek Interpretive signage (design); 2020: Phase II of Gore Creek Interpretive Signage includes installation of "story stations" and interpretive picnic table tops.PW Solar Project 1,100,000 (1,100,000) - - 2020: Installation of solar panels at Public Works Shops; Defer to 2021Open Space Land Acquisition 250,000 (250,000) - - 2019: $600K purchase of Lupine parcel with Eagle County- see corresponding reimbursement above; $50K for open space surveys/studies; 2019/2023 $250K annual set aside for purchase of open space - defer to 2021Total Enviromental3,863,236 501,445 (2,170,289) 2,194,392 - (37,440) 2,156,952 ArtPublic Art - Operating 130,771 130,771 130,771 Art in Public Places programming and operationsPublic Art - General program / art 60,000 538,022 (538,022) 60,000 60,000 To purchase sculptures, artwork, art programs and events; remainder is re-appropriated each year to accumulate enough funds. Defer carryover amount to 2021 while keeping annual expense intactPublic Art - Winterfest 30,000 26,094 56,094 56,094 2020: Re-appropriate $24.1K for Winterfest, $2K for damaged ice sculpture reimbursement; Winterfest $30K per yearSeibert Memorial Statue - - - 2019: Pete Seibert Memorial statue- See corresponding community reimbursement aboveArt Space - 37,544 37,544 37,544 2019: Design phase for Ford Park art space- see corresponding donation from East West aboveTotal Art220,771 601,660 (538,022) 284,409 - - 284,409 ContributionsBetty Ford Alpine Garden Support 71,094 71,094 71,094 Annual operating support of the Betty Ford Alpine Gardens; annual increase to follow town's general operating annual increaseEagle River Watershed Support 40,000 40,000 40,000 Annual support of the Eagle River Watershed Council programs Adopt A Trail 5,100 5,100 5,100 Adopt A Trail Council Contribution for trails in or bordering the TownTotal Contributions116,194 - - 116,194 - - 116,194 VRD-Managed Facility ProjectsRecreation Enhancement Account 168,317 373,348 541,665 541,665 2019: Annual rent paid by Vail Recreation District; to be re-invested in asset maintenance ($141,604), Transfer $240K to golf course other ; This amount will not be spent in 2020, but not removing because this account reserve is a term of the lease with VRDGolf Clubhouse - - - 2019: Wood trim repairs ($40K), AC and catering kitchen improvements ($30K); 2022: Wood Trim repairs ($20.2K); 2024: Roof maintenance ($12.8K)Golf Course - Other 494,636 227,873 722,509 722,509 2020: Re-appropriate $227K to complete reconstruction of maintenance building, parking and asphalt repairs, and drainage improvements; 2019: $511K for reconstruction of the golf maintenance buildings, improvements to the 14th and 15th hole bridges. and parking drainage improvements. Parking lot asphalt repairs ($10K), repair asphalt at maintenance building ($3K), replace roof on maintenance building ($161.2K), replace wood trim at maintenance building ($2.7K); 2020: chain link-netting hybrid safety fence ($230K); complete asphalt repairs ($75K); repair wood trim on maintenance building ($25.8K), privacy fence repairs($2.2K), replace roof ($161.2K); 2021:course streambank restoration ($73.8K), maintenance building, HVAC unit ($17.7K), maintenance building heater ($8.9K), maint. building furnace ($9.8M); 2022: VRD shared cost for 1st hole Timber Path planking ($38.0K), asphalt repairs ($3.3K); 2023: Clubhouse walkways($12.4K); Clubhouse drain pans ($18.9K); 2024: Maintenance privacy repairs ($2.5K)Dobson Ice Arena - 161,023 161,023 161,023 2020: Reappropriate to complete pavers and roof repairs ($161K); 2019: Complete pavers and concrete slab replacement ($54K); rock wall repair ($10.5K); roof snow removal contract ($44K); Repair exterior doors ($96K), window repairs ($7K); 2020: Projects delayed to 2021 for results of Civic Center master plan; 2021: Changing Rooms ($78.8), windows replacement ($74.3), heat pumps ($6.3K), restroom remodel ($78.7K), rebuild of electrical system ($144.2K), boiler room upgrades ($55K), steel gate ($14.3K), exterior lighting ($22.9), exterior wood trim ($9.3K); Repairs to exterior doors ($5.5K); exhaust stack repairs ($2.9K); 2023: grading and drainage repairs ($9.3K), rockwall repair ($15K), brick paver repairs ($16.9K), central air upgrades ($12.5K); 2024: Wood trim repairs ($10.4), chemical feed system repairs ($5.6K)13 June 2, 2020 - Page 73 of 772
New Request/AdjustmentProposed 1st COVID-19 2020 2nd COVID-19 20202020 Supplemental Adjustments Amended Supplemental Adjustments AmendedTOWN OF VAIL 2020 AMENDED BUDGETSUMMARY OF REVENUE, EXPENDITURES, AND CHANGES IN FUND BALANCEREAL ESTATE TRANSFER TAX Ford Park / Tennis Center Improvements 91,467 72,000 163,467 163,467 2020: Re-appropriate $72K for replace gutters ($10.0K), Stain wood siding of concessions ($6.0K) and restrooms ($6.0K), restroom remodel (50K); 2020: Repair exterior doors ($9.6K); replace furnace, hot water tank, baseboards ($47.8K), replace windows ($24K); Pickleball Feasibility Study ($10K); 2019: Complete replace gutters ($10.0K), Stain wood siding of concessions ($6.0K) and restrooms ($6.0K), restroom remodel (50K); Athletic Fields - 6,000 6,000 6,000 2020: Re-appropriate for sealcoat and crack fill in parking lot; 2019: Seal coat and crack fill in parking lot ($6K); Gymnastics Center - 258,608 258,608 258,608 2020: Re-appropriate $21K and increase budget by $200K for the installation of a new cooling system; 2019: Installation of cooling system in 2018 ($60K); 2022: Restroom remodel ($42.6K)Total VRD-Managed Facility Projects 754,419 1,098,852 - 1,853,271 - - 1,853,271 Total Expenditures 8,264,660 6,905,104 (4,863,725) 10,306,039 204,000 (233,288) 10,276,751 Other Financing Sources (Uses)Transfer from General Fund - Transfer from Capital Project Fund 3,000 3,000 3,000 Revenue Over (Under) Expenditures (1,665,494) (5,662,560) 4,163,725 (3,164,329) (204,000) 233,288 (3,135,041) Beginning Fund Balance 3,980,987 14,675,979 14,675,979Ending Fund Balance2,315,492$ 11,511,650$ 11,540,938$ 14 June 2, 2020 - Page 74 of 772
Proposed
2020 1st COVID-19 2020 COVID-19 2020
Budget Supplemental Adjustments Amended Adjustments Amended
Revenue
Town of Vail Interagency Charge 3,535,384$ -$ (253,042)$ 3,282,342$ (17,050)$ 3,265,292$
Insurance Reimbursements & Other 10,000 - - 10,000 10,000
Earnings on Investments 7,900 - - 7,900 7,900
Equipment Sales and Trade-ins 154,563 - - 154,563 154,563
Total Revenue 3,707,847 - (253,042) 3,454,805 (17,050) 3,437,755
Expenditures
Salaries & Benefits 1,168,085 - (35,901) 1,132,184 1,132,184
Operating, Maintenance & Contracts 1,624,769 - (162,477) 1,462,292 (17,050) 1,445,242
Capital Outlay 1,002,765 330,727 - 1,333,492 (83,135) 1,250,357
Reflect savings from
vehicle replacement
deferral and cost savings
Total Expenditures 3,795,619 330,727 (198,378) 3,927,968 (100,185) 3,827,783
Revenue Over (Under) Expenditures (87,772) (330,727) (54,664) (473,163) 83,135 (390,028)
Transfer In from General Fund - - - -
Beginning Fund Balance 1,782,613 2,176,524 2,176,524
Ending Fund Balance 1,694,841$ 1,703,361$ 1,786,496$
TOWN OF VAIL 2020 AMENDED BUDGET
SUMMARY OF REVENUE, EXPENDITURES AND CHANGES IN FUND BALANCE
HEAVY EQUIPMENT FUND
15
June 2, 2020 - Page 75 of 772
Proposed
2020 1st COVID-19 2020 COVID-19 2020
Budget Supplemental Adjustments Amended Adjustments Amended
Revenue
E911 Board Revenue 845,030$ -$ 845,030$ 845,030$
Interagency Charges 1,329,952 - 1,329,952 1,329,952
Other State Revenues - - - -
Other County Revenues - - - -
Town of Vail Interagency Charge 661,194 - (66,119) 595,075 66,119 661,194
Earnings on Investments 10,000 - 10,000 10,000
Other - - - -
Total Revenue 2,846,176 - (66,119) 2,780,057 66,119 2,846,176
Expenditures
Salaries & Benefits 2,248,023 - (65,961) 2,182,062 2,182,062
Operating, Maintenance & Contracts 497,003 20,052 (49,700) 467,355 49,700 517,055
Capital Outlay - 539,948 539,948 539,948
Total Expenditures 2,745,026 560,000 (115,661) 3,189,365 49,700 3,239,065
Revenue Over (Under) Expenditures 101,150 (560,000) 49,542 (409,308) 16,419 (392,889)
Transfer In from General Fund - - - -
Beginning Fund Balance 1,345,121 417,435 1,788,950 1,788,950
Ending Fund Balance 1,446,271$ 1,379,642$ 1,396,061$
TOWN OF VAIL 2020 AMENDED BUDGET
SUMMARY OF REVENUE, EXPENDITURES, AND CHANGES IN FUND BALANCE
DISPATCH SERVICES FUND
16
June 2, 2020 - Page 76 of 772
Ordinance No. 7, Series of 2020
ORDINANCE NO. 7
SERIES OF 2020
AN ORDINANCE MAKING BUDGET ADJUSTMENTS TO THE TOWN OF VAIL GENERAL
FUND, CAPITAL PROJECTS FUND, REAL ESTATE TRANSFER TAX FUND, MARKETING
FUND, DISPATCH SERVICES FUND, AND HEAVY EQUIPMENT FUND, OF THE 2020
BUDGET FOR THE TOWN OF VAIL, COLORADO; AND AUTHORIZING THE SAID
ADJUSTMENTS AS SET FORTH HEREIN; AND SETTING FORTH DETAILS IN REGARD
THERETO.
WHEREAS, contingencies have arisen during the fiscal year 2020 which could not have
been reasonably foreseen or anticipated by the Town Council at the time it enacted Ordinance No.
13, Series of 2019, adopting the 2020 Budget and Financial Plan for the Town of Vail, Colorado;
and,
WHEREAS, the Town Manager has certified to the Town Council that sufficient funds are
available to discharge the appropriations referred to herein, not otherwise reflected in the Budget, in
accordance with Section 9.10(a) of the Charter of the Town of Vail; and,
WHEREAS, in order to accomplish the foregoing, the Town Council finds that it should make
certain budget adjustments as set forth herein.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED, BY THE TOWN COUNCIL OF THE TOWN OF
VAIL, COLORADO that:
1. Pursuant to Section 9.10(a) of the Charter of the Town of Vail, Colorado, the Town
Council hereby makes the following budget adjustments for the 2020 Budget and Financial Plan for
the Town of Vail, Colorado, and authorizes the following budget adjustments:
General Fund $ (1,700,657)
Capital Projects Fund (4,594,300)
Real Estate Transfer Tax Fund (29,288)
Dispatch Services Fund 49,700
Marketing Fund (864,365)
Heavy Equipment Fund (100,185)
Interfund Transfers 881,415
Total ($ 6,357,680)
2. If any part, section, subsection, sentence, clause or phrase of this ordinance is for any
reason held to be invalid, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions of this
ordinance; and the Town Council hereby declares it would have passed this ordinance, and each
June 2, 2020 - Page 77 of 772
Ordinance No. 7, Series of 2020
part, section, subsection, sentence, clause or phrase thereof, regardless of the fact that any one or
more parts, sections, subsections, sentences, clauses or phrases be declared invalid.
3. The Town Council hereby finds, determines, and declares that this ordinance is
necessary and proper for the health, safety, and welfare of the Town of Vail and the inhabitants
thereof.
4. The repeal or the repeal and reenactment of any provision of the Municipal Code of
the Town of Vail as provided in this ordinance shall not affect any right which has accrued, any duty
imposed, any violation that occurred prior to the effective date hereof, any prosecution commenced,
nor any other action or proceedings as commenced under or by virtue of the provision repealed or
repealed and reenacted. The repeal of any provision hereby shall not revive any provision or any
ordinance previously repealed or superseded unless expressly stated herein.
5. All bylaws, orders, resolutions, and ordinances, or parts thereof, inconsistent
herewith are repealed to the extent only of such inconsistency. This repealer shall not be construed
to revise any bylaw, order, resolution, or ordinance, or part thereof, theretofore repealed.
INTRODUCED, READ, APPROVED, AND ORDERED PUBLISHED ONCE IN FULL ON
FIRST READING this 2nd day of June, 2020, and a public hearing shall be held on this Ordinance
on the 16th day of June, 2020, at the regular meeting of the Town Council of the Town of Vail,
Colorado, in the Municipal Building of the town.
_______________________________
Dave Chapin, Mayor
ATTEST:
___________________________
Tammy Nagel, Town Clerk
READ AND APPROVED ON SECOND READING AND ORDERED PUBLISHED IN FULL this
16th day of June.
_____________________________
June 2, 2020 - Page 78 of 772
Ordinance No. 7, Series of 2020
Dave Chapin, Mayor
ATTEST:
________________________________
Tammy Nagel, Town Clerk
June 2, 2020 - Page 79 of 772
VA I L TO W N C O UNC I L A G E ND A ME MO
I T E M /T O P I C: Ordinance No. 2, S eries of 2020, F irst Reading, An ordinance for the rezoning of
a portion of the property located at 366 Hanson Ranch Road/L ot 1, 366 Hanson Ranch Road
S ubdivision. The proposed rezoning would change the Z one District from A griculture and Open
S pace (A) District to the P ublic Accommodation (PA) District and setting forth details in regard
thereto. (P E C19-0022)
P RE S E NT E R(S ): J onathan S pence, Planning Manager
AC T IO N RE Q UE S T E D O F C O UNC I L: T he Vail Town Council shall approve, approve with
modifications, or deny Ordinance No. 2, Series of 2020, upon first reading.
B AC K G RO UND: The applicant, VailP oint L L C, represented by Sarah J B aker P C., is
requesting a zone district boundary amendment, pursuant to S ection 12-3-7, Amendment, Vail
Town Code, to allow for the rezoning of a portion of the property located at 366 Hanson Ranch
Road/L ot 1, 366 Hanson Ranch Road S ubdivision. The proposed rezoning would change the
Zone District from Agriculture and Open S pace (A) District to the P ublic Accommodation (PA)
District.
S TAF F RE C O M M E ND AT IO N: T he P lanning and E nvironmental Commission held a public
hearing on the zone district boundary amendment on March 9, 2020 where a recommendation for
approval was forwarded to the Vail Town Council by a vote of 4-2 (Gillette and P erez opposed).
AT TAC H ME N TS:
Description
Staff Memorandum
Staff Presentation
Attachment A. Ordinance No. 2, Series of 2020
Attachment B. Staff Memorandum, P E C19-0022, March 9, 2020 with attachments
Attachment C. P E C Minutes, March 9, 2020
Attachment D. Public Comment received prior to May 27, 2020
June 2, 2020 - Page 80 of 772
TO: Vail Town Council
FROM: Community Development Department
DATE: June 2, 2020
SUBJECT: First reading of Ordinance No. 2, Series of 2020, an ordinance for the rezoning
of a portion of the property located at 366 Hanson Ranch Road/Lot 1, 366
Hanson Ranch Road Subdivision. The proposed rezoning would change the
Zone District from Agriculture and Open Space (A) District to the Public
Accommodation (PA) District and setting forth details in regard thereto.
(PEC19-0022)
Applicant: VailPoint LLC, represented by Sarah J Baker PC
Planner: Jonathan Spence
I. SUMMARY
The applicant, VailPoint LLC, represented by Sarah J Baker PC., is requesting a zone district
boundary amendment, pursuant to Section 12-3-7, Amendment, Vail Town Code, to allow for
the rezoning of a portion of the property located at 366 Hanson Ranch Road/Lot 1, 366
Hanson Ranch Road Subdivision. The proposed rezoning would change the Zone District
from Agriculture and Open Space (A) District to the Public Accommodation (PA) District.
The Planning and Environmental Commission held a public hearing on the zone district
boundary amendment on March 9, 2020 where a recommendation for approval was
forwarded to the Vail Town Council by a vote of 4-2 (Gillette and Perez opposed).
Please find the staff memorandum to the PEC, with attachments included as Attachment B,
the minutes from the March 9th meeting (Attachment C) and public comments received
(Attachment D), attached to this report.
II. ACTION REQUESTED OF THE TOWN COUNCIL
The Vail Town Council shall approve, approve with m odif ications, or deny Ordinance
No. 2, Series of 2020, upon first reading.
III. BACKGROUND
In 1963, Vail Associates conveyed the entirety of Lot d, Block 2, Vail Village First Filing (Lot
d) to Christiania-at-Vail, Inc. (VailPoint’s predecessor in title). Lot d is comprised of the
June 2, 2020 - Page 81 of 772
Tow n of Vail Page 2
present-day Christiania at Vail Lodge, the Chateau Christian Condominiums, and the single-
family residence at 366 Hanson Ranch Road.
Over time and prior to the enactment of subdivision regulations in the Town, Christiania- at-
Vail, Inc. severed portions of Lot d. They did so by recording deeds that described these
smaller parcels by metes and bounds description. These deeds effectively served to
subdivide Lot d, although not through the process that would be required today. The property
at 366 Hanson Ranch Road is one of these severed parcels.
The property has an existing residence that was built in the early 1960s, prior to the
incorporation of Vail as a Town in 1966. It is located between the Christiania at Vail Lodge
and Chateau Christian Condominiums to the west, and the Tivoli Lodge to the east. The land
to the south of the home and to the east of the home (between the home and the Tivoli
Lodge) is owned by Vail Resorts. The land to the east of the home is Lot d-1, Block 2, Vail
Village Fifth Filing. The lands south of the home are a part of Tract E, Vail Village Fifth Filing.
For as long as 50 years, the existing property and the proposed properties subject to the
rezoning have been surrounded by a fence. For unknown reasons, the fence was not built on
the deeded property line and instead encloses a larger area, both to the south and east. All
previous owners have treated the fenced area as an integral part of the property and have
landscaped and maintained it consistent with the remainder of the property.
In January 2018, the Eagle County District Court entered an Order and Decree Quieting Title
(Court Order) to this area outside the deed boundary but inside the fence. Recognizing the
historic conditions, the Court Order declared VailPoint to be the fee simple owner of all the
lands within the fence.
The intent of this application is to complete the process started by the Court Order. The re-
zoning application seeks to rezone the property subject to the Court Order from Agriculture
and Open Space (A) to Public Accommodation (PA), consistent with the existing zoning of
the remainder of the lot. This action will also ensure that all lands within the subject property
have the same zoning designation.
On June 25, 2018 the PEC approved an Exemption Plat pursuant to Section 13-12-3 that
consolidated all of the property located within the historic fence into one lot, Lot 1 of the 366
Hanson Ranch Road Subdivision. The unintended consequence of the approval without a
change in the zoning of the property is a lot with multiple zonings.
On May 13, 2019 a worksession with the PEC was held to discuss a proposed Exterior
Alteration to replace the existing structure with a new lodge. The rezoning of the property
was also discussed.
On July 8, 2019 a public hearing on the rezoning was held. After significant discussion, the
application was tabled to a future date to give the applicant the opportunity to present the
rezoning request in tandem with application to replace the existing structure with a new
lodge.
June 2, 2020 - Page 82 of 772
Tow n of Vail Page 3
IV. REVIEW CRITERIA
Before acting on an application for a zone district boundary amendment, the planning and
environmental commission and town council shall consider the following factors with respect
to the requested zone district boundary amendment:
1. The extent to which the zone district amendments are consistent with all the
applicable elements of the adopted goals, objectives and policies outlined in the Vail
comprehensive plan and is compatible with the development objectives of the town.
The Vail Land Use Plan designation and applicable planning document for the subject
property is the Vail Village Master Plan. The Public Accommodation Zone district designation
for this property is consistent with the adjacent parcels and is consistent with the goals,
objectives and policies outlined in the Vail Village Master Plan.
The lands within the fence have long been perceived as a part of the existing property. The
amendment of the zone district boundaries to conform to the fenced area will have little or no
overall effect upon the larger goals of the community. The amendment will bring the property
into greater conformance with the development standards of the Public Accommodation
Zone District including minimum lot size, setbacks, site coverage and landscaping.
The proposed rezoning is supported by the Goals #1 and #2 of Vail Village Master Plan that
encourage high quality redevelopment and the importance of the tourist industry to the health
and vitality of the community.
Goal #4 is relative to open space and is relevant to the zone district boundary amendment
request. Because it was within the fence, the 5,380 square feet of area proposed for zone
change has likely not been a part of the perceived open space corridor behind or adjacent to
the home. The Vail Village Master Plan was originally adopted in 1990. The area proposed
for re-zoning has been enclosed by a fence, landscaped as part of the yard and used
exclusively and privately by the owners of the home since well prior to, and since, 1990. The
re-zoning of this land will not impact the historic area of perceived open space that exists in
this area. The lands outside of the fence will remain zoned as Agricultural and Open Space.
Staff finds this criterion to be met.
2. The extent to which the zone district amendments are suitable with the existing
and potential land uses on the site and existing and potential surrounding land uses
as set out in the town's adopted planning documents.
The zone district boundary amendment is both suitable and compatible with the existing and
proposed land uses on the site and the existing and potential surrounding land uses. The
rezoning will bring the property into greater conformance with the development standards of
the Public Accommodation Zone District including minimum lot size, setbacks, site coverage
and landscaping that will assist in redevelopment.
June 2, 2020 - Page 83 of 772
Tow n of Vail Page 4
As the rezoning follows the historical fence boundary, no impacts on surrounding land uses
are anticipated.
Staff finds this criterion to be met.
3. The extent to which the zone district amendments present a harmonious,
convenient, workable relationship among land uses consistent with municipal
development objectives.
The proposed zone district amendments will create a cohesive land use scheme consistent
with the development objectives of the town, namely orderly development and
redevelopment under a unified zoning designation.
Staff finds this criterion to be met.
4. The extent to which the zone district amendments provide for the growth of an
orderly viable community and does not constitute spot zoning as the amendment
serves the best interests of the community as a whole.
The zone district boundary amendment proposes to recognize the lot boundary correction
and maintains the Public Accommodation zoning of the 366 Hanson Ranch Road property.
This zone district designation is consistent with the Vail Village Master Plan and does not
constitute spot zoning. The application fosters order in the sense that it aligns zone district
and subdivision boundaries.
Staff finds this criterion to be met.
5. The extent to which the zone district amendments result in adverse or beneficial
impacts on the natural environment, including, but not limited to, water quality, air
quality, noise, vegetation, riparian corridors, hillsides and other desirable natural
features.
The proposed rezoning will not result in adverse impacts to the natural environment. Future
developments on the reconfigured and rezoned parcels will be required to adhere to all
applicable environmental standards during development review, construction and facility
operation.
Staff finds this criterion to be met.
6. The extent to which the zone district amendments are consistent with the
purpose statement of the proposed zone district.
The proposed rezoning is consistent with the purpose statement of the Public
Accommodation (PA) Districts and future development on the property will also be required
to be compatible with its intent.
June 2, 2020 - Page 84 of 772
Tow n of Vail Page 5
Staff finds this criterion to be met.
7. The extent to which the zone district amendments demonstrate how conditions
have changed since the zoning designation of the subject property was adopted and
is no longer appropriate.
The proposed zone district boundary amendment recognizes the historical boundary of the
property. Maintaining the existing zoning designation would be inappropriate as it is
problematic to have an individual property with multiple zone designations.
Staff finds this criterion to be met.
8. Such other factors and criteria as the commission and/or council deem applicable
to the proposed rezoning.
V. RECOMMENDED MOTIONS
Should the Vail Town Council choose to approve Ordinance No. 2 , Series of 2020, upon first
reading, the Planning and Environmental Commission recommends the Council pass the
f ollowing motion:
“The Vail Town Council approves, on first reading, Ordinance No. 2, Series of 2020, an
ordinance for the rezoning of a portion of the property located at 366 Hanson Ranch
Road/Lot 1, 366 Hanson Ranch Road Subdivision. The proposed rezoning would
change the Zone District from Agriculture and Open Space (A) District to the Public
Accommodation (PA) District and setting forth details in regard thereto.”
Should the Vail Town Council choose to approve Ordinance No. 2 Series of 2020, the
Planning and Environmental Co mmission recommends the Council m ake the f ollowing
findings:
“Based upon the review of the criteria outlined in Sections VIII of the Staff memorandum
to the Planning and Environmental Commission dated March 9, 2020, and the evidence
and testimon y presented, the Vail Town Council finds:
1. That the amendments are consistent with the adopted goals, objectives and
policies outlined in the Vail comprehensive plan and compatible with the
development objectives of the town;
2. That the amendments are compatible with and suitable to adjacent uses and
appropriate for the surrounding ar eas; and,
3. That the amendments promote the health, safety, morals, and general welfare of
the town and promote 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
June 2, 2020 - Page 85 of 772
Tow n of Vail Page 6
quality.”
Alternative Motion
Should the Vail Town Council choose to deny Ordinance No. 2, Series of 2020, upon first
reading, the Planning and Environmental Commission recommends the Council pass the
following motion:
“The Vail Town Council denies, on first reading, Ordinance No. 2, Series of 2020, an
ordinance for the rezoning of a portion of the property located at 366 Hanson Ranch
Road/Lot 1, 366 Hanson Ranch Road Subdivision. The proposed rezoning would
change the Zone District from Agriculture and Open Space (A) District to the Public
Accommodation (PA) District and setting forth details in regard thereto.”
“This denial results from the application’s noncompliance with required criterion Number
1, specifically a lack of consistency with the Vail Village Master Plan Goal No.4 to
preserve existing open space areas and expand green space opportunities.”
Should the Vail Town Council choose to deny Ordinance No. 2 Series of 2020, the following
findings are recommended:
“Based upon the review of the criteria outlined in Section VIII of the Staff me morandu m
to the Planning and Environmental Co mmission dated March 9, 2020, and the evidence
and testimon y presented, the Vail Town Council finds:
1. That the amendments are not consistent with the adopted goals, objectives
and policies outlined in the Vail comprehensive plan and compatible with the
development objectives of the town;
2. That the amendments are not compatible with and suitable to adjacent uses
and appropriate for the surrounding areas; and,
3. That the amendments do not promote the health, safety, morals, and general
welfare of the town and promote 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.”
VI. ATTACHMENTS
A. Ordinance No. 2, Series of 2020
B. Staff Memorandum, PEC19-0022, March 9, 2020 with attachments
C. PEC Minutes, March 9, 2020
D. Public Comment received prior to May 27, 2020
June 2, 2020 - Page 86 of 772
PRESENTATION BY Jonathan Spence, AICPPlanning ManagerOrdinance No. 2, Series of 2020366 Hanson Ranch RoadJune 2, 2020 - Page 87 of 772
Vicinity MapTown of Vail | Ordinance No. 3, Series of 2020| vailgov.comJune 2, 2020 - Page 88 of 772
Portions of Lot 1, 366 Hanson Ranch Road Subdivision, formerly known as parts of Lot d-1 and Tract E, to be rezoned from Agriculture and Open Space (A) District to the Public Accommodation (PA) District.Town of Vail | Ordinance No. 3, Series of 2020 | vailgov.comJune 2, 2020 - Page 89 of 772
Project HistoryTown of Vail | Ordinance No. 3, Series of 2020 | vailgov.com• For as long as 50 years, the existing property and the proposed properties subject to the rezoning have been surrounded by a fence. For unknown reasons, the fence was not built on the deeded property line and instead encloses a larger area, both to the south and east. All previous owners have treated the fenced area as an integral part of the property and have landscaped and maintained it consistent with the remainder of the property.• In January, 2018, the Eagle County District Court entered an Order and Decree Quieting Title (Court Order) to this area outside the deed boundary but inside the fence. Recognizing the historic conditions, the Court Order declared VailPoint to be the fee simple owner of all the lands within the fence.June 2, 2020 - Page 90 of 772
Project HistoryTown of Vail | Ordinance No. 3, Series of 2020 | vailgov.com• On June 25, 2018 the PEC approved an Exemption Plat pursuant to Section 13-12-3 that consolidated all of the property located within the historic fence into one lot, Lot 1 of the 366 Hanson Ranch Road Subdivision. The unintended consequence of the approval without a change in the zoning of the property is a lot with multiple zonings. A rezoning was proposed at this time but deadlocked (3-3) with the Commission.• On May 13, 2019 a worksession with the PEC was held to discuss a proposed Exterior Alteration to replace the existing structure with a new lodge. The rezoning of the property was also discussed. • On July 8, 2019 a public hearing on the rezoning was held with the PEC. After significant discussion, the application was tabled to a future date to give the applicant the opportunity to present the rezoning request in tandem with an application to replace the existing structure with a new lodge. June 2, 2020 - Page 91 of 772
Project HistoryTown of Vail | Ordinance No. 3, Series of 2020 | vailgov.com• The Planning and Environmental Commission held a public hearing on the zone district boundary amendment on March 9, 2020 where a recommendation for approval was forwarded to the Vail Town Council by a vote of 4-2 (Gillette and Perez opposed). June 2, 2020 - Page 92 of 772
Rezoning CriteriaTown of Vail | Ordinance No. 3, Series of 2020 | vailgov.com(1) The extent to which the zone district amendment is consistent with all the applicable elements of the adopted goals, objectives and policies outlined in the Vail comprehensive plan and is compatible with the development objectives of the town; and(2) The extent to which the zone district amendment is suitable with the existing and potential land uses on the site and existing and potential surrounding land uses as set out in the town's adopted planning documents; and(3) The extent to which the zone district amendment presents a harmonious, convenient, workable relationship among land uses consistent with municipal development objectives; andJune 2, 2020 - Page 93 of 772
Rezoning CriteriaTown of Vail | Ordinance No. 3, Series of 2020 | vailgov.com(4) The extent to which the zone district amendment provides for the growth of an orderly viable community and does not constitute spot zoning as the amendment serves the best interests of the community as a whole; and(5) The extent to which the zone district amendment results in adverse or beneficial impacts on the natural environment, including, but not limited to, water quality, air quality, noise, vegetation, riparian corridors, hillsides and other desirable natural features; and(6) The extent to which the zone district amendment is consistent with the purpose statement of the proposed zone district; andJune 2, 2020 - Page 94 of 772
Rezoning CriteriaTown of Vail | Ordinance No. 3, Series of 2020 | vailgov.com(7) The extent to which the zone district amendment demonstrates how conditions have changed since the zoning designation of the subject property was adopted and is no longer appropriate; and(8) Such other factors and criteria as the commission and/or council deem applicable to the proposed rezoning.June 2, 2020 - Page 95 of 772
Thank youJune 2, 2020 - Page 96 of 772
Ordinance No. 2, Series 2020
- 1 -
ORDINANCE NO. 2
SERIES OF 2020
AN ORDINANCE FOR A ZONE DISTRICT BOUNDARY AMENDMENT, PURSUANT
TO SECTION 12-3-7, AMENDMENT, VAIL TOWN CODE, TO ALLOW FOR A
REZONING OF TWO PORTIONS OF LOT 1, 366 HANSON RANCH ROAD
SUBDIVISION; THE REZONING WILL CHANGE THE ZONE DISTRICT FROM
AGRICULTURE AND OPEN SPACE (A) DISTRICT TO THE PUBLIC
ACCOMMODATION (PA) DISTRICT
WHEREAS, the Town of Vail, in the County of Eagle and State of Colorado (the
“Town”), is a home rule Town duly existing under the Constitution and laws of the State
of Colorado and its home rule charter (the “Charter”);
WHEREAS, the members of the Town Council of the Town (the “Council”) have
been duly elected and qualified;
WHEREAS, Section 12-3-7, Amendment, Vail Town Code, sets forth the
procedures for amending a zone district boundary;
WHEREAS, on August 7, 1973, the Town adopted Ordinance No. 8, Series of
1973, to establish comprehensive zoning regulations;
WHEREAS, the purpose of the amendment is to establish a development site with
uniform zoning for the property known as 366 Hanson ranch Road;
WHEREAS, on March 9, 2020 the Town’s Planning and Environmental
Commission (the “PEC”) held a public hearing on the zone district boundary amendment
to rezone the property described and depicted in Exhibit A, attached hereto and made a
part hereof by this reference, from the Agiculture and Open Speace (A) District to the
Public Accommodation (PA) District;
WHEREAS, on March 9, 2020 the PEC l Commission forwarded a
recommendation of approval to the Council for the zone district boundary amendment;
WHEREAS, the Council finds and determines that the amendment is consistent
with the applicable elements of the adopted goals, objectives and policies outlined in the
Vail Comprehensive Plan and is compatible with the development objectives of the Town;
WHEREAS, the Council finds and determines that the amendment to the Town
Code furthers the general and specific purposes of the Town’s zoning regulations; and
WHEREAS, the Council finds and determines that the amendment promotes the
health, safety, morals, and general welfare of the town and promote 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
June 2, 2020 - Page 97 of 772
Ordinance No. 2, Series 2020
- 2 -
of the highest quality.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED, BY THE TOWN COUNCIL OF THE
TOWN OF VAIL, COLORADO THAT:
Section 1. This ordinance adopts the following zone district boundary amendment
as further described in Exhibit A: Agriculture and Open Space (A) District to the Public
Accommodation (PA) District.
Section 2. Pursuant to Section 12-3-7, Amendment, Vail Town Code, and the
evidence and testimony presented in consideration of this ordinance, the Vail Town
Council finds and determines the follows:
a. The zone district boundary amendment is consistent with the adopted goals,
objectives and policies outlined in the Vail comprehensive plan and compatible
with the development objectives of the Town;
b. The zone district boundary amendment is compatible with and suitable to
adjacent uses and appropriate for the surrounding areas;
c. The zone district boundary amendment promotes the health, safety, morals, and
general welfare of the Town and promotes the coordinated and harmonious
development of the town in a manner that conserves and enhances its natural
environment and its established character as a resort and residential community
of the highest quality: and
d. This ordinance is necessary and proper for the health, safety and welfare of the
Town and the inhabitants thereof.
Section 3. If any part, section, subsection, sentence, clause or phrase of this
ordinance is for any reason held to be invalid, such decision shall not effect the validity of
the remaining portions of this ordinance; and the Council hereby declares it would have
passed this ordinance, and each part, section, subsection, sentence, clause or phrase
thereof, regardless of the fact that any one or more parts, sections, subsections,
sentences, clauses or phrases be declared invalid.
Section 4. The amendment of any provision of the Town Code as provided in
this ordinance shall not affect any right which has accrued, any duty imposed, any
violation that occurred prior to the effective date hereof, any prosecution commenced, nor
any other action or proceeding as commenced under or by virtue of the provision
amended. The amendment of any provision hereby shall not revive any provision or any
ordinance previously repealed or superseded unless expressly stated herein.
Section 5. All bylaws, orders, resolutions and ordinances, or parts thereof,
inconsistent herewith are repealed to the extent only of such inconsistency. This repealer
shall not be construed to revise any bylaw, order, resolution or ordinance, or part thereof,
June 2, 2020 - Page 98 of 772
Ordinance No. 2, Series 2020
- 3 -
theretofore repealed.
INTRODUCED, READ ON FIRST READING, APPROVED, AND ORDERED
PUBLISHED ONCE IN FULL ON FIRST READING this 2nd day of June, 2020, and a
public hearing for second reading of this Ordinance set for the 16th day of June, 2020 in
the Council Chambers of the Vail Municipal Building, Vail, Colorado.
_______________________
Dave Chapin, Town Mayor
ATTEST:
_________________________
Tammy Nagel, Town Clerk
READ AND APPROVED ON SECOND READING AND ORDERED PUBLISHED
this 16th day of June, 2020.
_____________________________
Dave Chapin, Town Mayor
ATTEST:
____________________________
Tammy Nagel, Town Clerk
June 2, 2020 - Page 99 of 772
Ordinance No. 2, Series 2020
- 4 -
Exhibit A
Portions of Lot 1, 366 Hanson Ranch Road Subdivision, formerly known as
parts of Lot d-1 and Tract E, to be rezoned from Agriculture and Open Space
(A) District to the Public Accommodation (PA) District.
June 2, 2020 - Page 100 of 772
TO: Planning and Environmental Commission
FROM: Community Development Department
DATE: March 9, 2020
SUBJECT: A request for a recommendation to the Vail Town Council for a zone
district boundary amendment, pursuant to Section 12-3-7, Amendment,
Vail Town Code, to allow for the rezoning of a portion of the property
located at 366 Hanson Ranch Road/Lot 1, 366 Hanson Ranch Road
Subdivision. The proposed rezoning would change the Zone District from
Agriculture and Open Space (A) District to the Public Accommodation
(PA) District and setting forth details in regard thereto. (PEC19-0022)
Applicant: VailPoint LLC, represented by Sarah J Baker PC
Planner: Jonathan Spence
I. SUMMARY
The applicant, VailPoint LLC, represented by Sarah J Baker PC., is requesting a
recommendation to the Vail Town Council for a zone district boundary amendment,
pursuant to Section 12-3-7, Amendment, Vail Town Code, to allow for the rezoning of a
portion of the property located at 366 Hanson Ranch Road/Lot 1, 366 Hanson Ranch
Road Subdivision. The proposed rezoning would change the Zone District from
Agriculture and Open Space (A) District to the Public Accommodation (PA) District.
Based upon Staff’s review of the criteria outlined in Section VII of this memorandum and
the evidence and testimony presented, the Community Development Department
recommends the Planning and Environmental Commission forward a
recommendation of approval to the Vail Town Council of this application, subject to
the findings noted in Section VIII of this memorandum. A vicinity map (Attachment A),
June 2, 2020 - Page 101 of 772
Town of Vail Page 2
the applicants’ narrative (Attachment B), PEC minutes from the May 13, 2019
worksession (Attachment C), PEC minutes from the July 8, 2019 public hearing
(Attachment D), a letter of opposition from the Vail Homeowner’s Association
(Attachment E) and a letter of opposition from Frederick Wyman (Attachment F) are
attached for review.
An identical application (PEC18-0022) was reviewed by the Planning and
Environmental Commission (PEC) in June of 2018. At that time, the PEC was unable to
forward a recommendation due to the commissioners deadlocked 3-3 vote. The
applicant chose to withdraw the application at that time and not proceed to the Town
Council. As this former application was withdrawn, this application (PEC19-0022) is
treated as a new application with the 2018 hearing having no bearing.
II. DESCRIPTION OF REQUEST
The applicant, VailPoint LLC, represented by Sarah J Baker PC., is requesting a
recommendation to the Vail Town Council for a zone district boundary amendment,
pursuant to Section 12-3-7, Amendment, Vail Town Code to allow for the rezoning of a
portion of the property located at 366 Hanson Ranch Road /Lot 1, 366 Hanson Ranch
Road Subdivision. The proposed rezoning would change the Zone District from
Agriculture and Open Space (A) District to the Public Accommodation (PA) District for
those portions of the lot that were formerly part of Lot d-1 and Tract E. The total land
area proposed to be rezoned is 5,380 square feet.
The two portions of the lot are located within the historic fence boundary of the property,
as shown on the exhibit below.
June 2, 2020 - Page 102 of 772
Town of Vail Page 3
III. BACKGROUND
In 1963, Vail Associates conveyed the entirety of Lot d, Block 2, Vail Village First Filing
(Lot d) to Christiania-at-Vail, Inc. (VailPoint’s predecessor in title). Lot d is comprised of
the present-day Christiania at Vail Lodge, the Chateau Christian Condominiums, and
the single-family residence at 366 Hanson Ranch Road.
Over time and apparently prior to enactment of subdivision regulations in the Town
Christiania- at-Vail, Inc. severed portions of Lot d. They did so by recording deeds that
described these smaller parcels by metes and bounds description. These deeds
effectively served to subdivide Lot d, although not through the process that would be
required today. The property at 366 Hanson Ranch Road is one of these severed
parcels.
The property has an existing residence that was built in the early 1960s, prior to the
incorporation of Vail as a Town in 1966. It is located between the Christiania at Vail
Lodge and Chateau Christian Condominiums to the west, and the Tivoli Lodge to the
east. The land to the south of the home and to the east of the home (between the home
and the Tivoli Lodge) is owned by Vail Resorts. The land to the east of the home is Lot
d-1, Block 2, Vail Village Fifth Filing. The lands south of the home are a part of Tract E,
Vail Village Fifth Filing.
For as long as 50 years, the existing property and the proposed properties subject to
the rezoning have been surrounded by a fence. For unknown reasons, the fence was
not built on the deeded property line and instead encloses a larger area, both to the
south and east. All previous owners have treated the fenced area as an integral part of
the property and have landscaped and maintained it consistent with the remainder of
the property.
In January, 2018, the Eagle County District Court entered an Order and Decree
Quieting Title (Court Order) to this area outside the deed boundary but inside the fence.
Recognizing the historic conditions, the Court Order declared VailPoint to be the fee
simple owner of all the lands within the fence.
The intent of this application is to complete the process started by the Court Order. The
re-zoning application seeks to rezone the property subject to the Court Order from
Agriculture and Open Space (A) to Public Accommodation (PA), consistent with the
existing zoning of the remainder of the lot. This action will also ensure that all lands
within the subject property have the same zoning designation.
On June 25, 2018 the PEC approved an Exemption Plat pursuant to Section 13-12-3
that consolidated all of the property located within the historic fence into one lot, Lot 1 of
the 366 Hanson Ranch Road Subdivision. The unintended consequence of the approval
without a change in the zoning of the property is a lot with multiple zonings.
June 2, 2020 - Page 103 of 772
Town of Vail Page 4
On May 13, 2019 a worksession with the PEC was held to discuss a proposed Exterior
Alteration to replace the existing structure with a new lodge. The rezoning of the
property was also discussed. The minutes from this worksession are included as
Attachment C.
On July 8, 2019 a public hearing on the rezoning was held. After significant discussion,
the application was tabled to a future date to give the applicant the opportunity to
present the rezoning request in tandem with application to replace the existing structure
with a new lodge. The minutes from this meeting are included as Attachment D.
IV. APPLICABLE PLANNING DOCUMENTS
Staff believes that following provisions of the Vail Land Use Plan, the Vail Village Master
Plan and the Vail Town Code are relevant to the review of this proposal:
TITLE 12: ZONING REGULATIONS, VAIL TOWN CODE
Article A. Public Accommodation (PA) District (in part)
12-7A-1: PURPOSE:
The public accommodation district is intended to provide sites for lodges and residential
accommodations for visitors, together with such public and semipublic facilities and
limited professional offices, medical facilities, private recreation, commercial/retail and
related visitor oriented uses as may appropriately be located within the same zone
district and compatible with adjacent land uses. The public accommodation 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
permitted 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. (Ord. 29(2005) § 24: Ord. 23(1999) § 1:
Ord. 30(1977) § 7: Ord. 8(1973) § 7.100)
12-7A-2: PERMITTED USES:
The following uses shall be permitted in the PA district:
Automated teller machines (ATMs) exterior to a building.
Employee housing units, as further regulated by chapter 13 of this title.
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. (Ord. 12(2008) § 11)
June 2, 2020 - Page 104 of 772
Town of Vail Page 5
12-7A-3: CONDITIONAL USES:
The following conditional uses shall be permitted in the PA 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.
Communications antennas and appurtenant equipment.
Fractional fee club units, as further regulated by subsection 12-16-7A8 of this title.
Healthcare facilities.
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 main structure or structures on the site.
Major arcades.
Private clubs and civic, cultural and fraternal organizations.
Private parking structures.
Private unstructured parking.
Professional and business offices.
Public and private schools.
Public buildings, grounds and facilities.
Public parking structures.
Public parks and recreational facilities.
Public transportation terminals.
Public unstructured parking.
Public utility and public service uses.
Religious institutions.
Ski lifts and tows.
Theaters and convention facilities. (Ord. 12(2008) § 11)
June 2, 2020 - Page 105 of 772
Town of Vail Page 6
12-7A-4: ACCESSORY USES:
The following accessory uses shall be permitted in the PA district:
Home occupations, subject to issuance of a home occupation permit in accordance
with the provisions of section 12-14-12 of this title.
Meeting rooms.
Minor arcades.
Swimming pools, tennis courts, patios, or other recreation facilities customarily
incidental to permitted lodge uses.
Other uses customarily incidental and accessory to permitted or conditional uses, and
necessary for the operation thereof. (Ord. 29(2005) § 24: Ord. 23(1999) § 1: Ord.
6(1982) § 8(b): Ord. 8(1973) § 7.400)
12-7A-5: LOT AREA AND SITE DIMENSIONS:
The minimum lot or site area shall be ten thousand (10,000) square feet of buildable
area and each site shall have a minimum frontage of thirty feet (30'). Each site shall be
of a size and shape capable of enclosing a square area eighty feet (80') on each side
within its boundaries. (Ord. 23(1999) § 1: Ord. 12(1978) § 3)
12-7A-6: SETBACKS:
In the PA 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 12-7A-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.
B. Proposed building setbacks comply with applicable elements of the Vail Village urban
design guide plan and design considerations.
C. Proposed building setbacks will provide adequate availability of light, air and open
space.
D. Proposed building setbacks will provide a compatible relationship with buildings and
uses on adjacent properties.
June 2, 2020 - Page 106 of 772
Town of Vail Page 7
E. Proposed building setbacks will result in creative design solutions or other public
benefits that could not otherwise be achieved by conformance with prescribed setback
standards. (Ord. 29(2005) § 24: Ord. 23(1999) § 1: Ord. 50(1978) § 2)
12-7A-7: HEIGHT:
For a flat roof 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').
(Ord. 23(1999) § 1: Ord. 37(1980) § 2)
12-7A-8: DENSITY CONTROL:
Up to one hundred fifty (150) square feet of gross residential floor area (GRFA) may be
permitted for each one hundred (100) square feet of buildable site area. Final
determination of allowable gross residential floor area shall be made by the planning
and environmental commission in accordance with section 12-7A-12 of this article.
Specifically, in determining allowable gross residential floor area the planning and
environmental commission shall make a finding that proposed gross residential floor
area is in conformance with applicable elements of the Vail Village urban design guide
plan and design considerations. Total density shall not exceed twenty five (25) dwelling
units per acre of buildable site area. For the purposes of calculating density, employee
housing units, accommodation units and fractional fee club units shall not be counted
towards density.
A dwelling unit in a multiple-family building may include one attached accommodation
unit no larger than one-third (1/3) of the total floor area of the dwelling. (Ord. 29(2005) §
24: Ord. 5(2003) § 4: Ord. 31(2001) §§ 3, 5: Ord. 23(1999) § 1: Ord. 50(1978) § 19:
Ord. 12(1978) § 2)
12-7A-9: SITE COVERAGE:
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
12-7A-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
the proposed site coverage is in conformance with applicable elements of the Vail
Village urban design guide plan and design considerations. (Ord. 29(2005) § 24: Ord.
23(1999) § 1: Ord. 17(1991) § 7: Ord. 8(1973) § 7.507)
12-7A-10: LANDSCAPING AND SITE DEVELOPMENT:
At least thirty percent (30%) of the total site area shall be landscaped. The minimum
width and length of any area qualifying as landscaping shall be fifteen feet (15') with a
minimum area not less than three hundred (300) square feet. (Ord. 23(1999) § 1: Ord.
19(1976) § 8: Ord. 8(1973) § 7.509)
June 2, 2020 - Page 107 of 772
Town of Vail Page 8
12-7A-11: PARKING AND LOADING:
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. (Ord. 29(2005) § 24:
Ord. 23(1999) § 1: Ord. 19(1976) § 8: Ord. 8(1973) § 7.510)
12-7A-12: EXTERIOR ALTERATIONS OR MODIFICATIONS:
A. Review Required: The construction of a new building or the alteration of an existing
building shall be reviewed by the design review board in accordance with chapter 11 of
this title. However, any project which adds additional dwelling units, accommodation
units, fractional fee club units, any project which adds more than one thousand (1,000)
square feet of commercial floor area or common space, or any project which has
substantial off site impacts (as determined by the administrator) shall be reviewed by
the planning and environmental commission as a major exterior alteration in accordance
with this chapter and section 12-3-6 of this title. Complete applications for major exterior
alterations shall be submitted in accordance with administrative schedules developed by
the department of community development for planning and environmental commission
and design review board review. The following submittal items are required:
1. Application: An application shall be made by the owner of the building or the building
owner's authorized agent or representative on a form provided by the administrator. Any
application for condominiumized buildings shall be authorized by the condominium
association in conformity with all pertinent requirements of the condominium
association's declarations.
2. Application; Contents: The administrator shall establish the submittal requirements for
an exterior alteration or modification application. A complete list of the submittal
requirements shall be maintained by the administrator and filed in the department of
community development. Certain submittal requirements may be waived and/or
modified by the administrator and/or the reviewing body if it is demonstrated by the
applicant that the information and materials required are not relevant to the proposed
development or applicable to the planning documents that comprise the Vail
comprehensive plan. The administrator and/or the reviewing body may require the
submission of additional plans, drawings, specifications, samples and other materials if
deemed necessary to properly evaluate the proposal.
3. Work Sessions/Conceptual Review: If requested by either the applicant or the
administrator, submittals may proceed to a work session with the planning and
environmental commission, a conceptual review with the design review board, or a work
session with the town council.
June 2, 2020 - Page 108 of 772
Town of Vail Page 9
4. Hearing: The public hearing before the planning and environmental commission shall
be held in accordance with section 12-3-6 of this title. The planning and environmental
commission may approve the application as submitted, approve the application with
conditions or modifications, or deny the application. The decision of the planning and
environmental commission may be appealed to the town council in accordance with
section 12-3-3 of this title.
5. Lapse Of Approval: Approval of an exterior alteration as prescribed by this article
shall lapse and become void three (3) years following the date of approval by the design
review board unless, prior to the expiration, a building permit is issued and construction
is commenced and diligently pursued to completion. Administrative extensions shall be
allowed for reasonable and unexpected delays as long as code provisions affecting the
proposal have not changed. (Ord. 29(2005) § 24: Ord. 5(2003) § 5: Ord. 31(2001) § 7:
Ord. 23(1999) § 1)
12-7A-13: COMPLIANCE BURDEN:
It shall be the burden of the applicant to prove by a preponderance of the evidence
before the planning and environmental commission and the design review board that
the proposed exterior alteration or new development is in compliance with the purposes
of the public accommodation district, that the proposal is consistent with applicable
elements of the Vail Village master plan, the Vail Village urban design guide plan and
the Vail streetscape master plan, and that the proposal does not otherwise have a
significant negative effect on the character of the neighborhood, and that the proposal
substantially complies with other applicable elements of the Vail comprehensive plan.
(Ord. 29(2005) § 24: Ord. 23(1999) § 1)
12-7A-14: MITIGATION OF DEVELOPMENT IMPACTS:
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 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. (Ord.
29(2005) § 24: Ord. 23(1999) § 1)
12-7A-15: ADDITION OF GROSS RESIDENTIAL FLOOR AREA TO EXISTING PA
PROPERTIES:
June 2, 2020 - Page 109 of 772
Town of Vail Page 10
For any gross residential floor area added to a public accommodation zoned property
following the effective date hereof, a minimum of seventy percent (70%) of the added
gross residential floor area shall be devoted to accommodation units, or fractional fee
club units subject to the issuance of a conditional use permit. This limitation shall not
apply to gross residential floor area being added in accordance with sections 12-15-4
and 12-15-5 of this title. (Ord. 23(1999) § 1)
Vail Land Use Plan (in part)
Chapter II - Land Use Plan Goals / Policies (in part)
1. General Growth/Development
1.1 Vail should continue to grow in a controlled environment, maintaining a
balance between residential, commercial and recreational uses to serve both the
visitor and the permanent resident.
1.3 The quality of development should be maintained and upgraded whenever
possible.
1.12 Vail should accommodate most of the additional growth in existing
developed areas (infill areas).
Chapter VI – Proposed Land Use (in part)
GOAL #2 TO FOSTER A STRONG TOURIST INDUSTRY AND PROMOTE YEAR-
AROUND ECONOMIC HEALTH AND VIABILITY FOR THE VILLAGE AND FOR THE
COMMUNITY AS A WHOLE.
Objective 2.1: Recognize the variety of land uses found in the 11 sub-areas
throughout the Village and allow for development that is compatible with these
established land use patterns.
Objective 2.3: Increase the number of residential units available for short term
overnight accommodations.
Policy 2.3.1: The development of short term accommodation units is
strongly encouraged. Residential units that are developed above existing
density levels are required to be designed or managed in a manner that
makes them available for short term overnight rental.
Objective 2.5: Encourage the continued upgrading, renovation and maintenance
of existing lodging and commercial facilities to better serve the needs of our
guests.
June 2, 2020 - Page 110 of 772
Town of Vail Page 11
Vail Village Master Plan (in part)
GOAL #1 ENCOURAGE HIGH QUALITY, REDEVELOPMENT WHILE PRESERVING
UNIQUE ARCHITECTURAL SCALE OF THE VILLAGE IN ORDER TO SUSTAIN ITS
SENSE OF COMMUNITY AND IDENTITY.
Objective 1.2: Encourage the upgrading and redevelopment of residential and
commercial facilities.
GOAL #2 TO FOSTER A STRONG TOURIST INDUSTRY AND PROMOTE YEAR-
AROUND ECONOMIC HEALTH AND VIABILITY FOR THE VILLAGE AND FOR THE
COMMUNITY AS A WHOLE.
Objective 2.1: Recognize the variety of land uses found in the 11 sub-areas throughout
the Village and allow for development that is compatible with these established land use
patterns.
Policy 2.1 The zoning code and development review criteria shall be consistent with the
goals and objectives of the Vail Village Master Plan.
Objective 2.3: Increase the number of residential units available for short-term overnight
accommodations.
Policy 2.3.1 : The development of short term accommodation units is strongly
encouraged. Residential units that are developed above existing density levels are
required to be designed or managed ina manner that makes them available for short
term overnight rental.
GOAL #4 TO PRESERVE EXISTING OPEN SPACE AREAS AND EXPAND GREEN
SPACE OPPORTUNITIES.
Objective 4.1: Improve existing open space areas and create new plazas with green
space and pocket parks. Recognize the different roles of each type of open space in
forming the overall fabric of the Village.
Policy 4.1.3: With the exception of ski base-related facilities, existing natural open space
areas at the base of Vail Mountain and throughout Vail Village and existing green
spaces shall be preserved as open space.
June 2, 2020 - Page 111 of 772
Town of Vail Page 12
V. SITE ANALYSIS
Address: 366 Hanson Ranch Road
Legal Description: Lot 1, 366 Hanson Ranch Road Subdivision, formerly Part of Lot d,
Block 2, Vail Village First Filing, a portion of Lot d-1, Block 2, Vail
Village Fifth Filing and a portion of Tract E, Vail Village Fifth Filing
Existing Zoning: Public Accommodation (PA) District and Agriculture and Open Space
(A) District
Proposed Zoning: Public Accommodation (PA) District
Land Use Plan Designation: Vail Village Master Plan
Current Land Use: Lodge
Anticipated Future Land Use: Lodge
Geological Hazards: None
VI. SURROUNDING LAND USES AND ZONING
Existing Use Zone District
North: Lodging/Multifamily Public Accommodation (PA) District
South: Open Space/Recreation Agriculture and Open Space (A) District
East: Lodging/Multifamily SDD #37, Tivoli Lodge with an underlying
zoning of Public Accommodation (PA)
District
West: Lodging/Multifamily SDD #28, Christiania with an underlying
zoning of Vail Public Accommodation (PA)
District
VII. REVIEW CRITERIA
Before acting on an application for a zone district boundary amendment, the planning
and environmental commission and town council shall consider the following factors
with respect to the requested zone district boundary amendment:
1. The extent to which the zone district amendments are consistent with all
the applicable elements of the adopted goals, objectives and policies outlined in
the Vail comprehensive plan and is compatible with the development objectives
of the town.
The Vail Land Use Plan designation and applicable planning document for the subject
property is the Vail Village Master Plan. The Public Accommodation Zone district
designation for this property is consistent with the adjacent parcels and is consistent
with the goals, objectives and policies outlined in the Vail Village Master Plan.
June 2, 2020 - Page 112 of 772
Town of Vail Page 13
The lands within the fence have long been perceived as a part of the existing property.
The amendment of the zone district boundaries to conform to the fenced area will have
little or no overall effect upon the larger goals of the community. The amendment will
bring the property into greater conformance with the development standards of the
Public Accommodation Zone District including minimum lot size, setbacks, site
coverage and landscaping.
The proposed rezoning is supported by the Goals #1 and #2 of Vail Village Master Plan
that encourage high quality redevelopment and the importance of the tourist industry to
the health and vitality of the community.
Goal #4 is relative to open space and is relevant to the zone district boundary
amendment request. Because it was within the fence, the 5,380 square feet of area
proposed for zone change has likely not been a part of the perceived open space
corridor behind or adjacent to the home. The Vail Village Master Plan was originally
adopted in 1990. The area proposed for re-zoning has been enclosed by a fence,
landscaped as part of the yard and used exclusively and privately by the owners of the
home since well prior to, and since, 1990. The re-zoning of this land will not impact the
historic area of perceived open space that exists in this area. The lands outside of the
fence will remain zoned as Agricultural and Open Space.
Staff finds this criterion to be met.
2. The extent to which the zone district amendments are suitable with the
existing and potential land uses on the site and existing and potential
surrounding land uses as set out in the town's adopted planning documents.
The zone district boundary amendment is both suitable and compatible with the existing
and proposed land uses on the site and the existing and potential surrounding land
uses. The rezoning will bring the property into greater conformance with the
development standards of the Public Accommodation Zone District including minimum
lot size, setbacks, site coverage and landscaping that will assist in redevelopment.
As the rezoning follows the historical fence boundary, no impacts on surrounding land
uses are anticipated.
Staff finds this criterion to be met.
3. The extent to which the zone district amendments present a harmonious,
convenient, workable relationship among land uses consistent with municipal
development objectives.
The proposed zone district amendments will create a cohesive land use scheme
consistent with the development objectives of the town, namely orderly development
and redevelopment under a unified zoning designation.
June 2, 2020 - Page 113 of 772
Town of Vail Page 14
Staff finds this criterion to be met.
4. The extent to which the zone district amendments provide for the growth of
an orderly viable community and does not constitute spot zoning as the
amendment serves the best interests of the community as a whole.
The zone district boundary amendment proposes to recognize the lot boundary
correction and maintains the Public Accommodation zoning of the 366 Hanson Ranch
Road property. This zone district designation is consistent with the Vail Village Master
Plan and does not constitute spot zoning. The application fosters order in the sense that
it aligns zone district and subdivision boundaries.
Staff finds this criterion to be met.
5. The extent to which the zone district amendments result in adverse or
beneficial impacts on the natural environment, including, but not limited to, water
quality, air quality, noise, vegetation, riparian corridors, hillsides and other
desirable natural features.
The proposed rezoning will not result in adverse impacts to the natural environment.
Future developments on the reconfigured and rezoned parcels will be required to
adhere to all applicable environmental standards during development review,
construction and facility operation.
Staff finds this criterion to be met.
6. The extent to which the zone district amendments are consistent with the
purpose statement of the proposed zone district.
The proposed rezoning is consistent with the purpose statement of the Public
Accommodation (PA) Districts and future development on the property will also be
required to be compatible with its intent.
Staff finds this criterion to be met.
7. The extent to which the zone district amendments demonstrate how
conditions have changed since the zoning designation of the subject property
was adopted and is no longer appropriate.
The proposed zone district boundary amendment recognizes the historical boundary of
the property. Maintaining the existing zoning designation would be inappropriate as it is
problematic to have an individual property with multiple zone designations.
Staff finds this criterion to be met.
June 2, 2020 - Page 114 of 772
Town of Vail Page 15
8. Such other factors and criteria as the commission and/or council deem
applicable to the proposed rezonings.
VIII. STAFF RECOMMENDATION
The Community Development Department recommends the Planning and
Environmental Commission forwards a recommendation of approval to the Vail Town
Council for a zone district boundary amendment, pursuant to Section 12-3-7,
Amendment, Vail Town Code, to allow for the rezoning of a portion of the property
located at 366 Hanson Ranch Road/Lot 1, 366 Hanson Ranch Road Subdivision. The
proposed rezoning would change the Zone District from Agriculture and Open Space
(A) District to the Public Accommodation (PA) District and setting forth details in regard
thereto. Staff’s recommendation is based upon the review of the criteria described in
Section VII of this memorandum and the evidence and testimony presented.
Should the Planning and Environmental Commission choose to forward a
recommendation of approval to the Vail Town Council for the zone district boundary
amendments, the Community Development Department recommends the Commission
pass the following motion:
“The Planning and Environmental Commission forwards a recommendation of
approval to the Vail Town Council for a zone district boundary amendment,
pursuant to Section 12-3-7, Amendment, Vail Town Code, to allow for the rezoning
of a portion of the property located at 366 Hanson Ranch Road/Lot 1, 366 Hanson
Ranch Road Subdivision. The proposed rezoning would change the Zone District
from Agriculture and Open Space (A) District to the Public Accommodation (PA)
District and setting forth details in regard thereto.”
Should the Planning and Environmental Commission choose to forward this
recommendation of approval, the Community Development Department recommends
the Commission makes the following findings:
“Based upon the review of the criteria outlined in Section VII of the Staff
memorandum to the Planning and Environmental Commission dated March 9, 2020,
and the evidence and testimony presented, the Planning and Environmental
Commission finds:
1. That the amendments are consistent with the adopted goals, objectives and
policies outlined in the Vail comprehensive plan and compatible with the
development objectives of the town; and
2. That the amendments are compatible with and suitable to adjacent uses and
appropriate for the surrounding areas; and
3. That the amendments promote the health, safety, morals, and general welfare
of the town and promote the coordinated and harmonious development of the
June 2, 2020 - Page 115 of 772
Town of Vail Page 16
town in a manner that conserves and enhances its natural environment and
its established character as a resort and residential community of the highest
quality.”
IX. ATTACHMENTS
A. Vicinity Map
B. Applicant’s Updated Narrative dated February 10, 2020
C. PEC worksession minutes, May 13, 2019
D. PEC public hearing minutes, July 8, 2019
E. Letter of Opposition, Vail Homeowner’s Association, June 3, 2019
F. Letter of Opposition, Frederick Wyman II, July 8, 2019
June 2, 2020 - Page 116 of 772
H A N S O N R A N C H R D
M IL L C R E E K C IR VAIL VALLEY DRGORE CREEK DR
B
R
I
D
G
E
S
T
GORE CREEK DR
I
Subject Property
0 50 10025
Feet
V A I L P O I N TVAILPOINTZone D i s t r i c t A m e n d m e n t (P E C 1 9 -0 0 2 2 )Z o n e D i s t r i c t A m e n d m e n t (P E C 1 9 -0 0 2 2 )3 6 6 H a n s o n R a n c h R o a d366 H a n s o n R a n c h R o a dLot 1 , 3 6 6 H a n s o n R a n c h R o a d S u b d i v i s i o nLot 1 , 3 6 6 H a n s o n R a n c h R o a d S u b d i v i s i o n
This ma p w as created by the Town of Vail Co mmu nity Development Departme nt. Use of this ma p shou ld be for g eneral p urp oses o nly.
The Town of Vail does no t warran t the accura cy of the informa tion co nta in ed herein.
(whe re sh own, pa rcel line work is ap pro xima te )
Last Modified:June 19, 2019June 2, 2020 - Page 117 of 772
LOT 1,
366 HANSON RANCH ROAD
SUBDIVISION
Narrative in support of
Petition for Zone District Boundary Amendment
Submittal Date: June 7, 2019
Updated: February 10, 2020
June 2, 2020 - Page 118 of 772
Table of Contents
Table of Contents
Page
I. Introduction ............................................................................................................. 1
II. Existing Conditions – Nonconformity ...................................................................... 3
III. 2018 Consideration of Rezoning Request ............................................................... 4
IV. Zone District Boundary Amendment Review Criteria ............................................. 5
V. Application Materials .............................................................................................. 9
June 2, 2020 - Page 119 of 772
Avanti Lodge / 366 Hanson Ranch Road
Zone District Map Amendment Page 1
Update: February 10, 2020
LOT 1, 366 HANSON RANCH ROAD SUBDIVISION
Project Narrative in support of
Petition for Zone District Boundary Amendment
Planning Commission File No. PEC-19-0022
TO: Planning Department, Town of Vail
RE: 366 Hanson Ranch Road, Vail, CO
DATE: February 10, 2020
Notable Updates:
This rezoning application was initially heard before the PEC on July 8, 2019. Based on the applicable
criteria set forth in the Vail Municipal Code, the Community Development Department recommended
that the PEC forward a recommendation of approval to the Vail Town Council. At the July 8, 2019 hearing,
several members of PEC indicated their desire to review the rezoning request only after they had reviewed
Applicant’s application for Major Exterior Alteration Permit. Applicant agreed to the tabling.
I. INTRODUCTION
This petition for zone district boundary amendment requests rezoning of a portion of Lot 1, 366 Hanson
Ranch Road Subdivision (Property), Assessor Parcel No. 2101-082-90-001, from Agriculture and Open
Space (A/OS) to Public Accommodation (PA). The Property is a 0.3040 acre lot — 7,862 square feet of
which is zoned PA and the remaining 5,380 square feet of which is zoned A/OS. The purpose of this
application is to apply a single zone district to the entirety of the Property.
The area proposed for rezoning is the area inside the Property boundary and depicted in green below:
June 2, 2020 - Page 120 of 772
Avanti Lodge / 366 Hanson Ranch Road
Zone District Map Amendment Page 2
Update: February 10, 2020
The Rezone Area is 5,380 square feet (Rezone Area)—or 0.1235 acre—and is depicted on the map
attached as Appendix A. The adjacent land to the north and west within the Property is 7,862 square feet
zoned as PA since the Town initially adopted zoning decades ago. These areas combined constitute the
lot that the Planning and Environmental Commission (PEC) approved as Lot 1, 366 Hanson Ranch Road
Subdivision.
Petitioner VailPoint LLC is the legal owner of record of all of the Property, as evidenced by the title
commitment attached as Appendix B. The Property is not owned in common and is not located within a
Development Lot.
The Rezone Area is comprised of lands that have been inside the fence at the Property for more than 50
years, but that were not originally within the deeded lot boundary. In January, 2018, the Eagle County
District Court entered an Order and Decree Quieting Title (Court Order) to the Rezone Area based on a
finding that Applicant and its predecessors in title have been in actual, adverse, hostile, open, notorious,
exclusive, continuous possession of the Rezone Area under claim of right, made in good faith, for a period
of time in excess of eighteen (18) years. A copy of the Court Order is attached as Appendix C.
The rezoning is proposed to proceed as a Zone District Boundary Amendment (Petition) in accordance
with the procedure established by Vail Municipal Code (VMC) § 12-3-7. This narrative is submitted, with
its supporting appendices, for the record in support of the Town of Vail’s (Town) requirements for the
Petition, as adopted in the VMC. In accordance with VMC § 12-3-7.B.2, this Petition is initiated by a
property owner in the Town.
The dual zoning within a single lot is recognized by both Town staff and the Applicant as unworkable and
undesirable.
June 2, 2020 - Page 121 of 772
Avanti Lodge / 366 Hanson Ranch Road
Zone District Map Amendment Page 3
Update: February 10, 2020
II. EXISTING CONDITIONS - NONCONFORMITY
The Property as it exists today is not in conformance with the Town’s zoning regulations in three respects.
First, at 0.1235 acres, the Rezone Area is less than 1% of the Town’s required minimum lot or site area of
thirty-five acres with a minimum of one acre of buildable area in this zone district. See VMC 12-8A-5.1
Second, at 7,862 square feet, the PA-zoned portion of the Property does not satisfy the Town’s required
10,000 square foot minimum size mandated within PA zone district. See VMC § 12-7A-5. Third, the PA-
zoned portion of the Property is not capable of enclosing a square eighty (80) feet on each side within its
boundaries. See VMC § 12-7A-5. Each of these non-conformities that exist on the Property today will
be eliminated—and the Property brought into compliance with the Town’s zoning regulations—by
approval of this Petition.
Courts in Colorado have long held that nonconformities are disfavored because they reduce the
effectiveness of zoning ordinances. See Hartley v. City of Colorado Springs, 764 P.2d 1216 (Colo. 1988);
see also City & County of Denver v. Board of Adjustment, 31 Colo.App. 324, 331, 505 P.2d 44, 47 (1972)
(quoting 2 A. Rathkopf, The Law of Zoning and Planning 62–1 (3d ed. 1976)); Comment, Conforming the
Nonconforming Use: Proposed Legislative Relief for a Zoning Dilemma, 33 Sw.L.J. 855, 863 (1979); see also
Tips, Nonconforming Uses—What Can Be Done With Them and How to Get Rid of Them, 1980 Inst. on
Plan. Zoning & Eminent Domain 85, 108. Because of their undesirable effect on the community,
nonconformities should be eliminated as speedily as possible. Wasinger v. Miller, 154 Colo. 61, 66, 388
P.2d 250, 253 (1964); Denver Police Protective Ass'n v. City & County of Denver, 710 P.2d 3, 6
(Colo.App.1985); 4 A. Rathkopf & D. Rathkopf, The Law of Zoning and Planning § 51.06[1], at 51–43 to –
617 (4th ed. 1988).
The Property is believed by Applicant and Town Staff to be the only lot in the Town of Vail that has two
separate zone districts. On every other property throughout Town, the zone district boundaries follow
platted property lines. Town staff has previously characterized the existing zoning condition of the
Property as unworkable from an administrative perspective and undesirable from a planning perspective,
and has recommended approval of this rezoning application.
1 Applicant’s research indicates that there are only about ten (10) parcels zoned A/OS in the Town, all but one of
which don’t even come close to satisfying the minimum lot size. Notes in the Town’s GIS mapping system indicate
that some of these may have been rezoned over the years, and there is some confusion about what property is even
within the zone district. See Assessor Account Nos. R006780 (30.6 acres); R066944 (3.150 acres); R050657 (6.302
acres); R057430 (2.132 acres); R007977 (0.762 acres); R008042 (1.687 acres); R008078 (2.860 acres); R031618 (1.390
acres); R033001 (0.272 acres); and R004010 (3.0 acres). Staff has indicated that the A/OS zone district is a relic of
Eagle County zoning, prior to Vail’s incorporation. At a minimum, it is apparent that there are problems with the
A/OS zone district throughout Town, including on this Property.
June 2, 2020 - Page 122 of 772
Avanti Lodge / 366 Hanson Ranch Road
Zone District Map Amendment Page 4
Update: February 10, 2020
III. 2018 CONSIDERATION OF REZONING REQUEST
In May 2018, Applicant submitted a petition seeking approval of the same rezoning sought under this
Petition. The Town’s Community Development Department found all review criteria to be satisfied and
recommended that the PEC forward a recommendation of approval to the Vail Town Council. A copy of
the Community Development Department’s June 25, 2018 staff report is attached as Appendix D.
The PEC was unable to forward a recommendation to the Vail Town Council. At its meeting on June 25,
2018, the PEC deadlocked 3-3 on a motion to recommend approval of the zone change with
Commissioners Stockmar, Kurz and Kjesbo voting in favor, and Commissioners Gillette, Hopkins and Perez
opposed. Applicant withdrew the zoning application prior to its consideration by the Vail Town Council.
Neither the Applicant’s request nor the Town’s criteria have changed since the Community Development
Department and three members of PEC found that the rezoning request complies with the Town’s criteria.
This rezoning application was filed on June 7, 2019 and initially heard before the PEC on July 8, 2019. At
that hearing, several members of PEC indicated their desire to review the rezoning request only after they
had reviewed Applicant’s application for Major Exterior Alteration Permit. Applicant agreed to the tabling
for that limited purpose.
June 2, 2020 - Page 123 of 772
Avanti Lodge / 366 Hanson Ranch Road
Zone District Map Amendment Page 5
Update: February 10, 2020
IV. ZONE DISTRICT BOUNDARY AMENDMENT REVIEW CRITERIA
VMC § 12-3-7 establishes the criteria for the review of amendments to zone district boundaries. Before
acting on an application for a zone district boundary amendment, the planning and environmental
commission and town council shall consider the following eight factors with respect to the requested zone
district boundary amendment.
(1) The extent to which the zone district amendment is consistent with all the applicable elements
of the adopted goals, objectives and policies outlined in the Vail comprehensive plan and is
compatible with the development objectives of the town.
Applicant response:
The Vail Land Use Plan designates this area of the community as Vail Village Master Plan and utilizes the
Vail Village Master Plan as the detailed land use plan. The PA zone district designation is consistent with
the adjacent parcels and is consistent with the goals, objectives and policies outlined in the Vail Village
Master Plan.
The Rezone Area has long been perceived and used as an integral part of the existing home. As a result,
the amendment of the zone district boundaries to conform to the historic fenced area will have little or
no overall effect upon the Town’s goals and objectives for the community. Moreover, the amendment is
consistent with criteria in that the rezoning will bring the existing lot into size conformance with the
minimum lot size of the existing PA zone district.
There are six primary goals of the Vail Village Master Plan. Goals #1 and 2 relate to re-development and
upgrading of private buildings. Goal #1 supports the high-quality upgrading of residential and commercial
buildings. This petition is one step in the process of ultimately redeveloping and upgrading the present,
obsolete residence. Goal #2 supports the PA Zone District designation as an important economic goal of
the community.
This Petition has no relation or bearing on Goals #3, #5 or #6.
Goal #4 relates to open space and is relevant to the Petition. The Rezone Area has been privately owned
for more than 50 years. The Rezone Area is not identified on any of the Town’s adopted open space plans
and has not been designated by the Town as open space. The Vail Village Master Plan was originally
adopted in 1990. The Rezone Area has been enclosed by a fence, landscaped as part of the yard and used
exclusively and privately by the owners of the home for the decades prior to, and since, 1990. The re-
zoning of this land will not impact the perception of open space in this area.
The Vail Village Master Plan Goals #1, #2 and #4 and the relevant objectives and policies are indicated
below.
GOAL #1 ENCOURAGE HIGH QUALITY, REDEVELOPMENT WHILE PRESERVING UNIQUE ARCHITECTURAL
SCALE OF THE VILLAGE IN ORDER TO SUSTAIN ITS SENSE OF COMMUNITY AND IDENTITY.
Objective 1.2: Encourage the upgrading and redevelopment of residential and commercial facilities.
June 2, 2020 - Page 124 of 772
Avanti Lodge / 366 Hanson Ranch Road
Zone District Map Amendment Page 6
Update: February 10, 2020
GOAL #2 TO FOSTER A STRONG TOURIST INDUSTRY AND PROMOTE YEAR-AROUND ECONOMIC HEALTH
AND VIABILITY FOR THE VILLAGE AND FOR THE COMMUNITY AS A WHOLE.
Objective 2.1: Recognize the variety of land uses found in the 11 sub-areas throughout the Village and
allow for development that is compatible with these established land use patterns.
Policy 2.1 The zoning code and development review criteria shall be consistent with the goals and
objectives of the Vail Village Master Plan.
Objective 2.3: Increase the number of residential units available for short term overnight accommodations.
Policy 2.3.1: The development of short-term accommodation units is strongly encouraged. Residential
units that are developed above existing density levels are required to be designed or managed in a manner
that makes them available for short term overnight rental.
GOAL #4 TO PRESERVE EXISTING OPEN SPACE AREAS AND EXPAND GREENSPACE OPPORTUNITIES.
Objective 4.1: Improve existing open space areas and create new plazas with greenspace and pocket parks.
Recognize the different roles of each type of open space in forming the overall fabric of the Village.
Policy 4.1.3: With the exception of ski base-related facilities, existing natural open space areas at the base
of Vail Mountain and throughout Vail Village and existing greenspaces shall be preserved as open space.
(2) The extent to which the zone district amendment is suitable with the existing and potential land
uses on the site and existing and potential surrounding land uses as set out in the town's
adopted planning documents.
Applicant response:
The existing land use of the property is as a yard and landscaping for the adjacent non-conforming single-
family home. The proposed re-zoning will not, alone, change the existing use of the land that is subject
to the rezoning. A potential, conforming future use of the entire parcel under the PA zone district would
be compatible with the town’s adopted planning documents, as described in the Avanti Lodge – Project
Narrative in support of Application for Major Exterior Alteration Permit, File No. PEC 19-008. The
proposed zone district boundary amendment will resolve a long-term fence boundary issue. The parcel
size will now conform to the minimum lot size requirement of the PA zone district.
The existing home has been suitable with the surrounding land use and a future, conforming use under
the Public Accommodation Zone District would likewise be consistent with adjacent properties.
Moreover, since development of varying types is permitted in both the PA and A/OS zone district, the
zone district amendment alone will not enable construction of improvements that would be prohibited
under the current zoning. Development is allowed in both the PA and A/OS zone district. Rather, the
requested rezoning will make for a better designed building by application of uniform setbacks, building
height and other development standards on the Property.
June 2, 2020 - Page 125 of 772
Avanti Lodge / 366 Hanson Ranch Road
Zone District Map Amendment Page 7
Update: February 10, 2020
(3) The extent to which the zone district amendment presents a harmonious, convenient,
workable relationship among land uses consistent with municipal development objective.
Applicant response:
The proposed amendment adjusts the existing zone district boundaries to apply a consistent zoning to all
of the fenced area of 366 Hanson Ranch Road. This amendment does not affect to any material extent
the harmonious, convenient, workable relationship among land uses.
(4) The extent to which the zone district amendment provides for the growth of an orderly
viable community and does not constitute spot zoning as the amendment serves the best
interests of the community as a whole.
Applicant response:
The zone district boundary amendment proposes to recognize the lot boundary correction and maintains
the PA zoning of the Property. This zone district designation is consistent with the Vail Village Master Plan
and does not constitute spot zoning. The application fosters order in the sense that it aligns zone district
and subdivision boundaries—the condition that exists for every other property within the Town of Vail.
(5) The extent to which the zone district amendment results in adverse or beneficial impacts
on the natural environment, including, but not limited to, water quality, air quality, noise,
vegetation, riparian corridors, hillsides and other desirable natural features.
Applicant response:
The proposed amendment has no adverse impact upon the natural environment. The 5,380 square feet
that are the subject of this application are currently landscaped as a part of a residential yard and are
enclosed by a fence. Development of various improvements is permitted in the existing A/OS zone district,
so the rezoning alone will not permit currently prohibited development.
(6) The extent to which the zone district amendment is consistent with the purpose statement
of the proposed zone district.
Applicant response:
The historic parcel boundary is zoned Public Accommodation but is legally non-conforming due to its size
and present use. First, at 0.1235 acres, the Rezone Area is less than 1% of the required 35-acre minimum
lot size in the existing Agriculture/Open Space zone district. Second, the minimum lot size for the PA Zone
district is 10,000 square feet, the existing home sits on a 7,862 square foot parcel. The addition of the
5,380 square feet of the Rezone Area will bring the Property into conformance with the minimum size
standard. This proposed amendme nt is completely consistent with the purpose statement of the Public
Accommodation Zone District, in fact correcting existing inconsistencies.
June 2, 2020 - Page 126 of 772
Avanti Lodge / 366 Hanson Ranch Road
Zone District Map Amendment Page 8
Update: February 10, 2020
(7) The extent to which the zone district amendment demonstrates how conditions have
changed since the zoning designation of the subject property was adopted and is no longer
appropriate.
Applicant response:
The Rezone Area has been an integral part of the primary home parcel for perhaps as long as zoning has
been enacted in the Town of Vail. The lands within the fence are not integrated into the adjacent A/OS
lands outside of the fence. Both visually and as actually used now and historically, the Rezone Area falls
under the same condition as the primary, PA-zoned home parcel.
The need for the zone district boundary amendment arises from the inconsistency between the historic
deeded property boundary and the location of the fence. Now that the fence line has been determined
to be the property boundary, it is appropriate to rezone so that the entire property is subject to only one
zoning designation.
(8) Such other factors and criteria as the commission and/or council deem applicable to the
proposed rezoning.
Applicant response:
No applicant response is necessary.
June 2, 2020 - Page 127 of 772
Avanti Lodge / 366 Hanson Ranch Road
Zone District Map Amendment Page 9
Update: February 10, 2020
V. APPLICATION MATERIALS
Application materials submitted in support of this application consist of the following:
Description
A. Map indicating existing and proposed zone district boundaries
B. Title commitment
C. Court Order
D. Community Development Department’s June 25, 2018 staff report
E. List of adjacent property owners (updated February 10, 2020)
June 2, 2020 - Page 128 of 772
TO: Planning and Environmental Commission
FROM: Community Development Department
DATE: March 9, 2020
SUBJECT: A request for a recommendation to the Vail Town Council for a zone
district boundary amendment, pursuant to Section 12-3-7, Amendment,
Vail Town Code, to allow for the rezoning of a portion of the property
located at 366 Hanson Ranch Road/Lot 1, 366 Hanson Ranch Road
Subdivision. The proposed rezoning would change the Zone District from
Agriculture and Open Space (A) District to the Public Accommodation
(PA) District and setting forth details in regard thereto. (PEC19-0022)
Applicant: VailPoint LLC, represented by Sarah J Baker PC
Planner: Jonathan Spence
I. SUMMARY
The applicant, VailPoint LLC, represented by Sarah J Baker PC., is requesting a
recommendation to the Vail Town Council for a zone district boundary amendment,
pursuant to Section 12-3-7, Amendment, Vail Town Code, to allow for the rezoning of a
portion of the property located at 366 Hanson Ranch Road/Lot 1, 366 Hanson Ranch
Road Subdivision. The proposed rezoning would change the Zone District from
Agriculture and Open Space (A) District to the Public Accommodation (PA) District.
Based upon Staff’s review of the criteria outlined in Section VII of this memorandum and
the evidence and testimony presented, the Community Development Department
recommends the Planning and Environmental Commission forward a
recommendation of approval to the Vail Town Council of this application, subject to
the findings noted in Section VIII of this memorandum. A vicinity map (Attachment A),
June 2, 2020 - Page 129 of 772
Town of Vail Page 2
the applicants’ narrative (Attachment B), PEC minutes from the May 13, 2019
worksession (Attachment C), PEC minutes from the July 8, 2019 public hearing
(Attachment D), a letter of opposition from the Vail Homeowner’s Association
(Attachment E) and a letter of opposition from Frederick Wyman (Attachment F) are
attached for review.
An identical application (PEC18-0022) was reviewed by the Planning and
Environmental Commission (PEC) in June of 2018. At that time, the PEC was unable to
forward a recommendation due to the commissioners deadlocked 3-3 vote. The
applicant chose to withdraw the application at that time and not proceed to the Town
Council. As this former application was withdrawn, this application (PEC19-0022) is
treated as a new application with the 2018 hearing having no bearing.
II. DESCRIPTION OF REQUEST
The applicant, VailPoint LLC, represented by Sarah J Baker PC., is requesting a
recommendation to the Vail Town Council for a zone district boundary amendment,
pursuant to Section 12-3-7, Amendment, Vail Town Code to allow for the rezoning of a
portion of the property located at 366 Hanson Ranch Road /Lot 1, 366 Hanson Ranch
Road Subdivision. The proposed rezoning would change the Zone District from
Agriculture and Open Space (A) District to the Public Accommodation (PA) District for
those portions of the lot that were formerly part of Lot d-1 and Tract E. The total land
area proposed to be rezoned is 5,380 square feet.
The two portions of the lot are located within the historic fence boundary of the property,
as shown on the exhibit below.
June 2, 2020 - Page 130 of 772
Town of Vail Page 3
III. BACKGROUND
In 1963, Vail Associates conveyed the entirety of Lot d, Block 2, Vail Village First Filing
(Lot d) to Christiania-at-Vail, Inc. (VailPoint’s predecessor in title). Lot d is comprised of
the present-day Christiania at Vail Lodge, the Chateau Christian Condominiums, and
the single-family residence at 366 Hanson Ranch Road.
Over time and apparently prior to enactment of subdivision regulations in the Town
Christiania- at-Vail, Inc. severed portions of Lot d. They did so by recording deeds that
described these smaller parcels by metes and bounds description. These deeds
effectively served to subdivide Lot d, although not through the process that would be
required today. The property at 366 Hanson Ranch Road is one of these severed
parcels.
The property has an existing residence that was built in the early 1960s, prior to the
incorporation of Vail as a Town in 1966. It is located between the Christiania at Vail
Lodge and Chateau Christian Condominiums to the west, and the Tivoli Lodge to the
east. The land to the south of the home and to the east of the home (between the home
and the Tivoli Lodge) is owned by Vail Resorts. The land to the east of the home is Lot
d-1, Block 2, Vail Village Fifth Filing. The lands south of the home are a part of Tract E,
Vail Village Fifth Filing.
For as long as 50 years, the existing property and the proposed properties subject to
the rezoning have been surrounded by a fence. For unknown reasons, the fence was
not built on the deeded property line and instead encloses a larger area, both to the
south and east. All previous owners have treated the fenced area as an integral part of
the property and have landscaped and maintained it consistent with the remainder of
the property.
In January, 2018, the Eagle County District Court entered an Order and Decree
Quieting Title (Court Order) to this area outside the deed boundary but inside the fence.
Recognizing the historic conditions, the Court Order declared VailPoint to be the fee
simple owner of all the lands within the fence.
The intent of this application is to complete the process started by the Court Order. The
re-zoning application seeks to rezone the property subject to the Court Order from
Agriculture and Open Space (A) to Public Accommodation (PA), consistent with the
existing zoning of the remainder of the lot. This action will also ensure that all lands
within the subject property have the same zoning designation.
On June 25, 2018 the PEC approved an Exemption Plat pursuant to Section 13-12-3
that consolidated all of the property located within the historic fence into one lot, Lot 1 of
the 366 Hanson Ranch Road Subdivision. The unintended consequence of the approval
without a change in the zoning of the property is a lot with multiple zonings.
June 2, 2020 - Page 131 of 772
Town of Vail Page 4
On May 13, 2019 a worksession with the PEC was held to discuss a proposed Exterior
Alteration to replace the existing structure with a new lodge. The rezoning of the
property was also discussed. The minutes from this worksession are included as
Attachment C.
On July 8, 2019 a public hearing on the rezoning was held. After significant discussion,
the application was tabled to a future date to give the applicant the opportunity to
present the rezoning request in tandem with application to replace the existing structure
with a new lodge. The minutes from this meeting are included as Attachment D.
IV. APPLICABLE PLANNING DOCUMENTS
Staff believes that following provisions of the Vail Land Use Plan, the Vail Village Master
Plan and the Vail Town Code are relevant to the review of this proposal:
TITLE 12: ZONING REGULATIONS, VAIL TOWN CODE
Article A. Public Accommodation (PA) District (in part)
12-7A-1: PURPOSE:
The public accommodation district is intended to provide sites for lodges and residential
accommodations for visitors, together with such public and semipublic facilities and
limited professional offices, medical facilities, private recreation, commercial/retail and
related visitor oriented uses as may appropriately be located within the same zone
district and compatible with adjacent land uses. The public accommodation 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
permitted 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. (Ord. 29(2005) § 24: Ord. 23(1999) § 1:
Ord. 30(1977) § 7: Ord. 8(1973) § 7.100)
12-7A-2: PERMITTED USES:
The following uses shall be permitted in the PA district:
Automated teller machines (ATMs) exterior to a building.
Employee housing units, as further regulated by chapter 13 of this title.
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. (Ord. 12(2008) § 11)
June 2, 2020 - Page 132 of 772
Town of Vail Page 5
12-7A-3: CONDITIONAL USES:
The following conditional uses shall be permitted in the PA 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.
Communications antennas and appurtenant equipment.
Fractional fee club units, as further regulated by subsection 12-16-7A8 of this title.
Healthcare facilities.
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 main structure or structures on the site.
Major arcades.
Private clubs and civic, cultural and fraternal organizations.
Private parking structures.
Private unstructured parking.
Professional and business offices.
Public and private schools.
Public buildings, grounds and facilities.
Public parking structures.
Public parks and recreational facilities.
Public transportation terminals.
Public unstructured parking.
Public utility and public service uses.
Religious institutions.
Ski lifts and tows.
Theaters and convention facilities. (Ord. 12(2008) § 11)
June 2, 2020 - Page 133 of 772
Town of Vail Page 6
12-7A-4: ACCESSORY USES:
The following accessory uses shall be permitted in the PA district:
Home occupations, subject to issuance of a home occupation permit in accordance
with the provisions of section 12-14-12 of this title.
Meeting rooms.
Minor arcades.
Swimming pools, tennis courts, patios, or other recreation facilities customarily
incidental to permitted lodge uses.
Other uses customarily incidental and accessory to permitted or conditional uses, and
necessary for the operation thereof. (Ord. 29(2005) § 24: Ord. 23(1999) § 1: Ord.
6(1982) § 8(b): Ord. 8(1973) § 7.400)
12-7A-5: LOT AREA AND SITE DIMENSIONS:
The minimum lot or site area shall be ten thousand (10,000) square feet of buildable
area and each site shall have a minimum frontage of thirty feet (30'). Each site shall be
of a size and shape capable of enclosing a square area eighty feet (80') on each side
within its boundaries. (Ord. 23(1999) § 1: Ord. 12(1978) § 3)
12-7A-6: SETBACKS:
In the PA 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 12-7A-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.
B. Proposed building setbacks comply with applicable elements of the Vail Village urban
design guide plan and design considerations.
C. Proposed building setbacks will provide adequate availability of light, air and open
space.
D. Proposed building setbacks will provide a compatible relationship with buildings and
uses on adjacent properties.
June 2, 2020 - Page 134 of 772
Town of Vail Page 7
E. Proposed building setbacks will result in creative design solutions or other public
benefits that could not otherwise be achieved by conformance with prescribed setback
standards. (Ord. 29(2005) § 24: Ord. 23(1999) § 1: Ord. 50(1978) § 2)
12-7A-7: HEIGHT:
For a flat roof 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').
(Ord. 23(1999) § 1: Ord. 37(1980) § 2)
12-7A-8: DENSITY CONTROL:
Up to one hundred fifty (150) square feet of gross residential floor area (GRFA) may be
permitted for each one hundred (100) square feet of buildable site area. Final
determination of allowable gross residential floor area shall be made by the planning
and environmental commission in accordance with section 12-7A-12 of this article.
Specifically, in determining allowable gross residential floor area the planning and
environmental commission shall make a finding that proposed gross residential floor
area is in conformance with applicable elements of the Vail Village urban design guide
plan and design considerations. Total density shall not exceed twenty five (25) dwelling
units per acre of buildable site area. For the purposes of calculating density, employee
housing units, accommodation units and fractional fee club units shall not be counted
towards density.
A dwelling unit in a multiple-family building may include one attached accommodation
unit no larger than one-third (1/3) of the total floor area of the dwelling. (Ord. 29(2005) §
24: Ord. 5(2003) § 4: Ord. 31(2001) §§ 3, 5: Ord. 23(1999) § 1: Ord. 50(1978) § 19:
Ord. 12(1978) § 2)
12-7A-9: SITE COVERAGE:
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
12-7A-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
the proposed site coverage is in conformance with applicable elements of the Vail
Village urban design guide plan and design considerations. (Ord. 29(2005) § 24: Ord.
23(1999) § 1: Ord. 17(1991) § 7: Ord. 8(1973) § 7.507)
12-7A-10: LANDSCAPING AND SITE DEVELOPMENT:
At least thirty percent (30%) of the total site area shall be landscaped. The minimum
width and length of any area qualifying as landscaping shall be fifteen feet (15') with a
minimum area not less than three hundred (300) square feet. (Ord. 23(1999) § 1: Ord.
19(1976) § 8: Ord. 8(1973) § 7.509)
June 2, 2020 - Page 135 of 772
Town of Vail Page 8
12-7A-11: PARKING AND LOADING:
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. (Ord. 29(2005) § 24:
Ord. 23(1999) § 1: Ord. 19(1976) § 8: Ord. 8(1973) § 7.510)
12-7A-12: EXTERIOR ALTERATIONS OR MODIFICATIONS:
A. Review Required: The construction of a new building or the alteration of an existing
building shall be reviewed by the design review board in accordance with chapter 11 of
this title. However, any project which adds additional dwelling units, accommodation
units, fractional fee club units, any project which adds more than one thousand (1,000)
square feet of commercial floor area or common space, or any project which has
substantial off site impacts (as determined by the administrator) shall be reviewed by
the planning and environmental commission as a major exterior alteration in accordance
with this chapter and section 12-3-6 of this title. Complete applications for major exterior
alterations shall be submitted in accordance with administrative schedules developed by
the department of community development for planning and environmental commission
and design review board review. The following submittal items are required:
1. Application: An application shall be made by the owner of the building or the building
owner's authorized agent or representative on a form provided by the administrator. Any
application for condominiumized buildings shall be authorized by the condominium
association in conformity with all pertinent requirements of the condominium
association's declarations.
2. Application; Contents: The administrator shall establish the submittal requirements for
an exterior alteration or modification application. A complete list of the submittal
requirements shall be maintained by the administrator and filed in the department of
community development. Certain submittal requirements may be waived and/or
modified by the administrator and/or the reviewing body if it is demonstrated by the
applicant that the information and materials required are not relevant to the proposed
development or applicable to the planning documents that comprise the Vail
comprehensive plan. The administrator and/or the reviewing body may require the
submission of additional plans, drawings, specifications, samples and other materials if
deemed necessary to properly evaluate the proposal.
3. Work Sessions/Conceptual Review: If requested by either the applicant or the
administrator, submittals may proceed to a work session with the planning and
environmental commission, a conceptual review with the design review board, or a work
session with the town council.
June 2, 2020 - Page 136 of 772
Town of Vail Page 9
4. Hearing: The public hearing before the planning and environmental commission shall
be held in accordance with section 12-3-6 of this title. The planning and environmental
commission may approve the application as submitted, approve the application with
conditions or modifications, or deny the application. The decision of the planning and
environmental commission may be appealed to the town council in accordance with
section 12-3-3 of this title.
5. Lapse Of Approval: Approval of an exterior alteration as prescribed by this article
shall lapse and become void three (3) years following the date of approval by the design
review board unless, prior to the expiration, a building permit is issued and construction
is commenced and diligently pursued to completion. Administrative extensions shall be
allowed for reasonable and unexpected delays as long as code provisions affecting the
proposal have not changed. (Ord. 29(2005) § 24: Ord. 5(2003) § 5: Ord. 31(2001) § 7:
Ord. 23(1999) § 1)
12-7A-13: COMPLIANCE BURDEN:
It shall be the burden of the applicant to prove by a preponderance of the evidence
before the planning and environmental commission and the design review board that
the proposed exterior alteration or new development is in compliance with the purposes
of the public accommodation district, that the proposal is consistent with applicable
elements of the Vail Village master plan, the Vail Village urban design guide plan and
the Vail streetscape master plan, and that the proposal does not otherwise have a
significant negative effect on the character of the neighborhood, and that the proposal
substantially complies with other applicable elements of the Vail comprehensive plan.
(Ord. 29(2005) § 24: Ord. 23(1999) § 1)
12-7A-14: MITIGATION OF DEVELOPMENT IMPACTS:
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 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. (Ord.
29(2005) § 24: Ord. 23(1999) § 1)
12-7A-15: ADDITION OF GROSS RESIDENTIAL FLOOR AREA TO EXISTING PA
PROPERTIES:
June 2, 2020 - Page 137 of 772
Town of Vail Page 10
For any gross residential floor area added to a public accommodation zoned property
following the effective date hereof, a minimum of seventy percent (70%) of the added
gross residential floor area shall be devoted to accommodation units, or fractional fee
club units subject to the issuance of a conditional use permit. This limitation shall not
apply to gross residential floor area being added in accordance with sections 12-15-4
and 12-15-5 of this title. (Ord. 23(1999) § 1)
Vail Land Use Plan (in part)
Chapter II - Land Use Plan Goals / Policies (in part)
1. General Growth/Development
1.1 Vail should continue to grow in a controlled environment, maintaining a
balance between residential, commercial and recreational uses to serve both the
visitor and the permanent resident.
1.3 The quality of development should be maintained and upgraded whenever
possible.
1.12 Vail should accommodate most of the additional growth in existing
developed areas (infill areas).
Chapter VI – Proposed Land Use (in part)
GOAL #2 TO FOSTER A STRONG TOURIST INDUSTRY AND PROMOTE YEAR-
AROUND ECONOMIC HEALTH AND VIABILITY FOR THE VILLAGE AND FOR THE
COMMUNITY AS A WHOLE.
Objective 2.1: Recognize the variety of land uses found in the 11 sub-areas
throughout the Village and allow for development that is compatible with these
established land use patterns.
Objective 2.3: Increase the number of residential units available for short term
overnight accommodations.
Policy 2.3.1: The development of short term accommodation units is
strongly encouraged. Residential units that are developed above existing
density levels are required to be designed or managed in a manner that
makes them available for short term overnight rental.
Objective 2.5: Encourage the continued upgrading, renovation and maintenance
of existing lodging and commercial facilities to better serve the needs of our
guests.
June 2, 2020 - Page 138 of 772
Town of Vail Page 11
Vail Village Master Plan (in part)
GOAL #1 ENCOURAGE HIGH QUALITY, REDEVELOPMENT WHILE PRESERVING
UNIQUE ARCHITECTURAL SCALE OF THE VILLAGE IN ORDER TO SUSTAIN ITS
SENSE OF COMMUNITY AND IDENTITY.
Objective 1.2: Encourage the upgrading and redevelopment of residential and
commercial facilities.
GOAL #2 TO FOSTER A STRONG TOURIST INDUSTRY AND PROMOTE YEAR-
AROUND ECONOMIC HEALTH AND VIABILITY FOR THE VILLAGE AND FOR THE
COMMUNITY AS A WHOLE.
Objective 2.1: Recognize the variety of land uses found in the 11 sub-areas throughout
the Village and allow for development that is compatible with these established land use
patterns.
Policy 2.1 The zoning code and development review criteria shall be consistent with the
goals and objectives of the Vail Village Master Plan.
Objective 2.3: Increase the number of residential units available for short-term overnight
accommodations.
Policy 2.3.1 : The development of short term accommodation units is strongly
encouraged. Residential units that are developed above existing density levels are
required to be designed or managed ina manner that makes them available for short
term overnight rental.
GOAL #4 TO PRESERVE EXISTING OPEN SPACE AREAS AND EXPAND GREEN
SPACE OPPORTUNITIES.
Objective 4.1: Improve existing open space areas and create new plazas with green
space and pocket parks. Recognize the different roles of each type of open space in
forming the overall fabric of the Village.
Policy 4.1.3: With the exception of ski base-related facilities, existing natural open space
areas at the base of Vail Mountain and throughout Vail Village and existing green
spaces shall be preserved as open space.
June 2, 2020 - Page 139 of 772
Town of Vail Page 12
V. SITE ANALYSIS
Address: 366 Hanson Ranch Road
Legal Description: Lot 1, 366 Hanson Ranch Road Subdivision, formerly Part of Lot d,
Block 2, Vail Village First Filing, a portion of Lot d-1, Block 2, Vail
Village Fifth Filing and a portion of Tract E, Vail Village Fifth Filing
Existing Zoning: Public Accommodation (PA) District and Agriculture and Open Space
(A) District
Proposed Zoning: Public Accommodation (PA) District
Land Use Plan Designation: Vail Village Master Plan
Current Land Use: Lodge
Anticipated Future Land Use: Lodge
Geological Hazards: None
VI. SURROUNDING LAND USES AND ZONING
Existing Use Zone District
North: Lodging/Multifamily Public Accommodation (PA) District
South: Open Space/Recreation Agriculture and Open Space (A) District
East: Lodging/Multifamily SDD #37, Tivoli Lodge with an underlying
zoning of Public Accommodation (PA)
District
West: Lodging/Multifamily SDD #28, Christiania with an underlying
zoning of Vail Public Accommodation (PA)
District
VII. REVIEW CRITERIA
Before acting on an application for a zone district boundary amendment, the planning
and environmental commission and town council shall consider the following factors
with respect to the requested zone district boundary amendment:
1. The extent to which the zone district amendments are consistent with all
the applicable elements of the adopted goals, objectives and policies outlined in
the Vail comprehensive plan and is compatible with the development objectives
of the town.
The Vail Land Use Plan designation and applicable planning document for the subject
property is the Vail Village Master Plan. The Public Accommodation Zone district
designation for this property is consistent with the adjacent parcels and is consistent
with the goals, objectives and policies outlined in the Vail Village Master Plan.
June 2, 2020 - Page 140 of 772
Town of Vail Page 13
The lands within the fence have long been perceived as a part of the existing property.
The amendment of the zone district boundaries to conform to the fenced area will have
little or no overall effect upon the larger goals of the community. The amendment will
bring the property into greater conformance with the development standards of the
Public Accommodation Zone District including minimum lot size, setbacks, site
coverage and landscaping.
The proposed rezoning is supported by the Goals #1 and #2 of Vail Village Master Plan
that encourage high quality redevelopment and the importance of the tourist industry to
the health and vitality of the community.
Goal #4 is relative to open space and is relevant to the zone district boundary
amendment request. Because it was within the fence, the 5,380 square feet of area
proposed for zone change has likely not been a part of the perceived open space
corridor behind or adjacent to the home. The Vail Village Master Plan was originally
adopted in 1990. The area proposed for re-zoning has been enclosed by a fence,
landscaped as part of the yard and used exclusively and privately by the owners of the
home since well prior to, and since, 1990. The re-zoning of this land will not impact the
historic area of perceived open space that exists in this area. The lands outside of the
fence will remain zoned as Agricultural and Open Space.
Staff finds this criterion to be met.
2. The extent to which the zone district amendments are suitable with the
existing and potential land uses on the site and existing and potential
surrounding land uses as set out in the town's adopted planning documents.
The zone district boundary amendment is both suitable and compatible with the existing
and proposed land uses on the site and the existing and potential surrounding land
uses. The rezoning will bring the property into greater conformance with the
development standards of the Public Accommodation Zone District including minimum
lot size, setbacks, site coverage and landscaping that will assist in redevelopment.
As the rezoning follows the historical fence boundary, no impacts on surrounding land
uses are anticipated.
Staff finds this criterion to be met.
3. The extent to which the zone district amendments present a harmonious,
convenient, workable relationship among land uses consistent with municipal
development objectives.
The proposed zone district amendments will create a cohesive land use scheme
consistent with the development objectives of the town, namely orderly development
and redevelopment under a unified zoning designation.
June 2, 2020 - Page 141 of 772
Town of Vail Page 14
Staff finds this criterion to be met.
4. The extent to which the zone district amendments provide for the growth of
an orderly viable community and does not constitute spot zoning as the
amendment serves the best interests of the community as a whole.
The zone district boundary amendment proposes to recognize the lot boundary
correction and maintains the Public Accommodation zoning of the 366 Hanson Ranch
Road property. This zone district designation is consistent with the Vail Village Master
Plan and does not constitute spot zoning. The application fosters order in the sense that
it aligns zone district and subdivision boundaries.
Staff finds this criterion to be met.
5. The extent to which the zone district amendments result in adverse or
beneficial impacts on the natural environment, including, but not limited to, water
quality, air quality, noise, vegetation, riparian corridors, hillsides and other
desirable natural features.
The proposed rezoning will not result in adverse impacts to the natural environment.
Future developments on the reconfigured and rezoned parcels will be required to
adhere to all applicable environmental standards during development review,
construction and facility operation.
Staff finds this criterion to be met.
6. The extent to which the zone district amendments are consistent with the
purpose statement of the proposed zone district.
The proposed rezoning is consistent with the purpose statement of the Public
Accommodation (PA) Districts and future development on the property will also be
required to be compatible with its intent.
Staff finds this criterion to be met.
7. The extent to which the zone district amendments demonstrate how
conditions have changed since the zoning designation of the subject property
was adopted and is no longer appropriate.
The proposed zone district boundary amendment recognizes the historical boundary of
the property. Maintaining the existing zoning designation would be inappropriate as it is
problematic to have an individual property with multiple zone designations.
Staff finds this criterion to be met.
June 2, 2020 - Page 142 of 772
Town of Vail Page 15
8. Such other factors and criteria as the commission and/or council deem
applicable to the proposed rezonings.
VIII. STAFF RECOMMENDATION
The Community Development Department recommends the Planning and
Environmental Commission forwards a recommendation of approval to the Vail Town
Council for a zone district boundary amendment, pursuant to Section 12-3-7,
Amendment, Vail Town Code, to allow for the rezoning of a portion of the property
located at 366 Hanson Ranch Road/Lot 1, 366 Hanson Ranch Road Subdivision. The
proposed rezoning would change the Zone District from Agriculture and Open Space
(A) District to the Public Accommodation (PA) District and setting forth details in regard
thereto. Staff’s recommendation is based upon the review of the criteria described in
Section VII of this memorandum and the evidence and testimony presented.
Should the Planning and Environmental Commission choose to forward a
recommendation of approval to the Vail Town Council for the zone district boundary
amendments, the Community Development Department recommends the Commission
pass the following motion:
“The Planning and Environmental Commission forwards a recommendation of
approval to the Vail Town Council for a zone district boundary amendment,
pursuant to Section 12-3-7, Amendment, Vail Town Code, to allow for the rezoning
of a portion of the property located at 366 Hanson Ranch Road/Lot 1, 366 Hanson
Ranch Road Subdivision. The proposed rezoning would change the Zone District
from Agriculture and Open Space (A) District to the Public Accommodation (PA)
District and setting forth details in regard thereto.”
Should the Planning and Environmental Commission choose to forward this
recommendation of approval, the Community Development Department recommends
the Commission makes the following findings:
“Based upon the review of the criteria outlined in Section VII of the Staff
memorandum to the Planning and Environmental Commission dated March 9, 2020,
and the evidence and testimony presented, the Planning and Environmental
Commission finds:
1. That the amendments are consistent with the adopted goals, objectives and
policies outlined in the Vail comprehensive plan and compatible with the
development objectives of the town; and
2. That the amendments are compatible with and suitable to adjacent uses and
appropriate for the surrounding areas; and
3. That the amendments promote the health, safety, morals, and general welfare
of the town and promote the coordinated and harmonious development of the
June 2, 2020 - Page 143 of 772
Town of Vail Page 16
town in a manner that conserves and enhances its natural environment and
its established character as a resort and residential community of the highest
quality.”
IX. ATTACHMENTS
A. Vicinity Map
B. Applicant’s Updated Narrative dated February 10, 2020
C. PEC worksession minutes, May 13, 2019
D. PEC public hearing minutes, July 8, 2019
E. Letter of Opposition, Vail Homeowner’s Association, June 3, 2019
F. Letter of Opposition, Frederick Wyman II, July 8, 2019
June 2, 2020 - Page 144 of 772
H A N S O N R A N C H R D
M IL L C R E E K C IR VAIL VALLEY DRGORE CREEK DR
B
R
I
D
G
E
S
T
GORE CREEK DR
I
Subject Property
0 50 10025
Feet
V A I L P O I N TVAILPOINTZone D i s t r i c t A m e n d m e n t (P E C 1 9 -0 0 2 2 )Z o n e D i s t r i c t A m e n d m e n t (P E C 1 9 -0 0 2 2 )3 6 6 H a n s o n R a n c h R o a d366 H a n s o n R a n c h R o a dLot 1 , 3 6 6 H a n s o n R a n c h R o a d S u b d i v i s i o nLot 1 , 3 6 6 H a n s o n R a n c h R o a d S u b d i v i s i o n
This ma p w as created by the Town of Vail Co mmu nity Development Departme nt. Use of this ma p shou ld be for g eneral p urp oses o nly.
The Town of Vail does no t warran t the accura cy of the informa tion co nta in ed herein.
(whe re sh own, pa rcel line work is ap pro xima te )
Last Modified:June 19, 2019June 2, 2020 - Page 145 of 772
LOT 1,
366 HANSON RANCH ROAD
SUBDIVISION
Narrative in support of
Petition for Zone District Boundary Amendment
Submittal Date: June 7, 2019
Updated: February 10, 2020
June 2, 2020 - Page 146 of 772
Table of Contents
Table of Contents
Page
I. Introduction ............................................................................................................. 1
II. Existing Conditions – Nonconformity ...................................................................... 3
III. 2018 Consideration of Rezoning Request ............................................................... 4
IV. Zone District Boundary Amendment Review Criteria ............................................. 5
V. Application Materials .............................................................................................. 9
June 2, 2020 - Page 147 of 772
Avanti Lodge / 366 Hanson Ranch Road
Zone District Map Amendment Page 1
Update: February 10, 2020
LOT 1, 366 HANSON RANCH ROAD SUBDIVISION
Project Narrative in support of
Petition for Zone District Boundary Amendment
Planning Commission File No. PEC-19-0022
TO: Planning Department, Town of Vail
RE: 366 Hanson Ranch Road, Vail, CO
DATE: February 10, 2020
Notable Updates:
This rezoning application was initially heard before the PEC on July 8, 2019. Based on the applicable
criteria set forth in the Vail Municipal Code, the Community Development Department recommended
that the PEC forward a recommendation of approval to the Vail Town Council. At the July 8, 2019 hearing,
several members of PEC indicated their desire to review the rezoning request only after they had reviewed
Applicant’s application for Major Exterior Alteration Permit. Applicant agreed to the tabling.
I. INTRODUCTION
This petition for zone district boundary amendment requests rezoning of a portion of Lot 1, 366 Hanson
Ranch Road Subdivision (Property), Assessor Parcel No. 2101-082-90-001, from Agriculture and Open
Space (A/OS) to Public Accommodation (PA). The Property is a 0.3040 acre lot — 7,862 square feet of
which is zoned PA and the remaining 5,380 square feet of which is zoned A/OS. The purpose of this
application is to apply a single zone district to the entirety of the Property.
The area proposed for rezoning is the area inside the Property boundary and depicted in green below:
June 2, 2020 - Page 148 of 772
Avanti Lodge / 366 Hanson Ranch Road
Zone District Map Amendment Page 2
Update: February 10, 2020
The Rezone Area is 5,380 square feet (Rezone Area)—or 0.1235 acre—and is depicted on the map
attached as Appendix A. The adjacent land to the north and west within the Property is 7,862 square feet
zoned as PA since the Town initially adopted zoning decades ago. These areas combined constitute the
lot that the Planning and Environmental Commission (PEC) approved as Lot 1, 366 Hanson Ranch Road
Subdivision.
Petitioner VailPoint LLC is the legal owner of record of all of the Property, as evidenced by the title
commitment attached as Appendix B. The Property is not owned in common and is not located within a
Development Lot.
The Rezone Area is comprised of lands that have been inside the fence at the Property for more than 50
years, but that were not originally within the deeded lot boundary. In January, 2018, the Eagle County
District Court entered an Order and Decree Quieting Title (Court Order) to the Rezone Area based on a
finding that Applicant and its predecessors in title have been in actual, adverse, hostile, open, notorious,
exclusive, continuous possession of the Rezone Area under claim of right, made in good faith, for a period
of time in excess of eighteen (18) years. A copy of the Court Order is attached as Appendix C.
The rezoning is proposed to proceed as a Zone District Boundary Amendment (Petition) in accordance
with the procedure established by Vail Municipal Code (VMC) § 12-3-7. This narrative is submitted, with
its supporting appendices, for the record in support of the Town of Vail’s (Town) requirements for the
Petition, as adopted in the VMC. In accordance with VMC § 12-3-7.B.2, this Petition is initiated by a
property owner in the Town.
The dual zoning within a single lot is recognized by both Town staff and the Applicant as unworkable and
undesirable.
June 2, 2020 - Page 149 of 772
Avanti Lodge / 366 Hanson Ranch Road
Zone District Map Amendment Page 3
Update: February 10, 2020
II. EXISTING CONDITIONS - NONCONFORMITY
The Property as it exists today is not in conformance with the Town’s zoning regulations in three respects.
First, at 0.1235 acres, the Rezone Area is less than 1% of the Town’s required minimum lot or site area of
thirty-five acres with a minimum of one acre of buildable area in this zone district. See VMC 12-8A-5.1
Second, at 7,862 square feet, the PA-zoned portion of the Property does not satisfy the Town’s required
10,000 square foot minimum size mandated within PA zone district. See VMC § 12-7A-5. Third, the PA-
zoned portion of the Property is not capable of enclosing a square eighty (80) feet on each side within its
boundaries. See VMC § 12-7A-5. Each of these non-conformities that exist on the Property today will
be eliminated—and the Property brought into compliance with the Town’s zoning regulations—by
approval of this Petition.
Courts in Colorado have long held that nonconformities are disfavored because they reduce the
effectiveness of zoning ordinances. See Hartley v. City of Colorado Springs, 764 P.2d 1216 (Colo. 1988);
see also City & County of Denver v. Board of Adjustment, 31 Colo.App. 324, 331, 505 P.2d 44, 47 (1972)
(quoting 2 A. Rathkopf, The Law of Zoning and Planning 62–1 (3d ed. 1976)); Comment, Conforming the
Nonconforming Use: Proposed Legislative Relief for a Zoning Dilemma, 33 Sw.L.J. 855, 863 (1979); see also
Tips, Nonconforming Uses—What Can Be Done With Them and How to Get Rid of Them, 1980 Inst. on
Plan. Zoning & Eminent Domain 85, 108. Because of their undesirable effect on the community,
nonconformities should be eliminated as speedily as possible. Wasinger v. Miller, 154 Colo. 61, 66, 388
P.2d 250, 253 (1964); Denver Police Protective Ass'n v. City & County of Denver, 710 P.2d 3, 6
(Colo.App.1985); 4 A. Rathkopf & D. Rathkopf, The Law of Zoning and Planning § 51.06[1], at 51–43 to –
617 (4th ed. 1988).
The Property is believed by Applicant and Town Staff to be the only lot in the Town of Vail that has two
separate zone districts. On every other property throughout Town, the zone district boundaries follow
platted property lines. Town staff has previously characterized the existing zoning condition of the
Property as unworkable from an administrative perspective and undesirable from a planning perspective,
and has recommended approval of this rezoning application.
1 Applicant’s research indicates that there are only about ten (10) parcels zoned A/OS in the Town, all but one of
which don’t even come close to satisfying the minimum lot size. Notes in the Town’s GIS mapping system indicate
that some of these may have been rezoned over the years, and there is some confusion about what property is even
within the zone district. See Assessor Account Nos. R006780 (30.6 acres); R066944 (3.150 acres); R050657 (6.302
acres); R057430 (2.132 acres); R007977 (0.762 acres); R008042 (1.687 acres); R008078 (2.860 acres); R031618 (1.390
acres); R033001 (0.272 acres); and R004010 (3.0 acres). Staff has indicated that the A/OS zone district is a relic of
Eagle County zoning, prior to Vail’s incorporation. At a minimum, it is apparent that there are problems with the
A/OS zone district throughout Town, including on this Property.
June 2, 2020 - Page 150 of 772
Avanti Lodge / 366 Hanson Ranch Road
Zone District Map Amendment Page 4
Update: February 10, 2020
III. 2018 CONSIDERATION OF REZONING REQUEST
In May 2018, Applicant submitted a petition seeking approval of the same rezoning sought under this
Petition. The Town’s Community Development Department found all review criteria to be satisfied and
recommended that the PEC forward a recommendation of approval to the Vail Town Council. A copy of
the Community Development Department’s June 25, 2018 staff report is attached as Appendix D.
The PEC was unable to forward a recommendation to the Vail Town Council. At its meeting on June 25,
2018, the PEC deadlocked 3-3 on a motion to recommend approval of the zone change with
Commissioners Stockmar, Kurz and Kjesbo voting in favor, and Commissioners Gillette, Hopkins and Perez
opposed. Applicant withdrew the zoning application prior to its consideration by the Vail Town Council.
Neither the Applicant’s request nor the Town’s criteria have changed since the Community Development
Department and three members of PEC found that the rezoning request complies with the Town’s criteria.
This rezoning application was filed on June 7, 2019 and initially heard before the PEC on July 8, 2019. At
that hearing, several members of PEC indicated their desire to review the rezoning request only after they
had reviewed Applicant’s application for Major Exterior Alteration Permit. Applicant agreed to the tabling
for that limited purpose.
June 2, 2020 - Page 151 of 772
Avanti Lodge / 366 Hanson Ranch Road
Zone District Map Amendment Page 5
Update: February 10, 2020
IV. ZONE DISTRICT BOUNDARY AMENDMENT REVIEW CRITERIA
VMC § 12-3-7 establishes the criteria for the review of amendments to zone district boundaries. Before
acting on an application for a zone district boundary amendment, the planning and environmental
commission and town council shall consider the following eight factors with respect to the requested zone
district boundary amendment.
(1) The extent to which the zone district amendment is consistent with all the applicable elements
of the adopted goals, objectives and policies outlined in the Vail comprehensive plan and is
compatible with the development objectives of the town.
Applicant response:
The Vail Land Use Plan designates this area of the community as Vail Village Master Plan and utilizes the
Vail Village Master Plan as the detailed land use plan. The PA zone district designation is consistent with
the adjacent parcels and is consistent with the goals, objectives and policies outlined in the Vail Village
Master Plan.
The Rezone Area has long been perceived and used as an integral part of the existing home. As a result,
the amendment of the zone district boundaries to conform to the historic fenced area will have little or
no overall effect upon the Town’s goals and objectives for the community. Moreover, the amendment is
consistent with criteria in that the rezoning will bring the existing lot into size conformance with the
minimum lot size of the existing PA zone district.
There are six primary goals of the Vail Village Master Plan. Goals #1 and 2 relate to re-development and
upgrading of private buildings. Goal #1 supports the high-quality upgrading of residential and commercial
buildings. This petition is one step in the process of ultimately redeveloping and upgrading the present,
obsolete residence. Goal #2 supports the PA Zone District designation as an important economic goal of
the community.
This Petition has no relation or bearing on Goals #3, #5 or #6.
Goal #4 relates to open space and is relevant to the Petition. The Rezone Area has been privately owned
for more than 50 years. The Rezone Area is not identified on any of the Town’s adopted open space plans
and has not been designated by the Town as open space. The Vail Village Master Plan was originally
adopted in 1990. The Rezone Area has been enclosed by a fence, landscaped as part of the yard and used
exclusively and privately by the owners of the home for the decades prior to, and since, 1990. The re-
zoning of this land will not impact the perception of open space in this area.
The Vail Village Master Plan Goals #1, #2 and #4 and the relevant objectives and policies are indicated
below.
GOAL #1 ENCOURAGE HIGH QUALITY, REDEVELOPMENT WHILE PRESERVING UNIQUE ARCHITECTURAL
SCALE OF THE VILLAGE IN ORDER TO SUSTAIN ITS SENSE OF COMMUNITY AND IDENTITY.
Objective 1.2: Encourage the upgrading and redevelopment of residential and commercial facilities.
June 2, 2020 - Page 152 of 772
Avanti Lodge / 366 Hanson Ranch Road
Zone District Map Amendment Page 6
Update: February 10, 2020
GOAL #2 TO FOSTER A STRONG TOURIST INDUSTRY AND PROMOTE YEAR-AROUND ECONOMIC HEALTH
AND VIABILITY FOR THE VILLAGE AND FOR THE COMMUNITY AS A WHOLE.
Objective 2.1: Recognize the variety of land uses found in the 11 sub-areas throughout the Village and
allow for development that is compatible with these established land use patterns.
Policy 2.1 The zoning code and development review criteria shall be consistent with the goals and
objectives of the Vail Village Master Plan.
Objective 2.3: Increase the number of residential units available for short term overnight accommodations.
Policy 2.3.1: The development of short-term accommodation units is strongly encouraged. Residential
units that are developed above existing density levels are required to be designed or managed in a manner
that makes them available for short term overnight rental.
GOAL #4 TO PRESERVE EXISTING OPEN SPACE AREAS AND EXPAND GREENSPACE OPPORTUNITIES.
Objective 4.1: Improve existing open space areas and create new plazas with greenspace and pocket parks.
Recognize the different roles of each type of open space in forming the overall fabric of the Village.
Policy 4.1.3: With the exception of ski base-related facilities, existing natural open space areas at the base
of Vail Mountain and throughout Vail Village and existing greenspaces shall be preserved as open space.
(2) The extent to which the zone district amendment is suitable with the existing and potential land
uses on the site and existing and potential surrounding land uses as set out in the town's
adopted planning documents.
Applicant response:
The existing land use of the property is as a yard and landscaping for the adjacent non-conforming single-
family home. The proposed re-zoning will not, alone, change the existing use of the land that is subject
to the rezoning. A potential, conforming future use of the entire parcel under the PA zone district would
be compatible with the town’s adopted planning documents, as described in the Avanti Lodge – Project
Narrative in support of Application for Major Exterior Alteration Permit, File No. PEC 19-008. The
proposed zone district boundary amendment will resolve a long-term fence boundary issue. The parcel
size will now conform to the minimum lot size requirement of the PA zone district.
The existing home has been suitable with the surrounding land use and a future, conforming use under
the Public Accommodation Zone District would likewise be consistent with adjacent properties.
Moreover, since development of varying types is permitted in both the PA and A/OS zone district, the
zone district amendment alone will not enable construction of improvements that would be prohibited
under the current zoning. Development is allowed in both the PA and A/OS zone district. Rather, the
requested rezoning will make for a better designed building by application of uniform setbacks, building
height and other development standards on the Property.
June 2, 2020 - Page 153 of 772
Avanti Lodge / 366 Hanson Ranch Road
Zone District Map Amendment Page 7
Update: February 10, 2020
(3) The extent to which the zone district amendment presents a harmonious, convenient,
workable relationship among land uses consistent with municipal development objective.
Applicant response:
The proposed amendment adjusts the existing zone district boundaries to apply a consistent zoning to all
of the fenced area of 366 Hanson Ranch Road. This amendment does not affect to any material extent
the harmonious, convenient, workable relationship among land uses.
(4) The extent to which the zone district amendment provides for the growth of an orderly
viable community and does not constitute spot zoning as the amendment serves the best
interests of the community as a whole.
Applicant response:
The zone district boundary amendment proposes to recognize the lot boundary correction and maintains
the PA zoning of the Property. This zone district designation is consistent with the Vail Village Master Plan
and does not constitute spot zoning. The application fosters order in the sense that it aligns zone district
and subdivision boundaries—the condition that exists for every other property within the Town of Vail.
(5) The extent to which the zone district amendment results in adverse or beneficial impacts
on the natural environment, including, but not limited to, water quality, air quality, noise,
vegetation, riparian corridors, hillsides and other desirable natural features.
Applicant response:
The proposed amendment has no adverse impact upon the natural environment. The 5,380 square feet
that are the subject of this application are currently landscaped as a part of a residential yard and are
enclosed by a fence. Development of various improvements is permitted in the existing A/OS zone district,
so the rezoning alone will not permit currently prohibited development.
(6) The extent to which the zone district amendment is consistent with the purpose statement
of the proposed zone district.
Applicant response:
The historic parcel boundary is zoned Public Accommodation but is legally non-conforming due to its size
and present use. First, at 0.1235 acres, the Rezone Area is less than 1% of the required 35-acre minimum
lot size in the existing Agriculture/Open Space zone district. Second, the minimum lot size for the PA Zone
district is 10,000 square feet, the existing home sits on a 7,862 square foot parcel. The addition of the
5,380 square feet of the Rezone Area will bring the Property into conformance with the minimum size
standard. This proposed amendme nt is completely consistent with the purpose statement of the Public
Accommodation Zone District, in fact correcting existing inconsistencies.
June 2, 2020 - Page 154 of 772
Avanti Lodge / 366 Hanson Ranch Road
Zone District Map Amendment Page 8
Update: February 10, 2020
(7) The extent to which the zone district amendment demonstrates how conditions have
changed since the zoning designation of the subject property was adopted and is no longer
appropriate.
Applicant response:
The Rezone Area has been an integral part of the primary home parcel for perhaps as long as zoning has
been enacted in the Town of Vail. The lands within the fence are not integrated into the adjacent A/OS
lands outside of the fence. Both visually and as actually used now and historically, the Rezone Area falls
under the same condition as the primary, PA-zoned home parcel.
The need for the zone district boundary amendment arises from the inconsistency between the historic
deeded property boundary and the location of the fence. Now that the fence line has been determined
to be the property boundary, it is appropriate to rezone so that the entire property is subject to only one
zoning designation.
(8) Such other factors and criteria as the commission and/or council deem applicable to the
proposed rezoning.
Applicant response:
No applicant response is necessary.
June 2, 2020 - Page 155 of 772
Avanti Lodge / 366 Hanson Ranch Road
Zone District Map Amendment Page 9
Update: February 10, 2020
V. APPLICATION MATERIALS
Application materials submitted in support of this application consist of the following:
Description
A. Map indicating existing and proposed zone district boundaries
B. Title commitment
C. Court Order
D. Community Development Department’s June 25, 2018 staff report
E. List of adjacent property owners (updated February 10, 2020)
June 2, 2020 - Page 156 of 772
P L ANNING AND E NV IRO NM E NTAL C O M M I S S IO N
M ay 13, 2019, 1:00 P M
Town C ouncil C hambers
75 S . F rontage Road - Vail, Colorado, 81657
1.Call to Order
Present: Pam Hopkins, K aren Perez, Brian Stockmar, Ludwig Kurz, Brian
Gillette, Rollie Kjesbo
Absent: J ohn-Ryan Lockman
2.S ite Visits
2.1.366 Hanson Ranch Road - Vailpoint L LC
2.2.2698 Cortina Lane - Sc heidegger Residence
3.Main A genda
3.1.A worksession to disc uss a Major Exterior Alteration, pursuant to Section
12-7A-12, Exterior A lterations or Modific ations, Vail Town C ode, to allow for
the replacement of the existing struc ture with a seven (7) suite private lodge
and staff apartment with related site improvements, loc ated at 366 Hanson
Ranc h Road/Lot D, B lock 2, Vail Village Filing 1, and setting forth details in
regard thereto. (P E C 19-0008)
60 min.
Applicant:Vailpoint L L C , represented by Sarah J Baker, PC
Planner:J onathan S penc e
Planner Spence introduc ed the project and noted that the public
ac commodation zone district has language that allows either staff or an
applicant to request a work session with the P E C, or any town body. He
noted that this work session has been initiated by the applicant, not by
staff. Mr. Spence referred to the staff memo submitted and noted that
there will be no action requested of the P E C today. Mr. S penc e further
noted that there has only been an initial analysis done on the proposal
Ms. Baker, on behalf of the applicant, introduced the team. Mr. Mueller,
owner of Cuvee, George Sollidge, Owner of Vail P oint L L C , J ens W arner,
from REcom Global, Ric k Py lman, Land planning and Emilia Kraft and
Hans Berglund from Berglund Arc hitects.
Ms. Baker stated they requested a work session due to town proc edure
and enumerated the three items they are seeking feedbac k on today. Ms.
Baker stated that there are a few options and would like feedbac k;
however, no formal action is requested.
Ms. Baker stated that the proposed building siting has a c ouple of options.
Setbac ks in the PA district may be modified based on c riteria. The
variation is not a varianc e.
Upon inquiry from Chairman Stockmar, Mr. Spenc e agreed with Ms.
June 2, 2020 - Page 157 of 772
Baker ’s interpretation of the PA zone district setbacks.
Ms. Baker noted that the building footprint that does meet setbac ks has
implic ations for the pedestrian experience in the area.
Mr. Baker stated there is also a desire to address the fac t that there are
two zoning designations for the single lot. She noted that there was a
previous attempt to rec oncile that issue, however, was not achieved on a
PE C vote.
Mr. Larry Mueller, founder and C E O of Cuvee, then provided an overview
of how the building will be operated. Mr. Mueller desc ribed the private
lodge and the clientele it serves. He noted that there is a large demand for
high end lodges that allow people to travel as extended families or as
friends and have a private lodge experience with acc ess to high-end
amenities.
Mr. Mueller noted that the property has private space for families as well as
common space. He stated that y ou c an only rent the structure as an entire
unit, and individual rooms are not individually leased out.
Hans Berglund and Emilia Kraft presented to the Board design images of
the proposed building. He noted that setbacks can be modified without a
variance as long as five c riteria are met. He then presented why this
proposal meets each of those criteria. Mr. Berglund stated that the
proposal maintains open spac e and creates a more welc oming pedestrian
element. Additionally, he noted that the proposal will maintain adequate light
and air. Mr. Berglund stated that they reviewed the I B C to ensure they will
meet building code requirements for building setbac k requirements. He
noted that the proposed building setbac k has the massing stepped bac k
between 10’-16’ to create more spac e.
Mr. Berglund then discussed the proposed tower which would c omply with
the 60’ standard for architec tural projections and stated that the tower is
essentially the same height as the Tivoli building next door. He noted that
towers are prominent features and is consistent and will add to the visual
overall landscape from a distance as well as a pedestrian.
Mr. Berglund then desc ribed the proposed materials, a stone base around
the house as the main arc hitectural element and the other materials inc lude
two c olors of copper siding, one as a very dark bronze tone and a lighter
copper color, heavy timber construction. He noted that the theme is
mountain architecture and speaks to the early day s of Vail. He noted that
while they are before the board to talk about setbac ks, he feels that the
building design will c ontribute to the c ommunity.
Mr. Kurz inquired about the func tion of the tower besides the arc hitectural
design.
Mr. Berglund stated that it is mainly arc hitectural, there is not spac e in it,
with the exception of stairs and a small landing with balc onies that wrap
around.
Upon inquiry from Ms. Hopkins, Mr. Berglund stated that the tower could
be lower, however, in order to ac hieve the effect of a tower, the height is
needed.
June 2, 2020 - Page 158 of 772
Ms. Hopkins inquired about the throughway from Mill Creek Circ le to
Golden Peak.
Mr. Berglund stated that the new building will be more attractive. Mr.
Berglund stated that there have been discussions with Vail Resorts about
updating the landsc aping. He stated that trees are to be removed within the
property.
The board then reviewed the shadow study. Mr. Stockmar noted a c oncern
that the shadow is extensive and puts all of Hanson Ranc h Road in
shadow, which is ic y and has implications for safety. The existing pavers
are snow melted but not the asphalt road.
Upon inquiry from Ms. P erez, Mr. Berglund noted that the alternative
footprint would be similar in terms of shadow impact.
Ms. Baker stated that at the next meeting they will provide the current
condition as well as proposed. Ms. Baker noted that the cumulative impact
will be helpful in a future discussion.
Mr. Kurz inquired about proposed parking.
Mr. Ric k Py lman, stated that the lodge parking requirements is 0.7 parking
spaces per room, 7 parking spac es total would be required. 1 ½ spaces
are attributed to the small c aretaker unit. He noted there are 3 spaces in
the garage and 4 spaces outside of the garage. All parking spac es are on
the property.
Mr. Kjesbo noted that Tivoli was required to have 15-minute parking and
cars c urrently block the sidewalk, which pushes people into the icy road.
Mr. Py lman stated that since the entire property is to be rented out and not
as individual units, they do not foresee parking being an issue. Mr. Kjesbo
noted that the use c an c hange which would impac t the operation. Mr.
Stoc kmar noted that the ownership and use can change at any time. Mr.
Stoc kmar noted that the P E C must consider future impac t as well as
proposed operations.
Mr. Py lman stated they will take the P E C’s comments into c onsideration
into the design.
Mr. Kjesbo stated that the Tivoli was approved with a varianc e for the
height and noted that he has an issue with something extending up 56’ on
the c orner and that it looks out of place and unbalanc es the building. He
does not like that much bulk right at the street.
Upon inquiry from Mr. Kjesbo, Mr. Spenc e noted that the Town Council
never opined on the zoning c hange.
Mr. Stockmar stated that the meeting when this property was addressed in
J une of 2018, the minutes reflect some of his conc erns are allayed by the
design. Mr. Stockmar stated that it was an odd circ umstance due to how
the property was obtained. Mr. Stoc kmar inquired if the applic ant would
take out the fence ac ross the bac k y ard?
Ms. Baker stated that they have not c ontemplated removing the fence,
however, will consider it through the design process. Ms. Baker stated that
the message has been rec eived and will focus on it moving forward. Mr.
June 2, 2020 - Page 159 of 772
Stoc kmar stated that there may be implic ations for the fence, existing
trees, and hot tub.
Upon inquiry from Ms. P erez, Mr. Spence stated that the same standards
for varianc es do not apply for a setbac k variation. He noted that a varianc e
is a different thing from a variation, which is subjec t to the five-c riteria Mr.
Berglund enumerated.
Chairman Stockmar opened the hearing up to public c omment. No public
comment was provided.
Mr. Gillette discussed the zoning of the property. The commission
disc ussed open space and zoning with the applicant and Planner Spence.
Ms. Perez stated regarding the zoning it was meant to be space available
to the public and stated the applic ant has created this issue. She noted
that it feels like the open spac e is part of the community. Ms. Perez stated
that she disagrees with Mr. Berglund’s analysis of the proposal meeting the
required five criteria.
Ms. Baker clarified that the spac e has never been publicly open spac e
and has always been a private lot.
There was a discussion regarding what development c an occ ur in open
space zone distric ts.
There was a discussion over how the spac e be preserved to open air and
light in the future.
Ms. Perez pointed out where existing trees will be removed from the street
to ac commodate the proposed tower. Ms. Perez stated this will deteriorate
open spac e, air and light. There was a disc ussion over where existing
trees will be removed. Tower would go to corner of where the existing
fenc e is, 60’ high.
Mr. Gillette inquired if the building could be built without the rezoning. Mr.
Spenc e stated no, it could not.
Mr. Stockmar stated they are conc erned about massing, height, and the
fenc e along the south side of the property.
3.2.A request for the review of varianc es from Section 14-3-1: Minimum
Standards, Table 1 Driveway /Feeder Road Standards, Entry Angle
Minimum Deflection, Vail Town Code, in ac cordance with the provisions of
Section 12-17-1, Varianc es, Vail Town Code, to allow for a variance to the
entry angle minimum deflec tion for first 30 feet of driveway length to
fac ilitate the development of a single-family structure, loc ated at 2698
C ortina Lane/Lot 11, B lock B, Vail Ridge Subdivision, and setting forth
details in regard thereto. (P EC19-00013)
20 min.
Applicant:Benno S cheidegger, represented by Berglund Arc hitects
Planner:Ashley Clark
Planner Clark introduc ed the variance request. S he noted that the
property is unique in that is shares a steep driveway with two other
parcels. Ms. Clark noted that Public W orks Department is supportive of
bringing the grade up to code and c hanging the angle to meet c ode.
June 2, 2020 - Page 160 of 772
P L ANNI NG AND E NV I RO NM E NTAL C O M M I S S I O N
J uly 8, 2019, 1:00 P M
Town Council C hambers
75 S. F rontage Road - Vail, Colorado, 81657
1.Call to Order
1.1.Attendance
Present: Brian Gillette, Pam Hopkins, Rollie Kjesbo, Ludwig Kurz, J ohn-
Ryan Lockman, Brian Stockmar, Karen Perez (arrived at 1:20 P M)
Absent: None
2.Main Agenda
2.1.A request for a recommendation to the Vail Town Council for a zone
district boundary amendment, pursuant to Section 12-3-7,
Amendment, Vail Town Code, to allow for the rezoning of a portion of
the property located at 366 Hanson Ranch Road/Lot 1, 366 Hanson
Ranch Road Subdivision. T he proposed rezoning would change the
Zone District from Agriculture and Open Space (A) District to the
Public Accommodation (PA) District, and setting forth details in regard
thereto (P E C19-0022)
30 min.
Applicant:Vailpoint L L C, represented by Sarah J Baker P C
Planner:J onathan Spence
Planner J onathan Spence presented the application. He stated that this
application has been before the P E C a few times over the past year and a
half. Mr. Spence stated that the P E C previously approved a subdivision for
this site. Relying upon a zoning map, Mr. Spence demonstrated that the lot
has two different zoning designations. He noted that the parcel is under the
same ownership and the applicant is seeking to change the zoning to one
designation. He noted that two letters in opposition have been submitted
into the record.
Chairman Stockmar called for questions from the commissioners.
Mr. Stockmar inquired about the court order quieting title.
Mr. Spence stated the court order did not opine on the local regulatory
structure or zoning and pertained only to ownership. Mr. Stockmar noted
that the staff memo provides details that this is a unique situation.
Upon inquiry from Chairman Stockmar, Mr. Spence stated that in terms of
the Community Development Department, having two zoning designations
on one lot creates regulatory problems. He stated that in terms of setbacks
and other calculations determining what is required is difficult.
Chairman Stockmar noted that this is a de novo review and the P E C shall
base their decision solely based on the materials in their packet and public
June 2, 2020 - Page 161 of 772
testimony given today.
There was a discussion over the protected covenants versus the change in
zoning. Mr. Spence noted that the private covenants are not handled within
the Community Development Department and are outside of the P E C or
Staff’s purview.
Ms. Sara Baker, representing the property owner, noted that the staff
report states that all criteria have been met and requested that the P E C
approve the zoning change. Ms. Baker noted that whatever covenants are
in place today will not be impacted by any zoning change. She noted that
the property is currently zoned Agriculture/Open Space and that
development is permitted. Ms. Baker stated that the uses that are allowed
by right are different in each district and is a unique situation and the
application is a clean-up.
Ms. Baker stated that the court order did not order a change in zoning and
just addressed ownership. She noted that this is not the first time the town
has rezoned property in identical situation. Relying upon the town zoning
map, she referred to an application to rezone on Hanson Ranch Road.
Ms. Baker provided additional examples of rezoning and stated that there
is precedent for rezoning.
Upon inquiry from Commissioner Hopkins, Mr. Spence stated that all
setbacks are measured from property lines.
There was a discussion regarding the flexibility in setbacks for Public
Accommodation (PA) zoning districts that the P E C has discretion in
setting.
Chairman Stockmar called for public comment.
Mr. J onathan Stauffer, resident, asked how we got here and stated that it
has been zoned open space since the first mayor. He noted that it is open
space that makes Vail such an attractive community. He stated if this
proposal is allowed any developer can do the same thing.
Mr. Wendell Porterfield, counsel for Christiana, and two others, stated that
this is a self-created problem by quiet title. He stated that there is a
statement in the memo that goal #4 has been met and a statement that the
public has always perceived this as part of the residence. He concluded
that they do not support the requested action.
An owner of a condo unit abutting the property stated that all three groups
sent a statement of objection and hope that they have received and read it.
She stated that the applicant is asking the town the same question over
and over. She noted that green space of any kind is valuable and stated
that if the P E C approves the request it will set a bad precedent.
Mr. J im Lamont, Vail Homeowners Association, stated that the covenants
were Vail’s first land use constitution. He noted that in a constitution you
have two things: the rules and how to change those rules. Mr. Lamont
stated that it would be best if not totally appropriate to have those rules
amended before the application is brought before the board.
A resident spoke in opposition to the proposal. He stated that it frightens
him to see where development is going and encouraged the board to look
June 2, 2020 - Page 162 of 772
at the open space encroachment across Vail.
Lu Maslak, resident, stated that they came to Vail after looking at many ski
towns and chose Vail because of open space and sentiment in the valley to
keep these open spaces and noted that she’s observed an erosion of that
concept. She stated that she is opposed to the encroachment on open
space. She stated she is imploring them to consider what the P E C is
doing.
Herman Stafford, Vail resident, echoed everything that has been said so
far. He stated that they have an obligation to protect open space public and
private. He stated they must protect what we have and not let other people
to take it away and let them redevelop the house but keep the open space.
Chairman Stockmar closed public comment.
Commissioner Lockman stated that he appreciated the public comment
and stated that the P E C must look at this application as if no prior
applications have been submitted. Mr. Lockman stated it is a challenging
application and noted their duty for the town is to review the criteria in an
objective way to see if the application meets the criteria in the town code.
He further noted that you cannot have two zoning designations on one
property. Mr. Lockman stated that, in reviewing, the criteria it does comply.
Commissioner Hopkins stated that she is an old timer as well. Ms. Hopkins
stated that she would have liked a plan delineating where the zoning district
transects the property and stated she is inclined to vote against it.
Commissioner Perez stated that she does not see that it meets Goal #4 of
the master plan. She noted that she would like to see the final development
and will vote against it.
Commissioner Kurz stated that he would like to see the development plan
as well. Mr. Kurz noted he is not ready to vote in favor at this time and
would like to see the proposed development plan along with the zoning
change.
Commissioner Gillette stated that he also did not feel it meets Goal #4 of
the master plan and is inclined to vote against.
Commissioner Kjesbo stated that he would like to see the development plan
before voting in favor.
Chairman Stockmar stated that the issue before the P E C is the zoning
and not the project, building, or anything presented to the board previously.
He stated he is in agreement with the other commissioners and would like
to see the development plan. He stated he would like to see the proposed
building as well as everything brought before and invited a motion to table.
Ms. Baker stated that the P E C has seen the development plan which they
previously reviewed. Ms. Baker stated that the applicant would agree to
table this request and urged the P E C to review the exterior alteration
application.
Upon inquiry from Ms. Perez, Ms. Baker stated there have been no
changes made from the previously reviewed development plan.
June 2, 2020 - Page 163 of 772
There was a discussion regarding the application for a major exterior
alteration. Chairman Stockmar stated reviewing both the zoning and
development plan together would be beneficial.
Mr. Spence stated that while both applications can be reviewed together,
zoning approval can not be tied to a development application.
Ludwig Kurz moved to table to a future date. Pam Hopkins seconded the
motion and it passed (6-1).
Ayes:(6)Hopkins, Kjesbo, Kurz, Lockman, Perez, Stockmar
Nays:(1)Gillette
2.2.A request for the review of a Development Plan, pursuant to Section 12-6I -
11, Development Plan Required, Vail Town Code, for a new housing
development located at 3700 North Frontage Road East/Lot 1, East Vail
Workforce Housing Subdivision (“Booth Heights Neighborhood”), and
setting forth details in regard thereto. (P E C19-0018)
120 min.
Applicant:Triumph Development
Planner:Chris Neubecker
Chairman Stockmar opened the hearing for P E C19-0018 and noted that
written comments are encouraged as it gives the board time to review them
ahead of time. Mr. Stockmar stated that he does not support allowing the
consolidation of comments for one person to speak on behalf of several.
Planner Neubecker stated that some comments were received by staff
after 12P M on Friday and noted that while the comments were not in the
packets, they were forwarded to the board for their review.
Mr. Neubecker gave a presentation for the Booth Heights Neighborhood.
Mr. Neubecker reviewed the Environmental I mpact Report (E I R) submitted
to the town and recommendations made to mitigate impacts to wildlife. Mr.
Neubecker noted that the application includes a landscaping plan and a
wildlife enhancement area to create a better habitat for sheep. Mr.
Neubecker noted that this area would be an ongoing commitment for the
applicant to maintain for the sheep habitat.
Mr. Neubecker stated that the previous application there was a discussion
regarding the location of the bus stop design. He noted that a
recommendation from Colorado Parks and W ildlife (C P W ) was to move
the bus stop out of the west end. Mr. Neubecker presented an alternative
design giving buses an area to turn around as suggested by the town’s
Public Works and Transportation department. Another alternative, Mr.
Neubecker, presented was to provide access to the east bus stop and not
have a bus stop on the west side.
Upon inquiry from Mr. Gillette, Mr. Neubecker stated that coming west
bound there is one stop on the north side of the Frontage Road. There
was a discussion regarding access to crosswalks and bus stops.
Mr. Neubecker reviewed four questions staff is requesting feedback on
from the P E C.
Mr. Lockman asked about the 3D model requested.
Mr. Neubecker stated that the applicant is working on those additional
materials and is part of the reason they are requesting to change the
June 2, 2020 - Page 164 of 772
VAIL HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION, INC.
Town of Vail
Planning and Environmental Commission
75 South Frontage Road
Vail, CO 81657
June 3, 2019
Dear Chairman and Commission Members:
During the recent PEC work session on the Vail Point LLC project, the attorney for Vail Point made the
incorrect assertion that the “fenced in” part of the property (parts of Tract E and Lot D-1), which was acquired
by adverse possession, “is not open space and has never been open space.” Giving her the benefit of the doubt,
she may not know the actual history and may not have made an intentional misstatement. Be that as it may, all
of Tract E and Lot D-1—including the so-called “fenced in” parts--are, and always have been, open space
dedicated to public use. We write to correct the record in that regard.
In Vail’s early days, there was no Town of Vail and Eagle County had no zoning applicable to what is now
Vail. Vail’s founders, therefore, used property covenants to lay out the land use, planning and architectural
controls and a host of other provisions to govern the orderly development of Vail Village. The covenants were
also used to expressly protect certain open spaces. Those covenants are part of the foundational documents of
the TOV.
Protective covenants were an effective way to lay out the future village because they “run with the land;” i.e.,
they are permanent regardless of ownership, cannot be zoned away and can only be changed by any procedures
contained in them for amendments. And, whether the property is in public or private ownership has no bearing
on the force and effect of protective covenants.
Tract E and Lot D-1 (by metes and bounds) was part of the Vail Village 5th filing. Tract E was originally
conceived as a possible parking area, and what became known as Lot D-1 was platted as an access to Tract E.
In keeping with that purpose, the original 5th Filing protective covenant stated:
Tract E … shall be used as open areas or for recreational uses, including parking. No permanent above-
ground building, other than buildings used for recreational purposes, shall be constructed or maintained
on … such tracts.
Although part of the 5th Filing, Lot D-1 was not named in the protective covenants. However, when the public
began using Lot D-1 as a through-way to the mountain, the Kindel’s objected to the public passing near their
home and built the encroaching fence on Lot D-1 to keep the public away from the side of their house.
Parking needs increased as Vail grew, and by 1971, the TOV and Vail Associates agreed that the Town would
build parking structures along the Frontage Road. The TOV wanted Vail Associates, the then owner of Tract E
and Lot D-1, to dedicate those properties to public use. VA wanted to reserve Tract E in case it was needed for
parking and keep Lot D-1 as a potential right-of-way to Tract E because the first bond issue to build a town
parking structure had failed to win approval. Nonetheless, when the protective covenants on Tract E and Lot D-
1 were revised in 1971, the TOV prevailed. At the same time, provision was made for what became the Pirate
Ship Park and a pedestrian walkway across Tract E. The amended protective covenant for Tract E and Lot D-1
provided that those parcels and others:
shall be used, held and maintained … for use at all times as a vacant and undisturbed open area in its
natural condition or landscaped with trees, shrubs and grass and no structure, building or improvement
of any kind or character, whether temporary or permanent, may be erected or maintained thereon.
It is hard to imagine stronger language. Tract E and Lot D-1 were unequivocally dedicated as open space. To
this day, Tract E and Lot D-1 remain under those protective covenants that require those lands remain open
space for all the public to use. And, to this day, Tract E has been maintained as open space, and the public has
continued to use Lot D-1 as a through-way to the mountain.
June 2, 2020 - Page 165 of 772
2 of 2
As far as zoning for those two parcels, when the TOV was incorporated in 1966, it began the process of
adopting zoning regulations. In keeping with the public use of Tract E and Lot D-1, those parcels were zoned
Agricultural & Open Space (AG/OS). That zoning does not permit public accommodations. It was not until
several years later that Eagle County adopted its zoning regulations. Thus, the zoning on those properties had
nothing to do with Eagle County zoning, and, specifically, Vail Point’s attorney's representation that the AG/OS
zoning was a "hold over mistake" from Eagle County zoning is uninformed and misleading.
Of course, Vail Point presumably knew all this when it purchased the Kindel property and when later it filed
suit to quiet title in the “fenced in” area since it is a matter of public record. As one commissioner noted at the
work session, Vail Point created the situation it now wants the PEC to “fix.”
We realize that since this was just a work session, TOV staff has not yet provided a staff analysis. When a
specific application is received and staff prepares its analysis, we expect it will recount this history since it is all
a matter of public record and is not subject to dispute.
Not mentioned at the work session was the fact that there has already been litigation concerning commercial
uses on Tract E. In 2001, the Tap Room wanted to extend an upstairs deck in such a fashion that it would
intrude into Tract E and obtained an easement for that purpose from Vail Resorts. Litigation followed, and in
that litigation, the Court made it clear that the public had accessibility rights to all of Tract E, and the proposed
deck would interfere with those rights. Once that became clear, the litigation was dropped, but it does provide a
clear picture about the enforceability and meaning of the protective covenant.
Also, not mentioned at the work session was that twice before the same kind of request had been turned
down. First, in the early days of Vail when the then owner, Ted Kindle, sought to do exactly what Vail Point
now seeks—a rezoning of the fenced in portion to a Public Accommodation use--and again last year during a
Town Council work session when Vail Point sought to buy the land with plans to convert the zoning. Both
times, the Council made it clear that public lands could not be used for private purposes.
It’s understandable that Vail Point wants to incorporate open space land into its development. That would allow
it to build a bigger building and presumably make greater profits, but it does seem strange that having created
the so called “two zoning” problem, Vail Point now wants the PEC to try to clear it up by recommending a
change in zoning. To do so would be wrong, both as a matter of principle and legality. It would be wrong as a
matter of principle because, as Vail’s history makes clear, there was a deliberative decision to protect these
lands from any development or commercial use, and the land has, historically, always been open space public
land. It would be wrong legally because protective covenants run with the land and cannot be zoned away.
Therefore, even though Vail Point holds title to the “fenced in” portions of Tract E and Lot D-1 that property
remains open space, and no structure or improvement of any kind, including any deck, hot tub or fence, should
be constructed on it.
Jim Lamont
Executive Director
Vail Homeowners Association.
Post Office Box 238 Vail, Colorado 81658
Telephone: (970) 827-5680 E-mail: vha@vail.net Web Site: www.vailhomeowners.com
June 2, 2020 - Page 166 of 772
BY Hand Please read into the record. FREDERICK WYMAN II 30776 Triple Farm Road Easton, MD 21601 (914) 980-5791 fredwyman@gmail.com July 8, 2019 Planning & Environmental Commission Town of Vail 75 S. Frontage Road Vail, CO 81657 Dear Chairman & Commission Members: RE: Lot 1, 366 Hanson Ranch Road Subdivision My family has been enjoying Vail since our first visit skiing the back bowls before any lifts were built and have owned a condo at All Seasons since 1963. We bought our property because of its location to the Town of Vail as well as its proximity to the mountain and have enjoyed for many decades, comforted by the protective covenants that we relied upon insuring the open space. We have watched with awe the growth of Vail into a world class ski resort as well as a year-round vacation destination. We are concerned at the continual institutionalized encroachment on open space by Vail Resorts aided and abetted by the Town of Vail as they attempt to monetize valuable public covenant protected open spaces for the benefit of private property owners as well as the misguided belief that creating fees to support bloated municipal departments as well as ever increasing property assessment values to finance questionable political agendas. The proposed matter is the most recent unconscionable assault on covenants that have for decades protected the open spaces that have made Vail such a unique destination. The long history of the nefarious activities that resulted in an influential businessman who then became the Mayor of Vail being allowed to erect a fence on covenant protected property resulting in the eventual court awarded quiet title suit by adverse possession is astounding. The only thing that is more galling than this transgression is the apparent actions of the Town of Vail Community Development Department staff to justify and rationalize the breaking of legal covenants to allow a private individual to profit at the expense of the community and in particular those people who relied in good faith on the perpetual legal covenants restricting the use of this property. June 2, 2020 - Page 167 of 772
Rest assured that the community will eventually rise up and challenge this egregious abuse of power and the extraordinary corruption between the Town of Vail and Vail Resorts in order to maintain the character of the community that we know and love. Regrettably the property owners in Vail are not allowed to vote because be assured that if I could, I would vote against all council members who support the breaking of covenants, the construction and development of so called affordable housing in environmentally sensitive areas that destroy the historical range of the Big Horn Sheep and further to hopefully stop the stillborn consideration of more development adjacent to the golf course requiring the reconfiguration of the course. Shame on you. Sincerely, i . il ' Frederick Wym'an II P.S. I understand that one is only allowed to address the Board for three minutes, which in principle is objectionable, otherwise this missive would have been longer and recounted to you the generational efforts of the Wyman Family to protect Tract E of the Vail Village Fifth filing by halting the encroachment of Los Amigos' planned expansion into the Base Area of the mountain as well as the Tap Room's deck which was determined by court after building permits supported by Vail Resorts had been issued by the Town of Vail to be an illegal encroachment on the covenanted area. I am proud to say my Father led the legal challenge to the Los Amigos disposition and I was the named complainant in the Tap Room matter. June 2, 2020 - Page 168 of 772
P L ANNING AND E NV IRO NM E NTAL C O M M I S S IO N
M ay 13, 2019, 1:00 P M
Town C ouncil C hambers
75 S . F rontage Road - Vail, Colorado, 81657
1.Call to Order
Present: Pam Hopkins, K aren Perez, Brian Stockmar, Ludwig Kurz, Brian
Gillette, Rollie Kjesbo
Absent: J ohn-Ryan Lockman
2.S ite Visits
2.1.366 Hanson Ranch Road - Vailpoint L LC
2.2.2698 Cortina Lane - Sc heidegger Residence
3.Main A genda
3.1.A worksession to disc uss a Major Exterior Alteration, pursuant to Section
12-7A-12, Exterior A lterations or Modific ations, Vail Town C ode, to allow for
the replacement of the existing struc ture with a seven (7) suite private lodge
and staff apartment with related site improvements, loc ated at 366 Hanson
Ranc h Road/Lot D, B lock 2, Vail Village Filing 1, and setting forth details in
regard thereto. (P E C 19-0008)
60 min.
Applicant:Vailpoint L L C , represented by Sarah J Baker, PC
Planner:J onathan S penc e
Planner Spence introduc ed the project and noted that the public
ac commodation zone district has language that allows either staff or an
applicant to request a work session with the P E C, or any town body. He
noted that this work session has been initiated by the applicant, not by
staff. Mr. Spence referred to the staff memo submitted and noted that
there will be no action requested of the P E C today. Mr. S penc e further
noted that there has only been an initial analysis done on the proposal
Ms. Baker, on behalf of the applicant, introduced the team. Mr. Mueller,
owner of Cuvee, George Sollidge, Owner of Vail P oint L L C , J ens W arner,
from REcom Global, Ric k Py lman, Land planning and Emilia Kraft and
Hans Berglund from Berglund Arc hitects.
Ms. Baker stated they requested a work session due to town proc edure
and enumerated the three items they are seeking feedbac k on today. Ms.
Baker stated that there are a few options and would like feedbac k;
however, no formal action is requested.
Ms. Baker stated that the proposed building siting has a c ouple of options.
Setbac ks in the PA district may be modified based on c riteria. The
variation is not a varianc e.
Upon inquiry from Chairman Stockmar, Mr. Spenc e agreed with Ms.
June 2, 2020 - Page 169 of 772
Baker ’s interpretation of the PA zone district setbacks.
Ms. Baker noted that the building footprint that does meet setbac ks has
implic ations for the pedestrian experience in the area.
Mr. Baker stated there is also a desire to address the fac t that there are
two zoning designations for the single lot. She noted that there was a
previous attempt to rec oncile that issue, however, was not achieved on a
PE C vote.
Mr. Larry Mueller, founder and C E O of Cuvee, then provided an overview
of how the building will be operated. Mr. Mueller desc ribed the private
lodge and the clientele it serves. He noted that there is a large demand for
high end lodges that allow people to travel as extended families or as
friends and have a private lodge experience with acc ess to high-end
amenities.
Mr. Mueller noted that the property has private space for families as well as
common space. He stated that y ou c an only rent the structure as an entire
unit, and individual rooms are not individually leased out.
Hans Berglund and Emilia Kraft presented to the Board design images of
the proposed building. He noted that setbacks can be modified without a
variance as long as five c riteria are met. He then presented why this
proposal meets each of those criteria. Mr. Berglund stated that the
proposal maintains open spac e and creates a more welc oming pedestrian
element. Additionally, he noted that the proposal will maintain adequate light
and air. Mr. Berglund stated that they reviewed the I B C to ensure they will
meet building code requirements for building setbac k requirements. He
noted that the proposed building setbac k has the massing stepped bac k
between 10’-16’ to create more spac e.
Mr. Berglund then discussed the proposed tower which would c omply with
the 60’ standard for architec tural projections and stated that the tower is
essentially the same height as the Tivoli building next door. He noted that
towers are prominent features and is consistent and will add to the visual
overall landscape from a distance as well as a pedestrian.
Mr. Berglund then desc ribed the proposed materials, a stone base around
the house as the main arc hitectural element and the other materials inc lude
two c olors of copper siding, one as a very dark bronze tone and a lighter
copper color, heavy timber construction. He noted that the theme is
mountain architecture and speaks to the early day s of Vail. He noted that
while they are before the board to talk about setbac ks, he feels that the
building design will c ontribute to the c ommunity.
Mr. Kurz inquired about the func tion of the tower besides the arc hitectural
design.
Mr. Berglund stated that it is mainly arc hitectural, there is not spac e in it,
with the exception of stairs and a small landing with balc onies that wrap
around.
Upon inquiry from Ms. Hopkins, Mr. Berglund stated that the tower could
be lower, however, in order to ac hieve the effect of a tower, the height is
needed.
June 2, 2020 - Page 170 of 772
Ms. Hopkins inquired about the throughway from Mill Creek Circ le to
Golden Peak.
Mr. Berglund stated that the new building will be more attractive. Mr.
Berglund stated that there have been discussions with Vail Resorts about
updating the landsc aping. He stated that trees are to be removed within the
property.
The board then reviewed the shadow study. Mr. Stockmar noted a c oncern
that the shadow is extensive and puts all of Hanson Ranc h Road in
shadow, which is ic y and has implications for safety. The existing pavers
are snow melted but not the asphalt road.
Upon inquiry from Ms. P erez, Mr. Berglund noted that the alternative
footprint would be similar in terms of shadow impact.
Ms. Baker stated that at the next meeting they will provide the current
condition as well as proposed. Ms. Baker noted that the cumulative impact
will be helpful in a future discussion.
Mr. Kurz inquired about proposed parking.
Mr. Ric k Py lman, stated that the lodge parking requirements is 0.7 parking
spaces per room, 7 parking spac es total would be required. 1 ½ spaces
are attributed to the small c aretaker unit. He noted there are 3 spaces in
the garage and 4 spaces outside of the garage. All parking spac es are on
the property.
Mr. Kjesbo noted that Tivoli was required to have 15-minute parking and
cars c urrently block the sidewalk, which pushes people into the icy road.
Mr. Py lman stated that since the entire property is to be rented out and not
as individual units, they do not foresee parking being an issue. Mr. Kjesbo
noted that the use c an c hange which would impac t the operation. Mr.
Stoc kmar noted that the ownership and use can change at any time. Mr.
Stoc kmar noted that the P E C must consider future impac t as well as
proposed operations.
Mr. Py lman stated they will take the P E C’s comments into c onsideration
into the design.
Mr. Kjesbo stated that the Tivoli was approved with a varianc e for the
height and noted that he has an issue with something extending up 56’ on
the c orner and that it looks out of place and unbalanc es the building. He
does not like that much bulk right at the street.
Upon inquiry from Mr. Kjesbo, Mr. Spenc e noted that the Town Council
never opined on the zoning c hange.
Mr. Stockmar stated that the meeting when this property was addressed in
J une of 2018, the minutes reflect some of his conc erns are allayed by the
design. Mr. Stockmar stated that it was an odd circ umstance due to how
the property was obtained. Mr. Stoc kmar inquired if the applic ant would
take out the fence ac ross the bac k y ard?
Ms. Baker stated that they have not c ontemplated removing the fence,
however, will consider it through the design process. Ms. Baker stated that
the message has been rec eived and will focus on it moving forward. Mr.
June 2, 2020 - Page 171 of 772
Stoc kmar stated that there may be implic ations for the fence, existing
trees, and hot tub.
Upon inquiry from Ms. P erez, Mr. Spence stated that the same standards
for varianc es do not apply for a setbac k variation. He noted that a varianc e
is a different thing from a variation, which is subjec t to the five-c riteria Mr.
Berglund enumerated.
Chairman Stockmar opened the hearing up to public c omment. No public
comment was provided.
Mr. Gillette discussed the zoning of the property. The commission
disc ussed open space and zoning with the applicant and Planner Spence.
Ms. Perez stated regarding the zoning it was meant to be space available
to the public and stated the applic ant has created this issue. She noted
that it feels like the open spac e is part of the community. Ms. Perez stated
that she disagrees with Mr. Berglund’s analysis of the proposal meeting the
required five criteria.
Ms. Baker clarified that the spac e has never been publicly open spac e
and has always been a private lot.
There was a discussion regarding what development c an occ ur in open
space zone distric ts.
There was a discussion over how the spac e be preserved to open air and
light in the future.
Ms. Perez pointed out where existing trees will be removed from the street
to ac commodate the proposed tower. Ms. Perez stated this will deteriorate
open spac e, air and light. There was a disc ussion over where existing
trees will be removed. Tower would go to corner of where the existing
fenc e is, 60’ high.
Mr. Gillette inquired if the building could be built without the rezoning. Mr.
Spenc e stated no, it could not.
Mr. Stockmar stated they are conc erned about massing, height, and the
fenc e along the south side of the property.
3.2.A request for the review of varianc es from Section 14-3-1: Minimum
Standards, Table 1 Driveway /Feeder Road Standards, Entry Angle
Minimum Deflection, Vail Town Code, in ac cordance with the provisions of
Section 12-17-1, Varianc es, Vail Town Code, to allow for a variance to the
entry angle minimum deflec tion for first 30 feet of driveway length to
fac ilitate the development of a single-family structure, loc ated at 2698
C ortina Lane/Lot 11, B lock B, Vail Ridge Subdivision, and setting forth
details in regard thereto. (P EC19-00013)
20 min.
Applicant:Benno S cheidegger, represented by Berglund Arc hitects
Planner:Ashley Clark
Planner Clark introduc ed the variance request. S he noted that the
property is unique in that is shares a steep driveway with two other
parcels. Ms. Clark noted that Public W orks Department is supportive of
bringing the grade up to code and c hanging the angle to meet c ode.
June 2, 2020 - Page 172 of 772
P L ANNI NG AND E NV I RO NM E NTAL C O M M I S S I O N
J uly 8, 2019, 1:00 P M
Town Council C hambers
75 S. F rontage Road - Vail, Colorado, 81657
1.Call to Order
1.1.Attendance
Present: Brian Gillette, Pam Hopkins, Rollie Kjesbo, Ludwig Kurz, J ohn-
Ryan Lockman, Brian Stockmar, Karen Perez (arrived at 1:20 P M)
Absent: None
2.Main Agenda
2.1.A request for a recommendation to the Vail Town Council for a zone
district boundary amendment, pursuant to Section 12-3-7,
Amendment, Vail Town Code, to allow for the rezoning of a portion of
the property located at 366 Hanson Ranch Road/Lot 1, 366 Hanson
Ranch Road Subdivision. T he proposed rezoning would change the
Zone District from Agriculture and Open Space (A) District to the
Public Accommodation (PA) District, and setting forth details in regard
thereto (P E C19-0022)
30 min.
Applicant:Vailpoint L L C, represented by Sarah J Baker P C
Planner:J onathan Spence
Planner J onathan Spence presented the application. He stated that this
application has been before the P E C a few times over the past year and a
half. Mr. Spence stated that the P E C previously approved a subdivision for
this site. Relying upon a zoning map, Mr. Spence demonstrated that the lot
has two different zoning designations. He noted that the parcel is under the
same ownership and the applicant is seeking to change the zoning to one
designation. He noted that two letters in opposition have been submitted
into the record.
Chairman Stockmar called for questions from the commissioners.
Mr. Stockmar inquired about the court order quieting title.
Mr. Spence stated the court order did not opine on the local regulatory
structure or zoning and pertained only to ownership. Mr. Stockmar noted
that the staff memo provides details that this is a unique situation.
Upon inquiry from Chairman Stockmar, Mr. Spence stated that in terms of
the Community Development Department, having two zoning designations
on one lot creates regulatory problems. He stated that in terms of setbacks
and other calculations determining what is required is difficult.
Chairman Stockmar noted that this is a de novo review and the P E C shall
base their decision solely based on the materials in their packet and public
June 2, 2020 - Page 173 of 772
testimony given today.
There was a discussion over the protected covenants versus the change in
zoning. Mr. Spence noted that the private covenants are not handled within
the Community Development Department and are outside of the P E C or
Staff’s purview.
Ms. Sara Baker, representing the property owner, noted that the staff
report states that all criteria have been met and requested that the P E C
approve the zoning change. Ms. Baker noted that whatever covenants are
in place today will not be impacted by any zoning change. She noted that
the property is currently zoned Agriculture/Open Space and that
development is permitted. Ms. Baker stated that the uses that are allowed
by right are different in each district and is a unique situation and the
application is a clean-up.
Ms. Baker stated that the court order did not order a change in zoning and
just addressed ownership. She noted that this is not the first time the town
has rezoned property in identical situation. Relying upon the town zoning
map, she referred to an application to rezone on Hanson Ranch Road.
Ms. Baker provided additional examples of rezoning and stated that there
is precedent for rezoning.
Upon inquiry from Commissioner Hopkins, Mr. Spence stated that all
setbacks are measured from property lines.
There was a discussion regarding the flexibility in setbacks for Public
Accommodation (PA) zoning districts that the P E C has discretion in
setting.
Chairman Stockmar called for public comment.
Mr. J onathan Stauffer, resident, asked how we got here and stated that it
has been zoned open space since the first mayor. He noted that it is open
space that makes Vail such an attractive community. He stated if this
proposal is allowed any developer can do the same thing.
Mr. Wendell Porterfield, counsel for Christiana, and two others, stated that
this is a self-created problem by quiet title. He stated that there is a
statement in the memo that goal #4 has been met and a statement that the
public has always perceived this as part of the residence. He concluded
that they do not support the requested action.
An owner of a condo unit abutting the property stated that all three groups
sent a statement of objection and hope that they have received and read it.
She stated that the applicant is asking the town the same question over
and over. She noted that green space of any kind is valuable and stated
that if the P E C approves the request it will set a bad precedent.
Mr. J im Lamont, Vail Homeowners Association, stated that the covenants
were Vail’s first land use constitution. He noted that in a constitution you
have two things: the rules and how to change those rules. Mr. Lamont
stated that it would be best if not totally appropriate to have those rules
amended before the application is brought before the board.
A resident spoke in opposition to the proposal. He stated that it frightens
him to see where development is going and encouraged the board to look
June 2, 2020 - Page 174 of 772
at the open space encroachment across Vail.
Lu Maslak, resident, stated that they came to Vail after looking at many ski
towns and chose Vail because of open space and sentiment in the valley to
keep these open spaces and noted that she’s observed an erosion of that
concept. She stated that she is opposed to the encroachment on open
space. She stated she is imploring them to consider what the P E C is
doing.
Herman Stafford, Vail resident, echoed everything that has been said so
far. He stated that they have an obligation to protect open space public and
private. He stated they must protect what we have and not let other people
to take it away and let them redevelop the house but keep the open space.
Chairman Stockmar closed public comment.
Commissioner Lockman stated that he appreciated the public comment
and stated that the P E C must look at this application as if no prior
applications have been submitted. Mr. Lockman stated it is a challenging
application and noted their duty for the town is to review the criteria in an
objective way to see if the application meets the criteria in the town code.
He further noted that you cannot have two zoning designations on one
property. Mr. Lockman stated that, in reviewing, the criteria it does comply.
Commissioner Hopkins stated that she is an old timer as well. Ms. Hopkins
stated that she would have liked a plan delineating where the zoning district
transects the property and stated she is inclined to vote against it.
Commissioner Perez stated that she does not see that it meets Goal #4 of
the master plan. She noted that she would like to see the final development
and will vote against it.
Commissioner Kurz stated that he would like to see the development plan
as well. Mr. Kurz noted he is not ready to vote in favor at this time and
would like to see the proposed development plan along with the zoning
change.
Commissioner Gillette stated that he also did not feel it meets Goal #4 of
the master plan and is inclined to vote against.
Commissioner Kjesbo stated that he would like to see the development plan
before voting in favor.
Chairman Stockmar stated that the issue before the P E C is the zoning
and not the project, building, or anything presented to the board previously.
He stated he is in agreement with the other commissioners and would like
to see the development plan. He stated he would like to see the proposed
building as well as everything brought before and invited a motion to table.
Ms. Baker stated that the P E C has seen the development plan which they
previously reviewed. Ms. Baker stated that the applicant would agree to
table this request and urged the P E C to review the exterior alteration
application.
Upon inquiry from Ms. Perez, Ms. Baker stated there have been no
changes made from the previously reviewed development plan.
June 2, 2020 - Page 175 of 772
There was a discussion regarding the application for a major exterior
alteration. Chairman Stockmar stated reviewing both the zoning and
development plan together would be beneficial.
Mr. Spence stated that while both applications can be reviewed together,
zoning approval can not be tied to a development application.
Ludwig Kurz moved to table to a future date. Pam Hopkins seconded the
motion and it passed (6-1).
Ayes:(6)Hopkins, Kjesbo, Kurz, Lockman, Perez, Stockmar
Nays:(1)Gillette
2.2.A request for the review of a Development Plan, pursuant to Section 12-6I -
11, Development Plan Required, Vail Town Code, for a new housing
development located at 3700 North Frontage Road East/Lot 1, East Vail
Workforce Housing Subdivision (“Booth Heights Neighborhood”), and
setting forth details in regard thereto. (P E C19-0018)
120 min.
Applicant:Triumph Development
Planner:Chris Neubecker
Chairman Stockmar opened the hearing for P E C19-0018 and noted that
written comments are encouraged as it gives the board time to review them
ahead of time. Mr. Stockmar stated that he does not support allowing the
consolidation of comments for one person to speak on behalf of several.
Planner Neubecker stated that some comments were received by staff
after 12P M on Friday and noted that while the comments were not in the
packets, they were forwarded to the board for their review.
Mr. Neubecker gave a presentation for the Booth Heights Neighborhood.
Mr. Neubecker reviewed the Environmental I mpact Report (E I R) submitted
to the town and recommendations made to mitigate impacts to wildlife. Mr.
Neubecker noted that the application includes a landscaping plan and a
wildlife enhancement area to create a better habitat for sheep. Mr.
Neubecker noted that this area would be an ongoing commitment for the
applicant to maintain for the sheep habitat.
Mr. Neubecker stated that the previous application there was a discussion
regarding the location of the bus stop design. He noted that a
recommendation from Colorado Parks and W ildlife (C P W ) was to move
the bus stop out of the west end. Mr. Neubecker presented an alternative
design giving buses an area to turn around as suggested by the town’s
Public Works and Transportation department. Another alternative, Mr.
Neubecker, presented was to provide access to the east bus stop and not
have a bus stop on the west side.
Upon inquiry from Mr. Gillette, Mr. Neubecker stated that coming west
bound there is one stop on the north side of the Frontage Road. There
was a discussion regarding access to crosswalks and bus stops.
Mr. Neubecker reviewed four questions staff is requesting feedback on
from the P E C.
Mr. Lockman asked about the 3D model requested.
Mr. Neubecker stated that the applicant is working on those additional
materials and is part of the reason they are requesting to change the
June 2, 2020 - Page 176 of 772
VAIL HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION, INC.
Town of Vail
Planning and Environmental Commission
75 South Frontage Road
Vail, CO 81657
June 3, 2019
Dear Chairman and Commission Members:
During the recent PEC work session on the Vail Point LLC project, the attorney for Vail Point made the
incorrect assertion that the “fenced in” part of the property (parts of Tract E and Lot D-1), which was acquired
by adverse possession, “is not open space and has never been open space.” Giving her the benefit of the doubt,
she may not know the actual history and may not have made an intentional misstatement. Be that as it may, all
of Tract E and Lot D-1—including the so-called “fenced in” parts--are, and always have been, open space
dedicated to public use. We write to correct the record in that regard.
In Vail’s early days, there was no Town of Vail and Eagle County had no zoning applicable to what is now
Vail. Vail’s founders, therefore, used property covenants to lay out the land use, planning and architectural
controls and a host of other provisions to govern the orderly development of Vail Village. The covenants were
also used to expressly protect certain open spaces. Those covenants are part of the foundational documents of
the TOV.
Protective covenants were an effective way to lay out the future village because they “run with the land;” i.e.,
they are permanent regardless of ownership, cannot be zoned away and can only be changed by any procedures
contained in them for amendments. And, whether the property is in public or private ownership has no bearing
on the force and effect of protective covenants.
Tract E and Lot D-1 (by metes and bounds) was part of the Vail Village 5th filing. Tract E was originally
conceived as a possible parking area, and what became known as Lot D-1 was platted as an access to Tract E.
In keeping with that purpose, the original 5th Filing protective covenant stated:
Tract E … shall be used as open areas or for recreational uses, including parking. No permanent above-
ground building, other than buildings used for recreational purposes, shall be constructed or maintained
on … such tracts.
Although part of the 5th Filing, Lot D-1 was not named in the protective covenants. However, when the public
began using Lot D-1 as a through-way to the mountain, the Kindel’s objected to the public passing near their
home and built the encroaching fence on Lot D-1 to keep the public away from the side of their house.
Parking needs increased as Vail grew, and by 1971, the TOV and Vail Associates agreed that the Town would
build parking structures along the Frontage Road. The TOV wanted Vail Associates, the then owner of Tract E
and Lot D-1, to dedicate those properties to public use. VA wanted to reserve Tract E in case it was needed for
parking and keep Lot D-1 as a potential right-of-way to Tract E because the first bond issue to build a town
parking structure had failed to win approval. Nonetheless, when the protective covenants on Tract E and Lot D-
1 were revised in 1971, the TOV prevailed. At the same time, provision was made for what became the Pirate
Ship Park and a pedestrian walkway across Tract E. The amended protective covenant for Tract E and Lot D-1
provided that those parcels and others:
shall be used, held and maintained … for use at all times as a vacant and undisturbed open area in its
natural condition or landscaped with trees, shrubs and grass and no structure, building or improvement
of any kind or character, whether temporary or permanent, may be erected or maintained thereon.
It is hard to imagine stronger language. Tract E and Lot D-1 were unequivocally dedicated as open space. To
this day, Tract E and Lot D-1 remain under those protective covenants that require those lands remain open
space for all the public to use. And, to this day, Tract E has been maintained as open space, and the public has
continued to use Lot D-1 as a through-way to the mountain.
June 2, 2020 - Page 177 of 772
2 of 2
As far as zoning for those two parcels, when the TOV was incorporated in 1966, it began the process of
adopting zoning regulations. In keeping with the public use of Tract E and Lot D-1, those parcels were zoned
Agricultural & Open Space (AG/OS). That zoning does not permit public accommodations. It was not until
several years later that Eagle County adopted its zoning regulations. Thus, the zoning on those properties had
nothing to do with Eagle County zoning, and, specifically, Vail Point’s attorney's representation that the AG/OS
zoning was a "hold over mistake" from Eagle County zoning is uninformed and misleading.
Of course, Vail Point presumably knew all this when it purchased the Kindel property and when later it filed
suit to quiet title in the “fenced in” area since it is a matter of public record. As one commissioner noted at the
work session, Vail Point created the situation it now wants the PEC to “fix.”
We realize that since this was just a work session, TOV staff has not yet provided a staff analysis. When a
specific application is received and staff prepares its analysis, we expect it will recount this history since it is all
a matter of public record and is not subject to dispute.
Not mentioned at the work session was the fact that there has already been litigation concerning commercial
uses on Tract E. In 2001, the Tap Room wanted to extend an upstairs deck in such a fashion that it would
intrude into Tract E and obtained an easement for that purpose from Vail Resorts. Litigation followed, and in
that litigation, the Court made it clear that the public had accessibility rights to all of Tract E, and the proposed
deck would interfere with those rights. Once that became clear, the litigation was dropped, but it does provide a
clear picture about the enforceability and meaning of the protective covenant.
Also, not mentioned at the work session was that twice before the same kind of request had been turned
down. First, in the early days of Vail when the then owner, Ted Kindle, sought to do exactly what Vail Point
now seeks—a rezoning of the fenced in portion to a Public Accommodation use--and again last year during a
Town Council work session when Vail Point sought to buy the land with plans to convert the zoning. Both
times, the Council made it clear that public lands could not be used for private purposes.
It’s understandable that Vail Point wants to incorporate open space land into its development. That would allow
it to build a bigger building and presumably make greater profits, but it does seem strange that having created
the so called “two zoning” problem, Vail Point now wants the PEC to try to clear it up by recommending a
change in zoning. To do so would be wrong, both as a matter of principle and legality. It would be wrong as a
matter of principle because, as Vail’s history makes clear, there was a deliberative decision to protect these
lands from any development or commercial use, and the land has, historically, always been open space public
land. It would be wrong legally because protective covenants run with the land and cannot be zoned away.
Therefore, even though Vail Point holds title to the “fenced in” portions of Tract E and Lot D-1 that property
remains open space, and no structure or improvement of any kind, including any deck, hot tub or fence, should
be constructed on it.
Jim Lamont
Executive Director
Vail Homeowners Association.
Post Office Box 238 Vail, Colorado 81658
Telephone: (970) 827-5680 E-mail: vha@vail.net Web Site: www.vailhomeowners.com
June 2, 2020 - Page 178 of 772
BY Hand Please read into the record. FREDERICK WYMAN II 30776 Triple Farm Road Easton, MD 21601 (914) 980-5791 fredwyman@gmail.com July 8, 2019 Planning & Environmental Commission Town of Vail 75 S. Frontage Road Vail, CO 81657 Dear Chairman & Commission Members: RE: Lot 1, 366 Hanson Ranch Road Subdivision My family has been enjoying Vail since our first visit skiing the back bowls before any lifts were built and have owned a condo at All Seasons since 1963. We bought our property because of its location to the Town of Vail as well as its proximity to the mountain and have enjoyed for many decades, comforted by the protective covenants that we relied upon insuring the open space. We have watched with awe the growth of Vail into a world class ski resort as well as a year-round vacation destination. We are concerned at the continual institutionalized encroachment on open space by Vail Resorts aided and abetted by the Town of Vail as they attempt to monetize valuable public covenant protected open spaces for the benefit of private property owners as well as the misguided belief that creating fees to support bloated municipal departments as well as ever increasing property assessment values to finance questionable political agendas. The proposed matter is the most recent unconscionable assault on covenants that have for decades protected the open spaces that have made Vail such a unique destination. The long history of the nefarious activities that resulted in an influential businessman who then became the Mayor of Vail being allowed to erect a fence on covenant protected property resulting in the eventual court awarded quiet title suit by adverse possession is astounding. The only thing that is more galling than this transgression is the apparent actions of the Town of Vail Community Development Department staff to justify and rationalize the breaking of legal covenants to allow a private individual to profit at the expense of the community and in particular those people who relied in good faith on the perpetual legal covenants restricting the use of this property. June 2, 2020 - Page 179 of 772
Rest assured that the community will eventually rise up and challenge this egregious abuse of power and the extraordinary corruption between the Town of Vail and Vail Resorts in order to maintain the character of the community that we know and love. Regrettably the property owners in Vail are not allowed to vote because be assured that if I could, I would vote against all council members who support the breaking of covenants, the construction and development of so called affordable housing in environmentally sensitive areas that destroy the historical range of the Big Horn Sheep and further to hopefully stop the stillborn consideration of more development adjacent to the golf course requiring the reconfiguration of the course. Shame on you. Sincerely, i . il ' Frederick Wym'an II P.S. I understand that one is only allowed to address the Board for three minutes, which in principle is objectionable, otherwise this missive would have been longer and recounted to you the generational efforts of the Wyman Family to protect Tract E of the Vail Village Fifth filing by halting the encroachment of Los Amigos' planned expansion into the Base Area of the mountain as well as the Tap Room's deck which was determined by court after building permits supported by Vail Resorts had been issued by the Town of Vail to be an illegal encroachment on the covenanted area. I am proud to say my Father led the legal challenge to the Los Amigos disposition and I was the named complainant in the Tap Room matter. June 2, 2020 - Page 180 of 772
1. Approval of this variance is contingent upon the applicant
obtaining Town of Vail design review approval for this
proposal; and
2. The applicant shall clearly demonstrate, via an
Improvement Location Certificate (ILC), to the Community
Development Department prior to requesting a final
planning inspection that improvements have been
constructed per plan.
Planner Roy: Introduced the project and described the site
conditions. Staff is supportive of this variance as it allows for a
more workable site. There are a number of existing garages in the
area in the front setback, doesn’t feel that a stairway would have
any greater impact.
Michael Phillips: Has lived in this house for decades and has had to
snow shovel the existing walkway for a long time. Age has made
this more and more difficult and adding a stair would allow them to
continue living in this house.
No Public Comment.
2.6. A request for the review of a variance from Section 14-3-1, Minimum Standards, Vail Town Code in accordance with the provisions of Section 12-17, Variances, Vail Town Code, to allow for a variance to the maximum centerline driveway grade, located at 1801 Sunburst Drive Unit A/Lot 2, Vail Valley Filing 3, and setting forth details in regard thereto. (PEC20-0002) 5 min.
The applicant has requested this item be tabled to a future date.
Applicant: Hilliard West LLC, represented by Pierce Austin Architects
Planner: Erik Gates
Motion: Table to March 23rd
First: Gillette Second: Kjesbo Vote: 7-0-0
2.7. A request for a recommendation to the Vail Town Council for a zone district boundary amendment, pursuant to Section 12-3-7, Amendment, Vail Town Code, to allow for the rezoning of a portion of the property located at 366 Hanson Ranch Road/Lot 1, 366 Hanson Ranch Road Subdivision. The proposed rezoning would change the Zone District from Agriculture and Open Space (A) District to the Public Accommodation (PA) District and setting forth details in regard thereto. (PEC19-0022) 90 min.
Applicant: Vailpoint LLC, represented by Sarah J Baker PC
Planner: Jonathan Spence
Motion: Recommend Approval
First: Kjesbo Second: Seibert Vote: 4-2-0 Gillette &
Perez opposed
Read concurrently with PEC20-0003 and PEC19-0008
June 2, 2020 - Page 181 of 772
Planner Spence opened the project by describing the nature of the
application and the history of this project. In the past, the PEC requested
that the exterior alteration be heard alongside the rezoning request for
context. The two applications cannot be tied together, so a motion on the
rezoning will be requested today, but the other items will be tabled.
Gillette: Disagrees with Staff’s assessment of the court order regarding
the rezoning. Says the order does not require a change of the zoning. It
preserves the covenants on the property, including conservation
easements.
Spence: Clarified that Staff did not mean to say otherwise in the memo.
Rick Pylman: Introduced his team on the project. Trying to meet the goals
of the Vail Master Plan. This building was built in the 60s and much of the
neighborhood has stayed the same. Continued to discuss the proposed
lodge and amenities involved. Goal is to build the nicest lodge property in
vail. Next discussed the site redevelopment. Showed the areas of the
lodge that extend over previous other properties.
Hanz Berglund: Began by introducing the exterior alteration application
and design. Aiming to enhance the quality of this site. Made a significant
effort to meet the goals and objectives of the Master Plan. Discussed that
this would pull more lodging demand into Vail Village rather than in the
more residential neighborhoods. Showed floor plans and elevations of the
project. Next he discussed the surrounding character and scale. The
existing building is significantly smaller than the buildings surrounding it.
The proposed building is comparable in height to its neighbors. Berglund
discussed the proposed tower on the building and showed another of
other towers throughout Vail Village and Lionshead. He discussed the
nature of the proposed setback encroachments and how surrounding
buildings also extend into their setbacks.
Perez: Asked about a previous discussion of a square design for the
property.
Berglund: To fit in the side setbacks would cut about 20ft of the building
off. It would lead to a steeper façade. Felt that the current proposal was a
better design architecturally.
Proposing an increase in landscaping between the proposed building and
the Christiana. Also aiming to create a more inviting walking portion in
front of the proposed Avanti building. Also showed a sun-shade analysis
for this building on Hanson Ranch Road.
Perez: Asked a clarifying question about ownership and operations
management
Sarah Baker: Stated that they refer to Vailpoint as “the client” as they
make all final decisions on the property.
Perez: Asked a question about if rooms could be rented individually.
June 2, 2020 - Page 182 of 772
Rick Pylman: Discussed the need for the setback variances and a
parking variance.
Kjesbo: Is there an ability to move the building back further to minimize
parking in the front setback?
Pylman: Potentially, but it is not preferred. Didn’t want to give too much
front space in parking and risk someone trying to double park and end up
parking on the sidewalk.
Kjesbo: In speaking to the design, feels that the tower is too much bulk
and mass. Didn’t think the Tivoli towers had as much b&m
Hopkins: Also felt that the building was too large. Feels that this scale
does not fit the goal of the project to be a small, highest-class lodge. Also
feels like the applicant may not be taking as many sustainability
measures as they could. This could also attract guests.
Baker: Refreshed the PEC on the history of the rezoning application. She
presented a diagram showing the old property and the former separate
parcels that are zoned agricultural/open space. Believes this is the only
parcel in vail with multiple zoning designations. Showed an overlay of the
proposed building over the old agricultural/open space tracts, tried to
keep the building off of the back tract as much as possible. Then showed
how the current zonings on the lot do not meet their lot size requirements.
Rezoning the whole lot to PA would bring the lot size into conformance.
Baker continued to describe how the redevelopment would further the
Vail Village Master Plan objectives.
Commissioner Lockman had to leave during this time and be absent for
the remainder of the meeting.
Baker: Discussed other factors to consider for redevelopment. Argued
that development is already allowed on agriculture/open space so this will
not result in or set precedent for further additional development on open
space lots.
Public Comment
Wendle Porterfield: Representing Villa Valhalla. Asked a question to Pete
Seibert about his previous employment with Vailpoint.
Seibert: Said that he had considered whether he should recuse himself
for this. However, he has not been involved in Vailpoint for around 3
years and does not stand to make any money off the project.
Porterfield: Asked a question about the sale of the property.
Seibert: Discussed the sale of the property and how the additional tract
was acquired and assumed to be a part of this property originally.
Porterfield: Feels that this is a self-inflicted situation. The applicant is
June 2, 2020 - Page 183 of 772
asking for a rezoning but they are clearly going for the rezoning that
makes them the most money instead of rezoning for ag and open space
for example. Feels that this is a clever way for the applicant to force the
PEC to rezone open space.
Carol Krueger: Argument against this development has not changed for
her since the last meeting. The back part of the property looks unkempt
because it is meant to be natural open space. Over 1600 sq ft of patio
with development is not undisturbed and will change the character of
previous open space. Also stated that the proposed design has not
significantly changed. Asked the PEC to carefully consider the setback
variance. The original buildings were built before the setback regulations
were in place. Doesn’t feel that this practice should be continued for a
redevelopment. Shouldn’t prioritize visitors over the neighboring
properties with bedrooms housing Vail residents. For the parking
variance, she asks the Commission to consider the current state of
Hansen Ranch Road. It’s a mess and drop offs happen in the road all the
time.
Public Comment Closed
Baker: The adverse possession case was not a contested trial. It was
resolved by stipulation. In addressing the claim that this a self-created
issue. Applicant has not proposed to build to a greater scale than what
would have been allowed with the previous, smaller parcel. Argues that
as such they are not asking to be “rewarded” for the extra lot size. They
recognize that parking and loading is an issue in this area and do not
want to contribute to that problem.
Hopkins: Asked about trash storage
Berglund: The current plan is to use regular garbage cans and store them
in the garage.
Perez: Disappointed that this is the 4th time hearing this project and
nothing has really changed. We disagreed that this is not an owner-
created problem. Not in agreement with staff that this meets the criteria.
Quoted a section of the Land Use Plan that stated that all greenspace
should be attempted to be preserved. Applicant hasn’t made an attempt
to comply with the PEC’s comments. The applicant has asked for
variances and does not feel that they shown the grounds for these
variances.
Hopkins: In agreement with Perez. There doesn’t seem to be any benefit
for the Town for this project.
Seibert: Feel there are 2 ways of looking at this. Open space is what
anyone sees when walking by natural vegetation. Seeing manicured
grass inside a fence does not read as open space. Disagrees with the
argument for the setbacks just because that is the old way buildings were
built. Wants to verify that they are not gaining GRFA. Generally
supportive of the rest.
Kjesbo: If we rezone this, and create a PA compliant lot, why are you
June 2, 2020 - Page 184 of 772
requesting a setback variance.
Spence: The PA zone district can enter the setbacks
Gillette: In the “preserve open space at all costs” boat. In agreement with
Perez and Hopkins.
Kurz: Based on the Staff report, it seems that the criteria for rezoning has
been met. Was in support of the rezoning. Ready to let Town Council to
make the final decision on this.
2.8. A request for the review of a variance from Section 12-7A-11: Parking and Loading, Vail Town Code in accordance with the provisions of Section 12- 17, Variances, Vail Town Code, to allow for a variance from the prohibition of parking located within the front setback and from the requirement that 75% of the required parking be located within the main building, located at
366 Hanson Ranch Road/Lot 1, 366 Hanson Ranch Road Subdivision, and setting forth details in regard thereto. (PEC20-0003)
Applicant: Vailpoint LLC, represented by Sarah J Baker PC
Planner: Jonathan Spence
Motion: Continued to March 23rd
First: Kjesbo Second: Gillette Vote: 6-0-0
2.9. A request for the review of a Major Exterior Alteration, pursuant to Section 12-7A-12, Exterior Alterations or Modifications, Vail Town Code, to allow for the replacement of the existing structure with a seven (7) suite private lodge with related site improvements, located at 366 Hanson Ranch Road/Lot 1, 366 Hanson Ranch Road Subdivision, and setting forth details in regard thereto. (PEC19-0008)
Applicant: Vailpoint LLC, represented by Sarah J Baker PC
Planner: Jonathan Spence
Motion: Continued to March 23rd
First: Kjesbo Second: Gillette Vote: 6-0-0
3. Approval of Minutes
3.1. February 10, 2020 PEC Results
Motion: Approve
First: Kjesbo Second: Gillette Vote: 6-0-1 Perez
abstain
4. Adjournment
Motion: Adjourn
First: Kjesbo Second: Perez Vote: 7-0-0
June 2, 2020 - Page 185 of 772
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. Please call 711 for sign language
interpretation 48 hour prior to meeting time. Community Development Department Published
in the Vail Daily March 6, 2020
June 2, 2020 - Page 186 of 772
From:Mike Meiners
To:Jonathan Spence
Subject:"Kindel" property rezone.
Date:Monday, April 13, 2020 2:45:35 PM
Mr. Spence,
I am a former Vail property owner and continuing visitor to Vail to see my many family
members who still own in the village. I'm writing on behalf of myself and those family
members by voicing my opposition to re-zoning the "Kindel" property for the following
reasons:
The new “Kindel” property owner/developer seeks to rezone its newly acquired Open Space
land for commercial hotel/public accommodation. We oppose this rezoning application
because we want the Town of Vail to preserve Vail’s time-honored Open Spaces as originally
envisioned by Vail’s founders and as reflected in the Town of Vail’s Master plan and zoning.
If one acquires land, as this developer did, knowing that it was long prior established for Open
Space, such new owner should abide by the Open Space restrictions on development. To rule
otherwise, will set a new precedent paving the way for other developers to acquire Open
Spaces and convert such to commercial developments. Because the Town of Vail is the
steward for the continued benefit of and enjoyment by the entire community, now and for
generations to come, we respectfully and appropriately submit to the Town of Vail our
opposition to this petition to rezone.
Best,
Mike Meiners
June 2, 2020 - Page 187 of 772
April 13, 2020
To: The Town of Vail
Re: PEC Rezoning of Tract E and Lot D-1
Dear Vail Town Council:
I am writing this letter in STAUNCH OPPOSITION of Vail’s Planning and Environmental
Commission (PEC) proposed rezoning of Tract E and Lot D-1 for Public Accommodation.
My family has owned property in the town of Vail since it opened in the 1960’s. I have
been coming to Vail for 43 years and a homeow ner for over 15 years. Many of my life’s
greatest memories are from the magnificent village off of I-70.
I currently own a unit in the Ramshorn building, directly across from the proposed
rezoning. Every morning I notice the increased traffic as the popularity of the mountain gains
more and more visitors each year. Creating more congestion in an already crowded area takes
away the magic of this special mountain town. What we need is more space for visitors and
residents to enjoy, not another development.
Not only will this development prove extremely detrimental for the town of Vail, it is in
fact in DIRECT OPPOSITION of currently standing covenants from the 1970’s, which serve to
ensure undisturbed, natural areas for the public.
Please consider Vail’s history and mission to remain a true mountain town. Rezoning to
overbuild would be a travesty.
Thank you for your consideration,
Jessica Allen
416 Vail Valley Drive Suite 7
Vail, CO 81657
June 2, 2020 - Page 188 of 772
June 2, 2020 - Page 189 of 772
From:Tammy Nagel
To:Matt Gennett; Jonathan Spence
Cc:Patty McKenny
Subject:FW: VailPoint Re-zoning Application
Date:Friday, April 10, 2020 11:59:34 AM
Attachments:image001.png
Tammy Nagel
Town Clerk
Town Clerk’s Office
970.479.2136
970.479.2157 fax
vailgov.com
From: Ronald pressman <rrpressman@gmail.com>
Sent: Friday, April 10, 2020 11:41 AM
To: Council Dist List <TownCouncil@vailgov.com>; Scott Robson <SRobson@vailgov.com>
Subject: Re: VailPoint Re-zoning Application
Town of Vail Council Members and Town Manager Robson
My name is Ron Pressman and I have had a residence in Vail since 1999. My family and I own
two apartments in the Rams Horn Condominium. During our ownership at the Rams Horn, I
have been a board member of the condominium and was the Board President for an
extended period during which we renovated the Rams Horn complex roughly ten years ago.
As such, I am reasonably familiar with the importance of working with the Town on
development projects and in this regard responsibly respecting historic property setbacks
and Town goals and objectives.
As a result of our geographic location, my wife and I, our kids and dogs have all “grown up”
walking between the Rams Horn and the Village/Gondola 1 green space coursing from
Golden Peak to the Village. As such, it was concerning to see that the Town of Vail plans to
June 2, 2020 - Page 190 of 772
consider approval of a zoning change for a portion of that important green space. With all the
development in Vail in recent years, it seems most important to preserve important green
spaces and not expose them to zoning change which will invariably lead to over
concentration of building and excessive development density.
It is my understanding that VailPoint Development has submitted a request to re-zone a
portion of the land they own at 366 Hanson Ranch Road. I have done a bit of research on the
history of this green space easement. It is clear dating back to 1971 that this tract of land was
to be kept forever wild and for public use. It is admirable that the Tract E green space
corridor has been respected for the last 50 plus years. It would be a shame to expose this
very attractive green space to development by re-zoning even a portion of it. As we know,
any change in land zoning can open the door to a cascade of future unintended
consequences. While perhaps obvious, we are very much against any change in the zoning of
the Tract E/Lot D-1. Thanks for considering the points raised below.
1. It appears that the “fenced in land” behind 366 Hanson Ranch Road, fenced illegally long
ago to protect the 366 Hanson Ranch Road residence, was actually “annexed” as a result of a
relatively recent lawsuit. It is not clear from published records why this legal decision was
reached. That said, it is also clear that there was no change allowed at that time to the
acquired land use zoning. Nor has there been any change to the zoning approved in the three
prior Town of Vail hearings requested by the Developers to change the use zoning of this
property. As such, the fenced in land that rests within Tract E/Lot D-1 zoning status should
remain intact as it has been for the past 50 years. There is no compelling rationale for a
zoning change. Such a change would ostensibly be to the benefit of the VailPoint investors
only and to the disadvantage of the entire neighborhood of current property owners.
2. Allowing a change in use for the “fenced in land” opens up the potential of all the land
currently viewed as a community thoroughfare between the Hanson Ranch and Mill Creek
road developments to be re-zoned. This would be completely unacceptable and I suspect
viewed as such by all homeowners and others in the vicinity. Why allow a zoning change that
could open the door to a much more destructive result? It appears that offers have already
been made to further extend into the Tract E protected area. So, this is not a far fetched
concern.
3. It appears from the limited details and one picture available that the VailPoint developer
already plans a lodge that is out of line with the historic/existing building mass and elevations
on that portion of Hanson Ranch Road. Adding to the potential footprint of the 366 Hanson
Ranch Road re-development will enable/encourage an even larger new lodge that will be out
of scale in its mass vs. the rest of the street and particularly vs. the Christiania Lodge and
residences across the street and along the Creekside below it. I can only assume that such a
building would impact existing neighbor sight lines.
June 2, 2020 - Page 191 of 772
4. If in fact this significant re-zoning were allowed, what will the town and neighborhood get
in terms of developer concessions? I would suggest the Town not approve this zoning
change. But, if The Town Council were to consider doing so, they should extract clear
commitments up front from the developer on things that the neighborhood would value in
exchange prior for a zoning change approval. Additionally, if such a zoning change were
approved, the zoning status of the remaining Tract E green space should be reinforced to
avoid further degradation of this important green space thoroughfare.
Thanks for your consideration.
Sincerely,
Ron Pressman
Sent from my iPad
June 2, 2020 - Page 192 of 772
From:Anthony Precourt
To:Jonathan Spence
Subject:Fw: VailPoint/Avanti Lodge: Town of Vail Protect our Open Spaces & Public Safety
Date:Monday, April 13, 2020 9:28:20 PM
Jonathan-
Our family has owned a home on Mill Creek Circle since the late 1970s,
and owned property as early as 1970 at The Four Seasons across from
Golden Peak. The Vail Valley remains today the central place for three
generations of Precourts to live, work and play.
We are contacting you today over our serious concerns about challenges to Open
Space between the Tivoli and Christiana Hotel just down from us off of Mill
Creek Circe.
This Open Space have been protected since Vail's founding, and have been
cherished by citizens and leaders of Vail for over 50 years.
We oppose this rezoning application for the reasons set forth in this opposition
email below. This has been voted down four times! Let's keep doing the right
thing, and not acquiesce to a developer that does not cherish and covet the
Open Space of Vail Village. This will become precedent with further
adverse consequences that could prove to be a negative long lasting impact on the
protected Open Space of Vail.
Much appreciated,
Jay Anthony Precourt, Jr and Family
_______________________________
Dear Friends-
Please consider joining us in opposing the upcoming application to rezone
for commercial development one of the Vail founders’ long-standing land
areas established for Open Space.
In essence, the segment of Open Space land targeted for commercial
development is adjacent to the back/south side of the original Kindel home
property, which property is located between the Christiania and Tivoli
hotels. The particular Open Space parcel in question is a part of the
larger, attractive, well-traveled Open Space land corridor through which
the walkway/bike path connects the Vail Village Gondola with Golden
Peak, and the other Open Space walkway between the Tivoli and Kindel
home connecting the above-referenced Open Space corridor with Hanson
June 2, 2020 - Page 193 of 772
Ranch Road. In addition, such expanded commercial/hotel development
will add more cars and pedestrian traffic hazards to this already congested
bottleneck in Vail Village. For these reasons, we base our opposition to
the rezoning application squarely on the Vail founders’ foundational
values--to preserve Open Space and to ensure public safety.
If you agree and would join in opposing, you are encouraged to originate
and transmit your own personal email opposition to Jonathan Spence at
the Town of Vail ( jspence@vailgov.com )—who is collecting citizen input
for the Town Council members on this rezoning petition. If you are
pressed for time and agree with the opposition arguments set forth in
more detail below, please “Forward” this email to Jonathan Spence at the
Town of Vail ( jspence@vailgov.com ). In doing so, simply state in your
forwarding email cover note that you “oppose this rezoning application for
the reasons set forth in this opposition email below.” Time is of the
essence, so please transmit your email opposition one way or the other by
close of business Tuesday, April 14th.
The following summarizes the rationale of our opposition based upon
Open Space and public safety reasoning:
Open Spaces:
A developer acquired both the original Kindel home/property between the
Christiania and Tivoli, and then further acquired of a sizeable portion of
adjacent land. The newly acquired adjacent land was originally
established by Vail (now Vail Resorts) as Open Space, i.e., part of the
original, larger Open Space walkway corridor which connects the Vail
Village Gondola to Golden Peak in between the Christiania and Tivoli on
the north and the Mill Creek Circle neighborhood on the south. And the
new owner/developer knew this when such adjacent parcel was acquired.
The new “Kindel” property owner/developer seeks to rezone its newly
acquired Open Space land, together with its adjoining original Kindel
home property, for commercial hotel/public accommodation. We oppose
this rezoning application because we want the Town of Vail to preserve
Vail’s time-honored Open Spaces as originally envisioned by Vail’s
founders and as reflected in the Town of Vail’s Master plan and zoning. If
one acquires land, as this developer did, knowing that it was long prior
established for Open Space, such new owner should abide by the Open
Space restrictions on development. To rule otherwise, will set a new
precedent paving the way for other developers to acquire Open Spaces
and convert such to commercial developments. Because the Town of Vail
is the steward for the continued benefit of and enjoyment by the entire
community, now and for generations to come, we respectfully and
appropriately submit to the Town of Vail our opposition to this petition to
June 2, 2020 - Page 194 of 772
rezone.
Public Safety:
The commercial development of such protected Open Space will add even
more cars and pedestrians to an already highly congested pedestrian and
traffic “loop”. This loop (1) is formed by the continuous roadway of Vail
Valley Drive, Hanson Ranch Road and East Gore Creek Drive, and (2)
intersects the original Vail Village pedestrian area in the eastern section of
the Village. The Kindel/home and Open Space property that the developer
seeks to rezone is located at the choke point of the swarming pedestrians
and auto traffic on this loop. The proposed rezoning to commercial
development will considerably add to public safety pedestrian and traffic
hazards. Because the Town of Vail is the steward responsible for public
safety, we respectfully and appropriately submit to the Town of Vail our
opposition to the petition to rezone, as, if approved, the rezoning of the
property will lead to aggravation of these hazards.
You will not be alone in joining us in opposing this rezoning application.
The time-honored and respected Vail Homeowner’s Association is on
record in opposition; there are also many other residential and commercial
landowners who are filing their opposition. Our lawyers are filing, on our
behalf, more detailed legal memos in support of our opposition.
This persistent developer has made four prior unsuccessful attempts
asking the Town of Vail to rezone away this Open Space in favor of
commercial hotel development, directly in contravention of the Vail
founders’ foundational values. This developer is trying again so we must
mobilize again in opposition in order to preserve Open Space and to
ensure public safety.
If you want to discuss this further, we’re available to do so.
Please join us in opposing this rezoning application by following the simple
instructions in the above third paragraph of this email.
Thanks so much!
Chris & Cindy Galvin
Mike & Elizabeth Galvin
June 2, 2020 - Page 195 of 772
June 2, 2020 - Page 196 of 772
From:rich.freyberg@comcast.net
To:Jonathan Spence
Subject:FW: VailPoint/Avanti Lodge: Town of Vail Protect our Open Spaces & Public Safety
Date:Monday, April 13, 2020 2:06:44 PM
Importance:High
I oppose this rezoning application for the reasons set forth in this opposition email below.
From: Mike Galvin <mgalvin@galventinc.com>
Sent: Monday, April 13, 2020 1:22 PM
To: rich.freyberg@comcast.net
Cc: Chris Galvin <cgalvin@blythebourne.com>
Subject: VailPoint/Avanti Lodge: Town of Vail Protect our Open Spaces & Public Safety
Importance: High
Please consider joining us in opposing the upcoming application to rezone for commercial
development one of the Vail founders’ long-standing land areas established for Open Space.
In essence, the segment of Open Space land targeted for commercial development is adjacent
to the back/south side of the original Kindel home property, which property is located
between the Christiania and Tivoli hotels. The particular Open Space parcel in question is a
part of the larger, attractive, well-traveled Open Space land corridor through which the
walkway/bike path connects the Vail Village Gondola with Golden Peak, and the other Open
Space walkway between the Tivoli and Kindel home connecting the above-referenced Open
Space corridor with Hanson Ranch Road. In addition, such expanded commercial/hotel
development will add more cars and pedestrian traffic hazards to this already congested
bottleneck in Vail Village. For these reasons, we base our opposition to the rezoning
application squarely on the Vail founders’ foundational values--to preserve Open Space and to
ensure public safety.
If you agree and would join in opposing, you are encouraged to originate and transmit your
own personal email opposition to Jonathan Spence at the Town of Vail ( jspence@vailgov.com
)—who is collecting citizen input for the Town Council members on this rezoning petition. If
you are pressed for time and agree with the opposition arguments set forth in more detail
below, please “Forward” this email to Jonathan Spence at the Town of Vail (
jspence@vailgov.com ). In doing so, simply state in your forwarding email cover note that you
“oppose this rezoning application for the reasons set forth in this opposition email below.”
Time is of the essence, so please transmit your email opposition one way or the other by
close of business Tuesday, April 14th.
The following summarizes the rationale of our opposition based upon Open Space and public
safety reasoning:
June 2, 2020 - Page 197 of 772
Open Spaces:
A developer acquired both the original Kindel home/property between the Christiania and
Tivoli, and then further acquired of a sizeable portion of adjacent land. The newly acquired
adjacent land was originally established by Vail (now Vail Resorts) as Open Space, i.e., part of
the original, larger Open Space walkway corridor which connects the Vail Village Gondola to
Golden Peak in between the Christiania and Tivoli on the north and the Mill Creek Circle
neighborhood on the south. And the new owner/developer knew this when such adjacent
parcel was acquired.
The new “Kindel” property owner/developer seeks to rezone its newly acquired Open Space
land, together with its adjoining original Kindel home property, for commercial hotel/public
accommodation. We oppose this rezoning application because we want the Town of Vail to
preserve Vail’s time-honored Open Spaces as originally envisioned by Vail’s founders and as
reflected in the Town of Vail’s Master plan and zoning. If one acquires land, as this developer
did, knowing that it was long prior established for Open Space, such new owner should abide
by the Open Space restrictions on development. To rule otherwise, will set a new precedent
paving the way for other developers to acquire Open Spaces and convert such to commercial
developments. Because the Town of Vail is the steward for the continued benefit of and
enjoyment by the entire community, now and for generations to come, we respectfully and
appropriately submit to the Town of Vail our opposition to this petition to rezone.
Public Safety:
The commercial development of such protected Open Space will add even more cars and
pedestrians to an already highly congested pedestrian and traffic “loop”. This loop (1) is
formed by the continuous roadway of Vail Valley Drive, Hanson Ranch Road and East Gore
Creek Drive, and (2) intersects the original Vail Village pedestrian area in the eastern section of
the Village. The Kindel/home and Open Space property that the developer seeks to rezone is
located at the choke point of the swarming pedestrians and auto traffic on this loop. The
proposed rezoning to commercial development will considerably add to public safety
pedestrian and traffic hazards. Because the Town of Vail is the steward responsible for public
safety, we respectfully and appropriately submit to the Town of Vail our opposition to the
petition to rezone, as, if approved, the rezoning of the property will lead to aggravation of
these hazards.
You will not be alone in joining us in opposing this rezoning application. The time-honored
and respected Vail Homeowner’s Association is on record in opposition; there are also many
other residential and commercial landowners who are filing their opposition. Our lawyers are
filing, on our behalf, more detailed legal memos in support of our opposition.
This persistent developer has made four prior unsuccessful attempts asking the Town of Vail
to rezone away this Open Space in favor of commercial hotel development, directly in
June 2, 2020 - Page 198 of 772
contravention of the Vail founders’ foundational values. This developer is trying again so we
must mobilize again in opposition in order to preserve Open Space and to ensure public
safety.
If you want to discuss this further, we’re available to do so.
Please join us in opposing this rezoning application by following the simple instructions in the
above third paragraph of this email.
Thanks so much!
Chris & Cindy Galvin
Mike & Elizabeth Galvin
June 2, 2020 - Page 199 of 772
From:Ben Marion
To:Jonathan Spence
Subject:FW: VailPoint/Avanti Lodge: Town of Vail Protect our Open Spaces & Public Safety
Date:Tuesday, April 14, 2020 10:54:46 AM
Hello Jonathan, I oppose this rezoning application for the reasons set forth in this opposition
email below. Thank you
Ben Marion, Project Manager
BenM@sriarchitect.com
SHEPHERD RESOURCES, INC/AIA
970 949 3302 Office
970 427 4805 Desk
www.sriarchitect.com
From: Jim Butterworth <jim@butterworth.net>
Sent: Tuesday, April 14, 2020 9:43 AM
To: Mr. Jim Butterworth <jim@butterworth.net>
Subject: VailPoint/Avanti Lodge: Town of Vail Protect our Open Spaces & Public Safety
Dear Vail friends,
First and foremost, I hope this email finds you safe & sound.
I am writing about the proposed rezoning of certain Vail Open Space for commercial development. I
am asking that you join others and me in opposing this application. The deadline for this is TODAY
(see below).
If you agree and would join in opposing, simply forward this email to Jonathan
Spence <jspence@vailgov.com> at the Town of Vail along with a note saying that you “oppose
this rezoning application for the reasons set forth in this opposition email below.” Time is of the
essence, so please transmit your email opposition by close of business TODAY, Tuesday, April
14th.
You will not be alone in joining us in opposing this rezoning application. The time-honored and
respected Vail Homeowner’s Association is on record in opposition; there are also many other
residential and commercial landowners who are filing their opposition.
This persistent developer has made four prior unsuccessful attempts asking the Town of Vail to
rezone this Open Space in favor of commercial hotel development, directly in contravention of the
Vail founders’ foundational values. This developer is trying again so we must mobilize again in
opposition in order to preserve Open Space and to ensure public safety.
Specifically, the segment of Open Space land targeted for commercial development is adjacent to
the back/south side of the original Kindel home property, which property is located between the
June 2, 2020 - Page 200 of 772
Christiania and Tivoli hotels. Further, this Open Space parcel is a part of the larger, attractive, well-
traveled Open Space land corridor through which the walkway/bike path connects the Vail Village
Gondola with Golden Peak, and the other Open Space walkway between the Tivoli and Kindel home
connecting the above-referenced corridor with Hanson Ranch Road. In addition, such
expanded commercial/hotel development will add more cars and pedestrian traffic hazards to this
already congested bottleneck in Vail Village. For these reasons, I base my opposition to the rezoning
application squarely on the Vail founders’ foundational values to preserve Open Space and to ensure
public safety.
Please join me in opposing this rezoning application by emailing Jonathan Spence ASAP (again, the
deadline is CoB today).
Thanks so much, and take care!
All the best, Jim
The following summarizes the rationale of my opposition based on Open Space and public safety
reasoning:
Open Spaces
A developer acquired both the original Kindel home/property between the Christiania and Tivoli, and
then further acquired a sizeable portion of adjacent land. The newly acquired adjacent land was
originally established by Vail (now Vail Resorts) as Open Space (i.e., part of the original, larger Open
Space walkway corridor which connects the Vail Village Gondola to Golden Peak between the
Christiania and Tivoli on the north and the Mill Creek Circle neighborhood on the south). And the
new owner/developer knew this when such adjacent parcel was acquired.
The new “Kindel” property owner/developer seeks to rezone its newly acquired Open Space land for
commercial hotel/public accommodation. I oppose this rezoning application because I want the
Town of Vail to preserve Vail’s time-honored Open Spaces, as originally envisioned by Vail’s founders
and as reflected in the Town of Vail’s Master plan and zoning. If one acquires land, as this developer
did, knowing that it was long prior established for Open Space, such new owner should abide by
the Open Space restrictions on development. To rule otherwise will set a new precedent paving the
way for other developers to acquire Open Spaces and convert such to commercial developments.
Because the Town of Vail is the steward for the continued benefit of and enjoyment by the entire
community, now and for generations to come, we respectfully and appropriately submit to the Town
of Vail our opposition to this petition to rezone.
Public Safety
The commercial development of such protected Open Space will add even more cars and
pedestrians to an already highly congested pedestrian and traffic “loop.” This loop (1) is formed by
the continuous roadway of Vail Valley Drive, Hanson Ranch Road and East Gore Creek Drive, and (2)
intersects the original Vail Village pedestrian area in the eastern section of the Village. The
June 2, 2020 - Page 201 of 772
Kindel/home property that the developer seeks to rezone is located at the choke point of the
swarming pedestrians and auto traffic on this loop. The proposed rezoning to commercial
development will considerably add to public safety pedestrian and traffic hazards. Because the
Town of Vail is the steward responsible for public safety, we respectfully and appropriately submit to
the Town of Vail our opposition to the petition to rezone, since, if approved, the rezoning of the
property will lead to aggravation of these hazards.
June 2, 2020 - Page 202 of 772
From:Sandra Pack
To:Jonathan Spence
Subject:Fw: VailPoint/Avanti Lodge: Town of Vail Protect our Open Spaces & Public Safety
Date:Tuesday, April 14, 2020 10:06:19 AM
I oppose this rezoning application for the reasons set forth in this opposition
email below.
Dear Vail friends,
First and foremost, I hope this email finds you safe & sound.
I am writing about the proposed rezoning of certain Vail Open Space for commercial development. I am
asking that you join others and me in opposing this application. The deadline for this is TODAY (see
below).
If you agree and would join in opposing, simply forward this email to Jonathan
Spence <jspence@vailgov.com> at the Town of Vail along with a note saying that you “oppose
this rezoning application for the reasons set forth in this opposition email below.” Time is of the
essence, so please transmit your email opposition by close of business TODAY, Tuesday, April
14th.
You will not be alone in joining us in opposing this rezoning application. The time-honored and respected
Vail Homeowner’s Association is on record in opposition; there are also many other residential and
commercial landowners who are filing their opposition.
This persistent developer has made four prior unsuccessful attempts asking the Town of Vail to rezone
this Open Space in favor of commercial hotel development, directly in contravention of the Vail founders’
foundational values. This developer is trying again so we must mobilize again in opposition in order to
preserve Open Space and to ensure public safety.
Specifically, the segment of Open Space land targeted for commercial development is adjacent to the
back/south side of the original Kindel home property, which property is located between the Christiania
and Tivoli hotels. Further, this Open Space parcel is a part of the larger, attractive, well-traveled Open
Space land corridor through which the walkway/bike path connects the Vail Village Gondola with Golden
Peak, and the other Open Space walkway between the Tivoli and Kindel home connecting the above-
referenced corridor with Hanson Ranch Road. In addition, such expanded commercial/hotel development
will add more cars and pedestrian traffic hazards to this already congested bottleneck in Vail Village. For
these reasons, I base my opposition to the rezoning application squarely on the Vail founders’
foundational values to preserve Open Space and to ensure public safety.
Please join me in opposing this rezoning application by emailing Jonathan Spence ASAP (again, the
deadline is CoB today).
Thanks so much, and take care!
All the best, Jim
The following summarizes the rationale of my opposition based on Open Space and public safety
reasoning:
Open Spaces
A developer acquired both the original Kindel home/property between the Christiania and Tivoli, and then
further acquired a sizeable portion of adjacent land. The newly acquired adjacent land was originally
established by Vail (now Vail Resorts) as Open Space (i.e., part of the original, larger Open
June 2, 2020 - Page 203 of 772
Space walkway corridor which connects the Vail Village Gondola to Golden Peak between the Christiania
and Tivoli on the north and the Mill Creek Circle neighborhood on the south). And the new
owner/developer knew this when such adjacent parcel was acquired.
The new “Kindel” property owner/developer seeks to rezone its newly acquired Open Space land for
commercial hotel/public accommodation. I oppose this rezoning application because I want the Town of
Vail to preserve Vail’s time-honored Open Spaces, as originally envisioned by Vail’s founders and as
reflected in the Town of Vail’s Master plan and zoning. If one acquires land, as this developer did,
knowing that it was long prior established for Open Space, such new owner should abide by the Open
Space restrictions on development. To rule otherwise will set a new precedent paving the way for other
developers to acquire Open Spaces and convert such to commercial developments. Because the Town
of Vail is the steward for the continued benefit of and enjoyment by the entire community, now and for
generations to come, we respectfully and appropriately submit to the Town of Vail our opposition to this
petition to rezone.
Public Safety
The commercial development of such protected Open Space will add even more cars and pedestrians to
an already highly congested pedestrian and traffic “loop.” This loop (1) is formed by the continuous
roadway of Vail Valley Drive, Hanson Ranch Road and East Gore Creek Drive, and (2) intersects the
original Vail Village pedestrian area in the eastern section of the Village. The Kindel/home property that
the developer seeks to rezone is located at the choke point of the swarming pedestrians and auto traffic
on this loop. The proposed rezoning to commercial development will considerably add to public safety
pedestrian and traffic hazards. Because the Town of Vail is the steward responsible for public safety, we
respectfully and appropriately submit to the Town of Vail our opposition to the petition to rezone, since, if
approved, the rezoning of the property will lead to aggravation of these hazards.
June 2, 2020 - Page 204 of 772
From:David Copeland
To:Jonathan Spence
Cc:"Jim Butterworth"; David Copeland; lhohman@careertakeoff.com
Subject:FW: VailPoint/Avanti Lodge: Town of Vail Protect our Open Spaces & Public Safety
Date:Tuesday, April 14, 2020 12:58:54 PM
Mr. Spence – we are the owners of 295 Forest Road (El Halcon Vail LLC), and wish to register our
opposition to the development discussed below in the email from Jim Butterworth. We are in
complete agreement with Jim’s comments opposing this proposal. Thank you.
David W. Copeland
Executive Vice President, General Counsel
and Corporate Secretary
1775 Sherman Street, Suite 1200
Denver, CO 80203
303.863.4325 - direct
303.864.2598 - fax
From: Jim Butterworth <jim@butterworth.net>
Sent: Tuesday, April 14, 2020 9:43 AM
To: Mr. Jim Butterworth <jim@butterworth.net>
Subject: VailPoint/Avanti Lodge: Town of Vail Protect our Open Spaces & Public Safety
EMAIL SAFETY ALERT:This email originated from outside of SM Energy. Do not click links or open attachments
unless you recognize the sender and are expecting the content and know it is safe.
Dear Vail friends,
First and foremost, I hope this email finds you safe & sound.
I am writing about the proposed rezoning of certain Vail Open Space for commercial development. I
am asking that you join others and me in opposing this application. The deadline for this is TODAY
(see below).
If you agree and would join in opposing, simply forward this email to Jonathan
Spence <jspence@vailgov.com> at the Town of Vail along with a note saying that you “oppose
this rezoning application for the reasons set forth in this opposition email below.” Time is of the
essence, so please transmit your email opposition by close of business TODAY, Tuesday, April
14th.
You will not be alone in joining us in opposing this rezoning application. The time-honored and
respected Vail Homeowner’s Association is on record in opposition; there are also many other
residential and commercial landowners who are filing their opposition.
June 2, 2020 - Page 205 of 772
This persistent developer has made four prior unsuccessful attempts asking the Town of Vail to
rezone this Open Space in favor of commercial hotel development, directly in contravention of the
Vail founders’ foundational values. This developer is trying again so we must mobilize again in
opposition in order to preserve Open Space and to ensure public safety.
Specifically, the segment of Open Space land targeted for commercial development is adjacent to
the back/south side of the original Kindel home property, which property is located between the
Christiania and Tivoli hotels. Further, this Open Space parcel is a part of the larger, attractive, well-
traveled Open Space land corridor through which the walkway/bike path connects the Vail Village
Gondola with Golden Peak, and the other Open Space walkway between the Tivoli and Kindel home
connecting the above-referenced corridor with Hanson Ranch Road. In addition, such
expanded commercial/hotel development will add more cars and pedestrian traffic hazards to this
already congested bottleneck in Vail Village. For these reasons, I base my opposition to the rezoning
application squarely on the Vail founders’ foundational values to preserve Open Space and to ensure
public safety.
Please join me in opposing this rezoning application by emailing Jonathan Spence ASAP (again, the
deadline is CoB today).
Thanks so much, and take care!
All the best, Jim
The following summarizes the rationale of my opposition based on Open Space and public safety
reasoning:
Open Spaces
A developer acquired both the original Kindel home/property between the Christiania and Tivoli, and
then further acquired a sizeable portion of adjacent land. The newly acquired adjacent land was
originally established by Vail (now Vail Resorts) as Open Space (i.e., part of the original, larger Open
Space walkway corridor which connects the Vail Village Gondola to Golden Peak between the
Christiania and Tivoli on the north and the Mill Creek Circle neighborhood on the south). And the
new owner/developer knew this when such adjacent parcel was acquired.
The new “Kindel” property owner/developer seeks to rezone its newly acquired Open Space land for
commercial hotel/public accommodation. I oppose this rezoning application because I want the
Town of Vail to preserve Vail’s time-honored Open Spaces, as originally envisioned by Vail’s founders
and as reflected in the Town of Vail’s Master plan and zoning. If one acquires land, as this developer
did, knowing that it was long prior established for Open Space, such new owner should abide by
the Open Space restrictions on development. To rule otherwise will set a new precedent paving the
way for other developers to acquire Open Spaces and convert such to commercial developments.
Because the Town of Vail is the steward for the continued benefit of and enjoyment by the entire
community, now and for generations to come, we respectfully and appropriately submit to the Town
of Vail our opposition to this petition to rezone.
June 2, 2020 - Page 206 of 772
Public Safety
The commercial development of such protected Open Space will add even more cars and
pedestrians to an already highly congested pedestrian and traffic “loop.” This loop (1) is formed by
the continuous roadway of Vail Valley Drive, Hanson Ranch Road and East Gore Creek Drive, and (2)
intersects the original Vail Village pedestrian area in the eastern section of the Village. The
Kindel/home property that the developer seeks to rezone is located at the choke point of the
swarming pedestrians and auto traffic on this loop. The proposed rezoning to commercial
development will considerably add to public safety pedestrian and traffic hazards. Because the
Town of Vail is the steward responsible for public safety, we respectfully and appropriately submit to
the Town of Vail our opposition to the petition to rezone, since, if approved, the rezoning of the
property will lead to aggravation of these hazards.
June 2, 2020 - Page 207 of 772
From:Scott Woodard
To:Jonathan Spence
Subject:FW: VailPoint/Avanti Lodge: Town of Vail Protect our Open Spaces & Public Safety
Date:Tuesday, April 14, 2020 10:09:47 AM
Jonathan,
I’ve been skiing Vail since its first year in operation and have watched the Town grow. I now own a
home in West Vail and regularly walk from Gondola One to Golden Peak, or pick up guests at the
Founders Garage pick up. I also ride the Gore Creek trail along that section in the summer.
I can’t imagine the Town of Vail approving this development of historical Open Space that would not
only interfere with pedestrian access to different parts of the mountain, but will also add traffic (cars
and pedestrians) to an already busy street.
I’m a developer myself and am whole heartedly in favor of new growth, done right. This is not that.
I oppose the redevelopment application and hope that the Town of Vail wiser heads prevail in this
decision.
Thanks for your time,
Scott Woodard
2400 Garmisch Dr
From: Jim Butterworth [mailto:jim@butterworth.net]
Sent: Tuesday, April 14, 2020 9:43 AM
To: Mr. Jim Butterworth <jim@butterworth.net>
Subject: VailPoint/Avanti Lodge: Town of Vail Protect our Open Spaces & Public Safety
Dear Vail friends,
First and foremost, I hope this email finds you safe & sound.
I am writing about the proposed rezoning of certain Vail Open Space for commercial
development. I am asking that you join others and me in opposing this application. The
deadline for this is TODAY (see below).
If you agree and would join in opposing, simply forward this email to Jonathan
Spence <jspence@vailgov.com> at the Town of Vail along with a note saying that you
“oppose this rezoning application for the reasons set forth in this opposition
email below.” Time is of the essence, so please transmit your email opposition by close of
business TODAY, Tuesday, April 14th.
You will not be alone in joining us in opposing this rezoning application. The time-honored
and respected Vail Homeowner’s Association is on record in opposition; there are also many
other residential and commercial landowners who are filing their opposition.
This persistent developer has made four prior unsuccessful attempts asking the Town of Vail
to rezone this Open Space in favor of commercial hotel development, directly in contravention
June 2, 2020 - Page 208 of 772
of the Vail founders’ foundational values. This developer is trying again so we must mobilize
again in opposition in order to preserve Open Space and to ensure public safety.
Specifically, the segment of Open Space land targeted for commercial development is adjacent
to the back/south side of the original Kindel home property, which property is located between
the Christiania and Tivoli hotels. Further, this Open Space parcel is a part of the larger,
attractive, well-traveled Open Space land corridor through which the walkway/bike path
connects the Vail Village Gondola with Golden Peak, and the other Open Space walkway
between the Tivoli and Kindel home connecting the above-referenced corridor with Hanson
Ranch Road. In addition, such expanded commercial/hotel development will add more cars
and pedestrian traffic hazards to this already congested bottleneck in Vail Village. For these
reasons, I base my opposition to the rezoning application squarely on the Vail founders’
foundational values to preserve Open Space and to ensure public safety.
Please join me in opposing this rezoning application by emailing Jonathan Spence ASAP
(again, the deadline is CoB today).
Thanks so much, and take care!
All the best, Jim
The following summarizes the rationale of my opposition based on Open Space and public
safety reasoning:
Open Spaces
A developer acquired both the original Kindel home/property between the Christiania and
Tivoli, and then further acquired a sizeable portion of adjacent land. The newly acquired
adjacent land was originally established by Vail (now Vail Resorts) as Open Space (i.e., part
of the original, larger Open Space walkway corridor which connects the Vail Village Gondola
to Golden Peak between the Christiania and Tivoli on the north and the Mill Creek Circle
neighborhood on the south). And the new owner/developer knew this when such adjacent
parcel was acquired.
The new “Kindel” property owner/developer seeks to rezone its newly acquired Open
Space land for commercial hotel/public accommodation. I oppose this rezoning application
because I want the Town of Vail to preserve Vail’s time-honored Open Spaces, as originally
envisioned by Vail’s founders and as reflected in the Town of Vail’s Master plan and zoning.
If one acquires land, as this developer did, knowing that it was long prior established
for Open Space, such new owner should abide by the Open Space restrictions on development.
To rule otherwise will set a new precedent paving the way for other developers to acquire
Open Spaces and convert such to commercial developments. Because the Town of Vail is the
steward for the continued benefit of and enjoyment by the entire community, now and for
generations to come, we respectfully and appropriately submit to the Town of Vail our
opposition to this petition to rezone.
Public Safety
The commercial development of such protected Open Space will add even more cars and
pedestrians to an already highly congested pedestrian and traffic “loop.” This loop (1) is
June 2, 2020 - Page 209 of 772
formed by the continuous roadway of Vail Valley Drive, Hanson Ranch Road and East Gore
Creek Drive, and (2) intersects the original Vail Village pedestrian area in the eastern section
of the Village. The Kindel/home property that the developer seeks to rezone is located at the
choke point of the swarming pedestrians and auto traffic on this loop. The proposed rezoning
to commercial development will considerably add to public safety pedestrian and traffic
hazards. Because the Town of Vail is the steward responsible for public safety, we
respectfully and appropriately submit to the Town of Vail our opposition to the petition to
rezone, since, if approved, the rezoning of the property will lead to aggravation of
these hazards.
June 2, 2020 - Page 210 of 772
From:Mike Galvin
To:Jonathan Spence
Cc:george@wiegersco.com
Subject:FW: VailPoint/Avanti Lodge: Town of Vail Protect our Open Spaces & Public Safety
Date:Monday, April 13, 2020 12:01:12 PM
Jonathan: I was asked below by George Wiegers (also email copied above) to include him in
opposing the rezoning petition pertaining to VailPoint/Avanti Lodge. Please add George Wiegers to
that list in oppostion. I thank you for doing so. Mike Galvin
From: George Wiegers <george@wiegersco.com>
Sent: Monday, April 13, 2020 1:49 PM
To: Mike Galvin <mgalvin@galventinc.com>
Subject: Re: VailPoint/Avanti Lodge: Town of Vail Protect our Open Spaces & Public Safety
Include me as opposing the application. George Wiegers
Sent from my iPad
On Apr 13, 2020, at 7:56 AM, Mike Galvin <mgalvin@galventinc.com> wrote:
Please consider joining us in opposing the upcoming application to rezone for
commercial development one of the Vail founders’ long-standing land areas
established for Open Space.
In essence, the segment of Open Space land targeted for commercial
development is adjacent to the back/south side of the original Kindel home
property, which property is located between the Christiania and Tivoli hotels. The
particular Open Space parcel in question is a part of the larger, attractive, well-
traveled Open Space land corridor through which the walkway/bike path connects
the Vail Village Gondola with Golden Peak, and the other Open Space walkway
between the Tivoli and Kindel home connecting the above-referenced Open
Space corridor with Hanson Ranch Road. In addition, such expanded
commercial/hotel development will add more cars and pedestrian traffic hazards
to this already congested bottleneck in Vail Village. For these reasons, we base
our opposition to the rezoning application squarely on the Vail founders’
foundational values--to preserve Open Space and to ensure public safety.
If you agree and would join in opposing, you are encouraged to originate and
transmit your own personal email opposition to Jonathan Spence at the Town of
Vail ( jspence@vailgov.com )—who is collecting citizen input for the Town Council
members on this rezoning petition. If you are pressed for time and agree with the
June 2, 2020 - Page 211 of 772
opposition arguments set forth in more detail below, please “Forward” this email
to Jonathan Spence at the Town of Vail ( jspence@vailgov.com ). In doing so,
simply state in your forwarding email cover note that you “oppose this rezoning
application for the reasons set forth in this opposition email below.” Time is of
the essence, so please transmit your email opposition one way or the other by
close of business Tuesday, April 14th.
The following summarizes the rationale of our opposition based upon Open Space
and public safety reasoning:
Open Spaces:
A developer acquired both the original Kindel home/property between the
Christiania and Tivoli, and then further acquired of a sizeable portion of adjacent
land. The newly acquired adjacent land was originally established by Vail (now
Vail Resorts) as Open Space, i.e., part of the original, larger Open Space walkway
corridor which connects the Vail Village Gondola to Golden Peak in between the
Christiania and Tivoli on the north and the Mill Creek Circle neighborhood on the
south. And the new owner/developer knew this when such adjacent parcel was
acquired.
The new “Kindel” property owner/developer seeks to rezone its newly acquired
Open Space land, together with its adjoining original Kindel home property, for
commercial hotel/public accommodation. We oppose this rezoning application
because we want the Town of Vail to preserve Vail’s time-honored Open Spaces
as originally envisioned by Vail’s founders and as reflected in the Town of Vail’s
Master plan and zoning. If one acquires land, as this developer did, knowing that
it was long prior established for Open Space, such new owner should abide by the
Open Space restrictions on development. To rule otherwise, will set a new
precedent paving the way for other developers to acquire Open Spaces and
convert such to commercial developments. Because the Town of Vail is the
steward for the continued benefit of and enjoyment by the entire community,
now and for generations to come, we respectfully and appropriately submit to the
Town of Vail our opposition to this petition to rezone.
Public Safety:
The commercial development of such protected Open Space will add even more
cars and pedestrians to an already highly congested pedestrian and traffic “loop”.
This loop (1) is formed by the continuous roadway of Vail Valley Drive, Hanson
Ranch Road and East Gore Creek Drive, and (2) intersects the original Vail Village
pedestrian area in the eastern section of the Village. The Kindel/home and Open
Space property that the developer seeks to rezone is located at the choke point of
June 2, 2020 - Page 212 of 772
the swarming pedestrians and auto traffic on this loop. The proposed rezoning to
commercial development will considerably add to public safety pedestrian and
traffic hazards. Because the Town of Vail is the steward responsible for public
safety, we respectfully and appropriately submit to the Town of Vail our
opposition to the petition to rezone, as, if approved, the rezoning of the property
will lead to aggravation of these hazards.
You will not be alone in joining us in opposing this rezoning application. The time-
honored and respected Vail Homeowner’s Association is on record in opposition;
there are also many other residential and commercial landowners who are filing
their opposition. Our lawyers are filing, on our behalf, more detailed legal memos
in support of our opposition.
This persistent developer has made four prior unsuccessful attempts asking the
Town of Vail to rezone away this Open Space in favor of commercial hotel
development, directly in contravention of the Vail founders’ foundational values.
This developer is trying again so we must mobilize again in opposition in order to
preserve Open Space and to ensure public safety.
If you want to discuss this further, we’re available to do so.
Please join us in opposing this rezoning application by following the simple
instructions in the above third paragraph of this email.
Thanks so much!
Chris & Cindy Galvin
Mike & Elizabeth Galvin
June 2, 2020 - Page 213 of 772
From:Debby Weinberg
To:Jonathan Spence
Subject:FW: VailPoint/Avanti Lodge: Town of Vail Protect our Open Spaces & Public Safety
Date:Monday, April 13, 2020 1:14:30 PM
Importance:High
I oppose this rezoning application for the reasons set forth in this opposition
email below.”
Debby Weinberg
From: Mike Galvin <mgalvin@galventinc.com>
Date: Monday, April 13, 2020 at 3:01 PM
To: Debby Weinberg <debby@pdweinberg.com>
Subject: VailPoint/Avanti Lodge: Town of Vail Protect our Open Spaces & Public Safety
Please consider joining us in opposing the upcoming application to rezone for commercial
development one of the Vail founders’ long-standing land areas established for Open Space.
In essence, the segment of Open Space land targeted for commercial development is adjacent
to the back/south side of the original Kindel home property, which property is located
between the Christiania and Tivoli hotels. The particular Open Space parcel in question is a
part of the larger, attractive, well-traveled Open Space land corridor through which the
walkway/bike path connects the Vail Village Gondola with Golden Peak, and the other Open
Space walkway between the Tivoli and Kindel home connecting the above-referenced Open
Space corridor with Hanson Ranch Road. In addition, such expanded commercial/hotel
development will add more cars and pedestrian traffic hazards to this already congested
bottleneck in Vail Village. For these reasons, we base our opposition to the rezoning
application squarely on the Vail founders’ foundational values--to preserve Open Space and to
ensure public safety.
If you agree and would join in opposing, you are encouraged to originate and transmit your
own personal email opposition to Jonathan Spence at the Town of Vail ( jspence@vailgov.com
)—who is collecting citizen input for the Town Council members on this rezoning petition. If
you are pressed for time and agree with the opposition arguments set forth in more detail
below, please “Forward” this email to Jonathan Spence at the Town of Vail (
jspence@vailgov.com ). In doing so, simply state in your forwarding email cover note that you
“oppose this rezoning application for the reasons set forth in this opposition email below.”
Time is of the essence, so please transmit your email opposition one way or the other by
close of business Tuesday, April 14th.
The following summarizes the rationale of our opposition based upon Open Space and public
safety reasoning:
June 2, 2020 - Page 214 of 772
Open Spaces:
A developer acquired both the original Kindel home/property between the Christiania and
Tivoli, and then further acquired of a sizeable portion of adjacent land. The newly acquired
adjacent land was originally established by Vail (now Vail Resorts) as Open Space, i.e., part of
the original, larger Open Space walkway corridor which connects the Vail Village Gondola to
Golden Peak in between the Christiania and Tivoli on the north and the Mill Creek Circle
neighborhood on the south. And the new owner/developer knew this when such adjacent
parcel was acquired.
The new “Kindel” property owner/developer seeks to rezone its newly acquired Open Space
land, together with its adjoining original Kindel home property, for commercial hotel/public
accommodation. We oppose this rezoning application because we want the Town of Vail to
preserve Vail’s time-honored Open Spaces as originally envisioned by Vail’s founders and as
reflected in the Town of Vail’s Master plan and zoning. If one acquires land, as this developer
did, knowing that it was long prior established for Open Space, such new owner should abide
by the Open Space restrictions on development. To rule otherwise, will set a new precedent
paving the way for other developers to acquire Open Spaces and convert such to commercial
developments. Because the Town of Vail is the steward for the continued benefit of and
enjoyment by the entire community, now and for generations to come, we respectfully and
appropriately submit to the Town of Vail our opposition to this petition to rezone.
Public Safety:
The commercial development of such protected Open Space will add even more cars and
pedestrians to an already highly congested pedestrian and traffic “loop”. This loop (1) is
formed by the continuous roadway of Vail Valley Drive, Hanson Ranch Road and East Gore
Creek Drive, and (2) intersects the original Vail Village pedestrian area in the eastern section of
the Village. The Kindel/home and Open Space property that the developer seeks to rezone is
located at the choke point of the swarming pedestrians and auto traffic on this loop. The
proposed rezoning to commercial development will considerably add to public safety
pedestrian and traffic hazards. Because the Town of Vail is the steward responsible for public
safety, we respectfully and appropriately submit to the Town of Vail our opposition to the
petition to rezone, as, if approved, the rezoning of the property will lead to aggravation of
these hazards.
You will not be alone in joining us in opposing this rezoning application. The time-honored
and respected Vail Homeowner’s Association is on record in opposition; there are also many
other residential and commercial landowners who are filing their opposition. Our lawyers are
filing, on our behalf, more detailed legal memos in support of our opposition.
This persistent developer has made four prior unsuccessful attempts asking the Town of Vail
June 2, 2020 - Page 215 of 772
to rezone away this Open Space in favor of commercial hotel development, directly in
contravention of the Vail founders’ foundational values. This developer is trying again so we
must mobilize again in opposition in order to preserve Open Space and to ensure public
safety.
If you want to discuss this further, we’re available to do so.
Please join us in opposing this rezoning application by following the simple instructions in the
above third paragraph of this email.
Thanks so much!
Chris & Cindy Galvin
Mike & Elizabeth Galvin
June 2, 2020 - Page 216 of 772
From:Kent Erickson
To:Jonathan Spence
Cc:"Jim Butterworth"; bjkski@aol.com
Subject:FW: VailPoint/Avanti Lodge: Town of Vail Protect our Open Spaces & Public Safety
Date:Tuesday, April 14, 2020 10:47:32 AM
Dear My Spence – my wife and I strongly oppose this re-zoning application for the reasons set forth
in the below e-mail. We are full time residents of the Town of Vail. Our home is located at 1139
Sandstone Dr. #3, Vail, CO 81657. R. Kent Erickson and Barbara J. Krichbaum
From: Jim Butterworth <jim@butterworth.net>
Sent: Tuesday, April 14, 2020 9:43 AM
To: Mr. Jim Butterworth <jim@butterworth.net>
Subject: VailPoint/Avanti Lodge: Town of Vail Protect our Open Spaces & Public Safety
Dear Vail friends,
First and foremost, I hope this email finds you safe & sound.
I am writing about the proposed rezoning of certain Vail Open Space for commercial development. I
am asking that you join others and me in opposing this application. The deadline for this is TODAY
(see below).
If you agree and would join in opposing, simply forward this email to Jonathan
Spence <jspence@vailgov.com> at the Town of Vail along with a note saying that you “oppose
this rezoning application for the reasons set forth in this opposition email below.” Time is of the
essence, so please transmit your email opposition by close of business TODAY, Tuesday, April
14th.
You will not be alone in joining us in opposing this rezoning application. The time-honored and
respected Vail Homeowner’s Association is on record in opposition; there are also many other
residential and commercial landowners who are filing their opposition.
This persistent developer has made four prior unsuccessful attempts asking the Town of Vail to
rezone this Open Space in favor of commercial hotel development, directly in contravention of the
Vail founders’ foundational values. This developer is trying again so we must mobilize again in
opposition in order to preserve Open Space and to ensure public safety.
Specifically, the segment of Open Space land targeted for commercial development is adjacent to
the back/south side of the original Kindel home property, which property is located between the
Christiania and Tivoli hotels. Further, this Open Space parcel is a part of the larger, attractive, well-
traveled Open Space land corridor through which the walkway/bike path connects the Vail Village
Gondola with Golden Peak, and the other Open Space walkway between the Tivoli and Kindel home
connecting the above-referenced corridor with Hanson Ranch Road. In addition, such
expanded commercial/hotel development will add more cars and pedestrian traffic hazards to this
already congested bottleneck in Vail Village. For these reasons, I base my opposition to the rezoning
June 2, 2020 - Page 217 of 772
application squarely on the Vail founders’ foundational values to preserve Open Space and to ensure
public safety.
Please join me in opposing this rezoning application by emailing Jonathan Spence ASAP (again, the
deadline is CoB today).
Thanks so much, and take care!
All the best, Jim
The following summarizes the rationale of my opposition based on Open Space and public safety
reasoning:
Open Spaces
A developer acquired both the original Kindel home/property between the Christiania and Tivoli, and
then further acquired a sizeable portion of adjacent land. The newly acquired adjacent land was
originally established by Vail (now Vail Resorts) as Open Space (i.e., part of the original, larger Open
Space walkway corridor which connects the Vail Village Gondola to Golden Peak between the
Christiania and Tivoli on the north and the Mill Creek Circle neighborhood on the south). And the
new owner/developer knew this when such adjacent parcel was acquired.
The new “Kindel” property owner/developer seeks to rezone its newly acquired Open Space land for
commercial hotel/public accommodation. I oppose this rezoning application because I want the
Town of Vail to preserve Vail’s time-honored Open Spaces, as originally envisioned by Vail’s founders
and as reflected in the Town of Vail’s Master plan and zoning. If one acquires land, as this developer
did, knowing that it was long prior established for Open Space, such new owner should abide by
the Open Space restrictions on development. To rule otherwise will set a new precedent paving the
way for other developers to acquire Open Spaces and convert such to commercial developments.
Because the Town of Vail is the steward for the continued benefit of and enjoyment by the entire
community, now and for generations to come, we respectfully and appropriately submit to the Town
of Vail our opposition to this petition to rezone.
Public Safety
The commercial development of such protected Open Space will add even more cars and
pedestrians to an already highly congested pedestrian and traffic “loop.” This loop (1) is formed by
the continuous roadway of Vail Valley Drive, Hanson Ranch Road and East Gore Creek Drive, and (2)
intersects the original Vail Village pedestrian area in the eastern section of the Village. The
Kindel/home property that the developer seeks to rezone is located at the choke point of the
swarming pedestrians and auto traffic on this loop. The proposed rezoning to commercial
development will considerably add to public safety pedestrian and traffic hazards. Because the
Town of Vail is the steward responsible for public safety, we respectfully and appropriately submit to
the Town of Vail our opposition to the petition to rezone, since, if approved, the rezoning of the
property will lead to aggravation of these hazards.
June 2, 2020 - Page 218 of 772
From:PATRICIA MUELLER
To:Jonathan Spence
Subject:Fwd: Abuse of Open Space in Vail
Date:Tuesday, April 14, 2020 10:33:04 AM
Dear Mr. Spence,
I am writing to oppose this rezoning application for the reasons set forth in this opposition
email below.
Patty Mueller
Sent from my iPhone
Begin forwarded message:
From: Lorie <hlgordon@comcast.net>
Date: April 13, 2020 at 3:34:10 PM MDT
To: pattymueller@mac.com, Elizabeth Woodhull <eawoodhull@gmail.com>,
John Woodhull <jawoodhull@gmail.com>, Alison Curwen
<alisonecurwen@gmail.com>, Alex MacCormick
<amaccormick@centerlanellc.com>, Ann Prochnow <atprochnow@gmail.com>,
ligapine@aol.com
Subject: Abuse of Open Space in Vail
Reply-To: Lorie <hlgordon@comcast.net>
4/13/20
Neighbors, please consider joining Lorie and I in opposition of a proposed
project to the Town Council of Vail. A developer's recent purchase of
land, described below, is trying to use a provision known as "eminent
domain" to encroach on a land area established for open space, which is
next to the Christiana and Tivoli. They want to rezone for commercial
development. This was brought to our attention today and a response is
needed by tomorrow, Tuesday, April 14. Sorry for short notice. Pickleball
is an example of the Town working their way into our wonderful enclave. I
believe the letter is self-explanatory as to why we don't want another large
development congesting our location, including Vail Valley Drive. If you so
agree, please join us and show your opposition by tomorrow. Instructions
are in third paragraph listed below.
Thank you.
Henry Gordon
Subject: VailPoint/Avanti Lodge: Town of Vail Protect our Open Spaces &
Public Safety
June 2, 2020 - Page 219 of 772
Importance: High
Please consider joining us in opposing the upcoming application to rezone
for commercial development one of the Vail founders’ long-standing land
areas established for Open Space.
In essence, the segment of Open Space land targeted for commercial
development is adjacent to the back/south side of the original Kindel home
property, which property is located between the Christiania and Tivoli
hotels. The particular Open Space parcel in question is a part of the
larger, attractive, well-traveled Open Space land corridor through which
the walkway/bike path connects the Vail Village Gondola with Golden
Peak, and the other Open Space walkway between the Tivoli and Kindel
home connecting the above-referenced Open Space corridor with Hanson
Ranch Road. In addition, such expanded commercial/hotel development
will add more cars and pedestrian traffic hazards to this already congested
bottleneck in Vail Village. For these reasons, we base our opposition to
the rezoning application squarely on the Vail founders’ foundational
values--to preserve Open Space and to ensure public safety
If you agree and would join in opposing, you are encouraged to originate
and transmit your own personal email opposition to Jonathan Spence at
the Town of Vail ( jspence@vailgov.com )—who is collecting citizen input
for the Town Council members on this rezoning petition. If you are
pressed for time and agree with the opposition arguments set forth in
more detail below, please “Forward” this email to Jonathan Spence at the
Town of Vail ( jspence@vailgov.com ). In doing so, simply state in your
forwarding email cover note that you “ oppose this rezoning application for
the reasons set forth in this opposition email below.” Time is of the
essence, so please transmit your email opposition one way or the other by
close of business Tuesday, April 14 th.
The following summarizes the rationale of our opposition based upon
Open Space and public safety reasoning:
Open Spaces:
A developer acquired both the original Kindel home/property between the
Christiania and Tivoli, and then further acquired of a sizeable portion of
adjacent land. The newly acquired adjacent land was originally
established by Vail (now Vail Resorts) as Open Space, i.e., part of the
original, larger Open Space walkway corridor which connects the Vail
Village Gondola to Golden Peak in between the Christiania and Tivoli on
the north and the Mill Creek Circle neighborhood on the south. And the
new owner/developer knew this when such adjacent parcel was acquired.
The new “Kindel” property owner/developer seeks to rezone its newly
acquired Open Space land, together with its adjoining original Kindel
June 2, 2020 - Page 220 of 772
home property, for commercial hotel/public accommodation. We oppose
this rezoning application because we want the Town of Vail to preserve
Vail’s time-honored Open Spaces as originally envisioned by Vail’s
founders and as reflected in the Town of Vail’s Master plan and zoning. If
one acquires land, as this developer did, knowing that it was long prior
established for Open Space, such new owner should abide by the Open
Space restrictions on development. To rule otherwise, will set a new
precedent paving the way for other developers to acquire Open Spaces
and convert such to commercial developments. Because the Town of Vail
is the steward for the continued benefit of and enjoyment by the entire
community, now and for generations to come, we respectfully and
appropriately submit to the Town of Vail our opposition to this petition to
rezone.
Public Safety:
The commercial development of such protected Open Space will add even
more cars and pedestrians to an already highly congested pedestrian and
traffic “loop”. This loop (1) is formed by the continuous roadway of Vail
Valley Drive, Hanson Ranch Road and East Gore Creek Drive, and (2)
intersects the original Vail Village pedestrian area in the eastern section of
the Village. The Kindel/home and Open Space property that the developer
seeks to rezone is located at the choke point of the swarming pedestrians
and auto traffic on this loop. The proposed rezoning to commercial
development will considerably add to public safety pedestrian and traffic
hazards. Because the Town of Vail is the steward responsible for public
safety, we respectfully and appropriately submit to the Town of Vail our
opposition to the petition to rezone, as, if approved, the rezoning of the
property will lead to aggravation of these hazards.
You will not be alone in joining us in opposing this rezoning application.
The time-honored and respected Vail Homeowner’s Association is on
record in opposition; there are also many other residential and commercial
landowners who are filing their opposition. Our lawyers are filing, on our
behalf, more detailed legal memos in support of our opposition.
This persistent developer has made four prior unsuccessful attempts
asking the Town of Vail to rezone away this Open Space in favor of
commercial hotel development, directly in contravention of the Vail
founders’ foundational values. This developer is trying again so we must
mobilize again in opposition in order to preserve Open Space and to
ensure public safety.
If you want to discuss this further, we’re available to do so.
Please join us in opposing this rezoning application by following the simple
instructions in the above third paragraph of this email.
June 2, 2020 - Page 221 of 772
Thanks so much!
June 2, 2020 - Page 222 of 772
From:ALAN DANSON
To:Jonathan Spence
Subject:Fwd: VailPoint/Avanti Lodge: Town of Vail Protect our Open Spaces & Public Safety
Date:Tuesday, April 14, 2020 10:39:26 AM
Jonathan, I oppose this rezoning application for the reasons set forth below. I also expressed
my opposition to the the rezoning in an email ten days ago to the Town Council and Town
Manager. Alan Danson
The following summarizes the rationale of my opposition based on Open Space
and public safety reasoning:
Open Spaces
A developer acquired both the original Kindel home/property between the
Christiania and Tivoli, and then further acquired a sizeable portion of adjacent
land. The newly acquired adjacent land was originally established by Vail (now
Vail Resorts) as Open Space (i.e., part of the original, larger Open Space walkway
corridor which connects the Vail Village Gondola to Golden Peak between the
Christiania and Tivoli on the north and the Mill Creek Circle neighborhood on the
south). And the new owner/developer knew this when such adjacent parcel was
acquired.
The new “Kindel” property owner/developer seeks to rezone its newly acquired
Open Space land for commercial hotel/public accommodation. I oppose this
rezoning application because I want the Town of Vail to preserve Vail’s time-
honored Open Spaces, as originally envisioned by Vail’s founders and as reflected
in the Town of Vail’s Master plan and zoning. If one acquires land, as this
developer did, knowing that it was long prior established for Open Space, such
new owner should abide by the Open Space restrictions on development. To rule
otherwise will set a new precedent paving the way for other developers to acquire
Open Spaces and convert such to commercial developments. Because the Town
of Vail is the steward for the continued benefit of and enjoyment by the entire
community, now and for generations to come, we respectfully and appropriately
submit to the Town of Vail our opposition to this petition to rezone.
Public Safety
The commercial development of such protected Open Space will add even more
cars and pedestrians to an already highly congested pedestrian and traffic “loop.”
This loop (1) is formed by the continuous roadway of Vail Valley Drive, Hanson
Ranch Road and East Gore Creek Drive, and (2) intersects the original Vail
Village pedestrian area in the eastern section of the Village. The Kindel/home
property that the developer seeks to rezone is located at the choke point of the
swarming pedestrians and auto traffic on this loop. The proposed rezoning to
commercial development will considerably add to public safety pedestrian and
traffic hazards. Because the Town of Vail is the steward responsible for public
safety, we respectfully and appropriately submit to the Town of Vail our
opposition to the petition to rezone, since, if approved, the rezoning of the
property will lead to aggravation of these hazards.
June 2, 2020 - Page 223 of 772
June 2, 2020 - Page 224 of 772
From:Andres R. Nevares, Esq.
To:Jonathan Spence
Subject:Fwd: VailPoint/Avanti Lodge: Town of Vail Protect our Open Spaces & Public Safety
Date:Tuesday, April 14, 2020 10:10:59 AM
Sent from my iPhone
Begin forwarded message:
From: Jim Butterworth <jim@butterworth.net>
Date: April 14, 2020 at 11:43:31 AM AST
To: "Mr. Jim Butterworth" <jim@butterworth.net>
Subject: VailPoint/Avanti Lodge: Town of Vail Protect our Open Spaces &
Public Safety
Dear Vail friends,
First and foremost, I hope this email finds you safe & sound.
I am writing about the proposed rezoning of certain Vail Open Space for
commercial development. I am asking that you join others and me in opposing
this application. The deadline for this is TODAY (see below).
If you agree and would join in opposing, simply forward this email to
Jonathan Spence <jspence@vailgov.com> at the Town of Vail along with a
note saying that you “oppose this rezoning application for the reasons set
forth in this opposition email below.” Time is of the essence, so please
transmit your email opposition by close of business TODAY, Tuesday, April
14th.
You will not be alone in joining us in opposing this rezoning application. The
time-honored and respected Vail Homeowner’s Association is on record
in opposition; there are also many other residential and commercial landowners
who are filing their opposition.
This persistent developer has made four prior unsuccessful attempts asking the
Town of Vail to rezone this Open Space in favor of commercial
hotel development, directly in contravention of the Vail founders’ foundational
values. This developer is trying again so we must mobilize again in opposition in
order to preserve Open Space and to ensure public safety.
Specifically, the segment of Open Space land targeted for commercial
development is adjacent to the back/south side of the original Kindel
home property, which property is located between the Christiania and Tivoli
hotels. Further, this Open Space parcel is a part of the larger, attractive, well-
traveled Open Space land corridor through which the walkway/bike path connects
the Vail Village Gondola with Golden Peak, and the other Open Space walkway
June 2, 2020 - Page 225 of 772
between the Tivoli and Kindel home connecting the above-referenced corridor
with Hanson Ranch Road. In addition, such expanded commercial/hotel
development will add more cars and pedestrian traffic hazards to this already
congested bottleneck in Vail Village. For these reasons, I base my opposition to
the rezoning application squarely on the Vail founders’ foundational values to
preserve Open Space and to ensure public safety.
Please join me in opposing this rezoning application by emailing Jonathan Spence
ASAP (again, the deadline is CoB today).
Thanks so much, and take care!
All the best, Jim
The following summarizes the rationale of my opposition based on Open
Space and public safety reasoning:
Open Spaces
A developer acquired both the original Kindel home/property between the
Christiania and Tivoli, and then further acquired a sizeable portion of adjacent
land. The newly acquired adjacent land was originally established by Vail (now
Vail Resorts) as Open Space (i.e., part of the original, larger Open Space walkway
corridor which connects the Vail Village Gondola to Golden Peak between the
Christiania and Tivoli on the north and the Mill Creek Circle neighborhood on the
south). And the new owner/developer knew this when such adjacent parcel was
acquired.
The new “Kindel” property owner/developer seeks to rezone its newly
acquired Open Space land for commercial hotel/public accommodation. I oppose
this rezoning application because I want the Town of Vail to preserve Vail’s time-
honored Open Spaces, as originally envisioned by Vail’s founders and as reflected
in the Town of Vail’s Master plan and zoning. If one acquires land, as this
developer did, knowing that it was long prior established for Open Space, such
new owner should abide by the Open Space restrictions on development. To rule
otherwise will set a new precedent paving the way for other developers to acquire
Open Spaces and convert such to commercial developments. Because the Town
of Vail is the steward for the continued benefit of and enjoyment by the entire
community, now and for generations to come, we respectfully and appropriately
submit to the Town of Vail our opposition to this petition to rezone.
Public Safety
The commercial development of such protected Open Space will add even more
cars and pedestrians to an already highly congested pedestrian and traffic “loop.”
This loop (1) is formed by the continuous roadway of Vail Valley Drive, Hanson
Ranch Road and East Gore Creek Drive, and (2) intersects the original Vail
Village pedestrian area in the eastern section of the Village. The Kindel/home
property that the developer seeks to rezone is located at the choke point of the
swarming pedestrians and auto traffic on this loop. The proposed rezoning to
June 2, 2020 - Page 226 of 772
commercial development will considerably add to public safety pedestrian and
traffic hazards. Because the Town of Vail is the steward responsible for public
safety, we respectfully and appropriately submit to the Town of Vail our
opposition to the petition to rezone, since, if approved, the rezoning of the
property will lead to aggravation of these hazards.
June 2, 2020 - Page 227 of 772
From:Joe McHugh
To:Jonathan Spence
Subject:Fwd: VailPoint/Avanti Lodge: Town of Vail Protect our Open Spaces & Public Safety
Date:Tuesday, April 14, 2020 10:23:02 AM
We oppose this rezoning application for the reasons set forth in the opposition email below.
Joe and Brenda McHugh
4014 Bighorn Road
Vail, CO
Begin forwarded message:
From: Jim Butterworth <jim@butterworth.net>
Subject: VailPoint/Avanti Lodge: Town of Vail Protect our Open
Spaces & Public Safety
Date: April 14, 2020 at 10:43:24 AM CDT
To: "Mr. Jim Butterworth" <jim@butterworth.net>
Dear Vail friends,
First and foremost, I hope this email finds you safe & sound.
I am writing about the proposed rezoning of certain Vail Open Space for
commercial development. I am asking that you join others and me in opposing
this application. The deadline for this is TODAY (see below).
If you agree and would join in opposing, simply forward this email to
Jonathan Spence <jspence@vailgov.com> at the Town of Vail along with a
note saying that you “oppose this rezoning application for the reasons set
forth in this opposition email below.” Time is of the essence, so please
transmit your email opposition by close of business TODAY, Tuesday, April
14th.
You will not be alone in joining us in opposing this rezoning application. The
time-honored and respected Vail Homeowner’s Association is on record in
opposition; there are also many other residential and commercial landowners who
are filing their opposition.
This persistent developer has made four prior unsuccessful attempts asking the
Town of Vail to rezone this Open Space in favor of commercial hotel
development, directly in contravention of the Vail founders’ foundational values.
This developer is trying again so we must mobilize again in opposition in order to
preserve Open Space and to ensure public safety.
Specifically, the segment of Open Space land targeted for commercial
development is adjacent to the back/south side of the original Kindel home
property, which property is located between the Christiania and Tivoli hotels.
Further, this Open Space parcel is a part of the larger, attractive, well-traveled
Open Space land corridor through which the walkway/bike path connects the Vail
June 2, 2020 - Page 228 of 772
Village Gondola with Golden Peak, and the other Open Space walkway between
the Tivoli and Kindel home connecting the above-referenced corridor with
Hanson Ranch Road. In addition, such expanded commercial/hotel development
will add more cars and pedestrian traffic hazards to this already congested
bottleneck in Vail Village. For these reasons, I base my opposition to the rezoning
application squarely on the Vail founders’ foundational values to preserve Open
Space and to ensure public safety.
Please join me in opposing this rezoning application by emailing Jonathan Spence
ASAP (again, the deadline is CoB today).
Thanks so much, and take care!
All the best, Jim
The following summarizes the rationale of my opposition based on Open Space
and public safety reasoning:
Open Spaces
A developer acquired both the original Kindel home/property between the
Christiania and Tivoli, and then further acquired a sizeable portion of adjacent
land. The newly acquired adjacent land was originally established by Vail (now
Vail Resorts) as Open Space (i.e., part of the original, larger Open Space walkway
corridor which connects the Vail Village Gondola to Golden Peak between the
Christiania and Tivoli on the north and the Mill Creek Circle neighborhood on the
south). And the new owner/developer knew this when such adjacent parcel was
acquired.
The new “Kindel” property owner/developer seeks to rezone its newly acquired
Open Space land for commercial hotel/public accommodation. I oppose this
rezoning application because I want the Town of Vail to preserve Vail’s time-
honored Open Spaces, as originally envisioned by Vail’s founders and as reflected
in the Town of Vail’s Master plan and zoning. If one acquires land, as this
developer did, knowing that it was long prior established for Open Space, such
new owner should abide by the Open Space restrictions on development. To rule
otherwise will set a new precedent paving the way for other developers to acquire
Open Spaces and convert such to commercial developments. Because the Town
of Vail is the steward for the continued benefit of and enjoyment by the entire
community, now and for generations to come, we respectfully and appropriately
submit to the Town of Vail our opposition to this petition to rezone.
Public Safety
The commercial development of such protected Open Space will add even more
cars and pedestrians to an already highly congested pedestrian and traffic “loop.”
This loop (1) is formed by the continuous roadway of Vail Valley Drive, Hanson
Ranch Road and East Gore Creek Drive, and (2) intersects the original Vail
Village pedestrian area in the eastern section of the Village. The Kindel/home
property that the developer seeks to rezone is located at the choke point of the
June 2, 2020 - Page 229 of 772
swarming pedestrians and auto traffic on this loop. The proposed rezoning to
commercial development will considerably add to public safety pedestrian and
traffic hazards. Because the Town of Vail is the steward responsible for public
safety, we respectfully and appropriately submit to the Town of Vail our
opposition to the petition to rezone, since, if approved, the rezoning of the
property will lead to aggravation of these hazards.
June 2, 2020 - Page 230 of 772
From:Climax Dave
To:Jonathan Spence
Subject:Fwd: VailPoint/Avanti Lodge: Town of Vail Protect our Open Spaces & Public Safety
Date:Monday, April 13, 2020 12:00:27 PM
Please let this serve as notice that Renie and David Gorsuch join the Galvin’s in protest of Re
zoning this open space parcel.
Sent from my iPhone
Begin forwarded message:
From: Mike Galvin <mgalvin@galventinc.com>
Date: April 13, 2020 at 11:34:11 AM MDT
To: "ClimaxDave@aol.com" <ClimaxDave@aol.com>
Cc: Chris Galvin <cgalvin@blythebourne.com>
Subject: VailPoint/Avanti Lodge: Town of Vail Protect our Open Spaces &
Public Safety
Please consider joining us in opposing the upcoming application to rezone for
commercial development one of the Vail founders’ long-standing land areas
established for Open Space.
In essence, the segment of Open Space land targeted for commercial
development is adjacent to the back/south side of the original Kindel home
property, which property is located between the Christiania and Tivoli hotels. The
particular Open Space parcel in question is a part of the larger, attractive, well-
traveled Open Space land corridor through which the walkway/bike path connects
the Vail Village Gondola with Golden Peak, and the other Open Space walkway
between the Tivoli and Kindel home connecting the above-referenced Open
Space corridor with Hanson Ranch Road. In addition, such expanded
commercial/hotel development will add more cars and pedestrian traffic hazards
to this already congested bottleneck in Vail Village. For these reasons, we base
our opposition to the rezoning application squarely on the Vail founders’
foundational values--to preserve Open Space and to ensure public safety.
If you agree and would join in opposing, you are encouraged to originate and
transmit your own personal email opposition to Jonathan Spence at the Town of
Vail ( jspence@vailgov.com )—who is collecting citizen input for the Town Council
members on this rezoning petition. If you are pressed for time and agree with the
opposition arguments set forth in more detail below, please “Forward” this email
to Jonathan Spence at the Town of Vail ( jspence@vailgov.com ). In doing so,
simply state in your forwarding email cover note that you “oppose this rezoning
June 2, 2020 - Page 231 of 772
application for the reasons set forth in this opposition email below.” Time is of
the essence, so please transmit your email opposition one way or the other by
close of business Tuesday, April 14th.
The following summarizes the rationale of our opposition based upon Open Space
and public safety reasoning:
Open Spaces:
A developer acquired both the original Kindel home/property between the
Christiania and Tivoli, and then further acquired of a sizeable portion of adjacent
land. The newly acquired adjacent land was originally established by Vail (now
Vail Resorts) as Open Space, i.e., part of the original, larger Open Space walkway
corridor which connects the Vail Village Gondola to Golden Peak in between the
Christiania and Tivoli on the north and the Mill Creek Circle neighborhood on the
south. And the new owner/developer knew this when such adjacent parcel was
acquired.
The new “Kindel” property owner/developer seeks to rezone its newly acquired
Open Space land, together with its adjoining original Kindel home property, for
commercial hotel/public accommodation. We oppose this rezoning application
because we want the Town of Vail to preserve Vail’s time-honored Open Spaces
as originally envisioned by Vail’s founders and as reflected in the Town of Vail’s
Master plan and zoning. If one acquires land, as this developer did, knowing that
it was long prior established for Open Space, such new owner should abide by the
Open Space restrictions on development. To rule otherwise, will set a new
precedent paving the way for other developers to acquire Open Spaces and
convert such to commercial developments. Because the Town of Vail is the
steward for the continued benefit of and enjoyment by the entire community,
now and for generations to come, we respectfully and appropriately submit to the
Town of Vail our opposition to this petition to rezone.
Public Safety:
The commercial development of such protected Open Space will add even more
cars and pedestrians to an already highly congested pedestrian and traffic “loop”.
This loop (1) is formed by the continuous roadway of Vail Valley Drive, Hanson
Ranch Road and East Gore Creek Drive, and (2) intersects the original Vail Village
pedestrian area in the eastern section of the Village. The Kindel/home and Open
Space property that the developer seeks to rezone is located at the choke point of
the swarming pedestrians and auto traffic on this loop. The proposed rezoning to
commercial development will considerably add to public safety pedestrian and
traffic hazards. Because the Town of Vail is the steward responsible for public
June 2, 2020 - Page 232 of 772
safety, we respectfully and appropriately submit to the Town of Vail our
opposition to the petition to rezone, as, if approved, the rezoning of the property
will lead to aggravation of these hazards.
You will not be alone in joining us in opposing this rezoning application. The time-
honored and respected Vail Homeowner’s Association is on record in opposition;
there are also many other residential and commercial landowners who are filing
their opposition. Our lawyers are filing, on our behalf, more detailed legal memos
in support of our opposition.
This persistent developer has made four prior unsuccessful attempts asking the
Town of Vail to rezone away this Open Space in favor of commercial hotel
development, directly in contravention of the Vail founders’ foundational values.
This developer is trying again so we must mobilize again in opposition in order to
preserve Open Space and to ensure public safety.
If you want to discuss this further, we’re available to do so.
Please join us in opposing this rezoning application by following the simple
instructions in the above third paragraph of this email.
Thanks so much!
Chris & Cindy Galvin
Mike & Elizabeth Galvin
June 2, 2020 - Page 233 of 772
From:Jim Butterworth
To:Jonathan Spence
Subject:Fwd: VailPoint/Avanti Lodge: Town of Vail Protect our Open Spaces & Public Safety
Date:Monday, April 13, 2020 11:20:16 AM
Importance:High
Jonathan, I hope you’re safe & sound. I strongly oppose this rezoning application for the
reasons set forth in this opposition email below.
Best, Jim
Begin forwarded message:
From: Elizabeth Galvin <EGalvin@egalvin.com>
Subject: VailPoint/Avanti Lodge: Town of Vail Protect our Open Spaces &
Public Safety
Date: April 13, 2020 at 10:11:41 AM MDT
To: "jim@butterworth.net" <jim@butterworth.net>
Please consider joining us in opposing the upcoming application to rezone for commercial
development one of the Vail founders’ long-standing land areas established for Open Space.
Specifically, the segment of Open Space land targeted for commercial development is adjacent
to the back/south side of the original Kindel home property, which property is located
between the Christiania and Tivoli hotels. Further, this Open Space parcel is a part of the
larger, attractive, well-traveled Open Space land corridor through which the walkway/bike
path connects the Vail Village Gondola with Golden Peak, and the other Open Space walkway
between the Tivoli and Kindel home connecting the above-referenced corridor with Hanson
Ranch Road. In addition, such expanded commercial/hotel development will add more cars
and pedestrian traffic hazards to this already congested bottleneck in Vail Village. For these
reasons, we base our opposition to the rezoning application squarely on the Vail founders’
foundational values--to preserve Open Space and to ensure public safety.
If you agree and would join in opposing, you are encouraged to originate and transmit your
own personal email opposition to Jonathan Spence at the Town of Vail (jspence@vailgov.com
)—who is collecting citizen input for the Town Council members. If you are pressed for time
and agree with the opposition arguments set forth in more detail below, please “Forward” this
email to Jonathan Spence at the Town of Vail ( jspence@vailgov.com ). In doing so, simply
state in your forwarding email cover note that you “oppose this rezoning application for the
reasons set forth in this opposition email below.” Time is of the essence, so please transmit
your email opposition one way or the other by close of business Tuesday, April 14th.
The following summarizes the rationale of our opposition based on Open Space and public
safety reasoning:
June 2, 2020 - Page 234 of 772
Open Spaces:
A developer acquired both the original Kindel home/property between the Christiania and
Tivoli, and then further acquired a sizeable portion of adjacent land. The newly acquired
adjacent land was originally established by Vail (now Vail Resorts) as Open Space, i.e., part of
the original, larger Open Space walkway corridor which connects the Vail Village Gondola to
Golden Peak between the Christiania and Tivoli on the north and the Mill Creek Circle
neighborhood on the south. And the new owner/developer knew this when such adjacent
parcel was acquired.
The new “Kindel” property owner/developer seeks to rezone its newly acquired Open Space
land for commercial hotel/public accommodation. We oppose this rezoning application
because we want the Town of Vail to preserve Vail’s time-honored Open Spaces, as originally
envisioned by Vail’s founders and as reflected in the Town of Vail’s Master plan and zoning. If
one acquires land, as this developer did, knowing that it was long prior established for Open
Space, such new owner should abide by the Open Spacerestrictions on development. To rule
otherwise will set a new precedent paving the way for other developers to acquire Open
Spaces and convert such to commercial developments. Because the Town of Vail is the
steward for the continued benefit of and enjoyment by the entire community, now and for
generations to come, we respectfully and appropriately submit to the Town of Vail our
opposition to this petition to rezone.
Public Safety:
The commercial development of such protected Open Space will add even more cars and
pedestrians to an already highly congested pedestrian and traffic “loop.” This loop (1) is
formed by the continuous roadway of Vail Valley Drive, Hanson Ranch Road and East Gore
Creek Drive, and (2) intersects the original Vail Village pedestrian area in the eastern section of
the Village. The Kindel/home property that the developer seeks to rezone is located at the
choke point of the swarming pedestrians and auto traffic on this loop. The proposed rezoning
to commercial development will considerably add to public safety pedestrian and traffic
hazards. Because the Town of Vail is the steward responsible for public safety, we respectfully
and appropriately submit to the Town of Vail our opposition to the petition to rezone, since, if
approved, the rezoning of the property will lead to aggravation of these hazards.
You will not be alone in joining us in opposing this rezoning application. The time-honored
and respected Vail Homeowner’s Association is on record in opposition; there are also many
other residential and commercial landowners who are filing their opposition. Our lawyers are
filing, on our behalf, more detailed legal memos in support of our opposition.
This persistent developer has made four prior unsuccessful attempts asking the Town of Vail
to rezone this Open Space in favor of commercial hotel development, directly in contravention
June 2, 2020 - Page 235 of 772
of the Vail founders’ foundational values. This developer is trying again so we must mobilize
again in opposition in order to preserve Open Space and to ensure public safety.
If you want to discuss this further, we are available to do so.
Please join us in opposing this rezoning application by following the simple instructions in the
above third paragraph of this email.
Thanks so much!
Chris & Cindy Galvin
Michael & Elizabeth Galvin
June 2, 2020 - Page 236 of 772
From:John Keane
To:Jonathan Spence
Subject:Fwd: VailPoint/Avanti Lodge: Town of Vail Protect our Open Spaces & Public Safety
Date:Tuesday, April 14, 2020 11:42:37 AM
Jonathan,
I oppose this rezoning applications for the reasons specified in the attached email.
Regards,
John
John Keane
jfkeane@me.com
617-803-5597
Begin forwarded message:
From: Jim Butterworth <jim@butterworth.net>
Subject: VailPoint/Avanti Lodge: Town of Vail Protect our Open
Spaces & Public Safety
Date: April 14, 2020 at 9:43:24 AM MDT
To: "Mr. Jim Butterworth" <jim@butterworth.net>
Dear Vail friends,
First and foremost, I hope this email finds you safe & sound.
I am writing about the proposed rezoning of certain Vail Open Space for
commercial development. I am asking that you join others and me in opposing
this application. The deadline for this is TODAY (see below).
If you agree and would join in opposing, simply forward this email to
Jonathan Spence <jspence@vailgov.com> at the Town of Vail along with a
note saying that you “oppose this rezoning application for the reasons set
forth in this opposition email below.” Time is of the essence, so please
transmit your email opposition by close of business TODAY, Tuesday, April
14th.
You will not be alone in joining us in opposing this rezoning application. The
time-honored and respected Vail Homeowner’s Association is on record in
opposition; there are also many other residential and commercial landowners who
are filing their opposition.
This persistent developer has made four prior unsuccessful attempts asking the
Town of Vail to rezone this Open Space in favor of commercial hotel
development, directly in contravention of the Vail founders’ foundational values.
This developer is trying again so we must mobilize again in opposition in order to
preserve Open Space and to ensure public safety.
June 2, 2020 - Page 237 of 772
Specifically, the segment of Open Space land targeted for commercial
development is adjacent to the back/south side of the original Kindel home
property, which property is located between the Christiania and Tivoli hotels.
Further, this Open Space parcel is a part of the larger, attractive, well-traveled
Open Space land corridor through which the walkway/bike path connects the Vail
Village Gondola with Golden Peak, and the other Open Space walkway between
the Tivoli and Kindel home connecting the above-referenced corridor with
Hanson Ranch Road. In addition, such expanded commercial/hotel development
will add more cars and pedestrian traffic hazards to this already congested
bottleneck in Vail Village. For these reasons, I base my opposition to the rezoning
application squarely on the Vail founders’ foundational values to preserve Open
Space and to ensure public safety.
Please join me in opposing this rezoning application by emailing Jonathan Spence
ASAP (again, the deadline is CoB today).
Thanks so much, and take care!
All the best, Jim
The following summarizes the rationale of my opposition based on Open Space
and public safety reasoning:
Open Spaces
A developer acquired both the original Kindel home/property between the
Christiania and Tivoli, and then further acquired a sizeable portion of adjacent
land. The newly acquired adjacent land was originally established by Vail (now
Vail Resorts) as Open Space (i.e., part of the original, larger Open Space walkway
corridor which connects the Vail Village Gondola to Golden Peak between the
Christiania and Tivoli on the north and the Mill Creek Circle neighborhood on the
south). And the new owner/developer knew this when such adjacent parcel was
acquired.
The new “Kindel” property owner/developer seeks to rezone its newly acquired
Open Space land for commercial hotel/public accommodation. I oppose this
rezoning application because I want the Town of Vail to preserve Vail’s time-
honored Open Spaces, as originally envisioned by Vail’s founders and as reflected
in the Town of Vail’s Master plan and zoning. If one acquires land, as this
developer did, knowing that it was long prior established for Open Space, such
new owner should abide by the Open Space restrictions on development. To rule
otherwise will set a new precedent paving the way for other developers to acquire
Open Spaces and convert such to commercial developments. Because the Town
of Vail is the steward for the continued benefit of and enjoyment by the entire
community, now and for generations to come, we respectfully and appropriately
submit to the Town of Vail our opposition to this petition to rezone.
Public Safety
The commercial development of such protected Open Space will add even more
June 2, 2020 - Page 238 of 772
cars and pedestrians to an already highly congested pedestrian and traffic “loop.”
This loop (1) is formed by the continuous roadway of Vail Valley Drive, Hanson
Ranch Road and East Gore Creek Drive, and (2) intersects the original Vail
Village pedestrian area in the eastern section of the Village. The Kindel/home
property that the developer seeks to rezone is located at the choke point of the
swarming pedestrians and auto traffic on this loop. The proposed rezoning to
commercial development will considerably add to public safety pedestrian and
traffic hazards. Because the Town of Vail is the steward responsible for public
safety, we respectfully and appropriately submit to the Town of Vail our
opposition to the petition to rezone, since, if approved, the rezoning of the
property will lead to aggravation of these hazards.
June 2, 2020 - Page 239 of 772
From:Andrea & Mats Andersson
To:Jonathan Spence
Subject:Fwd: VailPoint/Avanti Lodge: Town of Vail Protect our Open Spaces & Public Safety
Date:Monday, April 13, 2020 10:02:57 AM
I, Mats Andersson, oppose this rezoning application for the reasons set forth in this
opposition email below.
---------- Forwarded message ---------
From: Mike Galvin <mgalvin@galventinc.com>
Date: Mon, Apr 13, 2020 at 7:54 AM
Subject: VailPoint/Avanti Lodge: Town of Vail Protect our Open Spaces & Public Safety
To: MATS ANDERSSON (thetallswede@gmail.com) <thetallswede@gmail.com>, Andrea
Andersson (andianderssonvail@gmail.com) <andianderssonvail@gmail.com>
Cc: Chris Galvin <cgalvin@blythebourne.com>
Please consider joining us in opposing the upcoming application to rezone for commercial
development one of the Vail founders’ long-standing land areas established for Open Space.
In essence, the segment of Open Space land targeted for commercial development is adjacent
to the back/south side of the original Kindel home property, which property is located between
the Christiania and Tivoli hotels. The particular Open Space parcel in question is a part of the
larger, attractive, well-traveled Open Space land corridor through which the walkway/bike
path connects the Vail Village Gondola with Golden Peak, and the other Open Space walkway
between the Tivoli and Kindel home connecting the above-referenced Open Space corridor
with Hanson Ranch Road. In addition, such expanded commercial/hotel development will add
more cars and pedestrian traffic hazards to this already congested bottleneck in Vail Village.
For these reasons, we base our opposition to the rezoning application squarely on the Vail
founders’ foundational values--to preserve Open Space and to ensure public safety.
If you agree and would join in opposing, you are encouraged to originate and transmit your
own personal email opposition to Jonathan Spence at the Town of Vail (
jspence@vailgov.com )—who is collecting citizen input for the Town Council members on
this rezoning petition. If you are pressed for time and agree with the opposition arguments set
forth in more detail below, please “Forward” this email to Jonathan Spence at the Town of
Vail ( jspence@vailgov.com ). In doing so, simply state in your forwarding email cover note
that you “oppose this rezoning application for the reasons set forth in this opposition email
below.” Time is of the essence, so please transmit your email opposition one way or the other
by close of business Tuesday, April 14th.
The following summarizes the rationale of our opposition based upon Open Space and public
safety reasoning:
June 2, 2020 - Page 240 of 772
Open Spaces:
A developer acquired both the original Kindel home/property between the Christiania and
Tivoli, and then further acquired of a sizeable portion of adjacent land. The newly acquired
adjacent land was originally established by Vail (now Vail Resorts) as Open Space, i.e., part
of the original, larger Open Space walkway corridor which connects the Vail Village Gondola
to Golden Peak in between the Christiania and Tivoli on the north and the Mill Creek Circle
neighborhood on the south. And the new owner/developer knew this when such adjacent
parcel was acquired.
The new “Kindel” property owner/developer seeks to rezone its newly acquired Open Space
land, together with its adjoining original Kindel home property, for commercial hotel/public
accommodation. We oppose this rezoning application because we want the Town of Vail to
preserve Vail’s time-honored Open Spaces as originally envisioned by Vail’s founders and as
reflected in the Town of Vail’s Master plan and zoning. If one acquires land, as this developer
did, knowing that it was long prior established for Open Space, such new owner should abide
by the Open Space restrictions on development. To rule otherwise, will set a new precedent
paving the way for other developers to acquire Open Spaces and convert such to commercial
developments. Because the Town of Vail is the steward for the continued benefit of and
enjoyment by the entire community, now and for generations to come, we respectfully and
appropriately submit to the Town of Vail our opposition to this petition to rezone.
Public Safety:
The commercial development of such protected Open Space will add even more cars and
pedestrians to an already highly congested pedestrian and traffic “loop”. This loop (1) is
formed by the continuous roadway of Vail Valley Drive, Hanson Ranch Road and East Gore
Creek Drive, and (2) intersects the original Vail Village pedestrian area in the eastern section
of the Village. The Kindel/home and Open Space property that the developer seeks to rezone
is located at the choke point of the swarming pedestrians and auto traffic on this loop. The
proposed rezoning to commercial development will considerably add to public safety
pedestrian and traffic hazards. Because the Town of Vail is the steward responsible for public
safety, we respectfully and appropriately submit to the Town of Vail our opposition to the
petition to rezone, as, if approved, the rezoning of the property will lead to aggravation of
these hazards.
You will not be alone in joining us in opposing this rezoning application. The time-honored
and respected Vail Homeowner’s Association is on record in opposition; there are also many
other residential and commercial landowners who are filing their opposition. Our lawyers are
filing, on our behalf, more detailed legal memos in support of our opposition.
June 2, 2020 - Page 241 of 772
This persistent developer has made four prior unsuccessful attempts asking the Town of Vail
to rezone away this Open Space in favor of commercial hotel development, directly in
contravention of the Vail founders’ foundational values. This developer is trying again so we
must mobilize again in opposition in order to preserve Open Space and to ensure public
safety.
If you want to discuss this further, we’re available to do so.
Please join us in opposing this rezoning application by following the simple instructions in the
above third paragraph of this email.
Thanks so much!
Chris & Cindy Galvin
Mike & Elizabeth Galvin
--
Thank you,
Mats & Andrea Andersson
"The Tall Swede"
4995 B Juniper Ln.
Vail, CO 81657
Mats (970) 393-0590
Andrea (970)393-0378
June 2, 2020 - Page 242 of 772
From:Andrea Andersson
To:Jonathan Spence
Subject:Fwd: VailPoint/Avanti Lodge: Town of Vail Protect our Open Spaces & Public Safety
Date:Monday, April 13, 2020 9:59:02 AM
I, Andrea Andersson, oppose this rezoning application for the reasons set forth in this
opposition email below.
---------- Forwarded message ---------
From: Mike Galvin <mgalvin@galventinc.com>
Date: Mon, Apr 13, 2020 at 7:54 AM
Subject: VailPoint/Avanti Lodge: Town of Vail Protect our Open Spaces & Public Safety
To: MATS ANDERSSON (thetallswede@gmail.com) <thetallswede@gmail.com>, Andrea
Andersson (andianderssonvail@gmail.com) <andianderssonvail@gmail.com>
Cc: Chris Galvin <cgalvin@blythebourne.com>
Please consider joining us in opposing the upcoming application to rezone for commercial
development one of the Vail founders’ long-standing land areas established for Open Space.
In essence, the segment of Open Space land targeted for commercial development is adjacent
to the back/south side of the original Kindel home property, which property is located between
the Christiania and Tivoli hotels. The particular Open Space parcel in question is a part of the
larger, attractive, well-traveled Open Space land corridor through which the walkway/bike
path connects the Vail Village Gondola with Golden Peak, and the other Open Space walkway
between the Tivoli and Kindel home connecting the above-referenced Open Space corridor
with Hanson Ranch Road. In addition, such expanded commercial/hotel development will add
more cars and pedestrian traffic hazards to this already congested bottleneck in Vail Village.
For these reasons, we base our opposition to the rezoning application squarely on the Vail
founders’ foundational values--to preserve Open Space and to ensure public safety.
If you agree and would join in opposing, you are encouraged to originate and transmit your
own personal email opposition to Jonathan Spence at the Town of Vail (
jspence@vailgov.com )—who is collecting citizen input for the Town Council members on
this rezoning petition. If you are pressed for time and agree with the opposition arguments set
forth in more detail below, please “Forward” this email to Jonathan Spence at the Town of
Vail ( jspence@vailgov.com ). In doing so, simply state in your forwarding email cover note
that you “oppose this rezoning application for the reasons set forth in this opposition email
below.” Time is of the essence, so please transmit your email opposition one way or the other
by close of business Tuesday, April 14th.
The following summarizes the rationale of our opposition based upon Open Space and public
safety reasoning:
June 2, 2020 - Page 243 of 772
Open Spaces:
A developer acquired both the original Kindel home/property between the Christiania and
Tivoli, and then further acquired of a sizeable portion of adjacent land. The newly acquired
adjacent land was originally established by Vail (now Vail Resorts) as Open Space, i.e., part
of the original, larger Open Space walkway corridor which connects the Vail Village Gondola
to Golden Peak in between the Christiania and Tivoli on the north and the Mill Creek Circle
neighborhood on the south. And the new owner/developer knew this when such adjacent
parcel was acquired.
The new “Kindel” property owner/developer seeks to rezone its newly acquired Open Space
land, together with its adjoining original Kindel home property, for commercial hotel/public
accommodation. We oppose this rezoning application because we want the Town of Vail to
preserve Vail’s time-honored Open Spaces as originally envisioned by Vail’s founders and as
reflected in the Town of Vail’s Master plan and zoning. If one acquires land, as this developer
did, knowing that it was long prior established for Open Space, such new owner should abide
by the Open Space restrictions on development. To rule otherwise, will set a new precedent
paving the way for other developers to acquire Open Spaces and convert such to commercial
developments. Because the Town of Vail is the steward for the continued benefit of and
enjoyment by the entire community, now and for generations to come, we respectfully and
appropriately submit to the Town of Vail our opposition to this petition to rezone.
Public Safety:
The commercial development of such protected Open Space will add even more cars and
pedestrians to an already highly congested pedestrian and traffic “loop”. This loop (1) is
formed by the continuous roadway of Vail Valley Drive, Hanson Ranch Road and East Gore
Creek Drive, and (2) intersects the original Vail Village pedestrian area in the eastern section
of the Village. The Kindel/home and Open Space property that the developer seeks to rezone
is located at the choke point of the swarming pedestrians and auto traffic on this loop. The
proposed rezoning to commercial development will considerably add to public safety
pedestrian and traffic hazards. Because the Town of Vail is the steward responsible for public
safety, we respectfully and appropriately submit to the Town of Vail our opposition to the
petition to rezone, as, if approved, the rezoning of the property will lead to aggravation of
these hazards.
You will not be alone in joining us in opposing this rezoning application. The time-honored
and respected Vail Homeowner’s Association is on record in opposition; there are also many
other residential and commercial landowners who are filing their opposition. Our lawyers are
filing, on our behalf, more detailed legal memos in support of our opposition.
June 2, 2020 - Page 244 of 772
This persistent developer has made four prior unsuccessful attempts asking the Town of Vail
to rezone away this Open Space in favor of commercial hotel development, directly in
contravention of the Vail founders’ foundational values. This developer is trying again so we
must mobilize again in opposition in order to preserve Open Space and to ensure public
safety.
If you want to discuss this further, we’re available to do so.
Please join us in opposing this rezoning application by following the simple instructions in the
above third paragraph of this email.
Thanks so much!
Chris & Cindy Galvin
Mike & Elizabeth Galvin
--
Andi
Life is good!
June 2, 2020 - Page 245 of 772
From:Louise Hoversten
To:Jonathan Spence
Subject:Fwd: VailPoint/Avanti Lodge: Town of Vail Protect our Open Spaces & Public Safety
Date:Tuesday, April 14, 2020 9:19:27 AM
I oppose this rezoning application for the reasons set forth in the email below.
Sincerely,
Louise Hoversten
In essence, the segment of Open Space land targeted
for commercial development is adjacent to the
back/south side of the original Kindel home property,
which property is located between the Christiania and
Tivoli hotels. The particular Open Space parcel in
question is a part of the larger, attractive, well-traveled
Open Space land corridor through which the
walkway/bike path connects the Vail Village Gondola
with Golden Peak, and the other Open Space walkway
between the Tivoli and Kindel home connecting the
above-referenced Open Space corridor with Hanson
Ranch Road. In addition, such expanded
commercial/hotel development will add more cars and
pedestrian traffic hazards to this already congested
bottleneck in Vail Village. For these reasons, we base
our opposition to the rezoning application squarely on
the Vail founders’ foundational values--to preserve
Open Space and to ensure public safety.
The following summarizes the rationale of our
opposition based upon Open Space and public safety
reasoning:
Open Spaces:
A developer acquired both the original Kindel
home/property between the Christiania and Tivoli, and
then further acquired of a sizeable portion of adjacent
land. The newly acquired adjacent land was originally
June 2, 2020 - Page 246 of 772
established by Vail (now Vail Resorts) as Open Space,
i.e., part of the original, larger Open Space walkway
corridor which connects the Vail Village Gondola to
Golden Peak in between the Christiania and Tivoli on
the north and the Mill Creek Circle neighborhood on
the south. And the new owner/developer knew this
when such adjacent parcel was acquired.
The new “Kindel” property owner/developer seeks to
rezone its newly acquired Open Space land, together
with its adjoining original Kindel home property, for
commercial hotel/public accommodation. We oppose
this rezoning application because we want the Town of
Vail to preserve Vail’s time-honored Open Spaces as
originally envisioned by Vail’s founders and as
reflected in the Town of Vail’s Master plan and
zoning. If one acquires land, as this developer did,
knowing that it was long prior established for Open
Space, such new owner should abide by the Open
Space restrictions on development. To rule otherwise,
will set a new precedent paving the way for other
developers to acquire Open Spaces and convert such to
commercial developments. Because the Town of Vail
is the steward for the continued benefit of and
enjoyment by the entire community, now and for
generations to come, we respectfully and appropriately
submit to the Town of Vail our opposition to this
petition to rezone.
Public Safety:
The commercial development of such protected Open
Space will add even more cars and pedestrians to an
already highly congested pedestrian and traffic
“loop”. This loop (1) is formed by the continuous
roadway of Vail Valley Drive, Hanson Ranch Road
and East Gore Creek Drive, and (2) intersects the
original Vail Village pedestrian area in the eastern
section of the Village. The Kindel/home and Open
Space property that the developer seeks to rezone is
located at the choke point of the swarming pedestrians
and auto traffic on this loop. The proposed rezoning
to commercial development will considerably add to
public safety pedestrian and traffic hazards. Because
the Town of Vail is the steward responsible for public
safety, we respectfully and appropriately submit to the
Town of Vail our opposition to the petition to rezone,
June 2, 2020 - Page 247 of 772
as, if approved, the rezoning of the property will lead
to aggravation of these hazards.
You will not be alone in joining us in opposing this
rezoning application. The time-honored and respected
Vail Homeowner’s Association is on record in
opposition; there are also many other residential and
commercial landowners who are filing their
opposition. Our lawyers are filing, on our behalf,
more detailed legal memos in support of our
opposition.
This persistent developer has made four prior
unsuccessful attempts asking the Town of Vail to
rezone away this Open Space in favor of commercial
hotel development, directly in contravention of the
Vail founders’ foundational values. This developer is
trying again so we must mobilize again in opposition
in order to preserve Open Space and to ensure public
safety.
If you want to discuss this further, we’re available to
do so.
Please join us in opposing this rezoning application by
following the simple instructions in the above third
paragraph of this email.
Thanks so much!
Chris & Cindy Galvin
Mike & Elizabeth Galvin
June 2, 2020 - Page 248 of 772
--
Andi
Life is good!
--
Andi
Life is good!
June 2, 2020 - Page 249 of 772
From:heather s
To:Jonathan Spence
Subject:Fwd: VailPoint/Avanti Lodge: Town of Vail Protect our Open Spaces & Public Safety
Date:Monday, April 13, 2020 8:51:19 PM
I oppose this rezoning application for the reasons set forth in this
opposition email below.”
Heather Schultz
5059 Gore Circle
Vail,CO 81657
Begin forwarded message:
From: Andrea Andersson
<andianderssonvail@gmail.com>
Date: April 13, 2020 at 3:59:52 PM MDT
To: Bob Louthan <bob.louthan@comcast.net>, Ariane
Viola <arianeviola@gmail.com>, Christina Arrigoni
<Christina@arrigoniwoods.com>, Pattison Carol
<caroltuckerpattison@gmail.com>, Cynthia Ryerson
<cindyvvss@mac.com>, marie porter
<mariesporter@gmail.com>, heather s
<vailheather@hotmail.com>, Heather Gilmartin
<heathergilmartin@hotmail.com>, Hailee Rustad
<hailee.rustad@gmail.com>, Jennie Iverson
<jennie@skitownsoups.com>,
alicia.arseneau@gmail.com
Subject: Fwd: VailPoint/Avanti Lodge: Town of Vail
Protect our Open Spaces & Public Safety
Hi Friends,
please take a look at the e-mail below,
cheers,
Andi
---------- Forwarded message ---------
From: Mike Galvin <mgalvin@galventinc.com>
Date: Mon, Apr 13, 2020 at 10:02 AM
Subject: RE: VailPoint/Avanti Lodge: Town of Vail
Protect our Open Spaces & Public Safety
To: Andrea Andersson <andianderssonvail@gmail.com>
Cc: Chris Galvin <cgalvin@blythebourne.com>,
Elizabeth Galvin <EGalvin@egalvin.com>, Cindy
Galvin <cindy@bardesinteriors.com>
June 2, 2020 - Page 250 of 772
Thanks so much!
From: Andrea Andersson
<andianderssonvail@gmail.com>
Sent: Monday, April 13, 2020 12:01 PM
To: Mike Galvin <mgalvin@galventinc.com>
Subject: Re: VailPoint/Avanti Lodge: Town of Vail
Protect our Open Spaces & Public Safety
Mike,
done!
Cheers,
Andi
On Mon, Apr 13, 2020 at 7:54 AM Mike Galvin
<mgalvin@galventinc.com> wrote:
Please consider joining us in opposing the upcoming
application to rezone for commercial development one
of the Vail founders’ long-standing land areas
established for Open Space.
In essence, the segment of Open Space land targeted
for commercial development is adjacent to the
back/south side of the original Kindel home property,
which property is located between the Christiania and
Tivoli hotels. The particular Open Space parcel in
question is a part of the larger, attractive, well-traveled
Open Space land corridor through which the
walkway/bike path connects the Vail Village Gondola
with Golden Peak, and the other Open Space walkway
between the Tivoli and Kindel home connecting the
above-referenced Open Space corridor with Hanson
Ranch Road. In addition, such expanded
commercial/hotel development will add more cars and
pedestrian traffic hazards to this already congested
bottleneck in Vail Village. For these reasons, we base
our opposition to the rezoning application squarely on
the Vail founders’ foundational values--to preserve
June 2, 2020 - Page 251 of 772
Open Space and to ensure public safety.
If you agree and would join in opposing, you are
encouraged to originate and transmit your own
personal email opposition to Jonathan Spence at the
Town of Vail ( jspence@vailgov.com )—who is
collecting citizen input for the Town Council members
on this rezoning petition. If you are pressed for time
and agree with the opposition arguments set forth in
more detail below, please “Forward” this email to
Jonathan Spence at the Town of Vail (
jspence@vailgov.com ). In doing so, simply state in
your forwarding email cover note that you “oppose
this rezoning application for the reasons set forth in
this opposition email below.” Time is of the essence,
so please transmit your email opposition one way or
the other by close of business Tuesday, April 14th.
The following summarizes the rationale of our
opposition based upon Open Space and public safety
reasoning:
Open Spaces:
A developer acquired both the original Kindel
home/property between the Christiania and Tivoli, and
then further acquired of a sizeable portion of adjacent
land. The newly acquired adjacent land was originally
established by Vail (now Vail Resorts) as Open Space,
i.e., part of the original, larger Open Space walkway
corridor which connects the Vail Village Gondola to
Golden Peak in between the Christiania and Tivoli on
the north and the Mill Creek Circle neighborhood on
the south. And the new owner/developer knew this
when such adjacent parcel was acquired.
The new “Kindel” property owner/developer seeks to
rezone its newly acquired Open Space land, together
with its adjoining original Kindel home property, for
commercial hotel/public accommodation. We oppose
this rezoning application because we want the Town of
Vail to preserve Vail’s time-honored Open Spaces as
originally envisioned by Vail’s founders and as
June 2, 2020 - Page 252 of 772
reflected in the Town of Vail’s Master plan and
zoning. If one acquires land, as this developer did,
knowing that it was long prior established for Open
Space, such new owner should abide by the Open
Space restrictions on development. To rule otherwise,
will set a new precedent paving the way for other
developers to acquire Open Spaces and convert such to
commercial developments. Because the Town of Vail
is the steward for the continued benefit of and
enjoyment by the entire community, now and for
generations to come, we respectfully and appropriately
submit to the Town of Vail our opposition to this
petition to rezone.
Public Safety:
The commercial development of such protected Open
Space will add even more cars and pedestrians to an
already highly congested pedestrian and traffic
“loop”. This loop (1) is formed by the continuous
roadway of Vail Valley Drive, Hanson Ranch Road
and East Gore Creek Drive, and (2) intersects the
original Vail Village pedestrian area in the eastern
section of the Village. The Kindel/home and Open
Space property that the developer seeks to rezone is
located at the choke point of the swarming pedestrians
and auto traffic on this loop. The proposed rezoning
to commercial development will considerably add to
public safety pedestrian and traffic hazards. Because
the Town of Vail is the steward responsible for public
safety, we respectfully and appropriately submit to the
Town of Vail our opposition to the petition to rezone,
as, if approved, the rezoning of the property will lead
to aggravation of these hazards.
You will not be alone in joining us in opposing this
rezoning application. The time-honored and respected
Vail Homeowner’s Association is on record in
opposition; there are also many other residential and
commercial landowners who are filing their
opposition. Our lawyers are filing, on our behalf,
more detailed legal memos in support of our
opposition.
This persistent developer has made four prior
June 2, 2020 - Page 253 of 772
unsuccessful attempts asking the Town of Vail to
rezone away this Open Space in favor of commercial
hotel development, directly in contravention of the
Vail founders’ foundational values. This developer is
trying again so we must mobilize again in opposition
in order to preserve Open Space and to ensure public
safety.
If you want to discuss this further, we’re available to
do so.
Please join us in opposing this rezoning application by
following the simple instructions in the above third
paragraph of this email.
Thanks so much!
Chris & Cindy Galvin
Mike & Elizabeth Galvin
--
Andi
Life is good!
--
Andi
Life is good!
June 2, 2020 - Page 254 of 772
From:Cynthia Ryerson
To:Jonathan Spence
Subject:Fwd: VailPoint/Avanti Lodge: Town of Vail Protect our Open Spaces & Public Safety
Date:Monday, April 13, 2020 7:00:57 PM
I, cynthia Ryerson agree wholeheartedly and I
“oppose this rezoning application for the reasons set forth in this opposition
email below.”
sincerely,
Cynthia Ryerson
4859 Meadow Drive
Vail, Co. 81657
Sent from my iPhone
Begin forwarded message:
From: heather s <vailheather@hotmail.com>
Date: April 13, 2020 at 6:47:02 PM MDT
To: Andrea Andersson <andianderssonvail@gmail.com>
Cc: Bob Louthan <bob.louthan@comcast.net>, Ariane Viola
<arianeviola@gmail.com>, Christina Arrigoni <Christina@arrigoniwoods.com>,
Pattison Carol <caroltuckerpattison@gmail.com>, Cynthia Ryerson
<cindyvvss@mac.com>, marie porter <mariesporter@gmail.com>, Heather
Gilmartin <heathergilmartin@hotmail.com>, Hailee Rustad
<hailee.rustad@gmail.com>, Jennie Iverson <jennie@skitownsoups.com>,
"alicia.arseneau@gmail.com" <alicia.arseneau@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: VailPoint/Avanti Lodge: Town of Vail Protect our Open Spaces
& Public Safety
Done
On Apr 13, 2020, at 3:58 PM, Andrea Andersson
<andianderssonvail@gmail.com> wrote:
Hi Friends,
please take a look at the e-mail below,
cheers,
Andi
---------- Forwarded message ---------
From: Mike Galvin <mgalvin@galventinc.com>
Date: Mon, Apr 13, 2020 at 10:02 AM
Subject: RE: VailPoint/Avanti Lodge: Town of Vail Protect our Open
Spaces & Public Safety
June 2, 2020 - Page 255 of 772
To: Andrea Andersson <andianderssonvail@gmail.com>
Cc: Chris Galvin <cgalvin@blythebourne.com>, Elizabeth Galvin
<EGalvin@egalvin.com>, Cindy Galvin
<cindy@bardesinteriors.com>
Thanks so much!
From: Andrea Andersson <andianderssonvail@gmail.com>
Sent: Monday, April 13, 2020 12:01 PM
To: Mike Galvin <mgalvin@galventinc.com>
Subject: Re: VailPoint/Avanti Lodge: Town of Vail Protect our
Open Spaces & Public Safety
Mike,
done!
Cheers,
Andi
On Mon, Apr 13, 2020 at 7:54 AM Mike Galvin
<mgalvin@galventinc.com> wrote:
Please consider joining us in opposing the upcoming application to
rezone for commercial development one of the Vail founders’
long-standing land areas established for Open Space.
In essence, the segment of Open Space land targeted for
commercial development is adjacent to the back/south side of the
original Kindel home property, which property is located between
the Christiania and Tivoli hotels. The particular Open Space parcel
in question is a part of the larger, attractive, well-traveled Open
Space land corridor through which the walkway/bike path connects
the Vail Village Gondola with Golden Peak, and the other Open
Space walkway between the Tivoli and Kindel home connecting
the above-referenced Open Space corridor with Hanson Ranch
Road. In addition, such expanded commercial/hotel development
will add more cars and pedestrian traffic hazards to this already
congested bottleneck in Vail Village. For these reasons, we base
our opposition to the rezoning application squarely on the Vail
founders’ foundational values--to preserve Open Space and to
June 2, 2020 - Page 256 of 772
ensure public safety.
If you agree and would join in opposing, you are encouraged to
originate and transmit your own personal email opposition to
Jonathan Spence at the Town of Vail ( jspence@vailgov.com )—
who is collecting citizen input for the Town Council members on
this rezoning petition. If you are pressed for time and agree with
the opposition arguments set forth in more detail below, please
“Forward” this email to Jonathan Spence at the Town of Vail (
jspence@vailgov.com ). In doing so, simply state in your
forwarding email cover note that you “oppose this rezoning
application for the reasons set forth in this opposition email
below.” Time is of the essence, so please transmit your email
opposition one way or the other by close of business Tuesday,
April 14th.
The following summarizes the rationale of our opposition based
upon Open Space and public safety reasoning:
Open Spaces:
A developer acquired both the original Kindel home/property
between the Christiania and Tivoli, and then further acquired of a
sizeable portion of adjacent land. The newly acquired adjacent
land was originally established by Vail (now Vail Resorts) as Open
Space, i.e., part of the original, larger Open Space walkway
corridor which connects the Vail Village Gondola to Golden Peak
in between the Christiania and Tivoli on the north and the Mill
Creek Circle neighborhood on the south. And the new
owner/developer knew this when such adjacent parcel was
acquired.
The new “Kindel” property owner/developer seeks to rezone its
newly acquired Open Space land, together with its adjoining
original Kindel home property, for commercial hotel/public
accommodation. We oppose this rezoning application because we
want the Town of Vail to preserve Vail’s time-honored Open
Spaces as originally envisioned by Vail’s founders and as reflected
in the Town of Vail’s Master plan and zoning. If one acquires
land, as this developer did, knowing that it was long prior
established for Open Space, such new owner should abide by the
Open Space restrictions on development. To rule otherwise, will
set a new precedent paving the way for other developers to acquire
June 2, 2020 - Page 257 of 772
Open Spaces and convert such to commercial developments.
Because the Town of Vail is the steward for the continued benefit
of and enjoyment by the entire community, now and for
generations to come, we respectfully and appropriately submit to
the Town of Vail our opposition to this petition to rezone.
Public Safety:
The commercial development of such protected Open Space will
add even more cars and pedestrians to an already highly congested
pedestrian and traffic “loop”. This loop (1) is formed by the
continuous roadway of Vail Valley Drive, Hanson Ranch Road and
East Gore Creek Drive, and (2) intersects the original Vail Village
pedestrian area in the eastern section of the Village. The
Kindel/home and Open Space property that the developer seeks to
rezone is located at the choke point of the swarming pedestrians
and auto traffic on this loop. The proposed rezoning to commercial
development will considerably add to public safety pedestrian and
traffic hazards. Because the Town of Vail is the steward
responsible for public safety, we respectfully and appropriately
submit to the Town of Vail our opposition to the petition to rezone,
as, if approved, the rezoning of the property will lead to
aggravation of these hazards.
You will not be alone in joining us in opposing this rezoning
application. The time-honored and respected Vail Homeowner’s
Association is on record in opposition; there are also many other
residential and commercial landowners who are filing their
opposition. Our lawyers are filing, on our behalf, more detailed
legal memos in support of our opposition.
This persistent developer has made four prior unsuccessful
attempts asking the Town of Vail to rezone away this Open Space
in favor of commercial hotel development, directly in
contravention of the Vail founders’ foundational values. This
developer is trying again so we must mobilize again in opposition
in order to preserve Open Space and to ensure public safety.
If you want to discuss this further, we’re available to do so.
Please join us in opposing this rezoning application by following
June 2, 2020 - Page 258 of 772
the simple instructions in the above third paragraph of this email.
Thanks so much!
Chris & Cindy Galvin
Mike & Elizabeth Galvin
--
Andi
Life is good!
--
Andi
Life is good!
June 2, 2020 - Page 259 of 772
From:Fred Pack
To:Jonathan Spence
Subject:Fwd: VailPoint/Avanti Lodge: Town of Vail Protect our Open Spaces & Public Safety
Date:Tuesday, April 14, 2020 10:11:45 AM
Mr Spence,
Point 1: The hypocrisy of acquiring Open Space land and then wanting to develop it
commercially is more than enough to deny the petition. (It even rivals the old joke about the
definition of Chutzpah: the boy on trial for murdering both his parents begs for mercy on the
grounds that he is an orphan.)
Point 2: Jim Butterworth's point about traffic and safety also should doom this petition.
Point 3: Vail's Founders enshrined Open Space as a key value for the town -- this should never
be forgotten.
thank you,
FRED PACK
400 East Meadow Rd #2
Vail
---------- Forwarded message ---------
From: Jim Butterworth <jim@butterworth.net>
Date: Tue, Apr 14, 2020 at 9:43 AM
Subject: VailPoint/Avanti Lodge: Town of Vail Protect our Open Spaces & Public Safety
To: Mr. Jim Butterworth <jim@butterworth.net>
Dear Vail friends,
First and foremost, I hope this email finds you safe & sound.
I am writing about the proposed rezoning of certain Vail Open Space for commercial
development. I am asking that you join others and me in opposing this application. The
deadline for this is TODAY (see below).
If you agree and would join in opposing, simply forward this email to Jonathan
Spence <jspence@vailgov.com> at the Town of Vail along with a note saying that you
“oppose this rezoning application for the reasons set forth in this opposition
email below.” Time is of the essence, so please transmit your email opposition by close of
business TODAY, Tuesday, April 14th.
You will not be alone in joining us in opposing this rezoning application. The time-honored
and respected Vail Homeowner’s Association is on record in opposition; there are also many
other residential and commercial landowners who are filing their opposition.
This persistent developer has made four prior unsuccessful attempts asking the Town of Vail
to rezone this Open Space in favor of commercial hotel development, directly in contravention
June 2, 2020 - Page 260 of 772
of the Vail founders’ foundational values. This developer is trying again so we must mobilize
again in opposition in order to preserve Open Space and to ensure public safety.
Specifically, the segment of Open Space land targeted for commercial development is adjacent
to the back/south side of the original Kindel home property, which property is located between
the Christiania and Tivoli hotels. Further, this Open Space parcel is a part of the larger,
attractive, well-traveled Open Space land corridor through which the walkway/bike path
connects the Vail Village Gondola with Golden Peak, and the other Open Space walkway
between the Tivoli and Kindel home connecting the above-referenced corridor with Hanson
Ranch Road. In addition, such expanded commercial/hotel development will add more cars
and pedestrian traffic hazards to this already congested bottleneck in Vail Village. For these
reasons, I base my opposition to the rezoning application squarely on the Vail founders’
foundational values to preserve Open Space and to ensure public safety.
Please join me in opposing this rezoning application by emailing Jonathan Spence ASAP
(again, the deadline is CoB today).
Thanks so much, and take care!
All the best, Jim
The following summarizes the rationale of my opposition based on Open Space and public
safety reasoning:
Open Spaces
A developer acquired both the original Kindel home/property between the Christiania and
Tivoli, and then further acquired a sizeable portion of adjacent land. The newly acquired
adjacent land was originally established by Vail (now Vail Resorts) as Open Space (i.e., part
of the original, larger Open Space walkway corridor which connects the Vail Village Gondola
to Golden Peak between the Christiania and Tivoli on the north and the Mill Creek Circle
neighborhood on the south). And the new owner/developer knew this when such adjacent
parcel was acquired.
The new “Kindel” property owner/developer seeks to rezone its newly acquired Open
Space land for commercial hotel/public accommodation. I oppose this rezoning application
because I want the Town of Vail to preserve Vail’s time-honored Open Spaces, as originally
envisioned by Vail’s founders and as reflected in the Town of Vail’s Master plan and zoning.
If one acquires land, as this developer did, knowing that it was long prior established for Open
Space, such new owner should abide by the Open Space restrictions on development. To rule
otherwise will set a new precedent paving the way for other developers to acquire Open
Spaces and convert such to commercial developments. Because the Town of Vail is the
steward for the continued benefit of and enjoyment by the entire community, now and for
generations to come, we respectfully and appropriately submit to the Town of Vail our
opposition to this petition to rezone.
Public Safety
The commercial development of such protected Open Space will add even more cars and
pedestrians to an already highly congested pedestrian and traffic “loop.” This loop (1) is
June 2, 2020 - Page 261 of 772
formed by the continuous roadway of Vail Valley Drive, Hanson Ranch Road and East Gore
Creek Drive, and (2) intersects the original Vail Village pedestrian area in the eastern section
of the Village. The Kindel/home property that the developer seeks to rezone is located at the
choke point of the swarming pedestrians and auto traffic on this loop. The proposed rezoning
to commercial development will considerably add to public safety pedestrian and traffic
hazards. Because the Town of Vail is the steward responsible for public safety, we
respectfully and appropriately submit to the Town of Vail our opposition to the petition to
rezone, since, if approved, the rezoning of the property will lead to aggravation of
these hazards.
June 2, 2020 - Page 262 of 772
From:Andy Franklin
To:Jonathan Spence
Subject:Fwd: VailPoint/Avanti Lodge: Town of Vail Protect our Open Spaces & Public Safety
Date:Tuesday, April 14, 2020 10:54:04 AM
Jonathon,
As a person who has been a Vail skier every season of Vail's existence (really!), I join Jim in
opposition to the proposed rezoning described in the email below. I have long valued the
pedestrian corridor between Vail and Golden Peak for nearly 60 years and do not approve of
the idea of commercial development in that area of Vail.
Please reject the developers request for rezoning of that open space.
Sincerely,
Andy Franklin
Andy Franklin
Home: 303-443-2723
Mobile: 303-810-3809
sent from my mobile device - please excuse typos
---------- Forwarded message ---------
From: Jim Butterworth <jim@butterworth.net>
Date: Tue, Apr 14, 2020, 9:43 AM
Subject: VailPoint/Avanti Lodge: Town of Vail Protect our Open Spaces & Public Safety
To: Mr. Jim Butterworth <jim@butterworth.net>
Dear Vail friends,
First and foremost, I hope this email finds you safe & sound.
I am writing about the proposed rezoning of certain Vail Open Space for commercial
development. I am asking that you join others and me in opposing this application. The
deadline for this is TODAY (see below).
If you agree and would join in opposing, simply forward this email to Jonathan
Spence <jspence@vailgov.com> at the Town of Vail along with a note saying that you
“oppose this rezoning application for the reasons set forth in this opposition
email below.” Time is of the essence, so please transmit your email opposition by close of
business TODAY, Tuesday, April 14th.
You will not be alone in joining us in opposing this rezoning application. The time-honored
and respected Vail Homeowner’s Association is on record in opposition; there are also many
other residential and commercial landowners who are filing their opposition.
This persistent developer has made four prior unsuccessful attempts asking the Town of Vail
to rezone this Open Space in favor of commercial hotel development, directly in contravention
of the Vail founders’ foundational values. This developer is trying again so we must mobilize
June 2, 2020 - Page 263 of 772
again in opposition in order to preserve Open Space and to ensure public safety.
Specifically, the segment of Open Space land targeted for commercial development is adjacent
to the back/south side of the original Kindel home property, which property is located between
the Christiania and Tivoli hotels. Further, this Open Space parcel is a part of the larger,
attractive, well-traveled Open Space land corridor through which the walkway/bike path
connects the Vail Village Gondola with Golden Peak, and the other Open Space walkway
between the Tivoli and Kindel home connecting the above-referenced corridor with Hanson
Ranch Road. In addition, such expanded commercial/hotel development will add more cars
and pedestrian traffic hazards to this already congested bottleneck in Vail Village. For these
reasons, I base my opposition to the rezoning application squarely on the Vail founders’
foundational values to preserve Open Space and to ensure public safety.
Please join me in opposing this rezoning application by emailing Jonathan Spence ASAP
(again, the deadline is CoB today).
Thanks so much, and take care!
All the best, Jim
The following summarizes the rationale of my opposition based on Open Space and public
safety reasoning:
Open Spaces
A developer acquired both the original Kindel home/property between the Christiania and
Tivoli, and then further acquired a sizeable portion of adjacent land. The newly acquired
adjacent land was originally established by Vail (now Vail Resorts) as Open Space (i.e., part
of the original, larger Open Space walkway corridor which connects the Vail Village Gondola
to Golden Peak between the Christiania and Tivoli on the north and the Mill Creek Circle
neighborhood on the south). And the new owner/developer knew this when such adjacent
parcel was acquired.
The new “Kindel” property owner/developer seeks to rezone its newly acquired Open
Space land for commercial hotel/public accommodation. I oppose this rezoning application
because I want the Town of Vail to preserve Vail’s time-honored Open Spaces, as originally
envisioned by Vail’s founders and as reflected in the Town of Vail’s Master plan and zoning.
If one acquires land, as this developer did, knowing that it was long prior established for Open
Space, such new owner should abide by the Open Space restrictions on development. To rule
otherwise will set a new precedent paving the way for other developers to acquire Open
Spaces and convert such to commercial developments. Because the Town of Vail is the
steward for the continued benefit of and enjoyment by the entire community, now and for
generations to come, we respectfully and appropriately submit to the Town of Vail our
opposition to this petition to rezone.
Public Safety
The commercial development of such protected Open Space will add even more cars and
pedestrians to an already highly congested pedestrian and traffic “loop.” This loop (1) is
formed by the continuous roadway of Vail Valley Drive, Hanson Ranch Road and East Gore
June 2, 2020 - Page 264 of 772
Creek Drive, and (2) intersects the original Vail Village pedestrian area in the eastern section
of the Village. The Kindel/home property that the developer seeks to rezone is located at the
choke point of the swarming pedestrians and auto traffic on this loop. The proposed rezoning
to commercial development will considerably add to public safety pedestrian and traffic
hazards. Because the Town of Vail is the steward responsible for public safety, we
respectfully and appropriately submit to the Town of Vail our opposition to the petition to
rezone, since, if approved, the rezoning of the property will lead to aggravation of
these hazards.
June 2, 2020 - Page 265 of 772
From:Robert Louthan
To:Jonathan Spence
Subject:Fwd: VailPoint/Avanti Lodge: Town of Vail Protect our Open Spaces & Public Safety
Date:Tuesday, April 14, 2020 9:20:31 AM
Dear Mr. Pence
We oppose this rezoning application for the reasons and rationale set forth
below.
The newly acquired adjacent land (the original Kindel home/property between
theChristiania and Tivoli, and a sizable portion of the adjacent land) was
originally established by Vail (now Vail Resorts) as Open Space, i.e., part of
the original, larger Open Space walkway corridor which connects the Vail
Village Gondola to Golden Peak in between the Christiania and Tivoli on the
north and the Mill Creek Circle neighborhood on the south.
The new “Kindel” property owner/developer seeks to rezone its newly acquired
Open Space land, together with its adjoining original Kindel home property, for
commercial hotel/public accommodation. We oppose this rezoning application
because we want the Town of Vail to preserve Vail’s time-honored Open
Spaces as originally envisioned by Vail’s founders and as reflected in the Town
of Vail’s Master plan and zoning. If one acquires land, as this developer did,
knowing that it was long prior established for Open Space, such new owner
should abide by the Open Space restrictions on development. To rule
otherwise, will set a new precedent paving the way for other developers to
acquire Open Spaces and convert such to commercial developments. Because
the Town of Vail is the steward for the continued benefit of and enjoyment by
the entire community, now and for generations to come, we respectfully and
appropriately submit to the Town of Vail our opposition to this petition to
rezone.
Public Safety:
The commercial development of such protected Open Space will add even
more cars and pedestrians to an already highly congested pedestrian and traffic
“loop”. This loop (1) is formed by the continuous roadway of Vail Valley
Drive, Hanson Ranch Road and East Gore Creek Drive, and (2) intersects the
original Vail Village pedestrian area in the eastern section of the Village. The
Kindel/home and Open Space property that the developer seeks to rezone is
located at the choke point of the swarming pedestrians and auto traffic on this
loop. The proposed rezoning to commercial development will considerably add
to public safety pedestrian and traffic hazards. Because the Town of Vail is the
steward responsible for public safety, we respectfully and appropriately submit
to the Town of Vail our opposition to the petition to rezone, as, if approved, the
rezoning of the property will lead to aggravation of these hazards.
Bob & Ann Louthan
Vail
June 2, 2020 - Page 266 of 772
From:Heather Gilmartin
To:Jonathan Spence; chris@vailcoffee.com
Subject:I oppose the Kindel home property rezoning application for the reasons set forth in the opposition email below
Date:Monday, April 13, 2020 7:04:30 PM
Dear Jonathan,
Thank you for the opportunity to comment on the upcoming application to rezone for
commercial development one of the Vail founders’ long-standing land areas established for
Open Space. I oppose this rezoning application because I want the Town of Vail to preserve
Vail’s time-honored Open Spaces as originally envisioned by Vail’s founders and as reflected in
the Town of Vail’s Master plan and zoning. If one acquires land, as this developer did,
knowing that it was long prior established for Open Space, such new owner should abide by
the Open Space restrictions on development. To rule otherwise, will set a new precedent
paving the way for other developers to acquire Open Spaces and convert such to commercial
developments. Because the Town of Vail is the steward for the continued benefit of and
enjoyment by the entire community, now and for generations to come, I respectfully and
appropriately submit to the Town of Vail our opposition to this petition to rezone.
Sincerely,
Heather Gilmartin
4840 Meadow Lane
Vail, CO
June 2, 2020 - Page 267 of 772
From:Henry Gordon
To:Jonathan Spence
Cc:LORIE GORDON (hlgordon@comcast.net)
Date:Tuesday, April 14, 2020 10:35:42 AM
Jonathan,
My name is Henry Gordon and my wife, Lorie and I own 4 units in Texas Townhouses. I would like to
express my opposition to the development of open space rezoning for the commercial development
on the backside of the original Kindel home. Open space is like time and it is the only thing we don’t
have more of. Please consider Vail’s unique heritage when considering the application of adding one
more development at the expense of our few remaining open space locations.
Respectfully,
Henry and Lorie Gordon
June 2, 2020 - Page 268 of 772
From:kwsvail@gmail.com
To:Jonathan Spence
Subject:open space village to Golden Peak
Date:Monday, April 13, 2020 12:55:30 PM
Please do NOT rezone that wonderful open space where I walk and ride every day of the summer!
Kenny 310 200 3362
June 2, 2020 - Page 269 of 772
From:hamila atefi
To:Jonathan Spence
Subject:Oppose the rezoning application
Date:Tuesday, April 14, 2020 10:10:12 AM
Jonathan,
I oppose this rezoning application for the reasons set forth in this opposition email below.
Open Spaces
A developer acquired both the original Kindel home/property between the Christiania and Tivoli, and then
further acquired a sizeable portion of adjacent land. The newly acquired adjacent land was originally
established by Vail (now Vail Resorts) as Open Space (i.e., part of the original, larger Open
Space walkway corridor which connects the Vail Village Gondola to Golden Peak between the Christiania
and Tivoli on the north and the Mill Creek Circle neighborhood on the south). And the new
owner/developer knew this when such adjacent parcel was acquired.
The new “Kindel” property owner/developer seeks to rezone its newly acquired Open Space land for
commercial hotel/public accommodation. I oppose this rezoning application because I want the Town of
Vail to preserve Vail’s time-honored Open Spaces, as originally envisioned by Vail’s founders and as
reflected in the Town of Vail’s Master plan and zoning. If one acquires land, as this developer did,
knowing that it was long prior established for Open Space, such new owner should abide by the Open
Space restrictions on development. To rule otherwise will set a new precedent paving the way for other
developers to acquire Open Spaces and convert such to commercial developments. Because the Town
of Vail is the steward for the continued benefit of and enjoyment by the entire community, now and for
generations to come, we respectfully and appropriately submit to the Town of Vail our opposition to this
petition to rezone.
Public Safety
The commercial development of such protected Open Space will add even more cars and pedestrians to
an already highly congested pedestrian and traffic “loop.” This loop (1) is formed by the continuous
roadway of Vail Valley Drive, Hanson Ranch Road and East Gore Creek Drive, and (2) intersects the
original Vail Village pedestrian area in the eastern section of the Village. The Kindel/home property that
the developer seeks to rezone is located at the choke point of the swarming pedestrians and auto traffic
on this loop. The proposed rezoning to commercial development will considerably add to public safety
pedestrian and traffic hazards. Because the Town of Vail is the steward responsible for public safety, we
respectfully and appropriately submit to the Town of Vail our opposition to the petition to rezone, since, if
approved, the rezoning of the property will lead to aggravation of these hazards.
Thank you,
Hamila Atefi
(1468 Vail Valley Drive)
June 2, 2020 - Page 270 of 772
From:Esrey, William T [Sprint Ret]
To:Jonathan Spence
Subject:oppose the rezoning
Date:Monday, April 13, 2020 9:37:47 AM
Jonathan, I write to strenuously oppose the effort to rezone away from Open
Space the area around Golden Peak and the Kindel property.
The present leaders of Vail have a responsibility to maintain the quality of Vail
and the open space that our founders had the foresight to establish. While
progress is necessary and modernization is desired, this should not be confused
with losing the quality of our Village and continually increasing our density. If
we continue to go down this road, one day soon, we will turn around and
realize we have changed and permanently damaged what makes Vail so
special. I would hope our leaders would show the same backbone and foresight
of our Founders and deny this effort to remove open space near the core of
our village.
Respectfully submitted,
Bill Esrey, a permanent resident
June 2, 2020 - Page 271 of 772
From:Kathy Hubbard
To:Jonathan Spence
Subject:Opposition of rezoning application
Date:Monday, April 13, 2020 10:36:12 AM
Jonathan,
We have a home in Vail at 146 Forest Road which we dearly love. We wish to
inform you of our clear opposition to the rezoning application by a developer
to rezone space which is part of the “Open Space” walkway which connects
the Vail Village Gondola to Golden Peak in between the Christiana and Tivoli on
the north and the Mill Creek neighborhood on the south. We oppose this
because we want the Town of Vail to preserve the “Open Spaces” as originally
conceived by the founders of Vail and by the Master Plan for the town. Such a
development, if allowed to occur, would seriously add to the traffic and
congestion that already exists in this area. Preserving this open space is vital
to the feeling of nature and openness that we wish to maintain in our already
busy town.
Thanks very much for your serious consideration.
With best regards,
Kathy
Kathy Hubbard
Khubbard@ea-companies.com
June 2, 2020 - Page 272 of 772
From:Cille Williams
To:Jonathan Spence
Subject:Rezoning
Date:Monday, April 13, 2020 6:34:21 PM
We oppose the rezoning!!
Cille B Williams
Andrew B Robinson
Elizabeth Robinson Baker
Chase William Robinson
Owners of F1 and D4
Owners at All Seasons Condominiums
Sent from my iPhone
June 2, 2020 - Page 273 of 772
From:George Lamb
To:Jonathan Spence
Subject:Vail Point/Avanti Lodge Re-Zoning application
Date:Tuesday, April 14, 2020 9:42:58 AM
My wife and I are adamantly opposed to the re-zoning application primarily because long standing “open space”
should not be developed. In doing so an extremely dangerous precedent would further destroy the underlying
guidelines which Vail was established and must hold sacred.
George and Lizette Lamb
George Lamb
Georgelambpaintings.com
970-376-3280
June 2, 2020 - Page 274 of 772
From:JOHN & DIANA DONOVAN
To:Jonathan Spence; Council Dist List
Subject:Vail Pointe up zoning
Date:Tuesday, April 14, 2020 11:52:18 AM
This greedy proposal ignores every thing the town has stood for and planned for since the very beginning. All of the
towns official plans and actions support maintaining this area as open space for circulation of the east side of the
village in the unique atmosphere that is unique to Vail. We can not continue to cave to developers who have no
regard for the brand that has made Vail a success. They add nothing to Vail yet greatly diminish Vail. It is time to
say no to their greedy and self serving proposals. Ask yourself “how does this proposal improve or contribute
positively to Vail?” Tivoli was not allowed to grab additional land and neither was Christiania although they could
easily have used it. What has changed except for VRI selling the town out in a very short sighted uninformed
move? Staff needs to enforce long term planning and resulting goals and so does Council. I assume staff has not
provided any of those plans for council’s review. This open space has been protected over and over for decades for
good reason. Council must defend it once again as established precedent demands.
Sent from my iPhone
June 2, 2020 - Page 275 of 772
From:Craig Taylor
To:Jonathan Spence
Cc:Michelle Taylor (michelle@mtaylorassociates.com); Craig Taylor; Michael P. Galvin - Galvin Enterprises, Inc.
(mgalvin@galventinc.com)
Subject:VailPoint/Avanti Lodge: Town of Vail Protect our Open Spaces & Public Safety
Date:Monday, April 13, 2020 12:56:54 PM
Jonathan,
My wife and I want to go on the record for opposing this rezoning application for the reasons set
forth below-Open Spaces, Public Safety.
My father Vernon Taylor was one of the original handful of investors behind the founding of Vail, and
supported Vail nonprofits for over 45 years! We were forced to fight a developer that was trying to "
rezone" and build a hotel property above our home on Rockledge Road. We lived at 107 Rock Ledge
Rd.
The head of Bear Stearns office in Los Angeles also lived on Rock ledge Road and had, through a
lobbyist in Washington, inserted into a bill the rights for him to "rezone" and develop a hotel property
above our house (always designated as US forest service land). In exchange for the right to build a
commercial property above all homeowners On Rock Ledge, he would be " giving up"/not developing
2700 acres of wilderness land that he had purchased in the middle of nowhere with absolutely no
value. It was just scrub.
A friend of my father's notified him that this proposal had been inserted into a bill and was due to be
voted on in two weeks! Dad hired attorneys, contacted lobbyists, tried to activate our neighbors to
fight this effort. Due to my father's effort-shining a light on the sham "rezoning" development
proposal, it was removed from the bill three days before being voted on. We know how it was
inserted into the bill, he leaned as hard as he could on his Democratic LA Congressman/California
Sen. Relationships.
US Force Service land is sacrosanct, however in this case no one in Vail government was even aware
that this was taking place/ interceded. If it were not for my family the property adjacent to Bear
Tree run on the mountain would now be a hotel property. And therefore, it would be another
gotcha moment from a developer.
<><><><><><>
Open Spaces:
A developer acquired both the original Kindel home/property between the Christiania and
Tivoli, and then further acquired of a sizeable portion of adjacent land. The newly acquired
adjacent land was originally established by Vail (now Vail Resorts) as Open Space, i.e., part of
the original, larger Open Space walkway corridor which connects the Vail Village Gondola to
Golden Peak in between the Christiania and Tivoli on the north and the Mill Creek Circle
neighborhood on the south. And the new owner/developer knew this when such adjacent
parcel was acquired.
June 2, 2020 - Page 276 of 772
The new “Kindel” property owner/developer seeks to rezone its newly acquired Open Space
land, together with its adjoining original Kindel home property, for commercial hotel/public
accommodation. We oppose this rezoning application because we want the Town of Vail to
preserve Vail’s time-honored Open Spaces as originally envisioned by Vail’s founders and as
reflected in the Town of Vail’s Master plan and zoning. If one acquires land, as this developer
did, knowing that it was long prior established for Open Space, such new owner should abide
by the Open Space restrictions on development. To rule otherwise, will set a new precedent
paving the way for other developers to acquire Open Spaces and convert such to commercial
developments. Because the Town of Vail is the steward for the continued benefit of and
enjoyment by the entire community, now and for generations to come, we respectfully and
appropriately submit to the Town of Vail our opposition to this petition to rezone.
Public Safety:
The commercial development of such protected Open Space will add even more cars and
pedestrians to an already highly congested pedestrian and traffic “loop”. This loop (1) is
formed by the continuous roadway of Vail Valley Drive, Hanson Ranch Road and East Gore
Creek Drive, and (2) intersects the original Vail Village pedestrian area in the eastern section of
the Village. The Kindel/home and Open Space property that the developer seeks to rezone is
located at the choke point of the swarming pedestrians and auto traffic on this loop. The
proposed rezoning to commercial development will considerably add to public safety
pedestrian and traffic hazards. Because the Town of Vail is the steward responsible for public
safety, we respectfully and appropriately submit to the Town of Vail our opposition to the
petition to rezone, as, if approved, the rezoning of the property will lead to aggravation of
these hazards.
Best,
Michelle & Craig Taylor
Craig Taylor
22 W. Meadow Dr.
Vail Colorado, Apt. #230
Cell 805-698-3931
Fax 310-454-0431
E-Mail ct@oceanwize.com
_____Email Confidentiality Notice____
This e-mail and its attachments are intended solely for the persons to whom it is addressed. Additionally, this e-mail
transmission may contain confidential communications protected by law. If you are not the named addressee, or if this
message has been transmitted to you in error, you are directed not to read, disclose, reproduce, distribute, disseminate or
otherwise use this transmission. Delivery of this message to any person other than the intended recipients is not
intended in any way to waive confidentiality. If you have received this transmission in error, please alert the sender by
reply e-mail; we also request that you immediately delete this message and its attachments, if any. Thank you.
June 2, 2020 - Page 277 of 772
From:Mary Randall
To:Jonathan Spence
Cc:Christopher Randall
Subject:VailPoint/Avanti Lodge: Town of Vail Protect our Open Spaces & Public Safety
Date:Monday, April 13, 2020 9:32:07 AM
I am opposed to granting this request for rezoning this Open Space as I walk thru this area
frequently and feel we should honor the plans of Vail Founders. I urge you not to grant the
request by the developer. We do not need any more congestion in this area.
Mary
Mary B. Randall
mbrandall55@gmail.com
PO Box 2776
Edwards, CO 81632
970-390-6432 Cell
970-926-9611 Home
June 2, 2020 - Page 278 of 772
From:Mary Galvin
To:Jonathan Spence
Subject:VailPoint/Avanti Lodge: Town of Vail Protect our Open Spaces & Public Safety
Date:Monday, April 13, 2020 6:56:36 AM
I am Mary Galvin and I write to oppose the petition of the 366 Hanson Ranch Road owners to
rezone for commercial development on one of the Vail founders’ long-standing land areas
established for Open Space. And out of concern for the public safety hazards that will
certainly be added to that/our neighborhood, one of Vail Village’s most congested pedestrian
and traffic concentrations already.
The Bob & Mary Galvin family has been humbled to enjoy Vail as a center for its winter and
summer family reunions since Vail opened in 1962. While we started as a family of six in
Row House 12 (303 East Gore Creek Drive), we are now forty-six Galvin family spanning
four generations. The extended Galvin family together now own a total of eighteen residences
in Vail Village (i.e., four Row Houses, and one Vorlaufer, four Mill Creek Court and nine
Ramshorn condominiums). While the Galvins would never assert our Vail family roots or its
substantial investment commitment in Vail as deserving of special consideration, we would
hope that our time-honored productive and positive involvement in Vail’s development since
its inception would be valued for our objectivity and balance on such issues. For example, my
husband, Bob Galvin (now deceased) co-founded, and my daughter, Dr. Gail Ellis now Chairs,
the Vail Homeowners Association. Bob lead and collaborated collegially with all
constituencies in adding parking to the neighborhood in question in the form of the successful
Founders Garage project, among other numerous, positive civic and development initiatives.
My opposition is based upon the following Open Space and public safety reasoning:
Open Spaces:
A developer acquired both the original Kindel home/property between the Christiania and
Tivoli, and then further acquired of a sizeable portion of adjacent land. The newly acquired
adjacent land was originally established by Vail (now Vail Resorts) as Open Space, i.e., part
of the original, larger Open Space walkway corridor which connects the Vail Village Gondola
to Golden Peak in between the Christiania and Tivoli on the north and the Mill Creek Circle
neighborhood on the south. And the new owner/developer knew this when such adjacent
parcel was acquired.
The new “Kindel” property owner/developer seeks to rezone its newly acquired Open Space
land for commercial hotel/public accommodation. We oppose this rezoning application
because we want the Town of Vail to preserve Vail’s time-honored Open Spaces as originally
envisioned by Vail’s founders and as reflected in the Town of Vail’s Master plan and zoning.
If one acquires land, as this developer did, knowing that it was long prior established for Open
Space, such new owner should abide by the Open Space restrictions on development. To rule
June 2, 2020 - Page 279 of 772
otherwise, will set a new precedent paving the way for other developers to acquire Open
Spaces and convert such to commercial developments. Because the Town of Vail is the
steward for the continued benefit of and enjoyment by the entire community, now and for
generations to come, we respectfully and appropriately submit to the Town of Vail our
opposition to this petition to rezone.
Public Safety:
The commercial development of such protected Open Space will add even more cars and
pedestrians to an already highly congested pedestrian and traffic “loop”. This loop (1) is
formed by the continuous roadway of Vail Valley Drive, Hanson Ranch Road and East Gore
Creek Drive, and (2) intersects the original Vail Village pedestrian area in the eastern section
of the Village. The Kindel/home property that the developer seeks to rezone is located at the
choke point of the swarming pedestrians and auto traffic on this loop. The proposed rezoning
to commercial development will considerably add to public safety pedestrian and traffic
hazards. Because the Town of Vail is the steward responsible for public safety, we
respectfully and appropriately submit to the Town of Vail our opposition to the petition to
rezone, as, if approved, the rezoning of the property will lead to aggravation of these hazards.
I thank you for receiving with respect my opposition to this VailPoint rezoning application.
Sincerely,
Mary Galvin
June 2, 2020 - Page 280 of 772
From:Karin Morgan
To:Jonathan Spence
Subject:VailPoint?Avanti Lodge: Town of Vail Protect Our Open Spaces
Date:Monday, April 13, 2020 6:58:55 PM
Open Spaces:
A developer acquired both the original Kindel home/property
between the Christiania and Tivoli, and then further acquired of
a sizeable portion of adjacent land. The newly acquired
adjacent land was originally established by Vail (now Vail
Resorts) as Open Space, i.e., part of the original, larger Open
Space walkway corridor which connects the Vail Village
Gondola to Golden Peak in between the Christiania and Tivoli
on the north and the Mill Creek Circle neighborhood on the
south. And the new owner/developer knew this when such
adjacent parcel was acquired.
The new “Kindel” property owner/developer seeks to rezone its
newly acquired Open Space land, together with its adjoining
original Kindel home property, for commercial hotel/public
accommodation. We oppose this rezoning application
because we want the Town of Vail to preserve Vail’s time-
honored Open Spaces as originally envisioned by Vail’s
founders and as reflected in the Town of Vail’s Master plan and
zoning. If one acquires land, as this developer did, knowing
that it was long prior established for Open Space, such new
owner should abide by the Open Space restrictions on
development. To rule otherwise, will set a new precedent
paving the way for other developers to acquire Open Spaces
and convert such to commercial developments. Because the
Town of Vail is the steward for the continued benefit of and
enjoyment by the entire community, now and for generations to
come, we respectfully and appropriately submit to the Town of
Vail our opposition to this petition to rezone.
Public Safety:
The commercial development of such protected Open
Space will add even more cars and pedestrians to an already
highly congested pedestrian and traffic “loop”. This loop (1) is
formed by the continuous roadway of Vail Valley Drive, Hanson
Ranch Road and East Gore Creek Drive, and (2) intersects the
original Vail Village pedestrian area in the eastern section of
the Village. The Kindel/home and Open Space property that
the developer seeks to rezone is located at the choke point of
June 2, 2020 - Page 281 of 772
the swarming pedestrians and auto traffic on this loop. The
proposed rezoning to commercial development will
considerably add to public safety pedestrian and traffic
hazards. Because the Town of Vail is the steward responsible
for public safety, we respectfully and appropriately submit to
the Town of Vail our opposition to the petition to rezone, as, if
approved, the rezoning of the property will lead to aggravation
of these hazards.
Sincerely,
Karin Morgan
Board Member
All Seasons
Vail, Colorado
-- Karin W. Morgan2883 Lee Hill DriveBoulder, CO 80302
June 2, 2020 - Page 282 of 772
From:Dawn Meiners
To:Jonathan Spence
Subject:VailPoint/Avanti Lodge: Town of Vail Protect our Open Spaces & Public Safety
Date:Monday, April 13, 2020 11:33:16 AM
I am Dawn Galvin Meiners, daughter of Bob & Mary Galvin. My Vorlaufer condominium is still in my family (now owned by one of my adult
kids, Mark Meiners). And, I am still visiting Vail annually for family reunions, which reunions started with my immediate family in the early
1960s. And which family reunions now include my kids and grandkids, together with my Mom/Mary and my sister and brothers together
with their respective kids and grandkids.
I write to oppose the petition of the VailPoint/Avanti Lodge developer to rezone for commercial development on one of the Vail founders’
long-standing land areas established for Open Space. And out of concern for the public safety hazards that will certainly be added to
that/our neighborhood, one of Vail Village’s most congested pedestrian and traffic concentrations already.
The following summarizes the essence of my opposition based upon Open Space and public safety reasoning:
Open Spaces:
A developer acquired both the original Kindel home/property between the Christiania and Tivoli, and then further acquired of a sizeable
portion of adjacent land. The newly acquired adjacent land was originally established by Vail (now Vail Resorts) as Open Space, i.e., part
of the original, larger Open Space walkway corridor which connects the Vail Village Gondola to Golden Peak in between the Christiania
and Tivoli on the north and the Mill Creek Circle neighborhood on the south. And the new owner/developer knew this when such adjacent
parcel was acquired.
The new “Kindel” property owner/developer seeks to rezone its newly acquired Open Space land, together with its adjoining original Kindel
home property, for commercial hotel/public accommodation. We oppose this rezoning application because we want the Town of Vail to
preserve Vail’s time-honored Open Spaces as originally envisioned by Vail’s founders and as reflected in the Town of Vail’s Master plan
and zoning. If one acquires land, as this developer did, knowing that it was long prior established for Open Space, such new owner should
abide by the Open Space restrictions on development. To rule otherwise, will set a new precedent paving the way for other developers to
acquire Open Spaces and convert such to commercial developments. Because the Town of Vail is the steward for the continued benefit of
and enjoyment by the entire community, now and for generations to come, we respectfully and appropriately submit to the Town of Vail our
opposition to this petition to rezone.
Public Safety:
The commercial development of such protected Open Space will add even more cars and pedestrians to an already highly congested
pedestrian and traffic “loop”. This loop (1) is formed by the continuous roadway of Vail Valley Drive, Hanson Ranch Road and East Gore
Creek Drive, and (2) intersects the original Vail Village pedestrian area in the eastern section of the Village. The Kindel/home and Open
Space property that the developer seeks to rezone is located at the choke point of the swarming pedestrians and auto traffic on this loop.
The proposed rezoning to commercial development will considerably add to public safety pedestrian and traffic hazards. Because the
Town of Vail is the steward responsible for public safety, we respectfully and appropriately submit to the Town of Vail our opposition to the
petition to rezone, as, if approved, the rezoning of the property will lead to aggravation of these hazards.
I thank you for processing my opposition to this VailPoint rezoning application.
Sincerely, Dawn Galvin Meiners
June 2, 2020 - Page 283 of 772
From:Alex MacCormick - Center Lane, LLC
To:Jonathan Spence
Subject:VailPoint/Avanti Lodge: Town of Vail Protect our Open Spaces & Public Safety
Date:Monday, April 13, 2020 4:01:57 PM
Importance:High
Mr. Spence,
My family has been homeowners in Vail Village since the 70s. I am sending you this email in
opposition of the proposed development/rezoning application of the Kindel property as well as the
destruction of open space.
My concerns are similar to what you have probably already heard, so I wont get into, but please
record my official opposition. thank you
Best regards,
Alex MacCormick
483 Gore Creek Drive
amaccormick@centerlanellc.com
Phone: 646-229-4291
June 2, 2020 - Page 284 of 772
From:Alison Curwen
To:Jonathan Spence
Subject:In opposition to rezoning application
Date:Tuesday, April 14, 2020 1:30:09 PM
I am an owner in the Texas Townhome Association and I oppose the rezoning
application for the reasons set forth in this opposition email below:
Open Spaces:
A developer acquired both the original Kindel home/property between the Christiania
and Tivoli, and then further acquired a sizeable portion of adjacent land. The newly
acquired adjacent land was originally established by Vail (now Vail Resorts) as Open
Space, i.e., part of the original, larger Open Space walkway corridor which connects
the Vail Village Gondola to Golden Peak in between the Christiania and Tivoli on the
north and the Mill Creek Circle neighborhood on the south. And the new
owner/developer knew this when such an adjacent parcel was acquired.
The new “Kindel” property owner/developer seeks to rezone its newly acquired Open
Space land, together with its adjoining original Kindel home property, for commercial
hotel/public accommodation. We oppose this rezoning application because we want
the Town of Vail to preserve Vail’s time-honored Open Spaces as originally
envisioned by Vail’s founders and as reflected in the Town of Vail’s Master plan and
zoning. If one acquires land, as this developer did, knowing that it was long prior
established for Open Space, such new owner should abide by the Open
Space restrictions on development. To rule otherwise, will set a new precedent
paving the way for other developers to acquire Open Spaces and convert such to
commercial developments. Because the Town of Vail is the steward for the continued
benefit of and enjoyment by the entire community, now and for generations to come,
we respectfully and appropriately submit to the Town of Vail our opposition to this
petition to rezone.
Public Safety:
The commercial development of such protected Open Space will add even more cars
and pedestrians to an already highly congested pedestrian and traffic “loop”. This
loop (1) is formed by the continuous roadway of Vail Valley Drive, Hanson Ranch
Road and East Gore Creek Drive, and (2) intersects the original Vail Village
pedestrian area in the eastern section of the Village. The Kindel/home and Open
Space property that the developer seeks to rezone is located at the choke point of the
swarming pedestrians and auto traffic on this loop. The proposed rezoning to
commercial development will considerably add to public safety pedestrian and traffic
hazards. Because the Town of Vail is the steward responsible for public safety, we
respectfully and appropriately submit to the Town of Vail our opposition to the petition
to rezone, as, if approved, the rezoning of the property will lead to aggravation of
these hazards.
Sincerely,
June 2, 2020 - Page 285 of 772
Alison Curwen
June 2, 2020 - Page 286 of 772
From:Elaine Byrnes
To:Jonathan Spence
Subject:Opposition to Developer building on Open Space
Date:Tuesday, April 14, 2020 1:33:30 PM
We have a condo in Vail Village and use the bike/walking path from the Village to Golden
Peak. We are in agreement with the opposition for rezoning the Open Space area as expressed
below.
Regards,
Elaine and Tom Byrnes
The following summarizes the rationale of our opposition based upon Open
Spaceand public safety reasoning:
Open Spaces:
A developer acquired both the original Kindel home/property between the
Christiania and Tivoli, and then further acquired of a sizeable portion of
adjacent land. The newly acquired adjacent land was originally established by
Vail (now Vail Resorts) as Open Space, i.e., part of the original, larger Open
Space walkway corridor which connects the Vail Village Gondola to Golden
Peak in between the Christiania and Tivoli on the north and the Mill Creek
Circle neighborhood on the south. And the new owner/developer knew this
when such adjacent parcel was acquired.
The new “Kindel” property owner/developer seeks to rezone its newly
acquired Open Space land, together with its adjoining original Kindel home
property, for commercial hotel/public accommodation. We oppose this
rezoning application because we want the Town of Vail to preserve Vail’s time-
honored Open Spaces as originally envisioned by Vail’s founders and as
reflected in the Town of Vail’s Master plan and zoning. If one acquires land, as
this developer did, knowing that it was long prior established forOpen Space,
such new owner should abide by the Open Space restrictions on development.
To rule otherwise, will set a new precedent paving the way for other developers
to acquire Open Spaces and convert such to commercial developments.
Because the Town of Vail is the steward for the continued benefit of and
enjoyment by the entire community, now and for generations to come, we
respectfully and appropriately submit to the Town of Vail our opposition to this
petition to rezone.
Public Safety:
The commercial development of such protected Open Space will add even
more cars and pedestrians to an already highly congested pedestrian and traffic
June 2, 2020 - Page 287 of 772
“loop”. This loop (1) is formed by the continuous roadway of Vail Valley
Drive, Hanson Ranch Road and East Gore Creek Drive, and (2) intersects the
original Vail Village pedestrian area in the eastern section of the Village. The
Kindel/home and Open Space property that the developer seeks to rezone is
located at the choke point of the swarming pedestrians and auto traffic on this
loop. The proposed rezoning to commercial development will considerably add
to public safety pedestrian and traffic hazards. Because the Town of Vail is the
steward responsible for public safety, we respectfully and appropriately submit
to the Town of Vail our opposition to the petition to rezone, as, if approved, the
rezoning of the property will lead to aggravation of these hazards.
You will not be alone in joining us in opposing this rezoning application. The
time-honored and respected Vail Homeowner’s Association is on record in
opposition; there are also many other residential and commercial landowners
who are filing their opposition. Our lawyers are filing, on our behalf, more
detailed legal memos in support of our opposition.
This persistent developer has made four prior unsuccessful attempts asking the
Town of Vail to rezone away this Open Space in favor of commercial hotel
development, directly in contravention of the Vail founders’ foundational
values. This developer is trying again so we must mobilize again in opposition
in order to preserve Open Spaceand to ensure public safety.
Sent from my iPad
June 2, 2020 - Page 288 of 772
From:Laura Wolf
To:Jonathan Spence
Subject:Rezoning Open Space
Date:Tuesday, April 14, 2020 1:21:04 PM
Dear Mr. Spence,
I oppose the rezoning of application of the Open Space near the Tivoli and Christinia for the
reasons set forth below:
Open Spaces
A developer acquired both the original Kindel home/property between the Christiania and
Tivoli, and then further acquired a sizeable portion of adjacent land. The newly acquired
adjacent land was originally established by Vail (now Vail Resorts) as Open Space (i.e., part
of the original, larger Open Space walkway corridor which connects the Vail Village Gondola
to Golden Peak between the Christiania and Tivoli on the north and the Mill Creek Circle
neighborhood on the south). And the new owner/developer knew this when such adjacent
parcel was acquired.
The new “Kindel” property owner/developer seeks to rezone its newly acquired Open Space
land for commercial hotel/public accommodation. I oppose this rezoning application because
I want the Town of Vail to preserve Vail’s time-honored Open Spaces, as originally
envisioned by Vail’s founders and as reflected in the Town of Vail’s Master plan and zoning.
If one acquires land, as this developer did, knowing that it was long prior established for Open
Space, such new owner should abide by the Open Space restrictions on development. To rule
otherwise will set a new precedent paving the way for other developers to acquire Open
Spaces and convert such to commercial developments. Because the Town of Vail is the
steward for the continued benefit of and enjoyment by the entire community, now and for
generations to come, we respectfully and appropriately submit to the Town of Vail our
opposition to this petition to rezone.
Public Safety
The commercial development of such protected Open Space will add even more cars and
pedestrians to an already highly congested pedestrian and traffic “loop.” This loop (1) is
formed by the continuous roadway of Vail Valley Drive, Hanson Ranch Road and East Gore
Creek Drive, and (2) intersects the original Vail Village pedestrian area in the eastern section
of the Village. The Kindel/home property that the developer seeks to rezone is located at the
choke point of the swarming pedestrians and auto traffic on this loop. The proposed rezoning
to commercial development will considerably add to public safety pedestrian and traffic
hazards. Because the Town of Vail is the steward responsible for public safety, we
respectfully and appropriately submit to the Town of Vail our opposition to the petition to
rezone, since, if approved, the rezoning of the property will lead to aggravation of these
hazards.
As a former TOV resident (I now live in Minturn) since 1995, I am growing weary of the sale
and rezoning of Open Spaces.
Thank you,
June 2, 2020 - Page 289 of 772
Laura Wolf
June 2, 2020 - Page 290 of 772
June 2, 2020 - Page 291 of 772
June 2, 2020 - Page 292 of 772
June 2, 2020 - Page 293 of 772
June 2, 2020 - Page 294 of 772
June 2, 2020 - Page 295 of 772
June 2, 2020 - Page 296 of 772
From:Diane Lighthall
To:Jonathan Spence
Subject:Fwd: Abuse of Open Space in Vail
Date:Tuesday, April 14, 2020 8:09:44 PM
We would like to express our strong opposition to a rezoning of the area sited in the e-
mail below.
Diane and Kirk Lighthall
483 Gore Creek Dr. , #8
Vail, CO ,
---------- Forwarded message ---------
From: diane <ligampine@aol.com>
Date: Tue, Apr 14, 2020 at 5:36 PM
Subject: Fwd: Abuse of Open Space in Vail
To: <dianelighthall@gmail.com>
Sent from AOL Mobile Mail
Get the new AOL app: mail.mobile.aol.com
On Monday, April 13, 2020, Lorie <hlgordon@comcast.net> wrote:
---------- Original Message ----------
From: Lorie <hlgordon@comcast.net>
To: pattymueller@mac.com, Elizabeth Woodhull <eawoodhull@gmail.com>,
John Woodhull <jawoodhull@gmail.com>, Alison Curwen
<alisonecurwen@gmail.com>, Alex MacCormick
<amaccormick@centerlanellc.com>, Ann Prochnow
<atprochnow@gmail.com>, ligapine@aol.com
Date: April 13, 2020 at 3:34 PM
Subject: Abuse of Open Space in Vail
4/13/20
Neighbors, please consider joining Lorie and I in opposition of a
proposed project to the Town Council of Vail. A developer's recent
purchase of land, described below, is trying to use a provision known as
"eminent domain" to encroach on a land area established for open
space, which is next to the Christiana and Tivoli. They want to rezone
for commercial development. This was brought to our attention today
and a response is needed by tomorrow, Tuesday, April 14. Sorry for
short notice. Pickleball is an example of the Town working their way
into our wonderful enclave. I believe the letter is self-explanatory as to
why we don't want another large development congesting our location,
including Vail Valley Drive. If you so agree, please join us and show
June 2, 2020 - Page 297 of 772
your opposition by tomorrow. Instructions are in third paragraph listed
below.
Thank you.
Henry Gordon
Subject: VailPoint/Avanti Lodge: Town of Vail Protect our Open Spaces
& Public Safety
Importance: High
Please consider joining us in opposing the upcoming application to
rezone for commercial development one of the Vail founders’ long-
standing land areas established for Open Space.
In essence, the segment of Open Space land targeted for commercial
development is adjacent to the back/south side of the original Kindel
home property, which property is located between the Christiania and
Tivoli hotels. The particular Open Space parcel in question is a part of
the larger, attractive, well-traveled Open Space land corridor through
which the walkway/bike path connects the Vail Village Gondola with
Golden Peak, and the other Open Space walkway between the Tivoli
and Kindel home connecting the above-referenced Open Space
corridor with Hanson Ranch Road. In addition, such expanded
commercial/hotel development will add more cars and pedestrian traffic
hazards to this already congested bottleneck in Vail Village. For these
reasons, we base our opposition to the rezoning application squarely on
the Vail founders’ foundational values--to preserve Open Space and to
ensure public safety
If you agree and would join in opposing, you are encouraged to
originate and transmit your own personal email opposition to Jonathan
Spence at the Town of Vail ( jspence@vailgov.com )—who is collecting
citizen input for the Town Council members on this rezoning petition. If
you are pressed for time and agree with the opposition arguments set
forth in more detail below, please “Forward” this email to Jonathan
Spence at the Town of Vail ( jspence@vailgov.com ). In doing so,
simply state in your forwarding email cover note that you “ oppose this
rezoning application for the reasons set forth in this opposition email
below.” Time is of the essence, so please transmit your email
opposition one way or the other by close of business Tuesday, April 14th.
The following summarizes the rationale of our opposition based upon
Open Space and public safety reasoning:
Open Spaces:
June 2, 2020 - Page 298 of 772
A developer acquired both the original Kindel home/property between
the Christiania and Tivoli, and then further acquired of a sizeable
portion of adjacent land. The newly acquired adjacent land was
originally established by Vail (now Vail Resorts) as Open Space, i.e.,
part of the original, larger Open Space walkway corridor which connects
the Vail Village Gondola to Golden Peak in between the Christiania and
Tivoli on the north and the Mill Creek Circle neighborhood on the south.
And the new owner/developer knew this when such adjacent parcel was
acquired.
The new “Kindel” property owner/developer seeks to rezone its newly
acquired Open Space land, together with its adjoining original Kindel
home property, for commercial hotel/public accommodation. We
oppose this rezoning application because we want the Town of Vail to
preserve Vail’s time-honored Open Spaces as originally envisioned by
Vail’s founders and as reflected in the Town of Vail’s Master plan and
zoning. If one acquires land, as this developer did, knowing that it was
long prior established for Open Space, such new owner should abide by
the Open Space restrictions on development. To rule otherwise, will set
a new precedent paving the way for other developers to acquire Open
Spaces and convert such to commercial developments. Because the
Town of Vail is the steward for the continued benefit of and enjoyment
by the entire community, now and for generations to come, we
respectfully and appropriately submit to the Town of Vail our opposition
to this petition to rezone.
Public Safety:
The commercial development of such protected Open Space will add
even more cars and pedestrians to an already highly congested
pedestrian and traffic “loop”. This loop (1) is formed by the continuous
roadway of Vail Valley Drive, Hanson Ranch Road and East Gore
Creek Drive, and (2) intersects the original Vail Village pedestrian area
in the eastern section of the Village. The Kindel/home and Open Space
property that the developer seeks to rezone is located at the choke
point of the swarming pedestrians and auto traffic on this loop. The
proposed rezoning to commercial development will considerably add to
public safety pedestrian and traffic hazards. Because the Town of Vail
is the steward responsible for public safety, we respectfully and
appropriately submit to the Town of Vail our opposition to the petition to
rezone, as, if approved, the rezoning of the property will lead to
aggravation of these hazards.
You will not be alone in joining us in opposing this rezoning application.
The time-honored and respected Vail Homeowner’s Association is on
record in opposition; there are also many other residential and
commercial landowners who are filing their opposition. Our lawyers are
filing, on our behalf, more detailed legal memos in support of our
June 2, 2020 - Page 299 of 772
opposition.
This persistent developer has made four prior unsuccessful attempts
asking the Town of Vail to rezone away this Open Space in favor of
commercial hotel development, directly in contravention of the Vail
founders’ foundational values. This developer is trying again so we
must mobilize again in opposition in order to preserve Open Space and
to ensure public safety.
If you want to discuss this further, we’re available to do so.
Please join us in opposing this rezoning application by following the
simple instructions in the above third paragraph of this email.
Thanks so much!
June 2, 2020 - Page 300 of 772
From:Axel Wilhelmsen
To:Jonathan Spence
Subject:Fwd: VailPoint/Avanti Lodge: Town of Vail Protect our Open Spaces & Public Safety
Date:Tuesday, April 14, 2020 3:41:26 PM
I oppose this rezoning application for the reasons set forth in this opposition email below.
---------- Forwarded message ---------
From: Mike Galvin <mgalvin@galventinc.com>
Date: Mon, Apr 13, 2020 at 4:12 PM
Subject: VailPoint/Avanti Lodge: Town of Vail Protect our Open Spaces & Public Safety
To: axel@axelsltd.com <axel@axelsltd.com>
Cc: Chris Galvin <cgalvin@blythebourne.com>
Please consider joining us in opposing the upcoming application to rezone for commercial
development one of the Vail founders’ long-standing land areas established for Open Space.
In essence, the segment of Open Space land targeted for commercial development is adjacent
to the back/south side of the original Kindel home property, which property is located between
the Christiania and Tivoli hotels. The particular Open Space parcel in question is a part of the
larger, attractive, well-traveled Open Space land corridor through which the walkway/bike
path connects the Vail Village Gondola with Golden Peak, and the other Open Space walkway
between the Tivoli and Kindel home connecting the above-referenced Open Space corridor
with Hanson Ranch Road. In addition, such expanded commercial/hotel development will add
more cars and pedestrian traffic hazards to this already congested bottleneck in Vail Village.
For these reasons, we base our opposition to the rezoning application squarely on the Vail
founders’ foundational values--to preserve Open Space and to ensure public safety.
If you agree and would join in opposing, you are encouraged to originate and transmit your
own personal email opposition to Jonathan Spence at the Town of Vail (
jspence@vailgov.com )—who is collecting citizen input for the Town Council members on
this rezoning petition. If you are pressed for time and agree with the opposition arguments set
forth in more detail below, please “Forward” this email to Jonathan Spence at the Town of
Vail ( jspence@vailgov.com ). In doing so, simply state in your forwarding email cover note
that you “oppose this rezoning application for the reasons set forth in this opposition email
below.” Time is of the essence, so please transmit your email opposition one way or the other
by close of business Tuesday, April 14th.
The following summarizes the rationale of our opposition based upon Open Space and public
safety reasoning:
June 2, 2020 - Page 301 of 772
Open Spaces:
A developer acquired both the original Kindel home/property between the Christiania and
Tivoli, and then further acquired of a sizeable portion of adjacent land. The newly acquired
adjacent land was originally established by Vail (now Vail Resorts) as Open Space, i.e., part
of the original, larger Open Space walkway corridor which connects the Vail Village Gondola
to Golden Peak in between the Christiania and Tivoli on the north and the Mill Creek Circle
neighborhood on the south. And the new owner/developer knew this when such adjacent
parcel was acquired.
The new “Kindel” property owner/developer seeks to rezone its newly acquired Open Space
land, together with its adjoining original Kindel home property, for commercial hotel/public
accommodation. We oppose this rezoning application because we want the Town of Vail to
preserve Vail’s time-honored Open Spaces as originally envisioned by Vail’s founders and as
reflected in the Town of Vail’s Master plan and zoning. If one acquires land, as this developer
did, knowing that it was long prior established for Open Space, such new owner should abide
by the Open Space restrictions on development. To rule otherwise, will set a new precedent
paving the way for other developers to acquire Open Spaces and convert such to commercial
developments. Because the Town of Vail is the steward for the continued benefit of and
enjoyment by the entire community, now and for generations to come, we respectfully and
appropriately submit to the Town of Vail our opposition to this petition to rezone.
Public Safety:
The commercial development of such protected Open Space will add even more cars and
pedestrians to an already highly congested pedestrian and traffic “loop”. This loop (1) is
formed by the continuous roadway of Vail Valley Drive, Hanson Ranch Road and East Gore
Creek Drive, and (2) intersects the original Vail Village pedestrian area in the eastern section
of the Village. The Kindel/home and Open Space property that the developer seeks to rezone
is located at the choke point of the swarming pedestrians and auto traffic on this loop. The
proposed rezoning to commercial development will considerably add to public safety
pedestrian and traffic hazards. Because the Town of Vail is the steward responsible for public
safety, we respectfully and appropriately submit to the Town of Vail our opposition to the
petition to rezone, as, if approved, the rezoning of the property will lead to aggravation of
these hazards.
You will not be alone in joining us in opposing this rezoning application. The time-honored
and respected Vail Homeowner’s Association is on record in opposition; there are also many
other residential and commercial landowners who are filing their opposition. Our lawyers are
filing, on our behalf, more detailed legal memos in support of our opposition.
This persistent developer has made four prior unsuccessful attempts asking the Town of Vail
to rezone away this Open Space in favor of commercial hotel development, directly in
June 2, 2020 - Page 302 of 772
contravention of the Vail founders’ foundational values. This developer is trying again so we
must mobilize again in opposition in order to preserve Open Space and to ensure public
safety.
If you want to discuss this further, we’re available to do so.
Please join us in opposing this rezoning application by following the simple instructions in the
above third paragraph of this email.
Thanks so much!
Chris & Cindy Galvin
Mike & Elizabeth Galvin
--
201 Gore Creek Dr.
Vail, Co 81657
970-476-7625
www.axelsltd.com
Info@axelsltd.com
Follow us on Facebook
June 2, 2020 - Page 303 of 772
From:Sallie Smith
To:Jonathan Spence
Subject:Opposed to VailPoint/Avanti Lodge: Town of Vail Protect our Open Spaces & Public Safety
Date:Tuesday, April 14, 2020 4:35:51 PM
I oppose this rezoning application for the reasons set forth in this opposition
email below:
Sincerely,
Sarah Bland Smith. “Sallie”
285 Forest Road
Vail, CO 81657
Sent from my iPhone
Begin forwarded message:
From: Jim Butterworth <jim@butterworth.net>
Date: April 14, 2020 at 9:43:29 AM MDT
To: "Mr. Jim Butterworth" <jim@butterworth.net>
Subject: VailPoint/Avanti Lodge: Town of Vail Protect our Open Spaces &
Public Safety
Dear Vail friends,
First and foremost, I hope this email finds you safe & sound.
I am writing about the proposed rezoning of certain Vail Open Space for
commercial development. I am asking that you join others and me in opposing
this application. The deadline for this is TODAY (see below).
If you agree and would join in opposing, simply forward this email to
Jonathan Spence <jspence@vailgov.com> at the Town of Vail along with a
note saying that you “oppose this rezoning application for the reasons set
forth in this opposition email below.” Time is of the essence, so please
transmit your email opposition by close of business TODAY, Tuesday, April
14th.
You will not be alone in joining us in opposing this rezoning application. The
time-honored and respected Vail Homeowner’s Association is on record
in opposition; there are also many other residential and commercial landowners
who are filing their opposition.
This persistent developer has made four prior unsuccessful attempts asking the
Town of Vail to rezone this Open Space in favor of commercial
hotel development, directly in contravention of the Vail founders’ foundational
values. This developer is trying again so we must mobilize again in opposition in
order to preserve Open Space and to ensure public safety.
June 2, 2020 - Page 304 of 772
Specifically, the segment of Open Space land targeted for commercial
development is adjacent to the back/south side of the original Kindel
home property, which property is located between the Christiania and Tivoli
hotels. Further, this Open Space parcel is a part of the larger, attractive, well-
traveled Open Space land corridor through which the walkway/bike path connects
the Vail Village Gondola with Golden Peak, and the other Open Space walkway
between the Tivoli and Kindel home connecting the above-referenced corridor
with Hanson Ranch Road. In addition, such expanded commercial/hotel
development will add more cars and pedestrian traffic hazards to this already
congested bottleneck in Vail Village. For these reasons, I base my opposition to
the rezoning application squarely on the Vail founders’ foundational values to
preserve Open Space and to ensure public safety.
Please join me in opposing this rezoning application by emailing Jonathan Spence
ASAP (again, the deadline is CoB today).
Thanks so much, and take care!
All the best, Jim
The following summarizes the rationale of my opposition based on Open
Space and public safety reasoning:
Open Spaces
A developer acquired both the original Kindel home/property between the
Christiania and Tivoli, and then further acquired a sizeable portion of adjacent
land. The newly acquired adjacent land was originally established by Vail (now
Vail Resorts) as Open Space (i.e., part of the original, larger Open Space walkway
corridor which connects the Vail Village Gondola to Golden Peak between the
Christiania and Tivoli on the north and the Mill Creek Circle neighborhood on the
south). And the new owner/developer knew this when such adjacent parcel was
acquired.
The new “Kindel” property owner/developer seeks to rezone its newly
acquired Open Space land for commercial hotel/public accommodation. I oppose
this rezoning application because I want the Town of Vail to preserve Vail’s time-
honored Open Spaces, as originally envisioned by Vail’s founders and as reflected
in the Town of Vail’s Master plan and zoning. If one acquires land, as this
developer did, knowing that it was long prior established for Open Space, such
new owner should abide by the Open Space restrictions on development. To rule
otherwise will set a new precedent paving the way for other developers to acquire
Open Spaces and convert such to commercial developments. Because the Town
of Vail is the steward for the continued benefit of and enjoyment by the entire
community, now and for generations to come, we respectfully and appropriately
submit to the Town of Vail our opposition to this petition to rezone.
Public Safety
The commercial development of such protected Open Space will add even more
June 2, 2020 - Page 305 of 772
cars and pedestrians to an already highly congested pedestrian and traffic “loop.”
This loop (1) is formed by the continuous roadway of Vail Valley Drive, Hanson
Ranch Road and East Gore Creek Drive, and (2) intersects the original Vail
Village pedestrian area in the eastern section of the Village. The Kindel/home
property that the developer seeks to rezone is located at the choke point of the
swarming pedestrians and auto traffic on this loop. The proposed rezoning to
commercial development will considerably add to public safety pedestrian and
traffic hazards. Because the Town of Vail is the steward responsible for public
safety, we respectfully and appropriately submit to the Town of Vail our
opposition to the petition to rezone, since, if approved, the rezoning of the
property will lead to aggravation of these hazards.
Sincerely,
Sarah Bland Smith. “Sallie”
285 Forest Road
Vail, CO 81657
June 2, 2020 - Page 306 of 772
From:Clay Gordon
To:Jonathan Spence
Subject:Opposition to development
Date:Tuesday, April 14, 2020 4:02:54 PM
Jonathan,
My name is Clay Gordon and I am an owner of one of the units in Texas Townhouses. I am writing
you to express my opposition to the proposed development on the backside of the original Kindel
home. Vail is a treasure of Colorado that should be protected. This would reduce the beauty the
open space provides and I ask you reject the new development.
Sincere regards,
Clay
June 2, 2020 - Page 307 of 772
From:Clay Gordon
To:Jonathan Spence
Subject:Opposition to new development
Date:Tuesday, April 14, 2020 3:37:59 PM
Jonathan,
My name is Clay Gordon and I am an owner of one of the units in Texas Townhouses. I am writing
you to express my opposition to the proposed development on the backside of the original Kindel
home. Vail is a treasure of Colorado that should be protected. This would reduce the beauty the
open space provides and I ask you reject the new development to leave
Best regards,
Clay
June 2, 2020 - Page 308 of 772
From:GEORGE STRATE
To:Jonathan Spence
Subject:Opposition to Resoning
Date:Tuesday, April 14, 2020 3:50:13 PM
Dear Mr. Spence
My wife and I wish to advise you that we are opposed to the application for rezoning of the
property between the Tivoli and Christiania. We have read the email sent to you by the
Galvins and are in full agreement with the reasons stated for their opposition.
George and Charlene Strate
Vail, CO
June 2, 2020 - Page 309 of 772
From:Kiwi Hilliard
To:Jonathan Spence
Subject:Rezoning
Date:Tuesday, April 14, 2020 2:01:28 PM
I oppose the rezoning
Kiwi Hilliard
2049 Sunburst Drive
Vail Co 81657
516-669-1589 (c)
June 2, 2020 - Page 310 of 772
From:Sue Rychel
To:Jonathan Spence
Subject:Space to the south of the original Kindel home
Date:Wednesday, April 15, 2020 9:20:44 PM
Dear Jonathan,
Please note of record my strong opposition to the rezoning of the space to the south of the original Kindel home.
Thank you,
Sue
Sue Rychel
Slifer Smith & Frampton
Certified Residential Specialist
Premier Property Specialist
970-471-0109
srychel@slifer.net
www.susanrychel.com
June 2, 2020 - Page 311 of 772
From:Ellis, James
To:Jonathan Spence
Cc:Courtney Kline
Subject:VailPoint Re-Zoning Application
Date:Tuesday, April 14, 2020 3:51:48 PM
Dear Mr. Spence/ Vail Town Council/ Vail Town Manager Robson:
I am writing as a member of a family who has held home ownership in the Town of Vail for
about 58 years. Currently, we collectively own some 19 homes/condos all within 200 yards of
the proposed re-zoning by VailPoint Development. I am very familiar with the workings of the
Town of Vail when it comes to project development, and have the utmost respect for the
desire to keep the town as pure as possible.
I must admit that I am at a total loss as to why you would even bring this proposal as far as
you have. The green space that would be changed with this zoning change is a treasure that
generations have tried to protect---the space between the town itself and the ski runs. If we
do not preserve this green space properly, we risk a density that would be unfathomable, not
to mention the added traffic on Hanson Ranch Road. It is bad now, requiring Vail Police to be
stationed there to mitigate the traffic burden now----this would make it worse, and would
create more safety issues that we have now.
To overburden the land at that particular juncture does not make sense logically, nor from a
legal point of view either. This land was deemed Open Space some fifty years ago, and has
been protected all that time. It is heavily used for its walking trail, which would force walkers
to go around Tivoli, and along Vail Valley Drive---again safety issues. Once this space is
opened to development, it will set precedent for other space along that corridor to be
developed by others---a very slippery slope.
You also run the risk of impacting neighboring buildings’ sight lines---something they paid a
pretty penny for when they acquired their properties. They bought those properties knowing
that no one would be able to build there, just as VailPoint bought their parcel knowing no one
could build there----why might they be singled out to change the zoning and build there? Vail
runs a huge risk by allowing this to happen.
I cannot fathom any development being shoehorned into this space, and am writing to
adamantly support the declining of this proposal by the Town of Vail. We have a beautiful
mountain that does not need more encroachment on it from developments.
Thank you for your consideration.
Sincerely
June 2, 2020 - Page 312 of 772
James G. Ellis
416 Vail Valley Drive #16
Vail CO
June 2, 2020 - Page 313 of 772
April 14, 2020
Town Council
Town of Vail, Colorado
c/o Jonathan Spence, Town Planner
75 South Frontage Road
Vail, Colorado 81657
RE: Ordinance No. 2, Series of 2020, First Reading, An Ordinance for a Zone District
Boundary Amendment, Pursuant to Section 12-3-7, Amendment, Vail Town Code, to
Allow for a Rezoning of Two Portions of Lot 1, 366 Hanson Ranch Road Subdivision;
The Rezoning will change the Zone District from Agricultural and Open Space (A) to the
Public Accommodation (PA) District; Public Comment
Dear Vail Town Council:
I write to you as a property owner in the Town of Vail and neighbor of the property located at
366 Hanson Ranch Road that is the subject of this application, in lieu of providing public
comment at the Town Council’s hearing on this matter on April 21, 2020. Please accept these
comments or have them read into the record, as appropriate.
First and foremost, I am shocked that the Town would consider rezoning of this property when
covenants restrict its use to open space. The Vail Village 5th Filing Covenants, as amended in
1971, provide that this property “… shall be used, held and maintained in good order and
condition by the Town of Vail … for use at all times as a vacant and undisturbed open area in its
natural condition or landscaped with trees, shrubs and grass and no structure, building, or
improvement of any kind or character, whether temporary or permanent, may be erected or
maintained thereon”. Further, the Town has the right under these covenants to approve any
amendment to them, which is clearly a means to protect open spaces from future development. I
understand that covenants are often private in nature and therefore zoning decisions are separate
from issues of covenant enforcement. In this case, however, the Town is directly benefited by
the covenant. Why would the Town rezone property in a manner that conflicts with its own
rights under a covenant?
Notwithstanding the covenant question, I am opposed to the rezoning requested by this
application. The applicant has cleverly managed and packaged this proposal as a request for the
Town to resolve an anomaly – a single lot that is subject to two different zoning classifications:
Public Accommodation and Open Space. However, I am sure you will recognize that this is an
“anomaly” of the applicant’s own creation, designed to manipulate the Town into forgoing open
space area for the sole benefit of a developer seeking to maximize its profit from a problematic
parcel of land. The applicant knew what it was buying; to allow this zone change would
encourage any other private property owners in similar situations to seek rezoning of their land,
taking away valuable public benefits and reducing precious open areas in the Town.
The land in question here has always been “open”. The applicant would have you believe that it
was utilized as the back yard of this property and that therefore that rezoning would not really be
June 2, 2020 - Page 314 of 772
Town Council
Town of Vail, Colorado
Page 2 of 3
a change in use or have any effect on the goals and objectives of the Town. That could not be
farther from the truth. The backyard was always open planted area, separated from the rest of
Tract E by a minimal split-rail fence. The public could see that area and likely perceived it as a
continuation of the native landscape of Tract E. The stark change is evident when you review
the applicant’s proposed development plans (included with this letter). They show extensive
hardscaped patio and pool areas built to the new property line, changing what was open
landscaped area into pavers and stone for the applicant’s benefit.
Even worse, based on an easement agreement with Vail Resorts, the applicant proposes to
extensively landscape additional portions of the area between its property line and the bike path
on Lot d-1 and Tract E, effectively making those areas private space for the applicant’s benefit.
The applicant and Town staff will tell you that the applicant’s development plans are not relevant
to your consideration of this zoning request. However, rezoning would grant extensive
additional rights to develop this property, which would be impossible to manage through what
effectively becomes a design review process once the property is rezoned. Applicant’s proposed
development plans indicate just how far they intend to push this in their attempt to maximize
profit – setbacks are disregarded in the effort to make the building as massive as possible, all
under the guise of “this is how all other Public Accommodation properties in Vail have been
developed.” Your control of the zoning, and refusal to give up the Town’s interest in
maintaining the open space areas of Vail, is the only chance you have to effectively stop this
gross takeover of open lands.
Applicant asks the Town to cure the fact that the original parcel purchased does not meet
minimum standards for the PA zone district (which of course applicant knew when it purchased
the property). Applicant even cites several court cases to support the proposition that
nonconformities are not favored by the law. However, none of the cited cases involve the facts
presented here – none of them even involved a request to change zoning. Further, the fact that
this situation may be difficult or “unworkable” as stated by the applicant does not constitute a
basis for the change of zoning to change open space to developable property – especially when
you consider that applicant created the “unworkable” situation itself.
Applicant asserts that you should disregard Goal #4 of the Vail Village Master Plan related to
open space because the “Rezone Area” has been privately held for more than 50 years. All of
Tract E and Lot d-1 are and have always been privately owned – by Vail Resorts – and subject to
rights of the public for access to and from resort facilities. This surely would not be a reason to
rezone the rest of those properties for development! It is not clear to us that the Town’s open
space map does not include the “Rezone Area” – it appears to designate all of Tract E, prior to
applicant’s acquisition of a portion of it by legal action, as Open Space.
All of applicant’s other assertions of compliance with the criteria for granting the rezoning
request hinge on your acceptance of one principle: the fact that the open space area has been
enclosed by a fence for 50 years, even though it has always been landscaped, natural,
undeveloped area, changed its character from open space into developable land. It didn’t. The
June 2, 2020 - Page 315 of 772
Town Council
Town of Vail, Colorado
Page 3 of 3
character of that property always remained consistent with its underlying zoning (and, for that
matter, the 5th Filing Covenants); you are being asked to change that now in order for it to be
used in a manner wholly inconsistent with its underlying zoning. That change would be
detrimental to the neighborhood and to all users of open space within the Town.
For these reasons I respectfully request that the Town Council deny this rezoning request. Thank
you.
Very truly yours,
Christopher B. Galvin
June 2, 2020 - Page 316 of 772
June 2, 2020 - Page 317 of 772
US Mail Only: P. O. Box 2378Physical / Fedex: 210 Edwards
Village Blvd, Bldg A Suite A103
Edwards, Colorado 81632-2378
(970) 926 4301, Fax: 926 4364
hans@berglundarchitects.com
www . berglundarchitects.com
Scale
Date
Drawn by
Checked by
Issue Date
2/10/2020 1:18:28 PMAVANTI LODGELOT 1, 366 HANSON RANCH ROADSUBDIVISION, TOWN OF VAILA4.7
PERSPECTIVES
02-05-2020
AK
HB
02-05-2020
NORTHWEST VIEW FROM HANSON RANCH RD
NORTHEAST VIEW FROM HANSON RANCH RD
REVISION SCHEDULE
#DESCRIPTION DATE
352326('1(:/2'*(
June 2, 2020 - Page 318 of 772
From:Marian Boyd
To:Jonathan Spence
Subject:Protect our Open Spaces & Public Safety - Opposition to Vail Point/Avanti Lodge
Date:Friday, April 17, 2020 3:28:23 PM
We recently learned that a developer – Vail Point/Avanti Lodge - has applied for
rezoning to build a commercial property between Tivoli Lodge and Christiania.
We would like to express our opposition to this being approved.
Open Spaces:
The new “Kindel” property owner/developer seeks to rezone its newly acquired
Open Space land, together with its adjoining original Kindel home property, for
commercial hotel/public accommodation. We oppose this rezoning application
because we want the Town of Vail to preserve Vail’s time-honored Open Spaces
as originally envisioned by Vail’s founders and as reflected in the Town of Vail’s
Master plan and zoning. If one acquires land, as this developer did, knowing
that it was long prior established for Open Space, such new owner should abide
by the Open Space restrictions on development. To rule otherwise, will set a
new precedent paving the way for other developers to acquire Open Spaces and
convert such to commercial developments. Because the Town of Vail is the
steward for the continued benefit of and enjoyment by the entire community,
now and for generations to come, we respectfully and appropriately submit to
the Town of Vail our opposition to this petition to rezone.
Public Safety:
Another major concern regards public safety. This will add even more cars and
pedestrians to an already highly congested pedestrian and traffic “loop”. The
proposed rezoning to commercial development will considerably add to public
safety pedestrian and traffic hazards. Because the Town of Vail is the steward
responsible for public safety, we respectfully and appropriately submit to the
Town of Vail our opposition to the petition to rezone, as, if approved, the
rezoning of the property will lead to aggravation of these hazards.
We appreciate your strong consideration for disapproving this encroachment.
Marian & Michael Boyd
9 Vail Road
Vail CO 81657
June 2, 2020 - Page 319 of 772
From:Sue Rychel
To:Jonathan Spence
Subject:Space to the south of the original Kindel home
Date:Wednesday, April 15, 2020 9:20:44 PM
Dear Jonathan,
Please note of record my strong opposition to the rezoning of the space to the south of the original Kindel home.
Thank you,
Sue
Sue Rychel
Slifer Smith & Frampton
Certified Residential Specialist
Premier Property Specialist
970-471-0109
srychel@slifer.net
www.susanrychel.com
June 2, 2020 - Page 320 of 772
VA I L TO W N C O UNC I L A G E ND A ME MO
I T E M /T O P I C: Ordinance No. 3, S eries of 2020, F irst Reading, An Ordinance for a Zone District
B oundary Amendment, Pursuant to S ection 12-3-7, Amendment Vail Town Code, to Allow for a
Rezoning of Tract C, L ot 1, L ot 2, and L ot Vail Das Schone Filing No.. 1 and L ot 1, Vail Das
S chone F iling 3; T he Rezoning will Change the Z one District from Commercial Core 3 (C C3) to
the Public A ccommodation 2 (PA -2) District
P RE S E NT E R(S ): Greg Roy, Planner
AC T IO N RE Q UE S T E D O F C O UNC I L: A pprove, A pprove with Conditions, or Deny Ordinance
No. 3, S eries of 2020 - F irst Reading
B AC K G RO UND: The applicant, T NF R E F lll B ravo Vail L L C, represented by Mauriello Planning
Group and Triumph Development, is requesting approval of Ordinance No. 3, S eries of 2020 an
ordinance for a zone district boundary amendment, pursuant to S ection12-3-7, A mendment, Vail
Town code, to allow for a rezoning for Tract C, L ot 1, L ot 2, and L ot 3 Vail Das S chone F iling No. 1
and L ot 1, Vail Das Schone Filing 3; The rezoning will change the zone district from Community
Commercial 3 (C C3) to the P ublic Accommodation 2 (PA-2) District.
S TAF F RE C O M M E ND AT IO N: T he P lanning and E nvironmental Commission held a public
hearing on the proposed Z one District Boundary A mendment on A pril 13, 2020 where a
recommendation for approval was forwarded to the Vail Town Council by a vote of 6-1-0 (Gillette
opposed).
AT TAC H ME N TS:
Description
Staff Memorandum
Staff Presentation
Attachment A. Vicinity Map
Attachment B. Applicant Narrative - 3-16-2020
Attachment C. Public Comment Received
Additional Public Comment
Attachment D. P E C Minutes from Meeting on 12-09-2019
Attachment E. P E C Minutes from Meeting on 3-9-2020
Attachment F. P E C Minutes from Meetong on 4-13-2020
Attachment G. Staff Memorandum P E C19-0047 - 4-13-2020
Attachment H. Ordinance No. 3, Series 2020
June 2, 2020 - Page 321 of 772
TO: Town Council
FROM: Community Development Department
DATE: June 2, 2020
SUBJECT: First Reading of Ordinance No. 3, Series of 2020 an ordinance for a zone
district boundary amendment, pursuant to Section12-3-7, Amendment,
Vail Town code, to allow for a rezoning fo Tract C, Lot 1, Lot 2, and Lot 3
Vail Das Schone Filing No. 1 and Lot 1, Vail Das Schone Filing 3; The
rezoning will change the zone district from Community Commercial 3
(CC3) to the Public Accommodation 2 (PA-2) District. (PEC19-0047)
Applicant: TNFREF III Bravo Vail LLC represented by Mauriello
Planning Group & Triumph Development
Planner: Greg Roy
I. SUMMARY
The applicant, TNFREF lll Bravo Vail LLC, represented by Mauriello Planning Group
and Triumph Development, is requesting approval of Ordinance No. 3, Series of 2020
an ordinance for a zone district boundary amendment, pursuant to Section12-3-7,
Amendment, Vail Town code, to allow for a rezoning for Tract C, Lot 1, Lot 2, and Lot 3
Vail Das Schone Filing No. 1 and Lot 1, Vail Das Schone Filing 3; The rezoning will
change the zone district from Community Commercial 3 (CC3) to the Public
Accommodation 2 (PA-2) District.
The Planning and Environmental Commission held a public hearing on the proposed
Zone District Boundary Amendment on April 13, 2020 where a recommendation for
approval was forwarded to the Vail Town Council by a vote of 6-1-0 (Gillette opposed).
Please find the staff memorandum to the PEC as Attachment T, and the minutes from
the April 13 meeting (Attachment S) attached to this report.
II. DESCRIPTION OF REQUEST
June 2, 2020 - Page 322 of 772
Town of Vail Page 2
The Vail Town Council shall approve, approve with modifications, or deny Ordinance
No. 3, Series of 2020, upon first reading.
Included with this memorandum are the following for review by the Town Council:
A. Vicinity Map
B. Applicant Narrative, 3-16-2020
C. Public Comment Received
D. PEC Minutes from Meeting on 12-09-2019
E. PEC Minutes from Meeting on 3-09-2020
F. PEC Minutes from Meeting on 4-13-2020
G. Staff Memorandum, PEC19-0047, 4-13-2020
H. Ordinance No. 3, Series of 2020
IIl. BACKGROUND
In 1980 the hotel was built in the County and annexed into the town per Ordinance No.
43, Series of 1980 and subsequently zoned CC3 within the required ninety days. The
annexation ordinance was later overturned by the Colorado Court of Appeals due to a
lack on contiguity. The property was annexed again with Ordinance No. 1, Series 1986
and was again zoned CC3 through Ordinance No. 10, Series of 1986.
Over time there have been multiple applications for small additions or exterior
alterations. Most recently was the exterior alteration that allowed for restriping of the
parking lot, pool upgrades, and exterior facade upgrades to the building in 2016.
This application was discussed as part of a work session with the PEC on December
9th, 2019. The Design Review Board also saw the application for a conceptual review on
December 18th, 2019. The PEC heard this application on March 9th and the application
was tabled to the March 23rd meeting at the applicant’s request. Due to the March 23rd
meeting being postponed the application was reviewed at the April 13th PEC meeting
and approval of the application was recommended to Town Council.
lV. REVIEW CRITERIA
Before acting on an application for a zone district boundary amendment, the Planning
and environmental Commission shall consider the following factors with respect to the
requested zone district boundary amendment:
Zone District Boundary Amendment Factors
1. The extent to which the zone district amendment is consistent with all the
applicable elements of the adopted goals, objectives and policies outlined
in the Vail comprehensive plan and is compatible with the development
objectives of the town.
June 2, 2020 - Page 323 of 772
Town of Vail Page 3
The proposed zone district amendment is supported by the Vail comprehensive
plan. The Comprehensive plan values a healthy economy which includes a “year-
round economy that caters to full and part-time residents, visitors and business
owners and operators. A growing employment and revenue base supports the
economy . . .”
Other applicable goals met by this application include the following Land Use
Plan goals:
1.3 Quality development should be maintained and upgraded whenever possible.
3.1 The hotel bed base should be preserved and used more efficiently.
3.3 Hotel are important to the continued success of the Town of Vail, therefore
conversion to condominiums should be discouraged.
Staff finds that the proposed zone district amendment conforms to this criterion.
2. The extent to which the zone district amendment is suitable with the
existing and potential land uses on the site and existing and potential
surrounding land uses as set out in the town’s adopted planning
documents.
The proposed zone district amendment is suitable to the existing and potential
surrounding land uses as set out in the town’s adopted planning documents
when taken into context with the potential future plans for the area . The
“Preferred Plan” in the Town’s adopted Land Use Plan reviewed the proposed
land use categories and assessed the feasibility and compatibility with adjacent
existing land uses. The Plan included Community Commercial as a new category
designated for the West Vail commercial area to serve the needs of permanent
residents and long-term visitors.
The proposed rezoning to PA-2 alone is compatible with this land use
designation with the amount of commercial development on this site. Within the
PA-2 zone district commercial uses are limited to ten (10) percent of the total
GRFA on the site and fifteen (15) percent with a conditional use permit. The
amount of commercial on this site is within fifteen percent, which will require a
CUP, but still has room to expand in the future.
If there is desire for more commercial expansion in the future that fits within the
15% limit then the CUP could be amended to allow it. If there is desire for more
than that amount, a change to allowed uses on the site could be considered
based on the planning documents at that time.
Staff finds that the proposed zone district amendment conforms to this criterion.
June 2, 2020 - Page 324 of 772
Town of Vail Page 4
3. The extent to which the zone district amendment presents a harmonious,
convenient, workable relationship among land uses consistent with
municipal development objectives.
The proposed zone district amendment results in a harmonious relationship
among land uses. The rezoning is consistent with the following goals, objectives
and policies of the Land Use Plan:
• Goal 3.2 “The Village and Lionshead areas [are] the best location for
hotels to serve the future needs of destination skiers.”
• Goal 3.4 “Commercial growth should be concentrated in existing
commercial area to accommodate both local and visitor needs.”
The site includes commercial aspects and as stated previously has room to grow
within the PA-2 district with the use of the CUP process. As hotels are
considered a commercial use then allowing the hotel to remain and expand
would fit within the Goal 3.4.
Goal 3.2 above does not restrict hotels from being located in other areas of the
town, but simply states that the best areas are in the villages. This distinction is
what allows the PA-2 zone district itself to not conflict with the Land Use Plan.
Staff finds that the proposed zone district amendment conforms to this criterion.
4. The extent to which the zone district amendment provides for the growth of
an orderly viable community and does not constitute spot zoning as the
amendment serves the best interests of the community as a whole.
The proposed zone district amendment does serve the best interest of the
community as a whole. The comprehensive plan encourages a year-round
healthy economy, which is aided by the redevelopment of infill properties. The
existing hotel has not been significantly upgraded since its original construction
and an amendment to allow that to occur would serve as a benefit to the
community.
Staff finds that the proposed zone district amendment conforms to this criterion.
5. The extent to which the zone district amendment results in adverse or
beneficial impacts on the natural environment, including, but not limited to,
water quality, air quality, noise, vegetation, riparian corridors, hillsides and
other desirable natural features.
As this area is currently developed there is not a natural environment that has not
already been disturbed. The proposed uses being added to this existing
development would not negatively affect riparian corridors, air quality, water
June 2, 2020 - Page 325 of 772
Town of Vail Page 5
quality, or other environmental aspects. The application is proposing to add
vegetation to the site.
Staff finds that the proposed zone district amendment conforms to this criterion.
6. The extent to which the zone district amendment is consistent with the
purpose statement of the proposed zone district.
The proposed zone district amendment is generally consistent with the PA -2
zone district’s purpose, as it allows for lodges and residential accommodations
on a short-term basis outside of the core areas of the villages. It also includes the
commercial operations that support the lodge use.
Staff finds that the proposed zone district amendment conforms to this criterion.
7. The extent to which the zone district amendment demonstrates how
conditions have changed since the zoning designation of the subject
property was adopted and is no longer appropriate.
The PA-2 zone district was created in 2006, more than 20 years after this
property was originally zoned CC3. The PA-2 zone district is intended to “provide
for lodging sites located outside the periphery of the town’s Vail Village and
Lionshead commercial core areas”. It is differentiated from the Public
Accommodation zone district by the fact that it allows for limited service lodge
units which were desired to be kept out of the village centers. PA-2 allows for
hotels to be added to areas around the town where it is compatible with adjacent
uses. While the physical conditions have not changed, the creation of the PA -2
shows that the town believes that there are locations appropriate for hotels
outside of the core area.
Staff finds that the proposed zone district amendment conforms to this criterion.
8. Such other factors and criteria as the commission and/or council deem
applicable to the proposed rezoning.
V. RECOMMENDED MOTION
Should the Town Council choose to approve Ordinance No. 3, Series of 2020, upon
first reading, the Planning and Environmental Commission recommends the Council
pass the following motion:
“The Vail Town Council approves, on first reading, Ordinance No. 3, Series of
2020 an ordinance for a zone district boundary amendment, pursuant to
Section12-3-7, Amendment, Vail Town code, to allow for a rezoning fo r Tract C,
Lot 1, Lot 2, and Lot 3 Vail Das Schone Filing No. 1 and Lot 1, Vail Das Schone
June 2, 2020 - Page 326 of 772
Town of Vail Page 6
Filing 3; The rezoning will change the zone district from Community Commercial
3 (CC3) to the Public Accommodation 2 (PA-2) District.”
Should the Town Council choose to approve Ordinance No. 3, Series of 2020, the
Planning and Environmental Commission recommends the Council makes the following
findings:
“Based upon the review of the criteria outline in Section Vl of the Staff
memorandum to the Planning and Environmental Commission dated April 13,
2020, and the evidence and testimony presented, the Town Council finds:
1. That the amendment is consistent with the adopted goals, objectives and
policies outlined in the Vail comprehensive plan and compatible with the
development objectives of the town; and
2. That the amendment does further the general and specific purposes of the
zoning regulations; and
3. That the amendment does promote the health, safety, morals, and general
welfare of the town and promote 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.”
Vl. ATT ACHMENTS
A. Vicinity Map
B. Applicant Narrative, 3-16-2020
C. Public Comment Received
D. PEC Minutes from Meeting on 12-09-2019
E. PEC Minutes from Meeting on 3-09-2020
F. PEC Minutes from Meeting on 4-13-2020
G. Staff Memorandum, PEC19-0047, 4-13-2020
H. Ordinance No. 3, Series of 2020
June 2, 2020 - Page 327 of 772
PRESENTATION BY
Greg Roy, AICP
Planner ll
Ordinance No. 3, Series
of 2020
2211 N. Frontage Rd. W
June 2, 2020 - Page 328 of 772
Vicinity Map
Town of Vail | Ordinance No. 3, Series of 2020| vailgov.com
June 2, 2020 - Page 329 of 772
Existing and Proposed Zoning
Town of Vail | Ordinance No. 3, Series of 2020 | vailgov.com
June 2, 2020 - Page 330 of 772
Rezoning Criteria
Town of Vail | Ordinance No. 3, Series of 2020 | vailgov.com
(1) The extent to which the zone district amendment is consistent with all the applicable elements of the adopted goals,
objectives and policies outlined in the Vail comprehensive plan and is compatible with the development objectives of the
town; and
(2) The extent to which the zone district amendment is suitable with the existing and potential land uses on the site and
existing and potential surrounding land uses as set out in the town's adopted planning documents; and
(3) The extent to which the zone district amendment presents a harmonious, convenient, workable relationship among
land uses consistent with municipal development objectives; and
(4) The extent to which the zone district amendment provides for the growth of an orderly viable community and does not
constitute spot zoning as the amendment serves the best interests of the community as a whole; and
(5) The extent to which the zone district amendment results in adverse or beneficial impacts on the natural environment,
including, but not limited to, water quality, air quality, noise, vegetation, riparian corridors, hillsides and other desirable
natural features; and
(6) The extent to which the zone district amendment is consistent with the purpose statement of the proposed zone
district; and
(7) The extent to which the zone district amendment demonstrates how conditions have changed since the zoning
designation of the subject property was adopted and is no longer appropriate; and
(8) Such other factors and criteria as the commission and/or council deem applicable to the proposed rezoning.
June 2, 2020 - Page 331 of 772
PRESENTATION BY
Greg Roy, AICP
Planner ll
Ordinance No. 4, Series
of 2020
2211 N. Frontage Rd. W
June 2, 2020 - Page 332 of 772
Existing Conditions
Town of Vail | Ordinance No. 4, Series of 2020| vailgov.com
June 2, 2020 - Page 333 of 772
Proposed
Town of Vail | Ordinance No. 4, Series of 2020 | vailgov.com
June 2, 2020 - Page 334 of 772
Deviations Requested and Benefits
Town of Vail | Ordinance No. 4, Series of 2020 | vailgov.com
1. Reduction in parking requirements for the site.
2. Increase in the amount of parking controlled by the valet.
3. Exception to from the requirement that landscaped areas with trees cannot be used for snow storage.
4. Relief from the minimum size of landscaping areas.
5. Relief from the subdivision requirement that requires a new lot be able to enclose an 80’ by 80’.
6. Relief from the interior setbacks for the proposed two lots.
7. Relief from the required maximum allowed driveway slope.
8. Relief from the side setback for the recycling and dumpster enclosure.
9. Relief from the restriction that no structure shall be built on a slope that exceeds forty percent (40%)
or greater except in a single-family residential zone district as outlined in section 12-21-10.
Benefits:
1.Four EHU units above and beyond the housing requirement
2.Additional interim period between when the other 11 units in the mitigation bank are first leased
and when they are credited towards another development.
3.A six-foot easement for pedestrian access along the far eastern boundary of the lot.
4.A sidewalk along Chamonix Lane and Chamonix Road.
5.A Public art contribution which is proposed to amount to $15,000. PEC suggests the amount be
increased to $32,500.
6.A walkway from the bus stop through the property and to the frontage road.
June 2, 2020 - Page 335 of 772
EHU Building
Town of Vail | Ordinance No. 4, Series of 2020 | vailgov.com
June 2, 2020 - Page 336 of 772
Site Plan
Town of Vail | Ordinance No. 4, Series of 2020 | vailgov.com
June 2, 2020 - Page 337 of 772
SDD Criteria
Town of Vail | Ordinance No. 4, Series of 2020 | vailgov.com
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 orien tation.
2. Relationship: Uses, activity and density which provide a compatible, efficient and workable relationship with surrounding uses
and activity.
3. Parking And Loading: Compliance with parking and loading requirements as outlined in chapter 10 of this title.
4. Comprehensive Plan: Conformity with applicable elements of the Vail comprehensive plan, town policies and urban design
plans.
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.
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.
7. Traffic: A circulation system designed for both vehicles and pedestrians addressing on and off site traffic circulation.
8. Landscaping: Functional and aesthetic landscaping and open space in order to optimize and preserve natural features,
recreation, views and function.
9. Workable Plan: Phasing plan or subdivision plan that will maintain a workable, functional and efficient relationship throu ghout
the development of the special development district.
June 2, 2020 - Page 338 of 772
Thank you
June 2, 2020 - Page 339 of 772
Recommended Conditions
Town of Vail | Ordinance No. 4, Series of 2020 | vailgov.com
1.Applicant shall obtain approval for subdivision before a certificate of occupancy for the EHU building is granted.
2.The applicant shall obtain the certificate of occupancy for the EHU building before requesting a certificate of occupancy
for the hotel addition.
3.Approval is contingent upon the applicant obtaining Town of Vail approval of an associated design review application.
4.The applicant shall obtain approval for a conditional use permit for the commercial space on the first floor before a
building permit is issued.
5.Applicant shall obtain approval from Holy Cross to vacate the easement under the proposed hotel addition before a
building permit is issued.
6.Applicant shall set aside two (2) three-bedroom units and two (2) one-bedroom units in the EHU building not to be
included in the mitigation bank.
7.Prior to the issuance of any certificate of occupancy for the EHU building, the applicant shall record deed restrictions with
the Eagle County Clerk and Recorder, in a format approved by the Town Attorney, for the Type III Employee Housing Units.
8.The applicant shall coordinate and resolve landscape conflicts with utilities and sight distance before a building permit is
issued.
9.The applicant shall show the drainage outfall for Chamonix Lane swale in the building permit submittal.
10.The applicant shall provide a 2’ gravel shoulder along Chamonix Lane and side slopes of swale no steeper than 2:1.
11.Applicant shall increase AIPP contribution to $32,500 and the installation shall be completed before a certificate of
occupancy for the hotel addition is granted.
12.Applicant shall correct plans to meet the comments from the Fire Department prior to the submittal for a building
permit.
13.Applicant shall update all plan pages to match the latest submission prior to the submittal for the Design Review Board
application.
June 2, 2020 - Page 340 of 772
CHAMONIX LNN FRO NTA G E RD WCHAMONIX RDI 70 WestboundI 70 EastboundLOWERTRAVERSEWAYUPPERTRAVERSEWAYGARMISCHD R
I70OFF-RAMP(173W ESTBOUND)S FRONTAGE RD WI 70 ON-RAMP (173 EASTBOUND)N FRONTAGE RD WI
Subject Property
0 50 10025Feet
H i g h l i n e - A D o u b l e t r e e H o t e lHighline - A D o u b l e t r e e H o t e lMajor E x t e r i o r A l t e r a t i o n - P E C 1 9 -0 0 4 6Major E x t e r i o r A l t e r a t i o n - P E C 1 9 -0 0 4 6Rezoning - P E C 1 9 -0 0 4 7Rezoning - P E C 1 9 -0 0 4 7Special D e v e l o p m e n t D i s t r i c t - P E C 1 9 -0 0 4 8Special D e v e l o p m e n t D i s t r i c t - P E C 1 9 -0 0 4 82211 N o r t h F r o n t a g e R o a d W e s t2211 N o r t h F r o n t a g e R o a d W e s tLot 1 , V a i l D a s S c h o n e F i l i n g 3Lot 1 , V a i l D a s S c h o n e F i l i n g 3
This ma p w as created by the Town of Vail Co mmu nity Development Departme nt. Use of this ma p shou ld be for g eneral p urp oses o nly.The Town of Vail does no t warran t the accura cy of the informa tion co nta in ed herein.(whe re sh own, pa rcel line work is ap pro xima te )
Last Modified: December 2, 2019June 2, 2020 - Page 341 of 772
Highline, A DoubleTree by Hilton
Submitted to the Town of Vail:
November 11, 2019
Revised January 27, 2020
Revised February 25, 2020
Revised March 16, 2020
Application for a Rezoning, Major Exterior Alteration, and
Special Development District
June 2, 2020 - Page 342 of 772
Consultant Directory
Developer/Owner
Mark Mutkoski
TNREF III Bravo Vail, LLC
℅ True North Management Group, LLC
10 Bank Street, 12 Floor
White Plains, NY 10606
Project Manager/Owner Representative
Michael O’Connor
Triump Development
12 Vail Road, Suite 700
Vail, CO 81657
970.688.5057
Planning and Entitlements
Dominic Mauriello
Mauriello Planning Group
PO Box 4777
Eagle, CO 81657
970-376-3318
dominic@mpgvail.com
Community Outreach
Kristin Williams
Commfluent
PO Box 3402
Vail CO 81658
970 390-0062
kristin@commfluent.com
Architect
Bill Pierce and Kit Austin
Pierce Austin Architects
1650 Fallridge Road, Suite C-1
Vail, CO 81657
970.476.6342
Landscape Architecture
Dennis Anderson
Dennis Anderson Assoc., Inc.
P.O. Box 3722,
Eagle CO 81631
970.390.3745
Civil Engineering
Matt Wadey, P.E.
Alpine Engineering Inc.
34510 Highway 6, Unit A-9
Edwards, CO 81632
970.926.3373
Geology and Geo Hazards
Julia Frazier, P.G.
Skyline Geoscience
jfrazier@skylinegeoscience.com
303.746.1813
Traffic Engineering
Kari J. McDowell Schroeder, PE, PTOE
McDowell Engineering
P.O. Box 4259
Eagle, CO 81631
kari@mcdowelleng.com
970.623.0788
Highline, A DoubleTree by Hilton 2
June 2, 2020 - Page 343 of 772
Table of Contents
Consultant Directory 2
Background 9
Review Process 11
Rezoning 11
Special Development District 13
Major Exterior Alteration 14
Zoning Analysis 15
Parking 17
Deviations Sought through SDD 23
Workforce Housing Plan 28
Criteria for Review: Rezoning 33
Criteria for Review: Special Development District 40
Criteria for Review: Major Exterior Alteration 46
Conclusion 49
Highline, A DoubleTree by Hilton 3
June 2, 2020 - Page 344 of 772
Introduction
Highline, a DoubleTree by Hilton (Highline hereafter), is requesting an application for rezoning
to Public Accommodation 2 (PA2) and the establishment of a new Special Development District
(SDD) for Highline to facilitate the construction of a new mixed-use building located at 2211 N.
Frontage Rd. West in Vail. The proposed project consists of an employee housing apartment
building, limited service lodge units (LSLUs), accommodation units/hotel rooms (AUs), and an
Employee Housing Unit (EHU) dorm space. As part of the application, the applicant is
requesting a major exterior alteration in order to add the additional lodging and EHUs. In the
interest of providing a much needed public benefit, the applicant originally proposed the
development of an employee housing apartment building that included 16 units, providing a
total of 40 bedrooms. Through the review process and in order to address the concerns of the
Planning and Environmental Commission and Town staff, the EHU building has been modified
to 15 units with 34 bedrooms. This building is not required as part of the project, but is being
proposed as a public benefit. The workforce housing requirement for the additional lodging
space is being met with the addition of the EHU dorm space. The project furthers three key
identified community goals: the provision of employee housing, the provision of live beds,
and encouragement of in-fill development.
Highline, A DoubleTree by Hilton 4
New Hotel Wing
New
Conference
space Existing HotelNew EHU
Building
New Underground
Parking
June 2, 2020 - Page 345 of 772
The rendering below includes the previously proposed EHU Building massing prior to March
16, 2020.
The proposed project includes the following:
176 AUs with approximately 32,555 sq. ft. of net new GRFA (79 net new, one existing
AU lost to circulation needs)
19 LSLUs with approximately 20,050 sq. ft. of GRFA (previously dwelling units)
12 employee housing bedrooms within a dormitory space with approximately 4,400 sq.
ft. of floor area
15 employee housing units (1, 2, and 3 bedroom units) with approximately 13,502 sq. ft.
of floor area
208 total parking spaces (39 net new parking spaces, 48 of which are enclosed)
To facilitate the development of this project, the property is proposed to be rezoned from CC3
to PA2, and include a SDD. The SDD designation will apply to the entirety of the Highline
property, including the pre-existing lodge and restaurant facilities. The only practical method
to achieve the project as contemplated is a zoning change for the site to align with the
historical use of the property as a lodge as well as an SDD for some relatively minor deviations.
The required deviations are solely generated by the inclusion of the Employee Housing
structure within the development project. If that structure were removed, no SDD would be
necessary.
Highline, A DoubleTree by Hilton 5
Existing
H
otel
New Hotel
Win
g
New EHU
B
u
i
l
d
i
n
g EHU
Dorm
June 2, 2020 - Page 346 of 772
Rezoning and SDD applications follow a similar path in that they are each recommended by the
Planning and Environmental Commission and receive approval by the Town Council. For major
exterior alteration applications, the Planning and Environmental Commission is the final review
authority.
Highline presents a unique opportunity for redevelopment within the Town of Vail. It provides
a smooth transition between the West Vail commercial core to its east and west and residential
to the west (partially) and to the north. As an infill site, with a portion of the proposed
development constructed upon an existing parking lot that currently serves the existing
Highline and a previously disturbed portion of the site, there are minimal, if any, impacts to the
natural environment.
Public Benefits of the Project:
Employee housing far in excess of requirements, all on-site and near the major
employment center, addressing one of the documented critical needs of the Town
Highline, A DoubleTree by Hilton 6
Highline
Location Map
West Vail Commercial
Chamonix Employee HousingJune 2, 2020 - Page 347 of 772
(The proposal generates the need to house 9.5 employees and the project well
exceeds this requirement)
All EHUs are highly functional and livable dwellings within the employment center of
Vail for single and/or double occupancy
15 Type 3 EHUs, not required as mitigation, are proposed as a benefit of the project
Redevelopment of an infill site in the Town of Vail as suggested by the Vail Land Use
Plan
Economic vitality and enhanced public and private revenues to Town as a result of
new lodging facilities and locals housing
Improving the Town’s hotel bed base
New community sidewalk along Chamonix Road along the Highline frontage
improving neighborhood accessibility to and from the commercial areas
Fiscal Impacts of the project:
To expand upon the potential positive impacts to the economy, the applicant has estimated
the lodging and sales taxes revenues of the hotel addition (79 new hotel rooms and meeting
space) as well as the sales tax revenue impacts of the hotel guests and onsite employee
housing proposed.
The incremental sales and lodging tax collections for the hotel is estimated as follows:
•Total annual sales and lodging tax collections: $694,000
•Town of Vail annual sales and lodging tax collections: $382,000
The Vail Local Housing Authority commissioned an analysis in 2019 on the Economic Value and
Community Benefits of Resident Housing Investment. The report cites numerous benefits of
local resident housing including increased sales tax revenues, benefits to local businesses in
terms of labor supply, increase in revenue for local schools, increased supply of volunteerism,
reduced carbon footprint, and other benefits.
Looking at only one of the benefits, direct Town of Vail sales tax revenue per household, the 15
deed restricted employee housing units would generate approximately:
•$18,600 per year, based on annual Town sales collections per household of $1,165
•That sales tax collection is based upon approximately $29,000 spent annually per
household in the local economy, or
• $466,000 spent annually within the local economy from the 15 new employee units.
The applicant has also estimated the total revenues generated by the additional 79 hotel
rooms and meeting space in terms of guest spending. Data on guest spending is limited.
Highline, A DoubleTree by Hilton 7
June 2, 2020 - Page 348 of 772
When the Lionshead Redevelopment Master Plan was adopted over 20 years ago, it was
estimated, based on a study by RRC Associates that the average spending per hotel guest was
$100 per day and it was assumed that on average there were two guests per room. The
applicant believes these numbers, both the average spending and the average of 2 persons
per room are now grossly understated due to the age of the data, the effects of inflation, and
other factors. In 2018 the EGE Air Alliance commissioned a study, also prepared by RRC
Associates, of passengers at the Eagle Airport. This report found that the average daily
expenditure per person in 2018 was $405 per day. The 2018 data was collected from only
those people who flew into the Eagle Airport and may be a slightly more affluent data set
versus all occupants at the Highline. In order to be ultra conservative, the applicant assumed an
average daily spending per person of $100. If one assumes a 63% annualized occupancy rate
of the 79 new hotel rooms, the resulting annual spending from hotel guests at this site would
be approximately $3.6 million per year.
In summary:
$382,000 in incremental direct onsite TOV sales and lodging tax collections from the hotel
$466,000 in annual local resident spending from 15 units, plus associated sales tax
$3.6 million in annual incremental hotel guest spending, and associated sales tax, to the local
economy.
Planned Future Subdivision:
A future subdivision application will be processed for the property. This future application will
provide for a total of two parcels. One to accommodate the hotel and all of its related uses,
and another parcel for the employee housing structure. While the properties will be tied
together as it relates zoning and development standards, creating a separate parcel for the
employee housing building will facilitate a separate ownership for the purpose of financing the
employee housing separately from the hotel. This proposed subdivision concept is key and
inherent in the proposed development of the site. The Type 3 EHU building will be developed
at the same time as the hotel as a single phase. The subdivision of the property will be
required prior to a final CO being issued on the EHU building.
Public Art:
The applicant proposes to provide public art, yet to be determined, with a value of at least
$15,000.
Highline, A DoubleTree by Hilton 8
June 2, 2020 - Page 349 of 772
Background
The Highline site was originally built under the jurisdiction of Eagle County. In 1979, the newly
constructed facility received a certificate of occupancy from Eagle County. It was then annexed
to the Town of Vail as part of a larger annexation of the West Vail area by Ordinance No. 43,
Series of 1980, approved on
December 10, 1980. Per the
statutory requirements, the newly
annexed land was required to be
zoned by the Town of Vail within
90 days of annexation, by March
10, 1981. Ordinance No. 11,
Series of 1981, was first read in on
March 3, 1981. This ordinance
created the Commercial Core III
(hereinafter “CC3”) zone district,
under which this site was zoned.
It appears the zone district was
created hastily as the CC3 zoning
district did not allow for hotels or
dwelling units which were already
developed on the property. From
the inception, the CC3 zone
district upon application to this
site rendered the existing hotel a
nonconforming use. Over four
years later, on August 15, 1985,
the Colorado Court of Appeals
overturned the original West Vail
annexation because a rectangular
tract owned by the BLM was
between two contiguous tracts
that were being annexed. This
BLM land was improperly
included in the proposed area to
be annexed, and without this
land, the proposed annexation
would be ‘invalid for lack of the
necessary one-sixth contiguity.’
The Town of Vail moved quickly to
again annex West Vail. Ordinance
No. 1, Series of 1986, re-annexed
Highline, A DoubleTree by Hilton 9
Recent Drone Aerial of Highline
June 2, 2020 - Page 350 of 772
West Vail on January 29, 1986. Ordinance No. 10, Series of 1986, was first read in on March
18, 1986. There were no changes to the zoning for the site in this ordinance even though the
hotel (76 hotel rooms) and condominium units (19 dwelling units with 20 lock offs) on this
property had existed for 7 years (the condominium units were added in 1983). This was likely
an oversight since the hotel had been there for so long and because by that time the Town had
adopted the Vail Land Use Plan which encouraged the preservation and expansion of the
Town’s lodging bed base, specifically in the West Vail area. Thus, since 1981, this site has
operated as a nonconforming use and maintained its use as a lodge as it was first built in 1979.
A nonconforming use cannot be expanded or modified except if changed to a permitted or
conditional use even though the Town has been focused for the last 40 years at encouraging
and expanding the hotel base.
Today, the primary intended uses on the site permitted by CC3 zoning are the commercial
spaces (two restaurants and limited retail), which is key reason that a rezoning to PA2 is
necessary to allow the hotel.
Highline, A DoubleTree by Hilton 10
June 2, 2020 - Page 351 of 772
Review Process
Rezoning
As discussed above, the existing lodge and a few related development standards do not
conform with the provisions of the CC3 zoning on the property and therefore necessitates a
change in zoning on the property. Some of the current issues with the CC3 zone district as
applied to the Highline include the following:
Use
Hotel - The existing hotel (76 hotel rooms) and condominiums (19 dwelling units
with 20 lock-offs) are nonconforming uses. This means that the lodging use cannot
be expanded.
Building Height
The height of the existing building is 52 feet (worst-case), though the maximum
allowable building height for the CC3 zoning district is 35 feet.
Density
The CC3 zone district allows 12 dwelling units per acre, yet does not permit
dwelling units. Because accommodation units are not allowed, there is no
indication of how accommodation units are treated with regard to density.
Parking in the Front Setback
The front setback on this property is the North Frontage Road frontage. Parking is
developed to the front property line and does not comply with this requirement
however, the right-of-way has been nicely landscaped to provided an adequate
buffer.
The applicant examined a variety of potential approaches to redeveloping the the property in
terms of the Town’s development review processes. The existing CC3 zone district was
compared with the PA, PA2, and HDMF (High Density Multiple Family) to understand which
zone district most closely aligns with the existing development on the property and that
proposed by the applicant. No one zone district perfectly aligns with existing or proposed
conditions. To maintain the CC3 zoning on the property, that zone district would require
significant amendments. These amendments, which would apply to the remainder of the
parcels in the West Vail commercial area, may not be appropriate for all properties zoned CC3.
Hotels and limited service lodge units would have to be added as permitted uses, the height
allowance changed, as well as GRFA and density provisions modified.
It was determined that the best avenue to facilitate the development is to rezone the property
to PA2. There are several benefits of rezoning the property to PA2, including greater assurance
that the property will remain as a hotel into the future. This provides protection that one of the
Highline, A DoubleTree by Hilton 11
June 2, 2020 - Page 352 of 772
primary uses the Town seeks to support and encourage due to its ability to generate significant
tax revenues to the Town and increase the overall vitality of the Town year round. The rezoning
results in a property where all of the uses are conforming and comply with zoning. In addition,
the allowable building height in PA2 of 48’ more closely aligns with the existing hotel which has
one area on the roof of the building at 52’. The proposed new buildings fully comply with the
48’ height limit with further restrictions imposed by the SDD.
The Planning and Environmental Commission at its December 9, 2019 hearing (a worksession)
seemed to indicate that the PA2 zoning and the SDD overlay were appropriate designations
with the inclusion of the Employee Housing apartment building in the same phase of
development. The PEC also seemed to agree with the proposed parking reductions.
The rezoning to PA2 resolves the flaw of having included this property in the CC3 zone
district to begin with. The following nonconformities are resolved or reduced by rezoning
to PA2:
Lodging and all other uses will now comply as permitted/conditional uses
Building height more closely reflects the height of the existing structure on the
property with a height allowance of 48’. All new buildings will comply with 48’
limit with additional limits imposed by the SDD
Density issues will be resolved
GRFA issues will be resolved
There will continue to be some development standards in the PA2 zone district where the
existing site and proposed development does not fully comply, including the following:
Parking in the front setback. Because this condition is pre-existing and is also true in
CC3 zone district, and because the applicant is not making the condition any worse, the
proposed redevelopment is not required to meet this standard. If preferred by the
Town Council, a deviation from the parking located in the front setback could be
included in the SDD proposal.
Requirement for 75% of all parking to be enclosed. Unlike the CC3 zone district, the
PA2 zone district requires 75% of the parking to be enclosed. Today, all of the existing
parking is unenclosed surface parking. The applicant is proposing to enclose 48 new
proposed parking spaces with the proposed additions and actually reduce the amount
of pavement associated with the surface parking areas. Through the use of a valet
program, and being more efficient with the use of surface pavement, the applicant is
proposing a net increase in the number of surface parking spaces while reducing the
amount of pavement associated with surface parking. Overall, 23% percent of the
parking onsite will be enclosed, however, comparing the existing parking requirement
of 185 spaces (though only 169 spaces exist) with the proposed parking requirement of
Highline, A DoubleTree by Hilton 12
June 2, 2020 - Page 353 of 772
208 spaces, there is only a net new requirement of 23 parking spaces or 39 spaces over
what exists. The proposal is to add a total of 48 enclosed parking spaces and
reorganize the existing surface parking areas. The result is that all of the net new
parking is proposed to be enclosed. Therefore, the applicant believes that the
proposed redevelopment complies with the 75% enclosure requirement based upon
the net new impact of the proposal.
Building height. The existing hotel building will continue to be nonconforming with
respect to building height for the 52’ existing hotel structure. All proposed buildings
comply with the 48’ building height allowance and therefore the redevelopment
complies with the building height requirements.
A Special Development District is being sought to provide some relief from parking related
standards documented below generated solely due to the inclusion of the EHU structure. The
applicant believes that the public benefits offered by this project, outweigh the relatively minor
relief and deviation being sought. The benefits proposed include:
employee housing in excess of code requirements,
increase in the amount of hotel lodging provided within the Town,
increase in revenues to the Town and the business community,
increase in the amount of conference space provided within the Town,
dedication of easement for Chamonix Lane on applicant’s property, and
the overall aesthetic improvements being proposed.
Special Development District
The applicant is seeking to rezone the property to a PA2 so that it can more accurately function
in compliance with the zoning district. However, the applicant is faced with some minor
deviations largely generated due to the effort by the applicant to provide a public benefit,
addressing the employee housing crisis, by creating additional employee housing within the
Town of Vail. These deviations include parking rates, valet parking, landscape areas
dimensions, and snow storage (see parking section for details on these deviations). The
deviations being created are solely due to the inclusion of the employee housing structure
containing 15 units. No SDD would be required if the employee housing structure were
removed from the proposal.
Deviations such as the proposed, are common among Special Development Districts,
especially when trying to redevelop a property that was originally developed under Eagle
County regulations in the 1980s. In this case, the deviations being sought are relatively minor
in terms of impacts to the community at large. The proposed deviations have little impact
upon the bulk and mass of structure (height or footprint) but relate more to operational aspects
of the property. All of the deviations have to do with the unique circumstances found on this
Highline, A DoubleTree by Hilton 13
June 2, 2020 - Page 354 of 772
site and based upon how the property will be operated. There was a previous SDD granted on
this property that was never implemented.
Deviations from Underlying Zoning
Section 12-9A-9, Development Standards, provides the mechanism for deviating from the
underlying zone district. It states:
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.
Major Exterior Alteration
The PA2 Zone District requires a Major Exterior Alteration for the addition of dwelling units,
accommodation units, fractional fee club units, limited service lodge units, and the addition of
1,000 sq. ft. of commercial floor area or common space.
Highline, A DoubleTree by Hilton 14
June 2, 2020 - Page 355 of 772
Zoning Analysis
Location: 2211 N. Frontage Rd. West / VAIL DAS SCHONE FIL 3 Block: A Lot: 1
THRU:- Lot: 3, Subdivision: VAIL DAS SCHONE FIL 3 Lot: 1 VAIL DAS
SCHONE 1 PT OF TR C VAIL DAS SCHONE 1
Parcel Number: 210311415017
Lot Size: 3.95 acres / 172,047 sq. ft.
Existing Zoning: Commercial Core 3 (CC3)
Proposed Zoning: Public Accommodation 2 (PA2)
Development Standard Existing (CC3)Proposed (PA2)
Lot Area 3.95 acres (rounded)
172,047 sq. ft.
3.95 acres (rounded)
172,047 sq. ft.
Lodging and Residential
Uses
97 AU
19 DU
176 AU
19 LSLU
12 EHU Dorm Units
15 EHUs (apartments)
Commercial Uses (gross
sq. ft.)
1,520 sq. ft. hotel retail
6,955 sq. ft. restaurant
4,500 sq. ft. office/commercial
1,520 sq. ft. hotel retail
6,955 sq. ft. restaurant
0 sq. ft. office/commercial (converted
to EHU Dorm)
Conference 3,076 sq. ft. gross area
2,666 sq. ft. conference seating
area
7,666 sq. ft. gross area
6,616 sq. ft. conference seating area
Parking 169 spaces 208 spaces
Setbacks North - > 20 ft.
East - > 20 ft.
South - > 20 ft.
West - > 20 ft.
North - 20 ft.
East - > 20 ft.
South - >20 ft.
West - >20 ft.
Trash/Recycle 12’
Height 52 ft.52 ft. existing building
48 ft. new buildings
Density 12 units per acre allowed
Noncompliant with CC3
19 DU
97 AU
Total: 116 “units”
Uses do not count as density per code
176 AU
19 LSLU
12 EHU Dorm rooms
15 EHU apartments/condos
Development Standard
Highline, A DoubleTree by Hilton 15
June 2, 2020 - Page 356 of 772
*EHUs do not count towards density or GRFA.
GRFA 51,614 sq. ft. (30%) allowed
45,250 sq. ft. (26.3%) total
25,200 sq. ft. existing AUs
20,050 sq. ft. existing DUs
258,070.5 sq. ft. (150%) allowed
77,805 sq. ft. total
32,555 sq. ft. net new AUs
25,200 sq. ft. AUs existing
20,050 sq. ft. LSLU converted DUs
EHU Floor Area 0 sq. ft.17,902 sq. ft. total
4,400 sq. ft. EHU Dorm
13,302 sq. ft. EHUs
Site Coverage 68,818 sq. ft. (40%) allowed
Existing 36,084 sq. ft. (21%)
111,830 sq. ft. (65%) allowed
Proposed 62,070 sq. ft. (36%)
Landscape Area 43,012 sq. ft. (25%) required
60,388 sq. ft. (35%) existing
51,614.1 sq. ft. (30%) required
53,946 sq. ft. (31.35%) proposed (with
deviation and grasscrete area)
see discussion of pedestrian easement
Internal Parking
Landscaping
(10% of surface parking
area)
Paved area = 72,194 sq. ft.
Internal Landscaping Required:
7,219.4 sq. ft. (10%)
Internal Landscaping Existing:
6,564 sq. Ft. (9%)
Paved area = 58,019 sq. ft. proposed
Internal Landscaping Required:
5,802 sq. ft. (10%)
Internal Landscaping Proposed:
12,715 sq. ft. (21.9%) (including
grasscrete area)
Snow Storage
(30% of surface parking
area)
Paved Area: 72,194 sq. ft.
Snow storage Required:
21,658.2 sq. ft. (30%)
Snow Storage Existing: 23,210
sq. ft. (32%) sq. ft.
Paved area (unheated) = 59,134 sq. ft.
Paved area (heated) = 2,303 sq. ft.
Snow storage Required:
16,945 sq. ft. (30%/10%)
Snow storage Proposed:
17,189 sq. ft. (including grasscrete
area)
see discussion of pedestrian easement
Existing (CC3)Proposed (PA2)Development Standard
Highline, A DoubleTree by Hilton 16
June 2, 2020 - Page 357 of 772
Parking
Predicting the amount of parking that is needed for any use or development is a challenging
endeavor. Parking regulations are rarely reflective of empirical data and usually developed by
comparing one community to the next. Parking rates are influenced by the need to access a
property by one’s personal car, the availability of public transit, the availability of onsite private
shuttles, airport shuttles, availability of taxis or Uber, and the ability to access other commercial
offerings and services by foot. Highline is located in the West Vail core area, on the free Town
of Vail bus system, and within easy pedestrian or bicycle access to many services.
The applicant engaged McDowell Engineering to analyze the parking generation of this hotel
property. Their analysis includes using the 5th Addition of the Parking Generation Manual
published by ITE (Institute of Transportation Engineers) in 2019 and more importantly, the
collection of local onsite parking data. The applicant collected parking data over a 11 month
period to assist with this analysis. Section 12-10-20 Special Review Provisions of the Offstreet
Parking and Loading requirements of the Town Code allow the PEC to reduce the parking
requirements of the Town Code by up to 25% based upon data provided by a qualified
consultant that shows less parking is required. The following findings must be made by the
PEC:
A. The parking demand will be less than the requirements identified in section 12-10-10
of this chapter; and
B. The probable long term use of the building or structure, based on its design, will not
generate additional parking demand; and
C. The use or activity is part of a demonstrated permanent program (including, but not
limited to, "rideshare" programs, shuttle service, or staggered work shifts) intended to
reduce parking demand that has been incorporated into the project's final approved
development plan; and
D. Proximity or availability of alternative modes of transportation (including, but not
limited to, public transit or shuttle services) is significant and integral to the nature of
the use or business activity.
All of the criteria above is met at this property and with the demands generated by the uses
onsite.
Their parking analysis is provided with the application materials provided. A summary is
provided below.
Highline, A DoubleTree by Hilton 17
June 2, 2020 - Page 358 of 772
The analysis, based on the local data collected, shows that the highest average parking rate,
with a 99% confidence interval, per room existing on the property is 0.67 parking spaces per
hotel room (using Saturday as peak). This data represents that there are vacancies that occur
and that there is not 100% occupancy. A 99% confidence level means that 99% of the time the
parking rate will be at 0.67 parking spaces per hotel room or less.
To account for vacancies and try to predict the parking rate during an assumed 100%
occupancy scenario, the data was also analyzed based on the number of cars parked per
occupied hotel room. The result is a peak average of 0.70 cars parked per occupied hotel
room, with a 99% confidence level. A 99% confidence level means that 99% of the time the
parking rate will be at 0.70 parking spaces per hotel room or less considering full occupancy of
the hotel (worst-case scenario).
Using national parking data prepared by the ITE, the rate for similar hotels (suburban hotels
with conference/convention centers, hotel bar and restaurant, and retail uses) the average peak
period parking demand is 0.74 spaces per room or 0.83 spaces per occupied room. The
national parking data counts include meeting room space, retail, and hotel bar/restaurant so
that the rates include those ancillary uses in the overall number.
The ITE indicates that using local data is more accurate than relying on national data but we
have included it here as a conservative analysis and to account for meeting room and
commercial uses.
The local data was collected during the busy Christmas week in 2019 but was not collected
when the meeting space was being used. However, if you look at the use characteristics
collected during the day (see parking study Figure 1, page 3), the peak parking being utilized
from 9:00 am to 5:00 pm was 48 spaces leaving 121 spaces available during the day. The
conclusion being that during the day, even at 100% hotel occupancy, there will be significant
parking available during typical conference hours. Therefore, no adjustment was made to the
proposed parking rate for the hotel based on the characteristics of parking.
McDowell Engineering also performed a parking needs analysis based on the Lion’s Ridge
project located in Vail and found that the complex parking need is 1.06 parking spaces per
unit. The applicant is proposing to reduce the parking requirement for the 15 unit workforce
housing apartment building to 1.06 parking spaces per unit or 16 parking spaces.
The following tables are parking calculation for the Highline based on local data for the hotel,
the occupied room rate, and 99% confidence interval. The analysis was done based on
Occupied Room to be most conservative. Parking for the EHUs is being reduced as noted
above and third-party restaurants were calculated at the rates according to Town Code even
though the local data count was inclusive of the two third party restaurants, thus providing an
additional layer of conservatism.
Highline, A DoubleTree by Hilton 18
June 2, 2020 - Page 359 of 772
The McDowell parking analysis shows that the parking need is fairly consistent with our original
submittal which sought to seek deviation from the conference parking calculation as applied
outside the core area and reduction to the parking for the onsite retail uses within the hotel
(uses with no access or presence outside of the hotel common areas).
Parking Management Plan:
The Town staff requested the applicant provide a parking management plan to understand how
the parking will be managed or this project. The parking for the hotel and its related uses, the
two, third-party restaurant spaces, and the proposed EHU Building have parking that is co-
mingled on the property. Below is a description of the parking provided followed by the
management elements.
Parking Summary:
Total parking provided: 208 spaces
Total parking proposed as required: 175
Total valet spaces: 111 (53.3% of total)
Total enclosed spaces: 48 (23% of total site, all of net new parking)
Total net new parking: 39 spaces
Garage parking spaces: 42 valet, 6 regular
Surface Parking spaces:
Parking Per “Occupied” Room - Local data 99% confidence interval
Use Units Per Unit Existing
SF New SF Total SF Per
1000sf
Space
Req.
Accomodation Unit 176 0.70 123.2
Limit Service Lodge Unit 19 0.70 13.3
Meeting Space (seating area)Use occurs during the day (see discussion above)
Lobby Bar (Seating)Included in the rate above
3rd Party Restaurant (Seating)2277 0 2277 8.3 18.9
Spa - Simply Massage Included in the rate above
Retail - Charter Sports Included in the rate above
Dorm Apartment (one unit, 12
bedrooms)1 2.5 2.5
EHU 15 1.06 15.9
Total Parking Need 173.8
Parking provided 208.0
Difference/Surplus 34.2
Highline, A DoubleTree by Hilton 19
June 2, 2020 - Page 360 of 772
69 valet spaces
80 regular spaces
4 compact spaces
4 employee spaces (impacted by loading space used infrequently)
1 parallel space (plus one short term space)
2 spaces within the porte cochere
2 valet operation spaces (temporary car shuffling, not included in parking count)
Controlled Access Parking:
There are a total of 208 parking spaces provided onsite. Of these 208 parking spaces,
556 of them are located outside of the controlled access area. Within the controlled
access area, 32 spaces are capable of being self-parked where the guest or other user is
given access beyond the gate, however, the owner may decide to valet park all of the
spaces as necessary.
Hotel Guest Parking:
All hotel guest parking will be accommodated by valet or controlled gate access.
During peak winter season, all hotel guests may be valet parked at the discretion of the
owner.
EHU Apartments:
The 15 EHU apartments require a total of 16 parking spaces. The parking for these
apartments will be located within the parking area with controlled access and in the
parallel parking (1 parking space and 1 short term space) along Chamonix Lane. The
number of parking spaces needed for the apartments may end up being less for the 16
units and the need of the occupants to have daily access to their cars will be evaluated
based on experience. In concept, there will be 12 self-park spaces available within the
hotel parking area, 1 self parking spaces along Chamonix Lane, and another 3 valet
spaces available to EHU residents. Because the EHU building is a rental apartment
building, the owner will be able to control the number of occupants with cars as
documented in leases.
EHU Dormitory:
The EHU dormitory will be targeted to employees of the hotel and those with limited
need for car ownership. It is anticipated that only 2 parking spaces will be necessary for
the dormitory. These parking spaces will either be accommodated within the valet
system or otherwise designated for the dormitory use. Since this dormitory is a rental
facility, the owner will be able to closely control number of occupants with vehicles as
documented in leases.
Retail and Restaurant Establishments:
The primary parking for the retail and restaurant facilities employees and customers,
other than hotel guests who are already parked, will be within the self parking spaces
Highline, A DoubleTree by Hilton 20
June 2, 2020 - Page 361 of 772
provided outside of the controlled parking area. There are 56 parking spaces available
to patrons outside of the controlled parking area. Valet parking services will also be
provided to these customers as desired by the customer.
Meeting Room Space:
Parking for the meeting rooms will be primarily accommodated by the hotel parking
facilities, as these users are already parked within the facility. Users of the conference
space, other than hotel guests, will be parked via the hotel valet system.
Valet Operations:
The valet operation will require the shuffling around of cars within the exterior parking
lot and within the parking garage. For the exterior parking lot, two parking spaces, not
included in the total parking count, have been provided so that cars can be shuffled in
the parking lot without impairing the operation of the drive aisles.
Within the enclosed parking area, where the parking is only staked two cars deep, cars
will be parked temporarily within the drive aisle to perform the shuffling of cars.
The valet parking layout complies fully with Town Code.
Parking Lot Maintenance and Snow Removal:
The exterior parking lot will require snow removal and maintenance on a continuous
basis during the winter months. The hotel experiences high turnover of parking spaces
during the day as guests check out of the hotel in the morning and new guests arrive in
the evenings. This daily reduction in parking as well as the typical hotel occupancy
rates which are far less than 100%, 99% of the time, will allow for snow removal and
maintenance. When the need arrises, snow will be stored temporarily within the
parking lot until it can be removed and trucked offsite. In no case will snow be
temporarily stored within the parking areas for more than one week. The drive aisle/
ramp on the north side of the existing hotel building will be heated in order to maintain
it free from snow and ice and reduce the needs for snow storage.
Hotel Shuttle Operation:
The hotel has two shuttles that operate 365 days a year depending on need. In
general, the shuttle at peak times of the year, transports hotel guests with the
commercial core areas of the Town on a continuous loop from 8:00 am to 10:30 am and
again from 3:30 pm to 6:00 pm. During the afternoon and in the evening, the shuttles
run on-demand. This service makes it possible for hotel guests to book the Highline
and arrive via van or taxi and therefore not require a car during their stay.
Employee Parking Generally:
In general, employees of the hotel and businesses on this campus are required or
encouraged to use public transportation in order to reduce the parking demands of the
Highline, A DoubleTree by Hilton 21
June 2, 2020 - Page 362 of 772
property. Parking requirements and studies reflect the total number of cars parked on
commercial or residential property and therefore include cars that are parked by
employees as well as guests and consumers. Therefore, parking for employees is
inherent in the parking counts. That said, the Highline intends to reduce the impacts on
the environment and make more parking available to guests and consumers but
discouraging employees from driving to work.
Fire Truck Turn Around Area:
The fire truck turnaround area shall be maintained free from any obstacles, ice, and
snow. Snow storage shall not infringe upon the turnaround area.
Highline, A DoubleTree by Hilton 22
June 2, 2020 - Page 363 of 772
Deviations Sought through SDD
The applicant is attempting to provide a public benefit to the Town of Vail, and Eagle County
at large, by building additional EHU units on its property and improve local economic
conditions with increased Town and business revenues. In doing so, the applicant is using
space that could otherwise be put toward parking, landscaping, and snow storage. If the
Employee Housing building proposed were removed from the project, no deviations would be
necessary and no SDD would be required. Because it would be a lost benefit to the
community to not build the employee housing in this location, it is for this reason that the
applicant is seeking the following deviations.
Conference Parking:
The current parking regulations allow a fractional fee club style hotel outside of the core areas
to have its parking related to conference facilities reduced from 1 parking space for each 120
sq. ft. to 1 parking space for each 330 sq. ft. The same calculation is true within the core areas
of Lionshead and Vail Village. Yet a regular hotel, outside of the core area, is not afforded the
same relief as that of a fractional fee property. This is likely an error or oversight in the current
parking regulations.
The parking requirement for meeting rooms or conference rooms at 1 space for 120 sq. ft. is
for a stand alone facility with no lodging onsite. It makes sense that a hotel with meeting room
space, especially when the space is very limited total size, would primarily be occupied by
people already staying and parked at the hotel. The primary reason a hotel provides meeting
space is to increase occupancy of the hotel during slower periods of the year. Additionally, the
hotel operator provides shuttle services from West Vail to the core areas of Lionshead and Vail
Village which then requires less parking overall for the hotel. The applicant prepared a site
specific study to understand the parking utilization onsite.
The applicant is requesting a deviation that is consistent with the parking analysis prepared by
McDowell Engineering. Meeting room users are mostly also guests within the hotel that are
already parked as a hotel guest. The parking study shows that from the hours of approximately
9:00 am and 5:00 pm, the hours when the meeting rooms would typically be in use, the
parking onsite was more than 70% available or empty. Therefore, there is adequate parking
within the facility to accommodate the few that might attend an event that are not already
staying at the facility. The hotel also operates a town shuttle service that can also provide
transit for meeting room users onsite.
The parking analysis prepared by McDowell Engineering, supports this reduction in the amount
of parking for this site.
Parking for commercial and retail space:
Highline, A DoubleTree by Hilton 23
June 2, 2020 - Page 364 of 772
The existing and proposed hotel includes an 820 sq. ft. Simply Massage space and a 700 sq. ft.
Charter Sports space. The Town’s parking requirements do not provide any reduction in
parking requirement for these types of retail/service facilities within a hotel. The parking study
that was prepared analyzed the property as well as looking at national parking data. Hotels
typically have retail uses located within them and those parking counts are accounted for in the
data collected. The analysis shows that there is no additional parking that needs to be
assessed on these retail uses within the hotel. The applicant is proposing to maintain the
parking requirements per code for Casa Mexico and West Side Cafe, even though some
percentage of users come from the hotel guests.
Parking 15 Unit Apartment Building:
The applicant originally proposed to meet Town Code for the parking for the 15 unit employee
housing apartment building: 2 parking spaces per unit. However, based on concerns related
to snow storage and landscaping, the applicant is seeking a parking deviation that reflects the
actual parking utilization of EHUs in Vail. Vail’s access to transit allows the local workforce to
live and work in Vail without the need for a car. This is evidenced by parking studies that have
been conducted in Vail.
McDowell Engineering performed a parking needs analysis at Lion’s Ridge, a similar rental
complex located in Vail, in support of the Boothfalls application. This analysis shows that the
observed parking rate per unit is 1.06 parking spaces per unit. The applicant is providing 16
parking spaces which reflects the parking need.
Valet Parking:
The code allows up to 50% of the required parking to be within a valet parking program. The
proposed redevelopment project requires a total of 174 parking spaces and provides 208 total
parking spaces onsite. There are 111 parking spaces proposed as valet parking spaces or
51.62% of the required parking.
The applicant is requesting a deviation within the proposed SDD to account for this minor
deviation.
Snow Storage:
The code requires that an area equal to 30% of the surface parking areas that are not heated
for snow melt and 10% of the surface parking or driveways that are heated with snowmelt be
provided as snow storage. The proposed project provides approximately 17,189 sq. ft. of
snow storage where 16,945 sq. ft. is required. The applicant proposes to manage the snow
storage onsite by utilizing an area of the parking lot proposed as grasscrete designated for
valet parking to temporarily store snow until it can be removed from the property after a large
storm event. Grasscrete is a permeable surface that can grow grass but also allows vehicles to
park on it without damage. In the summer months, this area can be used for parking while in
the winter months it can also serve as snow storage. Similar successful approaches to snow
removal occur in the remainder of the West Vail commercial area. The Town Code does not
Highline, A DoubleTree by Hilton 24
June 2, 2020 - Page 365 of 772
allow areas where trees are located to be counted for snow storage even though it is common
to store snow around the bases of deciduous trees. In fact landscape areas with mature trees
are used today for snow storage. The applicant is seeking a deviation from this requirement in
order to maximize snow storage.
The applicant is proposing to provide a 6’ pedestrian easement along the east property line.
This is provided in the event there is a future redevelopment of properties to the east and the
area is needed for a joint pedestrian walkway. Until the walk is provided, the snow storage
calculations will remain as proposed herein. If the full 6’ pedestrian easement is paved with a
pedestrian pathway, the amount of snow storage will be reduced by another 2,535 sq. ft.
The applicant is requesting a deviation within the proposed SDD to account for the snow
storage calculation and counting of treed areas in the calculation.
Landscape Area:
The total landscape area required by the existing property under CC3 zoning is 43,012 sq. ft.
which represents 25% of the total site area. The PA2 zone district requires a minimum of 30%
or 51,614 sq. ft. The applicant is proposing 53,946 sq. ft. or 31.35% of the site as landscape
area including the grasscrete area, in excess of the minimum required. The calculations for
landscape areas only allow 20% of the landscape area calculation to include “hardscape”
improvements like pools, pool decks, and sidewalks. As proposed the project includes
hardscape areas of 16,052 sq. ft. but based on the definition of landscape area, only 10,323 sq.
ft. is able to be counted. The code limits areas on a property that can qualify as landscape
area. Per code, a landscape area must be at least 15’ wide and 15’ deep and contain a
minimum of 300 sq. ft. to qualify as a landscape area. This precludes a substantial amount of
landscape areas within this project. This site provides many large areas of landscaping that
does not meet the 15’ or 300 sq. ft. requirements. As examples, Commercial Core 1 and 2 and
Lionsheads Mixed Use 1 and 2 have no minimum landscape area dimension requirement.
Several other zone districts have a 10’ x 10’ requirement. This standard is not consistent
throughout the Town Code.
The applicant is proposing to provide a 6’ pedestrian easement along the east property line.
This is provided in the event there is a redevelopment of properties to the east and the area is
needed for a joint pedestrian walkway. Until the walk is provided, the landscape area
calculations will remain as proposed herein. If the full 6’ pedestrian easement is paved with a
pedestrian pathway, the amount of landscape area will be reduced by another 2,535 sq. ft.
The applicant is seeking a deviation from this minimum size limit for landscape areas within the
proposed SDD.
Future Subdivision:
A future subdivision plat will be filed to create a separate parcel for the EHU apartment
building so that it can be financed and owned separately from the hotel. The EHU apartment
Highline, A DoubleTree by Hilton 25
June 2, 2020 - Page 366 of 772
building parcel is intended to meet the minimum lot size of the PA2 zone district (10,000 sq. ft.
minimum) and site perimeter setback requirements but would not be subject to interior
setbacks (south and west property lines) nor the requirement of being of a shape that can
enclose an 80’ by 80’ square. The intent is not to create a lot that is intended to be sold as a
development parcel, but instead to allow a separate ownership within the context of an overall
planned development of the Highline SDD. The intent is that the entire development site,
including the hotel and the EHU apartment building, would be treated as one parcel for the
purpose of applying the development standards as adopted by this SDD, including parking
requirements (i.e., shared parking facilities). These deviations to the subdivision and zoning
regulations to accommodate this future subdivision are also embodied in this SDD. The
subdivision approval is proposed to occur prior to a CO being issued to the EHU Building.
Slope of Driveways:
The existing driveway does not meet Town Code as portions of unheated drive are steeper
than 9% and the access points do not meet the required 4% for the first 30’. The proposed
SDD is not making these standards any worse but staff has requested that we include this
existing condition as a deviation from development standards.
Trash and Recycling:
The trash and recycling enclosure is proposed to extend into the side setback on the east side
of the employee housing building resulting in a 12’ setback of this one story element to the
property line. The enclosure complies with the 20’ setback from Chamonix Lane. The
enclosures are capable of holding two 1.5 yard containers. One will be used for recycling and
the other for trash. This volume of trash and recycling is adequate for the EHU building with
service up to twice a week.
While not deviations, the follow issues noted as applicable to these applications:
Commercial Uses:
There is a total of 8,475 sq. ft. of retail and restaurant uses within the hotel today. The PA2
allows there to be these commercial uses on site as a permitted use limited to 10% of the
GRFA constructed onsite. The PA2 allows this limit to be increased to 15% with a Conditional
Use Permit. The GRFA of the property is 77,805 sq. ft. (only hotel room floor area) thus
allowing 7,780 sq. ft. of commercial uses as a permitted use or 11,670 sq. ft. as a conditional
use. The applicant will pursue approval of a Conditional Use Permit prior to an application for
a building permit for any of the proposed improvements to bring the commercial uses into
compliance with the PA2 zone district. In the future, if the Town wants to allow more variety of
commercial uses and more floor area of commercial uses in the PA2 zone district, amendments
to the PA zone district could allow these changes.
Existing Manmade Site Grades:
A small area of the site has grades that exceed 40% slope. Section 12-21-10 Development
Restricted states in part “No structure shall be built on a slope of forty percent (40%) or greater
Highline, A DoubleTree by Hilton 26
June 2, 2020 - Page 367 of 772
except in single-family residential, two-family residential, or two-family primary/secondary
residential zone districts.” This regulation was intended to apply to natural grades and not
where grades exist due to grading caused by prior development or excavation and is therefore
not applicable to the Highline property.
Highline, A DoubleTree by Hilton 27
June 2, 2020 - Page 368 of 772
Workforce 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. The proposed project exceeds
both the total requirement and the onsite requirement for employee housing. In fact, in the
interest of providing a much needed public benefit, the applicant is proposing the
development of an employee housing apartment building that will include 15 units, providing a
total of 38 bedrooms. Town Code limits occupancy of employee housing to two persons per
unit. This building is not required as part of the project, but is being proposed as a public
benefit. The workforce housing requirement for the additional lodging space is being met with
the addition of the EHU dorm space. The Employee Housing structure is intended to be
developed on a separate parcel of land that will be subdivided from the remainder of the
property, yet tied to the overall property for the purpose of applying zoning and development
standards. This will facilitate its development by a separate entity from the hotel to
accommodate a separate financing structure while still being integral to the hotel campus.
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:
Inclusionary zoning does not apply to this application as there are no new dwelling units
or GRFA being proposed. In fact, 19 dwelling units are being removed and replaced
with Limited Service Lodge Units. Therefore, the property will maintain an inclusionary
employee housing credit of 2,005 sq. ft. of EHU floor area that can be used in the
future, should dwelling units ever be proposed within the property.
Commercial linkage applies to this project.
Commercial Linkage Calculation
Use Calculation Total Employees Generated
79 net new
accommodation units
0.6 employees per unit 47.4
19 net new LSLUs 0.6 employees per unit 11.4
Conference Space 0.8 employee per 1,000 feet of
net new floor area (3,950 new)
3.2
Removal of 4,500 sq.
ft. office space
3.2 employees/1,000 sq.ft.-14.4
Net employees generated 47.6
Mitigation Rate 20%
Use
Highline, A DoubleTree by Hilton 28
June 2, 2020 - Page 369 of 772
The proposed project generates a net requirement of 9.5 employees to be housed.
This will offset by the applicant’s proposal of an EHU dormitory style housing to
accommodate up to 17.6 employees. Thus, the proposal has a surplus of 8.1
employees that shall be carried forward as a credit against future employee generating
proposals on the property.
The applicant is also proposing to develop a 15-unit employee housing apartment
structure onsite concurrent with the expansion of the hotel. These units will allow the
applicant to establish an employee housing bank pursuant to section 12-23-7 of the
Town Code. However, in order to provide a public benefit, 25% of the units (two, three-
bedroom units and two, one-bedroom units) will be set aside and excluded from any
future mitigation bank established for the EHU building as permitted by sections
12-23-7 and 12-24-7 of the Town Code.
The image below is the 15 unit EHU building proposed.
Total Commercial Linkage
Requirement
9.5 employees to be housed
Calculation Total Employees GeneratedUse
Highline, A DoubleTree by Hilton 29
15 Unit EHU Building
June 2, 2020 - Page 370 of 772
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 EHU dormitory style unit has
a total square footage of 4,400 sq. ft. and
with 12 total units or bedrooms. The
minimum square footage per person
occupying the dormitory is 250 sq. ft., which
therefore allows for a total of 17.6
employees.
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 not applicable to this application.
F.Off 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.
Highline, A DoubleTree by Hilton 30
Proposed Dormitory Layout
June 2, 2020 - Page 371 of 772
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 12-24-1: Purpose and Applicability, of the Vail Town Code provides the purpose
of the Inclusionary Zoning Chapter:
The purpose of this chapter is to ensure that new residential development and
redevelopment in the town of Vail provide for a reasonable amount of employee
housing to mitigate the impact on employee housing caused by such residential
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 of 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:
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
Highline, A DoubleTree by Hilton 31
June 2, 2020 - Page 372 of 772
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 of 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.
Highline, A DoubleTree by Hilton 32
June 2, 2020 - Page 373 of 772
Criteria for Review: Rezoning
Section 12-3-7: AMENDMENT, of the Vail Town Code, provides the criteria for review of a zone
district boundary amendment. The following section includes the criteria, along with an
analysis of the compliance of the proposal with the criteria.
1.The extent to which the zone district amendment is consistent with all the applicable
elements of the adopted goals, objectives and policies outlined in the Vail
comprehensive plan and is compatible with the development objectives of the town;
Applicant Analysis:
The property is governed by the Vail Land Use Plan. Other applicable plans include the
Vail 20/20 Plan and the Housing Strategic Plan, all of which are described below:
•Vail Land Use Plan
The adopted map of the Vail Land Use Plan shows a designation of “Community
Commercial” for the majority of the property.
Per the Vail Land Use Plan of 1986, this area was designated to be Community
Commercial. (See Vail Land Use Plan, Chapter VI - Proposed Land Use).
This area includes activities aimed at accommodating the overnight and short-
term visitor to the area. Primary uses include hotels, lodges, service stations,
and parking structures (with densities up to 25 dwelling units or 50
accommodation units per buildable acre). These areas are oriented toward
vehicular access from I-70, with other support commercial and business services
Highline, A DoubleTree by Hilton 33
June 2, 2020 - Page 374 of 772
included. Also allowed in this category, would be institutional uses and various
municipal uses.” (Vail Land Use Plan pg. 25)
This new category has been designated for the West Vail commercial area,
which is primarily oriented to serve the needs of the permanent resident and the
long-term visitor. Because the community expressed the desire to concentrate
commercial uses within existing commercial nodes, no new commercial areas
have been designated. The CC land use area contains 24 acres or 1% of the
land area. ” (Vail Land Use Plan pg. 28). The intention of the Preferred Land
Use Plan was to “…reflect[s] a balancing of existing conditions, community
opinion, opportunities and constraints, and projected growth demands.
Many properties were zoned at that time without much careful consideration of the
impact of proposed zoning throughout West Vail, including this property. Being more
thoughtful at the time would more likely have resulted in accommodation units being
allowed in the CC3 zone district or perhaps there would have been an appropriate zone
district applied to the hotel knowing that hotels, hot beds, and lodging taxes were and
are top goals of the Town.
The Vail Land Use Plan states that allowing accommodation units at 50 units per acre is
appropriate. On this 3.95 acre site, that would allow for 197.5 accommodation units.
The applicant is proposing 195 units, including the limited service lodge units.
The proposal includes a zoning of Public Accommodation-2 District. The PA2 zone
district allows lodges with multiple family dwellings, employee housing units, and
commercial/office uses. The proposed amendment will make all of the uses conform
with zoning.
•Vail 20/20 Plan
The Vail 20/20 Plan provides the following goals:
Provide for enough deed-restricted housing for at least 30 percent of the
workforce through policies, regulations and publicly initiated development.
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.
The proposed zoning of PA2 and the proposed SDD helps to further the goal of the
Town of Vail to provide deed-restricted housing for 30% of the workforce. This property
Highline, A DoubleTree by Hilton 34
June 2, 2020 - Page 375 of 772
creates an exciting opportunity to create new housing stock in an area that provides
services and transportation within walking distance.
•Employee Housing Strategic Plan
The Employee Housing Strategic Plan outlines the Town of Vail’s goals and policies to
ensure employee housing. It provides the following objectives:
Actively address affordable housing for Vail workers to ensure that the community
remains competitive in economic terms.
Increase and maintain deed-restricted housing within the Town to encourage the
efficient use of resources by placing employees closer to their place of work.
The proposed zoning will allow for the creation of new deed-restricted employee
housing units within the Town of Vail, allowing Vail to remain economically competitive
in attracting and maintaining a quality workforce.
The proposal is consistent with the goals and objectives of the various Town of Vail
planning documents and helps to further four of Vail’s critical goals: creating employee
housing within the Town of Vail boundaries to ensure that Vail remains economically
competitive; maintaining and increasing the Town’s lodging bed base to increase
revenues and improve the vitality of the Town’s economy; to increase occupancy and
vitality in the shoulder seasons by providing new conference space; and promoting infill
development within the Town.
2.The extent to which the zone district amendment is suitable with the existing and
potential land uses on the site and existing and potential surrounding land uses as set
out in the town's adopted planning documents; and
Applicant Analysis: The Highline site was originally built under the jurisdiction of Eagle
County. In 1979, the newly constructed facility received a certificate of occupancy from
Eagle County. It was then annexed to the Town of Vail as part of a larger annexation of
the West Vail area by Ordinance No. 43, Series of 1980, approved on December 10,
1980. Per the statutory requirements, the newly annexed land was required to be
zoned by the zoning district for the Town of Vail within 90 days of annexation, by March
10, 1981. Ordinance No. 11, Series of 1981, was first read in on March 3, 1981. This
ordinance created the CCC3 zone district, under which this site was zoned. It appears
the zone district was created hastily as the CC3 zoning district did not allow for hotels
or dwelling units where were already developed on the property. From the inception,
the CC3 zone district upon application to this site rendered the existing hotel (76 hotel
rooms) and condominiums (19 dwelling units with 20 lock-offs) as nonconforming uses.
Over four years later, on August 15, 1985, the Colorado Court of Appeals overturned
the original West Vail annexation because a rectangular tract owned by the BLM was
Highline, A DoubleTree by Hilton 35
June 2, 2020 - Page 376 of 772
between two contiguous tracts that were being annexed. This BLM land was
improperly included in the proposed area to be annexed, and without this land, the
proposed annexation would be ‘invalid for lack of the necessary one-sixth contiguity.’
The Town of Vail moved quickly to again annex West Vail. Ordinance No. 1, Series of
1986, re-annexed West Vail on January 29, 1986. Ordinance No. 10, Series of 1986,
was first read in on March 18, 1986. There were no changes to the zoning for the site in
this ordinance even though the hotel and condominium units on this property had
existed for 7 years. We believe that this was an incredible oversight since the hotel
have been there already for so long and because by that time the Town had adopted
the Vail Land Use Plan which encouraged the preservation and expansion of the Town’s
lodging bed base.
This property sits on the edge between the West Vail Commercial Center and multi-
family residential properties. The West Vail Commercial Center consists of commercial
uses designed to meet the needs of locals and guests alike. Just like the existing hotel,
the proposed hotel and employee housing will continue to be compatible and
complimentary to the other uses within the area. Given the location and transitional
point between commercial and residential, a hotel and workforce housing such as this
provide the obvious transition and naturally fit in the environment.
The proposed rezoning of the property to Public Accommodation 2 along with the
proposed SDD will allow the site to be conforming and thus allow the property to enjoy
conforming status and allow for the proposed expansion of the hotel.
3.The extent to which the zone district amendment presents a harmonious, convenient,
workable relationship among land uses consistent with municipal development
objectives;
Applicant Analysis:
This property sits on the edge between the West Vail Commercial Center and multi-
family residential properties. The West Vail Commercial Center consists of commercial
uses designed to meet the needs of locals and guests alike. When moving between
commercial zoning and residential zoning, it is important to consider a transition that
provides a harmonious, convenient, and workable relationship among the existing land
uses. Just like the existing hotel, the proposed hotel and employee housing will
provide such a transition and will continue to be compatible and complimentary to the
other uses within the area. Given the location and adjacency of two zone districts types
(commercial and residential), a hotel and workforce housing such as this provide an
obvious transition and present a harmonious, convenient and workable relationship
between these land uses.
Highline, A DoubleTree by Hilton 36
June 2, 2020 - Page 377 of 772
The proposal to rezone the property to PA2 furthers three major development
objectives:
Provision of employee housing
Encourage the preservation and expansion of the Town’s lodging bed base
Encourage the development of conference facilities to address generation of
revenues during the slower shoulder seasons
As a result, the proposal is consistent with this criterion.
4.The extent to which the zone district amendment provides for the growth of an
orderly viable community and does not constitute spot zoning as the amendment
serves the best interests of the community as a whole; and
Applicant Analysis:
The proposed zone district amendment provides for the growth of an orderly viable
community by allowing a hotel to be expanded within the limits of its development site
and provide for workforce housing. The proposal is close to existing services and
transportation, while simultaneously providing needed lodging to encourage overnight
visitors. Employee housing is key to ensuring that the Town of Vail remain economically
viable and competitive, while not having impacts to environmentally sensitive lands.
This proposed rezoning does not constitute spot zoning, as the PA2 zone district helps
to further these community goals and is consistent with the Town land use plan and
other guiding documents. As a result, the proposed amendment serves the best
interest of the community.
5.The extent to which the zone district amendment results in adverse or beneficial
impacts on the natural environment, including, but not limited to, water quality, air
quality, noise, vegetation, riparian corridors, hillsides and other desirable natural
features; and
Applicant Analysis:
The proposed zone district amendment proposes to rezone a property currently zoned
as CC3 zone district to PA2 zone district. The site is currently largely developed and
any environmental impacts the may have occurred did so decades ago. As evidenced
in the EIR provided from the project, there is limited to no impacts on water quality, air
quality, noise, vegetation, riparian corridors, hillsides, or other desirable natural
features.
Because the entirety of the site is already used as a lodge with commercial space, there
should be no new impact to the natural environment and complies with this criterion.
Highline, A DoubleTree by Hilton 37
June 2, 2020 - Page 378 of 772
6.The extent to which the zone district amendment is consistent with the purpose
statement of the proposed zone district; and
Applicant Analysis:
Section 12-7J-1 provides the purpose of the Public Accommodation-2 zone district is:
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. (Ord. 2(2006) § 2)
The Highline site was originally developed as a lodge facility with multiple-family
dwellings as well as commercial and retail uses, and received a Certificate of Occupancy
from Eagle County in 1979. Based on the background of the site and the annexation
and zoning of West Vail to the Town of Vail, it appears that the current zoning
designation, CC3, is inappropriate zoning for the property. CC3 has never allowed for a
lodge facility and thus was never appropriate zoning for the site. The facility pre-dated
the annexation and zoning, and it appears that applying more appropriate zoning was
overlooked and is now long over-due. Vail’s Land Use Plan recognized and encourage
the development of lodging facilities in this area of the Town. Furthermore, the
addition of the PA2 zoning exhibits the Town of Vail’s intention of providing lodging and
residential accommodations in the valley. Not only does this project accomplish that
intent, but it also fits perfectly within the definition of the PA2 zoning.
As a result, the proposed zone district amendment is consistent with the purpose
statement of the PA2 zone district.
7.The extent to which the zone district amendment demonstrates how conditions have
changed since the zoning designation of the subject property was adopted and is no
longer appropriate; and
Applicant Analysis:
Highline, A DoubleTree by Hilton 38
June 2, 2020 - Page 379 of 772
The Highline site first fell under the CC3 zone district in 1981 after the property was
originally annexed to the Town of Vail. Prior to this annexation and subsequent zone
designation, the property had already been developed as a lodge facility and had
received a Certificate of Occupancy in 1979. The property was then re-annexed to the
Town of Vail in 1986 and immediately thereafter was re-zoned as CC3. Just months
later, the Town of Vail issued the Vail Land Use Plan, with a proposed designation of
Community Commercial from the Highline site. Per the Vail Land Use Plan, and the
subsequent Vail 20/20 Plan and Employee Housing Strategic Plan, the intentions and
the goals for the Town of Vail are to encourage lodging facilities for overnight visitors as
well as to provide much-needed employee housing in the Vail Valley. The PA2 zoning
district allocation will allow for the Highline site to be redeveloped to allow for
additional lodging beds while also providing the community need of employee
housing. The CC3 zoning district has never been appropriate for this site, and
appropriate zoning designation is long over-due. Conditions have always been ripe for
this property to be rezoned to PA2 and what is proposed is consistent with the direction
given in the Vail Land Use Plan.
8.Such other factors and criteria as the commission and/or council deem applicable to
the proposed rezoning.
Applicant Analysis:
Any other factors can be addressed as necessary.
Highline, A DoubleTree by Hilton 39
June 2, 2020 - Page 380 of 772
Criteria for Review: Special Development District
Section 12-9A-8: DESIGN CRITERIA AND NECESSARY FINDINGS, of the Vail Town Code,
provides the criteria for review of a Special Development District. The following section
includes the criteria, along with an analysis of the compliance of the proposal with the criteria.
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.
Applicant Analysis:
The architecture is consistent with the surrounding architecture and the Town’s design
guidelines applicable to areas outside of the core areas. The concept is to use natural
materials, such as stone, wood composite siding, and metal panel or stucco, to create a
project that is responsive to the existing hotel and the surrounding neighborhood. This
design creates architectural interest by providing a variety of characteristics throughout
the new uses on the site. The project seeks to increase the Town’s lodging and
employee housing bed base while helping to screen or reduce the visual impact of the
existing surface parking areas from neighboring properties.
The property is on the edge of the West Vail Commercial Core, which consists of large
structures and several three-story buildings. The maximum height of the proposed
buildings is 48 ft., which complies with the PA2 zoning maximum height restriction of 48
ft. and less than the 52 ft. of the existing hotel. Additionally, the maximum height is
approximately 4 feet lower than the existing lodge building. Furthermore, the new
hotel tower is sized in relation to the current hotel tower. This project will provide a
visual and sound buffer zone to the neighbors to the north of the property from the I-70
traffic and the commercial areas with the residential building that faces the residential
neighbors to the north. Furthermore, the proposed hotel and EHUs are completing the
existing lodging block rather than seeking out new development opportunities on what
is currently non-developed open space.
Significant surface parking lots are a characteristic of the immediate neighborhood,
including residential properties, which is not a very efficient use of land. While surface
parking will remain on the property, the project is proposing to enclose a significant
amount of the parking below the proposed new wing of the building and screen the
surface parking lot from the residential neighborhood behind.
2.Relationship: Uses, activity and density which provide a compatible, efficient and
workable relationship with surrounding uses and activity.
Applicant Analysis:
Highline, A DoubleTree by Hilton 40
June 2, 2020 - Page 381 of 772
Highline is adjacent to the I-70 and North Frontage Road corridor to the south of the
property. It provides a smooth transition between the West Vail commercial core to its
east, commercial to the west, and residential to the west and to the north. The Vail
Land Use Plan expressed a desire to concentrate commercial uses in designated
locations. The Highline provides lodging to overnight guests, while the EHU units
provide the desirable transition from Commercial uses to Residential uses (which are to
the north and to the west of the property).
The proposed uses are compatible with the surrounding residential uses to the north
and west and the commercial uses to the east and the west. Pursuant to the PA2 zoning
and the Town of Vail’s policies and goals around encouraging hotel beds and employee
housing, the proposed density of the project is zero. The proposed EHU structure is
similar in scale and mass to the Chamonix Townhouses and other multi-family buildings
in the area. As a result, Highline is compatible with the surrounding uses and activity
and is consistent with this criterion. The SDD is only needed to address technical issues
related to parking and snow storage. Therefore the impacts to the neighbors or the
community at large is limited.
3.Parking And Loading: Compliance with parking and loading requirements as outlined
in chapter 10 of this title.
Applicant Analysis:
Highline, A DoubleTree by Hilton 41
Highline
Hotel
Chamonix Employee HousingResidential
Commercial
Residential
Commercial/
Institutional
I-70
June 2, 2020 - Page 382 of 772
A parking analysis was provided in a previous section of the submittal. As that analysis
provided, the entire project is not only in compliance with the parking requirements of
Chapter 10, except for the parking required for the meeting room facilities and onsite
retail which has been addressed herein. As permitted by Town Code, the applicant has
provided an analysis to show that the need for parking is less than that predicted by the
Town Code and the SDD complies with this analysis. The project complies with the
loading requirements found in Chapter 10. The application is therefore in compliance
with this requirement.
4.Comprehensive Plan: Conformity with applicable elements of the Vail comprehensive
plan, town policies and urban design plans.
Applicant Analysis: The property is governed by the Vail Land Use Plan. Other
applicable plans include the Vail 20/20 Plan and the Housing Strategic Plan.
•Vail Land Use Plan
The adopted map of the Vail Land Use Plan shows a designation of “Community
Commercial” for the property.
Per the Vail Land Use Plan of 1986, this area was proposed to be Community
Commercial. (See Vail Land Use Plan, Chapter VI - Proposed Land Use).
This area includes activities aimed at accommodating the overnight and short-
term visitor to the area. Primary uses include hotels, lodges, service stations, and
parking structures (with densities up to 25 dwelling units or 50 accommodation
units per buildable acre). These areas are oriented toward vehicular access from
Highline, A DoubleTree by Hilton 42
June 2, 2020 - Page 383 of 772
I-up, with other support commercial and business services included. Also
allowed in this category, would be institutional uses and various municipal uses.”
(Vail Land Use Plan pg. 25)
This new category has been designated for the West Vail commercial area,
which is primarily oriented to serve the needs of the permanent resident and the
long-term visitor. Because the community expressed the desire to concentrate
commercial uses within existing commercial nodes, no new commercial areas
have been designated. The CC land use area contains 24 acres or 1% of the
land area. ” (Vail Land Use Plan pg. 28). The intention of the Preferred Land
Use Plan was to “…reflect[s] a balancing of existing conditions, community
opinion, opportunities and constraints, and projected growth demands.
The Vail Land Use Plan states that allowing accommodation units at 50 units per acre is
appropriate. On this 3.95 acre site, that would allow for 197.5 accommodation units.
The applicant is proposing 195 units, including the limited service lodge units.
The proposal includes a zoning of Public Accommodation-2 District. The PA2 zone
district allows lodges with multiple family dwellings, included employee housing units,
and commercial/office uses. The proposed amendment will make all of the uses
conform with zoning and consistent with the Vail Land Use Plan.
•Vail 20/20 Plan
The Vail 20/20 Plan provides the following goals:
Provide for enough deed-restricted housing for at least 30 percent of the
workforce through policies, regulations and publicly initiated development.
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.
The proposed zoning of Housing on the buildable area of the site helps to further the
goal of the Town of Vail to provide deed-restricted housing for 30% of the workforce.
This property creates an exciting opportunity to create new housing stock.
•Employee Housing Strategic Plan
The Employee Housing Strategic Plan outlines the Town of Vail’s goals and policies to
ensure employee housing. It provides the following objectives:
Highline, A DoubleTree by Hilton 43
June 2, 2020 - Page 384 of 772
Actively address affordable housing for Vail workers to ensure that the community
remains competitive in economic terms.
Increase and maintain deed-restricted housing within the Town to encourage the
efficient use of resources by placing employees closer to their place of work.
The proposed zoning will allow for the creation of new deed-restricted employee
housing units within the Town of Vail, allowing Vail to remain economically competitive
in attracting and maintaining a quality workforce.
The proposal is consistent with the goals and objectives of the various Town of Vail
planning documents and helps to further one of Vail’s critical needs: creating employee
housing within the Town of Vail boundaries to ensure that Vail remains economically
competitive.
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 Analysis: There are two known geologic hazards that affect the property:
debris flow and rockfall. A Geological Report was prepared for this project. The report
concludes that the hazards are low severity due the existing development north of the
property but has provided some recommended mitigation for the structures on the
property.
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 Analysis: The property is currently
developed with an existing lodge and with
restaurants located onsite. There are no natural
features remaining on this portion of the
property since its initial development in the
1970s, nor any natural vegetation existing on
the site other than what has been planted. The
proposed project is sited above existing
surface parking and other previously disturbed
areas. As a result, there is little disturbance to
any natural features on the site.
The site plan and the building have been
developed to not only be responsive and
Highline, A DoubleTree by Hilton 44
June 2, 2020 - Page 385 of 772
compatible with the existing buildings on the site, but also consistent with the
development pattern in the neighborhood. The building design specifically moves the
project forward by meeting current design guidelines.
Open Space: The site is located within the West Vail Commercial hub with intensive
commercial uses and very limited open space. The town is surrounded by numerous
open space areas which this site does not directly impact.
Landscape Plan:
The landscape plan (shown above), prepared by Dennis Anderson, has been included
with the submittal. The plan provides for appropriate treatment of open areas. The
SDD produces a functional development plan which is sensitive to the existing
landscaping and neighborhood. As a result, the proposed SDD is consistent with this
criterion.
7.Traffic: A circulation system designed for both vehicles and pedestrians addressing on
and off site traffic circulation.
Applicant Analysis:
The proposed redevelopment maintains the same vehicular circulation system as exists
on the property today, with the exception that four parallel parking spaces are
proposed on the subject property but adjacent to Chamonix Lane. These parking
spaces are proposed to be reserved for the residents of the employee housing units.
The pedestrian circulation system is largely to same as exists today on the property with
the notable exception that a new sidewalk is proposed along Chamonix Lane and a new
stair connection is provided from the hotel parking area to Chamonix Lane and the
existing Town of Vail bus stop.
A traffic report has been provided by McDowell Engineering addressing the impacts of
the proposed redevelopment on traffic conditions in the area. The conclusions of this
report are favorable recommending only that the South Frontage Road be re-striped to
provide for a left turn into the site at its east access point.
The proposed SDD is consistent with this criterion.
8.Landscaping: Functional and aesthetic landscaping and open space in order to
optimize and preserve natural features, recreation, views and function.
Applicant Analysis:
The landscape plan was developed by Dennis Anderson Assoc. Inc. with an eye towards
functionality, use of native species, and maximizing the areas best suited for planting.
The PA2 zone district requires 30% of the total site area be landscaping, which would
Highline, A DoubleTree by Hilton 45
June 2, 2020 - Page 386 of 772
be 51,614 sq. ft. The proposed project meets this requirement subject to the deviation
for the 15’ x 15’ dimension requirement, being sought by this application. There are
no natural features to preserve in this area where the proposed building is being
located as the area was previously disturb from development that occurred in the
1970s. As a result, the proposed landscape plan is consistent with 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.
Applicant Analysis:
The improvements and addition to the hotel, as well as the addition of the Dorm EHUs,
and the 15 unit employee housing apartment building are to be completed in one
phase.
A future subdivision plat will be filed to create a separate parcel for the EHU apartment
building so that it can be financed and owned separately from the hotel. The EHU
apartment building parcel is intended to meet the minimum lot size of the PA2 zone
district (10,000 sq. ft. minimum) and site perimeter setback requirements but would not
be subject to interior setbacks (south and west property lines) nor the requirement of
being of a shape that can enclose an 80’ by 80’ square. The intent is not to create a lot
that is intended to be sold as a development parcel, but instead to allow a separate
ownership within the context of an overall planned development of the Highline SDD.
The intent is that the entire development site, including the hotel and the EHU
apartment building, would be treated as one parcel for the purpose of applying the
development standards as adopted by this SDD, including parking requirements (i.e.,
shared parking facilities). These deviations to the subdivision and zoning regulations to
accommodate this future subdivision are also embodied in this SDD.
Criteria for Review: Major Exterior Alteration
Section 12-7J-13: COMPLIANCE BURDEN, of the Vail Town Code, provides the criteria for
review of a Major Exterior Alteration in the Public Accommodation - 2 Zone District. This
section states:
It shall be the burden of the applicant to prove by a preponderance of the evidence
before the planning and environmental commission and the design review board that
the proposed exterior alteration or new development is in compliance with the
purposes of the public accommodation-2 (PA-2) zone district, and that the proposal
does not otherwise have a significant negative effect on the character of the
neighborhood, and that the proposal substantially complies with other applicable
elements of the Vail comprehensive plan.
Highline, A DoubleTree by Hilton 46
June 2, 2020 - Page 387 of 772
The following section includes the above criteria, along with an analysis of the compliance of
the proposal with the criteria.
1.The proposed exterior alteration or new development is in compliance with the
purposes of the Public Accommodation-2 (PA-2) zone district.
Applicant Analysis:
Section 12-7J-1: PURPOSE provides the following purpose statement for the PA-2 zone
district, stating:
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 Highline site was originally developed as a lodge facility with multiple-family
dwellings as well as commercial and retail uses. The current zoning, CC3 has never
allowed for a lodge facility and thus was never appropriate zoning for the site.
The proposed project includes the following:
176 AUs with approximately 32,555 sq. ft. of net new GRFA (79 net new, one
existing AU lost to circulation needs)
19 LSLUs with approximately 20,050 sq. ft. of GRFA (previously dwelling
units)
12 employee housing bedrooms within a dormitory space with
approximately 4,400 sq. ft. of floor area
15 employee housing units (1, 2, and 3 bedroom units) with approximately
13,502 sq. ft. of floor area
The proposed program increases the number of accommodation units by 79 and
limited service lodge units by 19. This complies with the purposes of the PA-2 Zone
Highline, A DoubleTree by Hilton 47
June 2, 2020 - Page 388 of 772
District, which encourages the provision of these uses for sites located outside of Vail
Village and Lionshead.
2.The proposal does not otherwise have a significant negative effect on the character of
the neighborhood.
Applicant Analysis:
Highline is adjacent to the I-70 and North Frontage Road corridor to the south of the
property. It provides a smooth transition between the West Vail commercial core to its
east, commercial to the west, and residential to the west and to the north. The Vail
Land Use Plan expressed a desire to concentrate commercial uses in designated
locations. The Highline provides lodging to overnight guests, while the EHU units
provide the desirable transition from Commercial uses to Residential uses (which are to
the north and to the west of the property).
The proposed uses are compatible with the surrounding residential uses to the north
and west and the commercial uses to the east and the west. Pursuant to the PA2 zoning
and the Town of Vail’s policies and goals around encouraging hotel beds and employee
housing, the proposed density of the project is zero. The proposed EHU structure is
similar in scale and mass to the Chamonix Townhouses and other multi-family buildings
in the area. Furthermore, vehicular traffic to the hotel and the EHU apartment building
is focussed at the current entrances off the north frontage road, and therefore do no
negatively impact the neighborhood. As a result, Highline is compatible with the
surrounding uses and will not have a negative effect on the character of the
neighborhood.
3.The proposal substantially complies with other applicable elements of the Vail
comprehensive plan.
Applicant Analysis:
This review of this criterion has been addressed in both the Criteria for Review of the
Rezoning and the Special Development District. As indicated in these sections, the
proposal is consistent with the goals and objectives of the various Town of Vail planning
documents and helps to further four of Vail’s critical goals: creating employee housing
within the Town of Vail boundaries to ensure that Vail remains economically competitive;
maintaining and increasing the Town’s lodging bed base to increase revenues and
improve the vitality of the Town’s economy; to increase occupancy and vitality in the
shoulder seasons by providing new conference space; and promoting infill
development within the Town.
Highline, A DoubleTree by Hilton 48
June 2, 2020 - Page 389 of 772
Conclusion
Highline presents a unique opportunity for redevelopment within the Town of Vail. It provides
a smooth transition between commercial use and residential use.
The proposed project achieves four key community goals: the provision of employee housing,
the provision of live beds, the development of conference facilities, and encouragement of in-
fill development. The 15 Type 3 EHUs are not required as mitigation, but are proposed as a
public benefit of the project. Furthermore, the project is part of an already existing lodge,
resulting in continuity of already established uses for the site. The proposed project consist of
employee housing units, limited service lodge units, hotel rooms, and EHU dorm space. As
part of this application, Highline is asking to clean up zoning inconsistencies by rezoning the
site to PA2, which is reflective of the existing and future desired use of the property.
For the reasons stated above, Highline respectfully requests approval of the applications for
Major Exterior Alteration, Rezoning to PA2, and the SDD.
Highline, A DoubleTree by Hilton 49
June 2, 2020 - Page 390 of 772
1
Greg Roy
From:Matt Gennett
Sent:Tuesday, December 3, 2019 9:13 AM
To:Greg Roy
Subject:FW: Expansion of DoubleTree Hotel
FYI and for the file. Thanks.
‐‐‐‐‐Original Message‐‐‐‐‐
From: Suzanne Silverthorn <SSilverthorn@vailgov.com>
Sent: Tuesday, December 3, 2019 7:46 AM
To: plauer@sisna.com; Council Dist List <TownCouncil@vailgov.com>; PEC <PEC@vailgov.com>
Cc: Matt Gennett <MGennett@vailgov.com>
Subject: RE: Expansion of DoubleTree Hotel
PEC & Town Council members, please see public comment below.
Suzanne Silverthorn, APR
Communications Director
Town Manager’s Office
75 South Frontage Road
Vail, CO 81657
Office: 970.479.2115
Cell: 970.471.1361
vailgov.com
‐‐‐‐‐Original Message‐‐‐‐‐
From: info@vailgov.com <info@vailgov.com>
Sent: Tuesday, December 3, 2019 7:28 AM
To: Info <Info@vailgov.com>
Subject: Expansion of DoubleTree Hotel
Hi,
My husband, Jay Lauer, and I are homeowners at 2269 Chamonix Ln, Apt. 4, Vail CO 81657. We are traveling
internationally until the middle of December. We received notification from one of our neighbors about the proposed
expansion of the DoubleTree hotel at 2211 North Frontage Road West.
We are definitely not in favor of this high density development and granting approval for variences on section 12‐6D‐8
or 12‐15‐3.
Is there a way to communicate to the town council at the Dec 9th meeting that we are not in favor of this development
since we are not able to attend the Dec 9th meeting?
June 2, 2020 - Page 391 of 772
2
Thanks for your help and I will wait to hear back.
Patricia Lauer
Submitted By:
Name:: Patricia Lauer
Telephone:: 3032298575
Email:: plauer@sisna.com
Submitted From:
https://www.vailgov.com/contact
June 2, 2020 - Page 392 of 772
1
Greg Roy
From:tania boyd <scubakiwi2@yahoo.com>
Sent:Tuesday, December 3, 2019 5:20 PM
To:Greg Roy
Cc:MICHAEL SPIERS; Jacqueline Nickel; Jim Pyke; Jay Lauer; kstandage@exclusivevailrentals.com
Subject:Double Tree Expansion
Dear Greg,
Brandywine Trace Condominium owners at 2249 Chamonix Lane will be directly impacted by the proposed expansion of
the Double Tree Hotel in West Vail.
Our building is directly behind the hotel and we are opposed to the rezoning of the property which would allow the
developer to exceed 40% of allowable site GRFA. This proposed development would significantly impact our property's
view and the attractiveness of our neighborhood.
The zoning that is currently in place protects developers from cramming in buildings and parking lots with disregard to the
surrounding beauty of our valley. I believe the Town put this regulation in place to ensure we do not fall victim to over
development and detract from the scenic landscape surrounding us. This is what makes Vail a desirable place to live for
all of us locals who have been fortunate enough to be able to afford to buy a home and live here.
The sheer scale of the project is daunting. The remodel that they undertook had numerous problems and lasted more
than two years. During that time we were subjected to constant construction and noise. Brandywine is very concerned that
now it has been finally completed we are going to be subject to this all over again.
As the President of the HOA I wanted to submit our disapproval as I will not be able to attend the December 9th meeting.
Regards
Tania Boyd
Brandywine Trace Condominium Association President
June 2, 2020 - Page 393 of 772
My husband (Jay Lauer) and myself (Pat Lauer) are full time Vail residents at 2269 Chamonix Lane, Apt 4, which is
behind the DoubleTree. We have owned our Vail Tenterrace property for approximately seven years so we are very
familiar with the area. Below are our reasons for not supporting this proposed development and required zoning changes.
We have also made some suggestions below for modifications to be considered by the PEC committee for the
development.
LIMITED COMMERCIAL SPACE IN VAIL - This Development Does Not Serve The Best Interest of Our Community
and Long Range Goals:
Since Vail has a very small commercial area development (1% as pointed out in t he Vail Land Use Plan), we believe that
the commercial area should stay as currently zoned as we feel like there is not enough commercial space allotted for the
size of Vail. If you look at the current commercial space in West Vail, there is very little commercial vacancy. In our
opinion, the commercial space we have now should be protected as to what was originally designated in the Vail Land
Use Plan. We think if there is a comparable study done with other Colorado ski towns nearby, such as Breckenridge or
Steamboat, you will find that the 1% commercial space allotted in Vail probably underserves our community.
When reviewing the rezoning criteria (section 12-3-7), changing the land from Commercial Core 3 (CC3) to the Public
Accomdation-2 (PA-2), we believe changing the zoning is not in the best interest of our community and does not match
with what the long term goals are for the town of Vail per the land use plan (12-3-7, Section 1, (a), 1). There are many
other beneficial commercial businesses that could be utilized in the current land to serve the Vail community.
DESIGN FEATURES OF THE 16 UNIT APARTMENT COMPLEX DON’T MATCH OUR EXISTING NEIGHBORHOOD
CHARACTER:
EXCESSIVE HEIGHT: The EHU 16 apartment complex is excessively high with four stories as there are no other
complexes in our neighborhood built with four stories. This design does not fit in with the rest of our neighborhood. The
height of the four story apartment impacts the neighborhood adversely in the following ways:
Even with the proposed sidewalk, it will be a huge winter road hazard for the extensive pedestrian foot and
vehicular traffic because of the ice accumulation (due to the shade) on Chamonix Lane.
The structure is not visually appealing to pedestrians and cars from street level as you are looking into an
intrusive, tall building with only a 20 foot set back requirement from the street.
It blocks the views of several developments behind it (Sunlight, Tenterrace, Brandywine and several of the Pine
Ridge units).
Triumph Shade Study: The shade study is difficult to interpret within the document we were given as there was no scale to
reference as to how much of the road the shade of the building covers. It would have been beneficial if they would have
imposed the road on their image in Attachment C 1 of 3, page 9. In our opinion, from looking at the shade on Chamonix
for the winter 10 am and 2 pm time periods, it looks Chamonix Lane road is completely shaded. Please see the attached
recent photos of Chamonix Lane we took so the PEC committee can see what the road looks like with our current shade
conditions as the road can be hazardous throughout the winter .
The developer expressed that this EHU 16 apartment building would mitigate some of the I-70 noise and that residents
behind it would prefer to look at the building instead of the parking lot. We strongly disagree as we would definitely prefer
to keep our existing views versus looking right at this very tall building.
Also, we are concerned that if the height of the EHU 16 apartment building is approved, that might open up the possibility
that the commercial buildings to the east might want to “raise the roof” on their complex to add additional square footage.
EXCESSIVE DENSITY: The EHU 16 apartment complex has way too high of a density compared to the rest of our
neighborhood. As mentioned above, there are no other complexes in our neighborhood built with four stories and with all
16 units attached together. The developer tries to equate the EHU structure as being similar in scale and mass to the
Chamonix Townhouses and other multi-family buildings in our area, which we don’t believe is accurate or a relevant
comparison. If you compare the building style and density per square foot in this proposed EHU 16 apartment complex, it
is clearly denser than the recently built neighboring Chamonix Townhouses – here is the developer’s quote below from
the SDD Narrative2 PDF:
June 2, 2020 - Page 394 of 772
12-9A-8: Design Criteria and Necessary Findings, #2: “The proposed EHU structure is similar in scale and mass
to the Chamonix Townhouses and other multi-family buildings in the area. As a result, Highline is compatible with
the surrounding uses and activity and is consistent with this criterion. The SDD is only needed to address
technical issues related to parking and snow storage. Therefore, the impacts to the neighbors or the community
at large is limited.”
OCCUPANCY: Below are the existing and proposed hotel and dormitory and EHU 16 apartment building with the number
of maximum occupants. This development could potentially double the number of people that will be occupying the
development, housing up to a maximum capacity of 792, from 386 people now. There would be a maximum capacity of
126 EUH permanent occupants, including the dormitory and the 16 EHU apartments. We believe this constitutes
excessive high density during the peak visitor time periods and doesn’t benefit our neighborhood.
Potential Maximum Occupancy Existing Hotel & Proposed DoubleTree (per the developer):
Existing Hotel: Current Total 386 People
116 rooms (97 hotel rooms + 19 condos)
193 beds
Proposed Hotel & Dormitory & EHU: Total 792 People - Increase of Maximum Potential Occupancy = 406
people
195 hotel rooms
333 beds
666 people
12 dorm bedrooms – 18 people
16 EHU apartments with 38 bedrooms = Total 108 (7 Three Bedrooms w/2 people per bedroom and 2 people in
the living room = 56 people / 8 Two Bedrooms w/2 people per bedroom & 2 people in the living room = 48 people /
One 1 Bedroom w/2 people per bedroom & 2 people in the living room = 4 people)
We recommend eliminating the EHU 16 apartments building as it is not in character with the existing neighborhood as well
as a winter ice hazard for pedestrians and vehicles. Some possible employee housing alternatives to consider:
Incorporate a separate wing in the new 79 hotel room addition with its own access to EHU units comprising of
various sized condos and reduce the number of hotel rooms. Perhaps some of the proposed 6,616 sq. ft.
conference space for these condos could utilized since the existing conference space of 2,666 sq. ft. is not being
fully utilized as the developer stated in the December 9th PEC meeting.
Convert some of the existing 19 condos that are in the currently in the existing hotel structure to employee
housing.
Design an appropriately sized EHU apartment building and move it to the east side of the parking lot (parallel to
the backside of Christy’s Sports and McDonalds), which in our opinion would be more visually appealing and not
as congested. By reorienting the EHU apartment structure, it would eliminate the treacherous icy road conditions
on Chamonix Lane in the winter.
If the EHU apartment building stays where it’s currently at on Cham onix Lane, reduce its height to two floors to
help minimize the shade impact of the building, which should lessen the icy, unsafe road and walkway conditions
in the winter.
HOTEL PARKING & CONFERENCE SPACE CONCERNS:
The conference space, at 2,666 sq. ft. is currently underutilized as was mentioned by the developer in the December 9 th
PEC meeting. At the January 8th meeting the developer held at DoubleTree for the public, they told us the conference
space was to be increased to approximately 4,000 sq. ft. In the most recent SDD Narrative2 update submitted by the
developer on January 17, the parking study shows the conference space now increasing to 6,616 sq. ft. so a very
significant increase. The increase in conference space directly affects the results of the parking study and lowers the
number of parking spaces required.
The developer is requesting a deviation as stated below per their SDD Narrative2 January 17 update:
June 2, 2020 - Page 395 of 772
Conference Parking: The developer is requesting a deviation within the proposed SDD to reduce to 1 parking
space for each 330 sq. ft. of conference space. The parking requirement for meeting rooms or conference rooms
at 1 space for 120 sq. ft. is what is currently required.
When we look at the proposed development with a potential of accommodating up to a maximum of 792 occupants during
peak time periods, we have a difficult time believing that there will be enough parking spaces. Our concern is that people
driving cars will park their vehicles in other commercial spots to the east of the DoubleTree hotel or perhaps, in our
residential building’s parking areas immediately behind the DoubleTree on Chamonix Lane. We are concerned the
employee housing may not have enough parking spots and guests visiting these residents would increase unauthorized
vehicles parking in our parking lots. We have already experienced people parking in our building parking areas that are
not authorized to park there. There would be increased pedestrian and vehicle traffic in the area with the employee
housing development.
In the SDD Narrative2 update, it shows a net of 47.6 employees would be working at DoubleTree. On page 21, it shows
there are only four parking spots allocated to hotel workers. W here will all of the DoubleTree employees park that don’t
live in the dormitory housing? They can’t all be expected to take the shuttle bus can they? Our concern is that employees
driving cars to work will park their vehicles in other commercial spots to the east of the DoubleTree hotel or in our
residential building’s parking areas immediately behind the DoubleTree on Chamonix Lane.
ENVIROMENTAL CONSIDERATION & DISRUPTION OF OUR NEIGHBORHOOD:
This project is going to remove and destroy the atheistic beauty of the mature spruce trees that line Chamonix Lane.
These spruce trees are “trophy” trees that can’t be replaced – see attached photos. Replanting with smaller trees doesn’t
have the screening impact of what is now offered with our mature spruce trees and changes the character of our
neighborhood.
The last remodel at the hotel a couple of years ago went way over the projected time period to be finished. It took them
well over two years to remodel the inside and do some minor exterior alterations. We are concerned that if th is
development goes through, our neighborhood will suffer for years with dirt and noisy construction and increased
congestion from the construction work force. The developer told us that they estimated it would take 15 months to
complete this project. If this project is approved, there needs to be some agreement between the developer and the Town
of Vail that the project will be completed in the agreed upon time so our neighborhood is not compromised and disrupted
for an unreasonable time period.
HOTEL SHUTTLE & PUBLIC BUS TRANSPORTATION:
Currently, the DoubleTree has two shuttle buses that each hold 14 people.
There will be a lot of DoubleTree guests, employees and residents during the busy winter hotel time periods (Saturdays,
Christmas/New Years, President’s Week, March spring breaks, winter weekends and powder snow d ays) in the morning
going to the Vail ski resort and returning in the late afternoons coming back from the resort. Our concern is that guests
will take the public bus system instead of waiting for the hotel’s shuttle buses. When people have the option of a short
one minute walk to get to the Pine Ridge bus stop, we think it will put excessive pressure on our already congested public
bus system. The public buses during these peak time periods are currently very full, with standing room only once you go
to the next one or two shuttle bus stops down from Pine Ridge.
We believe studies should be done during the above mentioned peak time periods to evaluate the additional amount of
buses that would need to be added to accommodate the increase in riders.
Thank you for your time and consideration in reading our concerns about this proposed development.
Sincerely,
Jay and Pat Lauer
2269 Chamonix Ln APT
Vail, CO 81657
June 2, 2020 - Page 396 of 772
June 2, 2020 - Page 397 of 772
June 2, 2020 - Page 398 of 772
June 2, 2020 - Page 399 of 772
June 2, 2020 - Page 400 of 772
From:Elyse Howard
To:Greg Roy
Cc:Council Dist List
Subject:Highline
Date:Monday, February 3, 2020 2:50:32 PM
Dear Greg,
I am writing to express my support for the Highline rezoning and special development
district applications.
I am excited that the proposed redevelopment of Highline includes 28 additional employee housing
units (EHUs). In order to meet the goals in the Town’s Housing 2027 plan, it's important to take
advantage of situations like this one where a private developer has brought forward the opportunity
to add EHU’s in an infill location.
It is well documented in the Town of Vail Housing strategic plan as well as the Eagle County Housing
Needs assessment that we face a scarcity in the supply of affordable rental and for sale homes for
our workforce. Today there is a shortage of 2,780 units County wide, and by 2025 that deficit will
grow to 5,900 units. It is a “win” that this project proposes to add 28 EHU’s at no cost to the
Town while also adding hotel rooms. When extended family comes to town, they typically choose to
stay in West Vail as it is closer and more convenient to our home. I appreciate the addition of this
type of mid-level accommodations. In addition, Highline is on the Town bus route, and close to the
West Vail commercial area. Having lived in West Vail since 2000, I know it's a great location
for workforce housing.
To realize the Town’s vision to be North America’s premier international resort community, we must
grow our community. Workforce housing is community infrastructure and an important component
to building a strong community.
Sincerely,
Elyse Howard
June 2, 2020 - Page 401 of 772
97 Main Street, Suite E-201, Edwards, CO 81632
VailValleyPartnership.com
January 27, 2020
Town of Vail
c/o Greg Roy
75 South Frontage Road
Vail, CO 81657
Dear Planning Commission members and Vail Town Council,
Vail Valley Partnership is the regional chamber of commerce, with over 900 members
throughout Eagle County who collectively represent over 80% of the local workforce. We
are dedicated to the economic vitality of the valley, and as such our board of governors –
which includes residents & business operators throughout Eagle County – has identified
workforce housing as our number one priority.
Our complete housing position can be found at
https://files.vailvalleypartnership.com/sites/2/2019/09/Housing -Position-White-Paper-
September-2019.pdf.
In short, Eagle County faces a gap in the availability of ownership and rental housing that is
affordable for local residents. Residents are burdened by high housing payments. Employees are
forced to commute long distances. According to the annual workforce survey, employers believe
that the availability of workforce housing is a critical or major problem in Eagle County. The
Eagle County Housing Assessment shows a shortfall of 4,500 units to meet current needs.
Currently and anecdotally, units that have been long-term workforce rentals are being removed
from that market as they are converted into short-term rentals. This has the potential to grow
both catch-up and keep-up needs for workforce housing.
Workforce and affordable housing has long been an issue in Eagle County. Addressing our
affordable housing issue is essential to the continued success and growth of our business
community across industry sectors. As such, we support the proposed Highline Vail
redevelop ment proposal.
We request that projects seeking Vail Valley Partnership support must meet the following
criteria, and believe that the Highline Vail project meets each of these requirements:
1. Demonstrate commitment to the future through incorporating resident occupied
workforce housing units/employee housing units at or above the minimum required
by local code and that result in a net increase in workforce housing stock (i.e., more
housing created than jobs created);
2. Utilize resident occupancy requirements in their deed restrictions;
June 2, 2020 - Page 402 of 772
97 Main Street, Suite E-201, Edwards, CO 81632
VailValleyPartnership.com
3. Actively engage neighboring communities before and during the process through
various stages of approval (planning & zoning, design & review, elected boards,
etc.);
4. Be located in appropriate in-fill locations throughout the county, and/or in areas
designated and zoned for housing development;
5. Be cognizant of regional transit and transportation impacts and mitigate these
impacts through their development plans.
Our board is also supportive of additional moderately priced hotel rooms within Vail, and sees
great value in maintaining the Hilton and Doubletree brands within our lodging inventory.
We want to ensure our community can remain competitive to keep locals local and to support our
business community. We encourage local governments and boards to approve appropriate in-fill
projects and to be open-minded and flexible to grant appropriate variances to local code to
facilitate the development of these projects.
Sincerely,
Chris Romer
President & CEO
Vail Valley Partnership
June 2, 2020 - Page 403 of 772
1
Greg Roy
From:Brett A. August <BAA@pattishall.com>
Sent:Saturday, December 7, 2019 12:50 PM
To:Greg Roy; Jonathan Spence
Cc:Erik Gates
Subject:STOP the DoubleTree Expansion!
Importance:High
To the Town of Vail Planning and Environmental Commission:
The proposed additions to the DoubleTree Hotel are far out of proportion to neighborhood standards and should NOT be
permitted.
We live directly across the street from the proposed addition, at 2309 Chamonix Lane. So we have a string and direct
interest in preventing the construction of so large a building as is proposed.
A review of the proposed project shows that, in contrast to the two-story existing structure, the DoubleTree proposal
would double that height, to four stories. This is not an "expansion," as that term is commonly used: it is a large and
inappropriate NEW project that would likely more than double the size of the existing structure. Although all the plans
refer to construction at a property on the north frontage road, ALL of the proposed construction is immediately adjacent
to Chamonix Lane, which is entirely residential.
The proposed project is so large that it would obstruct views of the residential properties on Chamonix Lane, an unjust
taking for which we would demand compensation.
We do not object to adding to the existing DoubleTree property so long as the addition is of the same height and density
as the existing structure. The developers describe the project as including: "176 AUs [accommodation units] with
approximately 32,555 sq. ft. of net new GRFA ." Such a large re-development of this parcel - which the developers
admit would require significant rezoning - is way out of proportion to the surrounding area and should NOT be permitted.
Moreover, as the developers admit: "since 1981, this site has operated as a nonconforming use and maintained its
use as a lodge as it was first built in 1979. A nonconforming use cannot be expanded or modified except if changed
to a permitted or conditional use even though the Town has been focused for the last 40 years at encouraging and
expanding the hotel base." So the existing structure already surpasses the intended size of the structure: to allow a
giant new structure to be placed on this parcel would make a mockery of Vail's once-vaunted planning process.
Vail is losing its way by allowing unbridled development and is in danger of destroying the very essence of the town, the
so-called "secret sauce" that has made Vail so special to all of us who live here. The Planning and Environmental
Commission needs to return to representing the best interests of the residents of Vail and not simply become a pawn to
commercial interests that are contrary to the interests of Vail's residents.
Cordially yours,
Carey and Brett August
Brett A. August
Pattishall, McAuliffe, Newbury, Hilliard & Geraldson LLP
200 South Wacker Drive
Suite 2900
Chicago, IL 60606-5896
June 2, 2020 - Page 404 of 772
2
Direct: (312) 554-7962 Main: (312) 554-8000 Fax: (312) 554-8015
BAA@pattishall.com www.pattishall.com
Pattishall Ranks GOLD in
the United States and in
Illinois in the prestigious
WTR 1000
The preceding message and any attachments may contain confidential information protected by the attorney-client or other privilege. You may not forward this
message or any attachments without the permission of the sender. If you believe that it has been sent to you in error, please reply to the sender that you received the
message in error and then delete it. Nothing in this email message, including the typed name of the sender and/or this signature block, is intended to constitute an
electronic signature unless a specific statement to the contrary is included in the message.
June 2, 2020 - Page 405 of 772
2269 Chamonix Ln Apt 3
Vail, CO 81657
February 26, 2020
Mr. Greg Roy, AICP
Planner ll
Community Development Department
Town of Vail
75 South Frontage Road
Vail, CO 81657
Dear Mr. Roy,
I am writing about the proposed DoubleTree Expansion. I’m a full-time resident of Vail living at 2269
Chamonix in the Tenterrace Condominiums. I recognize some of the goals of the expansion in order to
provide additional, affordable housing for workers in Vail; however, for many reasons, I do not see this
project as ultimately providing that in a sustainable, viable way. Furthermore, I see additional
challenges with the overall proposed development. At this point in time, I would have to strongly
oppose the planned changes. I was able to attend the first open house on December 5th. I also
attended the January PEC meeting. I will unfortunately be unable to attend the March PEC meeting due
to a family situation.
I have significant concerns about the impact on the local community from a traffic safety perspective.
The proposed development would substantially increase traffic in the local area. The EHU would have 16
units with up to 40 bedrooms. My experience at my condominium is that there is a car for each
bedroom. This would potentially result in another 40 cars in a concentrated area. Furthermore, there
would be substantially more people waiting at the Pine Ridge and West Vail Mall bus stops.
Substantially more vehicular and pedestrian traffic in the area would increase the likelihood of
accidents.
I do applaud the proposal to add a sidewalk to Chamonix Lane which would be helpful, but, noting our
most recent snowfalls, could substantially impact the viability of the sidewalk at the times it would be
most needed. Furthermore, the excessive height of the proposed buildings would create significant
shading along Chamonix lane, preventing ice from melting from the sidewalk and street and creating
hazards for pedestrians.
Vail already has a shortage of commercial space to support the community, reducing this through the
SDD would only negatively impact our community. Vail has limited commercial space to support
grocery stores and other amenities needed by both the full-time residents as well as visiting tourists. By
constraining the supply of available space even more by changing the zoning you, effectively, raise the
prices to everyone. Vail is already an expensive place to live and the reduction of commercial space will
simply exacerbate that situation.
The development as proposed has not considered ways to reduce its environmental footprint. While
I’m sure the development team would follow all the necessary requirements and regulations from the
Town of Vail and other AHJs. I was surprised by the lack of consideration of solar energy for all the
additional rooftop space. Having worked in the renewable energy industry for over 10 years, I believe
the Town of Vail should aspire to continuously push for the use of cleaner energy.
June 2, 2020 - Page 406 of 772
From a process point of view, I feel the development team could have done a better job with the
community. As I noted, I attended the first open house. I was unfortunately unable to attend the
second open house due to scheduling considerations. However, I would note that the letter for the
January 8th meeting was only written on January 2nd and not postmarked until January 4th. (Please see
my appendix for copies). I believe I received the letter on January 7th which was about 24 hours prior to
the actual meeting. To me, this is noteworthy since during the first PEC meeting, the development team
presented photos of the impacted views from Chamonix properties. However, they did not present
photos from all the impacted properties. In fact, they only presented photos from the least impacted
properties. Both 2269 Chamonix and 2249 Chamonix were excluded. To date, I have not seen photos of
the property view impact from the development team. Perhaps these were available at the open house
that I could not attend.
Creating a consistent approach to redevelopment of West Vail will be important to maintaining the
character of our community. From my attendance at the first PEC meeting where this discussed, I
understand that there is a broader redevelopment plan being considered for West Vail. I think it would
make more sense to pursue a comprehensive plan for West Vail rather than pursuing individual projects
that are inconsistent with the community. Once the Town of Vail makes significant zoning changes and
special accommodations for a single developer, there will be no end of requests. Will the Town of Vail
approve all of these requests or just some? How will they decide? In the absence of a larger plan, it
seems there will be a real risk of significant damage to the community from unintended consequences.
I appreciate your consideration of the community’s input to this proposed project. I understand the
need for affordable housing in our community for employees is quite significant. I also appreciate the
effort that the development team has put into the design and planning of this project. However, as
noted above, I do not feel this project will meet the needs of the community in a sustainable way.
Sincerely,
James T. Pyke
2269 Chamonix Ln Apt 3
Vail, CO 81657
June 2, 2020 - Page 407 of 772
Appendix
Letter Written on January 2nd for January 8th meeting
June 2, 2020 - Page 408 of 772
Letter Postmarked on January 4th
June 2, 2020 - Page 409 of 772
March 3, 2020
Mr. Jonathan Spence jspence@vailgov.com and members of the Planning &
Environmental Commission
The Vail Town Council via Mayor Dave Chapin dchapin@vailgov.com
Mr. George Ruther gruther@vailgov.com
Dear Mr. Mayor, Mr. Ruther and Mr. Spence:
After a presentation by the Highline (DoubleTree in West Vail)
development team at our February meeting, the Board of the Vail Chamber & Business Assoc.
offered its unanimous support of the proposed additional lodging,
conference room space and the 16 units of employee housing and
12-bedroom employee housing dorm.
The VCBA highly recognizes how this proposed project helps to meet
Vail's economic and housing goals. DoubleTree is a great complementary
brand to our five-star offerings, and the workforce housing is in such
high demand. We also appreciate the changes made to address neighbor
concerns about needing a sidewalk and views.
Thank you for all of your hard work and please approve the rezoning,
major exterior alternation and Special Development District
applications.
Best regards,
Alison C. Wadey
Executive director
Vail Chamber and Business Association
June 2, 2020 - Page 410 of 772
Mr. Michael O’Connor December 18, 2019
Triumph Development
12 Vail Road
Vail, Colorado 81657
Dear Michael-
I am writing to you on behalf the Vail Local Housing Authority to express our support for the proposed
Highline – Double Tree by Hilton Hotel development. We very much appreciated the presentation
shared by your team during our most recent public meeting on December 17th. We appreciate your
willingness to incorporate incremental new, deed-restricted, resident-occupied housing into your overall
development plan.
In determining our support for the development plan, several key factors were taken into consideration.
Those factors included:
• The deed-restricted housing use is permitted as a use by right in the Public Accommodation-2
zone district.
• The deed-restricted housing is supported by the Town’s recently adopted 2018 Housing Policy
Statements.
• The deed-restricted housing is provided by the private sector with no financial participation of
the Vail taxpayer or the Vail Local Housing Authority.
• The deed-restricted housing is an incremental net new increase in overall supply.
• The private sector is an important partner in helping solve our housing challenges.
• An infill approach to development is taken thereby resulting in greater utilization of already
developed land.
• The deed-restricted housing is within convenient, walkable proximity to restaurants, commercial
uses, and Town of Vail free public transit.
• There is a demonstrated demand for additional for-rent homes in Vail.
• The deed-restricted homes result in a incremental increase in the supply of resident-occupied
homes until such time as the owner requests an ehu credit.
Respectfully, the Vail Local Housing Authority requests you exclude a minimum of 4 (25%) of the 16
deed-restricted homes from any future mitigation bank. In the Vail community, there are both existing
demands, and future needs, for housing. Each could be addressed as a public benefit of the proposed
special development district if a percentage of the homes were excluded from future mitigation bank
opportunities.
Again, thank you for sharing your presentation and plans for development. We appreciate the efforts
you are making to help address the housing needs in the Vail community.
Sincerely,
Steve Lindstrom, Chair
Vail Local Housing Authority
June 2, 2020 - Page 411 of 772
From:MICHAEL SPIERS
To:Greg Roy
Cc:tania boyd
Subject:Highline hotel development.
Date:Tuesday, March 3, 2020 2:16:40 PM
Dear Greg, Hi my name is Mike Spiers and I am a member of the Brandywine condominium
association in West Vail.
I wanted to express to you our concerns regarding the Highline hotel development in West
Vail.
Please understand that we are not NIMBYs and understand the need for more employee
housing and don’t necessarily oppose the development of more hotel rooms on the Doubletree
lot.
What we are very concerned about is the size of the project and it’s effect on the overall
character of the neighborhood. In particular the proposed EHU building parallel to Chamonix
Lane would dwarf the street and be completely out of character with other buildings on the
street.
Not only would it block the views of the Apartments on the north side of Chamonix ln but it
would completely shade Chamonix ln and permanently change the look of the neighborhood.
I have attended all the community meetings provided by the Highline people. Initially they
seemed receptive to reducing the size of this building to two stories which we thought would
be a good compromise. Unfortunately in their latest plans the building is still a monolithic
three stories high reducing only one small end of the building to two stories.
Many of my fellow neighbors are sure to express concerns about snow removal, parking,
traffic along Chamonix ln and these are all legitimate concerns.
It is my hope that you will get a chance to thoroughly look at the impact of this building and
the main hotel building to see if we can make it more compatible with the size of the other
buildings in the neighborhood.My suggestion for compromise is to reduce the EHU Building
to two stories maximum. This would still provide many employee housing units but not alter
the nature and character of the neighborhood as much. Thank you for listening to our
concerns, regards Mike Spiers.
Get Outlook for iOS
June 2, 2020 - Page 412 of 772
April 11, 2020
Mr. Greg Roy, AICP
Planner ll
Community Development Department
Town of Vail
75 South Frontage Road
Vail, CO 81557
The Tall Pines Homeowners Assoc at 2239 A & B Chamonix Lane, & 2241 A & B Chamonix Lane are
again reaching out to you to oppose this Doubletree Developers proposal. We had a filed our first
complaint with you on March 7, 2020, and now after seeing the proposed modifications from the
developer- we see that they are minimal modifications. This is so disappointing, as there were so many
comments from the PEC committee and the Public comments at the March meeting, which we
attended. Our Tall Pines development is directly behind the Doubletree Hotel and parking area. We have
been West Vail residents for 20 years.
We are in complete agreement with Pat & Jay Lauer’s letter sent to you April 10, 2020. They recognized
3 parts to the Developers request which is Rezoning, Special Development District and Exterior
Alterations. The community Development Dept (Vail Planning Staff) recommended a denial on all of the
3 parts of the Developers Request at the March Town Council meeting. The Lauer’s most recent April
letter to you, summarized the areas below to re-emphasize that the developer has specific criteria that
needed to be met according to the Vail regulatory codes. Especially for the SDD- the developer has the
burden of proof to meet each design criteria and the Tall Pines Homeowners Assoc thinks this new
proposal falls way short!
FAILURE OF ZONE CODE AMENDMENT/REZONING - LIMITED COMMERCIAL SPACE IN VAIL:
Since Vail has a very small commercial area development (1% as pointed out in the Vail Land Use Plan),
the commercial area should stay as currently zoned as there is not enough commercial space allotted for
the size of Vail. If you look at the current commercial space in West Vail, there is very little commercial
vacancy. The commercial space we have now should be protected as to what was originally designated
in the Vail Land Use Plan.
At the last PEC meeting, Vail planning staff found that the proposed rezone district amendment did
not conform to 4 out of 8 rezoning criteria by the developer (2, 3, 4 and 7 – shown below). Nothing
has changed in the rezoning request in the developer’s modified proposal.
2. The extent to which the zone district amendment is suitable with the existing and potential land uses
on the site and existing and potential surrounding land uses as set out in the town’s adopted planning
documents.
June 2, 2020 - Page 413 of 772
3. The extent to which the zone district amendment presents a harmonious, convenient, workable
relationship among land uses consistent with municipal development objectives.
4. The extent to which the zone district amendment provides for the growth of an orderly viable
community and does not constitute spot zoning as the amendment serves the best interests of the
community as a whole.
7. The extent to which the zone district amendment demonstrates how conditions have changed since
the zoning designation of the subject property was adopted and is no longer appropriate.
FAILURE ON SPECIAL DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT (SDD) CRITERIA – APPLICANT DID NOT PROVE THEIR
BURDEN OF PROOF FOR EACH REVIEW CRITERIA:
Per section 12-9A-8, under the design criteria and necessary findings, section A states:
SDD Criteria: The following design criteria shall be used as the principal criteria in evaluation the merits
of the proposed special development district. It shall be the burden of the applicant to demonstrate that
the submittal material and the proposed development plan comply with each of the following
standards, or demonstrate that one or more of them is not applicable or that a practical solution
consistent with the public interest has been achieved.
With this new proposal, the first criteria, compatibility, will still fail since there were minimal design
changes on the EHU 15 apartment complex, so the developer does not comply with each of the SDD
criteria.
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.
3. Parking and Loading: Compliance with parking and loading requirements as outlined in chapter 10 of
this title.
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.
7. Traffic: A circulation system designed for both vehicles and pedestrians addressing on and off site
traffic circulation.
8. Landscaping: Functional and aesthetic landscaping and open space in order to optimize and preserve
natural features, recreation, views and function.
SDD Deviations: Also, there were a total of 11 deviations requested by the developer of which 3 were
denied at the last meeting. The last deviation will never be met due to the design of the EHU 15
apartment complex.
3. Exception from the requirement that landscaped areas with trees cannot be used for snow storage.
4. Reduction in the amount of snow storage required.
June 2, 2020 - Page 414 of 772
7. Relief from the subdivision requirement that requires a new lot be able to enclose an 80’ by 80’
square.
FAILURE ON EXTERIOR ALTERATION– APPLICANT FAILED TO MEET THEIR CRITERIA:
The Vail planning staff found that the criteria for section 2 below was not met and was denied. The
new proposal will not change as the EHU 15 apartment complex design has barely changed.
2. That the proposal does not otherwise have a significant negative effect on the character of the
neighborhood.
The reply from the Vail planning staff stated: The proposal does have a negative effect on the
character of the neighborhood. The height that is proposed is as part of this application is not
compatible with this neighborhood. As discussed in SDD criteria #1, there is a large difference
between the residential zone districts across Chamonix Road and the proposed height of the buildings
in this application. With this proposal, that difference is tripled, which is out of character to any other
properties in the neighborhood.
OUR ADDITIONAL COMMENTS:
Lastly, we mentioned (and want to emphasize again) the following points in our previous letter to PEC
and in the March meeting:
Density of the Complex: The number of people (guests, employees and tenants) at this entire complex
will be over double the current capacity (386 people) with a new maximum capacity of 782 people.
We believe this is excessively high density during the peak visitor time periods and definitely doesn’t
benefit our neighborhood. There would be increased pedestrian and vehicle traffic in the area with the
employee housing development.
Excessive Stress on Our Public Bus System: Currently, the DoubleTree has 2 shuttle buses that each hold
14 people. If you figure the shuttles can only move 112 people per hour (4 round trips per shuttle in an
hour), then the DoubleTree guests, employees and residents during the busy winter hotel time periods
(Saturdays, Christmas/New Years, President’s Week, March spring breaks, winter weekends and powder
snow days) will be utilizing our public bus system to get to Vail Resort instead of waiting for the hotel’s
shuttle buses. When people have the option of less than a 1 minute walk to get to the Pine Ridge bus
stop, we think it will put excessive pressure on our already congested public bus system. The public
buses during these peak time periods are currently very full, with standing room only once you go to the
next one or two shuttle bus stops down from Pine Ridge.
Lack of Adequate Parking in the 15 EHU building: With only 16 parking spots for 34 bedrooms
(maximum of 98 people), the parking is inadequate. The McDowell Engineering performed a parking
needs analysis at Lion’s Ridge, which is not a good comparison as the location is substantially different
compared to the DoubleTree location. Having only 16 parking spots for this many people seems
unrealistic.
Lack of Adequate Parking for DoubleTree Employees: With only 4 employee spaces, this is inadequate
parking for a hotel expansion this size. Our concern is that employees driving cars to work will park
their vehicles in other commercial spots to the east of the DoubleTree hotel or in our residential
building’s parking areas immediately behind the DoubleTree on Chamonix Lane.
June 2, 2020 - Page 415 of 772
Destruction of the Neighborhood’s Mature Spruce Trees: This project is going to remove and destroy
the atheistic beauty of the mature spruce trees that line Chamonix Lane. These spruce trees are
“trophy” trees that can’t be replaced. Replanting with smaller trees doesn’t have the screening
impact as well as the majestic beauty of these mature spruce trees. It changes the character of our
neighborhood.
No Penalty if the Project is not completed in 15 Months: The last remodel at the hotel a couple of
years ago went way over the projected time period to be finished. It took them well over two years to
remodel the inside and do some minor exterior alterations. We are concerned that if this development
goes through, our neighborhood will suffer for years with dirt and noisy construction and increased
congestion from the construction workforce. The developer told us that they estimated it would take
15 months to complete this project. If this project is approved, there needs to be some agreement
between the developer and the Town of Vail that the project will be completed in the agreed upon
time so our neighborhood is not compromised and disrupted for an unreasonable time period.
Thank you for your time and consideration in reading our concerns about this proposed development.
By the way: We will be in attendance via the internet for the Mon April 13 meeting.
Sincerely,
Tall Pines HOA:
Kathy Standage & Mike Oldham- 2239B Chamonix Lane
Plowden Bridges & Vaughn Bollard- 2239A Chamonix Lane
Judy & Charles Goldman, 2241B Chamonix Lane
Evan Noyes, 2241A Chamonix Lane
June 2, 2020 - Page 416 of 772
1
Ashley Brown
From:tania boyd <scubakiwi2@yahoo.com>
Sent:Monday, April 13, 2020 9:30 AM
To:Greg Roy
Subject:Doubletree Expansion
Dear Greg,
Brandywine Trace Condominium Association concurs with Pat and Jay Lauer’s letter representing Tenterrace
regarding issues with the Double Tree expansion.
I attended part of the last PEC meeting and am disappointed to see the latest plans from the developer. They
do not seem to have taken any of the recommendations and concerns into account in their revised plans, at
least as far as the drawings are concerned.
I wish to reiterate previous concerns that Brandywine has in regards to the shading and snow removal on
Chamonix Lane. As I’m sure you are aware, the sun is low in the south during the winter months and as a
consequence both Chamonix Lane along with Tenterrace and Brandywine parking areas receive limited snow
or ice melt depending on the weather. Our parking lot and walking along Chamonix Lane can be very
treacherous at times. With significantly reduced sun on the street and parking lot, along with our steep entry,
we foresee an increase in the number of falls and injuries. Also, as the town needs to plow along the street,
would the proposed sidewalk be available to walk on? Currently the town pushes snow over the bank on the
south side and also along the front of our properties. Would the town still push snow over the bank or would it
now be pushed in front of our properties where we already struggle with enough room for snow storage??
We are wondering how the entryway to the EHU would be kept clear and who would be responsible for that
and maintaining the stairs? Our condo complex struggles with ice on our stairs and we are south facing. These
north facing areas would not melt until long after the season ends and would be a hazard for the guests and
employees trying to use the Pine Ridge bus stop.
Also during the meeting you addressed the snow removal issue and valet parking. We agree with you that their
proposed snow removal and storage would definitely be of concern particularly in high snow years. We have
witnessed this for the past several years and are struggling to understand with an increased building footprint
that there would be enough room for snow storage. Their proposed parking and particularly 3 deep valet
parking is definitely going to be problematic in regards to enough spaces for the expanded number of guests
and employees, along with being able to move cars for plowing.
We also wanted to bring up something that we aren’t sure if anyone has addressed so far. There are multiple
semi’s and other truck drivers along with tour buses who stay at the Double Tree for tournaments in Vail. They
are often parked up where the EHU will be built or around the corner near where the hotel expansion will be.
Will these trucks and buses still be allowed to park on the hotel property or will they need to park on the
Frontage road thereby blocking the Frontage road for plowing and skier parking? Or will they be allowed to
park in the commercial parking adjacent to the hotel also rendering plowing difficult. Currently no vehicles are
allowed to be stored overnight in these spaces.
Several years ago we approached the Town about adding 2 guest parking spaces to our lot. We were told that
we could not exceed the GPA required by the town as that percentage of land needed to be landscaped
according to code. We would be disappointed if these huge edifices are approved when all the surrounding
HOA’s are required to follow the Town code and landscaping requirements.To Tenterrace‘s point, the mature
spruce trees would be need to removed and minimal landscaping would be possible.
June 2, 2020 - Page 417 of 772
2
We feel that the sheer size of the EHU building in particular is not in keeping with the current size of the other
buildings on this part of Chamonix Lane contrary to what the developer has tried to prove. It will definitely be
taller and not fit in with the general aesthetic of the neighborhood where all the buildings are set back from the
roadway with landscaping in front. As mentioned in our previous email, we are not completely opposed to the
project but would want the construction to enhance the beauty and safety of our neighborhood.
As locals who have made West Vail our home we hope you will take our concerns to heart and consider the
long term vision for our neighborhood.
Regards Tania Boyd
on behalf of Michael Spiers, Jackie Nickel and Brandywine Trace Condominium Association
June 2, 2020 - Page 418 of 772
April 10, 2020
Mr. Greg Roy, AICP
Planner ll
Community Development Department
Town of Vail
75 South Frontage Road
Vail, CO 81557
My husband (Jay Lauer) and myself (Pat Lauer) are full time Vail residents at 2269 Chamonix Lane, Apt 4, which is behind
the DoubleTree. We have owned our Vail Tenterrace property for approximately seven years so we are very familiar
with the area. We are disappointed with the DoubleTree developer’s newest proposal as the modifications are minimal,
especially given the comments from the PEC committee and public at the March meeting, which we attended.
There are three parts to this developer’s request which are the rezoning, special development district and exterior
alterations. The Community Development Department (Vail planning staff) recommended a denial on all three of the
above requests at the March Vail Town Council meeting. We summarized these areas below to re-emphasize that the
developer has specific criteria that need to be met according to the Vail regulatory codes. Especially for the SDD, the
developer has the burden of proof to meet each design criteria and we think it is clear that their new proposal falls
short.
FAILURE OF ZONE CODE AMENDMENT/REZONING - LIMITED COMMERCIAL SPACE IN VAIL:
Since Vail has a very small commercial area development (1% as pointed out in the Vail Land Use Plan), the commercial
area should stay as currently zoned as there is not enough commercial space allotted for the size of Vail. If you look at
the current commercial space in West Vail, there is very little commercial vacancy. The commercial space we have now
should be protected as to what was originally designated in the Vail Land Use Plan.
At the last PEC meeting, Vail planning staff found that the proposed rezone district amendment did not conform to 4
out of 8 rezoning criteria by the developer (2, 3, 4 and 7 – shown below). Nothing has changed in the rezoning request
in the developer’s modified proposal.
2. The extent to which the zone district amendment is suitable with the existing and potential land uses on the
site and existing and potential surrounding land uses as set out in the town’s adopted planning documents .
3. The extent to which the zone district amendment presents a harmonious, convenient, workable relationship
among land uses consistent with municipal development objectives.
4. The extent to which the zone district amendment provides for the growth of an orderly viable community and
does not constitute spot zoning as the amendment serves the best interests of the community as a whole.
7. The extent to which the zone district amendment demonstrates how conditions have changed since the zoning
designation of the subject property was adopted and is no longer appropriate.
FAILURE ON SPECIAL DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT (SDD) CRITERIA – APPLICANT DID NOT PROVE THEIR BURDEN OF
PROOF FOR EACH REVIEW CRITERIA:
Per section 12-9A-8, under the design criteria and necessary findings, section A states:
June 2, 2020 - Page 419 of 772
SDD Criteria: The following design criteria shall be used as the principal criteria in evaluation the merits of the proposed
special development district. It shall be the burden of the applicant to demonstrate that the submittal material and the
proposed development plan comply with each of the following standards, or demonstrate that one or more of them is
not applicable or that a practical solution consistent with the public interest has been achieved.
With this new proposal, the first criteria, compatibility, will still fail since there were minimal design changes on the EHU
15 apartment complex, so the developer does not comply with each of the SDD criteria.
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.
3. Parking And Loading: Compliance with parking and loading requirements as outlined in chapter 10 of this title.
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.
7. Traffic: A circulation system designed for both vehicles and pedestrians addressing on and off site traffic
circulation.
8. Landscaping: Functional and aesthetic landscaping and open space in order to optimize and preserve natural
features, recreation, views and function.
SDD Deviations: Also, there were a total of 11 deviations requested by the developer of which 3 were denied at the last
meeting. The last deviation will never be met due to the design of the EHU 15 apartment complex.
3. Exception from the requirement that landscaped areas with trees cannot be used for snow storage.
4. Reduction in the amount of snow storage required.
7. Relief from the subdivision requirement that requires a new lot be able to enclose an 80’ by 80’ square.
FAILURE ON EXTERIOR ALTERATION– APPLICANT FAILED TO MEET THEIR CRITERIA:
The Vail planning staff found that the criteria for section 2 below was not met and was denied. The new proposal will
not change as the EHU 15 apartment complex design has barely changed.
2. That the proposal does not otherwise have a significant negative effect on the character of the neighborhood.
The reply from the Vail planning staff stated: The proposal does have a negative effect on the character of the
neighborhood. The height that is proposed is as part of this application is not compatible with this neighborhood. As
discussed in SDD criteria #1, there is a large difference between the residential zone districts across Chamonix Road and
the proposed height of the buildings in this application. With this proposal, that difference is tripled, which is out of
character to any other properties in the neighborhood.
OUR ADDITIONAL COMMENTS:
Lastly, we mentioned (and want to emphasize again) the following points in our previous letter to PEC and in the March
meeting:
June 2, 2020 - Page 420 of 772
Density of the Complex: The number of people (guests, employees and tenants) at this entire complex will be over
double the current capacity (386 people) with a new maximum capacity of 782 people. We believe this is excessively
high density during the peak visitor time periods and definitely doesn’t benefit our neighborhood. There would be
increased pedestrian and vehicle traffic in the area with the employee housing development.
Excessive Stress on Our Public Bus System: Currently, the DoubleTree has 2 shuttle buses that each hold 14 people. If
you figure the shuttles can only move 112 people per hour (4 round trips per shuttle in an hour), then the DoubleTree
guests, employees and residents during the busy winter hotel time periods (Saturdays, Christmas/New Years, President’s
Week, March spring breaks, winter weekends and powder snow days) will be utilizing our public bus system to get to
Vail Resort instead of waiting for the hotel’s shuttle buses. When people have the option of less than a 1 minute walk to
get to the Pine Ridge bus stop, we think it will put excessive pressure on our already congested public bus system. The
public buses during these peak time periods are currently very full, with standing room only once you go to the next one
or two shuttle bus stops down from Pine Ridge.
Lack of Adequate Parking in the 15 EHU building: With only 16 parking spots for 34 bedrooms (maximum of 98 people),
the parking is inadequate. The McDowell Engineering performed a parking needs analysis at Lion’s Ridge, which is not a
good comparison as the location is substantially different compared to the DoubleTree location. Having only 16 parking
spots for this many people seems unrealistic.
Lack of Adequate Parking for DoubleTree Employees: With only 4 employee spaces, this is inadequate parking for a
hotel expansion this size. Our concern is that employees driving cars to work will park their vehicles in other commercial
spots to the east of the DoubleTree hotel or in our residential building’s parking areas immediately behind the
DoubleTree on Chamonix Lane.
Destruction of the Neighborhood’s Mature Spruce Trees: This project is going to remove and destroy the atheistic
beauty of the mature spruce trees that line Chamonix Lane. These spruce trees are “trophy” trees that can’t be
replaced. Replanting with smaller trees doesn’t have the screening impact as well as the majestic beauty of these
mature spruce trees. It changes the character of our neighborhood.
No Penalty if the Project is not Completed in 15 Months: The last remodel at the hotel a couple of years ago went way
over the projected time period to be finished. It took them well over two years to remodel the inside and do some
minor exterior alterations. We are concerned that if this development goes through, our neighborhood will suffer for
years with dirt and noisy construction and increased congestion from the construction workforce. The developer told us
that they estimated it would take 15 months to complete this project. If this project is approved, there needs to be
some agreement between the developer and the Town of Vail that the project will be completed in the agreed upon
time so our neighborhood is not compromised and disrupted for an unreasonable time period.
Thank you for your time and consideration in reading our concerns about this proposed development.
Sincerely,
Jay and Pat Lauer
2269 Chamonix Ln Apt 4,
Vail, CO 81557
plauer@sisna.com
June 2, 2020 - Page 421 of 772
1
Ashley Brown
From:MICHAEL SPIERS <mspiersy@msn.com>
Sent:Monday, April 13, 2020 12:07 PM
To:Greg Roy
Cc:tania boyd
Subject:Highline West Vail Expansion
Dear Greg Roy, I am writing to you to highlight my concerns about the Double Tree expansion in West Vail. Many of my
neighbors in the area have expressed their concerns over several aspects of the development which I am sure you have
received.
My particular focus is on the size of the employee housing unit along Chamonix Lane. Having lived here for 25 years we
all realize the importance of employee housing. I attended several of the preliminary meetings when the Highline
developers were asking for feedback from the neighborhood. We expressed to them that we thought the height of the
EHU would completely shade the street on Chamonix Lane, cause problems for snow Removal, and is totally out of
character with the other buildings in the neighborhood. We suggested to them that perhaps they could reduce the
height of the EHU by one floor as a compromise and then the neighborhood would be more likely to get behind this
development. Unfortunately in the latest plans that they are presenting today most of the building is still at four stories
high and in fact the skyline will now look like a jigsaw puzzle. None of our concerns about the aesthetics were addressed
either.
I have taken several photographs of buildings along the south side of Chamonix Lane to illustrate the height
discrepancies with the rest of the neighborhood. Unfortunately because of the remote nature of the upcoming meeting I
won’t be able to present this to the committee but have included them here for your perusal.
As you can see the buildings along the south side of Chamonix Lane consist mostly of one and two story buildings with
the highest point above the road being approximately 20 feet. As I am sure you are aware the EHU building rises 3
Stories above road level(36ft) and has four levels total.The building is also very thin so what we have is a monolith
towering over Chamonix ln. I believe a reasonable solution here would be to reduce this to a 3 level building total.This
would only slightly affect the number of units in the EHU but would be way more in keeping with the size of other
buildings in the neighborhood. This would not only be more aesthetically pleasing but would not block the views of the 3
apartment buildings that are directly behind the Doubletree and are extremely affected by the development as it is now.
Hopefully I will be able to express these concerns at today's meeting,Thank you for time, Regards, Mike Spiers
Get Outlook for iOS
June 2, 2020 - Page 422 of 772
June 2, 2020 - Page 423 of 772
June 2, 2020 - Page 424 of 772
June 2, 2020 - Page 425 of 772
June 2, 2020 - Page 426 of 772
June 2, 2020 - Page 427 of 772
From: Barry Davis <williambarrydavis@gmail.com>
Date: March 9, 2020 at 10:58:56 AM MDT
To: jspence@vailgov.com, George Ruther <GRuther@vailgov.com>, Dave Chapin
<DChapin@vailgov.com>
Subject: Highline by DoubleTree Support
Dear Mayor Chapin, Mr. Ruther and Mr. Spence:
My name is Barry Davis and my family and I live in the Chamonix Town homes right across the street
from the Highline / DoubleTree.
I want to thank the hotel ownership and development team for hosting open houses and providing
information about their proposal. I understand they've even met with neighbors who were concerned
about their views.
As a very engaged community member, I appreciate the hotel wanting to enhance the Vail economy
with an additional 79 rooms - the DoubleTree is an important brand for many of our guests.
And as a proud resident of deed-restricted housing allowing my young family to live, work and go to pre-
school in Vail, I am fully supportive of the proposed 16-unit apartment building and its design that fits in
well with our West Vail neighborhood. Our community is a leader when it comes to affordable and
workforce housing and to have this hotel operator step up and do the right thing is huge public benefit.
This project has my support and I hope PEC and the Council approves this, as well.
Thank you,
Barry Davis
June 2, 2020 - Page 428 of 772
From: Brian Nolan <brian@group970.com>
Sent: Friday, March 6, 2020 4:44 PM
To: Jonathan Spence <JSpence@vailgov.com>; Dave Chapin <DChapin@vailgov.com>
Subject: Blue Moose support
Dear Mayor Chapin and Mr. Spence:
As a longtime Vail business owner and active participant on the Vail Economic Advisory Council, I'd like
to convey my support for the proposed 79 new hotel rooms at Highline, a DoubleTree by Hilton, in West
Vail. The DoubleTree should be commended for proactively making significant upgrades recently and
now wanting to further contribute to our local economy with these rooms.
Further, what a terrific neighborhood to in-fill with incremental workforce housing, meeting another
community priority.
Please lend your support in approving the applications before you.
Brian Nolan
Blue Moose Pizza
Lionshead Arrabelle
Vail
Brian Nolan
GROUP970 | FOOD.DRINK.ADVENTURE.
Blue Moose Vail | Blue Moose Beaver Creek
63 Avondale Lane, Suite C-1, PO Box 5549, Beaver Creek, CO 81620
(P) 970.845.0545 (F) 970.845.8444 (E) brian@group970.com
June 2, 2020 - Page 429 of 772
June 2, 2020 - Page 430 of 772
From:
2239 A & B, 2241A & B
Vail, CO 81657
March 7, 2020
To:
Mr. Greg Roy, AICP
Planner ll
Community Development Department
Town of Vail
75 South Frontage Road
Vail, CO 81657
Dear Mr. Roy,
This letter is concerning the proposed DoubleTree Expansion and especially the plan to build
employee housing on the site. Our family has owned our home at 2239 B Chamonix Ln for 20
years. Our home is located in the Tall Pines development directly north of the Doubletree
Hotel. We are members of the Tall Pines HOA (4 homeowners in the Tall Pines HOA). We are
regular riders of the town bus and frequent the West Vail stores and restaurants; we know the
West Vail area very well and have stayed here all these years because of the less populated and
hectic nature of the neighborhood. We are not opposed to reasonable expansion of the hotel,
but we do sincerely believe the proposed plan is too aggressive and has not been proper ly
vetted with the residents of the neighborhood.
Therefore, our family and the Tall Pines HOA oppose this development as it is currently
proposed.
We would like to see a comprehensive and long-term plan for West Vail development that
incorporates traffic planning, pedestrian safety, allocation of parks and open space, noise
reduction, sidewalks, bike lanes, trails, trees and shrubbery, protecting our views, minimizing
environmental impact, etc. We would like to see more thought given to maintaining th e
character of the West Vail neighborhood. We expect the city planning and community
development departments to represent the needs of the entire community not cater to
developers and Vail Associates. So far, this plan is woefully deficient in many of th ese areas.
We plan to attend the meeting on March 9th and hope these issues are discussed and this
project is not forced on our neighborhood.
We appreciate your consideration of our family, the Tall Pines HOA and the West Vail
community’s input to this proposed project. We also appreciate the effort that the Vail
June 2, 2020 - Page 431 of 772
Development Team has put into the design and planning of this project, but we strongly believe
a project of this magnitude and impact on the neighborhood requires a more comprehensive
and thoughtful approach.
To reiterate, we are not opposed to reasonable development of the Doubletree property, but
we are strongly opposed to this project as it is currently proposed.
Sincerely,
Tall Pines HOA:
Kathy Standage & Mike Oldham- 2239B Chamonix Lane
Plowden Bridges & Vaughn Bollard- 2239A Chamonix Lane
Judy & Charles Goldman, 2241B Chamonix Lane
Evan Noyes, 2241A Chamonix Lane
June 2, 2020 - Page 432 of 772
I as Founder and Co-Chair of the Eagle County Housing Task
Force (ECOHTF) support the Highline Project in West Vail
without reservations. The project proposes the construction of
an additional 79 hotel rooms, approximately 4,000SF of new
conference space, an employee housing apartment building
consisting of 16 units with a total of 38 bedrooms and a 12
bedroom employee housing dorm in the existing lodge
commercial space. I believe that many visitors to Town will
benefit from additional moderately priced lodging and the need
for additional workforce housing is clear to all of us! The
ECOHTF believes the location is very good given its proximity to
amenities, services and transportation. This project would
provide a public benefit to the Vail community and economy.
As a resident of West Vail I believe the architectural design will
enhance the quality of the property and the view for
neighboring properties.
Bobby Lipnick, Co-Chair, ECOHTF
Robert N. Lipnick, M.D., MBA, LEED AP
Kogod School of Business
Adjunct Faculty
202-223-1080 ext.105
June 2, 2020 - Page 433 of 772
June 2, 2020 - Page 434 of 772
P L ANNI NG AND E NV I RO NM E NTAL C O M M I S S I O N
December 9, 2019, 1:00 P M
Town Council C hambers
75 S. F rontage Road - Vail, Colorado, 81657
1.Call to Order
1.1.Attendance
Present: Brian Gillette, Rollie Kjesbo, Ludwig Kurz, J ohn-Ryan Lockman,
Karen Perez, Pete Seibert
Absent: Pam Hopkins
1.2.Swearing I n New Member
New Member Pete Seibert was sworn in by the Town Clerk
1.3.Election of Officers
Brian Gillette moved to appoint Ludwig Kurz as Chair. Rollie Kjesbo
seconded the motion and it passed (6-0).
Absent:(1)Hopkins
Brian Gillette moved to appoint Karen Perez as Vice Chair. Rollie Kjesbo
seconded the motion and it passed (6-0).
Absent:(1)Hopkins
2.Main Agenda
2.1.A request for a recommendation to the Vail Town Council for a zone district
boundary amendment, pursuant to Section 12-3-7, Amendment, Vail Town
Code, to allow for the rezoning of 2211 North Frontage Road W est which is
composed of Tract C, Lot 1 Lot 2, and Lot 3 Vail Das Schone Filing No. 1
and Lot 1, Vail Das Schone Filing 3, from the Commercial Core 3 (C C3)
District to the Public Accommodation-2 (PA-2) District and setting forth
details in regard thereto. (P E C19-0047)
This item will be heard concurrently with P E C19-0046 and P E C19-0048.
45 min.
Applicant:TNRE F I I I Bravo Vail L L C W idewaters Group I nc., represented
by Mauriello Planning Group
Planner:Greg Roy
2.1, 2.2, & 2.3 will all be heard concurrently.
Chairman Kurz: Clarified that the 3 items are all being heard as
worksessions today.
Planner Roy: Not looking for any motion today, just looking for feedback
from the P E C. Started by introducing the location of the site and the existing
June 2, 2020 - Page 435 of 772
conditions. Described an increase in accommodation units and the addition
of E HUs and a new building only for housing E HUs. Roy then described the
reason for the rezoning to PA-2 and the criteria for the rezoning. Lodges
are not allowed in the current C C3 zoning. Roy then went on to describe the
application for a Special Development District. This will help the proposal
reach compliance with the Code with regard to parking requirements.
Commissioner Lockman: Asked staff to clarify “nonconforming”
Roy: The hotel was built before it was annexed into the Town. W hen it was
annexed into the Town under C C3 it became legally nonconforming with
respect to use. This means that the current development can be maintained
but not expanded under the current zoning.
Dominic Mauriello: Began by introducing his team.
Mark Mutkoski: I ntroduced himself by describing his history visiting Vail. He
then described the current state of the Hotel renovation. Also described the
chain of ownership until now including his role as the Owner Representative.
Described how they reinvigorated the property already in order to bring it in
line with the Town’s standards. The current hotel is not the highest and best
use for the property.
Mauriello: Continued to describe the site as it exists today. Pointed out
several largely unutilized areas of the site and the surrounding commercial
uses. Mauriello then began to describe the proposed additions to the site.
Seventy-nine (79) net new accessory units, 19 limited-service lodge units
(L S L Us), 12 dormitory units, and 16 employee housing units of 2-3
bedrooms. Two-hundred-twenty-three (223) parking spaces proposed,
however this number will change due to some Fire Department concerns.
From here, the applicant moved on to describe the proposed hotel units
themselves. The applicant also provided a number of renderings, including
some neighboring view renderings.
Commissioner Perez: Asked if these renderings showed both buildings.
Mauriello: I ndicated that they did, but also stated that other angles showing
more of both buildings could be provided in the future. Mauriello then went
on to describe how the development would align with the goals of the Town.
He then described the hotel’s history and how this relates to the current non-
conformities. This property has both nonconforming structures and
nonconforming uses. Nonconforming structures cannot have their non-
conformity expanded upon, but compliant additions and alterations are
permitted by the code. Nonconforming uses effectively stop all additions to
the nonconforming use. Current nonconformities include building height,
density, parking, and internal landscaping. W ith respect to use, hotels and
dwelling units are not permitted in the C C3 zone district, hence the rezoning
request. The PA-2 zone district is more applicable to this development. The
special development district is being proposed primarily in order to address
some parking compliance difficulties. The parking requirements for the PA-2
would be 250 spaces, but 223 are being proposed. One reason for this
proposed reduced parking has to do with the proposed meeting space on
site. As attendees to this conference space would primarily be lodged within
the Highline Hotel, there is a large overlap between the parking necessary
for the conference space and the parking necessary for the hotel itself.
Mentioned that the E HU building is creating the need for some of these
deviations from the code, so there is a question regarding the value of E HUs
June 2, 2020 - Page 436 of 772
to the Town vs the standards that relief is being requested from. Available
land for Employee Housing is very limited in Vail. A Public Open House was
hosted by the applicant in early December to share the proposed
development to the neighboring public. Mauriello then addressed some of the
concerns mentioned by staff in their memorandum to the Commission.
Addressed concerns related to the increased density in the area, the
rezoning to PA-2 in an area with limited commercial services, and parking
deviations from what is required by the Code.
Perez: The SDD is Vail’s equivalent of a Planned building group. What is
the purpose of the rezoning AND an SDD?
Mauriello: In Vail, an SDD is an overlay as opposed to a replacement for a
rezoning district. The SDD cannot violate the allowed uses of the underlying
zone district.
Perez: Clarified that she was referring to planned building groups as
opposed to a planned unit development.
Mauriello: Stated that it made sense for them to propose both in order to
bring the hotel into compliance and to allow for the proposed EHU building.
Lockman: Asked a question about an existing SDD on the property.
Mauriello: Stated that this SDD was no longer active.
Lockman: Directed staff to correct this in future memos.
Kurz: Asked about the specific benefit to the town for the proposed SDD.
Mauriello: Talked about the need to increase hotel units in Vail. The Town
has lost some significant hotel units in recent history. The SDD will also
facilitate the addition of more EHUs, this is not required for the project, but
the applicant feels this a net benefit for the Town.
Kurz: Asked about the upcoming West Vail Master Plan.
Matt Gennett: Stated that staff will be going in front of Town Council to
get direction on the Master Plan scope on December 17. This Master
Plan process is expected to take a calendar year.
Mauriello: There was a previous attempt to improve this property, but it was
recommended they wait for a previous West Vail Master Plan effort. This
Master Plan effort fell through, so the applicant would like to avoid risking
this happening again to the property owner.
Kjesbo: Felt that the EHUs are being waved as a carrot for this application
but saw that the EHU building could be sold off.
Mauriello: This was stated in order to add some flexibility.
Kjesbo: Felt that the employee housing needs to be tied in with the rest of
the project to avoid the EHUs being sold off and never being developed.
Perez: The three applications makes it unclear what is being proposed and
what the timing will be for this project. It also obfuscates the benefit to the
Town and the community.
June 2, 2020 - Page 437 of 772
Mauriello: Stated that the proposed benefits were well stated in the proposal.
Perez: Need to look at how the stated benefits to the Town relate to the
proposed deviations from the code.
Lockman: Had a question regarding the proposed height, as staff and the
applicant had a disagreement on how the height should be measured.
Mauriello: Showed a rendering of the buildings. Stated that the height is
strictly compliant with the code as some of the roof forms have been
staggered in order to meet compliance.
Perez: I t would also be helpful to know how high the buildings would be
above Chamonix Rd. Feels that existing residents are concerned about the
view.
Lockman: Had a question about the parking and valet.
Mauriello: I ndicated that most units, including the E HU units, would be using
the valet parking. Also, there will be a stairwell and sidewalk from the E HU
building leading down to the rest of the development and Frontage Rd.
Kurz then opened the floor for public comment.
Molly Rabin Concerned about density in West Vail. Glad that the parking is
being kept off of Chamonix. There are no sidewalks on Chamonix, so an
increase in development will create a greater safety issue. Asked for some
form of density study.
Mike Spiers: Representing Brandywine Trace Condominiums behind this
development. The proposed buildings dwarf the existing. There is no building
of the scale of the E HU unit on Chamonix. Mentioned that some affected
views not shown in the application would be potentially significant.
J im Pike: Echoing Mike’s comments. Specifically mentioned how some
impacted views were not represented in the meeting. Thinks it would also be
a great opportunity to add solar to these buildings.
Pam Stenmark: Expressed gratitude for the questions presented by the
P E C.
Public Comments closed.
Kjesbo: Stated that his E HU concerns were already mentioned. W ants the
E HU building to be in conjunction with the rest of the site. Could likely
support the deviation from parking requirements. Needs a sun/shade
analysis. Need references to new and existing heights. Feels PA-2 zoning is
likely the correct zoning here. Likes the idea of adding a sidewalk heading
towards the Frontage Road.
Gillette: Thinks of something grander than this for the redevelopment of W est
Vail. Thinks the planning for W est Vail should be done first before this.
Doing the Master Plan right, might help direct this development to more
accurately reflect Town goals. Sees this area being redeveloped as multiuse
in the future. Approving the development like this may hamper redevelopment
efforts in the rest of W est Vail.
June 2, 2020 - Page 438 of 772
Perez: Also indicated that the development needs to be developed
comprehensively, needs a timeline as well. Need to make sure that the
applicant is meeting the requirements of an S D D. Wants to also see a
sun/shade analysis and more information on building heights. Concerned
that with the conference center not being utilized much now, that increasing
the conference space and needs is unnecessary.
Seibert: Liked how this would solve some nonconforming use. Has a
concern with the proposed valet parking for the E HUs. A large number of
employees are likely to need their cars at the same time.
Lockman: Echoed the concerns of Perez regarding the expanded
conference space. Likes the idea of converting the underutilized commercial
space into employee dorms, however, he also needed to see a parking plan
for the E HUs. Likes the effort to reduce nonconforming uses. Also
struggling with this project in the absence of a W est Vail Master Plan. The
Master Plan would help describe the appropriate density and bulk and mass
for this site. I mproving circulation and safety along Chamonix could be an
additional public benefit of this project.
Kurz: Also concerned about this project going ahead of the West Vail
Master Plan. However, in responding just to the project that is before the
commission, Kurz echoes Kjesbo’s comments. One could call the proposed
“carrot” of the E HUs as a “quid pro quo.” I mportant that sensitivity toward
the surrounding neighborhood is shown. Also wants sun/shade analysis.
Largely neutral on parking now but would like to see parking maximized.
Brian Gillette moved to continue to J anuary 13, 2019. Rollie Kjesbo
seconded the motion and it passed (6-0).
Absent:(1)Hopkins
2.2.A request for a recommendation to the Vail Town Council of an application
establishing Special Development District No. 42 (Highline Hotel Renovation
2019), pursuant to Section 12-9(A), Special Development Districts, Vail
Town Code, to allow for the development of a hotel addition to add 79
accommodation units, convert 19 existing dwelling units to 19 limited service
lodge units, create a 12 unit E HU dormitory, remove office space, add
conference space and build 16 unit employee housing apartment building,
and related uses and improvements, located at 2211 North Frontage Road
West which is composed of Tract C, Lot 1, Lot 2, and Lot 3 Vail Das
Schone Filing No. 1 and Lot 1, Vail Das Schone Filing 3, and setting forth
details in regard thereto. (P E C19-0048)
This item will be heard concurrently with P E C19-0047 and P E C19-0046.
Applicant:TNRE F I I I Bravo Vail L L C W idewaters Group I nc., represented
by Mauriello Planning Group
Planner:Greg Roy
Brian Gillette moved to continue to J anuary 13, 2019. Rollie Kjesbo
seconded the motion and it passed (6-0).
Absent:(1)Hopkins
2.3.A request for review of an Exterior Alteration, pursuant to Section 12-7J -12,
Exterior Alterations or Modifications, Vail Town Code, to allow for
construction of a hotel addition and an E HU apartment building, located at
June 2, 2020 - Page 439 of 772
2211 North Frontage Road West which is composed of Tract C, Lot 1, Lot
2, and Lot 3 Vail Das Schone Filing No. 1 and Lot 1, Vail Das Schone
Filing 3, and setting forth details in regard thereto. (P E C19-0046)
This item will be heard concurrently with P E C19-0047 and P E C19-0048.
Applicant:TNRE F I I I Bravo Vail L L C W idewaters Group I nc., represented
by Mauriello Planning Group
Planner:Greg Roy
Brian Gillette moved to continue to J anuary 13, 2019. Rollie Kjesbo
seconded the motion and it passed (6-0).
Absent:(1)Hopkins
2.4.A request for review of a Conditional Use Permit, pursuant to Section 12-
16, Conditional Use Permits, Vail Town Code, to allow for the installation of
an outdoor dining patio, located at 254 Bridge Street Unit C/Lot C & L,
Block 5C, Vail Village Filing 1, and setting forth details in regard thereto.
(P E C19-0049)
20 min.
Applicant:Mt. Belvedere 45 LLC North Bridge Venture Partners,
represented by Resort Design Architects
Planner:J onathan Spence
1. This Conditional Use Permit approval is contingent upon the applicant
obtaining Town of Vail approval of an associated design review
application.
2. The applicant shall operate the outdoor patio in a manner generally
consistent with the approved site plan dated 07/19/2019.
Chairman Kurz: Moved this item to the front of the Main Agenda
Planner Spence: Began by explaining the need for a C UP for an outdoor
patio in Vail Village. This proposed outdoor patio is entirely within private
property. Spence then went on to explain some of the proposed
improvements. Public W orks and Fire Department have both reviewed and
found no issues.
Tom Braun: Began by introducing his team members present at the meeting.
During construction of Gorsuch, the unit below vacated, so the new proposal
is for a new café on the street level. The C UP is only for the patio with
outdoor seating and firepits. No food service will occur outside, patrons will
have to order inside and bring items out to the patio.
No Public Comment.
Commissioner Kjesbo: No additional comment
Commissioner Gillette: No additional comment
Commissioner Perez: Asked about how far the patio extends.
Planner Spence showed a diagram demonstrating the extent of the patio.
Perez: Concerned about the amount of clutter in the corridor. The corridor
is already narrow and ski racks also are set out in this area. The proposed
patio will be put right in this area.
Spence: Felt that the patio will be an overall improvement to the area over
the ski racks.
Commissioner Seibert: No additional comment
Commissioner Lockman: No additional comment.
J ohn-Ryan Lockman moved to approve with conditions. Rollie Kjesbo
seconded the motion and it passed (6-0).
Absent:(1)Hopkins
June 2, 2020 - Page 440 of 772
2.5.A request for the review of a variance from Section 12-6D-8, Density
Control, Vail Town Code, to allow for a variance to the requirement that a
secondary unit in the Two-Family Primary/Secondary Residential zone
district not exceed 40% of allowable site GRFA, and a request for the review
of a variance from Section 12-15-3, Definition, Calculation, and Exclusions,
Vail Town Code, to allow for a variance to the stipulation that basement
GRFA deductions apply only to floors within six vertical feet of the lowest
level of a structure, both in accordance with the provisions of Section 12-17,
Variances, Vail Town Code, located at 775 Potato Patch Drive/Lot 19, Block
1, Vail Potato Patch Filing 1, and setting forth details in regard thereto.
(P E C19-0050)
The applicant has requested this item be tabled to J anuary 13, 2020.
5 min.
Applicant:Scott Ryan & Foster Gillett, represented by Mauriello Planning
Group
Planner:Erik Gates
Karen Perez moved to table to J anuary 13, 2019. Brian Gillette seconded
the motion and it passed (6-0).
Absent:(1)Hopkins
2.6.A request for review of a variance from Section 14-6-7, Retaining Walls,
Vail Town Code, pursuant to Title 12 Chapter 17, Variances, Vail Town
Code, to allow for a retaining wall in excess of six (6) feet tall at the Town of
Vail Public Works facility located at 1289 Elkhorn Drive/Unplatted, and
setting forth details in regard thereto. (P E C19-0041)
45 min.
Applicant:Town of Vail, represented by Greg Hall
Planner:Erik Gates
1. Construction of the shoring wall and rockfall berm shall be limited to
the months of J une to November, unless a consultation with Colorado
Parks and W ildlife reveals a need to adjust this window.
Planner Erik Gates recapped the process on how the application got to the
current meeting. Third meeting before P E C. Master plan schedule, and
process. Applications today are for the streets building expansion and the
retaining wall. Both need C UP due to being in the General Use Zone
District.
Changes from last meeting are the comments from C P W on this application
and the E I R submitted. Staff added another condition that the construction
of the wall be limited to J une to November. Another comment from C P W
was to prohibit dogs, which is already a policy at the Public Works site and
Buzzard Park units.
Greg Hall introduced Rick Kahn the wildlife biologists. Streets building will be
pushed off until 2021 due to schedule. Gives time to monitor the site this
winter and next winter. I f approved, the wall, berm, and utilities would
hopefully be built next summer.
Gillette – Can you not build the wall and do the streets building?
Hall – Yes, but severely limits parking.
Kahn – Professional wildlife biologist hired to consult on this project and
Booth Heights for context. General comments, a lot of interests in the sheep
June 2, 2020 - Page 441 of 772
right now. People are comparing it to Booth Heights, and there are
differences and similarities. Both projects in overall winter range of S2 native
herd. Herd is not doing well due to bad winters and hasn’t picked back up to
former levels. Very small winter range, as typical of sheep in high altitudes.
Booth Creek area is typically ewes and rams. The town area is exclusively
used by rams. Ewes are much less mobile and tied into steep areas to stay
away from mountain lions. W inter range for ewes much more critical. Rams
are more mobile, bigger, and less susceptible to change in landscape. Site
is used intermittently, and 3-4 times in the last few years. Not every winter
such as last year when there was a big snow layering. Groups segregate by
sexes during the winter. Rams could be attracted to salt storage or
something to attract them to the site. Site has not always been historically
occupied by sheep. Less than ideal information since there are a lack of
studies. This is not at all unusual. Made an observation during the process
that the area of the rockfall berm and solar that would be occupied and lost,
occurs in a small narrow band of the sheep habitat. Not a significant loss.
Biggest concern would be that this greens up earlier in the spring due to
non-native grasses. W inter is a period where they starve and lose weight.
They are attracted to that disturbed area with non-native grasses. Loss of
area of disturbed area is not a big concern. Key is that the disturbed areas
needs to be located near escape cover and they are. This site has had
extensive human activity for 40-50 years. Not new area loss, but small
disturbance of an already active site. The solar array extends to the west a
couple hundred yards that is not heavily disturbed yet. No literature on the
topic of solar array disturbance to sheep. Very narrow area that could have
small impact. Losing native vegetation could be potentially problematic.
Cumulative impacts unknown. W ith mitigation and C P W ’s recommended
mitigation it can be managed to minimize impact. As it sits, with available
information, impacts will be minimal and mitigatable.
Perez – Do you think the proposed condition from staff is sufficient or is
more required?
Kahn – J une thru November makes a lot of sense. I t depends on if the
sheep are present.
Gillette – How do we get to a collar study?
Kahn – Money
Gillette – How much?
Kahn – For state-of-the-art collar study it could be $500,000. A lot of the
habitat work would need to be on the US FS land. Habitat improvement would
be better done by Booth Heights. There could still be some done on this site.
Gillette – Of $500,000 how much is collar and how much is emergency
funds?
Kahn – $150,000 for collar and $100,000 for personnel. The rest would be
money in the bank for reaction to what was discovered during that study.
This one herd is not #1 on the books for C P W and they would need money
to make something happen soon.
Gillette – W hat kind of checks would you need for habitat work.
Kahn – Three things, fertilization, fire, and hand trimming and setback of
June 2, 2020 - Page 442 of 772
vegetation. I don’t have figures, but you’re talking about hundreds of
thousands of dollars to do all the sites, maybe $1 million.
Gillette – On a yearly basis, what would be the most important?
Kahn – Collar and some habitat would be best.
Gillette – So $250,000 for collar and another $250,000 for habitat.
Kahn – I f you maintain the status quo and development you can expect the
herd to continue to be affected.
Gillette – So let’s say $250,000 a year for the next 10 years, do you think
this would affect this herd?
Kahn – Yes, it would dramatically lower the risk of extirpation.
Gillette - W hat’s the number one thing you can do to increase herd
numbers?
Kahn – Limit disturbance, resetting habitat in winter range specifically and
summer range. Not all of which is in the purview of Town of Vail.
Gillette – So the plan to burn hasn’t happened after it was planned for 20
years. W hy didn’t that happen?
Kahn – I don’t think the town was behind it because of the concern of fire.
The Forest Service could do it if they needed to. I t is the initiative of leaders
at district level that needs to happen.
Gillette – I f the Town wants to be a lobbyist, how would they do that? Use
staff, hire someone?
Kahn – Citizenry has to consent moving forward. There are a variety of
ways moving forward.
Lockman – I s there a recommendation on the terraced retaining wall vs non-
terraced wall. Does one have more benefits?
Kahn – I think in the long term keeping the sheep out of habited area is the
best option. Non-terraced wall does more of a job keeping them out. W e
don’t want to see them on I -70. Adding a fence is not a huge deal as they
can get around it.
Gillette – So no fence, correct?
Kahn – No, it wouldn’t do a lot, and you don’t want to keep them out of the
disturbed sites that could give them early spring greenery. Large fences not
a solution to this problem.
Kurz – We got a letter from C P W , should we hear them now or at public
comment.
Gillette – Let’s bring C P W up so we can ask questions instead of during
public comment.
Duval – C P W . This is a remarkably different proposal from what you’ve
June 2, 2020 - Page 443 of 772
heard before. This is a small review of a limited area. For me, I have to view
it through a wholistic lens where we look at miles around for the effect.
Limited habitat right now, that needs to be treated as a valuable and finite
resource.
Gillette – Any comments on the numbers?
Duval – Those sound good, but mitigation is not a one and done deal. It is a
concerted effort and needs to be done in perpetuity. In conjunction with
habitat, contingency and collars, then a $500,000 starts to get you to that
area.
Gillette – What is the value of the collar study? What are we learning?
Duval – It says whether the mitigation is working, and what habitat use looks
like. Where are they congregating. We’re operating on old information on
where they are utilizing the landscape based on our best guesses.
Gillette – We don’t know the extent of the problem is what you’re saying?
Isn’t the solution always doing mitigation?
Duval – But where is the question. Do we focus in the middle or on the
edges? Where are they actually using the landscape?
Public Comment
Larry Stewart, East Vail
I just heard for the first time today that the building is not going to be built
until 2021, so why are we approving that now? We have more time to do
more observations between then. There is no time limit for when the streets
building could get built. They could start tomorrow. One question you need to
address is why are we approving the CUP today until we can study it since it
won’t be built until later? I want this to be built in the most effective way.
There is a dearth of information on how the sheep are using the site. This
points towards caution, since there is no do over. They are already stressed
and compressed. I think fencing would be a good idea to keep the sheep out
and the humans from entering the hills. What you want to accomplish here is
to keep the human activities from the sheep. You could also require
landscaped screening to keep them out. They don’t like cover and would
keep them out. Why isn’t there a condition that no dogs are allowed on the
site. That should be part of the approval since the masterplan and comments
are not enforceable. I implore you not to look at this just as a variance on a
retaining wall and building, but the larger impact on the herd. No room for
error. This has to be gotten right.
Tom Vucich, 4957 Juniper Lane
You expressed at the last meeting that you wanted a more comprehensive
view and thank you. The only difference is the CPW statement. **reads
from CPW comments** You all touched on it two weeks ago about wanting a
more comprehensive plan. It is time that you and the town put a specific
number and timeline on this project and how to address the impacts to the
herd.
Patti Langmaid, 2940 Manns Ranch Road
On the burn, one of the reasons that the neighbors were opposed was
because there was an escaped forest service burn that burned down a
couple houses in Colorado. I think now, we are more savvy and that with the
June 2, 2020 - Page 444 of 772
right conditions a burn would be acceptable.
Blondie Vucich, East Vail
Bill was unable to be here, so I wanted to read a couple sentences from the
public comment he submitted **reads from letter**.
Close public comment
Open Commissioner Comments
Lockman – Thanks C P W for memorandum. I ’m struggling here on this one
with all of the dialogue. I would implore our elected officials to do something
on this issue. This board faces challenging decisions that impact wildlife.
W hether that is putting specific funding towards it or making a plan. On the
retaining wall, the variance for the non-terraced wall makes the most sense.
I f we look at the criteria of the application, I think public works has met all
the items needed for approval.
Seibert – I concur with the need for a more comprehensive plan. We need
to get to a more proactive point, but not what is before us today. The vertical
wall makes more sense to save hillside and doesn’t tempt a sheep to come
down. I t’s a small site, so they will get around a fence. I agree on the
prohibition of dogs and possibly adding it as a condition. On timing, they
need this approval so they can meet the window even if they aren’t doing the
whole building.
Perez – I want to know where the mitigation plan is, and what the plan is.
We have to treat the applicants the same, in particular criteria #2 **quotes
criteria**. The Booth Height project had many conditions of approval related
to the sheep herd, and this site is only 2 miles away from Booth Heights. I
don’t see how we are treating these sites with consistency. There is no real
mitigation plan here. I f we approve now, we aren’t going there with a
comprehensive view. I don’t think this conforms today. W ould vote against.
Gillette – Agree with Perez 100%. W e need this building to provide bus
service and snow removal service. The mitigation effort should be part of this
plan. We need to do some significant study and dedication half a million
towards it. W e need to lobby congress to get this stuff done, and we need to
have this money in place, and we need to have Council fund this. Kristen
where are we with this?
Kristen Bertuglia – The Town had to get a strategic plan and divvy up what
we could do on this. We did some cutting and stacking. W e had a burn plan
approved, but the presence of sheep delayed it. We’ve had several meetings
with the Forest Service but heard that burning for wildlife was not supportive
there. W e continue to look at the option for a larger burn but cannot do that
due to the burn in designated wilderness area. W e’ve got $100,000 this year
to do some effort. W hat we want to do is find what the best thing to do for
these sheep.
Gillette – W hat’s next?
Bertuglia – Rewrite the mitigation plan from the 90s to today’s conditions.
Hopefully in the next couple months.
Gillette – Greg, what do you need? I f we separate the wall and building?
Hall – Based on time limits, getting materials ready and making construction
June 2, 2020 - Page 445 of 772
go quickly is why we need another year. We couldn’t have everything done
next year. No issues on dog prohibition. By waiting one more year we have
more time for observation. For collaring there are a lot of costs that go in as
well as staff. We are waiting for a comprehensive study to do some
mitigation, instead of doing something that won’t be as effective. I don’t have
the $250,000 budget to put towards something like this, as Town Council
does. W ith regard to construction, get a contract, get final approval, we
need that longer time period to get it done.
Kurz – On dog rules, how are they being adhered to and controlled, what
about recreation on the hill, have they done a ski jump that you are aware
of?
Hall – Three-year leases with no pets, if we find one then they’re gone.
Limited approval for dogs when it comes to vet visits (for employee pet
emergencies). As for a ski jump, there might have been, but I hadn’t seen
anything back there except one hiker.
Gillette – Kristen, is the collar study part of your funding?
Bertuglia – Depends on the mitigation plan.
Gillette – J ust so Council understands the importance of this stuff I suggest
we break this up and get the wall and the berm approved and hold them
hostage on the building. J ust to let them know that it is important to us, we’ll
hold them hostage on the one part. I t adds to the importance of getting the
long term plan done.
Lockman – Does that affect your ability to operate Greg?
Hall – Limits us to the timeline of the plan.
Kjesbo – I f we disturb habitat, we need to build it somewhere. W e need a
mitigation plan that is equal at the same time. I ’d like to see the Forest
Service be part of that, but we can’t wait on them. W e need it defined from
council and staff what the end result on the public works area. I f the town
defines the final result of the plan, then we need to have an E I S started or
under contract with this approval. I ’d like a definition from the council what
the final number of units would be approved in the masterplan. W e need to
control this and not do it piecemeal. Definitely no dogs. I don’t think we’re
ready for a vote yet and I think we have time.
Gillette – Kahn, do you value an E I S over E I R?
Kahn – I don’t know how an E I R is defined here, but it just needs to be
comprehensive. For an official E I S, feels that these studies can take
upwards of 10 years to complete, by which time conditions on the site have
often changed.
Gillette – Greg if we don’t vote today what is your schedule on this wall?
Hall – Part of this is moving the project along, planning time is being taken
away from us if delayed. Getting a plan together is less time than getting the
construction plans and approvals for the building.
Gillette – Less concerned with the actual mitigation than a commitment from
council on actually doing it.
June 2, 2020 - Page 446 of 772
Kjesbo – I ’d be open to mitigation in other areas, if not here, in the case that
we don’t have US FS approval to do it on other town areas. Our constituents
are concerned with the sheep, so we need to be.
Gillette – I want to hold the Town of Vail to a higher standard. Let’s hold this
project and see if we can get Council to do something. W e want to hear
from the Town of Vail as the applicant whether they are committed to the
herd.
Perez – The other alternative path is that we say no, and Town Council calls
it up to do what they want anyway.
Gillette – W here are we with requiring the E I S in masterplans? We want an
update from Kristen on the mitigation, and staff on the master planning
process including an environmental portion.
Spence – We can do that now and moving forward that all masterplans
include an environmental study.
Kjesbo – I ’m fine with separating them and voting on the variance so they
can move forward with design, but not construction.
Spence – We’ll add the conditions to the C UP that you are not going to vote
on tonight, so it is cleaned up for the next meeting.
Kurz – This commission has some issues that we are not ok with as of now.
We understand their time constraint. We are all ok with the motion on the
variance as of today.
Rollie Kjesbo moved to approve with conditions. Brian Gillette seconded the
motion and it passed (6-0).
Absent:(1)Hopkins
2.7.A request for review of a Conditional Use Permit pursuant to Section 12-
9C-3, Conditional Uses, Vail Town Code, in accordance with Title 12,
Chapter 16, Conditional Use Permits, Vail Town Code, to allow for an
amendment to the conditional use permit for the Town of Vail Public W orks
facility located at 1289 Elkhorn Drive/Unplatted, and setting forth details in
regard thereto. (P E C19-0039)
45 min.
Applicant:Town of Vail, represented by Greg Hall
Planner:Erik Gates
Karen Perez moved to table to J anuary 13, 2019. Brian Gillette seconded
the motion and it passed (6-0).
Absent:(1)Hopkins
3.Approval of Minutes
3.1.November 25, 2019 P E C Results
Karen Perez moved to approve. Brian Gillette seconded the motion and it
passed (5-0).
Abstain:(1)Seibert
June 2, 2020 - Page 447 of 772
Absent:(1)Hopkins
4.Adjournment
Rollie Kjesbo moved to adjourn. Brian Gillette seconded the motion and it
passed (6-0).
Absent:(1)Hopkins
The applications and information about the proposals are available for public inspec tion during regular offic e 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 vis its that prec ede the public hearing in the Tow n of Vail Community Development Department.
Times and order of items are approximate, subject to c hange, and c annot be relied upon to determine at w hat time the
Planning and Environmental Commission w ill c onsider an item. Please c all (970) 479-2138 for additional information. Please
call 711 for sign language interpretation 48 hour prior to meeting time.
Community Development Department
June 2, 2020 - Page 448 of 772
PLANNING AND ENVIRONMENTAL COMMISSION
March 9, 2020, 1:00 PM Town Council Chambers
75 S. Frontage Road - Vail, Colorado, 81657
1. Call to Order
1.1. Attendance
Present: Ludwig Kurz, Karen Perez, Pam Hopkins, John-Ryan Lockman, Rollie Kjesbo,
Pete Seibert, and Brian Gillette
Absent:
2. Main Agenda
2.1. A request for a recommendation to the Vail Town Council for a zone district boundary amendment, pursuant to Section 12-3-7, Amendment, Vail Town Code, to allow for the rezoning of 2211 North Frontage Road West which is composed of Tract C, Lot 1 Lot 2, and Lot 3 Vail Das Schone Filing No. 1 and Lot 1, Vail Das Schone Filing 3, from the Commercial Core 3 (CC3) District to the Public Accommodation-2 (PA-2) District and setting forth details in regard thereto. (PEC19-0047) 90 min.
This item will be heard concurrently with PEC19-0046 and PEC19-0048.
Applicant: TNREF III Bravo Vail LLC Widewaters Group Inc., represented by Mauriello Planning Group
Planner: Greg Roy
Motion: Continued to March 23rd
First: Gillette Second: Perez Vote: 7-0-0
Planner Roy began by introducing the rezoning application (PEC19-
0047). He showed a vicinity map showing surrounding residential and
commercial property. He also explained the existing zoning and uses in
the vicinity. Roy then explained the criteria for a rezoning. In discussing
the 3rd criteria, Roy discussed the additional height and density
allowances that would result from a rezoning from CC3 to PA-2. In
discussing the 7th criteria, Roy discussed the history of development on
this property. It was built as a hotel in the county and later annexed into
the town with the CC3 zone district. Staff found that site conditions have
not significantly changed over time. Concluded that Staff is
recommending denial, but stressed that staff is not opposed to
redevelopment, instead suggesting the current zoning remain and add a
Conditional Use into the CC3 be sought for the hotel.
Commissioner Perez: Had a question about links to code sections in the
staff memo that were not working.
Roy: Indicated that staff would work with Sterling Codifiers and the IT
department to fix this issue.
Perez: They’re going for an SDD anyway, so why are we rezoning or
changing zoning requirements if the SDD will set their standards anyway.
June 2, 2020 - Page 449 of 772
Roy: An SDD cannot allow a new use, so they need a zoning change
regardless.
Perez: Asked a question about the relevance of the upcoming West Vail
Master Plan to this project.
Gillette: Asked staff about the idea to add a text amendment for a
conditional use to the CC3. Worried that everyone in CC3 would try to
redevelop for a hotel.
Roy: The conditional use for a hotel could be tailored and have other
specific requirements that could limit hotel development in CC3.
Roy: Proceeded to explain the SDD request (PEC19-0048)
Perez: Asked what is different from the last time this came before the
PEC.
Roy: Stated some design changes have been made as a result of DRB
and Public Works comments. Roy pointed out these changes on a
diagram.
Perez: Asked if the height has been changed.
Roy: Ridge heights have not changed, but one building was moved in
order to reduce its height as defined by the code.
Gillette: Asked about a proposed sidewalk.
Tom Kassmel: This sidewalk was requested largely for the use of
residents north of the site to access the commercial area along North
Frontage Road. PW requested the sidewalk connect to the existing
sidewalk, but this is not shown on the application.
Roy: Continued by explaining the purpose of an SDD as defined by the
Code. Then began to describe the deviations from the proposed zone
district that the SDD would be addressed. Staff identified 11 deviations.
There are also 4 proposed public benefits from this SDD which are,
EHUs, pedestrian access along the east side of the property, pedestrian
access along the west side of the property, and (missed this one). Roy
continued by discussing proposed parking deviations. Then discussed
deviation for the snow storage requirement.
Perez: They want excess valet parking, but also to use some of these
excess spaces for temporary snow storage, why?
Roy: Staff would rather see some valet parking being converted to
permanent snow storage.
Hopkins: Had a question about snow storage in relation to the trees and
proposed walkway on the east side of the property. June 2, 2020 - Page 450 of 772
Roy: Continued discussing the requested deviations by discussing a
deviation from the minimum size of landscaping areas requirement and
deviation from total landscaping required. Roy then finished out the
discussion of deviations by discussing the remaining 5 deviations that
Staff found appropriate.
Hopkins: Asked about fire access.
Roy: Stated that the applicant had worked with the Fire department and
was able to meet the Fire department’s requirements.
Roy: Next discussed the design criteria for this application. These criteria
include compatibility, parking and loading, design features, traffic,
landscaping, and a workable plan.
Perez: Asked why having a valet to shuffle cars for snow storage would
be worse than asking people to self-move.
Roy: If the parking lot was full, which is most likely to happen in the
winter, then the development would only have two spots to shuffle cars
to.
Perez: Mentioned that with her building they work around limits like that
by utilizing temporary street parking.
Roy: Stated that staff was just looking at parking viability at the site scale.
Roy: Then discussed the review criteria for the exterior alteration
application (PEC19-0046). Thinks that with changes to parking,
landscaping, and snow storage, this could be a very successful project.
Lockman: Asked if staff had been working with the applicant.
Roy: Indicated that staff had and had been discussing these issues with
the applicant.
Dominic Mauriello: Introduced himself and his team. Also mentioned that
the Widewaters Group is no longer associated with this property.
Discussed some of the process that led to this meeting. Mauriello then
began discussing their request. Argued that EHUs were not meant to be
counted as GRFA in the CC3 zone district and that the PA-2 district
exempts EHU GRFA. The PA-2 zone district would also allow other kinds
of units like hotel units and lodge units. The proposed district also brings
the existing height closer into compliance.
In discussing the Vail Land Use Plan, Mauriello stated that hotels are
considered a commercial use in this document. The Land Use Plan also
doesn’t indicate that this hotel in West Vail should be removed.
Perez: Asked if by switching to PA-2, they are limiting commercial uses,
which is not encouraged by the Vail Land Use Plan.
June 2, 2020 - Page 451 of 772
Mauriello: We are proposing what we think will be on this property for
decades, and that zoning eventually changes over time. Continuing the
discussion of the Land Use Plan, thinks Staff has misinterpreted the
goals of the Vail Land Use Plan.
Mauriello then discussed the feedback from the previous PEC discussion.
Feedback included keeping the rezoning to PA-2 with an SDD concept,
changing the existing roof color, pedestrian access, building the EHU
building around the same time as everything else, and additional
feedback.
Mauriello continued with a discussion of the existing site conditions and
the proposed project. Ultimately reducing parking area on the site. Adding
additional hotel rooms and EHUs. Acknowledges that the lower units of
the EHU building are not as good as the above floor units, but it felt like a
missed opportunity to not include additional EHUs when it is possible.
Discussed how the applicant has met with the local community, and
community and town boards multiple times. Vail Local Housing Authority
and the Eagle County Housing Taskforce have also stated their support
for this project.
Discussed the changes to the plan as a result of discussions with the Fire
Department. Discussed the Chamonix Lane sidewalk. Not bringing this
sidewalk all the way down through the property as to not direct
pedestrians into a parking lot. Proposing more parking than required.
Conducted a traffic study that showed that the Frontage Rd can handle
the additional traffic. Next discussed the minimum landscaping standards
by showing that the Town does not have consistent minimum
landscaping area standards.
Hopkins: Asked about snow storage and trees.
Mauriello: Stated that while evergreens limit snow storage somewhat, you
wouldn’t clear out a 20’ landscaping area of trees to make room for snow
storage.
Mauriello: Continued to show how much of the uses in this area are non-
conforming, not just the hotel. A 3-story building is not uncommon in this
area. Then showed some renderings of the proposed buildings and their
effect on surrounding views.
Perez: Asked if there were renderings from the Chamonix development.
Mauriello: Showed a rendering from Chamonix Road near the site.
Mauriello: Continued his presentation by discussing the anticipated
revenue. Next discussed the hotel occupancy. In 2019, the hotel had an
average occupancy of just under 60% with about 1.7 persons per
occupied room. The hotel will never reach its theoretical maximum
occupancy.
Then discussed the need for the SDD. Discussed the variations needed
and what is being offered in return.
Stated how the project was strongly aligned with the Vail Housing
Authority Plan.
Open to forwarding a recommendation of approval with conditions for
height, parking, or snow storage, if deemed necessary.
June 2, 2020 - Page 452 of 772
Gillette: Had a question about putting some EHU into the mitigation bank.
Mauriello: Explained how these unit’s credits could be purchased by
future development.
Gillette: So what’s the community development for those units? This
means that the next development that comes in won’t have to add 2
EHUs and could buy these banked units instead.
Mauriello: Many developments find that they can meet EHUs on site
anyway and that it is common for these banked units to take years to sell
off.
Hopkins: Asked a question about access to the West Vail Mall and the
bus stop from the EHU building.
Perez: Talked about how walking through parking lots in the winter can
be treacherous, but mentioned how for a hotel it is better risk
management to have the lot well maintained.
Public Comment
Pat Lauer: Lives right behind the development. Wrote a letter about this
project and is opposed to the development. Already very limited
commercial space in this area. While everyone wants EHU housing, but
the proposed building is too tall. This building is actually 4 levels and
there is no 4-level building in the area. Worried also that Chamonix Ln will
be hazardous in the winter due to the shading from the EHU building.
Discussed some ideas on how this could be mitigated. Also worried about
traffic and snow removal on Chamonix. Density is too high and will
overcrowd the already crowded public shuttles. Unclear on how the
proposed parking will work. Understands that only 4 spots are designated
for employee parking. The tripled conference space size benefits the
parking requirement in favor of the developer.
Mike Oldham: Lives on Chamonix Ln. and represents the HOA at Tall
Pines. Not opposed to the expansion of the hotel use as long as it is done
effectively. Opposed to the EHU building and especially with its north
facing orientation. The now will pile up and will not melt in the winter
season, this is why the residential developments in the area face south.
The current stairs from Chamonix into the West Vail mall gets icy and
hazardous, feels that a walkway on the east side is an overdue idea.
Opposed to removing large conifers and doesn’t think snow storage in
this east area makes sense. Likes the idea of better using this land, but
there are a lot of issues with this proposal.
Joel Barton: In favor of expanding existing uses. Most lowest-level
residential units will not have their views impacted. Workforce housing is
a big issue for his work and as a result is supportive of the additional
workforce housing.
Public Comment closed
June 2, 2020 - Page 453 of 772
Planner Roy: Supportive of the expansion of the existing use and adding
EHUs, but finds that the site plan needs improvement.
Lockman: Thinks that the broad zoning approach with CC3 in the 80s
made created this and a lot of issues. Can’t hold up this project for the
West Vail Master Plan. Wishes there was more overall planning for West
Vail already. Doesn’t want to lose the hotel and doesn’t want to lose
commercial uses. We want West Vail to have a broad option of
commercial uses. Ultimately doesn’t see a huge barrier with the proposed
rezoning. See’s Staff’s concerns with the criteria, but also finds that the
applicant has made an effort to meet these criteria and is working with
the situation they’re given. Wants a clearer plan for pedestrian access
along this lot. EHU building could make more sense with a south-facing
orientation.
Seibert: Could the SDD be used to limit the development potential of this
property so that the full extent of the PA-2 density could not be used
here?
Roy: Yes.
Seibert: Concerned about parking in the first meeting, and still a little
concerned. Understands Gillette’s concern about the EHU banking, but
finding land to build new housing is difficult and we have a proposal here
to build new units.
Hopkins: Doesn’t like small spot landscaping that doesn’t work with snow
storage. Looking at the plan it seems like the applicant has been trying to
put too much on the property. Wishes the EHU building was further offset
from the road, doesn’t seem like this building is as effective as it could be.
Thinks this might have a negative impact on the neighborhood. The
Chamonix development is more balanced with density and height.
Perez: This is a big improvement from the December meeting. Thinks this
is a nice transition from the residential areas, to the commercial, to I-70.
This could reduce I-70 impacts for residents north of the development.
Concerned about the light in the lower units of the EHU building. Doesn’t
like the island landscaping, would rather see some extra landscaping
around the EHU building. Thinks it is absurd that hotels aren’t considered
commercial in the Zoning Code. Doesn’t think that this project or others
should be held up by the West Vail Master Planning process. Wants the
sidewalk as a condition of approval. Blocks some view, but is not out of
character for the neighborhood.
Kjesbo: Thinks this method will get the property more in compliance.
Agrees that hotels should be considered commercial. Thinks that the
EHU building towers too high above Chamonix Rd. The bulk and mass is
too great for being that close to the road. The hotel will deal with the
parking and it is in their best interest to make it work for the guests. Not
holding his breath for a West Vail Master Plan. Doesn’t think the parking
makes sense specifically for the EHU units, would need snowmelt along
the entire path for those residents.
Gillette: Still in the same place as last meeting. Yes a hotel is
commercial, but it is not community commercial. Zoning is the only way to June 2, 2020 - Page 454 of 772
protect the community commercial as commercial developers will go with
the use that gets them the most value. CC3 was created to protect the
commercial that is still in town. Doesn’t see how the commission can
approve this project. The project can’t and doesn’t meet the criteria. Feels
that this process needed more discussion when talking about the
expansion of a hotel in this area. Can’t get on board with the current
proposal.
Kurz: Tends to agree with Gillette’s comments, but we need to act on this
project today. Complimented both the applicant and staff. Feels that there
must not have been enough discussion between staff and the applicant if
staff is recommending denial on all three applications. It appears that this
application is not approvable based on the required criteria. Wants to
table in the effort to create a more approvable plan for this project.
Comfortable with the height. There is a problem with access between
parking and the EHU. Worried about the owner maintaining the snow
storage. Seeing a project of this scale continuing to have major Staff
concerns, brings him concern.
Perez: Had a question about being able to preserve the current allowed
commercial uses.
Planner Spence: Indicated that Staff would envision more of a mixed use
project to maintain the commercial nature of this area. The SDD process
can limit uses, but cannot expand them.
Mauriello: Zoning is not forever, and we are not rezoning the entire CC3
district. If the West Vail Master plan comes in at a later date, this property
can still be rezoned to come in conformance with that plan. Has met
many times with Staff, but feels that there is a philosophical difference of
opinion.
Perez: There are some issues remaining on this project. Specifically, the
orientation of the entry and access for the EHU.
Kjesbo: Wants the height for the EHU building to come down a story.
Mauriello: Requested a tabling.
2.2. A request for review of an Exterior Alteration, pursuant to Section 12-7J-12, Exterior Alterations or Modifications, Vail Town Code, to allow for construction of a hotel addition and an EHU apartment building, located at 2211 North Frontage Road West which is composed of Tract C, Lot 1, Lot 2, and Lot 3 Vail Das Schone Filing No. 1 and Lot 1, Vail Das Schone Filing 3, and setting forth details in regard thereto. (PEC19-0046)
This item will be heard concurrently with PEC19-0047 and PEC19-0048.
Applicant: TNREF III Bravo Vail LLC Widewaters Group Inc., represented by Mauriello Planning Group
Planner: Greg Roy
Motion: Continued to March 23rd
June 2, 2020 - Page 455 of 772
First: Gillette Second: Perez Vote: 7-0-0
2.3. A request for a recommendation to the Vail Town Council of an application establishing Special Development District No. 42 (Highline Hotel Renovation 2019), pursuant to Section 12-9(A), Special Development Districts, Vail Town Code, to allow for the development of a hotel addition to add 79 accommodation units, convert 19 existing dwelling units to 19 limited service lodge units, create a 12 unit EHU dormitory, remove office space, add conference space and build 16 unit employee housing apartment building, and related uses and improvements, located at 2211 North Frontage Road West which is composed of Tract C, Lot 1, Lot 2, and Lot 3 Vail Das Schone Filing No. 1 and Lot 1, Vail Das Schone Filing 3, and setting forth details in regard thereto. (PEC19-0048)
This item will be heard concurrently with PEC19-0047 and PEC19-0046.
Applicant: TNREF III Bravo Vail LLC Widewaters Group Inc., represented by Mauriello Planning Group
Planner: Greg Roy
Motion: Continued to March 23rd
First: Kjesbo Second: Perez Vote: 7-0-0
2.4. A request for the review of a variance from Section 12-6D-8, Density Control, Vail Town Code, to allow for a variance to the requirement that a secondary unit in the Two-Family Primary/Secondary Residential zone district not exceed 40% of allowable site GRFA, and a request for the review of a variance from Section 12-15-3, Definition, Calculation, and Exclusions, Vail Town Code, to allow for a variance to the stipulation that basement GRFA deductions apply only to floors within six vertical feet of the lowest level of a structure, both in accordance with the provisions of Section 12-17, Variances, Vail Town Code, located at 775 Potato Patch Drive/Lot 19, Block 1, Vail Potato Patch Filing 1, and setting forth details in regard thereto. (PEC19-0050) 5 min.
The applicant has requested this item be tabled to May 11, 2020.
Applicant: Scott Ryan & Foster Gillett, represented by Mauriello Planning Group
Planner: Erik Gates
Motion: Table to May 11, 2020
First: Gillette Second: Perez Vote: 7-0-0
2.5. A request for the review of a variance from Section 12-6D-6 Setbacks, Vail Town Code in accordance with the provisions of Section 12-17, Variances, Vail Town Code, to allow for a variance to the required front setback for a stair tower, located at 2696 Davos Trail/Lot 6, Block C, Vail Ridge Subdivision, and setting forth details in regard thereto. (PEC20-0001) 20 min.
Applicant: Michael & Carol Kay Phillips
Planner: Greg Roy
Motion: Approve with conditions
First: Kjesbo Second: Gillette Vote: 7-0-0
Conditions:
June 2, 2020 - Page 456 of 772
1. Approval of this variance is contingent upon the applicant
obtaining Town of Vail design review approval for this
proposal; and
2. The applicant shall clearly demonstrate, via an
Improvement Location Certificate (ILC), to the Community
Development Department prior to requesting a final
planning inspection that improvements have been
constructed per plan.
Planner Roy: Introduced the project and described the site
conditions. Staff is supportive of this variance as it allows for a
more workable site. There are a number of existing garages in the
area in the front setback, doesn’t feel that a stairway would have
any greater impact.
Michael Phillips: Has lived in this house for decades and has had to
snow shovel the existing walkway for a long time. Age has made
this more and more difficult and adding a stair would allow them to
continue living in this house.
No Public Comment.
2.6. A request for the review of a variance from Section 14-3-1, Minimum Standards, Vail Town Code in accordance with the provisions of Section 12-17, Variances, Vail Town Code, to allow for a variance to the maximum centerline driveway grade, located at 1801 Sunburst Drive Unit A/Lot 2, Vail Valley Filing 3, and setting forth details in regard thereto. (PEC20-0002) 5 min.
The applicant has requested this item be tabled to a future date.
Applicant: Hilliard West LLC, represented by Pierce Austin Architects
Planner: Erik Gates
Motion: Table to March 23rd
First: Gillette Second: Kjesbo Vote: 7-0-0
2.7. A request for a recommendation to the Vail Town Council for a zone district boundary amendment, pursuant to Section 12-3-7, Amendment, Vail Town Code, to allow for the rezoning of a portion of the property located at 366 Hanson Ranch Road/Lot 1, 366 Hanson Ranch Road Subdivision. The proposed rezoning would change the Zone District from Agriculture and Open Space (A) District to the Public Accommodation (PA) District and setting forth details in regard thereto. (PEC19-0022) 90 min.
Applicant: Vailpoint LLC, represented by Sarah J Baker PC
Planner: Jonathan Spence
Motion: Recommend Approval
First: Kjesbo Second: Seibert Vote: 4-2-0 Gillette &
Perez opposed
Read concurrently with PEC20-0003 and PEC19-0008
June 2, 2020 - Page 457 of 772
Planner Spence opened the project by describing the nature of the
application and the history of this project. In the past, the PEC requested
that the exterior alteration be heard alongside the rezoning request for
context. The two applications cannot be tied together, so a motion on the
rezoning will be requested today, but the other items will be tabled.
Gillette: Disagrees with Staff’s assessment of the court order regarding
the rezoning. Says the order does not require a change of the zoning. It
preserves the covenants on the property, including conservation
easements.
Spence: Clarified that Staff did not mean to say otherwise in the memo.
Rick Pylman: Introduced his team on the project. Trying to meet the goals
of the Vail Master Plan. This building was built in the 60s and much of the
neighborhood has stayed the same. Continued to discuss the proposed
lodge and amenities involved. Goal is to build the nicest lodge property in
vail. Next discussed the site redevelopment. Showed the areas of the
lodge that extend over previous other properties.
Hanz Berglund: Began by introducing the exterior alteration application
and design. Aiming to enhance the quality of this site. Made a significant
effort to meet the goals and objectives of the Master Plan. Discussed that
this would pull more lodging demand into Vail Village rather than in the
more residential neighborhoods. Showed floor plans and elevations of the
project. Next he discussed the surrounding character and scale. The
existing building is significantly smaller than the buildings surrounding it.
The proposed building is comparable in height to its neighbors. Berglund
discussed the proposed tower on the building and showed another of
other towers throughout Vail Village and Lionshead. He discussed the
nature of the proposed setback encroachments and how surrounding
buildings also extend into their setbacks.
Perez: Asked about a previous discussion of a square design for the
property.
Berglund: To fit in the side setbacks would cut about 20ft of the building
off. It would lead to a steeper façade. Felt that the current proposal was a
better design architecturally.
Proposing an increase in landscaping between the proposed building and
the Christiana. Also aiming to create a more inviting walking portion in
front of the proposed Avanti building. Also showed a sun-shade analysis
for this building on Hanson Ranch Road.
Perez: Asked a clarifying question about ownership and operations
management
Sarah Baker: Stated that they refer to Vailpoint as “the client” as they
make all final decisions on the property.
Perez: Asked a question about if rooms could be rented individually.
June 2, 2020 - Page 458 of 772
Rick Pylman: Discussed the need for the setback variances and a
parking variance.
Kjesbo: Is there an ability to move the building back further to minimize
parking in the front setback?
Pylman: Potentially, but it is not preferred. Didn’t want to give too much
front space in parking and risk someone trying to double park and end up
parking on the sidewalk.
Kjesbo: In speaking to the design, feels that the tower is too much bulk
and mass. Didn’t think the Tivoli towers had as much b&m
Hopkins: Also felt that the building was too large. Feels that this scale
does not fit the goal of the project to be a small, highest-class lodge. Also
feels like the applicant may not be taking as many sustainability
measures as they could. This could also attract guests.
Baker: Refreshed the PEC on the history of the rezoning application. She
presented a diagram showing the old property and the former separate
parcels that are zoned agricultural/open space. Believes this is the only
parcel in vail with multiple zoning designations. Showed an overlay of the
proposed building over the old agricultural/open space tracts, tried to
keep the building off of the back tract as much as possible. Then showed
how the current zonings on the lot do not meet their lot size requirements.
Rezoning the whole lot to PA would bring the lot size into conformance.
Baker continued to describe how the redevelopment would further the
Vail Village Master Plan objectives.
Commissioner Lockman had to leave during this time and be absent for
the remainder of the meeting.
Baker: Discussed other factors to consider for redevelopment. Argued
that development is already allowed on agriculture/open space so this will
not result in or set precedent for further additional development on open
space lots.
Public Comment
Wendle Porterfield: Representing Villa Valhalla. Asked a question to Pete
Seibert about his previous employment with Vailpoint.
Seibert: Said that he had considered whether he should recuse himself
for this. However, he has not been involved in Vailpoint for around 3
years and does not stand to make any money off the project.
Porterfield: Asked a question about the sale of the property.
Seibert: Discussed the sale of the property and how the additional tract
was acquired and assumed to be a part of this property originally.
Porterfield: Feels that this is a self-inflicted situation. The applicant is
June 2, 2020 - Page 459 of 772
asking for a rezoning but they are clearly going for the rezoning that
makes them the most money instead of rezoning for ag and open space
for example. Feels that this is a clever way for the applicant to force the
PEC to rezone open space.
Carol Krueger: Argument against this development has not changed for
her since the last meeting. The back part of the property looks unkempt
because it is meant to be natural open space. Over 1600 sq ft of patio
with development is not undisturbed and will change the character of
previous open space. Also stated that the proposed design has not
significantly changed. Asked the PEC to carefully consider the setback
variance. The original buildings were built before the setback regulations
were in place. Doesn’t feel that this practice should be continued for a
redevelopment. Shouldn’t prioritize visitors over the neighboring
properties with bedrooms housing Vail residents. For the parking
variance, she asks the Commission to consider the current state of
Hansen Ranch Road. It’s a mess and drop offs happen in the road all the
time.
Public Comment Closed
Baker: The adverse possession case was not a contested trial. It was
resolved by stipulation. In addressing the claim that this a self-created
issue. Applicant has not proposed to build to a greater scale than what
would have been allowed with the previous, smaller parcel. Argues that
as such they are not asking to be “rewarded” for the extra lot size. They
recognize that parking and loading is an issue in this area and do not
want to contribute to that problem.
Hopkins: Asked about trash storage
Berglund: The current plan is to use regular garbage cans and store them
in the garage.
Perez: Disappointed that this is the 4th time hearing this project and
nothing has really changed. We disagreed that this is not an owner-
created problem. Not in agreement with staff that this meets the criteria.
Quoted a section of the Land Use Plan that stated that all greenspace
should be attempted to be preserved. Applicant hasn’t made an attempt
to comply with the PEC’s comments. The applicant has asked for
variances and does not feel that they shown the grounds for these
variances.
Hopkins: In agreement with Perez. There doesn’t seem to be any benefit
for the Town for this project.
Seibert: Feel there are 2 ways of looking at this. Open space is what
anyone sees when walking by natural vegetation. Seeing manicured
grass inside a fence does not read as open space. Disagrees with the
argument for the setbacks just because that is the old way buildings were
built. Wants to verify that they are not gaining GRFA. Generally
supportive of the rest.
Kjesbo: If we rezone this, and create a PA compliant lot, why are you
June 2, 2020 - Page 460 of 772
requesting a setback variance.
Spence: The PA zone district can enter the setbacks
Gillette: In the “preserve open space at all costs” boat. In agreement with
Perez and Hopkins.
Kurz: Based on the Staff report, it seems that the criteria for rezoning has
been met. Was in support of the rezoning. Ready to let Town Council to
make the final decision on this.
2.8. A request for the review of a variance from Section 12-7A-11: Parking and Loading, Vail Town Code in accordance with the provisions of Section 12- 17, Variances, Vail Town Code, to allow for a variance from the prohibition of parking located within the front setback and from the requirement that 75% of the required parking be located within the main building, located at
366 Hanson Ranch Road/Lot 1, 366 Hanson Ranch Road Subdivision, and setting forth details in regard thereto. (PEC20-0003)
Applicant: Vailpoint LLC, represented by Sarah J Baker PC
Planner: Jonathan Spence
Motion: Continued to March 23rd
First: Kjesbo Second: Gillette Vote: 6-0-0
2.9. A request for the review of a Major Exterior Alteration, pursuant to Section 12-7A-12, Exterior Alterations or Modifications, Vail Town Code, to allow for the replacement of the existing structure with a seven (7) suite private lodge with related site improvements, located at 366 Hanson Ranch Road/Lot 1, 366 Hanson Ranch Road Subdivision, and setting forth details in regard thereto. (PEC19-0008)
Applicant: Vailpoint LLC, represented by Sarah J Baker PC
Planner: Jonathan Spence
Motion: Continued to March 23rd
First: Kjesbo Second: Gillette Vote: 6-0-0
3. Approval of Minutes
3.1. February 10, 2020 PEC Results
Motion: Approve
First: Kjesbo Second: Gillette Vote: 6-0-1 Perez
abstain
4. Adjournment
Motion: Adjourn
First: Kjesbo Second: Perez Vote: 7-0-0
June 2, 2020 - Page 461 of 772
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. Please call 711 for sign language
interpretation 48 hour prior to meeting time. Community Development Department Published
in the Vail Daily March 6, 2020
June 2, 2020 - Page 462 of 772
PLANNING AND ENVIRONMENTAL COMMISSION
April 13, 2020, 1:00 PM
Virtual
75 S. Frontage Road - Vail, Colorado, 81657
1. Call to Order
1.1. Link to Virtual Meeting:
Join from a PC, Mac, iPad, iPhone or Android device:
Please click this URL to join. https://zoom.us/j/269691644
Password: 266421
Or join by phone: Dial:
US: +1 346 248 7799
Webinar ID: 269 691 644
1.2. Attendance
Present: Ludwig Kurz, Karen Perez, Henry Pratt, John-Ryan Lockman,
Rollie Kjesbo, Pete Seibert, and Brian Gillette
Absent:
1.3 Swearing in of new members.
2. Main Agenda
2.1. A request for the review of a variance from Section 14-3-1, Minimum
Standards, Vail Town Code in accordance with the provisions of Section
12-17, Variances, Vail Town Code, to allow for a variance to the
maximum centerline driveway grade, located at 1801 Sunburst Drive Unit
A/Lot 2, Vail Valley Filing 3, and setting forth details in regard thereto.
(PEC20-0002) 20 min.
Applicant: Hilliard West LLC, represented by Pierce Austin Architects
Planner: Erik Gates
Motion: Approve
First: Gillette Second: Lockman Vote: 6-0-0 Kurz absent
Planner Gates presents the application.
Commissioners had no questions for the applicant.
No public comments.
Lockman: Straight forward and would improve safety.
Rollie: I see the issue, and this is a better alternative.
Gillette: I agree with commissioners and staff.
Seibert: This is an improvement all around.
June 2, 2020 - Page 463 of 772
Pratt: Site constraints warrant granting.
Perez: This meets the requirements for a variance.
2.2. A request for the review of a variance from Section 11-6 Business and
Building Identification Signs, Vail Town Code, in accordance with the
provisions of Section 11-10, Variances, Vail Town Code, to allow for a
variance to the number and size of hospital campus signs, located at 180
South Frontage Road West/Lot E and F, Vail Village Filing 2, and setting
forth details in regard thereto. (PEC20-0006) 20 min.
Applicant: Vail Health, represented by Braun Associates Inc.
Planner: Jonathan Spence
Motion: Table to 27th of April
First: Gillette Second: Perez Vote: 7-0-0
Planner Spence presents the application.
Lockman: Please provide some clarity on why staff does not want to have
the name on the tower but allows the cross.
Spence: The cross is needed to identify the building for safety, the name
is not necessary for safety and does not meet the criteria.
Pratt: Does this integrate with signs on the highway?
Spence: These are for the campus; those other signs are separate from
this application.
Gillette: Are we allowing more signs and larger signs than we typically
allow?
Spence: The signs and size are more for wayfinding. Braun’s
presentation will address this question more fully.
Applicant Tom Braun presents.
Lockman: What would be the alternative? Is the red cross alone ok?
Braun: We would take the cross at a minimum but would also like Vail
Health up there even if lower. However, don’t want to do it too low so that
a redevelopment of the Evergreen would block it in future.
Gillette: What about the signs on the road?
Braun: We are working with Tom Kassmel on signs in the ROW.
Kurz: Great looking signs to meet public needs. Concern of highest sign,
which seems to be branding. I would like to see mock up of sign on tower
for visual impact.
June 2, 2020 - Page 464 of 772
Braun: Happy to do that if rest of commissioners agree.
Perez: I would like to see how these compare to the current signs.
Braun: Prior to construction, not a lot if signs on there.
Spence: Agreed most of the signs were along meadow.
Lockman: What about wayfinding for helicopter? Is there a need for aerial
signs for helicopters?
Spence: That would be handled by FAA.
Braun: This is private pad without necessity for aerial signs.
Lockman: Based on what we did for museum, we only allowed “museum”
without added parts.
Gillette: What is the international symbol for hospital? Is it the cross or the
H?
Braun: Unsure if it is H or the cross.
Pratt: Is the cross backlit?
Spence: Yes, it is halo lit. Staff has concerns that lettering up there will
not be legible.
Lockman: Would the mock up be digital or physical.
Braun: Physical.
Kjesbo: Agree with staff, I support for the cross only.
Gillette: I disagree. Better off with H path on roads than the red cross.
Red cross ineffective and better done with road signs.
Kurz: Total package effective and well done. Issue with big sign high up.
Would like to see a mock up.
Seibert: Agree with staff that signs should be limited to 25 feet for these
brand signs. Understand the comments on the red cross from everyone,
but no problem with cross alone.
Lockman: Agree on branding. Crucial that people are able to identify and
get to the hospital. Think the cross or other indicator helpful on tower.
Would like to see mockups.
Pratt: I don’t think anything needed on the tower. Agree with Gillette, that June 2, 2020 - Page 465 of 772
people will be looking for blue H. Think 28, 29 and 30 are overkill.
Question the need for 28 for branding. Rest ok.
Perez: We want to be consistent with “hospital” and “H” wherever
possible. The branding is not necessary and inconsistent. Want to see
mockup and what the old signs are compared to what is now. Like a big
H better than cross.
Discussion of the existing signs included in this packet. All signs existing
are included in packet, but most are new signs.
Braun: Happy to regroup and come back with new plans in two weeks.
What about the other signs in the packet?
Gillette: Do wayfinding signs need to be so big?
Lockman: Would like to see other examples of hospitals with these signs.
2.3. A request for a recommendation to the Vail Town Council for a prescribed
regulation amendment pursuant to Section 12-3-7 Amendment, Vail
Town Code to amend Section 12-10-6 Parking; Off Site and Joint
Facilities, Vail Town Code, to refine standards to be used in the review of
such proposals and to clarify the review process and other
considerations, and setting forth details in regard thereto. (PEC20-0007)
20 min.
Applicant: Braun Associates, Inc.
Planner: Greg Roy
Motion: Motion: Table to 4/27
First: Gillette Second: Kjesbo Vote: 7-0-0
Planner Roy introduced the project by describing the code section in its
existing form and describing the substantive changes proposed by this
application. Major changes include increasing the maximum required
distance to off-site parking, allow review of off-site parking to be handled
by PEC, setting a percentage of off-site parking allowed, requiring an
outline of off-site parking operation and maintenance, and a minimum
lease of 10 years.
Gillette: Asked a question about the 10-year lease. Asked when the last
time this provision had been used.
Planner Spence: No memory of this provision being used but knows it
had been used by the Lift House over 40 years ago.
Gillette: Asked about why only 10 years for the lease, indicated 50 or 100
may be more appropriate.
Perez: Echoed Gillette’s statement, and also had a question about
submittal requirements
Roy: The 10-year lease would provide more flexibility to the town if the
property changed uses over the years. The submittal material would be June 2, 2020 - Page 466 of 772
reviewed by PEC.
Tom Braun: This provision provides more flexibility for developments. The
proposal also closes a potential gap in the code in regard to what an
applicant is to do once their parking lease expires.
Public Comment
Bill Pierce: Asked a question about the goal of this change. Wanted
clarification on the 25% allowance and if this was new provision. Had a
question about the last proposed provision for what happens when a 10-
year lease ends. Also asked why the Town couldn’t expand fee in lieu
areas. Some areas, like in Lionshead, would benefit from this.
Braun: All of the properties along Meadow Drive are not in the fee-in-lieu
area. However, these places do have road access into their on-site
parking. It was decided among the applicant and town staff that this
method would bring less issues in the future than expanding the fee-in-
lieu areas to areas with road access.
Gillette: Expressed concern about potentially recommending a code
change for the benefit for an applicant. Thinks that the fee-in-lieu
structure should be reviewed. “Quarter mile” and “10-year lease”
language feels arbitrary.
Kjesbo: Also expressed concern about the 10year lease. What happens if
after 10 years the lease is not agreed to be renewed? A potentially bigger
parking problem would arise.
Perez: A 10-year lease is not long-term control.
Spence: Is it the responsibility of the town or the applicant to provide
parking. If we just collect fee-in-lieu the town will not be able to provide
the needed parking to the market. Feels that many developments will opt
for the fee.
Gillette: Feels that we have a current parking issue due to allowing the
market to handle parking.
Spence: Feels that tourism is the biggest stressor on the town’s parking.
We have a lot of underutilized parking.
Gillette: That underutilized parking is more the issue for town parking.
Doesn’t feel that the proposed language would address this.
Braun: We have parking in the town parking structures and most
developments have their own parking. There needs to be something to
address additions to existing structures that will require additional
parking. With fee-in-lieu a development is “in or out” with their parking.
Gillette: Asked staff to look at the towns current parking provisions and
the fee-in-lieu structure.
June 2, 2020 - Page 467 of 772
Roy: Yes, staff can look into this.
Spence: Addressing these issues will take multiple meetings
Gillette: Feels that addressing these issues more comprehensively is
appropriate.
Lockman: What would a more comprehensive parking program look like?
Spence: The town has hired a mobility planner to look at town parking
requirements and approach. Moving forward we would likely need to
include this employee.
Braun: To put the quarter mile distance into perspective. The on-site
parking for the hospital, for example, would have people walking up to
400 ft into the building. The quarter mile distance is also a common
walkability measure.
Perez: Need to adjust the lease length and look at this issue more
globally rather than using specific project examples.
Braun: Requested to table to April 27th.
2.4. A request for a recommendation to the Vail Town Council to adopt the
Community Wildfire Protection Plan as an element of the Town of Vail
Comprehensive Plan to reduce the risk of wildfire, and setting forth
details in
regard thereto. (PEC20-0004) 30 min.
Applicant: Town of Vail, represented by Paul Cada
Planner: Greg Roy
Motion: Recommend Approval
First: Gillette Second: Kjesbo Vote: 7-0-0
Planner Roy introduced the project and Paul Cada, Wildland Program
Manager.
Paul Cada: Introduced the concept of a Community Wildfire Protection
Plan. This is a planning tool that helps communities identify and reduce
wildfire risk. These plans are also used by federal land management
agencies to help prioritize their efforts. A CWPP does not obligate the
town to implement any specific recommendations or expend funds. There
are however minimum standards for a CWPP. These standards are:
defining the community’s wildland-urban interface (WUI), identify adjacent
land owners, conduct a community risk analysis, a discussion with the
community about preparedness to respond to a wildland fire,
recommendations to reduce structural ignitability.
Cada then described the stakeholder involvement conducted for the
CWPP. This started in early 2018.
June 2, 2020 - Page 468 of 772
Cada went on to discuss the goals of the plan which include reducing
wildland fire risk and community preparedness.
Cada continued by discussing the town’s wildland fire risk, he provided
maps to aid in this portion of the presentation.
Next Cada discussed completed and ongoing measures within the town,
these included things such as outreach and education, fuels reduction,
the WUI Code amendments, and other operational programs. Cada then
explained proposed preparedness strategies.
Gillette: Is the CWPP a requirement for fire department funding.
Cada: Yes, this plan would open up more grant funding for the mitigation
projects desired by Fire. This plan can be updated to include completed
projects and new identified projects.
Kjesbo: Asked about the recommendation for clearing 100ft worth of fuels
from structures. Is this going to be a requirement?
Cada: This is just a recommendation, but it would be targeted towards
specific at-risk properties.
No public comment.
Lockman: Thinks this is a good collaborative effort and plan for the
community.
Seibert: Asked about how this connects with the mitigation above Booth
Heights.
Cada: This recommendation would help the forest service to reduce and
manage the wildlife hazard above booth heights. This would also help
reduce other hazards.
Pratt: Has concerns about applying these recommendations to properties
not adjacent to forest land. Also had a question asking if people have
been sued for implementing or not implementing these
recommendations.
Cada: In his experience no, he has not seen this happen. Cada did not
see this as opening up lawsuits for property owners.
Perez, Gillette, and Kurz were in support of the proposal.
2.5. A request for a recommendation to the Vail Town Council for a zone
district boundary amendment, pursuant to Section 12-3-7, Amendment,
Vail Town Code, to allow for the rezoning of 2211 North Frontage Road
West which is composed of Tract C, Lot 1 Lot 2, and Lot 3 Vail Das
Schone Filing No. 1 and Lot 1, Vail Das Schone Filing 3, from the
Commercial Core 3 (CC3) District to the Public Accommodation-2 (PA-2)
District and setting forth details in regard thereto. (PEC19-0047) 90 min.
This item will be heard concurrently with PEC19-0046 and PEC19-0048. June 2, 2020 - Page 469 of 772
Applicant: TNREF III Bravo Vail LLC True North Management Group
LLC, represented by Mauriello Planning Group
Planner: Greg Roy
Motion: Recommend Approval
First: Kjesbo Second: Lockman Vote: 6-1-0 (Gillette
opposed)
Planner Greg Roy read into the record correspondence received after all
other correspondence had been provided to the commission and the
public.
Planner Greg provided the commission with an overview of the proposal
and the applicable criteria. Greg discussed the change in
recommendation from the previous meeting. Staff also looked more
closely at the criteria related to what has changed. Greg discussed the
PA-2 zone district and its intent.
Commissioner Lockman asked for additional clarification regarding the
commercial uses.
Greg spoke to staff considerations on this.
Dominic Mauriello provided a presentation concerning all three
applications. Dominic spoke to the resolution of long-standing
nonconformities related to use, density and height.
Dominic spoke to the reasoning for the SDD. Dominic summarized the
ideas/issues that arose during the previous meeting(s).
Dominic discussed the conditions of approval and the condition related to
public art. The applicant does not agree with the proposed AIPP
contribution proposed by staff.
Dominic walked the commission through changes that were made to the
plans, specifically the changes to the EHU building and the
parking/sidewalk/snow storage configurations.
Lockman asked for clarification on the “sharrow” through the parking lot.
Dominic clarified that it is striping only at that the valet will be aware.
Lockman spoke to the sidewalk alignment and what is intended for the
public vs the occupants.
Dominic clarified that the western sidewalk is intended for the public while
the area through the site is intended for occupants. The easement on the
east side was spoken to.
PUBLIC COMMENT
June 2, 2020 - Page 470 of 772
Michael Spiers-Spoke to concerns/comments related to the EHU building,
its location and height. Feels that it is out of scale with the neighborhood
and that it should be reduced the three stories.
Pat Lauer- Spoke to the need to hear staff’s view on the SDD criteria.
Feels that staff has changed their direction concerning the rezoning.
COMMISSIONER COMMENTS
Rollie- Supports the rezoning.
Lockman- Supports the rezoning and removing the nonconformities.
Siebert- Concurs with Lockman and Rollie.
Gillette- A loss of the commercial uses cannot be overlooked. Interested
in more multiple used, need community commercial. This is a huge
mistake and is short sighted.
Perez- Supports the rezoning
Pratt- Recognizes the change in the commission. Supports the rezoning.
Kurz- Supports the rezoning.
2.6. A request for review of an Exterior Alteration, pursuant to Section 12-7J-
12, Exterior Alterations or Modifications, Vail Town Code, to allow for
construction of a hotel addition and an EHU apartment building, located
at 2211 North Frontage Road West which is composed of Tract C, Lot 1,
Lot 2, and Lot 3 Vail Das Schone Filing No. 1 and Lot 1, Vail Das Schone
Filing 3, and setting forth details in regard thereto. (PEC19-0046)
This item will be heard concurrently with PEC19-0047 and PEC19-0048.
Applicant: TNREF III Bravo Vail LLC True North Management Group
LLC, represented by Mauriello Planning Group
Planner: Greg Roy
Motion: Approve with Conditions
First: Lockman Second: Seibert Vote: 4-3-0 (Pratt,
Kjesbo and Gillette opposed)
Conditions:
1.This approval is contingent upon the applicant receiving
approval of the Special Development District application
PEC19-0048 and the Zoning Code Amendment application
PEC19-0047.
Planner Roy continued his presentation, focusing on the SDD and
Exterior Alteration. Roy walked through the changes that occurred since
the previous hearing including the changes to the EHU building including
massing and building entrances.
June 2, 2020 - Page 471 of 772
Roy spoke to changes in the snow storage management plan and the
inclusion of the grasscrete pavers. Many of the changes reduced the
level of deviations necessary and has improved the functionality of the
project.
Roy spoke to the deviations requested, the benefits offered and the
reason for the level of AIPP contribution requested. Roy spoke to the
changes in building height.
Dominic had no further comments but referenced the criteria in the staff
report and applicant narrative.
PUBLIC COMMENT
Tanya Boyd- Concerned with the sun shading of the EHU building and
how snow storage and removal will occur.
Tom Kassmel-Town Engineer-Spoke to the separated sidewalk allowing
an adequate area for snow storage. Recognized that additional sun
shading will require increased maintenance.
Pat Lauer- Spoke to the mass of the building and the image shown and
feels that it is excessive in size. Would require removing the entire top
floor. Not just chunks. Concerned about the shading creating unsafe
conditions for pedestrians. Concerned with the public transit capacity and
that Highline does not have the shuttle capacity. Feels that the EHU
building is out of character with the neighborhood. Double standard with
the developer being allowed things that are not otherwise permissible.
Tanya Boyd- Concerned about large vehicles, buses and tractor trailers
and a lack of parking for them. Concerned about parking for EHU
building. Has witnessed a lot of parking on site during the winter months.
Kathy Standage-President of the Tall Pines HOA on Chamonix. Major
concerns with parking for the EHU building. Concerned with the
aesthetics of the EHU building. Cheep façade that does not match hotel.
People in West Vail are not happy about this. How can this be stopped
from being pushed through?
Mike Spiers- Is this the last opportunity to discuss the height of the EHU
building? What would be the harm in reducing the EHU building to an
acceptable height? Need a compromise here.
Pat Lauer- Where do employees park at the Double Tree? Does anybody
care about the mature trees that will be removed? Are there any penalties
if the project takes too long?
Steve Lindstrom- Speaking for Housing Authority- This proposal is
absolutely what we should be doing. On the bus line, close to services
with minimal infrastructure needed.
Kathy Standish-No discussion on pollution, trees removal etc. June 2, 2020 - Page 472 of 772
END OF PUBLIC COMMENT
Brian Gillette- Its public comment not negotiation between the public and
the applicant. Great letters have been received that speak to how the
application relate to the standards and guidelines. The public has done a
great job.
Kurz- Questions arose concerning employee parking and large buses.
Planner Roy spoke to the parking study that was provided and that the
parking provided exceeds that what demand is anticipated.
Dominic spoke to required parking of the EHU building based on other
similar developments. Dominic also spoke to tour buses and other large
vehicles.
COMMISSIONER COMMENTS
Rollie- Still concerned with the height of the EHU building. Need to
remove a total floor. Asked to look at the elevations again as some of the
mass is increased with the proposal. Ok with the parking being managed.
Still have a problem with height being over 38’ on the EHU building.
Support staff on public art.
Lockman- Likes other commissioners’ comments. Looking at criteria and
process, a good process. Interior walkway through the parking lot is a
good compromise but that easement on the east is important. Agrees
with staff on AIPP contribution.
Siebert- Good changes made to EHU building. Will support.
Gillette- A lot can be done to improve this development. Questions public
benefit and deviations. Need to reduce deviation or add increased public
benefit.
Perez- Applicant has made good changes. Not perfect but a lot of the
concerns are view based. Project good for community.
Pratt- Very concerned about the height, bulk and mass of the EHU
building. Concerned with criteria 1,2 and 6 in the staff report. Questions
about loading and trash. (Planner ROY responded to question) Question
for the applicant concerning placing the EHU building along the east side
of the property (Dominic responded that it was looked at and did not
work) Thinks north south is a better orientation.
Kurz- Feels that the applicant has made significant changes. Has
concerns with the height but does not want to lose units. Thinks there are
more public benefits including tax revenue. Feels the sun/shading has
been addressed. We should ask the applicant to table so more can be
worked on. Feels that the public benefit outweighs deviation. Supports
staff on AIPP contribution.
June 2, 2020 - Page 473 of 772
Dominic: Ok with AIPP. Would like to move forward to the TC.
2.7. A request for a recommendation to the Vail Town Council of an
application establishing Special Development District No. 42 (Highline
Hotel Renovation 2019), pursuant to Section 12-9(A), Special
Development Districts, Vail Town Code, to allow for the development of a
hotel addition to add 79 accommodation units, convert 19 existing
dwelling units to 19 limited service lodge units, create a 12 unit EHU
dormitory, remove office space, add conference space and build 16 unit
employee housing apartment building, and related uses and
improvements, located at 2211 North Frontage Road West which is
composed of Tract C, Lot 1, Lot 2, and Lot 3 Vail Das Schone Filing No. 1
and Lot 1, Vail Das Schone Filing 3, and setting forth details in regard
thereto. (PEC19-0048)
This item will be heard concurrently with PEC19-0047 and PEC19-0046.
Applicant: TNREF III Bravo Vail LLC True North Management Group
LLC, represented by Mauriello Planning Group
Planner: Greg Roy
Motion: Approve with Conditions
First: Lockman Second: Seibert Vote: 4-3-0 (Pratt,
Kjesbo and Gillette opposed)
Conditions:
1. Applicant shall obtain approval for subdivision before a
certificate of occupancy for the EHU building is granted.
2. The applicant shall obtain the certificate of occupancy for the
EHU building before requesting a certificate of occupancy for
the hotel addition.
3. Approval is contingent upon the applicant obtaining Town of Vail
approval of an associated design review application.
4. The applicant shall obtain approval for a conditional use permit
for the commercial space on the first floor before a building
permit is issued.
5. Applicant shall obtain approval from Holy Cross to vacate the
easement under the proposed hotel addition before a building
permit is issued.
6. Applicant shall set aside two (2) three-bedroom units and two
(2) one-bedroom units in the EHU building not to be included in
the mitigation bank.
7. Prior to the issuance of a certificate of occupancy, the applicant
shall record deed restrictions with the Eagle County Clerk and
Recorder, in a format approved by the Town Attorney, for the
Type III Employee Housing Units.
June 2, 2020 - Page 474 of 772
8. The applicant shall coordinate and resolve landscape conflicts
with utilities and sight distance before a building permit is
issued.
9. The applicant shall show the drainage outfall for Chamonix
Lane swale in the building permit submittal.
10. The applicant shall provide a 2’ gravel shoulder along Chamonix
Lane and side slopes of swale no steeper than 2:1.
11. Applicant shall increase AIPP contribution to $32,500 and the
installation shall be completed before a certificate of occupancy
for the hotel addition is granted.
12. Applicant shall correct plans to meet the comments from the
Fire Department prior to the submittal for a building permit.
13. Applicant shall update all plan pages to match the latest
submission prior to the submittal for the Design Review Board
application.
(Please see commentary from previous item)
2.8. A request for the review of a variance from Section 12-7A-11: Parking
and Loading, Vail Town Code in accordance with the provisions of
Section 12- 17, Variances, Vail Town Code, to allow for a variance from
the prohibition of parking located within the front setback and from the
requirement that 75% of the required parking be located within the main
building, located at 366 Hanson Ranch Road/Lot 1, 366 Hanson Ranch
Road Subdivision, and setting forth details in regard thereto. (PEC20-
0003) 2 min.
The applicant has requested that this item be continued to the April 27,
2020 public hearing.
Applicant: Vailpoint LLC, represented by Sarah J Baker PC
Planner: Jonathan Spence
Motion: Continue to April 27, 2020
First: Perez Second: Kjesbo Vote: 7-0-0
2.9. A request for the review of a Major Exterior Alteration, pursuant to
Section 12-7A-12, Exterior Alterations or Modifications, Vail Town Code,
to allow for the replacement of the existing structure with a seven (7)
suite lodge with related site improvements, located at 366 Hanson Ranch
Road/Lot 1, 366 Hanson Ranch Road Subdivision, and setting forth
details in regard thereto. (PEC19-0008) 2 min.
The applicant has requested that this item be continued to the April 27,
2020 public hearing.
Applicant: Vailpoint LLC, represented by Sarah J Baker PC
Planner: Jonathan Spence
June 2, 2020 - Page 475 of 772
Motion: Continue to April 27, 2020
First: Gillette Second: Perez Vote: 7-0-0
2.10. A request for a recommendation to the Vail Town Council, pursuant to
Section 12-3-7, Amendment, Vail Town Code, for prescribed regulations
amendments to Title 12, Zoning Regulations, Vail Town Code, to amend
Section 12-6I-8: Parking and Loading, to revise the requirements related
to mobility and onsite parking in the Housing (H) District, and setting forth
details in regard thereto. (PEC20-0005) 2 min.
The applicant has requested this item be tabled to April 27, 2020.
Applicant: Town of Vail
Planner: Jonathan Spence
Motion: Tabled to April 27, 2020
First: Kjesbo Second: Perez Vote: 7-0-0
3. Approval of Minutes
3.1. March 9, 2020 PEC Results
Motion: Approve
First: Gillette Second: Perez Vote: 6-0-1 (Pratt
recused)
4. Adjournment
Motion: Adjourn
First: Kjesbo Second: Perez 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. Please call 711 for
sign language interpretation 48 hour prior to meeting time.
Community Development Department Published in the Vail Daily April 10, 2020
June 2, 2020 - Page 476 of 772
TO: Planning and Environmental Commission
FROM: Community Development Department
DATE: April 13, 2020
SUBJECT: A Zoning Code Amendment/Rezoning, pursuant to Section 12 -3-7C1,
Zone District Boundary Amendment, Vail town Code, to change the zone
district from Commercial Core 3 (CC3) to Public Accommodation – 2 (PA-
2) on a parcel of land located at 2211 North Frontage Road West which is
composed of Tract C, Lot 1, Lot 2, and Lot 3 Vail Das Schone Filing No. 1
and Lot 1, Vail Das Schone Filing 3, and setting forth details in regard
thereto. (PEC19-0047)
Applicant: TNFREF III Bravo Vail LLC represented by Mauriello
Planning Group & Triumph Development
Planner: Greg Roy
I. SUMMARY
The applicant, TNFREF lll Bravo Vail LLC, represented by Mauriello Planning Group
and Triumph Development, is requesting a recommendation to the Vail Town Council
for a zone district boundary amendment, pursuant to Section 12 -3-7, Amendment, Vail
Town Code, to allow for the rezoning of 2211 N. Frontage Road West, which is
composed of Tract C, Lot 1, Lot 2, and Lot 3 Vail Das Schone Filing No. 1 and Lot 1,
Vail Das Schone Filing 3, from Commercial Core 3 (CC3) to Public Accommodation – 2
(PA-2).
Based upon Staff’s review of the criteria outline in Section Vl of this memorandum and
the evidence and testimony presented, the Community Development Department
recommends the Planning and Environmental Commission forward a
recommendation of approval to the Vail Town Council.
June 2, 2020 - Page 477 of 772
Town of Vail Page 2
II. DESCRIPTION OF REQUEST
The applicant, is proposing to rezone the parcel with the existing hotel from CC3 to the
PA-2 zone district, to allow for the expansion of the hotel which is not currently allowed
under the CC3 zone district. Switching to the PA-2 zone district would make the hotel no
longer a non-conforming use and allow the expansion that includes the following:
• Development of a hotel addition to add 79 accommodation units
• Convert 19 existing dwelling units to 19 limited service lodge units
• Create a 12 unit EHU dormitory
• Remove office space
• Add conference space
• Build 15 unit employee housing apartment building
While these additions are proposed concurrently through a separate application, the
zoning designation will remain with or without the approval or construction of the
aforementioned proposed additions.
The proposed rezoning is being reviewed concurrently with a Special Development
District, and Major Exterior Alteration applications. These applications are dependent on
the zone boundary amendment being approved by the Vail town Council.
Included with this memorandum are the following for review by the commission:
A. Vicinity Map
B. Applicant Narrative, 3-16-2020
C. Public Comment – Patricia Lauer – 12-3-2019
D. Public Comment – Tania Boyd – 12-3-2019
E. Public Comment – Patricia Lauer – 2-4-2020
F. Public Comment – Elyse Howard – 2-3-2020
G. Public Comment – Chris Romer – 1-27-2020
H. Public Comment – Carey and Brett August – 12-7-2019
I. Public Comment – James Pyke – 2-26-2020
J. Public Comment – VCBA – 3-4-2020
K. Vail Local Housing Authority Letter – 12-18-2019
L. Public Comment – Michael Spiers – 3-3-2020
M. PEC Minutes from Meeting on 12-09-2019
N. PEC Minutes from Meeting on 3-09-2020
II. BACKGROUND
In 1980 the hotel was built in the County and annexed into the town per Ordinance No.
43, Series of 1980 and subsequently zoned CC3 within the required ninety days. The
annexation ordinance was later overturned by the Colorado Court of Appeals due to a
lack on contiguity. The property was annexed again with Ordinance No. 1, Series 1986
and was again zoned CC3 through Ordinance No. 10, Series of 1986.
June 2, 2020 - Page 478 of 772
Town of Vail Page 3
Over time there have been multiple applications for small additions or exterior
alterations. Most recently was the exterior alteration that allowed for restriping of the
parking lot, pool upgrades, and exterior facade upgrades to the building in 2016.
This application was discussed as part of a work session with the PEC on December
9th, 2019. The Design Review Board also saw the application for a conceptual review on
December 18th, 2019. The PEC heard this application on March 9th and the application
was tabled to the March 23rd meeting at the applicant’s request. Due to the March 23rd
meeting being postponed the application is to be reviewed at the April 13th meeting.
III. APPLICABLE PLANNING DOCUMENTS
Staff believes that following provisions of the Vail Land Use Plan, the Vail Village Master
Plan and the Vail Town Code are relevant to the review of this proposal:
Vail Town Code
TITLE 12: ZONING REGULATIONS, VAIL TOWN CODE
June 2, 2020 - Page 479 of 772
Town of Vail Page 4
12-3-7: AMENDMENT:
A. Prescription: The regulations prescribed in this title and the boundaries of the zone
districts shown on the official zoning map may be amended, or repealed by the town
council in accordance with the procedures prescribed in this chapter.
B. Initiation:
1. An amendment of the regulations of this title or a change in zone district
boundaries may be initiated by the town council on its own motion, by the
planning and environmental commission on its own motion, by petition of any
resident or property owner in the town, or by the administrator.
2. A petition for amendment of the regulations or a change in zone district
boundaries shall be filed on a form to be prescribed by the administrator. The
petition shall include a summary of the proposed revision of the regulations,
or a complete description of proposed changes in zone district boundaries
and a map indicating the existing and proposed zone district boundaries. If
the petition is for a change in zone district boundaries, the petition shall
include a list of the owners of all properties within the boundaries of the area
to be rezoned or changed, and the property adjacent thereto. The owners' list
shall include the names of all owners, their mailing and street addresses, and
the legal description of the property owned by each. Accompanying the list
shall be stamped, addressed envelopes to each owner to be used for the
mailing of the notice of hearing. The petition also shall include such additional
information as prescribed by the administrator.
C. Criteria And Findings:
1. Zone District Boundary Amendment:
a. Factors, Enumerated: Before acting on an application for a zone
district boundary amendment, the planning and environmental
commission and town council shall consider the following factors with
respect to the requested zone district boundary amendment:
(1) The extent to which the zone district amendment is consistent
with all the applicable elements of the adopted goals, objectives
and policies outlined in the Vail comprehensive plan and is
compatible with the development objectives of the town; and
(2) The extent to which the zone district amendment is suitable with
the existing and potential land uses on the site and existing and
potential surrounding land uses as set out in the town's adopted
planning documents; and
June 2, 2020 - Page 480 of 772
Town of Vail Page 5
(3) The extent to which the zone district amendment presents a
harmonious, convenient, workable relationship among land uses
consistent with municipal development objectives; and
(4) The extent to which the zone district amendment provides for
the growth of an orderly viable community and does not constitute
spot zoning as the amendment serves the best interests of the
community as a whole; and
(5) The extent to which the zone district amendment results in
adverse or beneficial impacts on the natural environment, including,
but not limited to, water quality, air quality, noise, vegetation,
riparian corridors, hillsides and other desirable natural features; and
(6) The extent to which the zone district amendment is consistent
with the purpose statement of the proposed zone district; and
(7) The extent to which the zone district amendment demonstrates
how conditions have changed since the zoning designation of the
subject property was adopted and is no longer appropriate; and
(8) Such other factors and criteria as the commission and/or council
deem applicable to the proposed rezoning.
b. Necessary Findings: Before recommending and/or granting an
approval of an application for a zone district boundary amendment, the
planning and environmental commission and the town council shall
make the following findings with respect to the requested amendment:
(1) That the amendment is consistent with the adopted goals,
objectives and policies outlined in the Vail comprehensive plan and
compatible with the development objectives of the town; and
(2) That the amendment is compatible with and suitable to adjacent
uses and appropriate for the surrounding areas; and
(3) That the amendment promotes the health, safety, morals, and
general welfare of the town and promotes the coordinated and
harmonious development of the town in a manner that conserves
and enhances its natural environment and its established character
as a resort and residential community of the highest quality.
ARTICLE D. COMMERCIAL CORE 3 (CC3) DISTRICT
12-7D-1: PERMITTED USES:
June 2, 2020 - Page 481 of 772
Town of Vail Page 6
The following uses shall be permitted in the commercial core 3 district:
Automated teller
machines (ATMs)
exterior to a building.
Banks and financial
institutions.
Communications
antennas and
appurtenant equipment.
Eating and drinking
establishments,
including the following:
Cocktail lounges and
bars.
Coffee shops.
Fountain and sandwich
shops.
Restaurants.
Employee housing units,
as further regulated by
chapter 13 of this title.
Health clubs.
Personal services and
repair shops, including
the following:
Beauty and barber
shops.
Business and office
services.
Cleaning and laundry
pick up agencies without
bulk cleaning or dyeing.
Laundromats.
Shoe repair.
Small appliance repair
shops, excluding
furniture repair.
Tailors and
dressmakers.
Travel and ticket
agencies.
Professional offices,
business offices, and
studios.
Retail stores and
establishments without
limit as to floor area
including the following:
Apparel stores.
Art supply stores and
galleries.
Auto parts stores.
Bakeries and
confectioneries,
preparation of products
for sale on the premises.
Bookstores.
Building materials stores
without outdoor storage.
Camera stores and
photographic studios.
Candy stores.
Chinaware and
glassware stores.
Delicatessens and
specialty food stores.
Department and general
merchandise stores.
Drugstores.
Electronics sales and
repair shops.
Florists.
Food stores.
Furniture stores.
Gift shops.
Hardware stores.
June 2, 2020 - Page 482 of 772
Town of Vail Page 7
Health food stores.
Hobby stores.
Household appliance
stores.
Jewelry stores.
Leather goods stores.
Liquor stores.
Music and record stores.
Newsstands and
tobacco stores.
Photographic studios.
Radio and television
broadcasting studios.
Sporting goods stores.
Stationery stores.
Supermarkets.
Toy stores.
Variety stores.
Yardage and dry goods
stores.
Additional offices, business, or services determined to be similar to permitted uses in
accordance with the provisions of this section. (Ord. 12(2008) § 13)
12-7D-2: CONDITIONAL USES:
The following conditional uses shall be permitted in the commercial core 3 district,
subject to issuance of a conditional use permit in accord with the provisions of chapter
16 of this title:
Any use permitted by section 12-7D-1 of this article which is not conducted entirely
within a building.
Bed and breakfasts, as
further regulated by
section 12-14-18 of this
title.
Brewpubs.
Child daycare center.
Commercial laundry and
cleaning services, bulk
plant.
Commercial storage.
Dog kennels.
Drive-up facilities.
Major arcades.
Massage parlors.
Outside car wash.
Pet shops.
Public buildings,
grounds, and facilities.
Public park and
recreation facilities.
Public utility and public
service uses.
Radio and television
signal relay transmission
facilities.
Religious institutions.
June 2, 2020 - Page 483 of 772
Town of Vail Page 8
Theaters, meeting
rooms, and convention
facilities.
Transportation
businesses. (Ord.
2(2016) § 10: Ord.
12(2008) § 13)
12-7D-3: ACCESSORY USES:
The following accessory uses shall be permitted in the commercial core 3 district:
Home occupations, subject to issuance of a home occupation permit in accordance with
the provisions of section 12-14-12 of this title.
Minor arcades.
Swimming pools, tennis courts, patios, or other recreation facilities customarily
incidental to conditional residential.
Other uses customarily incidental and accessory to permitted or conditional uses, and
necessary for the operation thereof. (Ord. 29(2005) § 24: Ord. 6(1982) § 5(b): Ord.
11(1981) § 1)
12-7D-4: LOT AREA AND SITE DIMENSIONS:
The minimum lot or site area shall be twenty five thousand (25,000) square feet of
buildable area, and each site shall have a minimum frontage of o ne hundred feet (100').
(Ord. 11(1981) § 1)
12-7D-5: SETBACKS:
In the commercial core 3 district, the setback shall be twenty feet (20') on all exterior
boundaries of the zone district. (Ord. 29(2005) § 24: Ord. 11(1981) § 1)
12-7D-6: HEIGHT:
For a flat roof or mansard roof, the height of buildings shall not exceed thirty five feet
(35'). For a sloping roof, the height of buildings shall not exceed thirty eight feet (38').
(Ord. 11(1981) § 1)
12-7D-7: DENSITY CONTROL:
Not more than thirty (30) square feet of gross residential floor area (GRFA) shall be
permitted for each one hundred (100) square feet of buildable site area. Total density
June 2, 2020 - Page 484 of 772
Town of Vail Page 9
shall not exceed twelve (12) dwelling units per acre of buildable site area. (Ord.
11(1981) § 1)
12-7D-8: SITE COVERAGE:
Site coverage shall not exceed forty percent (40%) of the total site area. (Ord. 17(1991)
§ 10: Ord. 11(1981) § 1)
12-7D-9: LANDSCAPING AND SITE DEVELOPMENT:
At least twenty five percent (25%) of the total site shall be landscaped. The minimum
width and length of any area qualifying as landscaping shall be fifteen feet (15') with a
minimum area not less than three hundred (300) square feet. (Ord. 11(1981) § 1)
12-7D-10: PARKING AND LOADING:
Off street parking and loading shall be provided in accordance with chapter 10 of this
title. No parking or loading area shall be located in any required front setback area.
(Ord. 11(1981) § 1)
12-7D-11: LOCATION OF BUSINESS ACTIVITY:
A. Limitation; Exception: All permitted and conditional uses shall be operated and
conducted entirely within a building, except for permitted loading areas and such
activities as may be specifically authorized to be unenclosed by a conditional use
permit and the outdoor display of goods. For purposes of this section, "conducted
entirely within a building" means that all activities related to the permitted use,
including contacting potential customers and clients, must occur completely inside of
a building, and not in an open doorway of the building.
B. Outdoor Displays: The area to be used for an outdoor display shall be located directly in
front of the establishment displaying the goods and entirely upon the establishment's own
property. Sidewalks, building entrances and exits, driveways and streets shall not be
obstructed by outdoor displays. (Ord. 11(2019) § 3: Ord. 34(1982) § 3: Ord. 11(1981)
§ 1)ARTICLE J. PUBLIC ACCOMMODATION-2 (PA-2) DISTRICT
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
June 2, 2020 - Page 485 of 772
Town of Vail Page 10
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. (Ord. 2(2006) § 2)
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. (Ord. 1(2 008) § 23:
Ord. 2(2006) § 2)
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.
June 2, 2020 - Page 486 of 772
Town of Vail Page 11
Public utility and public service uses.
Religious institutions.
Theaters and convention facilities. (Ord. 2(2016) § 18: Ord. 12(2008) § 25: Ord. 1(2008)
§ 23: Ord. 2(2006) § 2)
12-7J-4: ACCESSORY USES:
The following accessory uses shall be permitted in the PA -2 district:
Home occupations, subject to issuance of a home occupa tion permit in accordance with
the provisions of section 12-14-12 of this title.
Meeting rooms.
Swimming pools, tennis courts, patios, or other recreation facilities customarily
incidental to permitted lodge uses.
Other uses customarily incidental and accessory to permitted or conditional uses, and
necessary for the operation thereof. (Ord. 2(2006) § 2)
12-7J-5: LOT AREA AND SITE DIMENSIONS:
The minimum lot or site area shall be ten thousand (10,000) square feet of buildable
area and each site shall have a minimum frontage of thirty feet (30'). Each site shall be
of a size and shape capable of enclosing a square area eighty feet (80') on each side
within its boundaries. (Ord. 2(2006) § 2)
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.
June 2, 2020 - Page 487 of 772
Town of Vail Page 12
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. (Ord. 2(2006) § 2)
12-7J-7: HEIGHT:
For a flat roof 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').
(Ord. 2(2006) § 2)
12-7J-8: DENSITY CONTROL:
Up to one hundred fifty (150) square feet of gross residential floor area (GRFA) may be
permitted for each one hundred (100) square feet of buildable site area. Final
determination of allowable gross residential floor area shall be made by the planning
and environmental commission in accordance with section 12-7J-12 of this article.
Specifically, in determining allowable gross residential floor area the planning and
environmental commission shall make a finding that proposed gross residential floor
area is in conformance with applicable elements of the Vail comprehensive plan. Total
density shall not exceed twenty five (25) dwelling units per acre of buildable site area.
For the purposes of calculating density, employee housing units, limited service lodge
units, accommodation units and fractional fee club units shall not be counted towards
density (dwelling units per acre).
A dwelling unit in a multiple-family building may include one or more attached
accommodation units. (Ord. 2(2006) § 2)
12-7J-9: SITE COVERAGE:
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. (Ord. 2(2006) § 2)
June 2, 2020 - Page 488 of 772
Town of Vail Page 13
12-7J-10: LANDSCAPING AND SITE DEVELOPMENT:
At least thirty percent (30%) of the total site area shall be landscaped. The minimum
width and length of any area qualifying as landscaping shall be fifteen feet (15') with a
minimum area not less than three hundred (300) square feet. (Ord. 2(2006) § 2)
12-7J-11: PARKING AND LOADING:
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 g uest 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. (Ord. 2(2006) § 2)
12-7J-12: EXTERIOR ALTERATIONS OR MODIFICATIONS:
A. Review Required: The construction of a new building or the alteration of an existing
building shall be reviewed by the design review board in accordance with chapter 11
of this title. However, any project which adds additional dwelling units,
accommodation units, fractional fee club units, limited service lodge units, any
project which adds more than one thousand (1,000) square feet of commercial floor
area or common space, or any project which has substantial off site impacts (as
determined by the administrator) shall be reviewed by the planning and
environmental commission as a major exterior alteration in accordance with this
chapter and section 12-3-6 of this title. Complete applications for major exterior
alterations shall be submitted in accordance with administrative schedules
developed by the department of community development for planning and
environmental commission and design review board review. The following submittal
items are required:
1. Application: An application shall be made by the owner of the building or the
building owner's authorized agent or representative on a form provided by the
administrator. Any application for condominiumized buildings shall be
authorized by the condominium association in conformity with all pertinent
requirements of the condominium association's declarations.
2. Application; Contents: The administrator shall establish the submittal
requirements for an exterior alteration or modification application. A complete
list of the submittal requirements shall be maintained by the administrator and
filed in the department of community development. Certain submittal
requirements may be waived and/or modified by the administrator and/or the
reviewing body if it is demonstrated by the applicant that the information and
June 2, 2020 - Page 489 of 772
Town of Vail Page 14
materials required are not relevant to the proposed development or applicable
to the planning documents that comprise the Vail comprehensive plan. The
administrator and/or the reviewing body may require the submission of
additional plans, drawings, specifications, samples and other materials if
deemed necessary to properly evaluate the proposal.
3. Work Sessions/Conceptual Review: If requested by either the applicant or the
administrator, submittals may proceed to a work session with the planning
and environmental commission, a conceptual review with the design review
board, or a work session with the town council.
4. Hearing: The public hearing before the planning and environmental
commission shall be held in accordance with section 12-3-6 of this title. The
planning and environmental commission may approve the application as
submitted, approve the application with conditions or modifications, or deny
the application. The decision of the planning and environmental commission
may be appealed to the town council in accordance with section 12-3-3 of this
title.
5. Lapse Of Approval: Approval of an exterior alteration as prescribed by this
article shall lapse and become void three (3) years following the date of
approval by the design review board unless, prior to the expiration, a building
permit is issued and construction is commenced and diligently pursued to
completion. Administrative extensions shall be allowed for reasonable and
unexpected delays as long as code provisions affecting the proposal have not
changed. (Ord. 2(2006) § 2)
12-7J-13: COMPLIANCE BURDEN:
It shall be the burden of the applicant to prove by a preponderance of the evidence
before the planning and environmental commission and the design review board that
the proposed exterior alteration or new development is in compliance with the purposes
of the public accommodation-2 (PA-2) zone district, and that the proposal does not
otherwise have a significant negative effect on the character of the neighborhood, and
that the proposal substantially complies with other applicable elements of the Vail
comprehensive plan. (Ord. 2(2006) § 2)
12-7J-14: MITIGATION OF DEVELOPMENT IMPACTS:
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
June 2, 2020 - Page 490 of 772
Town of Vail Page 15
determined by the 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. (Ord.
2(2006) § 2)
12-7J-15: LOCATION OF BUSINESS ACTIVITY:
A. Limitations; Exception: All permitted and conditional uses shall be operated and
conducted entirely within a building except for permitted parking and loading areas
and such activities as may be specifically authorized to be unenclosed by a
conditional use permit and the outdoor display of goods. For purposes of this
section, "conducted entirely within a building" means that all activities related to the
permitted use, including contacting potential customers and clients, must occur
completely inside of a building, and not in an open doorway of the building .
B. Outdoor Displays: The area to be used for an outdoor display shall be located
directly in front of the establishment displaying the goods and entirely upon the
establishment's own property. Sidewalks, building entrances and exits, driveways
and streets shall not be obstructed by outdoor displays. (Ord. 11(2019) § 10)
Vail Land Use Plan (in part)
Chapter ll – Land Use Goals/Policies
3. Commercial
3.1. The hotel bed base should be preserved and use more efficiently.
3.2. The Village and Lionshead areas the best location for hotels to serve
the future needs of destination skiers.
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.
Chapter IV – Proposed Land Use
2. Key Goals
June 2, 2020 - Page 491 of 772
Town of Vail Page 16
2.A.2 Commercial growth should be concentrated primarily in existing
commercial areas to accommodate both local and visitor needs.
2.A.3 New hotels should continue to be located primarily in the Village and
Lionshead areas.
5. “Preferred Plan” Land Use Pattern
5.B.4 Community Commercial: This new category has been designated for
the West Vail commercial area, which is primarily oriented to serve the
needs of the permanent resident and the long-term visitor. Because the
community expressed the desire to concentrate commercial uses within
existing commercial nodes, no new commercial areas have been
designated. The CC land use area contains 24 acres or 1% of the land
area.
This table also shows that there will be a deficit of 70,272 square feet or
approximately 3.3 acres of land for commercial / retail uses. This may be
accommodated through: 1) increasing intensities of use within the core
areas; 2) adding commercial square footage within Lionshead through the
relocation of the Gondola building and possible addition of commercial
space to the parking structure. These are both options being discussed
but are not yet quantified. These two options could then provide the
additional 51,850 square feet of skier-related retail space; 3) addition of
support retail outside of the core areas within the Community Office land
use area; and, 4) increased intensity of use in the West Vail Community
Commercial undeveloped area. These two options could be utilized to
accommodate the 18,422 square foot shortfall of local related retail space.
It was decided to rely on the marketplace to accommodate this additional
retail demand through these types of options, rather than designating new
June 2, 2020 - Page 492 of 772
Town of Vail Page 17
commercial areas away from existing nodes, which would have been
contrary to the desires expressed by the community at large.
IV. SITE ANALYSIS
Address: 2211 North Frontage Road West
Legal Description: Tract C, Lot 1, Lot 2, and Lot 3 Vail Das Schone Filing
No. 1 and Lot 1, Vail Das Schone Filing 3
Existing Zoning: Commercial Core 3 (CC3)
Proposed Zoning: Public Accommodation-2 (PA-2) District
Land Use Plan Designation: Community Commercial
Current Land Use: Lodge
Proposed Land Use: Lodge
Geological Hazards: Debris Flow, Steep Slopes and Rock Fall Hazard
Development
Standard
Community
Commercial 3
(CC3)
Public
Accommodation 2
(PA-2)
Lot Size Min. 25,000 sq. ft.
buildable area
Min. 10,000 sq. ft.
buildable area
Minimum Setbacks Front – 20’
Sides – 20’
Rear – 20’
Front – 20’
Sides – 20’
Rear – 20’
Maximum Height 38 ft. max - sloped
35 ft. max - mansard
48 ft. max - sloped
45 ft. max - mansard
Density Max: 30 sq. ft. GRFA per
100 sq. ft. buildable site
area
Max 12 DUs/Acre
Max: 150 sq. ft. GRFA
per 100 sq. ft. buildable
site area
Max 25 DUs/Acre
Site coverage
maximum
Max. 40% of site area Max. 65% of site area
Minimum Landscaping Min. 25% of site area Min. 30% of site area
V. SURROUNDING LAND USES AND ZONING
Existing Use Zone District
North: Multi-family/Single-
family
Two-Family Primary/Secondary Residential
South: I-70 N/A
East: Commercial Commercial Core 3 (CC3)
W est: Commercial/Housing Commercial Core 3 (CC3) & Housing (H)
June 2, 2020 - Page 493 of 772
Town of Vail Page 18
VI. REVIEW CRITERIA
Before acting on an application for a zone district boundary amendment, the Planning
and environmental Commission shall consider the following factors with respect to the
requested zone district boundary amendment:
Zone District Boundary Amendment Factors
1. The extent to which the zone district amendment is consistent with all the
applicable elements of the adopted goals, objectives and policies outlined
in the Vail comprehensive plan and is compatible with the development
objectives of the town.
The proposed zone district amendment is supported by the Vail comprehensive
plan. The Comprehensive plan values a healthy economy which includes a “year-
round economy that caters to full and part-time residents, visitors and business
owners and operators. A growing employment and revenue base supports the
economy . . .”
Other applicable goals met by this application include the following Land Use
Plan goals:
1.3 Quality development should be maintained and upgraded whenever possible.
3.1 The hotel bed base should be preserved and used more efficiently.
3.3 Hotel are important to the continued success of the Town of Vail, therefore
conversion to condominiums should be discouraged.
Staff finds that the proposed zone district amendment conforms to this criterion.
2. The extent to which the zone district amendment is suitable with the
existing and potential land uses on the site and existing and potential
surrounding land uses as set out in the town’s adopted planning
documents.
The proposed zone district amendment is suitable to the existing and potential
surrounding land uses as set out in the town’s adopted planning documents
when taken into context with the potential future plans for the area . The
“Preferred Plan” in the Town’s adopted Land Use Plan reviewed the proposed
land use categories and assessed the feasibility and compatibility with adjacent
existing land uses. The Plan included Community Commercial as a new category
designated for the West Vail commercial area to serve the needs of permanent
residents and long-term visitors.
June 2, 2020 - Page 494 of 772
Town of Vail Page 19
The proposed rezoning to PA-2 alone is compatible with this land use
designation with the amount of commercial development on this site. Within the
PA-2 zone district commercial uses are limited to ten (10) percent of the total
GRFA on the site and fifteen (15) percent with a conditional use permit. The
amount of commercial on this site is within fifteen p ercent, which will require a
CUP, but still has room to expand in the future.
If there is desire for more commercial expansion in the future that fits within the
15% limit then the CUP could be amended to allow it. If there is desire for more
than that amount, a change to allowed uses on the site could be considered
based on the planning documents at that time.
Staff finds that the proposed zone district amendment conforms to this criterion.
3. The extent to which the zone district amendment presents a harmonious,
convenient, workable relationship among land uses consistent with
municipal development objectives.
The proposed zone district amendment results in a harmonious relationship
among land uses. The rezoning is consistent with the following goals, objectives
and policies of the Land Use Plan:
• Goal 3.2 “The Village and Lionshead areas [are] the best location for
hotels to serve the future needs of destination skiers.”
• Goal 3.4 “Commercial growth should be concentrated in existing
commercial area to accommodate both local and visitor needs.”
The site includes commercial aspects and as stated previously has room to grow
within the PA-2 district with the use of the CUP process. As hotels are
considered a commercial use then allowing the hotel to remain and expand
would fit within the Goal 3.4.
Goal 3.2 above does not restrict hotels from being located in other areas of the
town, but simply states that the best areas are in the villages. This distinction is
what allows the PA-2 zone district itself to not conflict with the Land Use Plan.
Staff finds that the proposed zone district amendment conforms to this criterion.
4. The extent to which the zone district amendment provides for the growth of
an orderly viable community and does not constitute spot zoning as the
amendment serves the best interests of the community as a whole.
The proposed zone district amendment does serve the best interest of the
community as a whole. The comprehensive plan encourages a year round
healthy economy, which is aided by the redevelopment of infill properties. The
existing hotel has not been significantly upgraded since its original construction
June 2, 2020 - Page 495 of 772
Town of Vail Page 20
and an amendment to allow that to occur would serve as a benefit to the
community.
Staff finds that the proposed zone district amendment conforms to this criterion.
5. The extent to which the zone district amendment results in adverse or
beneficial impacts on the natural environment, including, but not limited to,
water quality, air quality, noise, vegetation, riparian corridors, hillsides and
other desirable natural features.
As this area is currently developed there is not a natural environment that has not
already been disturbed. The proposed uses being added to this existing
development would not negatively affect riparian corridors, air quality, water
quality, or other environmental aspects. The application is propo sing to add
vegetation to the site.
Staff finds that the proposed zone district amendment conforms to this criterion.
6. The extent to which the zone district amendment is consistent with the
purpose statement of the proposed zone district.
The proposed zone district amendment is generally consistent with the PA -2
zone district’s purpose, as it allows for lodges and residential accommodations
on a short-term basis outside of the core areas of the villages. It also includes the
commercial operations that support the lodge use.
Staff finds that the proposed zone district amendment conforms to this criterion.
7. The extent to which the zone district amendment demonstrates how
conditions have changed since the zoning designation of the subject
property was adopted and is no longer appropriate.
The PA-2 zone district was created in 2006, more than 20 years after this
property was originally zoned CC3. The PA-2 zone district is intended to “provide
for lodging sites located outside the periphery of the town’s Vail Village and
Lionshead commercial core areas”. It is differentiated from the Public
Accommodation zone district by the fact that it allows for limited service lodge
units which were desired to be kept out of the village centers. PA-2 allows for
hotels to be added to areas around the town where it is compatible with adjacent
uses. While the physical conditions have not changed, the creation of the PA-2
shows that the town believes that there are locations appropriate for hotels
outside of the core area.
Staff finds that the proposed zone district amendment conforms to this criterion.
June 2, 2020 - Page 496 of 772
Town of Vail Page 21
8. Such other factors and criteria as the commission and/or council deem
applicable to the proposed rezoning.
VIII. STAFF RECOMMENDATION
Based upon the review of the criteria outlined in Section Vl of this memorandum and the
evidence and testimony presented, the Community Development Department
recommends the Planning and Environmental Commission forward a
recommendation of approval to the Vail Town Council for a zone district boundary
amendment, pursuant to Section 12-3-7, Amendment, Vail Town Code, to allow for the
rezoning of the parcel which is composed of Tract C, Lot 1, Lot 2, and Lot 3 Vail Das
Schone Filing No. 1 and Lot 1, Vail Das Schone Filing 3 from the Commercial Core 3
(CC3) District to the Public Accommodation-2 (PA-2) District.
Should the Planning and Environmental Commission choose to forward a
recommendation of approval to the Vail Town Council, the Community Development
Department recommends the Commission pass the following motion:
“The Planning and Environmental Commission forwards a recommendation of
approval to the Vail Town Council for a zone district boundary amendment,
pursuant to Section 12-3-7, Amendment, Vail Town Code, to allow for the
rezoning of the parcel which is composed of Tract C, Lot 1, Lot 2, and Lot 3 Vail
Das Schone Filing No. 1 and Lot 1, Vail Das Schone Filing 3 from the
Commercial Core 3 (CC3) District to the Public Accommodation-2 (PA-2) District
and setting forth details in regard thereto”.
Should the Planning and Environmental Commission choose to forward this
recommendation of approval, the Community Development Department recommends
the Commission makes the following findings:
“Based upon the review of the criteria outline in Section Vl of the Staff
memorandum to the Planning and Environmental Commission dated April 13th,
2020, and the evidence and testimony presented, the Planning and
Environmental Commission finds:
1. That the amendment is consistent with the adopted goals, objectives and
policies outlined in the Vail comprehensive plan and compatible with the
development objectives of the town; and
2. That the amendment does further the general and specific purposes of the
zoning regulations; and
3. That the amendment does promote the health, safety, morals, and general
welfare of the town and promote the coordinated and harmonious
development of the town in a manner that conserves and enhances its natural
June 2, 2020 - Page 497 of 772
Town of Vail Page 22
environment and its established character as a resort and residential
community of the highest quality.”
IX. ATT ACHMENTS
A. Vicinity Map
B. Applicant Narrative, March 16, 2020
C. Public Comment – Patricia Lauer – 12-3-19
D. Public Comment – Tania Boyd – 12-3-19
E. Public Comment – Patricia Lauer – 2-4-2020
F. Public Comment – Elyse Howard – 2-3-2020
G. Public Comment – Chris Romer – 1-27-2020
H. Public Comment – Carey and Brett August – 12-7-2019
I. Public Comment – James Pyke – 2-26-2020
J. Public Comment – VCBA – 3-4-2020
K. Vail Local Housing Authority Letter – 12-18-2019
L. Public Comment – Michael Spiers – 3-3-2020
M. PEC Minutes from Meeting on 12-09-2019
N. PEC Minutes from Meeting on 3-09-2020
June 2, 2020 - Page 498 of 772
Ordinance No. 3, Series 2020
- 1 -
ORDINANCE NO. 3
SERIES OF 2020
AN ORDINANCE FOR A Z ONE DISTRICT BOUNDAR Y AMENDMENT, PURSUANT
TO SECTION 12-3-7, AMENDMENT, VAIL TOWN CODE, TO ALLOW FOR A
REZONING OF T RACT C, LOT 1, LOT 2, AND LOT 3 VAIL D AS SCHONE FILING NO.
1 AND LOT 1, V AIL DAS SCHONE FILING 3; THE REZONING WILL CHANGE THE
ZONE DISTRICT FROM COMMERCIAL CORE 3 (CC3) TO THE PUBLIC
ACCOMMODATION 2 (PA-2) DISTRICT
WHEREAS, the Town of Vail, in the County of Eagle and State of Colorado (the
“Town”), is a home rule Town duly existing under the Const itution and laws of the State
of Colorado and its home rule charter (the “Charter”);
WHEREAS, the members of the Town Council of the Town (the “Council”) have
been duly elected and qualified;
WHEREAS, Section 12-3-7, Amendment, Vail Town Code, sets f orth the
procedures for amending a zone district boundary;
WHEREAS, on August 7, 1973, the Town adopted Ordinance No. 8, Series of
1973, to establish comprehensive zoning re gulations;
WHEREAS, on April 13, 2020 the Town ’s Planning and Environmental
Commission (the “PEC”) held a public hearing on the zone district boundary amendment
to rezone the property described and depicted in Exhibit A. attached hereto and made a
part hereof by this reference from Commercial Core 3 to Public Accommodation 2;
WHEREAS, on April 13, 2020 the PEC forwarded a recommendation of approval
to the Council for the zone district boundary amendment;
WHEREAS, the Council finds and determines that the amendment is consistent
with the applicable elements of the adopted goals, objectives and policies outlined in the
Vail Comprehensive Plan and is compatible with the development objectives of the Town;
WHEREAS, the Council finds and determines that the amendment to the Town
Code furthers the general and specific purposes of the Town’s zoning regulations; and
WHEREAS, the Council finds and determines that the amendment promotes the
health, safety, moral s, and general welfare of the town and promote 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.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED, BY THE TOWN COUNCIL OF THE
TOWN OF VAIL, COLORADO THAT:
June 2, 2020 - Page 499 of 772
Ordinance No. 3, Series 2020
- 2 -
Section 1. This ordinance adopts the following zone district boundary amendment
as further described in Exhibit A: Commercial Core 3 (CC3) District to the Public
Accommodation 2 (PA-2) District
Section 2. Pursuant to Section 12-3-7, Amendment, Vail Town Code, and the
evidence and testimony presented in consideration of this ordinance, the Vail Town
Council finds and determines the follows:
a. The zone district boundary amendment is consistent with the adopted goals,
objectives and policies outlined in the Vail comprehensive plan and compatible
with the development objectives of the Town;
b. The zone district boundary amendment is compatible with and suitable to
adjacent uses and appropriate for the surrounding areas;
c. The zone district boundary amendment promotes the health, safety, morals, and
general welfare of the Town and promotes the coordinated and harmonious
development of the town in a manner that conserves and enhances its natural
environment and its established character as a resort and residential community
of the highest quality; and
d. This ordinance is necessary and proper for the health, safety and welfare of the
Town and the inhabitants thereof.
Section 3. If any part, section, subsection, sentence, clause or phrase of this
ordinance is for any reason held to be invalid, such decision shall not effect the validity of
the remaining portions of this ordinance; and the Council hereby declares it would have
passed this ordinance, and each part, section, subsection, sentence, clause or phrase
thereof, regardless of the fact that any one or more parts, sections, subsections,
sentences, clauses or phrases be declared invalid.
Section 4. The amendment of any provision of the Town Code as provided in
this ordinance shall not affect any right which has accrued, any duty imposed, any
violation that occurred prior to the effective date hereof, any prosecution commenced, nor
any other action or proceeding as commenced under or by virtue of the provision
amended. The amendment of any provision hereby shall not revive any provision or any
ordinance previously repealed or superseded unless expressly stated herein.
Section 5. All bylaws, orders, resolutions and ordinances, or p arts thereof,
inconsistent herewith are repealed to the extent only of such inconsistency. This repealer
shall not be construed to revise any bylaw, order, resolution or ordinance, or part thereof,
theretofore repealed.
INTRODUCED, READ ON FIRST READING, APPROVED, AND ORDERED
PUBLISHED ONCE IN FULL ON FIRST READING this 21st day of April, 2020, and a
June 2, 2020 - Page 500 of 772
Ordinance No. 3, Series 2020
- 3 -
public hearing for second reading of this Ordinance set for the 2nd day of Ju ne, 2020 in
the Council Chambers of the Vail Municipal Building, Vail, Colorado.
__________________________
Dave Chapin , Town Mayor
ATTEST:
_________________________
Tammy Nagel , Town Clerk
READ AND APPROVED ON SECOND READING AND ORDERED PUBLISHED
this 16th day of June, 2020.
___________________________
Dave Chapin , Town Mayor
ATTEST:
____________________________
Tammy Nagel , Town Clerk
June 2, 2020 - Page 501 of 772
Ordinance No. 3, Series 2020
- 4 -
Exhibit A
Portions of Tract C, Lot 1, Lot 2, and Lot 3 Vail Das Schone Filing NO. 1 and Lot
1, Vail Das Schone Filing 3 , to be rezoned from Commercial Core 3 (CC3)
District to the Public Accommodation 2 (PA-2) District.
June 2, 2020 - Page 502 of 772
VA I L TO W N C O UNC I L A G E ND A ME MO
I T E M /T O P I C: Ordinance No. 4, S eries of 2020, F irst Reading, An Ordinance Creating S pecial
Development District No, 42, Highline Doubletree, P ursuant to A rticle A , S pecial Development
District, Chapter 9, Title 12, Zoning Regulations, Vail Town Code, and S etting F orth Details in
Regard T hereto.
P RE S E NT E R(S ): Greg Roy, Planner
AC T IO N RE Q UE S T E D O F C O UNC I L: A pprove, A pprove with Conditions, or Deny Ordinance
No. 4, S eries of 2020 - F irst Reading
B AC K G RO UND: The applicant, T NF R E F lll B ravo Vail L L C, represented by Mauriello Planning
Group and Triumph Development, is requesting a recommendation to the Vail Town Council for
approval of a S pecial Development District, pursuant to Section 12-9-A , S pecial Development
(S D D) District, Vail Town Code, located at the property of 2211 N. Frontage Road West, which is
comprised of Tract C, L ot 1, L ot 2, and L ot 3 Vail Das S chone F iling No. 1 and L ot 1, Vail Das
S chone F iling 3.
S TAF F RE C O M M E ND AT IO N: T he P lanning and E nvironmental Commission held a public
hearing on the proposed S D D on April 13, 2020 where a recommendation for approval was
forwarded to the Vail Town Council by a vote of 4-3 (Gillette, K jesbo, and Pratt opposed).
AT TAC H ME N TS:
Description
Staff Memorandum Ordinance No. 4, Series 2020
Attachment A. Vicinity Map
Attachment B. Applicant Cover Letter Dated 3-16-20
Attachment C. Applicant Narrative 3-16-2020
Attachment D. Plans 1 of 4
Attachment D. Plans 2 of 4
Attachment D. Plans 3 of 4
Attachment D. Plans 4 of 4
Attachment E. Highline Parking Study 1-10-20
Attachment F. Public Comment Received
Attachment G. P E C Minutes from Meeting on 12-09-2019
Attachment H. P E C Minutes from Meeting on 3-9-2020
Attachment I. P E C Minutes from Meetong on 4-13-2020
Attachment J. Staff Memorandum P E C19-0048 - 4-13-2020
June 2, 2020 - Page 503 of 772
Attachment K. Ordinance No. 4, Series 2020
June 2, 2020 - Page 504 of 772
TO: Vail Town Council
FROM: Community Development Department
DATE: June 2, 2020
SUBJECT: First reading of Ordinance No. 4, Series of 2020 an ordinance creating
special development district no.42, Highline Double Tree, pursuant to
Article A, Special Development (SDD) District, Chapter 9, Title 12, Zoning
Regulations, Vail Town Code, and setting forth details in regard thereto.
(PEC19-0048)
Applicant: TNFREF III Bravo Vail LLC represented by Mauriello
Planning Group & Triumph Development
Planner: Greg Roy
I. SUMMARY
The applicant, TNFREF lll Bravo Vail LLC, represented by Mauriello Planning Group
and Triumph Development, is requesting a recommendation to the Vail Town Council
for approval of a Special Development District, pursuant to Section 12 -9-A, Special
Development (SDD) District, Vail Town Code, located at the property of 2211 N.
Frontage Road West, which is comprised of Tract C, Lot 1, Lot 2, and Lot 3 Vail Das
Schone Filing No. 1 and Lot 1, Vail Das Schone Filing 3 .
The Planning and Environmental Commission held a public hearing on the proposed
SDD on April 13, 2020 where a recommendation for approval was forwarded to the Vail
Town Council by a vote of 4-3 (Gillette, Kjesbo, and Pratt opposed).
Please find the staff memorandum to the PEC, included as Attachment W, and the
minutes from the April 13 meeting (Attachment V) attached to this report.
II. DESCRIPTION OF REQUEST
The Vail Town Council shall approve, approve with m odifications, or deny Ordinance
No. 4, Series of 2020, upon first reading.
June 2, 2020 - Page 505 of 772
Town of Vail Page 2
Attached for review are:
A. Vicinity Map
B. Applicant Cover Letter Dated 3-16-2020
C. Applicant Narrative, 3-16-2020
D. Plan Set, Pierce Austin Architects, 3-16-2020
E. Parking Study 1-10-2020
F. Public Comment Received
G. PEC Minutes from Meeting on 12-9-2019
H. PEC Minutes from Meeting on 3-9-2020
I. PEC Minutes from Meeting on 4-13-2020
J. Staff Memorandum - PEC19-0048 4-13-2020
K. Ordinance No. 4, Series of 2020
III. BACKGROUND
In 1980, the hotel was built under Eagle County jurisdiction and was annexed into the
Town of Vail per Ordinance No. 43, Series 1980 and the zoned Commercial Core 3
(CC3) within the required ninety days. The Ordinance was later overturned by the
Colorado Court of Appeals due to a lack on contiguity. It was then annexed again with
Ordinance No. 1, Series 1986 and was again zoned CC3 with Ordinance No. 10, Series
of 1986.
Over time there have been multiple application for small remodels or exterior
alterations. Most recently was an exterior alteration that allowed for the restriping of the
parking lot, pool upgrades, and exterior facade upgrades to the building in 2016.
This application was discussed before the PEC as part of a work session on December
9th, 2019. Please find the minutes from this meeting included as Attachment P. The
Design Review Board also reviewed a conceptual application on December 18th, 2019.
This application was scheduled to be heard on March 23rd but was brought to the April
13th meeting. The Planning and Environmental Commission made recommendation of
approval to the Vail Town Council at the April 13 meeting.
lV. REVIEW CRITERIA
Criteria: The following design criteria shall be used as the principal criteria in evaluation
the merits of the proposed special development district. It shall be the burden of the
applicant to demonstrate that the submittal material and the proposed development plan
comply with each of the following standards, or demonstrate that one or more of them is
not applicable or that a practical solution consistent with the public interest has been
achieved:
1. Compatibility: Design compatibility and sensitivity to the immediate
environment, neighborhood and adjacent properties relative to architectural
June 2, 2020 - Page 506 of 772
Town of Vail Page 3
design, scale, bulk, building height, buffer zones, identity, character, visual
integrity and orientation.
The proposed SDD is generally compatible and sensitive to the immediate environment,
neighborhood or adjacent properties.
The SDD hotel addition is in the west and north portion of the lot. This is adjacent to
residential properties to the north and the Chamonix development to the west. In
relation to the properties to the west the proposed height is similar to what was
approved for Chamonix. The homes there have a maximum height of 44 feet for sloped
roofs. This is similar to the proposed height of the h otel addition which would be higher
at 48 feet. While the height of the addition is taller than the homes to the north, there is
more of a setback from those homes that may lessen the impact.
The SDD also is proposing an EHU apartment building on the north end of the property.
The structure is broken down to have steps in the floors on the Chamonix Lane façade.
It alternates between being two stories and three stories on the façade facing Chamonix
Lane. This brings the mass of the structure down and has two story portions that are
closer to thirty feet (30’) in height instead of forty-five feet (45’). These portions of the
building relate to the maximum heights of the residences across the street.
Other commercial buildings that have frontage on Chamonix Lane and the North
Frontage road have larger buffers to the residential area than the current proposal. The
Safeway and the Das Schone buildings have parking lots in the rear of the building to
set the building further away from residential properties. City Market has a similar buffer
to what is proposed here by facing a residential component on the Ch amonix Lane side
of the lot and the commercial portion towards the frontage road.
Staff finds that the proposed SDD conforms to this criterion.
2. Relationship: Uses, activity and density which provide a compatible, efficient
and workable relationship with surrounding uses and activity.
The SDD does not propose a change in the use, or activity on the site. Density in terms
of residential will be decreased with this application. In terms of building density as site
coverage, the application proposes 36% site coverage which would be within the
maximum 40% allowed in the CC3 Zone District on either side of this property.
Staff finds that this criterion is met.
3. Parking And Loading: Compliance with parking and loading requirements as
outlined in chapter 10 of this title.
This application proposes a deviation from the maximum amount of parking that is
allowed to be controlled by valet and to minimize the amount of parking on the lot
according to the provided parking study.
June 2, 2020 - Page 507 of 772
Town of Vail Page 4
There are several things to consider when it comes to the amount of parking that is
proposed to be valet parked. The application shows valet parking that is three cars deep
on the surface parking lot. The third row of the parking aisle is proposed to be covered
by grass pavers. The application states that this area will be used for snow storage
during the winter and allow for it to be used as excess parking during the summer.
Keeping the lot clear enough for fire access and staging could be difficult, but with the
available third row of parking snow removal operations should not be of concern.
The PA-2 zone district has a requirement that 75% of the required parking be located
within the main building. With this application there will be 48 parking spaces located
within the main building, or twenty-seven percent (27%) of the 175 spaces discussed
above. There are only 39 spaces being added with this application, meaning the
application does not exacerbate the existing non-conformity, but does not reach the
75%. Staff finds that as there is no increase to the non-conformity, this is acceptable.
Staff finds that this criterion is met.
4. Comprehensive Plan: Conformity with applicable elements of the Vail
comprehensive plan, town policies and urban design plans.
The application would be forwarding the Goal #4 of the Land Use and Development
section of the comprehensive plan if the employee housing building would be in addition
to required employee housing. The applicant is proposing to build this as a mitigation
bank so that future developments that are unable to build the necessary units on their
site can buy into the mitigation bank to satisfy their requirement. The application is
leaving two one-bedroom units and two three-bedroom units out of the bank as a true
benefit that cannot be credited towards another development. Having these additional
units puts the town closer to achieving its goals for providing housing.
Staff finds that this criterion is met.
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.
There are steep slopes, hazardous rock fall, and debris flow that affect this property.
The applicant supplied a report on these hazards. The report states that a site specific
study would need to be completed for debris flow to suggest the needed mitigation for
the site, and that the rock fall hazard was low for this site. A site specific study for all
geologic hazards will be required prior to building permit.
Staff finds that this criterion is met.
6. Design Features: Site plan, building design and location and open space
provisions designed to produce a functional development responsive and
June 2, 2020 - Page 508 of 772
Town of Vail Page 5
sensitive to natural features, vegetation and overall aesthetic quality of the
community.
The site plan does produce a functional development that is in line with aesthetic quality
of the community.
The employee housing building is oriented towards Chamonix Lane with two entrances
on the street side and one entrance on the rear of the building that faces the inte rior
parking lot. The rear entrance allows for the residents to have a covered access when
entering from the parking lot. The entrance does not service the western units of the
building but will give them a covered stairway to a heated path that leads to t heir portion
of the building. This will be a benefit to residences during the winter months to have an
interior stairwell to avoid snow.
If residents are parking in the enclosed garage, then they must walk up the sloped drive
aisle to the building. However, having that rear access makes the travel distance to their
unit easier. For residents utilizing the valet parking they have a designated walkway that
is striped in the drive aisle to access their building. This acknowledges the pedestrians
and gives vehicular traffic an indication that pedestrians may be present and increases
the safety and walkability of the parking lot.
The grass pavers in the third row of valet parking allows for seasonal flexibility when it
comes to the valet operations. It will allow the additional parking in the summer and
extra snow storage during the winter months.
When it comes to the design of the buildings the Design Review Board (DRB) made
several comments on the overall design of the proposed buildings and the site as a
whole. The DRB, based on the Code, had concerns relating to a lack of unified
architecture and extensive unbroken roof lines. The application has incorporated a few
changes to try to address these concerns. The color of the roofs have been coordinated
and, the building color on the existing hotel will match the new addition, breaks between
dormers on the new building have also been added to improve the aesthetic
appearance.
Two of the units on the bottom floor have a windo w in the living room portion of the unit,
which allows some natural light into the living areas of the units. On the west half of the
building, the bottom floor windows will be cast in the shadow of the hotel, as seen on
the sun/shade analysis. Additional possibilities to adding windows will be explored
through the Design Review Board process.
Staff finds that this criterion is met.
7. Traffic: A circulation system designed for both vehicles and pedestrians
addressing on and off site traffic circulation.
June 2, 2020 - Page 509 of 772
Town of Vail Page 6
The application proposes a sidewalk along Chamonix Lane and Chamonix Road that
fluctuates between five feet, six feet, and ten feet in areas. The sidewalk improves off
site pedestrian circulation resulting in a benefit to the community. The sidewalk
terminates into the property and will provide an access path to the frontage road from
those users.
The interior circulation system promotes walkability to and through the site. It features a
way for residents and hotel users to access the frontage road sidewalk without walking
through the entrance drive. There is a delineated path through the parking lot for
residents and users going to the bus stop. The stairs and paths around the EHU
building that lead to the entrances are proposed to be heated. All of these items
combined assist in creating a safer pedestrian environment.
Staff finds that this criterion is met.
8. Landscaping: Functional and aesthetic landscaping and open space in order
to optimize and preserve natural features, recreation, views and function.
At the December 9th PEC work session, the Commissioners requested the landscape
plan to be revised to provide adequate screening of the buildings from adjacent
properties. The plan includes two 10’-14’ conifers between Chamonix Lane and the
EHU building and nine between the hotel addition and Chamonix Lane and Chamonix
Road. The exact size and location of the trees will be decided through the Design
Review Board approval process.
The SDD asks for relief from the minimum dimensions for landscaped areas to count in
the landscaping calculations. Allowing these areas that do not meet the minimum size
requirements allows more landscaping to be distributed throughout the site evenly. This
increases the aesthetic quality of the landscaping on the site.
Staff finds that this criterion is met.
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 applicant has stated that the EHU building will be constructed at the same time as
the hotel addition. A future subdivision is proposed to occur prior to the first certificate of
occupancy. The applicant will also be required to obtain a Conditional Use Permit for
retail uses that exceeds the 10% PA-2 zone district maximum.
Staff finds that this criterion is met.
June 2, 2020 - Page 510 of 772
Town of Vail Page 7
V. RECOMMENDED MOTION
Should the Vail Town Council choose to approve, with conditions, Ordinance No. 4,
Series of 2020, upon first reading, the Planning and Environmental Commission
recommends the Council pass the following motion:
“The Vail Town Council approves, with conditions, on first reading, Ordinance
No. 4, Series of 2020 an ordinance creating special development district No.42, Highline
Double Tree, pursuant to Article A, Special Development (SDD) District, Chapter 9, Title
12, Zoning Regulations, Vail Town Code, and setting forth details in regard thereto.”
Should the Vail Town Council choose to approve, with conditions, Ordinance No. 4,
Series of 2020, the Planning and Environmental Commission recommends the Council
applies the following conditions:
1. Applicant shall obtain approval for subdivision before a certificate of occupancy
for the EHU building is granted.
2. The applicant shall obtain the certificate of occupancy for the EHU building
before requesting a certificate of occupancy for the hotel addition.
3. Approval is contingent upon the applicant obtaining Town of Vail approval of an
associated design review application.
4. The applicant shall obtain approval for a conditional use permit for the
commercial space on the first floor before a building pe rmit is issued.
5. Applicant shall obtain approval from Holy Cross to vacate the easement under
the proposed hotel addition before a building permit is issued.
6. Applicant shall set aside two (2) three-bedroom units and two (2) one-bedroom
units in the EHU building not to be included in the mitigation bank.
7. Prior to the issuance of a certificate of occupancy, the applicant shall record deed
restrictions with the Eagle County Clerk and Recorder, in a format approved by
the Town Attorney, for the Type III Employee Housing Units.
8. The applicant shall coordinate and resolve landscape conflicts with utilities and
sight distance before a building permit is issued.
9. The applicant shall show the drainage outfall for Chamonix Lane swale in the
building permit submittal.
June 2, 2020 - Page 511 of 772
Town of Vail Page 8
10. The applicant shall provide a 2’ gravel shoulder along Chamonix Lane and side
slopes of swale no steeper than 2:1.
11. Applicant shall increase AIPP contribution to $32,500 and the installation shall be
completed before a certificate of occupancy for the hotel addition is granted.
12. Applicant shall correct plans to meet the comments from the Fire Department
prior to the submittal for a building permit.
13. Applicant shall update all plan pages to match the latest submission prior to the
submittal for the Design Review Board application.
Should the Vail Town Council choose to approve Ordinance No. 4, Series of 2020, the
Planning and Environmental Commission recommends the Council makes the following
findings:
“Based upon the review of the criteria outline in Section Vlll of the Staff
memorandum to the Planning and Environmental Commission dated April 13th,
2020, and the evidence and testimony presented, the Vail Town Council finds:
1. That the SDD does comply with the standards listed in subsection A of this
section; and
2. That 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; and
3. That the SDD is compatible with and suitable to adjacent uses and
appropriate for the surrounding areas; and
4. That the SDD does promote the health, safety, morals, and general welfare of
the town and promote 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.”
Vl. ATTACHMENTS
A. Vicinity Map
B. Applicant Cover Letter Dated 3-16-2020
C. Applicant Narrative, 3-16-2020
D. Plan Set, Pierce Austin Architects, 3-16-2020
E. Parking Study 1-10-2020
F. Public Comment Received
G. PEC Minutes from Meeting on 12-9-2019
H. PEC Minutes from Meeting on 3-9-2020
I. PEC Minutes from Meeting on 4-13-2020
June 2, 2020 - Page 512 of 772
Town of Vail Page 9
J. Staff Memorandum - PEC19-0048 4-13-2020
K. Ordinance No. 4, Series of 2020
June 2, 2020 - Page 513 of 772
CHAMONIX LNN FRO NTA G E RD WCHAMONIX RDI 70 WestboundI 70 EastboundLOWERTRAVERSEWAYUPPERTRAVERSEWAYGARMISCHD R
I70OFF-RAMP(173W ESTBOUND)S FRONTAGE RD WI 70 ON-RAMP (173 EASTBOUND)N FRONTAGE RD WI
Subject Property
0 50 10025Feet
H i g h l i n e - A D o u b l e t r e e H o t e lHighline - A D o u b l e t r e e H o t e lMajor E x t e r i o r A l t e r a t i o n - P E C 1 9 -0 0 4 6Major E x t e r i o r A l t e r a t i o n - P E C 1 9 -0 0 4 6Rezoning - P E C 1 9 -0 0 4 7Rezoning - P E C 1 9 -0 0 4 7Special D e v e l o p m e n t D i s t r i c t - P E C 1 9 -0 0 4 8Special D e v e l o p m e n t D i s t r i c t - P E C 1 9 -0 0 4 82211 N o r t h F r o n t a g e R o a d W e s t2211 N o r t h F r o n t a g e R o a d W e s tLot 1 , V a i l D a s S c h o n e F i l i n g 3Lot 1 , V a i l D a s S c h o n e F i l i n g 3
This ma p w as created by the Town of Vail Co mmu nity Development Departme nt. Use of this ma p shou ld be for g eneral p urp oses o nly.The Town of Vail does no t warran t the accura cy of the informa tion co nta in ed herein.(whe re sh own, pa rcel line work is ap pro xima te )
Last Modified: December 2, 2019June 2, 2020 - Page 514 of 772
March 16, 2020
Planning and Environmental Commission
℅ Greg Roy, Planner II
Community Development Department
Town of Vail
75 South Frontage Road
Vail, Colorado 81657
Re: Highline Rezoning and SDD Applications
Dear PEC Members:
Along with this letter, we have submitted revised application materials for the rezoning, SDD, and Major
Exterior Alteration applications previously submitted to the Town. The revisions to the application materials
are a result of the comments we received at the hearing with the PEC held on March 9, 2020 and discussions
with the Town staff held on March 11, 2020.
We look forward to a final hearing with the PEC on March 23, 2020.
As you recall, the applicant was originally proposing to add 79 net new hotel rooms, ~4,000 sq. ft. of meeting
room space, a 12 bedroom deed restricted EHU dormitory facility, and a 16 unit Employee Housing
Apartment Building (40 bedrooms with 16,270 sq. ft.) at the site of the Highline hotel.
Below is a summary of the more significant changes that have occurred to the plans and application materials
for this facility:
•Addition of grasscrete pavers (permeable reinforced turf area) within the parking lot to
accommodate parking, landscaping, and snow storage;
•Reduced massing on the top floor of the EHU building so that the north facade of the building
transitions from 2-stories, to 3-stories, to 2-stories, to 3-stories and back to 2-stories. The result
of this change is a reduction of unit count, bedrooms, and total floor area. The unit count is
now 15 units with a total of 34 bedrooms (loss of 6 bedrooms) and total floor area of 13,502 sq.
ft. (loss of 2,768 sq. ft.). The reduced massing provides building mass relief to the street and
lesser impacts to neighbors;
•The sidewalks and parallel parking spaces on the north side of the EHU Building are now
snowmelted, as well as the stairs leading down to the parking lot and the sidewalk on the south
side of the building;
•A new entry has been provided on the south side of the building, accessed by a heated sidewalk,
to allow residents more direct access to the parking area;
1
PO Box 4777
Eagle, Colorado 81631
970.376.3318
www.mpgvail.com
June 2, 2020 - Page 515 of 772
•A pedestrian path is proposed to be stripped and marked with pedestrian symbols within the
parking lot so that drivers are alerted to the presence of pedestrians that may be traversing the
property;
•The applicant has realigned the sidewalk along Chamonix Road per the direction of the Town
Engineer so that it provides access directly into the Highline property;
•The applicant has provided a sidewalk connection at the main driveway to the Town’s North
Frontage Road sidewalk;
•The proposed EHU Building will be built concurrently with the hotel expansion and at least
25% of the units (4 units) will be excluded from the ability of the owner to create a mitigation
bank for those units as currently allowed by Town Code. The units to be excluded include two,
one bedroom units and two, three bedroom units; and
•The applicant proposes to maintain the public art value at a minimum $15,000 in light of the
extensive package of public benefits (costs to the project) including workforce housing and
public sidewalk improvements.
We are very excited about the positive response we received from the PEC and believe the changes that we
have proposed address the critical staff issues and input provided by the PEC. We believe the changes that
have been made, make the proposed development plan much more cohesive and provide it with a unified
identity that the Town can be proud of.
We look forward to presenting the revised application to you in the weeks ahead.
Sincerely,
Dominic F. Mauriello, AICP
Principal
2
June 2, 2020 - Page 516 of 772
Highline, A DoubleTree by Hilton
Submitted to the Town of Vail:
November 11, 2019
Revised January 27, 2020
Revised February 25, 2020
Revised March 16, 2020
Application for a Rezoning, Major Exterior Alteration, and
Special Development District
June 2, 2020 - Page 517 of 772
Consultant Directory
Developer/Owner
Mark Mutkoski
TNREF III Bravo Vail, LLC
℅ True North Management Group, LLC
10 Bank Street, 12 Floor
White Plains, NY 10606
Project Manager/Owner Representative
Michael O’Connor
Triump Development
12 Vail Road, Suite 700
Vail, CO 81657
970.688.5057
Planning and Entitlements
Dominic Mauriello
Mauriello Planning Group
PO Box 4777
Eagle, CO 81657
970-376-3318
dominic@mpgvail.com
Community Outreach
Kristin Williams
Commfluent
PO Box 3402
Vail CO 81658
970 390-0062
kristin@commfluent.com
Architect
Bill Pierce and Kit Austin
Pierce Austin Architects
1650 Fallridge Road, Suite C-1
Vail, CO 81657
970.476.6342
Landscape Architecture
Dennis Anderson
Dennis Anderson Assoc., Inc.
P.O. Box 3722,
Eagle CO 81631
970.390.3745
Civil Engineering
Matt Wadey, P.E.
Alpine Engineering Inc.
34510 Highway 6, Unit A-9
Edwards, CO 81632
970.926.3373
Geology and Geo Hazards
Julia Frazier, P.G.
Skyline Geoscience
jfrazier@skylinegeoscience.com
303.746.1813
Traffic Engineering
Kari J. McDowell Schroeder, PE, PTOE
McDowell Engineering
P.O. Box 4259
Eagle, CO 81631
kari@mcdowelleng.com
970.623.0788
Highline, A DoubleTree by Hilton 2
June 2, 2020 - Page 518 of 772
Table of Contents
Consultant Directory 2
Background 9
Review Process 11
Rezoning 11
Special Development District 13
Major Exterior Alteration 14
Zoning Analysis 15
Parking 17
Deviations Sought through SDD 23
Workforce Housing Plan 28
Criteria for Review: Rezoning 33
Criteria for Review: Special Development District 40
Criteria for Review: Major Exterior Alteration 46
Conclusion 49
Highline, A DoubleTree by Hilton 3
June 2, 2020 - Page 519 of 772
Introduction
Highline, a DoubleTree by Hilton (Highline hereafter), is requesting an application for rezoning
to Public Accommodation 2 (PA2) and the establishment of a new Special Development District
(SDD) for Highline to facilitate the construction of a new mixed-use building located at 2211 N.
Frontage Rd. West in Vail. The proposed project consists of an employee housing apartment
building, limited service lodge units (LSLUs), accommodation units/hotel rooms (AUs), and an
Employee Housing Unit (EHU) dorm space. As part of the application, the applicant is
requesting a major exterior alteration in order to add the additional lodging and EHUs. In the
interest of providing a much needed public benefit, the applicant originally proposed the
development of an employee housing apartment building that included 16 units, providing a
total of 40 bedrooms. Through the review process and in order to address the concerns of the
Planning and Environmental Commission and Town staff, the EHU building has been modified
to 15 units with 34 bedrooms. This building is not required as part of the project, but is being
proposed as a public benefit. The workforce housing requirement for the additional lodging
space is being met with the addition of the EHU dorm space. The project furthers three key
identified community goals: the provision of employee housing, the provision of live beds,
and encouragement of in-fill development.
Highline, A DoubleTree by Hilton 4
New Hotel Wing
New
Conference
space Existing HotelNew EHU
Building
New Underground
Parking
June 2, 2020 - Page 520 of 772
The rendering below includes the previously proposed EHU Building massing prior to March
16, 2020.
The proposed project includes the following:
176 AUs with approximately 32,555 sq. ft. of net new GRFA (79 net new, one existing
AU lost to circulation needs)
19 LSLUs with approximately 20,050 sq. ft. of GRFA (previously dwelling units)
12 employee housing bedrooms within a dormitory space with approximately 4,400 sq.
ft. of floor area
15 employee housing units (1, 2, and 3 bedroom units) with approximately 13,502 sq. ft.
of floor area
208 total parking spaces (39 net new parking spaces, 48 of which are enclosed)
To facilitate the development of this project, the property is proposed to be rezoned from CC3
to PA2, and include a SDD. The SDD designation will apply to the entirety of the Highline
property, including the pre-existing lodge and restaurant facilities. The only practical method
to achieve the project as contemplated is a zoning change for the site to align with the
historical use of the property as a lodge as well as an SDD for some relatively minor deviations.
The required deviations are solely generated by the inclusion of the Employee Housing
structure within the development project. If that structure were removed, no SDD would be
necessary.
Highline, A DoubleTree by Hilton 5
Existing
H
otel
New Hotel
Win
g
New EHU
B
u
i
l
d
i
n
g EHU
Dorm
June 2, 2020 - Page 521 of 772
Rezoning and SDD applications follow a similar path in that they are each recommended by the
Planning and Environmental Commission and receive approval by the Town Council. For major
exterior alteration applications, the Planning and Environmental Commission is the final review
authority.
Highline presents a unique opportunity for redevelopment within the Town of Vail. It provides
a smooth transition between the West Vail commercial core to its east and west and residential
to the west (partially) and to the north. As an infill site, with a portion of the proposed
development constructed upon an existing parking lot that currently serves the existing
Highline and a previously disturbed portion of the site, there are minimal, if any, impacts to the
natural environment.
Public Benefits of the Project:
Employee housing far in excess of requirements, all on-site and near the major
employment center, addressing one of the documented critical needs of the Town
Highline, A DoubleTree by Hilton 6
Highline
Location Map
West Vail Commercial
Chamonix Employee HousingJune 2, 2020 - Page 522 of 772
(The proposal generates the need to house 9.5 employees and the project well
exceeds this requirement)
All EHUs are highly functional and livable dwellings within the employment center of
Vail for single and/or double occupancy
15 Type 3 EHUs, not required as mitigation, are proposed as a benefit of the project
Redevelopment of an infill site in the Town of Vail as suggested by the Vail Land Use
Plan
Economic vitality and enhanced public and private revenues to Town as a result of
new lodging facilities and locals housing
Improving the Town’s hotel bed base
New community sidewalk along Chamonix Road along the Highline frontage
improving neighborhood accessibility to and from the commercial areas
Fiscal Impacts of the project:
To expand upon the potential positive impacts to the economy, the applicant has estimated
the lodging and sales taxes revenues of the hotel addition (79 new hotel rooms and meeting
space) as well as the sales tax revenue impacts of the hotel guests and onsite employee
housing proposed.
The incremental sales and lodging tax collections for the hotel is estimated as follows:
•Total annual sales and lodging tax collections: $694,000
•Town of Vail annual sales and lodging tax collections: $382,000
The Vail Local Housing Authority commissioned an analysis in 2019 on the Economic Value and
Community Benefits of Resident Housing Investment. The report cites numerous benefits of
local resident housing including increased sales tax revenues, benefits to local businesses in
terms of labor supply, increase in revenue for local schools, increased supply of volunteerism,
reduced carbon footprint, and other benefits.
Looking at only one of the benefits, direct Town of Vail sales tax revenue per household, the 15
deed restricted employee housing units would generate approximately:
•$18,600 per year, based on annual Town sales collections per household of $1,165
•That sales tax collection is based upon approximately $29,000 spent annually per
household in the local economy, or
• $466,000 spent annually within the local economy from the 15 new employee units.
The applicant has also estimated the total revenues generated by the additional 79 hotel
rooms and meeting space in terms of guest spending. Data on guest spending is limited.
Highline, A DoubleTree by Hilton 7
June 2, 2020 - Page 523 of 772
When the Lionshead Redevelopment Master Plan was adopted over 20 years ago, it was
estimated, based on a study by RRC Associates that the average spending per hotel guest was
$100 per day and it was assumed that on average there were two guests per room. The
applicant believes these numbers, both the average spending and the average of 2 persons
per room are now grossly understated due to the age of the data, the effects of inflation, and
other factors. In 2018 the EGE Air Alliance commissioned a study, also prepared by RRC
Associates, of passengers at the Eagle Airport. This report found that the average daily
expenditure per person in 2018 was $405 per day. The 2018 data was collected from only
those people who flew into the Eagle Airport and may be a slightly more affluent data set
versus all occupants at the Highline. In order to be ultra conservative, the applicant assumed an
average daily spending per person of $100. If one assumes a 63% annualized occupancy rate
of the 79 new hotel rooms, the resulting annual spending from hotel guests at this site would
be approximately $3.6 million per year.
In summary:
$382,000 in incremental direct onsite TOV sales and lodging tax collections from the hotel
$466,000 in annual local resident spending from 15 units, plus associated sales tax
$3.6 million in annual incremental hotel guest spending, and associated sales tax, to the local
economy.
Planned Future Subdivision:
A future subdivision application will be processed for the property. This future application will
provide for a total of two parcels. One to accommodate the hotel and all of its related uses,
and another parcel for the employee housing structure. While the properties will be tied
together as it relates zoning and development standards, creating a separate parcel for the
employee housing building will facilitate a separate ownership for the purpose of financing the
employee housing separately from the hotel. This proposed subdivision concept is key and
inherent in the proposed development of the site. The Type 3 EHU building will be developed
at the same time as the hotel as a single phase. The subdivision of the property will be
required prior to a final CO being issued on the EHU building.
Public Art:
The applicant proposes to provide public art, yet to be determined, with a value of at least
$15,000.
Highline, A DoubleTree by Hilton 8
June 2, 2020 - Page 524 of 772
Background
The Highline site was originally built under the jurisdiction of Eagle County. In 1979, the newly
constructed facility received a certificate of occupancy from Eagle County. It was then annexed
to the Town of Vail as part of a larger annexation of the West Vail area by Ordinance No. 43,
Series of 1980, approved on
December 10, 1980. Per the
statutory requirements, the newly
annexed land was required to be
zoned by the Town of Vail within
90 days of annexation, by March
10, 1981. Ordinance No. 11,
Series of 1981, was first read in on
March 3, 1981. This ordinance
created the Commercial Core III
(hereinafter “CC3”) zone district,
under which this site was zoned.
It appears the zone district was
created hastily as the CC3 zoning
district did not allow for hotels or
dwelling units which were already
developed on the property. From
the inception, the CC3 zone
district upon application to this
site rendered the existing hotel a
nonconforming use. Over four
years later, on August 15, 1985,
the Colorado Court of Appeals
overturned the original West Vail
annexation because a rectangular
tract owned by the BLM was
between two contiguous tracts
that were being annexed. This
BLM land was improperly
included in the proposed area to
be annexed, and without this
land, the proposed annexation
would be ‘invalid for lack of the
necessary one-sixth contiguity.’
The Town of Vail moved quickly to
again annex West Vail. Ordinance
No. 1, Series of 1986, re-annexed
Highline, A DoubleTree by Hilton 9
Recent Drone Aerial of Highline
June 2, 2020 - Page 525 of 772
West Vail on January 29, 1986. Ordinance No. 10, Series of 1986, was first read in on March
18, 1986. There were no changes to the zoning for the site in this ordinance even though the
hotel (76 hotel rooms) and condominium units (19 dwelling units with 20 lock offs) on this
property had existed for 7 years (the condominium units were added in 1983). This was likely
an oversight since the hotel had been there for so long and because by that time the Town had
adopted the Vail Land Use Plan which encouraged the preservation and expansion of the
Town’s lodging bed base, specifically in the West Vail area. Thus, since 1981, this site has
operated as a nonconforming use and maintained its use as a lodge as it was first built in 1979.
A nonconforming use cannot be expanded or modified except if changed to a permitted or
conditional use even though the Town has been focused for the last 40 years at encouraging
and expanding the hotel base.
Today, the primary intended uses on the site permitted by CC3 zoning are the commercial
spaces (two restaurants and limited retail), which is key reason that a rezoning to PA2 is
necessary to allow the hotel.
Highline, A DoubleTree by Hilton 10
June 2, 2020 - Page 526 of 772
Review Process
Rezoning
As discussed above, the existing lodge and a few related development standards do not
conform with the provisions of the CC3 zoning on the property and therefore necessitates a
change in zoning on the property. Some of the current issues with the CC3 zone district as
applied to the Highline include the following:
Use
Hotel - The existing hotel (76 hotel rooms) and condominiums (19 dwelling units
with 20 lock-offs) are nonconforming uses. This means that the lodging use cannot
be expanded.
Building Height
The height of the existing building is 52 feet (worst-case), though the maximum
allowable building height for the CC3 zoning district is 35 feet.
Density
The CC3 zone district allows 12 dwelling units per acre, yet does not permit
dwelling units. Because accommodation units are not allowed, there is no
indication of how accommodation units are treated with regard to density.
Parking in the Front Setback
The front setback on this property is the North Frontage Road frontage. Parking is
developed to the front property line and does not comply with this requirement
however, the right-of-way has been nicely landscaped to provided an adequate
buffer.
The applicant examined a variety of potential approaches to redeveloping the the property in
terms of the Town’s development review processes. The existing CC3 zone district was
compared with the PA, PA2, and HDMF (High Density Multiple Family) to understand which
zone district most closely aligns with the existing development on the property and that
proposed by the applicant. No one zone district perfectly aligns with existing or proposed
conditions. To maintain the CC3 zoning on the property, that zone district would require
significant amendments. These amendments, which would apply to the remainder of the
parcels in the West Vail commercial area, may not be appropriate for all properties zoned CC3.
Hotels and limited service lodge units would have to be added as permitted uses, the height
allowance changed, as well as GRFA and density provisions modified.
It was determined that the best avenue to facilitate the development is to rezone the property
to PA2. There are several benefits of rezoning the property to PA2, including greater assurance
that the property will remain as a hotel into the future. This provides protection that one of the
Highline, A DoubleTree by Hilton 11
June 2, 2020 - Page 527 of 772
primary uses the Town seeks to support and encourage due to its ability to generate significant
tax revenues to the Town and increase the overall vitality of the Town year round. The rezoning
results in a property where all of the uses are conforming and comply with zoning. In addition,
the allowable building height in PA2 of 48’ more closely aligns with the existing hotel which has
one area on the roof of the building at 52’. The proposed new buildings fully comply with the
48’ height limit with further restrictions imposed by the SDD.
The Planning and Environmental Commission at its December 9, 2019 hearing (a worksession)
seemed to indicate that the PA2 zoning and the SDD overlay were appropriate designations
with the inclusion of the Employee Housing apartment building in the same phase of
development. The PEC also seemed to agree with the proposed parking reductions.
The rezoning to PA2 resolves the flaw of having included this property in the CC3 zone
district to begin with. The following nonconformities are resolved or reduced by rezoning
to PA2:
Lodging and all other uses will now comply as permitted/conditional uses
Building height more closely reflects the height of the existing structure on the
property with a height allowance of 48’. All new buildings will comply with 48’
limit with additional limits imposed by the SDD
Density issues will be resolved
GRFA issues will be resolved
There will continue to be some development standards in the PA2 zone district where the
existing site and proposed development does not fully comply, including the following:
Parking in the front setback. Because this condition is pre-existing and is also true in
CC3 zone district, and because the applicant is not making the condition any worse, the
proposed redevelopment is not required to meet this standard. If preferred by the
Town Council, a deviation from the parking located in the front setback could be
included in the SDD proposal.
Requirement for 75% of all parking to be enclosed. Unlike the CC3 zone district, the
PA2 zone district requires 75% of the parking to be enclosed. Today, all of the existing
parking is unenclosed surface parking. The applicant is proposing to enclose 48 new
proposed parking spaces with the proposed additions and actually reduce the amount
of pavement associated with the surface parking areas. Through the use of a valet
program, and being more efficient with the use of surface pavement, the applicant is
proposing a net increase in the number of surface parking spaces while reducing the
amount of pavement associated with surface parking. Overall, 23% percent of the
parking onsite will be enclosed, however, comparing the existing parking requirement
of 185 spaces (though only 169 spaces exist) with the proposed parking requirement of
Highline, A DoubleTree by Hilton 12
June 2, 2020 - Page 528 of 772
208 spaces, there is only a net new requirement of 23 parking spaces or 39 spaces over
what exists. The proposal is to add a total of 48 enclosed parking spaces and
reorganize the existing surface parking areas. The result is that all of the net new
parking is proposed to be enclosed. Therefore, the applicant believes that the
proposed redevelopment complies with the 75% enclosure requirement based upon
the net new impact of the proposal.
Building height. The existing hotel building will continue to be nonconforming with
respect to building height for the 52’ existing hotel structure. All proposed buildings
comply with the 48’ building height allowance and therefore the redevelopment
complies with the building height requirements.
A Special Development District is being sought to provide some relief from parking related
standards documented below generated solely due to the inclusion of the EHU structure. The
applicant believes that the public benefits offered by this project, outweigh the relatively minor
relief and deviation being sought. The benefits proposed include:
employee housing in excess of code requirements,
increase in the amount of hotel lodging provided within the Town,
increase in revenues to the Town and the business community,
increase in the amount of conference space provided within the Town,
dedication of easement for Chamonix Lane on applicant’s property, and
the overall aesthetic improvements being proposed.
Special Development District
The applicant is seeking to rezone the property to a PA2 so that it can more accurately function
in compliance with the zoning district. However, the applicant is faced with some minor
deviations largely generated due to the effort by the applicant to provide a public benefit,
addressing the employee housing crisis, by creating additional employee housing within the
Town of Vail. These deviations include parking rates, valet parking, landscape areas
dimensions, and snow storage (see parking section for details on these deviations). The
deviations being created are solely due to the inclusion of the employee housing structure
containing 15 units. No SDD would be required if the employee housing structure were
removed from the proposal.
Deviations such as the proposed, are common among Special Development Districts,
especially when trying to redevelop a property that was originally developed under Eagle
County regulations in the 1980s. In this case, the deviations being sought are relatively minor
in terms of impacts to the community at large. The proposed deviations have little impact
upon the bulk and mass of structure (height or footprint) but relate more to operational aspects
of the property. All of the deviations have to do with the unique circumstances found on this
Highline, A DoubleTree by Hilton 13
June 2, 2020 - Page 529 of 772
site and based upon how the property will be operated. There was a previous SDD granted on
this property that was never implemented.
Deviations from Underlying Zoning
Section 12-9A-9, Development Standards, provides the mechanism for deviating from the
underlying zone district. It states:
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.
Major Exterior Alteration
The PA2 Zone District requires a Major Exterior Alteration for the addition of dwelling units,
accommodation units, fractional fee club units, limited service lodge units, and the addition of
1,000 sq. ft. of commercial floor area or common space.
Highline, A DoubleTree by Hilton 14
June 2, 2020 - Page 530 of 772
Zoning Analysis
Location: 2211 N. Frontage Rd. West / VAIL DAS SCHONE FIL 3 Block: A Lot: 1
THRU:- Lot: 3, Subdivision: VAIL DAS SCHONE FIL 3 Lot: 1 VAIL DAS
SCHONE 1 PT OF TR C VAIL DAS SCHONE 1
Parcel Number: 210311415017
Lot Size: 3.95 acres / 172,047 sq. ft.
Existing Zoning: Commercial Core 3 (CC3)
Proposed Zoning: Public Accommodation 2 (PA2)
Development Standard Existing (CC3)Proposed (PA2)
Lot Area 3.95 acres (rounded)
172,047 sq. ft.
3.95 acres (rounded)
172,047 sq. ft.
Lodging and Residential
Uses
97 AU
19 DU
176 AU
19 LSLU
12 EHU Dorm Units
15 EHUs (apartments)
Commercial Uses (gross
sq. ft.)
1,520 sq. ft. hotel retail
6,955 sq. ft. restaurant
4,500 sq. ft. office/commercial
1,520 sq. ft. hotel retail
6,955 sq. ft. restaurant
0 sq. ft. office/commercial (converted
to EHU Dorm)
Conference 3,076 sq. ft. gross area
2,666 sq. ft. conference seating
area
7,666 sq. ft. gross area
6,616 sq. ft. conference seating area
Parking 169 spaces 208 spaces
Setbacks North - > 20 ft.
East - > 20 ft.
South - > 20 ft.
West - > 20 ft.
North - 20 ft.
East - > 20 ft.
South - >20 ft.
West - >20 ft.
Trash/Recycle 12’
Height 52 ft.52 ft. existing building
48 ft. new buildings
Density 12 units per acre allowed
Noncompliant with CC3
19 DU
97 AU
Total: 116 “units”
Uses do not count as density per code
176 AU
19 LSLU
12 EHU Dorm rooms
15 EHU apartments/condos
Development Standard
Highline, A DoubleTree by Hilton 15
June 2, 2020 - Page 531 of 772
*EHUs do not count towards density or GRFA.
GRFA 51,614 sq. ft. (30%) allowed
45,250 sq. ft. (26.3%) total
25,200 sq. ft. existing AUs
20,050 sq. ft. existing DUs
258,070.5 sq. ft. (150%) allowed
77,805 sq. ft. total
32,555 sq. ft. net new AUs
25,200 sq. ft. AUs existing
20,050 sq. ft. LSLU converted DUs
EHU Floor Area 0 sq. ft.17,902 sq. ft. total
4,400 sq. ft. EHU Dorm
13,302 sq. ft. EHUs
Site Coverage 68,818 sq. ft. (40%) allowed
Existing 36,084 sq. ft. (21%)
111,830 sq. ft. (65%) allowed
Proposed 62,070 sq. ft. (36%)
Landscape Area 43,012 sq. ft. (25%) required
60,388 sq. ft. (35%) existing
51,614.1 sq. ft. (30%) required
53,946 sq. ft. (31.35%) proposed (with
deviation and grasscrete area)
see discussion of pedestrian easement
Internal Parking
Landscaping
(10% of surface parking
area)
Paved area = 72,194 sq. ft.
Internal Landscaping Required:
7,219.4 sq. ft. (10%)
Internal Landscaping Existing:
6,564 sq. Ft. (9%)
Paved area = 58,019 sq. ft. proposed
Internal Landscaping Required:
5,802 sq. ft. (10%)
Internal Landscaping Proposed:
12,715 sq. ft. (21.9%) (including
grasscrete area)
Snow Storage
(30% of surface parking
area)
Paved Area: 72,194 sq. ft.
Snow storage Required:
21,658.2 sq. ft. (30%)
Snow Storage Existing: 23,210
sq. ft. (32%) sq. ft.
Paved area (unheated) = 59,134 sq. ft.
Paved area (heated) = 2,303 sq. ft.
Snow storage Required:
16,945 sq. ft. (30%/10%)
Snow storage Proposed:
17,189 sq. ft. (including grasscrete
area)
see discussion of pedestrian easement
Existing (CC3)Proposed (PA2)Development Standard
Highline, A DoubleTree by Hilton 16
June 2, 2020 - Page 532 of 772
Parking
Predicting the amount of parking that is needed for any use or development is a challenging
endeavor. Parking regulations are rarely reflective of empirical data and usually developed by
comparing one community to the next. Parking rates are influenced by the need to access a
property by one’s personal car, the availability of public transit, the availability of onsite private
shuttles, airport shuttles, availability of taxis or Uber, and the ability to access other commercial
offerings and services by foot. Highline is located in the West Vail core area, on the free Town
of Vail bus system, and within easy pedestrian or bicycle access to many services.
The applicant engaged McDowell Engineering to analyze the parking generation of this hotel
property. Their analysis includes using the 5th Addition of the Parking Generation Manual
published by ITE (Institute of Transportation Engineers) in 2019 and more importantly, the
collection of local onsite parking data. The applicant collected parking data over a 11 month
period to assist with this analysis. Section 12-10-20 Special Review Provisions of the Offstreet
Parking and Loading requirements of the Town Code allow the PEC to reduce the parking
requirements of the Town Code by up to 25% based upon data provided by a qualified
consultant that shows less parking is required. The following findings must be made by the
PEC:
A. The parking demand will be less than the requirements identified in section 12-10-10
of this chapter; and
B. The probable long term use of the building or structure, based on its design, will not
generate additional parking demand; and
C. The use or activity is part of a demonstrated permanent program (including, but not
limited to, "rideshare" programs, shuttle service, or staggered work shifts) intended to
reduce parking demand that has been incorporated into the project's final approved
development plan; and
D. Proximity or availability of alternative modes of transportation (including, but not
limited to, public transit or shuttle services) is significant and integral to the nature of
the use or business activity.
All of the criteria above is met at this property and with the demands generated by the uses
onsite.
Their parking analysis is provided with the application materials provided. A summary is
provided below.
Highline, A DoubleTree by Hilton 17
June 2, 2020 - Page 533 of 772
The analysis, based on the local data collected, shows that the highest average parking rate,
with a 99% confidence interval, per room existing on the property is 0.67 parking spaces per
hotel room (using Saturday as peak). This data represents that there are vacancies that occur
and that there is not 100% occupancy. A 99% confidence level means that 99% of the time the
parking rate will be at 0.67 parking spaces per hotel room or less.
To account for vacancies and try to predict the parking rate during an assumed 100%
occupancy scenario, the data was also analyzed based on the number of cars parked per
occupied hotel room. The result is a peak average of 0.70 cars parked per occupied hotel
room, with a 99% confidence level. A 99% confidence level means that 99% of the time the
parking rate will be at 0.70 parking spaces per hotel room or less considering full occupancy of
the hotel (worst-case scenario).
Using national parking data prepared by the ITE, the rate for similar hotels (suburban hotels
with conference/convention centers, hotel bar and restaurant, and retail uses) the average peak
period parking demand is 0.74 spaces per room or 0.83 spaces per occupied room. The
national parking data counts include meeting room space, retail, and hotel bar/restaurant so
that the rates include those ancillary uses in the overall number.
The ITE indicates that using local data is more accurate than relying on national data but we
have included it here as a conservative analysis and to account for meeting room and
commercial uses.
The local data was collected during the busy Christmas week in 2019 but was not collected
when the meeting space was being used. However, if you look at the use characteristics
collected during the day (see parking study Figure 1, page 3), the peak parking being utilized
from 9:00 am to 5:00 pm was 48 spaces leaving 121 spaces available during the day. The
conclusion being that during the day, even at 100% hotel occupancy, there will be significant
parking available during typical conference hours. Therefore, no adjustment was made to the
proposed parking rate for the hotel based on the characteristics of parking.
McDowell Engineering also performed a parking needs analysis based on the Lion’s Ridge
project located in Vail and found that the complex parking need is 1.06 parking spaces per
unit. The applicant is proposing to reduce the parking requirement for the 15 unit workforce
housing apartment building to 1.06 parking spaces per unit or 16 parking spaces.
The following tables are parking calculation for the Highline based on local data for the hotel,
the occupied room rate, and 99% confidence interval. The analysis was done based on
Occupied Room to be most conservative. Parking for the EHUs is being reduced as noted
above and third-party restaurants were calculated at the rates according to Town Code even
though the local data count was inclusive of the two third party restaurants, thus providing an
additional layer of conservatism.
Highline, A DoubleTree by Hilton 18
June 2, 2020 - Page 534 of 772
The McDowell parking analysis shows that the parking need is fairly consistent with our original
submittal which sought to seek deviation from the conference parking calculation as applied
outside the core area and reduction to the parking for the onsite retail uses within the hotel
(uses with no access or presence outside of the hotel common areas).
Parking Management Plan:
The Town staff requested the applicant provide a parking management plan to understand how
the parking will be managed or this project. The parking for the hotel and its related uses, the
two, third-party restaurant spaces, and the proposed EHU Building have parking that is co-
mingled on the property. Below is a description of the parking provided followed by the
management elements.
Parking Summary:
Total parking provided: 208 spaces
Total parking proposed as required: 175
Total valet spaces: 111 (53.3% of total)
Total enclosed spaces: 48 (23% of total site, all of net new parking)
Total net new parking: 39 spaces
Garage parking spaces: 42 valet, 6 regular
Surface Parking spaces:
Parking Per “Occupied” Room - Local data 99% confidence interval
Use Units Per Unit Existing
SF New SF Total SF Per
1000sf
Space
Req.
Accomodation Unit 176 0.70 123.2
Limit Service Lodge Unit 19 0.70 13.3
Meeting Space (seating area)Use occurs during the day (see discussion above)
Lobby Bar (Seating)Included in the rate above
3rd Party Restaurant (Seating)2277 0 2277 8.3 18.9
Spa - Simply Massage Included in the rate above
Retail - Charter Sports Included in the rate above
Dorm Apartment (one unit, 12
bedrooms)1 2.5 2.5
EHU 15 1.06 15.9
Total Parking Need 173.8
Parking provided 208.0
Difference/Surplus 34.2
Highline, A DoubleTree by Hilton 19
June 2, 2020 - Page 535 of 772
69 valet spaces
80 regular spaces
4 compact spaces
4 employee spaces (impacted by loading space used infrequently)
1 parallel space (plus one short term space)
2 spaces within the porte cochere
2 valet operation spaces (temporary car shuffling, not included in parking count)
Controlled Access Parking:
There are a total of 208 parking spaces provided onsite. Of these 208 parking spaces,
556 of them are located outside of the controlled access area. Within the controlled
access area, 32 spaces are capable of being self-parked where the guest or other user is
given access beyond the gate, however, the owner may decide to valet park all of the
spaces as necessary.
Hotel Guest Parking:
All hotel guest parking will be accommodated by valet or controlled gate access.
During peak winter season, all hotel guests may be valet parked at the discretion of the
owner.
EHU Apartments:
The 15 EHU apartments require a total of 16 parking spaces. The parking for these
apartments will be located within the parking area with controlled access and in the
parallel parking (1 parking space and 1 short term space) along Chamonix Lane. The
number of parking spaces needed for the apartments may end up being less for the 16
units and the need of the occupants to have daily access to their cars will be evaluated
based on experience. In concept, there will be 12 self-park spaces available within the
hotel parking area, 1 self parking spaces along Chamonix Lane, and another 3 valet
spaces available to EHU residents. Because the EHU building is a rental apartment
building, the owner will be able to control the number of occupants with cars as
documented in leases.
EHU Dormitory:
The EHU dormitory will be targeted to employees of the hotel and those with limited
need for car ownership. It is anticipated that only 2 parking spaces will be necessary for
the dormitory. These parking spaces will either be accommodated within the valet
system or otherwise designated for the dormitory use. Since this dormitory is a rental
facility, the owner will be able to closely control number of occupants with vehicles as
documented in leases.
Retail and Restaurant Establishments:
The primary parking for the retail and restaurant facilities employees and customers,
other than hotel guests who are already parked, will be within the self parking spaces
Highline, A DoubleTree by Hilton 20
June 2, 2020 - Page 536 of 772
provided outside of the controlled parking area. There are 56 parking spaces available
to patrons outside of the controlled parking area. Valet parking services will also be
provided to these customers as desired by the customer.
Meeting Room Space:
Parking for the meeting rooms will be primarily accommodated by the hotel parking
facilities, as these users are already parked within the facility. Users of the conference
space, other than hotel guests, will be parked via the hotel valet system.
Valet Operations:
The valet operation will require the shuffling around of cars within the exterior parking
lot and within the parking garage. For the exterior parking lot, two parking spaces, not
included in the total parking count, have been provided so that cars can be shuffled in
the parking lot without impairing the operation of the drive aisles.
Within the enclosed parking area, where the parking is only staked two cars deep, cars
will be parked temporarily within the drive aisle to perform the shuffling of cars.
The valet parking layout complies fully with Town Code.
Parking Lot Maintenance and Snow Removal:
The exterior parking lot will require snow removal and maintenance on a continuous
basis during the winter months. The hotel experiences high turnover of parking spaces
during the day as guests check out of the hotel in the morning and new guests arrive in
the evenings. This daily reduction in parking as well as the typical hotel occupancy
rates which are far less than 100%, 99% of the time, will allow for snow removal and
maintenance. When the need arrises, snow will be stored temporarily within the
parking lot until it can be removed and trucked offsite. In no case will snow be
temporarily stored within the parking areas for more than one week. The drive aisle/
ramp on the north side of the existing hotel building will be heated in order to maintain
it free from snow and ice and reduce the needs for snow storage.
Hotel Shuttle Operation:
The hotel has two shuttles that operate 365 days a year depending on need. In
general, the shuttle at peak times of the year, transports hotel guests with the
commercial core areas of the Town on a continuous loop from 8:00 am to 10:30 am and
again from 3:30 pm to 6:00 pm. During the afternoon and in the evening, the shuttles
run on-demand. This service makes it possible for hotel guests to book the Highline
and arrive via van or taxi and therefore not require a car during their stay.
Employee Parking Generally:
In general, employees of the hotel and businesses on this campus are required or
encouraged to use public transportation in order to reduce the parking demands of the
Highline, A DoubleTree by Hilton 21
June 2, 2020 - Page 537 of 772
property. Parking requirements and studies reflect the total number of cars parked on
commercial or residential property and therefore include cars that are parked by
employees as well as guests and consumers. Therefore, parking for employees is
inherent in the parking counts. That said, the Highline intends to reduce the impacts on
the environment and make more parking available to guests and consumers but
discouraging employees from driving to work.
Fire Truck Turn Around Area:
The fire truck turnaround area shall be maintained free from any obstacles, ice, and
snow. Snow storage shall not infringe upon the turnaround area.
Highline, A DoubleTree by Hilton 22
June 2, 2020 - Page 538 of 772
Deviations Sought through SDD
The applicant is attempting to provide a public benefit to the Town of Vail, and Eagle County
at large, by building additional EHU units on its property and improve local economic
conditions with increased Town and business revenues. In doing so, the applicant is using
space that could otherwise be put toward parking, landscaping, and snow storage. If the
Employee Housing building proposed were removed from the project, no deviations would be
necessary and no SDD would be required. Because it would be a lost benefit to the
community to not build the employee housing in this location, it is for this reason that the
applicant is seeking the following deviations.
Conference Parking:
The current parking regulations allow a fractional fee club style hotel outside of the core areas
to have its parking related to conference facilities reduced from 1 parking space for each 120
sq. ft. to 1 parking space for each 330 sq. ft. The same calculation is true within the core areas
of Lionshead and Vail Village. Yet a regular hotel, outside of the core area, is not afforded the
same relief as that of a fractional fee property. This is likely an error or oversight in the current
parking regulations.
The parking requirement for meeting rooms or conference rooms at 1 space for 120 sq. ft. is
for a stand alone facility with no lodging onsite. It makes sense that a hotel with meeting room
space, especially when the space is very limited total size, would primarily be occupied by
people already staying and parked at the hotel. The primary reason a hotel provides meeting
space is to increase occupancy of the hotel during slower periods of the year. Additionally, the
hotel operator provides shuttle services from West Vail to the core areas of Lionshead and Vail
Village which then requires less parking overall for the hotel. The applicant prepared a site
specific study to understand the parking utilization onsite.
The applicant is requesting a deviation that is consistent with the parking analysis prepared by
McDowell Engineering. Meeting room users are mostly also guests within the hotel that are
already parked as a hotel guest. The parking study shows that from the hours of approximately
9:00 am and 5:00 pm, the hours when the meeting rooms would typically be in use, the
parking onsite was more than 70% available or empty. Therefore, there is adequate parking
within the facility to accommodate the few that might attend an event that are not already
staying at the facility. The hotel also operates a town shuttle service that can also provide
transit for meeting room users onsite.
The parking analysis prepared by McDowell Engineering, supports this reduction in the amount
of parking for this site.
Parking for commercial and retail space:
Highline, A DoubleTree by Hilton 23
June 2, 2020 - Page 539 of 772
The existing and proposed hotel includes an 820 sq. ft. Simply Massage space and a 700 sq. ft.
Charter Sports space. The Town’s parking requirements do not provide any reduction in
parking requirement for these types of retail/service facilities within a hotel. The parking study
that was prepared analyzed the property as well as looking at national parking data. Hotels
typically have retail uses located within them and those parking counts are accounted for in the
data collected. The analysis shows that there is no additional parking that needs to be
assessed on these retail uses within the hotel. The applicant is proposing to maintain the
parking requirements per code for Casa Mexico and West Side Cafe, even though some
percentage of users come from the hotel guests.
Parking 15 Unit Apartment Building:
The applicant originally proposed to meet Town Code for the parking for the 15 unit employee
housing apartment building: 2 parking spaces per unit. However, based on concerns related
to snow storage and landscaping, the applicant is seeking a parking deviation that reflects the
actual parking utilization of EHUs in Vail. Vail’s access to transit allows the local workforce to
live and work in Vail without the need for a car. This is evidenced by parking studies that have
been conducted in Vail.
McDowell Engineering performed a parking needs analysis at Lion’s Ridge, a similar rental
complex located in Vail, in support of the Boothfalls application. This analysis shows that the
observed parking rate per unit is 1.06 parking spaces per unit. The applicant is providing 16
parking spaces which reflects the parking need.
Valet Parking:
The code allows up to 50% of the required parking to be within a valet parking program. The
proposed redevelopment project requires a total of 174 parking spaces and provides 208 total
parking spaces onsite. There are 111 parking spaces proposed as valet parking spaces or
51.62% of the required parking.
The applicant is requesting a deviation within the proposed SDD to account for this minor
deviation.
Snow Storage:
The code requires that an area equal to 30% of the surface parking areas that are not heated
for snow melt and 10% of the surface parking or driveways that are heated with snowmelt be
provided as snow storage. The proposed project provides approximately 17,189 sq. ft. of
snow storage where 16,945 sq. ft. is required. The applicant proposes to manage the snow
storage onsite by utilizing an area of the parking lot proposed as grasscrete designated for
valet parking to temporarily store snow until it can be removed from the property after a large
storm event. Grasscrete is a permeable surface that can grow grass but also allows vehicles to
park on it without damage. In the summer months, this area can be used for parking while in
the winter months it can also serve as snow storage. Similar successful approaches to snow
removal occur in the remainder of the West Vail commercial area. The Town Code does not
Highline, A DoubleTree by Hilton 24
June 2, 2020 - Page 540 of 772
allow areas where trees are located to be counted for snow storage even though it is common
to store snow around the bases of deciduous trees. In fact landscape areas with mature trees
are used today for snow storage. The applicant is seeking a deviation from this requirement in
order to maximize snow storage.
The applicant is proposing to provide a 6’ pedestrian easement along the east property line.
This is provided in the event there is a future redevelopment of properties to the east and the
area is needed for a joint pedestrian walkway. Until the walk is provided, the snow storage
calculations will remain as proposed herein. If the full 6’ pedestrian easement is paved with a
pedestrian pathway, the amount of snow storage will be reduced by another 2,535 sq. ft.
The applicant is requesting a deviation within the proposed SDD to account for the snow
storage calculation and counting of treed areas in the calculation.
Landscape Area:
The total landscape area required by the existing property under CC3 zoning is 43,012 sq. ft.
which represents 25% of the total site area. The PA2 zone district requires a minimum of 30%
or 51,614 sq. ft. The applicant is proposing 53,946 sq. ft. or 31.35% of the site as landscape
area including the grasscrete area, in excess of the minimum required. The calculations for
landscape areas only allow 20% of the landscape area calculation to include “hardscape”
improvements like pools, pool decks, and sidewalks. As proposed the project includes
hardscape areas of 16,052 sq. ft. but based on the definition of landscape area, only 10,323 sq.
ft. is able to be counted. The code limits areas on a property that can qualify as landscape
area. Per code, a landscape area must be at least 15’ wide and 15’ deep and contain a
minimum of 300 sq. ft. to qualify as a landscape area. This precludes a substantial amount of
landscape areas within this project. This site provides many large areas of landscaping that
does not meet the 15’ or 300 sq. ft. requirements. As examples, Commercial Core 1 and 2 and
Lionsheads Mixed Use 1 and 2 have no minimum landscape area dimension requirement.
Several other zone districts have a 10’ x 10’ requirement. This standard is not consistent
throughout the Town Code.
The applicant is proposing to provide a 6’ pedestrian easement along the east property line.
This is provided in the event there is a redevelopment of properties to the east and the area is
needed for a joint pedestrian walkway. Until the walk is provided, the landscape area
calculations will remain as proposed herein. If the full 6’ pedestrian easement is paved with a
pedestrian pathway, the amount of landscape area will be reduced by another 2,535 sq. ft.
The applicant is seeking a deviation from this minimum size limit for landscape areas within the
proposed SDD.
Future Subdivision:
A future subdivision plat will be filed to create a separate parcel for the EHU apartment
building so that it can be financed and owned separately from the hotel. The EHU apartment
Highline, A DoubleTree by Hilton 25
June 2, 2020 - Page 541 of 772
building parcel is intended to meet the minimum lot size of the PA2 zone district (10,000 sq. ft.
minimum) and site perimeter setback requirements but would not be subject to interior
setbacks (south and west property lines) nor the requirement of being of a shape that can
enclose an 80’ by 80’ square. The intent is not to create a lot that is intended to be sold as a
development parcel, but instead to allow a separate ownership within the context of an overall
planned development of the Highline SDD. The intent is that the entire development site,
including the hotel and the EHU apartment building, would be treated as one parcel for the
purpose of applying the development standards as adopted by this SDD, including parking
requirements (i.e., shared parking facilities). These deviations to the subdivision and zoning
regulations to accommodate this future subdivision are also embodied in this SDD. The
subdivision approval is proposed to occur prior to a CO being issued to the EHU Building.
Slope of Driveways:
The existing driveway does not meet Town Code as portions of unheated drive are steeper
than 9% and the access points do not meet the required 4% for the first 30’. The proposed
SDD is not making these standards any worse but staff has requested that we include this
existing condition as a deviation from development standards.
Trash and Recycling:
The trash and recycling enclosure is proposed to extend into the side setback on the east side
of the employee housing building resulting in a 12’ setback of this one story element to the
property line. The enclosure complies with the 20’ setback from Chamonix Lane. The
enclosures are capable of holding two 1.5 yard containers. One will be used for recycling and
the other for trash. This volume of trash and recycling is adequate for the EHU building with
service up to twice a week.
While not deviations, the follow issues noted as applicable to these applications:
Commercial Uses:
There is a total of 8,475 sq. ft. of retail and restaurant uses within the hotel today. The PA2
allows there to be these commercial uses on site as a permitted use limited to 10% of the
GRFA constructed onsite. The PA2 allows this limit to be increased to 15% with a Conditional
Use Permit. The GRFA of the property is 77,805 sq. ft. (only hotel room floor area) thus
allowing 7,780 sq. ft. of commercial uses as a permitted use or 11,670 sq. ft. as a conditional
use. The applicant will pursue approval of a Conditional Use Permit prior to an application for
a building permit for any of the proposed improvements to bring the commercial uses into
compliance with the PA2 zone district. In the future, if the Town wants to allow more variety of
commercial uses and more floor area of commercial uses in the PA2 zone district, amendments
to the PA zone district could allow these changes.
Existing Manmade Site Grades:
A small area of the site has grades that exceed 40% slope. Section 12-21-10 Development
Restricted states in part “No structure shall be built on a slope of forty percent (40%) or greater
Highline, A DoubleTree by Hilton 26
June 2, 2020 - Page 542 of 772
except in single-family residential, two-family residential, or two-family primary/secondary
residential zone districts.” This regulation was intended to apply to natural grades and not
where grades exist due to grading caused by prior development or excavation and is therefore
not applicable to the Highline property.
Highline, A DoubleTree by Hilton 27
June 2, 2020 - Page 543 of 772
Workforce 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. The proposed project exceeds
both the total requirement and the onsite requirement for employee housing. In fact, in the
interest of providing a much needed public benefit, the applicant is proposing the
development of an employee housing apartment building that will include 15 units, providing a
total of 38 bedrooms. Town Code limits occupancy of employee housing to two persons per
unit. This building is not required as part of the project, but is being proposed as a public
benefit. The workforce housing requirement for the additional lodging space is being met with
the addition of the EHU dorm space. The Employee Housing structure is intended to be
developed on a separate parcel of land that will be subdivided from the remainder of the
property, yet tied to the overall property for the purpose of applying zoning and development
standards. This will facilitate its development by a separate entity from the hotel to
accommodate a separate financing structure while still being integral to the hotel campus.
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:
Inclusionary zoning does not apply to this application as there are no new dwelling units
or GRFA being proposed. In fact, 19 dwelling units are being removed and replaced
with Limited Service Lodge Units. Therefore, the property will maintain an inclusionary
employee housing credit of 2,005 sq. ft. of EHU floor area that can be used in the
future, should dwelling units ever be proposed within the property.
Commercial linkage applies to this project.
Commercial Linkage Calculation
Use Calculation Total Employees Generated
79 net new
accommodation units
0.6 employees per unit 47.4
19 net new LSLUs 0.6 employees per unit 11.4
Conference Space 0.8 employee per 1,000 feet of
net new floor area (3,950 new)
3.2
Removal of 4,500 sq.
ft. office space
3.2 employees/1,000 sq.ft.-14.4
Net employees generated 47.6
Mitigation Rate 20%
Use
Highline, A DoubleTree by Hilton 28
June 2, 2020 - Page 544 of 772
The proposed project generates a net requirement of 9.5 employees to be housed.
This will offset by the applicant’s proposal of an EHU dormitory style housing to
accommodate up to 17.6 employees. Thus, the proposal has a surplus of 8.1
employees that shall be carried forward as a credit against future employee generating
proposals on the property.
The applicant is also proposing to develop a 15-unit employee housing apartment
structure onsite concurrent with the expansion of the hotel. These units will allow the
applicant to establish an employee housing bank pursuant to section 12-23-7 of the
Town Code. However, in order to provide a public benefit, 25% of the units (two, three-
bedroom units and two, one-bedroom units) will be set aside and excluded from any
future mitigation bank established for the EHU building as permitted by sections
12-23-7 and 12-24-7 of the Town Code.
The image below is the 15 unit EHU building proposed.
Total Commercial Linkage
Requirement
9.5 employees to be housed
Calculation Total Employees GeneratedUse
Highline, A DoubleTree by Hilton 29
15 Unit EHU Building
June 2, 2020 - Page 545 of 772
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 EHU dormitory style unit has
a total square footage of 4,400 sq. ft. and
with 12 total units or bedrooms. The
minimum square footage per person
occupying the dormitory is 250 sq. ft., which
therefore allows for a total of 17.6
employees.
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 not applicable to this application.
F.Off 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.
Highline, A DoubleTree by Hilton 30
Proposed Dormitory Layout
June 2, 2020 - Page 546 of 772
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 12-24-1: Purpose and Applicability, of the Vail Town Code provides the purpose
of the Inclusionary Zoning Chapter:
The purpose of this chapter is to ensure that new residential development and
redevelopment in the town of Vail provide for a reasonable amount of employee
housing to mitigate the impact on employee housing caused by such residential
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 of 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:
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
Highline, A DoubleTree by Hilton 31
June 2, 2020 - Page 547 of 772
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 of 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.
Highline, A DoubleTree by Hilton 32
June 2, 2020 - Page 548 of 772
Criteria for Review: Rezoning
Section 12-3-7: AMENDMENT, of the Vail Town Code, provides the criteria for review of a zone
district boundary amendment. The following section includes the criteria, along with an
analysis of the compliance of the proposal with the criteria.
1.The extent to which the zone district amendment is consistent with all the applicable
elements of the adopted goals, objectives and policies outlined in the Vail
comprehensive plan and is compatible with the development objectives of the town;
Applicant Analysis:
The property is governed by the Vail Land Use Plan. Other applicable plans include the
Vail 20/20 Plan and the Housing Strategic Plan, all of which are described below:
•Vail Land Use Plan
The adopted map of the Vail Land Use Plan shows a designation of “Community
Commercial” for the majority of the property.
Per the Vail Land Use Plan of 1986, this area was designated to be Community
Commercial. (See Vail Land Use Plan, Chapter VI - Proposed Land Use).
This area includes activities aimed at accommodating the overnight and short-
term visitor to the area. Primary uses include hotels, lodges, service stations,
and parking structures (with densities up to 25 dwelling units or 50
accommodation units per buildable acre). These areas are oriented toward
vehicular access from I-70, with other support commercial and business services
Highline, A DoubleTree by Hilton 33
June 2, 2020 - Page 549 of 772
included. Also allowed in this category, would be institutional uses and various
municipal uses.” (Vail Land Use Plan pg. 25)
This new category has been designated for the West Vail commercial area,
which is primarily oriented to serve the needs of the permanent resident and the
long-term visitor. Because the community expressed the desire to concentrate
commercial uses within existing commercial nodes, no new commercial areas
have been designated. The CC land use area contains 24 acres or 1% of the
land area. ” (Vail Land Use Plan pg. 28). The intention of the Preferred Land
Use Plan was to “…reflect[s] a balancing of existing conditions, community
opinion, opportunities and constraints, and projected growth demands.
Many properties were zoned at that time without much careful consideration of the
impact of proposed zoning throughout West Vail, including this property. Being more
thoughtful at the time would more likely have resulted in accommodation units being
allowed in the CC3 zone district or perhaps there would have been an appropriate zone
district applied to the hotel knowing that hotels, hot beds, and lodging taxes were and
are top goals of the Town.
The Vail Land Use Plan states that allowing accommodation units at 50 units per acre is
appropriate. On this 3.95 acre site, that would allow for 197.5 accommodation units.
The applicant is proposing 195 units, including the limited service lodge units.
The proposal includes a zoning of Public Accommodation-2 District. The PA2 zone
district allows lodges with multiple family dwellings, employee housing units, and
commercial/office uses. The proposed amendment will make all of the uses conform
with zoning.
•Vail 20/20 Plan
The Vail 20/20 Plan provides the following goals:
Provide for enough deed-restricted housing for at least 30 percent of the
workforce through policies, regulations and publicly initiated development.
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.
The proposed zoning of PA2 and the proposed SDD helps to further the goal of the
Town of Vail to provide deed-restricted housing for 30% of the workforce. This property
Highline, A DoubleTree by Hilton 34
June 2, 2020 - Page 550 of 772
creates an exciting opportunity to create new housing stock in an area that provides
services and transportation within walking distance.
•Employee Housing Strategic Plan
The Employee Housing Strategic Plan outlines the Town of Vail’s goals and policies to
ensure employee housing. It provides the following objectives:
Actively address affordable housing for Vail workers to ensure that the community
remains competitive in economic terms.
Increase and maintain deed-restricted housing within the Town to encourage the
efficient use of resources by placing employees closer to their place of work.
The proposed zoning will allow for the creation of new deed-restricted employee
housing units within the Town of Vail, allowing Vail to remain economically competitive
in attracting and maintaining a quality workforce.
The proposal is consistent with the goals and objectives of the various Town of Vail
planning documents and helps to further four of Vail’s critical goals: creating employee
housing within the Town of Vail boundaries to ensure that Vail remains economically
competitive; maintaining and increasing the Town’s lodging bed base to increase
revenues and improve the vitality of the Town’s economy; to increase occupancy and
vitality in the shoulder seasons by providing new conference space; and promoting infill
development within the Town.
2.The extent to which the zone district amendment is suitable with the existing and
potential land uses on the site and existing and potential surrounding land uses as set
out in the town's adopted planning documents; and
Applicant Analysis: The Highline site was originally built under the jurisdiction of Eagle
County. In 1979, the newly constructed facility received a certificate of occupancy from
Eagle County. It was then annexed to the Town of Vail as part of a larger annexation of
the West Vail area by Ordinance No. 43, Series of 1980, approved on December 10,
1980. Per the statutory requirements, the newly annexed land was required to be
zoned by the zoning district for the Town of Vail within 90 days of annexation, by March
10, 1981. Ordinance No. 11, Series of 1981, was first read in on March 3, 1981. This
ordinance created the CCC3 zone district, under which this site was zoned. It appears
the zone district was created hastily as the CC3 zoning district did not allow for hotels
or dwelling units where were already developed on the property. From the inception,
the CC3 zone district upon application to this site rendered the existing hotel (76 hotel
rooms) and condominiums (19 dwelling units with 20 lock-offs) as nonconforming uses.
Over four years later, on August 15, 1985, the Colorado Court of Appeals overturned
the original West Vail annexation because a rectangular tract owned by the BLM was
Highline, A DoubleTree by Hilton 35
June 2, 2020 - Page 551 of 772
between two contiguous tracts that were being annexed. This BLM land was
improperly included in the proposed area to be annexed, and without this land, the
proposed annexation would be ‘invalid for lack of the necessary one-sixth contiguity.’
The Town of Vail moved quickly to again annex West Vail. Ordinance No. 1, Series of
1986, re-annexed West Vail on January 29, 1986. Ordinance No. 10, Series of 1986,
was first read in on March 18, 1986. There were no changes to the zoning for the site in
this ordinance even though the hotel and condominium units on this property had
existed for 7 years. We believe that this was an incredible oversight since the hotel
have been there already for so long and because by that time the Town had adopted
the Vail Land Use Plan which encouraged the preservation and expansion of the Town’s
lodging bed base.
This property sits on the edge between the West Vail Commercial Center and multi-
family residential properties. The West Vail Commercial Center consists of commercial
uses designed to meet the needs of locals and guests alike. Just like the existing hotel,
the proposed hotel and employee housing will continue to be compatible and
complimentary to the other uses within the area. Given the location and transitional
point between commercial and residential, a hotel and workforce housing such as this
provide the obvious transition and naturally fit in the environment.
The proposed rezoning of the property to Public Accommodation 2 along with the
proposed SDD will allow the site to be conforming and thus allow the property to enjoy
conforming status and allow for the proposed expansion of the hotel.
3.The extent to which the zone district amendment presents a harmonious, convenient,
workable relationship among land uses consistent with municipal development
objectives;
Applicant Analysis:
This property sits on the edge between the West Vail Commercial Center and multi-
family residential properties. The West Vail Commercial Center consists of commercial
uses designed to meet the needs of locals and guests alike. When moving between
commercial zoning and residential zoning, it is important to consider a transition that
provides a harmonious, convenient, and workable relationship among the existing land
uses. Just like the existing hotel, the proposed hotel and employee housing will
provide such a transition and will continue to be compatible and complimentary to the
other uses within the area. Given the location and adjacency of two zone districts types
(commercial and residential), a hotel and workforce housing such as this provide an
obvious transition and present a harmonious, convenient and workable relationship
between these land uses.
Highline, A DoubleTree by Hilton 36
June 2, 2020 - Page 552 of 772
The proposal to rezone the property to PA2 furthers three major development
objectives:
Provision of employee housing
Encourage the preservation and expansion of the Town’s lodging bed base
Encourage the development of conference facilities to address generation of
revenues during the slower shoulder seasons
As a result, the proposal is consistent with this criterion.
4.The extent to which the zone district amendment provides for the growth of an
orderly viable community and does not constitute spot zoning as the amendment
serves the best interests of the community as a whole; and
Applicant Analysis:
The proposed zone district amendment provides for the growth of an orderly viable
community by allowing a hotel to be expanded within the limits of its development site
and provide for workforce housing. The proposal is close to existing services and
transportation, while simultaneously providing needed lodging to encourage overnight
visitors. Employee housing is key to ensuring that the Town of Vail remain economically
viable and competitive, while not having impacts to environmentally sensitive lands.
This proposed rezoning does not constitute spot zoning, as the PA2 zone district helps
to further these community goals and is consistent with the Town land use plan and
other guiding documents. As a result, the proposed amendment serves the best
interest of the community.
5.The extent to which the zone district amendment results in adverse or beneficial
impacts on the natural environment, including, but not limited to, water quality, air
quality, noise, vegetation, riparian corridors, hillsides and other desirable natural
features; and
Applicant Analysis:
The proposed zone district amendment proposes to rezone a property currently zoned
as CC3 zone district to PA2 zone district. The site is currently largely developed and
any environmental impacts the may have occurred did so decades ago. As evidenced
in the EIR provided from the project, there is limited to no impacts on water quality, air
quality, noise, vegetation, riparian corridors, hillsides, or other desirable natural
features.
Because the entirety of the site is already used as a lodge with commercial space, there
should be no new impact to the natural environment and complies with this criterion.
Highline, A DoubleTree by Hilton 37
June 2, 2020 - Page 553 of 772
6.The extent to which the zone district amendment is consistent with the purpose
statement of the proposed zone district; and
Applicant Analysis:
Section 12-7J-1 provides the purpose of the Public Accommodation-2 zone district is:
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. (Ord. 2(2006) § 2)
The Highline site was originally developed as a lodge facility with multiple-family
dwellings as well as commercial and retail uses, and received a Certificate of Occupancy
from Eagle County in 1979. Based on the background of the site and the annexation
and zoning of West Vail to the Town of Vail, it appears that the current zoning
designation, CC3, is inappropriate zoning for the property. CC3 has never allowed for a
lodge facility and thus was never appropriate zoning for the site. The facility pre-dated
the annexation and zoning, and it appears that applying more appropriate zoning was
overlooked and is now long over-due. Vail’s Land Use Plan recognized and encourage
the development of lodging facilities in this area of the Town. Furthermore, the
addition of the PA2 zoning exhibits the Town of Vail’s intention of providing lodging and
residential accommodations in the valley. Not only does this project accomplish that
intent, but it also fits perfectly within the definition of the PA2 zoning.
As a result, the proposed zone district amendment is consistent with the purpose
statement of the PA2 zone district.
7.The extent to which the zone district amendment demonstrates how conditions have
changed since the zoning designation of the subject property was adopted and is no
longer appropriate; and
Applicant Analysis:
Highline, A DoubleTree by Hilton 38
June 2, 2020 - Page 554 of 772
The Highline site first fell under the CC3 zone district in 1981 after the property was
originally annexed to the Town of Vail. Prior to this annexation and subsequent zone
designation, the property had already been developed as a lodge facility and had
received a Certificate of Occupancy in 1979. The property was then re-annexed to the
Town of Vail in 1986 and immediately thereafter was re-zoned as CC3. Just months
later, the Town of Vail issued the Vail Land Use Plan, with a proposed designation of
Community Commercial from the Highline site. Per the Vail Land Use Plan, and the
subsequent Vail 20/20 Plan and Employee Housing Strategic Plan, the intentions and
the goals for the Town of Vail are to encourage lodging facilities for overnight visitors as
well as to provide much-needed employee housing in the Vail Valley. The PA2 zoning
district allocation will allow for the Highline site to be redeveloped to allow for
additional lodging beds while also providing the community need of employee
housing. The CC3 zoning district has never been appropriate for this site, and
appropriate zoning designation is long over-due. Conditions have always been ripe for
this property to be rezoned to PA2 and what is proposed is consistent with the direction
given in the Vail Land Use Plan.
8.Such other factors and criteria as the commission and/or council deem applicable to
the proposed rezoning.
Applicant Analysis:
Any other factors can be addressed as necessary.
Highline, A DoubleTree by Hilton 39
June 2, 2020 - Page 555 of 772
Criteria for Review: Special Development District
Section 12-9A-8: DESIGN CRITERIA AND NECESSARY FINDINGS, of the Vail Town Code,
provides the criteria for review of a Special Development District. The following section
includes the criteria, along with an analysis of the compliance of the proposal with the criteria.
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.
Applicant Analysis:
The architecture is consistent with the surrounding architecture and the Town’s design
guidelines applicable to areas outside of the core areas. The concept is to use natural
materials, such as stone, wood composite siding, and metal panel or stucco, to create a
project that is responsive to the existing hotel and the surrounding neighborhood. This
design creates architectural interest by providing a variety of characteristics throughout
the new uses on the site. The project seeks to increase the Town’s lodging and
employee housing bed base while helping to screen or reduce the visual impact of the
existing surface parking areas from neighboring properties.
The property is on the edge of the West Vail Commercial Core, which consists of large
structures and several three-story buildings. The maximum height of the proposed
buildings is 48 ft., which complies with the PA2 zoning maximum height restriction of 48
ft. and less than the 52 ft. of the existing hotel. Additionally, the maximum height is
approximately 4 feet lower than the existing lodge building. Furthermore, the new
hotel tower is sized in relation to the current hotel tower. This project will provide a
visual and sound buffer zone to the neighbors to the north of the property from the I-70
traffic and the commercial areas with the residential building that faces the residential
neighbors to the north. Furthermore, the proposed hotel and EHUs are completing the
existing lodging block rather than seeking out new development opportunities on what
is currently non-developed open space.
Significant surface parking lots are a characteristic of the immediate neighborhood,
including residential properties, which is not a very efficient use of land. While surface
parking will remain on the property, the project is proposing to enclose a significant
amount of the parking below the proposed new wing of the building and screen the
surface parking lot from the residential neighborhood behind.
2.Relationship: Uses, activity and density which provide a compatible, efficient and
workable relationship with surrounding uses and activity.
Applicant Analysis:
Highline, A DoubleTree by Hilton 40
June 2, 2020 - Page 556 of 772
Highline is adjacent to the I-70 and North Frontage Road corridor to the south of the
property. It provides a smooth transition between the West Vail commercial core to its
east, commercial to the west, and residential to the west and to the north. The Vail
Land Use Plan expressed a desire to concentrate commercial uses in designated
locations. The Highline provides lodging to overnight guests, while the EHU units
provide the desirable transition from Commercial uses to Residential uses (which are to
the north and to the west of the property).
The proposed uses are compatible with the surrounding residential uses to the north
and west and the commercial uses to the east and the west. Pursuant to the PA2 zoning
and the Town of Vail’s policies and goals around encouraging hotel beds and employee
housing, the proposed density of the project is zero. The proposed EHU structure is
similar in scale and mass to the Chamonix Townhouses and other multi-family buildings
in the area. As a result, Highline is compatible with the surrounding uses and activity
and is consistent with this criterion. The SDD is only needed to address technical issues
related to parking and snow storage. Therefore the impacts to the neighbors or the
community at large is limited.
3.Parking And Loading: Compliance with parking and loading requirements as outlined
in chapter 10 of this title.
Applicant Analysis:
Highline, A DoubleTree by Hilton 41
Highline
Hotel
Chamonix Employee HousingResidential
Commercial
Residential
Commercial/
Institutional
I-70
June 2, 2020 - Page 557 of 772
A parking analysis was provided in a previous section of the submittal. As that analysis
provided, the entire project is not only in compliance with the parking requirements of
Chapter 10, except for the parking required for the meeting room facilities and onsite
retail which has been addressed herein. As permitted by Town Code, the applicant has
provided an analysis to show that the need for parking is less than that predicted by the
Town Code and the SDD complies with this analysis. The project complies with the
loading requirements found in Chapter 10. The application is therefore in compliance
with this requirement.
4.Comprehensive Plan: Conformity with applicable elements of the Vail comprehensive
plan, town policies and urban design plans.
Applicant Analysis: The property is governed by the Vail Land Use Plan. Other
applicable plans include the Vail 20/20 Plan and the Housing Strategic Plan.
•Vail Land Use Plan
The adopted map of the Vail Land Use Plan shows a designation of “Community
Commercial” for the property.
Per the Vail Land Use Plan of 1986, this area was proposed to be Community
Commercial. (See Vail Land Use Plan, Chapter VI - Proposed Land Use).
This area includes activities aimed at accommodating the overnight and short-
term visitor to the area. Primary uses include hotels, lodges, service stations, and
parking structures (with densities up to 25 dwelling units or 50 accommodation
units per buildable acre). These areas are oriented toward vehicular access from
Highline, A DoubleTree by Hilton 42
June 2, 2020 - Page 558 of 772
I-up, with other support commercial and business services included. Also
allowed in this category, would be institutional uses and various municipal uses.”
(Vail Land Use Plan pg. 25)
This new category has been designated for the West Vail commercial area,
which is primarily oriented to serve the needs of the permanent resident and the
long-term visitor. Because the community expressed the desire to concentrate
commercial uses within existing commercial nodes, no new commercial areas
have been designated. The CC land use area contains 24 acres or 1% of the
land area. ” (Vail Land Use Plan pg. 28). The intention of the Preferred Land
Use Plan was to “…reflect[s] a balancing of existing conditions, community
opinion, opportunities and constraints, and projected growth demands.
The Vail Land Use Plan states that allowing accommodation units at 50 units per acre is
appropriate. On this 3.95 acre site, that would allow for 197.5 accommodation units.
The applicant is proposing 195 units, including the limited service lodge units.
The proposal includes a zoning of Public Accommodation-2 District. The PA2 zone
district allows lodges with multiple family dwellings, included employee housing units,
and commercial/office uses. The proposed amendment will make all of the uses
conform with zoning and consistent with the Vail Land Use Plan.
•Vail 20/20 Plan
The Vail 20/20 Plan provides the following goals:
Provide for enough deed-restricted housing for at least 30 percent of the
workforce through policies, regulations and publicly initiated development.
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.
The proposed zoning of Housing on the buildable area of the site helps to further the
goal of the Town of Vail to provide deed-restricted housing for 30% of the workforce.
This property creates an exciting opportunity to create new housing stock.
•Employee Housing Strategic Plan
The Employee Housing Strategic Plan outlines the Town of Vail’s goals and policies to
ensure employee housing. It provides the following objectives:
Highline, A DoubleTree by Hilton 43
June 2, 2020 - Page 559 of 772
Actively address affordable housing for Vail workers to ensure that the community
remains competitive in economic terms.
Increase and maintain deed-restricted housing within the Town to encourage the
efficient use of resources by placing employees closer to their place of work.
The proposed zoning will allow for the creation of new deed-restricted employee
housing units within the Town of Vail, allowing Vail to remain economically competitive
in attracting and maintaining a quality workforce.
The proposal is consistent with the goals and objectives of the various Town of Vail
planning documents and helps to further one of Vail’s critical needs: creating employee
housing within the Town of Vail boundaries to ensure that Vail remains economically
competitive.
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 Analysis: There are two known geologic hazards that affect the property:
debris flow and rockfall. A Geological Report was prepared for this project. The report
concludes that the hazards are low severity due the existing development north of the
property but has provided some recommended mitigation for the structures on the
property.
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 Analysis: The property is currently
developed with an existing lodge and with
restaurants located onsite. There are no natural
features remaining on this portion of the
property since its initial development in the
1970s, nor any natural vegetation existing on
the site other than what has been planted. The
proposed project is sited above existing
surface parking and other previously disturbed
areas. As a result, there is little disturbance to
any natural features on the site.
The site plan and the building have been
developed to not only be responsive and
Highline, A DoubleTree by Hilton 44
June 2, 2020 - Page 560 of 772
compatible with the existing buildings on the site, but also consistent with the
development pattern in the neighborhood. The building design specifically moves the
project forward by meeting current design guidelines.
Open Space: The site is located within the West Vail Commercial hub with intensive
commercial uses and very limited open space. The town is surrounded by numerous
open space areas which this site does not directly impact.
Landscape Plan:
The landscape plan (shown above), prepared by Dennis Anderson, has been included
with the submittal. The plan provides for appropriate treatment of open areas. The
SDD produces a functional development plan which is sensitive to the existing
landscaping and neighborhood. As a result, the proposed SDD is consistent with this
criterion.
7.Traffic: A circulation system designed for both vehicles and pedestrians addressing on
and off site traffic circulation.
Applicant Analysis:
The proposed redevelopment maintains the same vehicular circulation system as exists
on the property today, with the exception that four parallel parking spaces are
proposed on the subject property but adjacent to Chamonix Lane. These parking
spaces are proposed to be reserved for the residents of the employee housing units.
The pedestrian circulation system is largely to same as exists today on the property with
the notable exception that a new sidewalk is proposed along Chamonix Lane and a new
stair connection is provided from the hotel parking area to Chamonix Lane and the
existing Town of Vail bus stop.
A traffic report has been provided by McDowell Engineering addressing the impacts of
the proposed redevelopment on traffic conditions in the area. The conclusions of this
report are favorable recommending only that the South Frontage Road be re-striped to
provide for a left turn into the site at its east access point.
The proposed SDD is consistent with this criterion.
8.Landscaping: Functional and aesthetic landscaping and open space in order to
optimize and preserve natural features, recreation, views and function.
Applicant Analysis:
The landscape plan was developed by Dennis Anderson Assoc. Inc. with an eye towards
functionality, use of native species, and maximizing the areas best suited for planting.
The PA2 zone district requires 30% of the total site area be landscaping, which would
Highline, A DoubleTree by Hilton 45
June 2, 2020 - Page 561 of 772
be 51,614 sq. ft. The proposed project meets this requirement subject to the deviation
for the 15’ x 15’ dimension requirement, being sought by this application. There are
no natural features to preserve in this area where the proposed building is being
located as the area was previously disturb from development that occurred in the
1970s. As a result, the proposed landscape plan is consistent with 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.
Applicant Analysis:
The improvements and addition to the hotel, as well as the addition of the Dorm EHUs,
and the 15 unit employee housing apartment building are to be completed in one
phase.
A future subdivision plat will be filed to create a separate parcel for the EHU apartment
building so that it can be financed and owned separately from the hotel. The EHU
apartment building parcel is intended to meet the minimum lot size of the PA2 zone
district (10,000 sq. ft. minimum) and site perimeter setback requirements but would not
be subject to interior setbacks (south and west property lines) nor the requirement of
being of a shape that can enclose an 80’ by 80’ square. The intent is not to create a lot
that is intended to be sold as a development parcel, but instead to allow a separate
ownership within the context of an overall planned development of the Highline SDD.
The intent is that the entire development site, including the hotel and the EHU
apartment building, would be treated as one parcel for the purpose of applying the
development standards as adopted by this SDD, including parking requirements (i.e.,
shared parking facilities). These deviations to the subdivision and zoning regulations to
accommodate this future subdivision are also embodied in this SDD.
Criteria for Review: Major Exterior Alteration
Section 12-7J-13: COMPLIANCE BURDEN, of the Vail Town Code, provides the criteria for
review of a Major Exterior Alteration in the Public Accommodation - 2 Zone District. This
section states:
It shall be the burden of the applicant to prove by a preponderance of the evidence
before the planning and environmental commission and the design review board that
the proposed exterior alteration or new development is in compliance with the
purposes of the public accommodation-2 (PA-2) zone district, and that the proposal
does not otherwise have a significant negative effect on the character of the
neighborhood, and that the proposal substantially complies with other applicable
elements of the Vail comprehensive plan.
Highline, A DoubleTree by Hilton 46
June 2, 2020 - Page 562 of 772
The following section includes the above criteria, along with an analysis of the compliance of
the proposal with the criteria.
1.The proposed exterior alteration or new development is in compliance with the
purposes of the Public Accommodation-2 (PA-2) zone district.
Applicant Analysis:
Section 12-7J-1: PURPOSE provides the following purpose statement for the PA-2 zone
district, stating:
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 Highline site was originally developed as a lodge facility with multiple-family
dwellings as well as commercial and retail uses. The current zoning, CC3 has never
allowed for a lodge facility and thus was never appropriate zoning for the site.
The proposed project includes the following:
176 AUs with approximately 32,555 sq. ft. of net new GRFA (79 net new, one
existing AU lost to circulation needs)
19 LSLUs with approximately 20,050 sq. ft. of GRFA (previously dwelling
units)
12 employee housing bedrooms within a dormitory space with
approximately 4,400 sq. ft. of floor area
15 employee housing units (1, 2, and 3 bedroom units) with approximately
13,502 sq. ft. of floor area
The proposed program increases the number of accommodation units by 79 and
limited service lodge units by 19. This complies with the purposes of the PA-2 Zone
Highline, A DoubleTree by Hilton 47
June 2, 2020 - Page 563 of 772
District, which encourages the provision of these uses for sites located outside of Vail
Village and Lionshead.
2.The proposal does not otherwise have a significant negative effect on the character of
the neighborhood.
Applicant Analysis:
Highline is adjacent to the I-70 and North Frontage Road corridor to the south of the
property. It provides a smooth transition between the West Vail commercial core to its
east, commercial to the west, and residential to the west and to the north. The Vail
Land Use Plan expressed a desire to concentrate commercial uses in designated
locations. The Highline provides lodging to overnight guests, while the EHU units
provide the desirable transition from Commercial uses to Residential uses (which are to
the north and to the west of the property).
The proposed uses are compatible with the surrounding residential uses to the north
and west and the commercial uses to the east and the west. Pursuant to the PA2 zoning
and the Town of Vail’s policies and goals around encouraging hotel beds and employee
housing, the proposed density of the project is zero. The proposed EHU structure is
similar in scale and mass to the Chamonix Townhouses and other multi-family buildings
in the area. Furthermore, vehicular traffic to the hotel and the EHU apartment building
is focussed at the current entrances off the north frontage road, and therefore do no
negatively impact the neighborhood. As a result, Highline is compatible with the
surrounding uses and will not have a negative effect on the character of the
neighborhood.
3.The proposal substantially complies with other applicable elements of the Vail
comprehensive plan.
Applicant Analysis:
This review of this criterion has been addressed in both the Criteria for Review of the
Rezoning and the Special Development District. As indicated in these sections, the
proposal is consistent with the goals and objectives of the various Town of Vail planning
documents and helps to further four of Vail’s critical goals: creating employee housing
within the Town of Vail boundaries to ensure that Vail remains economically competitive;
maintaining and increasing the Town’s lodging bed base to increase revenues and
improve the vitality of the Town’s economy; to increase occupancy and vitality in the
shoulder seasons by providing new conference space; and promoting infill
development within the Town.
Highline, A DoubleTree by Hilton 48
June 2, 2020 - Page 564 of 772
Conclusion
Highline presents a unique opportunity for redevelopment within the Town of Vail. It provides
a smooth transition between commercial use and residential use.
The proposed project achieves four key community goals: the provision of employee housing,
the provision of live beds, the development of conference facilities, and encouragement of in-
fill development. The 15 Type 3 EHUs are not required as mitigation, but are proposed as a
public benefit of the project. Furthermore, the project is part of an already existing lodge,
resulting in continuity of already established uses for the site. The proposed project consist of
employee housing units, limited service lodge units, hotel rooms, and EHU dorm space. As
part of this application, Highline is asking to clean up zoning inconsistencies by rezoning the
site to PA2, which is reflective of the existing and future desired use of the property.
For the reasons stated above, Highline respectfully requests approval of the applications for
Major Exterior Alteration, Rezoning to PA2, and the SDD.
Highline, A DoubleTree by Hilton 49
June 2, 2020 - Page 565 of 772
UPUPUPUPEXISTING LEVEL 10 SF GRFAEXISTING LEVEL 212,600 SF EXISTING GRFAEXISTING LEVEL 312,600 SF EXISTING GRFAEXISTING LEVEL 412,600 SF EXISTING LSLU GRFAEXISTING LOFT LEVEL7,450 SF EXISTING LSLU GRFANORTHEXISTING HOTEL ROOM GRFA25,200 SFEXISTING LSLU GRFA20,050 SF(4TH FLOOR ROOMS + LOFT)TOTAL EXISTING GRFA45,250 SF1650 Fallridge Road, Suite C-1Vail, Colorado 81657f.(970) 476-4901 p.(970)476-6342NOT FOR CONSTRUCTIONA0.02AGRFAEXISTINGHOTELHIGHLINEProject Number - 19632211 N FRONTAGE RD WVAIL COLORADO 816571/27/2020SD-DDDATE NO. DESCRIPTION1/32" = 1'-0"1DT - MAIN LEVEL - GRFA1/32" = 1'-0"2DT - 2ND LEVEL - GRFA1/32" = 1'-0"3DT - 3RD LEVEL GRFA1/32" = 1'-0"4DT - 4TH LEVEL -GRFA1/32" = 1'-0"5DT - LOFT LEVEL -GRFANORTHJune 2, 2020 - Page 566 of 772
UPPROPOSED ADDITION LEVEL 1 0 SF PROPOSED GRFAPROPOSED ADDITION LEVEL 210,725 SF PROPOSED GRFAPROPOSED ADDITION LEVEL 310,915 SF PROPOSED GRFAPROPOSED ADDITION LEVEL 410,915 SF PROPOSED GRFANORTHPROPOSED HOTEL ROOM GRFA32,555 SFEXISTING HOTEL ROOM GRFA25,200 SFPROPOSED DORM ROOM/SFPROPOSED EHU UNIT/SF16 UNITS / 15,858 SF12 ROOMS / 4,435 SFEXISTING LSLU GRFA20,050 SF(4TH FLOOR ROOMS + LOFT)TOTAL ONSITE GRFA77,805 SF1650 Fallridge Road, Suite C-1Vail, Colorado 81657f.(970) 476-4901 p.(970)476-6342NOT FOR CONSTRUCTIONA0.02BGRFAPROPOSEDHOTELHIGHLINEProject Number - 19632211 N FRONTAGE RD WVAIL COLORADO 816571/27/2020SD-DDDATE NO. DESCRIPTION1/32" = 1'-0"1DT - ADDITION LEVEL 1 - GRFA1/32" = 1'-0"2DT - ADDITION LEVEL 2 - GRFA1/32" = 1'-0"3DT - ADDITION LEVEL 3- GRFA1/32" = 1'-0"4DT - ADDITION LEVEL 4 - GRFANORTHJune 2, 2020 - Page 567 of 772
REF.REF.REF. REF.REF.REF.REF. REF.REF.REF.REF.REF.REF.REF.REF.REF.UNIT 1UNIT 2UNIT 3UNIT 43928 SF UNIT 5UNIT 6UNIT 7UNIT 84066 SF UNIT 9UNIT 10UNIT 11UNIT 124123 SF UNIT 13UNIT 14UNIT 15UNIT 163741 SF NORTHPROPOSED HOTEL ROOM GRFA32,555 SFEXISTING HOTEL ROOM GRFA25,200 SFPROPOSED DORM ROOM/SFPROPOSED EHU UNIT/SF16 UNITS / 15,858 SF12 ROOMS / 4,435 SFEXISTING LSLU GRFA20,050 SF(4TH FLOOR ROOMS + LOFT)TOTAL ONSITE GRFA77,805 SF1650 Fallridge Road, Suite C-1Vail, Colorado 81657f.(970) 476-4901 p.(970)476-6342NOT FOR CONSTRUCTIONA0.02CGRFAPROPOSEDEHUHIGHLINEProject Number - 19632211 N FRONTAGE RD WVAIL COLORADO 816571/27/2020SD-DDDATE NO. DESCRIPTION1/16" = 1'-0"1DT - EHU LEVEL 1 SF1/16" = 1'-0"2DT - EHU LEVEL 2 SF1/16" = 1'-0"3DT - EHU LEVEL 3 SF1/16" = 1'-0"4DT - EHU LEVEL 4 SFNORTHJune 2, 2020 - Page 568 of 772
WDDNDNPROPOSED HOTEL ROOM GRFA32,555 SFEXISTING HOTEL ROOM GRFA25,200 SFPROPOSED DORM ROOM/SFPROPOSED EHU UNIT/SF16 UNITS / 15,858 SF12 ROOMS / 4,435 SFEXISTING LSLU GRFA20,050 SF(4TH FLOOR ROOMS + LOFT)TOTAL ONSITE GRFA77,805 SFNORTH1650 Fallridge Road, Suite C-1Vail, Colorado 81657f.(970) 476-4901 p.(970)476-6342NOT FOR CONSTRUCTIONA0.02DGRFAPROPOSEDDORM UNITSHIGHLINEProject Number - 19632211 N FRONTAGE RD WVAIL COLORADO 816571/27/2020SD-DDDATE NO. DESCRIPTION3/16" = 1'-0"1CASA MEXICO LEVEL 2 - SF 4,435 SFNORTHJune 2, 2020 - Page 569 of 772
TOTAL (E) SITE COVERAGE-36,084 SFTOTAL (E) SOFTSCAPE-50,065 SFTOTAL (E) HARDSCAPE-12,704 SFTOTAL (E) PAVEMENT-72,194 SFTOTAL (E) LANDSCAPING 50,065+ 10,323 60,388 SFMAX HARDSCAPE ALLOWEDPROPOSED SITE COVERAGE-62,070 SF TOTAL PROPOSED SOFTSCAPE -43,623 SFTOTAL PROPOSED HARDSCAPE -16,052 SFPROPOSED PAVEMENT-58,019 SFTOTAL PROPOSED LANDSCAPE AREA 43,623 + 10,323 = 53,946 SF*ALL LANDSCAPE AREAS COUNTED REGARDLESS OF DIMENSION OR SIZE PER DEVIATION REQUESTED*MAX HARDSCAPE ALLOWEDPROPOSED PARKING LOT LIGHTING;LIGHTING POSTS (x5) 20FT MAX HEIGHT;LED DOWNLIGHT TYP.TOTAL SITE AREA -172,047 SFFUTURE 6 FT PEDESTRIAN EASEMENT; 2,535 SFWITH PEDESTRIAN EASEMENT AS HARDSCAPETOTAL PROPOSED SOFTSCAPE -41,197 SFTOTAL PROPOSED HARDSCAPE -18,478 SFTOTAL PROPOSED LANDSCAPE AREA 41,197 + 10,323 = 51,520 SFMAX HARDSCAPE ALLOWED2426PROPOSED HOTEL ROOM GRFA32,555 SFEXISTING HOTEL ROOM GRFA25,200 SFPROPOSED DORM ROOM/SFPROPOSED EHU UNIT/SF16 UNITS / 15,858 SF12 ROOMS / 4,435 SFEXISTING LSLU GRFA20,050 SF(4TH FLOOR ROOMS + LOFT)TOTAL ONSITE GRFA77,805 SFHIGHLINE HOTEL GROSS SF SUMMARYHOTEL OFFICE/LOBBY/ENTRYMAIN FLOOR SERVICE AREAGUESTROOM LOFTGUESTROOM FLOORSCOMMERCIAL RETAIL 3950SF 7,544 SF11,030 SF 3,893 SF 1,798 SF 9,464 SFCOMMERCIAL/RETAIL 2 STORY COMMERCIAL/RETAIL HOTEL EHU SQUARE FOOTAGENEW BALLROOM BALLROOM PREFUNCTION AND SUPPORT GARAGE AREA EXISTING SF46,341 SF 3,950 SF 4,400 SF12,650 SF64,130 SFPROPOSED SF 4,500 SFTOTAL SF84,971 SF 5,600 SF38,630 SF149,800 SF85,670 SFTOTAL SF 7,544 SF11,030 SF 3,893 SF 1,798 SF 9,464 SF 5,600 SF 3,950 SF 4,400 SF12,650 SF 4,500 SF1650 Fallridge Road, Suite C-1Vail, Colorado 81657f.(970) 476-4901 p.(970)476-6342NOT FOR CONSTRUCTIONA0.03SITE DATAHIGHLINEProject Number - 19632211 N FRONTAGE RD WVAIL COLORADO 816573/16/2020SD-DDNORTHDATE NO. DESCRIPTION1" = 50'-0"1SITE PLAN - SITE DATA - EXISTING1" = 50'-0"2SITE PLAN - SITE DATA - PROPOSEDJune 2, 2020 - Page 570 of 772
PROPOSED SITE COVERAGE-62,070 SFPROPOSED LANDSCAPING-53,946 SFPROPOSED SNOW STORAGE-17,189 SFPROPOSED PAVEMENT-58,019 SFSNOWMELTED -2,303 SFNON-SNOWMELTED -55,716 SFINTERNAL LANDSCAPING-12,715 SF16,945 REQUIRED*ALL LANDSCAPE AREAS COUNTED REGARDLESS OF DIMENSION OR SIZE PER DEVIATION REQUESTED*FUTURE 6 FT PEDESTRIAN EASEMENT; 2535 SFWITH PEDESTRIAN EASEMENT AS HARDSCAPEPROPOSED LANDSCAPING-51,520 SFPROPOSED SNOW STORAGE-14,761 SFEXISTING SITE COVERAGE-36,084 SFEXISTING LANDSCAPING-61,338 SFEXISTING SNOWSTORAGE-23,210 SFEXISTING PAVEMENT-72,194 SFINTERNAL LANDSCAPING- 6,564 SF1650 Fallridge Road, Suite C-1Vail, Colorado 81657f.(970) 476-4901 p.(970)476-6342NOT FOR CONSTRUCTIONA0.04SITE PARKINGDATAHIGHLINEProject Number - 19632211 N FRONTAGE RD WVAIL COLORADO 816573/16/2020SD-DDDATE NO. DESCRIPTION1" = 50'-0"1SITE PLAN - SITE DATA - PROPOSED PARKING LOT1" = 50'-0"2SITE PLAN - SITE DATA - EXISTING PARKING LOTNORTHJune 2, 2020 - Page 571 of 772
07010714090207140613BERRIDGE ZEE LOCK -AGED BRONZELUDOWICI NEXCLAD TERRACOTTA SHINGLE -TAUPEINTEGRAL COLOR -3 COAT STUCCO SYSTEM -COLOR 1 -WESTHIGHLAND WHITEALLURA SMOOTH LAP -SABLE BROWNROUGH SAWN TIMBER FASCIA -BLACK FOXBLACK FOX -ROUGH SAWNTO MATCH FASCIA07131650 Fallridge Road, Suite C-1Vail, Colorado 81657f.(970) 476-4901 p.(970)476-6342NOT FOR CONSTRUCTIONA0.05EXTERIORMATERIALS -EHUHIGHLINEProject Number - 19632211 N FRONTAGE RD WVAIL COLORADO 816571/27/2020SD-DDDATE NO. DESCRIPTION1EHU EXTERIOR MATERIALSJune 2, 2020 - Page 572 of 772
07010711090108210802INTEGRAL COLOR 3 COAT STUCCO SYSTEM -COLOR 1FIBER BOARD CEMENT PLANKS -ALLURA 'SABLE BROWN'BERRIGE STANDING METAL SEAMZEE-LOCK -AGED BRONZE@ DORMERS0612ALUMINIUM DARK BRONZE WINDOW TRIM ROUGH SAWN TIMBER FASCIA -SW "BLACK FOX"ALUMINIUM DARK BRONZE DOOR TRIM TOMATCH WINDOWS BRACKET TRIM TO MATCH WINDOWSDARK BRONZE METAL BRACE0621PAINTED TIMBERRAILINGS06110501ASPHALT SHINGLE ROOF -AGED BRONZE@ PRIMARY ROOF07021650 Fallridge Road, Suite C-1Vail, Colorado 81657f.(970) 476-4901 p.(970)476-6342NOT FOR CONSTRUCTIONA0.06EXTERIORMATERIALS -HOTELHIGHLINEProject Number - 19632211 N FRONTAGE RD WVAIL COLORADO 816571/27/2020SD-DDDATE NO. DESCRIPTION1HOTEL EXTERIOR MATERIALSJune 2, 2020 - Page 573 of 772
1650 Fallridge Road, Suite C-1Vail, Colorado 81657f.(970) 476-4901 p.(970)476-6342NOT FOR CONSTRUCTIONA0.11SHADEANALYSISHIGHLINEProject Number - 19632211 N FRONTAGE RD WVAIL COLORADO 816571/27/2020SD-DDDATE NO. DESCRIPTION1" = 50'-0"1SHADE ANALYSIS - 10 AM WINTER SOLSTICE1" = 50'-0"2SHADE ANALYSIS - 2 PM WINTER SOLSTICE1" = 50'-0"3SHADE ANALYSIS - 10 AM EQUINOX1" = 50'-0"4SHADE ANALYSIS - 2 PM EQUINOXJune 2, 2020 - Page 574 of 772
79707970CHAMONIX LANECHAMONIX ROADNORTH FRONTAGE ROAD796679667962795879547950794679427938793479467950795479587962ABCDEFGHJAABBCCDDGGHHJJABCDEFGHJAABBCCDDEEFFGGHHJJROOF ELEV.8003' - 9"7991' - 9"7972' - 9"7991' - 9"7972' - 9"7999' - 3"7999' - 3"7999' - 3"7991' - 9"8000' - 1"7999' - 11"8000' - 3"7991' - 1"7991' - 1"8000' - 1"8004' - 6"7999' - 10"8003' - 9"GRADE ELEV.7956' - 3"7954' - 6"7954' - 0"7954' - 6"7954' - 0"7957' - 0"7961' - 0"7964' - 0"7968' - 0"7967' - 0"7966' - 0"7965' - 0"7970' - 0"7970' - 0"7969' - 0"7970' - 0"7970' - 0"7970' - 0"HEIGHT47' - 6"37' - 3"18' - 9"37' - 3"18' - 9"42' - 3"38' - 3"35' - 3"23' - 9"33' - 1"33' - 11"35' - 3"21' - 1"21' - 1"31' - 1"34' - 6"19' - 10"33' - 9"1 1/2" / 1'-0"1 1/2" / 1'-0"1 1/2" / 1'-0"1 1/2" / 1'-0"1 1/2" / 1'-0"1 1/2" / 1'-0"1 1/2" / 1'-0"1 1/2" / 1'-0"EEFFBUILDING FOOTPRINT BELOW1A1.00C1650 Fallridge Road, Suite C-1Vail, Colorado 81657f.(970) 476-4901 p.(970)476-6342NOT FOR CONSTRUCTIONA1.00AROOF PLANHISTORICGRADEHIGHLINEProject Number - 19632211 N FRONTAGE RD WVAIL COLORADO 816571/27/2020SD-DD1" = 20'-0"1ROOF PLAN HISTORIC GRADEDATE NO. DESCRIPTIONNORTHJune 2, 2020 - Page 575 of 772
NORTH FRONTAGE ROAD 7952' 7954' 7956' 7958' 7960' 7962' 7964' 7942' 7944' 7946' 7948' 7950' CEFGHJAABBCCDDEEFFGGCEFGHJAABBCCDDEEFFGGHHJJROOF ELEV.7972' - 9"7972' - 9"7999' - 3"7999' - 3"7999' - 3"7991' - 9"8000' - 1"7999' - 11"8000' - 3"7991' - 1"7991' - 1"8000' - 1"8004' - 6"7999' - 10"8003' - 9"GRADE ELEV.7942' - 2"7942' - 2"7955' - 0"7960' - 0"7960' - 0"7963' - 0"7955' - 10"7955' - 10"7959' - 0"7959' - 6"7972' - 0"7969' - 0"7966' - 0"7970' - 8"7965' - 9"HEIGHT30' - 7"30' - 7"44' - 3"39' - 3"39' - 3"28' - 9"44' - 3"44' - 1"41' - 3"31' - 7"19' - 1"31' - 1"38' - 6"29' - 2"38' - 0"1 1/2" / 1'-0"1 1/2" / 1'-0"1 1/2" / 1'-0"1 1/2" / 1'-0"1 1/2" / 1'-0"1 1/2" / 1'-0"1/4" / 1'-0"1 1/2" / 1'-0"1 1/2" / 1'-0"HHJJBUILDING FOOTPRINT BELOW1650 Fallridge Road, Suite C-1Vail, Colorado 81657f.(970) 476-4901 p.(970)476-6342NOT FOR CONSTRUCTIONA1.00BROOF PLANFINISHEDGRADEHIGHLINEProject Number - 19632211 N FRONTAGE RD WVAIL COLORADO 816571/27/2020SD-DDDATE NO. DESCRIPTION1" = 20'-0"1ROOF PLAN FINISHED GRADENORTHJune 2, 2020 - Page 576 of 772
DT -MAIN LEVEL7942' -2"DT -ADDITIONLEVEL 27960' -4"DT -ADDITIONLEVEL 37971' -4"DT -ADDITIONLEVEL 47982' -4"PROPOSED RIDGEHEIGHT8003' -8 9/32"UPPER ROOF EAVE; 37' -8" ABOVE (E) GRADE7991' - 8 1/2"BUILDING FOOTPRINT7972' - 9"LOWER ROOF EAVE7941' - 2"FINISHED GRADE7954' - 0"7956' - 0"EXISTING GRADEEXISTING GRADED/BA1650 Fallridge Road, Suite C-1Vail, Colorado 81657f.(970) 476-4901 p.(970)476-6342NOT FOR CONSTRUCTIONA1.00CROOF HEIGHTSECTIONHIGHLINEProject Number - 19632211 N FRONTAGE RD WVAIL COLORADO 816571/27/2020SD-DDDATE NO. DESCRIPTION1/8" = 1'-0"1ROOF HEIGHT SECTIONJune 2, 2020 - Page 577 of 772
UPUPENGINEER STORAGEEMPLOYEE BREAKROOMSTORAGEENGINEERRECEPTIONOFFICE 4OFFICE 1OFFICE 2 OFFICE 3MEETING ROOMEMPLOYEE LOCKERROOMEMPLOYEE LOCKERROOMBOARDROOMMASSAGEMASSAGE MASSAGEMASSAGEMASSAGE/SPAWAITINGMASSAGEELECTRICALLUGGAGE ROOMTELECOM ROOMGUEST LAUNDRYMECHANICALPOOL EQUIPMENS BATHROOMWOM. BATHROOMFITNESS CENTERMENS RESTROOMWOMENS RESTROOMWORK AREARETAILSKI STORAGEBALLROOMKITCHENMARKETLOBBYMASSAGE STUDIO 820 SF RETAIL 700 SF DT -LOBBY BAR (SEATING AREA)80 SF (GROSS)1051 SFWEST SIDE CAFE(SEATING AREA) 945 SF (GROSS)2941 SFCASA MEXICO(SEATING AREA) 1332 SF (GROSS)4204 SFNEW CHEM STORAGE ROOMMEETING ROOM (SEATING AREA 1920 SF)(GROSS 2055 SF) MEETING ROOM (SEATING AREA 485 SF)(GROSS 557 SF)MEETING ROOM (SEATING AREA 261 SF) (GROSS 314 SF)NORTH1650 Fallridge Road, Suite C-1Vail, Colorado 81657f.(970) 476-4901 p.(970)476-6342NOT FOR CONSTRUCTIONA1.01EXISTINGHOTEL -LEVEL 1HIGHLINEProject Number - 19632211 N FRONTAGE RD WVAIL COLORADO 816571/27/2020SD-DDNORTH1/16" = 1'-0"1DT - MAIN LEVEL - EXISTINGDATE NO. DESCRIPTIONJune 2, 2020 - Page 578 of 772
UPUPRM 237SKADA-M(ROLL IN SHR)RM 235DQADA-M(ROLL IN SHR)RM 233DQADA-HRM 231DQRM 229DQRM 227DQRM 225DQRM 223DQRM 221DQRM 219DQRM 217DQRM 215DQRM 213DQRM 211DQRM 209DQRM 207DQRM 206DQRM 205SKRM 204SKADA-M(TUB)RM 203SKADA-H/M(TUB)RM 202SKRM 238SKRM 236SKRM 234SKADA-HRM 232SKRM 230SKRM 228SKRM 226SKRM 224SKRM 222SKRM 220SKRM 218SKRM 216SKRM 214SKRM 212SKRM 210SKRM 208SKRM 201SKEXISTING ROOMSLEVEL 1LEVEL 2LEVEL 3TOTAL LEVEL 4HOTEL ROOMS25 SINGLE KING39 ROOMSTOTAL 17 SINGLE KING22 SINGLE KING64 SINGLE KING9 DOUBLE KING1 SINGLE QUEEN9 DOUBLE KING 2 DOUBLE QUEEN W/ SINGLE KING21 DOUBLE QUEEN16 DOUBLE QUEEN4 SINGLE QUEEN39 ROOMS38 ROOMS116 ROOMS3 SINGLE QUEEN2 DOUBLE QUEEN W/ SINGLE KING37 DOUBLE QUEEN4 ADA-M / 2 ADA-H1 ADA-M / 4 ADA-H3 ADA-M / 5 ADA-H8 ADA-M / 10 ADA-HTOTAL SF 15,100 SF 15,100 SF15,100 SF + 4,434 SF28,000 SF85,049 SFLOFT 7,315 SF 1650 Fallridge Road, Suite C-1Vail, Colorado 81657f.(970) 476-4901 p.(970)476-6342NOT FOR CONSTRUCTIONA1.02LEVEL 2HIGHLINEProject Number - 19632211 N FRONTAGE RD WVAIL COLORADO 816571/27/2020SD-DDNORTH1/16" = 1'-0"1DT - 2ND LEVELDATE NO. DESCRIPTIONJune 2, 2020 - Page 579 of 772
RM 339DQRM 337DQRM 335DQADA-HRM 333DQRM 331DQRM 329DQRM 327DQRM 325DQRM 323DQRM 321DQRM 319DQRM 317DQRM 315DQRM 313DQRM 311DQRM 309DQRM 307DQRM 305DQRM 304DQRM 303DQRM 302DQADA-HRM 338SKRM 336SKRM 334SKADA-HRM 332SKRM 330SKRM 328SKRM 326SKRM 324SKRM 322SKRM 320SKRM 318SKRM 316SKRM 314SKRM 312SKRM 310SKRM 308SKRM 301SKADA-HRM 306SQADA-M(TUB)EXISTING ROOMSLEVEL 1LEVEL 2LEVEL 3TOTAL LEVEL 4HOTEL ROOMS25 SINGLE KING39 ROOMSTOTAL 17 SINGLE KING22 SINGLE KING64 SINGLE KING9 DOUBLE KING1 SINGLE QUEEN9 DOUBLE KING 2 DOUBLE QUEEN W/ SINGLE KING21 DOUBLE QUEEN16 DOUBLE QUEEN4 SINGLE QUEEN39 ROOMS38 ROOMS116 ROOMS3 SINGLE QUEEN2 DOUBLE QUEEN W/ SINGLE KING37 DOUBLE QUEEN4 ADA-M / 2 ADA-H1 ADA-M / 4 ADA-H3 ADA-M / 5 ADA-H8 ADA-M / 10 ADA-HTOTAL SF 15,100 SF 15,100 SF15,100 SF + 4,434 SF28,000 SF85,049 SFLOFT 7,315 SF 1650 Fallridge Road, Suite C-1Vail, Colorado 81657f.(970) 476-4901 p.(970)476-6342NOT FOR CONSTRUCTIONA1.03LEVEL 3HIGHLINEProject Number - 19632211 N FRONTAGE RD WVAIL COLORADO 816571/27/2020SD-DDNORTH1/16" = 1'-0"1DT - 3RD LEVELDATE NO. DESCRIPTIONJune 2, 2020 - Page 580 of 772
RM 439SKRM 4372QB/1KLRM 435SKRM 4332KLRM 431SKRM 4292KLRM 427SKRM 4252KLRM 423SKRM 4212KLRM 419SKRM 4172KLRM 415SKRM 4132KLRM 411SKRM 4092KLRM 407SKRM 4052KLRM 404SKRM 4031KLRM 402SKADA-HRM 438SKRM 4361KL/1KBRM 434SKADA-HRM 4321KLADA-HRM 430SKRM 4281KLRM 426SKRM 4241KLRM 422SQADA-M(TUB)RM 4201KLRM 418SKRM 4161KLRM 414SKRM 4121KLRM 410SQADA-M(TUB)RM 4081KLRM 4012QB/1KLRM 306SQADA-M(TUB)EXISTING ROOMSLEVEL 1LEVEL 2LEVEL 3TOTAL LEVEL 4HOTEL ROOMS25 SINGLE KING39 ROOMSTOTAL 17 SINGLE KING22 SINGLE KING64 SINGLE KING9 DOUBLE KING1 SINGLE QUEEN9 DOUBLE KING 2 DOUBLE QUEEN W/ SINGLE KING21 DOUBLE QUEEN16 DOUBLE QUEEN4 SINGLE QUEEN39 ROOMS38 ROOMS116 ROOMS3 SINGLE QUEEN2 DOUBLE QUEEN W/ SINGLE KING37 DOUBLE QUEEN4 ADA-M / 2 ADA-H1 ADA-M / 4 ADA-H3 ADA-M / 5 ADA-H8 ADA-M / 10 ADA-HTOTAL SF 15,100 SF 15,100 SF15,100 SF + 4,434 SF28,000 SF85,049 SFLOFT 7,315 SF 1650 Fallridge Road, Suite C-1Vail, Colorado 81657f.(970) 476-4901 p.(970)476-6342NOT FOR CONSTRUCTIONA1.04LEVEL 4HIGHLINEProject Number - 19632211 N FRONTAGE RD WVAIL COLORADO 816571/27/2020SD-DDNORTH1/16" = 1'-0"1DT - 4TH LEVELDATE NO. DESCRIPTIONJune 2, 2020 - Page 581 of 772
1650 Fallridge Road, Suite C-1Vail, Colorado 81657f.(970) 476-4901 p.(970)476-6342NOT FOR CONSTRUCTIONA1.05LOFT LEVELHIGHLINEProject Number - 19632211 N FRONTAGE RD WVAIL COLORADO 816571/27/2020SD-DD1/16" = 1'-0"1DT - LOFT LEVELDATE NO. DESCRIPTIONJune 2, 2020 - Page 582 of 772
CONFERENCE SPACE(SEATING AREA 3950 SF)F.F. 7942'-2"PRE-FUNCTION / CIRCULATION75'-0" @ 6% SLOPE = 4'-6"1A3.012A3.01ENTER GARAGE @ 7948'6"NO SLOPE1A3.02WARMING KITCHEN556 SFEHUs ABOVEUPRESTROOMS12'-0" DROP CEILINGMECH SPACE7941' - 10"NEW CHEM STORAGE ROOM(E) EGRESS DOOR FOR DORM UNITS20' - 0"4590 SF GROSS CONFERENCE SPACE / WARMING KITCHEN24' - 0"28' - 6"1A1.00CPROPOSED ADDITIONLEVEL 1LEVEL 2LEVEL 3TOTAL LEVEL 4CONFERENCE ROOMHOTEL ROOMS7 SINGLE KING27 ROOMSTOTAL 3950SF20 SINGLE KING20 DOUBLE KING (1 ADA)60 DOUBLE KING27 ROOMS26 ROOMS80 ROOMSTOTAL SF 12,725 SF12,725 SF13,180 SF21,000 SF59,630 SF7 SINGLE KING20 DOUBLE KING6 SINGLE KING20 DOUBLE KINGACCESSIBLE ROOMS1 KING1 DOUBLE1 KING1 DOUBLE1 KINGW/ ROLL-IN SHOWER5 TOTAL ACCESSIBLE ROOMS1107.6.1.1NORTH1650 Fallridge Road, Suite C-1Vail, Colorado 81657f.(970) 476-4901 p.(970)476-6342NOT FOR CONSTRUCTIONA1.11HOTELADDITION -LEVEL 1HIGHLINEProject Number - 19632211 N FRONTAGE RD WVAIL COLORADO 816572/25/2020SD-DD1/16" = 1'-0"1DT - ADDITION LEVEL 1DATE NO. DESCRIPTIONNORTHJune 2, 2020 - Page 583 of 772
REF.REF.REF.4A2A1ABCDEFGHIJ.3AA32'-0"32'-0"34'-0"1A3.012A3.014B4C7956' - 4"1A3.02ADA ROOM98'-0"28'-0"28'-0"28'-0"28'-0"28'-0"28'-0"28'-0"28'-0"28'-0"252'-0"WALKOUT PATIOSPATIO/DECK;RE LANDSCAPE PLAN20'-0"WALKOUTCANTILEVERUP1A1.00CPROPOSED ADDITIONLEVEL 1LEVEL 2LEVEL 3TOTAL LEVEL 4CONFERENCE ROOMHOTEL ROOMS7 SINGLE KING27 ROOMSTOTAL 3950SF20 SINGLE KING20 DOUBLE KING (1 ADA)60 DOUBLE KING27 ROOMS26 ROOMS80 ROOMSTOTAL SF 12,725 SF12,725 SF13,180 SF21,000 SF59,630 SF7 SINGLE KING20 DOUBLE KING6 SINGLE KING20 DOUBLE KINGACCESSIBLE ROOMS1 KING1 DOUBLE1 KING1 DOUBLE1 KINGW/ ROLL-IN SHOWER5 TOTAL ACCESSIBLE ROOMS1107.6.1.1NORTH1650 Fallridge Road, Suite C-1Vail, Colorado 81657f.(970) 476-4901 p.(970)476-6342NOT FOR CONSTRUCTIONA1.12HOTELADDITION -LEVEL 2HIGHLINEProject Number - 19632211 N FRONTAGE RD WVAIL COLORADO 816571/27/2020SD-DD1/16" = 1'-0"1DT - ADDITION LEVEL 2DATE NO. DESCRIPTIONNORTHJune 2, 2020 - Page 584 of 772
4A2A1ABCDEFGHIJ.3AA28'-0"28'-0"28'-0"28'-0"28'-0"28'-0"28'-0"28'-0"28'-0"252'-0"32'-0"32'-0"34'-0"4B4CADA ROOMADA ROOM98'-0"PROPOSED ADDITIONLEVEL 1LEVEL 2LEVEL 3TOTAL LEVEL 4CONFERENCE ROOMHOTEL ROOMS7 SINGLE KING27 ROOMSTOTAL 3950SF20 SINGLE KING20 DOUBLE KING (1 ADA)60 DOUBLE KING27 ROOMS26 ROOMS80 ROOMSTOTAL SF 12,725 SF12,725 SF13,180 SF21,000 SF59,630 SF7 SINGLE KING20 DOUBLE KING6 SINGLE KING20 DOUBLE KINGACCESSIBLE ROOMS1 KING1 DOUBLE1 KING1 DOUBLE1 KINGW/ ROLL-IN SHOWER5 TOTAL ACCESSIBLE ROOMS1107.6.1.1NORTH1650 Fallridge Road, Suite C-1Vail, Colorado 81657f.(970) 476-4901 p.(970)476-6342NOT FOR CONSTRUCTIONA1.13HOTELADDITION -LEVEL 3HIGHLINEProject Number - 19632211 N FRONTAGE RD WVAIL COLORADO 816571/27/2020SD-DD1/16" = 1'-0"1DT - ADDITION LEVEL 3DATE NO. DESCRIPTIONNORTHJune 2, 2020 - Page 585 of 772
4A2A1ABCDEFGHIJ.3AA28'-0"28'-0"28'-0"28'-0"28'-0"28'-0"28'-0"28'-0"28'-0"252'-0"32'-0"32'-0"34'-0"98'-0"13'-3"ADA ROOMADA ROOMPROPOSED ADDITIONLEVEL 1LEVEL 2LEVEL 3TOTAL LEVEL 4CONFERENCE ROOMHOTEL ROOMS7 SINGLE KING27 ROOMSTOTAL 3950SF20 SINGLE KING20 DOUBLE KING (1 ADA)60 DOUBLE KING27 ROOMS26 ROOMS80 ROOMSTOTAL SF 12,725 SF12,725 SF13,180 SF21,000 SF59,630 SF7 SINGLE KING20 DOUBLE KING6 SINGLE KING20 DOUBLE KINGACCESSIBLE ROOMS1 KING1 DOUBLE1 KING1 DOUBLE1 KINGW/ ROLL-IN SHOWER5 TOTAL ACCESSIBLE ROOMS1107.6.1.1NORTH1650 Fallridge Road, Suite C-1Vail, Colorado 81657f.(970) 476-4901 p.(970)476-6342NOT FOR CONSTRUCTIONA1.14HOTELADDITION -LEVEL 4HIGHLINEProject Number - 19632211 N FRONTAGE RD WVAIL COLORADO 816571/27/2020SD-DD1/16" = 1'-0"1DT - ADDITION LEVEL 4DATE NO. DESCRIPTIONNORTHJune 2, 2020 - Page 586 of 772
KING BEDKING BED14'-0"BUILT-IN CLOSETCOAT HOOKS WITH BENCH BELOWLIVE EDGE DRESSER WITH CHAIR AND WORKSPACETV MOUNTED ON WALLCONNECTION DOOR OR WETBARBEAN BAG CHAIR14'-0"1650 Fallridge Road, Suite C-1Vail, Colorado 81657f.(970) 476-4901 p.(970)476-6342NOT FOR CONSTRUCTIONA1.20DOUBLEROOMSHIGHLINEProject Number - 19632211 N FRONTAGE RD WVAIL COLORADO 816571/27/2020SD-DD1/2" = 1'-0"1HOTEL ROOM LAYOUT - DOUBLE KINGELECTRICAL CHASEDATE NO. DESCRIPTIONJune 2, 2020 - Page 587 of 772
KING BEDLOVE SEAT AND 18" NIGHT STAND 7'-0"7'-0"28'-0"2'-0"30'-0"CONNECTION DOOR OR WETBARLIVE EDGE DRESSER WITH CHAIR AND WORKSPACETV MOUNTED ON WALLELECTRICAL CHASEBUILT-IN CLOSETCOAT HOOKS WITH BENCH BELOWPLUMBING CHASEROOM NUMBER AND SCONCE14'-0"1650 Fallridge Road, Suite C-1Vail, Colorado 81657f.(970) 476-4901 p.(970)476-6342NOT FOR CONSTRUCTIONA1.21SINGLE ROOMHIGHLINEProject Number - 19632211 N FRONTAGE RD WVAIL COLORADO 816571/27/2020SD-DD1/2" = 1'-0"1HOTEL ROOM LAYOUT - SINGLE KINGDATE NO. DESCRIPTIONJune 2, 2020 - Page 588 of 772
WDOCCUPANT LOAD -"RESIDENTIAL"FACTOR-200 GROSSSF AVAILABLE-4400 SF LIVING LEVELMAX. OCC.-22 PERSONSEGRESS2 EXITS REQUIREDPLUMBING STANDARDS -"CONGREGATE LIVING"LAVATORIE-1 PER 10WATER CLOSET -1 PER 10SHOWER -1 PER 8DNDN123456789101112PROPOSED ELEVATORFOLDABLE COUNTER;STACKED DRYERSSTACKED WASHERS12'-0"QUEEN BED12'-0"NORTH1650 Fallridge Road, Suite C-1Vail, Colorado 81657f.(970) 476-4901 p.(970)476-6342NOT FOR CONSTRUCTIONA1.29EHU LVL 2(ABOVE CASAMEXICO)HIGHLINEProject Number - 19632211 N FRONTAGE RD WVAIL COLORADO 816571/27/2020SD-DD3/16" = 1'-0"1CASA MEXICO LEVEL 2 - DORM PLAN3/8" = 1'-0"2CASA MEX. ENLARGED BEDROOM3/8" = 1'-0"3CASA MEX. ENLARGED RESTROOM3/8" = 1'-0"4CASA MEX. ENLARGED KITCHENDATE NO. DESCRIPTIONNORTHCAP OCC @ 12-18 PERSONSJune 2, 2020 - Page 589 of 772
REF.REF.REF.REF.REF.REF.REF.REF.UNIT 1UNIT 2UNIT 3UNIT 4SETBACK LINEEASEMENTPROPERTY LINE9x5 DUMPSTER PAD LOCATIONUP7963' - 0"UP7956' - 9"UPPROPERTY LINEUNIT 5UNIT 6UNIT 71060 SF 3 BEDROOM UNITUNIT 8860 SF 2 BEDROOM UNITSETBACK LINEEASEMENTTYPE "B" UNITS ON THIS LEVELUPUPPROPOSED EHULEVEL 2LEVEL 3SF LEVEL 4PARKINGUNITS2267 SFTOTAL 15 UNITS3 UNITS4 UNITS4 UNITS 13502 SF2 -3 BEDROOMS860 -1060 SFLEVEL 14 UNITS 3870 SF3813 SF3552 SFNORTH1650 Fallridge Road, Suite C-1Vail, Colorado 81657f.(970) 476-4901 p.(970)476-6342NOT FOR CONSTRUCTIONA1.31EHU LEVEL 1 /LEVEL 2HIGHLINEProject Number - 19632211 N FRONTAGE RD WVAIL COLORADO 816573/16/2020SD-DD1/8" = 1'-0"1DT - EHU LEVEL 11/8" = 1'-0"2DT - EHU LEVEL 2DATE NO. DESCRIPTIONNORTHJune 2, 2020 - Page 590 of 772
REF.REF.REF.REF.REF.REF.REF.REF.REF.REF.REF.UNIT 9UNIT 10UNIT 11UNIT 12UPDNPROPERTY LINESETBACK LINEEASEMENTTYP. DECK 5' - 0"TYP. ROOF OVERHANG4' - 0"UPUPUNIT 13UNIT 14UNIT 15PROPERTY LINESETBACK LINEEASEMENTTYP. ROOF OVERHANG4' - 0"DNDNPROPOSED EHULEVEL 2LEVEL 3SF LEVEL 4PARKINGUNITS2267 SFTOTAL 15 UNITS3 UNITS4 UNITS4 UNITS 13502 SF2 -3 BEDROOMS860 -1060 SFLEVEL 14 UNITS 3870 SF3813 SF3552 SFNORTH1650 Fallridge Road, Suite C-1Vail, Colorado 81657f.(970) 476-4901 p.(970)476-6342NOT FOR CONSTRUCTIONA1.32EHU LEVEL 3 /LEVEL 4HIGHLINEProject Number - 19632211 N FRONTAGE RD WVAIL COLORADO 816573/16/2020SD-DD1/8" = 1'-0"1DT - EHU LEVEL 31/8" = 1'-0"2DT - EHU LEVEL 4DATE NO. DESCRIPTIONNORTHJune 2, 2020 - Page 591 of 772
REF.1650 Fallridge Road, Suite C-1Vail, Colorado 81657f.(970) 476-4901 p.(970)476-6342NOT FOR CONSTRUCTIONA1.33EHU ROOMPLANHIGHLINEProject Number - 19632211 N FRONTAGE RD WVAIL COLORADO 816571/27/2020SD-DD3/8" = 1'-0"1DT - EHU UNIT PLAN - 3 BEDROOMDATE NO. DESCRIPTIONJune 2, 2020 - Page 592 of 772
REF.1650 Fallridge Road, Suite C-1Vail, Colorado 81657f.(970) 476-4901 p.(970)476-6342NOT FOR CONSTRUCTIONA1.34EHU ROOMPLANHIGHLINEProject Number - 19632211 N FRONTAGE RD WVAIL COLORADO 816571/27/2020SD-DDDATE NO. DESCRIPTION3/8" = 1'-0"1DT - EHU UNIT PLAN - 2 BEDROOMJune 2, 2020 - Page 593 of 772
DT -MAIN LEVEL7942' -2"MAIN HOTELRIDGE HEIGHT7999' -1"DT -ADDITIONLEVEL 27960' -4"DT -ADDITIONLEVEL 37971' -4"DT -ADDITIONLEVEL 47982' -4"DT -PROPOSEDGARAGE7948' -6"PROPOSED RIDGEHEIGHT8003' -8 9/32"07110701090106210821070206210622EXISTING HOTEL0711REPAINT (E) STUCCO AND TRIM TO MATCH PROPOSED1A1.00C1650 Fallridge Road, Suite C-1Vail, Colorado 81657f.(970) 476-4901 p.(970)476-6342NOT FOR CONSTRUCTIONA2.05PROPOSEDNORTHELEVATIONHIGHLINEProject Number - 19632211 N FRONTAGE RD WVAIL COLORADO 816571/27/2020SD-DD1/8" = 1'-0"1ELEVATION - ADDITION NORTHDATE NO. DESCRIPTIONKEYNOTE LEGENDKEYVALUEKEYNOTE TEXT0301 HOTEL CONCRETE 10501 HOTEL METAL 10601 HOTEL WOOD TIMBER 10602 EHU WOOD TIMBER 10611 HOTEL WOOD TRIM 10612 HOTEL WOOD TRIM 20613 ROUGH SAWN TIMBER FASCIA - BLACK FOX0621 HOTEL RAILING 10622 HOTEL RAILING 20623 ROUGH SAWN - BLACK FOX - TO MATCH FASCIA0701 BERRIDGE ZEE LOCK - KYNAR FINISH DARK BRONZE0702 ASPHALT SHINGLE ROOF - DARK BRONZE0711 HOTEL SIDING 10713 ALLURA SMOOTH LAP - SABLE BROWN0714 LUDOWICI NEXCLAD TERRACOTTA SHINGLE - TAUPE0801 HOTEL DOOR 10802 HOTEL DOOR 20803 EHU DOOR 10804 EHU DOOR 20811 HOTEL CURTAIN WALL 10821 ALUMINUM CLAD WINDOW - DARK BRONZE0822 ALUMINUM CLAD WINDOW - STEEL GRAY0901 INTEGRAL COLOR - 3 COAT STUCCO SYSTEM - COLOR 1 -MIST OF DUST0902 INTEGRAL COLOR - 3 COAT STUCCO SYSTEM - COLOR 1 -WESTHIGHLAND WHITEJune 2, 2020 - Page 594 of 772
DT -MAIN LEVEL7942' -2"DT -ADDITIONLEVEL 27960' -4"DT -ADDITIONLEVEL 37971' -4"DT -ADDITIONLEVEL 47982' -4"DT -PROPOSEDGARAGE7948' -6"PROPOSED RIDGEHEIGHT8003' -8 9/32"CONNECTIONHALLWAY090107010622082107110612070107020901071108210621080205010622060106010711062108027999' - 5 1/2"NON-OPERATING WINDOWS IN DORMERS 1650 Fallridge Road, Suite C-1Vail, Colorado 81657f.(970) 476-4901 p.(970)476-6342NOT FOR CONSTRUCTIONA2.06PROPOSEDEASTELEVATIONHIGHLINEProject Number - 19632211 N FRONTAGE RD WVAIL COLORADO 816571/27/2020SD-DD1/8" = 1'-0"1ELEVATION - ADDITION EASTDATE NO. DESCRIPTIONKEYNOTE LEGENDKEYVALUEKEYNOTE TEXT0301 HOTEL CONCRETE 10501 HOTEL METAL 10601 HOTEL WOOD TIMBER 10602 EHU WOOD TIMBER 10611 HOTEL WOOD TRIM 10612 HOTEL WOOD TRIM 20613 ROUGH SAWN TIMBER FASCIA - BLACK FOX0621 HOTEL RAILING 10622 HOTEL RAILING 20623 ROUGH SAWN - BLACK FOX - TO MATCH FASCIA0701 BERRIDGE ZEE LOCK - KYNAR FINISH DARK BRONZE0702 ASPHALT SHINGLE ROOF - DARK BRONZE0711 HOTEL SIDING 10713 ALLURA SMOOTH LAP - SABLE BROWN0714 LUDOWICI NEXCLAD TERRACOTTA SHINGLE - TAUPE0801 HOTEL DOOR 10802 HOTEL DOOR 20803 EHU DOOR 10804 EHU DOOR 20811 HOTEL CURTAIN WALL 10821 ALUMINUM CLAD WINDOW - DARK BRONZE0822 ALUMINUM CLAD WINDOW - STEEL GRAY0901 INTEGRAL COLOR - 3 COAT STUCCO SYSTEM - COLOR 1 -MIST OF DUST0902 INTEGRAL COLOR - 3 COAT STUCCO SYSTEM - COLOR 1 -WESTHIGHLAND WHITEJune 2, 2020 - Page 595 of 772
DT -MAIN LEVEL7942' -2"MAIN HOTELRIDGE HEIGHT7999' -1"DT -ADDITIONLEVEL 27960' -4"DT -ADDITIONLEVEL 37971' -4"DT -ADDITIONLEVEL 47982' -4"DT -PROPOSEDGARAGE7948' -6"PROPOSED RIDGEHEIGHT8003' -8 9/32"09010811080106210621070107020701061205010701081106210711071107010501DT -ADDITION 17941' -10"EXISTING HOTELREPAINT (E) STUCCO AND TRIM TO MATCH PROPOSED1650 Fallridge Road, Suite C-1Vail, Colorado 81657f.(970) 476-4901 p.(970)476-6342NOT FOR CONSTRUCTIONA2.07PROPOSEDSOUTHELEVATIONHIGHLINEProject Number - 19632211 N FRONTAGE RD WVAIL COLORADO 816571/27/2020SD-DD1/8" = 1'-0"1ELEVATION - ADDITION SOUTHDATE NO. DESCRIPTIONKEYNOTE LEGENDKEYVALUEKEYNOTE TEXT0301 HOTEL CONCRETE 10501 HOTEL METAL 10601 HOTEL WOOD TIMBER 10602 EHU WOOD TIMBER 10611 HOTEL WOOD TRIM 10612 HOTEL WOOD TRIM 20613 ROUGH SAWN TIMBER FASCIA - BLACK FOX0621 HOTEL RAILING 10622 HOTEL RAILING 20623 ROUGH SAWN - BLACK FOX - TO MATCH FASCIA0701 BERRIDGE ZEE LOCK - KYNAR FINISH DARK BRONZE0702 ASPHALT SHINGLE ROOF - DARK BRONZE0711 HOTEL SIDING 10713 ALLURA SMOOTH LAP - SABLE BROWN0714 LUDOWICI NEXCLAD TERRACOTTA SHINGLE - TAUPE0801 HOTEL DOOR 10802 HOTEL DOOR 20803 EHU DOOR 10804 EHU DOOR 20811 HOTEL CURTAIN WALL 10821 ALUMINUM CLAD WINDOW - DARK BRONZE0822 ALUMINUM CLAD WINDOW - STEEL GRAY0901 INTEGRAL COLOR - 3 COAT STUCCO SYSTEM - COLOR 1 -MIST OF DUST0902 INTEGRAL COLOR - 3 COAT STUCCO SYSTEM - COLOR 1 -WESTHIGHLAND WHITEJune 2, 2020 - Page 596 of 772
DT -ADDITIONLEVEL 27960' -4"DT -ADDITIONLEVEL 37971' -4"DT -ADDITIONLEVEL 47982' -4"DT -PROPOSEDGARAGE7948' -6"PROPOSED RIDGEHEIGHT8003' -8 9/32"09010701071106210802070107020821090105010821070107110821062209010601030105010701DT -ADDITION 17941' -10"7999' - 5 1/2"NON-OPERATING WINDOWS IN DORMERS1650 Fallridge Road, Suite C-1Vail, Colorado 81657f.(970) 476-4901 p.(970)476-6342NOT FOR CONSTRUCTIONA2.08PROPOSEDWESTELEVATIONHIGHLINEProject Number - 19632211 N FRONTAGE RD WVAIL COLORADO 816571/27/2020SD-DD1/8" = 1'-0"1ELEVATION - ADDITION WESTDATE NO. DESCRIPTIONKEYNOTE LEGENDKEYVALUEKEYNOTE TEXT0301 HOTEL CONCRETE 10501 HOTEL METAL 10601 HOTEL WOOD TIMBER 10602 EHU WOOD TIMBER 10611 HOTEL WOOD TRIM 10612 HOTEL WOOD TRIM 20613 ROUGH SAWN TIMBER FASCIA - BLACK FOX0621 HOTEL RAILING 10622 HOTEL RAILING 20623 ROUGH SAWN - BLACK FOX - TO MATCH FASCIA0701 BERRIDGE ZEE LOCK - KYNAR FINISH DARK BRONZE0702 ASPHALT SHINGLE ROOF - DARK BRONZE0711 HOTEL SIDING 10713 ALLURA SMOOTH LAP - SABLE BROWN0714 LUDOWICI NEXCLAD TERRACOTTA SHINGLE - TAUPE0801 HOTEL DOOR 10802 HOTEL DOOR 20803 EHU DOOR 10804 EHU DOOR 20811 HOTEL CURTAIN WALL 10821 ALUMINUM CLAD WINDOW - DARK BRONZE0822 ALUMINUM CLAD WINDOW - STEEL GRAY0901 INTEGRAL COLOR - 3 COAT STUCCO SYSTEM - COLOR 1 -MIST OF DUST0902 INTEGRAL COLOR - 3 COAT STUCCO SYSTEM - COLOR 1 -WESTHIGHLAND WHITEJune 2, 2020 - Page 597 of 772
REFERENCE7950' -0"LEVEL 17960' -0"LEVEL 27970' -0"LEVEL 37980' -0"ROOF8004' -8"LEVEL 47990' -0"0713070106230701080308220701080308221650 Fallridge Road, Suite C-1Vail, Colorado 81657f.(970) 476-4901 p.(970)476-6342NOT FOR CONSTRUCTIONA2.09EHU NORTHHIGHLINEProject Number - 19632211 N FRONTAGE RD WVAIL COLORADO 816573/16/2020SD-DDDATE NO. DESCRIPTION1/8" = 1'-0"1EHU NORTHKEYNOTE LEGENDKEYVALUEKEYNOTE TEXT0301 HOTEL CONCRETE 10501 HOTEL METAL 10601 HOTEL WOOD TIMBER 10611 HOTEL WOOD TRIM 10612 HOTEL WOOD TRIM 20613 ROUGH SAWN TIMBER FASCIA - BLACK FOX0621 HOTEL RAILING 10622 HOTEL RAILING 20623 ROUGH SAWN - BLACK FOX - TO MATCH FASCIA0701 BERRIDGE ZEE LOCK - KYNAR FINISH DARK BRONZE0702 ASPHALT SHINGLE ROOF - DARK BRONZE0711 HOTEL SIDING 10713 ALLURA SMOOTH LAP - SABLE BROWN0714 LUDOWICI NEXCLAD TERRACOTTA SHINGLE - TAUPE0801 HOTEL DOOR 10802 HOTEL DOOR 20803 EHU DOOR 10811 HOTEL CURTAIN WALL 10821 ALUMINUM CLAD WINDOW - DARK BRONZE0822 ALUMINUM CLAD WINDOW - STEEL GRAY0901 INTEGRAL COLOR - 3 COAT STUCCO SYSTEM - COLOR 1 -MIST OF DUST0902 INTEGRAL COLOR - 3 COAT STUCCO SYSTEM - COLOR 1 -WESTHIGHLAND WHITEJune 2, 2020 - Page 598 of 772
REFERENCE7950' -0"LEVEL 17960' -0"LEVEL 27970' -0"LEVEL 37980' -0"ROOF8004' -8"LEVEL 47990' -0"0613082206230902070107010613REFERENCE7950' -0"LEVEL 17960' -0"LEVEL 27970' -0"LEVEL 37980' -0"ROOF8004' -8"LEVEL 47990' -0"0701062309021650 Fallridge Road, Suite C-1Vail, Colorado 81657f.(970) 476-4901 p.(970)476-6342NOT FOR CONSTRUCTIONA2.10EHUEAST/WESTHIGHLINEProject Number - 19632211 N FRONTAGE RD WVAIL COLORADO 816573/16/2020SD-DDDATE NO. DESCRIPTION1/8" = 1'-0"1EHU EAST1/8" = 1'-0"2EHU WESTKEYNOTE LEGENDKEYVALUEKEYNOTE TEXT0301 HOTEL CONCRETE 10501 HOTEL METAL 10601 HOTEL WOOD TIMBER 10611 HOTEL WOOD TRIM 10612 HOTEL WOOD TRIM 20613 ROUGH SAWN TIMBER FASCIA - BLACK FOX0621 HOTEL RAILING 10622 HOTEL RAILING 20623 ROUGH SAWN - BLACK FOX - TO MATCH FASCIA0701 BERRIDGE ZEE LOCK - KYNAR FINISH DARK BRONZE0702 ASPHALT SHINGLE ROOF - DARK BRONZE0711 HOTEL SIDING 10713 ALLURA SMOOTH LAP - SABLE BROWN0714 LUDOWICI NEXCLAD TERRACOTTA SHINGLE - TAUPE0801 HOTEL DOOR 10802 HOTEL DOOR 20803 EHU DOOR 10811 HOTEL CURTAIN WALL 10821 ALUMINUM CLAD WINDOW - DARK BRONZE0822 ALUMINUM CLAD WINDOW - STEEL GRAY0901 INTEGRAL COLOR - 3 COAT STUCCO SYSTEM - COLOR 1 -MIST OF DUST0902 INTEGRAL COLOR - 3 COAT STUCCO SYSTEM - COLOR 1 -WESTHIGHLAND WHITEJune 2, 2020 - Page 599 of 772
REFERENCE7950' -0"LEVEL 17960' -0"LEVEL 27970' -0"LEVEL 37980' -0"ROOF8004' -8"LEVEL 47990' -0"0902061307011650 Fallridge Road, Suite C-1Vail, Colorado 81657f.(970) 476-4901 p.(970)476-6342NOT FOR CONSTRUCTIONA2.11EHU SOUTHHIGHLINEProject Number - 19632211 N FRONTAGE RD WVAIL COLORADO 816573/16/2020SD-DDDATE NO. DESCRIPTION1/8" = 1'-0"1EHU SOUTHKEYNOTE LEGENDKEYVALUEKEYNOTE TEXT0301 HOTEL CONCRETE 10501 HOTEL METAL 10601 HOTEL WOOD TIMBER 10611 HOTEL WOOD TRIM 10612 HOTEL WOOD TRIM 20613 ROUGH SAWN TIMBER FASCIA - BLACK FOX0621 HOTEL RAILING 10622 HOTEL RAILING 20623 ROUGH SAWN - BLACK FOX - TO MATCH FASCIA0701 BERRIDGE ZEE LOCK - KYNAR FINISH DARK BRONZE0702 ASPHALT SHINGLE ROOF - DARK BRONZE0711 HOTEL SIDING 10713 ALLURA SMOOTH LAP - SABLE BROWN0714 LUDOWICI NEXCLAD TERRACOTTA SHINGLE - TAUPE0801 HOTEL DOOR 10802 HOTEL DOOR 20803 EHU DOOR 10811 HOTEL CURTAIN WALL 10821 ALUMINUM CLAD WINDOW - DARK BRONZE0822 ALUMINUM CLAD WINDOW - STEEL GRAY0901 INTEGRAL COLOR - 3 COAT STUCCO SYSTEM - COLOR 1 -MIST OF DUST0902 INTEGRAL COLOR - 3 COAT STUCCO SYSTEM - COLOR 1 -WESTHIGHLAND WHITEJune 2, 2020 - Page 600 of 772
HOTEL NORTH PROPERTY LINE7993'7984'CHAMONIX LANE50 FT R.O.W50'-0"20'-0"7983' - 0"7973' - 0"NEIGHBOR SOUTH PROPERTY LINE7999' - 0"PROPOSED EHU8006' -11" @ TALLEST EAVEEXISTING HOTEL 7999' -0" @ RIDGELINEBRANDYWINE TRACE CONDOMINIUM2249 CHAMONIX LNAPPROX 8009' -0" @ RIDGELINE* BASED ON CONDO MAP DATED MAY 8 1973 AND SURVEY POINTS PROVIDED BY INTER-MOUNTAIN SURVEY ON DEC 31 2019*APPROXAPPROXAPPROX8009'APPROX 63'-9"APPROX 133'-9"7997' - 6"NORTHCHAMONIX R.O.W1650 Fallridge Road, Suite C-1Vail, Colorado 81657f.(970) 476-4901 p.(970)476-6342NOT FOR CONSTRUCTIONA3.04EHU SITESECTIONHIGHLINEProject Number - 19632211 N FRONTAGE RD WVAIL COLORADO 816573/16/2020SD-DDDATE NO. DESCRIPTION1/8" = 1'-0"1SITE SECTION - BRANDYWINEJune 2, 2020 - Page 601 of 772
HOTEL NORTH PROPERTY LINECHAMONIX LANE50 FT R.O.W50'-0"20'-0"7983' - 0"7973' - 0"NEIGHBOR SOUTH PROPERTY LINE7999' - 0"PROPOSED EHU8006' -11" @ TALLEST EAVEEXISTING HOTEL 7999' -0" @ RIDGELINETENTERRACE CONDOMINIUM2269 CHAMONIX LNAPPROX 8010' -0" @ RIDGELINE7978'APPROXAPPROXAPPROXAPPROX8010'7987'APPROX 58'-5"APPROX 128'-5"7996'* BASED ON CONDO MAP DATED NOV 28 1973 AND SURVEY POINTS PROVIDED BY INTER-MOUNTAIN SURVEY ON DEC 31 2019*7993' - 10 1/2"NORTHCHAMONIX R.O.W1650 Fallridge Road, Suite C-1Vail, Colorado 81657f.(970) 476-4901 p.(970)476-6342NOT FOR CONSTRUCTIONA3.05EHU SITESECTIONHIGHLINEProject Number - 19632211 N FRONTAGE RD WVAIL COLORADO 816573/16/2020SD-DDDATE NO. DESCRIPTION1/8" = 1'-0"1SITE SECTION - TENTERRACEJune 2, 2020 - Page 602 of 772
8003' - 8 1/2"7998' - 9 1/2"7991' - 8 1/2"7982' - 4"7971' - 4"7960' - 4"39'-0"50'-0"APPROX 47'-0"APPROX 136'-0"8006'7995'7985'7977'APPROXAPPROXAPPROXAPPROXSUNLIGHT CONDOMINIUMS2289 CHAMONIX LNAPPROX 8006' -0" @ RIDGELINEHOTEL NORTH PROPERTY LINECHAMONIX LANE50 FT R.O.WNEIGHBOR SOUTH PROPERTY LINEPROPOSED HOTEL8003' -8" @ RIDGELINE* BASED ON CONDO MAP DATED NOV 1974 AND SURVEY POINTS PROVIDED BY INTER-MOUNTAIN SURVEY ON DEC 31 2019*NORTHCHAMONIX R.O.W1650 Fallridge Road, Suite C-1Vail, Colorado 81657f.(970) 476-4901 p.(970)476-6342NOT FOR CONSTRUCTIONA3.06HOTEL SITESECTIONHIGHLINEProject Number - 19632211 N FRONTAGE RD WVAIL COLORADO 816571/27/2020SD-DDDATE NO. DESCRIPTION1/8" = 1'-0"1SITE SECTION - SUNLIGHTJune 2, 2020 - Page 603 of 772
31' 4" FROM GRADE42' -4" FROM GRADE44' -1" FROM GRADE33' -11" FROM GRADE31' -10" FROM GRADE7998' - 8 1/2"7981' - 6 1/2"7991' - 6 1/2"8003' - 8 1/2"7991' - 8 1/2"7993' - 1 1/2"7997' - 6"20' -1" FROM GRADE38' -6" FROM GRADE7993' - 0 1/2"7993' - 0 1/2"20' -0" FROM GRADE35' -6" FROM GRADE8003' - 1 1/2"8006' - 11 1/2"1650 Fallridge Road, Suite C-1Vail, Colorado 81657f.(970) 476-4901 p.(970)476-6342NOT FOR CONSTRUCTIONA9.013DHIGHLINEProject Number - 19632211 N FRONTAGE RD WVAIL COLORADO 816573/16/2020SD-DDDATE NO. DESCRIPTIONEXISTING HOTEL RIDGE HEIGHT7998' -8"EXISTING HOTEL EAVE HEIGHT7981' -6"PROPOSED HOTEL RIDGE HEIGHT8003' -8"PROPOSED HOTEL EAVE HEIGHT7991' -8"PROPOSED EHU RIDGE HEIGHT8001' -11"PROPOSED EHU EAVE HEIGHT8006' -11" / 8003' -1"7990' -1" / 7994' -6"June 2, 2020 - Page 604 of 772
1650 Fallridge Road, Suite C-1Vail, Colorado 81657f.(970) 476-4901 p.(970)476-6342NOT FOR CONSTRUCTIONA9.023DHIGHLINEProject Number - 19632211 N FRONTAGE RD WVAIL COLORADO 816573/16/2020SD-DDDATE NO. DESCRIPTIONJune 2, 2020 - Page 605 of 772
1650 Fallridge Road, Suite C-1Vail, Colorado 81657f.(970) 476-4901 p.(970)476-6342NOT FOR CONSTRUCTIONA9.033DHIGHLINEProject Number - 19632211 N FRONTAGE RD WVAIL COLORADO 816573/13/2020SD-DDDATE NO. DESCRIPTIONJune 2, 2020 - Page 606 of 772
1650 Fallridge Road, Suite C-1Vail, Colorado 81657f.(970) 476-4901 p.(970)476-6342NOT FOR CONSTRUCTIONA9.043DHIGHLINEProject Number - 19632211 N FRONTAGE RD WVAIL COLORADO 816573/13/2020SD-DDDATE NO. DESCRIPTIONJune 2, 2020 - Page 607 of 772
33' -3" FROM GRADE33' -11" FROM GRADE41' -4" FROM GRADE31' -4" FROM GRADE8006' - 11 1/2"8003' - 1 1/2"1650 Fallridge Road, Suite C-1Vail, Colorado 81657f.(970) 476-4901 p.(970)476-6342NOT FOR CONSTRUCTIONA9.053DHIGHLINEProject Number - 19632211 N FRONTAGE RD WVAIL COLORADO 816573/13/2020SD-DDDATE NO. DESCRIPTIONEXISTING HOTEL RIDGE HEIGHT7998' -8"EXISTING HOTEL EAVE HEIGHT7981' -6"PROPOSED HOTEL RIDGE HEIGHT8003' -8"PROPOSED HOTEL EAVE HEIGHT7991' -8"PROPOSED EHU EAVE HEIGHT8006' -11" / 8003' -1"June 2, 2020 - Page 608 of 772
1650 Fallridge Road, Suite C-1Vail, Colorado 81657f.(970) 476-4901 p.(970)476-6342NOT FOR CONSTRUCTIONA9.063DHIGHLINE HOTELProject Number - 19632211 N FRONTAGE RD WVAIL COLORADO 8165711/04/2019SD-DDDATE NO. DESCRIPTIONJune 2, 2020 - Page 609 of 772
1650 Fallridge Road, Suite C-1Vail, Colorado 81657f.(970) 476-4901 p.(970)476-6342NOT FOR CONSTRUCTIONA9.073DHIGHLINEProject Number - 19632211 N FRONTAGE RD WVAIL COLORADO 816573/16/2020SD-DDDATE NO. DESCRIPTIONJune 2, 2020 - Page 610 of 772
June 2, 2020 - Page 611 of 772
June 2, 2020 - Page 612 of 772
AERIAL ACCESS ROADLOCATED BETWEEN15-30FT OF THEBUILDING WITH MINIMUMWIDTH OF 26FTEXISTING HYDRANT ATCHAMONIX TOWNHOMESSHIFT PARKING UPTOWARDS NEWAPARTMENTS INORDER TO CREATEMORE ROOM FOR FIREDEPARTMENT STAGINGNEAR FRONTENTRANCE AND FDC.NEW DRIVE AISLE28'-9"EXISTINGHYDRANT375 FT RADIUSFROM EXISTINGHYDRANTSEXISTINGHYDRANTANTICIPATED FIREDEPARTMENT STAGINGNEAR FRONT ENTRANCEAND FDC.FIRE DEPARTMENTACCESS NOT REQUIRED BYENTRANCE TO PARKINGGARAGE BASED ON9/16/2019 MEETING WITHTHE TOWN OF VAIL FIREDEPARTMENT.HAMMERHEADTURNAROUND FORAPPARATUS30 ft3June 2, 2020 - Page 613 of 772
June 2, 2020 - Page 614 of 772
June 2, 2020 - Page 615 of 772
June 2, 2020 - Page 616 of 772
June 2, 2020 - Page 617 of 772
June 2, 2020 - Page 618 of 772
June 2, 2020 - Page 619 of 772
June 2, 2020 - Page 620 of 772
June 2, 2020 - Page 621 of 772
1650 Fallridge Road, Suite C-1Vail, Colorado 81657f.(970) 476-4901 p.(970)476-6342NOT FOR CONSTRUCTIONG0.00COVERHIGHLINEProject Number - 19632211 N FRONTAGE RD WVAIL COLORADO 816571/27/2020SD-DDOWNER: TNREF III BRAVO VAIL, LLCC/O TRUE NORTH MANAGEMENT GROUP, LLC10 BSNK ST - 12 FLOORWHITE PLAINS, NY 10606ARCHITECT: BILL PIERCE, PRINCIPAL IN CHARGEPIERCE ARCHITECTS1650 E. VAIL VALLEY DRIVE, C1VAIL, COLORADO 81657P: 970.476.6342F: 970.476.4901E: bill@vailarchitects.comOWNER'S REP MICHAEL O'CONNERTRIUMPH DEVELOPEMENT WEST, LLC12 VAIL ROAD, SUITE 700VAIL, CO81657PLANNER: DOMINIC MAURIELLOMAURIELLO PLANNING GROUPPO. BOX 4777EAGLE, CO 81631CIVIL ENGINEER: MATT WADEYALPINE ENGINEERING34510 HIGHWAY 6 - UNIT A-9EDWARDS, CO 81632CONTRACTOR:P:M:E:STRUCTURAL ENGINEER:P:E:ADMINISTRATIVE INFO.BUILDING CODE SUMMARY PROJECT DIRECTORYBUILDING CODE: 2018 IBCCONSTRUCTION TYPE: TYPE V-ADWELLING UNITS:OCCUPANCY TYPE R-1 / R-2LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF PROPERTY:Situs Address 002211 N FRONTAGE RD WTax Area SC103 -VAIL (TOWN) -SC103Parcel Number 2103-114-15-017Legal Summary Subdivision: VAIL DAS SCHONE FIL 3 Block: A Lot: 1 THRU:-Lot: 3, Subdivision: VAIL DAS SCHONE FIL 3 Lot: 1 VAIL DAS SCHONE 1 PT OF TR C VAIL DAS SCHONE 1BK-0372 PG-0865 DEC 11-15-83BK-0609 PG-0822 CERT 05-26-93HIGHLINE, A DOUBLETREE BY HILTON HOTELVAIL, CO 81657DATE NO. DESCRIPTIONJune 2, 2020 - Page 622 of 772
°±ФW/<ROUNDWITHDEGREESPLUS OR MINUSPROPERTY LINEANGLECENTER LINERoom nameELEVATIONA1011SIM100'-0"SPOT ELEVATION1A101SIMDETAIL NUMBERSHEET WHERE SHOWNSECTION LETTERSHEET WHERE SHOWNDETAIL DESIGNATORBUILDING SECTION DESIGNATOR1101DOOR DESIGNATOR1iWINDOW DESIGNATOR0GRID LINE1iWALL TYPE1REVISION NUMBERLEVEL INDICATORNAME INTERIOR ELEVATION DESIGNATORA6011ELEVATION NUMBERSHEET NUMBERDOOR NUMBERROOM NUMBERROOM NUMBEREXTERIOR ELEVATION DESIGNATORA3011ELEVATION NUMBERSHEET NUMBER00 00 00CONSTRUCTION SPECIFICATION INSTITUTE SECTION NUMBER -REFER TO PROJECT MANUAL FOR PRODUCT SPECIFICATION4' - 5"FACE OF STRUCTURE TO FACE OF STRUCTURE OR EXISTING FINISHNPROJECT NORTH1650 Fallridge Road, Suite C-1Vail, Colorado 81657f.(970) 476-4901 p.(970)476-6342NOT FOR CONSTRUCTIONG0.01SHEET INDEXHIGHLINEProject Number - 19632211 N FRONTAGE RD WVAIL COLORADO 816573/16/2020SD-DDSHEET INDEXSHEET # DESCRIPTION BY ISSUE DATEGENERALG0.00 COVERPIERCE ARCHITECTS 1/27/2020G0.01 SHEET INDEX PIERCE ARCHITECTS 3/16/2020CIVILC 1.1 SITE LAYOUT ALPINE CIVIL 3/16/2020C 1.2 HISTORICAL SITE GRADES ALPINE CIVIL 3/16/2020C 2.0 DEMOLITION PLAN ALPINE CIVIL 3/16/2020C 2.1 GRADING PLAN ALPINE CIVIL 3/16/2020C 2.2 GRADING PLAN ALPINE CIVIL 3/16/2020C 3.0 STORM SEWER PLAN ALPINE CIVIL 3/16/2020C 4.0 UTILITY PLAN ALPINE CIVIL 3/16/2020C 5.0 FIRE TURNING SIMULATION ALPINE CIVIL 3/16/2020LANDSCAPINGL 0 EXISTING SURVEY INTER-MOUNTIAN ENG. 9/20/2019L 1 PROPOSED LANDSCAPING DENNIS ANDERSON 3/16/2020ARCHITECTUREA0.02A GRFA EXISTING HOTEL PIERCE ARCHITECTS 1/27/2020A0.02B GRFA PROPOSED HOTEL PIERCE ARCHITECTS 1/27/2020A0.02C GRFA PROPOSED EHU PIERCE ARCHITECTS 1/27/2020A0.02D GRFA PROPOSED DORM UNITS PIERCE ARCHITECTS 1/27/2020A0.03 SITE DATA PIERCE ARCHITECTS 3/16/2020A0.04 SITE PARKING DATA PIERCE ARCHITECTS 3/16/2020A0.05 EXTERIOR MATERIALS - EHU PIERCE ARCHITECTS 1/27/2020A0.06 EXTERIOR MATERIALS - HOTEL PIERCE ARCHITECTS 1/27/2020A0.11 SHADE ANALYSIS PIERCE ARCHITECTS 1/27/2020A1.00A ROOF PLAN HISTORIC GRADE PIERCE ARCHITECTS 1/27/2020A1.00B ROOF PLAN FINISHED GRADE PIERCE ARCHITECTS 1/27/2020A1.00C ROOF HEIGHT SECTION PIERCE ARCHITECTS 1/27/2020A1.01 EXISTING HOTEL - LEVEL 1 PIERCE ARCHITECTS 1/27/2020A1.02 LEVEL 2 PIERCE ARCHITECTS 1/27/2020A1.03 LEVEL 3 PIERCE ARCHITECTS 1/27/2020A1.04 LEVEL 4 PIERCE ARCHITECTS 1/27/2020A1.05 LOFT LEVEL PIERCE ARCHITECTS 1/27/2020A1.11 HOTEL ADDITION - LEVEL 1 PIERCE ARCHITECTS 2/25/2020A1.12 HOTEL ADDITION - LEVEL 2 PIERCE ARCHITECTS 1/27/2020A1.13 HOTEL ADDITION - LEVEL 3 PIERCE ARCHITECTS 1/27/2020A1.14 HOTEL ADDITION - LEVEL 4 PIERCE ARCHITECTS 1/27/2020A1.20 DOUBLE ROOMS PIERCE ARCHITECTS 1/27/2020A1.21 SINGLE ROOM PIERCE ARCHITECTS 1/27/2020A1.29 EHU LVL 2 (ABOVE CASA MEXICO) PIERCE ARCHITECTS1/27/2020A1.31 EHU LEVEL 1 / LEVEL 2 PIERCE ARCHITECTS 3/16/2020A1.32 EHU LEVEL 3 / LEVEL 4 PIERCE ARCHITECTS 3/16/2020A1.33 EHU ROOM PLAN PIERCE ARCHITECTS 1/27/2020A1.34 EHU ROOM PLAN PIERCE ARCHITECTS 1/27/2020A2.05 PROPOSED NORTH ELEVATION PIERCE ARCHITECTS 1/27/2020A2.06 PROPOSED EAST ELEVATION PIERCE ARCHITECTS 1/27/2020A2.07 PROPOSED SOUTH ELEVATION PIERCE ARCHITECTS 1/27/2020A2.08 PROPOSED WEST ELEVATION PIERCE ARCHITECTS 1/27/2020A2.09 EHU NORTH PIERCE ARCHITECTS 3/16/2020A2.10 EHU EAST/WEST PIERCE ARCHITECTS 3/16/2020A2.11 EHU SOUTH PIERCE ARCHITECTS 3/16/2020A3.04 EHU SITE SECTION PIERCE ARCHITECTS 3/16/2020A3.05 EHU SITE SECTION PIERCE ARCHITECTS 3/16/2020A3.06 HOTEL SITE SECTION PIERCE ARCHITECTS 1/27/2020A9.01 3DPIERCE ARCHITECTS 3/16/2020A9.02 3DPIERCE ARCHITECTS 3/16/2020A9.03 3DPIERCE ARCHITECTS 3/16/2020A9.04 3DPIERCE ARCHITECTS 3/16/2020A9.05 3DPIERCE ARCHITECTS 3/16/2020DRAWING CONVENTIONSMISC. ABBREVIATIONSSHEET SETSDATE NO. DESCRIPTIONJune 2, 2020 - Page 623 of 772
June 2, 2020 - Page 624 of 772
June 2, 2020 - Page 625 of 772
June 2, 2020 - Page 626 of 772
1
Triumph Development
Attn: Michael O’Connor
12 Vail Road, Suite 700
Vail, CO 81657
January 10, 2020
Re: Doubletree Hotel Expansion - Parking Analysis
Vail, Colorado
Purpose:
This memorandum was developed to give a recommendation for the redevelopment of the Doubletree
Hotel. The recommendation is based upon the following two methodologies:
Institute of Transportation Engineers’ (ITE) parking demand data
Local parking rates at current facilities
Proposed Expansion:
Existing Conditions: The existing Doubletree Hotel currently has ninety-seven (97) hotel rooms and
nineteen (19) condominium units. The hotel has 2,000sf of meeting space. Additionally, there are two
existing restaurants on the property. The hotel operates its own private shuttle service to and from the
Vail core area, and will continue to operate this shuttle in the future.
Proposed Conditions: The redevelopment at the Doubletree Hotel will bring the facility to a total of the
following:
176 hotel rooms
19 hotel suites (hotel rooms with kitchens)
16 deed restricted employee dwelling units (2-3 bedrooms per unit)
12 deed restricted employee housing units in a dormitory configuration
6,000sf of meeting space
The two restaurants will remain unchanged
National Parking Rate:
The Institute of Transportation Engineers’ Parking Generation Manual1 is a publication of the Institute of
Transportation Engineers (ITE). Its purpose is to present data based upon land uses and provide data and
statistics to forecast parking demand by time of day on a specific day of the week, for a specific land use.
Land Use Selection: Land Use 310 Hotel in the Parking Generation Manual was selected based upon the
description best matching the Doubletree Hotel’s land use. Per the Land Use Description:
“A hotel is a place of lodging that provides sleeping accommodations and supporting facilities such
as a full-service restaurant, cocktail lounge, meeting rooms, banquet room, and convention
facilities. It typically provides a swimming pool or another recreational facility such as a fitness
1 Parking Generation Manual, 5th Edition, Institute of Transportation Engineers, 2019
June 2, 2020 - Page 627 of 772
2
room. All suites hotel (Land Use 311), business hotel (Land Use 312), motel (Land Use 320), and
resort hotel (Land Use 330) are related uses.” 2
It should be noted that the land use description 310 Hotel includes the ancillary uses of a full-service
restaurant, lounge, meeting and banquet rooms, and convention facilities. The other above-mentioned
related land uses (311 All suites hotel, 312 business hotel, 320 motel, and 330 resort hotel) do not provide
all these ancillary uses, and therefore the Land Use 310 represents the best appropriate fit for the
proposed Doubletree Hotel project, as it is assumed that these ancillary uses are included within the
parking counts.
The Institute of Transportation Engineers’ Parking Generation Manual states that the average peak period
parking demand for a suburban hotel (Land Use #310) is 0.74 spaces per room. The statistic is given based
upon the 95th Percent Confidence Interval for a nationwide study of 22 hotel sites. The 95th Percent
Confidence Interval indicates that there is a 95% likelihood that the parking demand will fall within 0.65
to 0.83 parking spaces per room. The statistical analysis on this data set is considered good with a low
coefficient of variation of 30%.
Additionally, the average peak period parking demand for a suburban hotel (Land Use #310) is 0.83 spaces
per occupied room. The statistic is given based upon the 95th Percent Confidence Interval for a nationwide
study of 27 hotel sites. The 95th Percent Confidence Interval indicates that there is a 95% likelihood that
the parking demand will fall within 0.74 to 0.92 parking spaces per occupied room. The statistical analysis
on this data set is considered good with a low coefficient of variation of 28%.
These rates were taken in a general urban/suburban setting throughout the United States. These hotel
facilities do not necessarily have the same access to transit, employee workforce, and restricted
workplace parking that the Doubletree Hotel will likely experience.
Observed Actual Parking Rate:
As stated in the Parking Generation Manual:
“The quality and quantity of parking demand data vary significantly by land use code. The Parking
Generation Manual should be considered only the beginning point of information to be used in
estimating parking demand. Local conditions and area type can influence parking demand. The
wide array of data in the manual blends many site conditions and may not best reflect a particular
local condition. Therefore, a survey of a site in a comparable local condition should always be
considered as one potential means to estimate parking demand.”
Therefore, local data provides a more accurate representation of parking for the site. The hotel has
collected the following datasets:
Two days of counts taken 5 times per day
Nightly count data taken for eleven (11) months
2 Parking Generation Manual, page 201 (Included as an attachment to this memorandum)
June 2, 2020 - Page 628 of 772
3
Two Days of Counts: Ten (10) counts were taken from Friday, December 20, 2019 to Saturday, December
21, 2019 at the following times, as shown in Table 1 below. The meeting room space was not being utilized
when these counts were acquired.
Table 1: Doubletree Hotel Hourly Count Data
Time
# of Vehicles
Friday
12/20/19
# of Vehicles
Saturday
12/21/19
Fri
Occupancy
Rate
(61 Occupied
Rooms)
Saturday
Occupancy
Rate
(74 Occupied
Rooms)
Fri
Occupancy
Rate
(97 Total
Rooms)
Saturday
Occupancy
Rate
(97 Total
Rooms)
5:00 AM 42 57 0.69 0.77 0.43 0.59
9:00 AM 27 48 0.44 0.65 0.28 0.49
12:00 PM 23 27 0.38 0.36 0.24 0.28
5:00 PM 37 48 0.61 0.65 0.38 0.49
9:00 PM 45 59 0.74 0.80 0.46 0.61
Averages 35 48 0.57 0.65 0.36 0.49
The data shows that the overall average was 0.65 parked vehicles per occupied room. The overall average
was 0.49 parked vehicles per room for the Saturday time, which is the highest rate for both the occupied
room and room rates.
Figure 1 shows the data in Table 1 graphically.
Figure 1: Doubletree Hotel Hourly Count Data
69%, 4244%, 2738%, 2361%, 3774%, 4577%, 5765%, 4836%, 2765%, 4880%, 590
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
5:00 AM 9:00 AM 12:00 PM 5:00 PM 9:00 PM# of VehiclesFriday (% of 61 Occupied Rooms, # of Vehicles)Saturday (% of 74 Occupied Rooms, # of Vehicles)
June 2, 2020 - Page 629 of 772
4
From inspection of the above data, the peaks occur during the 5:00 AM and 9:00 PM count times, thus
showing that the peak parking is during the nighttime. Additionally, the parking demand during the
midday hours is less than the overnight parking. This trend of parking being the maximum during the
nighttime is consistent with the parking demand for Land Use 310, as shown in the Percent of Peak Parking
Demand3 section of the Parking Generation Manual.
This daily parking pattern is consistent with high hotel turnover in the morning hours and later afternoon
hours, leaving parking capacity during the midday for any drive-in participants for an event utilizing a
meeting room. However, there are also participants that are presently parked as an overnight guest at
the hotel.
Nightly Count Data: The hotel has collected nightly data over the last 11 months (January-November 2019)
to show how many rooms were occupied and the related number of cars onsite. The counts were taken
at night at 10:00 PM to capture the peak parking time. Copies of this data is provided as an attachment.
Table 2 summarizes the data and shows the average rate, the low and high 95% confidence interval4 rates
for both the Parking Generation Manual and the nightly count data, based upon a parking rate per room.
Additional confidence intervals of 98% and 99% have also been added. Scenarios shown include a
weekday and Saturday, and provides a “Peak” time defined as the months of March and July which
represent the highest number of vehicles and occupancy per month.
Figure 2 shows the data from Table 2 in a graphic format. There are not any 95% confidence intervals
calculated for the Parking Generation Manual’s Saturday category, as this data set had only one study
performed.
Table 3 and Figure 3 similarly summarize and display the data based upon a parking rate per occupied
room. Additional confidence intervals of 98% and 99% have also been added. There are not any 95%
confidence intervals provided from the Parking Generation Manual’s Saturday category5, as this data set
had eight (8) studies performed, however, this 95% confidence interval has been calculated to provide a
comparison of the rates.
3 Parking Generation Manual, Page 201 (Included as an attachment to this memorandum)
4 The 95% confidence interval is defined from the Parking Generation Manual as follows: “95 Percent
Confidence Interval—a measure of confidence in the statistical data to the average. It indicates the range
within which there is 95 percent likelihood the average will fall. This range is shown when data for 20 or
more study sites are available. It is computed as two standard errors plus or minus the average.”
5 Parking Generation Manual, Page 206 (Included as an attachment to this memorandum)
June 2, 2020 - Page 630 of 772
5
Table 2: Parking Rates by Rooms
Scenario
Confidence
Interval (Low) Avg.
Rate
Confidence
Interval (High) # of
Studies 99% 98% 95% 95% 98% 99%
Hotel (310) - Rooms - Weekday 0.62 0.63 0.65 0.74 0.83 0.85 0.86 22
Hotel (310) - Rooms - Saturday - - - 1.15 * - - - 1 *
Doubletree Hotel - Rooms - Weekday
(Annual) 0.33 0.34 0.34 0.36 0.38 0.38 0.38 236
Doubletree Hotel - Rooms - Saturday
(Annual) 0.40 0.40 0.41 0.46 0.50 0.51 0.52 48
Doubletree Hotel - Rooms - Weekday
(Peak (Mar & Jul)) 0.45 0.46 0.47 0.50 0.54 0.54 0.55 44
Doubletree Hotel - Rooms - Saturday
(Peak (Mar & Jul)) 0.49 0.50 0.51 0.58 0.65 0.66 0.67 9
Figure 2: Parking Rates by Rooms
* Note: Scenarios shown in Red Bold type represent a small sample size and their data should not be used for
analysis, especially when there is site-specific data available. Additionally, confidence intervals cannot be
calculated when there is only one study in the data set.
0.620.330.400.450.490.630.340.400.460.500.650.340.410.470.510.741.15*0.360.460.500.580.830.380.500.540.650.850.380.510.540.660.860.380.520.550.670.00
0.20
0.40
0.60
0.80
1.00
1.20
1.40
1.60
1.80
2.00
Hotel (310) -
Rooms - Weekday
Hotel (310) -
Rooms - Saturday
Doubletree Hotel -
Rooms - Weekday
(Annual)
Doubletree Hotel -
Rooms - Saturday
(Annual)
Doubletree Hotel -
Rooms - Weekday
(Peak (Mar & Jul))
Doubletree Hotel -
Rooms - Saturday
(Peak (Mar & Jul))
99% Confidence Interval (Low)98% Confidence Interval (Low)95% Confidence Interval (Low)
Average Rate 95% Confidence Interval (High)98% Confidence Interval (High)
99% Confidence Interval (High)
June 2, 2020 - Page 631 of 772
6
Table 3: Parking Rates by Occupied Rooms
Scenario
Confidence
Interval (Low) Avg.
Rate
Confidence
Interval (High) # of
Studies 99% 98% 95% 95% 98% 99%
Hotel (310) - Occupied Rooms -
Weekday 0.72 0.73 0.74 0.83 0.92 0.93 0.94 27
Hotel (310) - Occupied Rooms -
Saturday 0.89 0.92 0.96 1.18 * 1.40 1.44 1.47 8 *
Doubletree Hotel - Occupied Rooms -
Weekday (Annual) 0.63 0.63 0.64 0.65 0.68 0.68 0.68 237
Doubletree Hotel - Occupied Rooms -
Saturday (Annual) 0.60 0.60 0.61 0.65 0.69 0.69 0.70 46
Doubletree Hotel - Occupied Rooms -
Weekday (Peak (Mar & Jul)) 0.65 0.66 0.66 0.70 0.73 0.74 0.74 44
Doubletree Hotel - Occupied Rooms -
Saturday (Peak (Mar & Jul)) 0.60 0.60 0.62 0.68 0.74 0.75 0.76 9
Figure 3: Parking Rates by Occupied Rooms
* Note: Values shown in Red Bold type represent a small sample size and their data should not be used for analysis,
especially when there is site-specific data available.
Observed Highest Parking Rates per Occupied Room: Table 4 provides a summary of the top 5 highest
observed rates per occupied room. It should be noted that in all cases where the rate per occupied room 0.720.890.630.600.650.600.730.920.630.600.660.600.740.960.640.610.660.620.831.18*0.650.650.700.680.921.400.680.690.730.740.931.440.680.690.740.750.941.470.680.700.740.760.00
0.20
0.40
0.60
0.80
1.00
1.20
1.40
1.60
1.80
2.00
Hotel (310) -
Occupied Rooms -
Weekday
Hotel (310) -
Occupied Rooms -
Saturday
Doubletree Hotel -
Occupied Rooms -
Weekday (Annual)
Doubletree Hotel -
Occupied Rooms -
Saturday (Annual)
Doubletree Hotel -
Occupied Rooms -
Weekday (Peak
(Mar & Jul))
Doubletree Hotel -
Occupied Rooms -
Saturday (Peak
(Mar & Jul))
99% Confidence Interval (Low)98% Confidence Interval (Low)95% Confidence Interval (Low)
Average Rate 95% Confidence Interval (High)98% Confidence Interval (High)
99% Confidence Interval (High)
June 2, 2020 - Page 632 of 772
7
is high, there is minimal hotel room occupancy, and the parking rate per room is consistent with the
remaining data. Therefore, it is assumed that these observed rates can be treated as outliers.
Nevertheless, the statistical analysis as shown in Table 3 and Figure 3 include these values and because
they only occur rarely, the confidence intervals demonstrate that the rates per occupied room in Table 4
are statistically irrelevant.
Table 4: Top 5 Highest Parking Rate per Occupied Rooms
Date Day Parked
Vehicles
Occupied
Rooms
Room Occupancy
(out of 119
rooms)
Parking Rate
per Occupied
Rooms
Parking Rate
per Rooms
11/21/2019 Thu 38 21 18% 1.81 0.32
2/5/2019 Tue 80 58 49% 1.38 0.67
3/25/2019 Mon 47 37 31% 1.27 0.39
2/11/2019 Mon 49 41 34% 1.20 0.41
2/17/2019 Sun 87 77 65% 1.13 0.73
The Doubletree Hotel is located where it has direct access to Vail’s transit system. The site is located
within walking and bus proximity to recreation and amenities including restaurants, retail and grocery
stores.
Observed Parking Rate per Room: Per the nightly count data, the observed parking rate was 0.36 vehicles
per room during the weekday and 0.46 vehicles per room on Saturday, based on the annual data. The
observed parking rate for the two highest “peak” months of March and July was 0.50 and 0.58 for the
weekday and Saturday respectively. The “two days of counts” dataset had averages of 0.36 and 0.49 for
the weekday and Saturday respectively.
Observed Parking Rate per Occupied Room: Per the nightly count data, the observed parking rate was
0.65 vehicles per occupied room during the weekday and 0.65 vehicles per occupied room on Saturday,
based on the annual data. The observed parking rate for the two highest “peak” months of March and
July was 0.70 and 0.68 for the weekday and Saturday respectively. The “two days of counts” dataset had
averages of 0.57 and 0.65 for the weekday and Saturday respectively.
Effect of Weekday and Saturday Rates: Comparing the room and occupied room rates, the ITE data shows
a consistently higher rate for Saturdays than for the weekdays. This same trend is not realized with the
Doubletree Hotel data sets. Additionally, the Saturday rate for the parking rate by room has only one
study, and therefore is not sufficient for predicting valid parking rate conclusions. Likewise, the Saturday
rate for the parking rate by occupied rooms has eight (8) studies.
Comparing the ratios of the ITE Weekday to Saturday rates against the Doubletree Weekday to Saturday
rates indicates that the Doubletree has a very consistent parking rate which is only slightly higher
(approximately 16-27% higher for the Doubletree), where the ITE ratios are approximately 42-55%.
June 2, 2020 - Page 633 of 772
8
Proposed Parking Rate:
The parking rate for this facility is best determined by using local parking data. From inspection of the
detailed, eleven (11) month data and its statistical confidence, and in alignment with the
recommendations from the Parking Generation Manual to utilize a local site survey, this parking analysis
utilizes the data collected at the Doubletree Hotel.
To provide a conservative and statistically valid estimate of parking for the Doubletree Hotel, a parking
rate of 0.70 spaces per room would be appropriate, and would include the hotel retail spaces,
restaurant/bar/lounge, and the conference/meeting room spaces. This rate is based off the 99%
confidence interval for a Saturday annually, and represents a conservative rate utilizing the collected data.
The 99% confidence interval would expect to see parking rates within this rate 99% of the time.
The Doubletree Hotel Development is proposing to provide 215 parking spaces. After subtracting out the
parking required for the two third-party restaurants (18.9 spaces) and the employee housing and
dormitory (32 and 2.5 spaces), the effective rate of parking for the hotel will be 0.83 parking spaces per
room, a very liberal amount of parking for the hotel and ancillary uses.
Please call if you would like any additional information or have any questions regarding this matter.
Sincerely,
McDowell Engineering, LLC
Kari J. McDowell Schroeder, PE, PTOE
Traffic Engineer
Enc.
June 2, 2020 - Page 634 of 772
201
Land Use: 310 Hotel
Description
A hotel is a place of lodging that provides sleeping accommodations and supporting facilities such as
a full-service restaurant, cocktail lounge, meeting rooms, banquet room, and convention facilities. It
typically provides a swimming pool or another recreational facility such as a fitness room. All suites
hotel (Land Use 311), business hotel (Land Use 312), motel (Land Use 320), and resort hotel (Land
Use 330) are related uses.
Time of Day Distribution for Parking Demand
The following table presents a time-of-day distribution of parking demand (1) on a weekday (four
study sites) and a Saturday (five study sites) in a general urban/suburban setting and (2) on a
weekday (one study site) and a Saturday (one study site) in a dense multi-use urban setting.
Percent of Peak Parking Demand
General Urban/Suburban Dense Multi–Use Urban
Hour Beginning Weekday Saturday Weekday Saturday
12:00–4:00 a.m. 96 74 93 100
5:00 a.m.––––
6:00 a.m.91 62 97 95
7:00 a.m.89 62 100 95
8:00 a.m.90 72 93 89
9:00 a.m.100 74 72 85
10:00 a.m.98 76 69 74
11:00 a.m.89 77 65 61
12:00 p.m.85 79 78 47
1:00 p.m.75 78 78 42
2:00 p.m.81 67 63 41
3:00 p.m.70 64 59 43
4:00 p.m.74 67 58 48
5:00 p.m.65 73 52 53
6:00 p.m.73 83 63 64
7:00 p.m.78 92 74 67
8:00 p.m.93 97 78 78
9:00 p.m.96 100 72 81
10:00 p.m.95 91 84 93
11:00 p.m.95 83 92 98
Land Use Descriptions and Data Plots
June 2, 2020 - Page 635 of 772
203
Hotel
(310)
Peak Period Parking Demand vs: Rooms
On a: Weekday (Monday - Friday)
Setting/Location: General Urban/Suburban
Peak Period of Parking Demand: 11:00 p.m. - 8:00 a.m.
Number of Studies: 22
Avg. Num. of Rooms: 321
Peak Period Parking Demand per Room
Average Rate Range of Rates 33rd / 85th Percentile 95% Confidence
Interval
Standard Deviation
(Coeff. of Variation)
0.74 0.43 - 1.47 0.64 / 0.99 0.65 - 0.83 0.22 ( 30% )
Data Plot and Equation
0 100 200 300 400 5000
100
200
300
400
500
Average RateStudy Site Fitted Curve
Fitted Curve Equation: Ln(P) = 0.90 Ln(X) + 0.26 R²= 0.72
X = Number of RoomsP = Parked VehiclesLand Use Descriptions and Data Plots
June 2, 2020 - Page 636 of 772
204 Parking Generation Manual, 5th Edition
Hotel
(310)
Peak Period Parking Demand vs: Rooms
On a: Saturday
Setting/Location: General Urban/Suburban
Peak Period of Parking Demand: 10:00 p.m. - 9:00 a.m.
Number of Studies: 1
Avg. Num. of Rooms: 285
Peak Period Parking Demand per Room
Average Rate Range of Rates 33rd / 85th Percentile 95% Confidence
Interval
Standard Deviation
(Coeff. of Variation)
1.15 1.15 - 1.15 *** / ********* ( *** )
Data Plot and Equation Caution – Small Sample Size
0 100 200 3000
100
200
300
400
Average RateStudy Site
Fitted Curve Equation: ***R²= ***
X = Number of RoomsP = Parked VehiclesJune 2, 2020 - Page 637 of 772
205
Hotel
(310)
Peak Period Parking Demand vs: Occupied Rooms
On a: Weekday (Monday - Friday)
Setting/Location: General Urban/Suburban
Peak Period of Parking Demand: 11:00 p.m. - 8:00 a.m.
Number of Studies: 27
Avg. Num. of Occupied Rooms: 268
Peak Period Parking Demand per Occupied Room
Average Rate Range of Rates 33rd / 85th Percentile 95% Confidence
Interval
Standard Deviation
(Coeff. of Variation)
0.83 0.43 - 1.58 0.72 / 1.03 0.74 - 0.92 0.23 ( 28% )
Data Plot and Equation
0 100 200 300 400 5000
100
200
300
400
500
Average RateStudy Site Fitted Curve
Fitted Curve Equation: Ln(P) = 0.94 Ln(X) + 0.10 R²= 0.77
X = Number of Occupied RoomsP = Parked VehiclesLand Use Descriptions and Data Plots
June 2, 2020 - Page 638 of 772
206 Parking Generation Manual, 5th Edition
Hotel
(310)
Peak Period Parking Demand vs: Occupied Rooms
On a: Saturday
Setting/Location: General Urban/Suburban
Peak Period of Parking Demand: 10:00 p.m. - 9:00 a.m.
Number of Studies: 8
Avg. Num. of Occupied Rooms: 242
Peak Period Parking Demand per Occupied Room
Average Rate Range of Rates 33rd / 85th Percentile 95% Confidence
Interval
Standard Deviation
(Coeff. of Variation)
1.18 0.72 - 1.58 0.93 / 1.55 ***0.32 ( 27% )
Data Plot and Equation
0 100 200 300 4000
200
400
600
Average RateStudy Site Fitted Curve
Fitted Curve Equation: P = 1.50(X) - 76.91 R²= 0.72
X = Number of Occupied RoomsP = Parked VehiclesJune 2, 2020 - Page 639 of 772
Date Sum of ParkedVehicles Sum of OccupiedRooms
Jan 1179 2029
1-Jan 74 114
2-Jan 68 108
3-Jan 71 110
4-Jan 44 108
5-Jan 27 91
6-Jan 15 43
7-Jan 12 26
8-Jan 13 39
9-Jan 22 37
10-Jan 39 49
11-Jan 43 59
12-Jan 52 58
13-Jan 17 27
14-Jan 14 25
15-Jan 17 23
16-Jan 26 44
17-Jan 37 78
18-Jan 79 113
19-Jan 102 115
20-Jan 15 94
21-Jan 18 47
22-Jan 22 35
23-Jan 32 43
24-Jan 45 73
25-Jan 61 111
26-Jan 63 113
27-Jan 30 49
28-Jan 20 31
29-Jan 16 25
30-Jan 32 56
31-Jan 53 85
Page 1 of 11
June 2, 2020 - Page 640 of 772
Date Sum of ParkedVehicles Sum of OccupiedRooms
Feb 1497 1919
1-Feb 79 90
2-Feb 58
3-Feb 61 72
4-Feb 42 64
5-Feb 80 58
6-Feb 47 101
7-Feb 70 104
8-Feb 73 107
9-Feb 81
10-Feb
11-Feb 49 41
12-Feb 31 67
13-Feb 40 91
14-Feb 63 114
15-Feb 80 116
16-Feb 87 116
17-Feb 87 77
18-Feb 46 74
19-Feb 46 88
20-Feb 59
21-Feb 25 89
22-Feb 80 100
23-Feb 45 77
24-Feb 41 79
25-Feb
26-Feb 53 94
27-Feb 74 100
28-Feb
Page 2 of 11
June 2, 2020 - Page 641 of 772
Date Sum of ParkedVehicles Sum of OccupiedRooms
Mar 1806 2695
1-Mar 82 113
2-Mar 86 116
3-Mar 83 112
4-Mar 42 64
5-Mar 55 85
6-Mar 48 72
7-Mar 59 87
8-Mar 87 116
9-Mar 66 104
10-Mar 52 94
11-Mar 49 96
12-Mar 49 77
13-Mar 50 94
14-Mar 38 71
15-Mar 67 95
16-Mar 75 88
17-Mar 54 85
18-Mar 51 74
19-Mar 43 59
20-Mar 40 61
21-Mar 53 74
22-Mar 74 112
23-Mar 83 116
24-Mar 51 85
25-Mar 47 37
26-Mar 54 91
27-Mar 62 98
28-Mar 57 99
29-Mar 63 97
30-Mar 43 79
31-Mar 43 44
Page 3 of 11
June 2, 2020 - Page 642 of 772
Date Sum of ParkedVehicles Sum of OccupiedRooms
Apr 786 1223
1-Apr 21 27
2-Apr 24 38
3-Apr 29 58
4-Apr 21 57
5-Apr 38 68
6-Apr 47 68
7-Apr 23 34
8-Apr 26 39
9-Apr 22 33
10-Apr 31 40
11-Apr 23 27
12-Apr 30 41
13-Apr 28 44
14-Apr 28 38
15-Apr 20 42
16-Apr 26 50
17-Apr 26 45
18-Apr 26 40
19-Apr 32 40
20-Apr 34 56
21-Apr 8 23
22-Apr 27 37
23-Apr 26 30
24-Apr 25 33
25-Apr 22 30
26-Apr 28 44
27-Apr 22 39
28-Apr 21 32
29-Apr 26 35
30-Apr 26 35
Page 4 of 11
June 2, 2020 - Page 643 of 772
Date Sum of ParkedVehicles Sum of OccupiedRooms
May 779 1171
1-May 27 35
2-May 20 26
3-May 48 53
4-May 31 46
5-May 4 17
6-May 14 24
7-May 22 31
8-May 21 37
9-May 22 40
10-May 19 20
11-May 45 83
12-May 12 20
13-May 22 34
14-May 36 38
15-May 36 39
16-May 15 19
17-May 18 21
18-May 22 31
19-May 15 22
20-May 42 56
21-May 37 57
22-May 27 41
23-May 16 40
24-May 18 39
25-May 31 59
26-May 25 41
27-May 12 26
28-May 20 32
29-May 21 42
30-May 40 51
31-May 41 51
Page 5 of 11
June 2, 2020 - Page 644 of 772
Date Sum of ParkedVehicles Sum of OccupiedRooms
Jun 1230 1826
1-Jun 29 53
2-Jun 18 25
3-Jun 33 46
4-Jun 43 56
5-Jun 37 63
6-Jun 44 82
7-Jun 52 92
8-Jun 59 103
9-Jun 26 51
10-Jun 29 59
11-Jun 35 50
12-Jun 31 41
13-Jun 31 48
14-Jun 53 66
15-Jun 57 65
16-Jun 23 39
17-Jun 37 57
18-Jun 56 76
19-Jun 41 48
20-Jun 35 55
21-Jun 45 60
22-Jun 65 77
23-Jun 29 48
24-Jun 32 62
25-Jun 41 53
26-Jun 40 66
27-Jun 44 57
28-Jun 56 79
29-Jun 69 100
30-Jun 40 49
Page 6 of 11
June 2, 2020 - Page 645 of 772
Date Sum of ParkedVehicles Sum of OccupiedRooms
Jul 1923 2740
1-Jul 38 65
2-Jul 53 69
3-Jul 50 80
4-Jul 82 112
5-Jul 80 114
6-Jul 64 96
7-Jul 46 71
8-Jul 43 62
9-Jul 62 86
10-Jul 65 87
11-Jul 64 86
12-Jul 66 86
13-Jul 69 91
14-Jul 56 92
15-Jul 59 78
16-Jul 62 100
17-Jul 86 110
18-Jul 83 105
19-Jul 69 101
20-Jul 57 106
21-Jul 46 62
22-Jul 54 70
23-Jul 57 78
24-Jul 59 98
25-Jul 86 107
26-Jul 86 116
27-Jul 76 116
28-Jul 57 77
29-Jul 44 70
30-Jul 53 69
31-Jul 51 80
Page 7 of 11
June 2, 2020 - Page 646 of 772
Date Sum of ParkedVehicles Sum of OccupiedRooms
Aug 1627 2733
1-Aug 56 87
2-Aug 65 93
3-Aug 66 106
4-Aug 56 87
5-Aug 53 95
6-Aug 67 113
7-Aug 64 104
8-Aug 67 102
9-Aug 74 108
10-Aug 63 111
11-Aug 34 100
12-Aug 38 111
13-Aug 51 104
14-Aug 50 94
15-Aug 63 97
16-Aug 64 97
17-Aug 58 103
18-Aug 40 72
19-Aug 42 86
20-Aug 45 83
21-Aug 49 73
22-Aug 49 75
23-Aug 43 60
24-Aug 46 78
25-Aug 36 53
26-Aug 32 56
27-Aug 41 65
28-Aug 41 64
29-Aug 35 57
30-Aug 61 83
31-Aug 78 116
Page 8 of 11
June 2, 2020 - Page 647 of 772
Date Sum of ParkedVehicles Sum of OccupiedRooms
Sep 1358 2204
1-Sep 68 110
2-Sep 30 64
3-Sep 27 46
4-Sep 41 45
5-Sep 52 69
6-Sep 58 73
7-Sep 67 86
8-Sep 48 64
9-Sep 38 63
10-Sep 48 63
11-Sep 37 71
12-Sep 35 50
13-Sep 62 85
14-Sep 61 85
15-Sep 23 53
16-Sep 31 44
17-Sep 35 54
18-Sep 43 75
19-Sep 48 80
20-Sep 70 116
21-Sep 71 116
22-Sep 28 59
23-Sep 40 78
24-Sep 45 78
25-Sep 49 91
26-Sep 43 83
27-Sep 67 104
28-Sep 48 113
29-Sep 21 41
30-Sep 24 45
Page 9 of 11
June 2, 2020 - Page 648 of 772
Date Sum of ParkedVehicles Sum of OccupiedRooms
Oct 1097 1766
1-Oct 44 55
2-Oct 45 58
3-Oct 42 60
4-Oct 83 112
5-Oct 75 113
6-Oct 21 36
7-Oct 30 62
8-Oct 42 60
9-Oct 32 49
10-Oct 28 49
11-Oct 29 56
12-Oct 40 69
13-Oct 28 45
14-Oct 33 52
15-Oct 31 53
16-Oct 36 61
17-Oct 28 47
18-Oct 47 68
19-Oct 35 67
20-Oct 33 56
21-Oct 27 42
22-Oct 32 42
23-Oct 23 40
24-Oct 35 44
25-Oct 46 64
26-Oct 28 60
27-Oct 14 25
28-Oct 25 54
29-Oct 36 67
30-Oct 22 58
31-Oct 27 42
Page 10 of 11
June 2, 2020 - Page 649 of 772
Date Sum of ParkedVehicles Sum of OccupiedRooms
Nov 1025 1492
1-Nov 18 58
2-Nov 29 69
3-Nov 14 23
4-Nov 24 40
5-Nov 29 44
6-Nov 23 39
7-Nov 25 47
8-Nov 58 73
9-Nov 50 76
10-Nov 10 25
11-Nov 11 27
12-Nov 28 36
13-Nov 20 37
14-Nov 27 36
15-Nov 41 51
16-Nov 40 47
17-Nov 16 26
18-Nov 21 38
19-Nov 32 43
20-Nov 33 43
21-Nov 38 21
22-Nov 38 47
23-Nov 60 70
24-Nov 40 48
25-Nov 45 67
26-Nov 38 62
27-Nov 40 74
28-Nov 62 81
29-Nov 83 99
30-Nov 32 45
Page 11 of 11
June 2, 2020 - Page 650 of 772
1
Greg Roy
From:Matt Gennett
Sent:Tuesday, December 3, 2019 9:13 AM
To:Greg Roy
Subject:FW: Expansion of DoubleTree Hotel
FYI and for the file. Thanks.
‐‐‐‐‐Original Message‐‐‐‐‐
From: Suzanne Silverthorn <SSilverthorn@vailgov.com>
Sent: Tuesday, December 3, 2019 7:46 AM
To: plauer@sisna.com; Council Dist List <TownCouncil@vailgov.com>; PEC <PEC@vailgov.com>
Cc: Matt Gennett <MGennett@vailgov.com>
Subject: RE: Expansion of DoubleTree Hotel
PEC & Town Council members, please see public comment below.
Suzanne Silverthorn, APR
Communications Director
Town Manager’s Office
75 South Frontage Road
Vail, CO 81657
Office: 970.479.2115
Cell: 970.471.1361
vailgov.com
‐‐‐‐‐Original Message‐‐‐‐‐
From: info@vailgov.com <info@vailgov.com>
Sent: Tuesday, December 3, 2019 7:28 AM
To: Info <Info@vailgov.com>
Subject: Expansion of DoubleTree Hotel
Hi,
My husband, Jay Lauer, and I are homeowners at 2269 Chamonix Ln, Apt. 4, Vail CO 81657. We are traveling
internationally until the middle of December. We received notification from one of our neighbors about the proposed
expansion of the DoubleTree hotel at 2211 North Frontage Road West.
We are definitely not in favor of this high density development and granting approval for variences on section 12‐6D‐8
or 12‐15‐3.
Is there a way to communicate to the town council at the Dec 9th meeting that we are not in favor of this development
since we are not able to attend the Dec 9th meeting?
June 2, 2020 - Page 651 of 772
2
Thanks for your help and I will wait to hear back.
Patricia Lauer
Submitted By:
Name:: Patricia Lauer
Telephone:: 3032298575
Email:: plauer@sisna.com
Submitted From:
https://www.vailgov.com/contact
June 2, 2020 - Page 652 of 772
1
Greg Roy
From:tania boyd <scubakiwi2@yahoo.com>
Sent:Tuesday, December 3, 2019 5:20 PM
To:Greg Roy
Cc:MICHAEL SPIERS; Jacqueline Nickel; Jim Pyke; Jay Lauer; kstandage@exclusivevailrentals.com
Subject:Double Tree Expansion
Dear Greg,
Brandywine Trace Condominium owners at 2249 Chamonix Lane will be directly impacted by the proposed expansion of
the Double Tree Hotel in West Vail.
Our building is directly behind the hotel and we are opposed to the rezoning of the property which would allow the
developer to exceed 40% of allowable site GRFA. This proposed development would significantly impact our property's
view and the attractiveness of our neighborhood.
The zoning that is currently in place protects developers from cramming in buildings and parking lots with disregard to the
surrounding beauty of our valley. I believe the Town put this regulation in place to ensure we do not fall victim to over
development and detract from the scenic landscape surrounding us. This is what makes Vail a desirable place to live for
all of us locals who have been fortunate enough to be able to afford to buy a home and live here.
The sheer scale of the project is daunting. The remodel that they undertook had numerous problems and lasted more
than two years. During that time we were subjected to constant construction and noise. Brandywine is very concerned that
now it has been finally completed we are going to be subject to this all over again.
As the President of the HOA I wanted to submit our disapproval as I will not be able to attend the December 9th meeting.
Regards
Tania Boyd
Brandywine Trace Condominium Association President
June 2, 2020 - Page 653 of 772
My husband (Jay Lauer) and myself (Pat Lauer) are full time Vail residents at 2269 Chamonix Lane, Apt 4, which is
behind the DoubleTree. We have owned our Vail Tenterrace property for approximately seven years so we are very
familiar with the area. Below are our reasons for not supporting this proposed development and required zoning changes.
We have also made some suggestions below for modifications to be considered by the PEC committee for the
development.
LIMITED COMMERCIAL SPACE IN VAIL - This Development Does Not Serve The Best Interest of Our Community
and Long Range Goals:
Since Vail has a very small commercial area development (1% as pointed out in t he Vail Land Use Plan), we believe that
the commercial area should stay as currently zoned as we feel like there is not enough commercial space allotted for the
size of Vail. If you look at the current commercial space in West Vail, there is very little commercial vacancy. In our
opinion, the commercial space we have now should be protected as to what was originally designated in the Vail Land
Use Plan. We think if there is a comparable study done with other Colorado ski towns nearby, such as Breckenridge or
Steamboat, you will find that the 1% commercial space allotted in Vail probably underserves our community.
When reviewing the rezoning criteria (section 12-3-7), changing the land from Commercial Core 3 (CC3) to the Public
Accomdation-2 (PA-2), we believe changing the zoning is not in the best interest of our community and does not match
with what the long term goals are for the town of Vail per the land use plan (12-3-7, Section 1, (a), 1). There are many
other beneficial commercial businesses that could be utilized in the current land to serve the Vail community.
DESIGN FEATURES OF THE 16 UNIT APARTMENT COMPLEX DON’T MATCH OUR EXISTING NEIGHBORHOOD
CHARACTER:
EXCESSIVE HEIGHT: The EHU 16 apartment complex is excessively high with four stories as there are no other
complexes in our neighborhood built with four stories. This design does not fit in with the rest of our neighborhood. The
height of the four story apartment impacts the neighborhood adversely in the following ways:
Even with the proposed sidewalk, it will be a huge winter road hazard for the extensive pedestrian foot and
vehicular traffic because of the ice accumulation (due to the shade) on Chamonix Lane.
The structure is not visually appealing to pedestrians and cars from street level as you are looking into an
intrusive, tall building with only a 20 foot set back requirement from the street.
It blocks the views of several developments behind it (Sunlight, Tenterrace, Brandywine and several of the Pine
Ridge units).
Triumph Shade Study: The shade study is difficult to interpret within the document we were given as there was no scale to
reference as to how much of the road the shade of the building covers. It would have been beneficial if they would have
imposed the road on their image in Attachment C 1 of 3, page 9. In our opinion, from looking at the shade on Chamonix
for the winter 10 am and 2 pm time periods, it looks Chamonix Lane road is completely shaded. Please see the attached
recent photos of Chamonix Lane we took so the PEC committee can see what the road looks like with our current shade
conditions as the road can be hazardous throughout the winter .
The developer expressed that this EHU 16 apartment building would mitigate some of the I-70 noise and that residents
behind it would prefer to look at the building instead of the parking lot. We strongly disagree as we would definitely prefer
to keep our existing views versus looking right at this very tall building.
Also, we are concerned that if the height of the EHU 16 apartment building is approved, that might open up the possibility
that the commercial buildings to the east might want to “raise the roof” on their complex to add additional square footage.
EXCESSIVE DENSITY: The EHU 16 apartment complex has way too high of a density compared to the rest of our
neighborhood. As mentioned above, there are no other complexes in our neighborhood built with four stories and with all
16 units attached together. The developer tries to equate the EHU structure as being similar in scale and mass to the
Chamonix Townhouses and other multi-family buildings in our area, which we don’t believe is accurate or a relevant
comparison. If you compare the building style and density per square foot in this proposed EHU 16 apartment complex, it
is clearly denser than the recently built neighboring Chamonix Townhouses – here is the developer’s quote below from
the SDD Narrative2 PDF:
June 2, 2020 - Page 654 of 772
12-9A-8: Design Criteria and Necessary Findings, #2: “The proposed EHU structure is similar in scale and mass
to the Chamonix Townhouses and other multi-family buildings in the area. As a result, Highline is compatible with
the surrounding uses and activity and is consistent with this criterion. The SDD is only needed to address
technical issues related to parking and snow storage. Therefore, the impacts to the neighbors or the community
at large is limited.”
OCCUPANCY: Below are the existing and proposed hotel and dormitory and EHU 16 apartment building with the number
of maximum occupants. This development could potentially double the number of people that will be occupying the
development, housing up to a maximum capacity of 792, from 386 people now. There would be a maximum capacity of
126 EUH permanent occupants, including the dormitory and the 16 EHU apartments. We believe this constitutes
excessive high density during the peak visitor time periods and doesn’t benefit our neighborhood.
Potential Maximum Occupancy Existing Hotel & Proposed DoubleTree (per the developer):
Existing Hotel: Current Total 386 People
116 rooms (97 hotel rooms + 19 condos)
193 beds
Proposed Hotel & Dormitory & EHU: Total 792 People - Increase of Maximum Potential Occupancy = 406
people
195 hotel rooms
333 beds
666 people
12 dorm bedrooms – 18 people
16 EHU apartments with 38 bedrooms = Total 108 (7 Three Bedrooms w/2 people per bedroom and 2 people in
the living room = 56 people / 8 Two Bedrooms w/2 people per bedroom & 2 people in the living room = 48 people /
One 1 Bedroom w/2 people per bedroom & 2 people in the living room = 4 people)
We recommend eliminating the EHU 16 apartments building as it is not in character with the existing neighborhood as well
as a winter ice hazard for pedestrians and vehicles. Some possible employee housing alternatives to consider:
Incorporate a separate wing in the new 79 hotel room addition with its own access to EHU units comprising of
various sized condos and reduce the number of hotel rooms. Perhaps some of the proposed 6,616 sq. ft.
conference space for these condos could utilized since the existing conference space of 2,666 sq. ft. is not being
fully utilized as the developer stated in the December 9th PEC meeting.
Convert some of the existing 19 condos that are in the currently in the existing hotel structure to employee
housing.
Design an appropriately sized EHU apartment building and move it to the east side of the parking lot (parallel to
the backside of Christy’s Sports and McDonalds), which in our opinion would be more visually appealing and not
as congested. By reorienting the EHU apartment structure, it would eliminate the treacherous icy road conditions
on Chamonix Lane in the winter.
If the EHU apartment building stays where it’s currently at on Cham onix Lane, reduce its height to two floors to
help minimize the shade impact of the building, which should lessen the icy, unsafe road and walkway conditions
in the winter.
HOTEL PARKING & CONFERENCE SPACE CONCERNS:
The conference space, at 2,666 sq. ft. is currently underutilized as was mentioned by the developer in the December 9 th
PEC meeting. At the January 8th meeting the developer held at DoubleTree for the public, they told us the conference
space was to be increased to approximately 4,000 sq. ft. In the most recent SDD Narrative2 update submitted by the
developer on January 17, the parking study shows the conference space now increasing to 6,616 sq. ft. so a very
significant increase. The increase in conference space directly affects the results of the parking study and lowers the
number of parking spaces required.
The developer is requesting a deviation as stated below per their SDD Narrative2 January 17 update:
June 2, 2020 - Page 655 of 772
Conference Parking: The developer is requesting a deviation within the proposed SDD to reduce to 1 parking
space for each 330 sq. ft. of conference space. The parking requirement for meeting rooms or conference rooms
at 1 space for 120 sq. ft. is what is currently required.
When we look at the proposed development with a potential of accommodating up to a maximum of 792 occupants during
peak time periods, we have a difficult time believing that there will be enough parking spaces. Our concern is that people
driving cars will park their vehicles in other commercial spots to the east of the DoubleTree hotel or perhaps, in our
residential building’s parking areas immediately behind the DoubleTree on Chamonix Lane. We are concerned the
employee housing may not have enough parking spots and guests visiting these residents would increase unauthorized
vehicles parking in our parking lots. We have already experienced people parking in our building parking areas that are
not authorized to park there. There would be increased pedestrian and vehicle traffic in the area with the employee
housing development.
In the SDD Narrative2 update, it shows a net of 47.6 employees would be working at DoubleTree. On page 21, it shows
there are only four parking spots allocated to hotel workers. W here will all of the DoubleTree employees park that don’t
live in the dormitory housing? They can’t all be expected to take the shuttle bus can they? Our concern is that employees
driving cars to work will park their vehicles in other commercial spots to the east of the DoubleTree hotel or in our
residential building’s parking areas immediately behind the DoubleTree on Chamonix Lane.
ENVIROMENTAL CONSIDERATION & DISRUPTION OF OUR NEIGHBORHOOD:
This project is going to remove and destroy the atheistic beauty of the mature spruce trees that line Chamonix Lane.
These spruce trees are “trophy” trees that can’t be replaced – see attached photos. Replanting with smaller trees doesn’t
have the screening impact of what is now offered with our mature spruce trees and changes the character of our
neighborhood.
The last remodel at the hotel a couple of years ago went way over the projected time period to be finished. It took them
well over two years to remodel the inside and do some minor exterior alterations. We are concerned that if th is
development goes through, our neighborhood will suffer for years with dirt and noisy construction and increased
congestion from the construction work force. The developer told us that they estimated it would take 15 months to
complete this project. If this project is approved, there needs to be some agreement between the developer and the Town
of Vail that the project will be completed in the agreed upon time so our neighborhood is not compromised and disrupted
for an unreasonable time period.
HOTEL SHUTTLE & PUBLIC BUS TRANSPORTATION:
Currently, the DoubleTree has two shuttle buses that each hold 14 people.
There will be a lot of DoubleTree guests, employees and residents during the busy winter hotel time periods (Saturdays,
Christmas/New Years, President’s Week, March spring breaks, winter weekends and powder snow d ays) in the morning
going to the Vail ski resort and returning in the late afternoons coming back from the resort. Our concern is that guests
will take the public bus system instead of waiting for the hotel’s shuttle buses. When people have the option of a short
one minute walk to get to the Pine Ridge bus stop, we think it will put excessive pressure on our already congested public
bus system. The public buses during these peak time periods are currently very full, with standing room only once you go
to the next one or two shuttle bus stops down from Pine Ridge.
We believe studies should be done during the above mentioned peak time periods to evaluate the additional amount of
buses that would need to be added to accommodate the increase in riders.
Thank you for your time and consideration in reading our concerns about this proposed development.
Sincerely,
Jay and Pat Lauer
2269 Chamonix Ln APT
Vail, CO 81657
June 2, 2020 - Page 656 of 772
June 2, 2020 - Page 657 of 772
June 2, 2020 - Page 658 of 772
June 2, 2020 - Page 659 of 772
June 2, 2020 - Page 660 of 772
From:Elyse Howard
To:Greg Roy
Cc:Council Dist List
Subject:Highline
Date:Monday, February 3, 2020 2:50:32 PM
Dear Greg,
I am writing to express my support for the Highline rezoning and special development
district applications.
I am excited that the proposed redevelopment of Highline includes 28 additional employee housing
units (EHUs). In order to meet the goals in the Town’s Housing 2027 plan, it's important to take
advantage of situations like this one where a private developer has brought forward the opportunity
to add EHU’s in an infill location.
It is well documented in the Town of Vail Housing strategic plan as well as the Eagle County Housing
Needs assessment that we face a scarcity in the supply of affordable rental and for sale homes for
our workforce. Today there is a shortage of 2,780 units County wide, and by 2025 that deficit will
grow to 5,900 units. It is a “win” that this project proposes to add 28 EHU’s at no cost to the
Town while also adding hotel rooms. When extended family comes to town, they typically choose to
stay in West Vail as it is closer and more convenient to our home. I appreciate the addition of this
type of mid-level accommodations. In addition, Highline is on the Town bus route, and close to the
West Vail commercial area. Having lived in West Vail since 2000, I know it's a great location
for workforce housing.
To realize the Town’s vision to be North America’s premier international resort community, we must
grow our community. Workforce housing is community infrastructure and an important component
to building a strong community.
Sincerely,
Elyse Howard
June 2, 2020 - Page 661 of 772
97 Main Street, Suite E-201, Edwards, CO 81632
VailValleyPartnership.com
January 27, 2020
Town of Vail
c/o Greg Roy
75 South Frontage Road
Vail, CO 81657
Dear Planning Commission members and Vail Town Council,
Vail Valley Partnership is the regional chamber of commerce, with over 900 members
throughout Eagle County who collectively represent over 80% of the local workforce. We
are dedicated to the economic vitality of the valley, and as such our board of governors –
which includes residents & business operators throughout Eagle County – has identified
workforce housing as our number one priority.
Our complete housing position can be found at
https://files.vailvalleypartnership.com/sites/2/2019/09/Housing -Position-White-Paper-
September-2019.pdf.
In short, Eagle County faces a gap in the availability of ownership and rental housing that is
affordable for local residents. Residents are burdened by high housing payments. Employees are
forced to commute long distances. According to the annual workforce survey, employers believe
that the availability of workforce housing is a critical or major problem in Eagle County. The
Eagle County Housing Assessment shows a shortfall of 4,500 units to meet current needs.
Currently and anecdotally, units that have been long-term workforce rentals are being removed
from that market as they are converted into short-term rentals. This has the potential to grow
both catch-up and keep-up needs for workforce housing.
Workforce and affordable housing has long been an issue in Eagle County. Addressing our
affordable housing issue is essential to the continued success and growth of our business
community across industry sectors. As such, we support the proposed Highline Vail
redevelop ment proposal.
We request that projects seeking Vail Valley Partnership support must meet the following
criteria, and believe that the Highline Vail project meets each of these requirements:
1. Demonstrate commitment to the future through incorporating resident occupied
workforce housing units/employee housing units at or above the minimum required
by local code and that result in a net increase in workforce housing stock (i.e., more
housing created than jobs created);
2. Utilize resident occupancy requirements in their deed restrictions;
June 2, 2020 - Page 662 of 772
97 Main Street, Suite E-201, Edwards, CO 81632
VailValleyPartnership.com
3. Actively engage neighboring communities before and during the process through
various stages of approval (planning & zoning, design & review, elected boards,
etc.);
4. Be located in appropriate in-fill locations throughout the county, and/or in areas
designated and zoned for housing development;
5. Be cognizant of regional transit and transportation impacts and mitigate these
impacts through their development plans.
Our board is also supportive of additional moderately priced hotel rooms within Vail, and sees
great value in maintaining the Hilton and Doubletree brands within our lodging inventory.
We want to ensure our community can remain competitive to keep locals local and to support our
business community. We encourage local governments and boards to approve appropriate in-fill
projects and to be open-minded and flexible to grant appropriate variances to local code to
facilitate the development of these projects.
Sincerely,
Chris Romer
President & CEO
Vail Valley Partnership
June 2, 2020 - Page 663 of 772
1
Greg Roy
From:Brett A. August <BAA@pattishall.com>
Sent:Saturday, December 7, 2019 12:50 PM
To:Greg Roy; Jonathan Spence
Cc:Erik Gates
Subject:STOP the DoubleTree Expansion!
Importance:High
To the Town of Vail Planning and Environmental Commission:
The proposed additions to the DoubleTree Hotel are far out of proportion to neighborhood standards and should NOT be
permitted.
We live directly across the street from the proposed addition, at 2309 Chamonix Lane. So we have a string and direct
interest in preventing the construction of so large a building as is proposed.
A review of the proposed project shows that, in contrast to the two-story existing structure, the DoubleTree proposal
would double that height, to four stories. This is not an "expansion," as that term is commonly used: it is a large and
inappropriate NEW project that would likely more than double the size of the existing structure. Although all the plans
refer to construction at a property on the north frontage road, ALL of the proposed construction is immediately adjacent
to Chamonix Lane, which is entirely residential.
The proposed project is so large that it would obstruct views of the residential properties on Chamonix Lane, an unjust
taking for which we would demand compensation.
We do not object to adding to the existing DoubleTree property so long as the addition is of the same height and density
as the existing structure. The developers describe the project as including: "176 AUs [accommodation units] with
approximately 32,555 sq. ft. of net new GRFA ." Such a large re-development of this parcel - which the developers
admit would require significant rezoning - is way out of proportion to the surrounding area and should NOT be permitted.
Moreover, as the developers admit: "since 1981, this site has operated as a nonconforming use and maintained its
use as a lodge as it was first built in 1979. A nonconforming use cannot be expanded or modified except if changed
to a permitted or conditional use even though the Town has been focused for the last 40 years at encouraging and
expanding the hotel base." So the existing structure already surpasses the intended size of the structure: to allow a
giant new structure to be placed on this parcel would make a mockery of Vail's once-vaunted planning process.
Vail is losing its way by allowing unbridled development and is in danger of destroying the very essence of the town, the
so-called "secret sauce" that has made Vail so special to all of us who live here. The Planning and Environmental
Commission needs to return to representing the best interests of the residents of Vail and not simply become a pawn to
commercial interests that are contrary to the interests of Vail's residents.
Cordially yours,
Carey and Brett August
Brett A. August
Pattishall, McAuliffe, Newbury, Hilliard & Geraldson LLP
200 South Wacker Drive
Suite 2900
Chicago, IL 60606-5896
June 2, 2020 - Page 664 of 772
2
Direct: (312) 554-7962 Main: (312) 554-8000 Fax: (312) 554-8015
BAA@pattishall.com www.pattishall.com
Pattishall Ranks GOLD in
the United States and in
Illinois in the prestigious
WTR 1000
The preceding message and any attachments may contain confidential information protected by the attorney-client or other privilege. You may not forward this
message or any attachments without the permission of the sender. If you believe that it has been sent to you in error, please reply to the sender that you received the
message in error and then delete it. Nothing in this email message, including the typed name of the sender and/or this signature block, is intended to constitute an
electronic signature unless a specific statement to the contrary is included in the message.
June 2, 2020 - Page 665 of 772
2269 Chamonix Ln Apt 3
Vail, CO 81657
February 26, 2020
Mr. Greg Roy, AICP
Planner ll
Community Development Department
Town of Vail
75 South Frontage Road
Vail, CO 81657
Dear Mr. Roy,
I am writing about the proposed DoubleTree Expansion. I’m a full-time resident of Vail living at 2269
Chamonix in the Tenterrace Condominiums. I recognize some of the goals of the expansion in order to
provide additional, affordable housing for workers in Vail; however, for many reasons, I do not see this
project as ultimately providing that in a sustainable, viable way. Furthermore, I see additional
challenges with the overall proposed development. At this point in time, I would have to strongly
oppose the planned changes. I was able to attend the first open house on December 5th. I also
attended the January PEC meeting. I will unfortunately be unable to attend the March PEC meeting due
to a family situation.
I have significant concerns about the impact on the local community from a traffic safety perspective.
The proposed development would substantially increase traffic in the local area. The EHU would have 16
units with up to 40 bedrooms. My experience at my condominium is that there is a car for each
bedroom. This would potentially result in another 40 cars in a concentrated area. Furthermore, there
would be substantially more people waiting at the Pine Ridge and West Vail Mall bus stops.
Substantially more vehicular and pedestrian traffic in the area would increase the likelihood of
accidents.
I do applaud the proposal to add a sidewalk to Chamonix Lane which would be helpful, but, noting our
most recent snowfalls, could substantially impact the viability of the sidewalk at the times it would be
most needed. Furthermore, the excessive height of the proposed buildings would create significant
shading along Chamonix lane, preventing ice from melting from the sidewalk and street and creating
hazards for pedestrians.
Vail already has a shortage of commercial space to support the community, reducing this through the
SDD would only negatively impact our community. Vail has limited commercial space to support
grocery stores and other amenities needed by both the full-time residents as well as visiting tourists. By
constraining the supply of available space even more by changing the zoning you, effectively, raise the
prices to everyone. Vail is already an expensive place to live and the reduction of commercial space will
simply exacerbate that situation.
The development as proposed has not considered ways to reduce its environmental footprint. While
I’m sure the development team would follow all the necessary requirements and regulations from the
Town of Vail and other AHJs. I was surprised by the lack of consideration of solar energy for all the
additional rooftop space. Having worked in the renewable energy industry for over 10 years, I believe
the Town of Vail should aspire to continuously push for the use of cleaner energy.
June 2, 2020 - Page 666 of 772
From a process point of view, I feel the development team could have done a better job with the
community. As I noted, I attended the first open house. I was unfortunately unable to attend the
second open house due to scheduling considerations. However, I would note that the letter for the
January 8th meeting was only written on January 2nd and not postmarked until January 4th. (Please see
my appendix for copies). I believe I received the letter on January 7th which was about 24 hours prior to
the actual meeting. To me, this is noteworthy since during the first PEC meeting, the development team
presented photos of the impacted views from Chamonix properties. However, they did not present
photos from all the impacted properties. In fact, they only presented photos from the least impacted
properties. Both 2269 Chamonix and 2249 Chamonix were excluded. To date, I have not seen photos of
the property view impact from the development team. Perhaps these were available at the open house
that I could not attend.
Creating a consistent approach to redevelopment of West Vail will be important to maintaining the
character of our community. From my attendance at the first PEC meeting where this discussed, I
understand that there is a broader redevelopment plan being considered for West Vail. I think it would
make more sense to pursue a comprehensive plan for West Vail rather than pursuing individual projects
that are inconsistent with the community. Once the Town of Vail makes significant zoning changes and
special accommodations for a single developer, there will be no end of requests. Will the Town of Vail
approve all of these requests or just some? How will they decide? In the absence of a larger plan, it
seems there will be a real risk of significant damage to the community from unintended consequences.
I appreciate your consideration of the community’s input to this proposed project. I understand the
need for affordable housing in our community for employees is quite significant. I also appreciate the
effort that the development team has put into the design and planning of this project. However, as
noted above, I do not feel this project will meet the needs of the community in a sustainable way.
Sincerely,
James T. Pyke
2269 Chamonix Ln Apt 3
Vail, CO 81657
June 2, 2020 - Page 667 of 772
Appendix
Letter Written on January 2nd for January 8th meeting
June 2, 2020 - Page 668 of 772
Letter Postmarked on January 4th
June 2, 2020 - Page 669 of 772
March 3, 2020
Mr. Jonathan Spence jspence@vailgov.com and members of the Planning &
Environmental Commission
The Vail Town Council via Mayor Dave Chapin dchapin@vailgov.com
Mr. George Ruther gruther@vailgov.com
Dear Mr. Mayor, Mr. Ruther and Mr. Spence:
After a presentation by the Highline (DoubleTree in West Vail)
development team at our February meeting, the Board of the Vail Chamber & Business Assoc.
offered its unanimous support of the proposed additional lodging,
conference room space and the 16 units of employee housing and
12-bedroom employee housing dorm.
The VCBA highly recognizes how this proposed project helps to meet
Vail's economic and housing goals. DoubleTree is a great complementary
brand to our five-star offerings, and the workforce housing is in such
high demand. We also appreciate the changes made to address neighbor
concerns about needing a sidewalk and views.
Thank you for all of your hard work and please approve the rezoning,
major exterior alternation and Special Development District
applications.
Best regards,
Alison C. Wadey
Executive director
Vail Chamber and Business Association
June 2, 2020 - Page 670 of 772
Mr. Michael O’Connor December 18, 2019
Triumph Development
12 Vail Road
Vail, Colorado 81657
Dear Michael-
I am writing to you on behalf the Vail Local Housing Authority to express our support for the proposed
Highline – Double Tree by Hilton Hotel development. We very much appreciated the presentation
shared by your team during our most recent public meeting on December 17th. We appreciate your
willingness to incorporate incremental new, deed-restricted, resident-occupied housing into your overall
development plan.
In determining our support for the development plan, several key factors were taken into consideration.
Those factors included:
• The deed-restricted housing use is permitted as a use by right in the Public Accommodation-2
zone district.
• The deed-restricted housing is supported by the Town’s recently adopted 2018 Housing Policy
Statements.
• The deed-restricted housing is provided by the private sector with no financial participation of
the Vail taxpayer or the Vail Local Housing Authority.
• The deed-restricted housing is an incremental net new increase in overall supply.
• The private sector is an important partner in helping solve our housing challenges.
• An infill approach to development is taken thereby resulting in greater utilization of already
developed land.
• The deed-restricted housing is within convenient, walkable proximity to restaurants, commercial
uses, and Town of Vail free public transit.
• There is a demonstrated demand for additional for-rent homes in Vail.
• The deed-restricted homes result in a incremental increase in the supply of resident-occupied
homes until such time as the owner requests an ehu credit.
Respectfully, the Vail Local Housing Authority requests you exclude a minimum of 4 (25%) of the 16
deed-restricted homes from any future mitigation bank. In the Vail community, there are both existing
demands, and future needs, for housing. Each could be addressed as a public benefit of the proposed
special development district if a percentage of the homes were excluded from future mitigation bank
opportunities.
Again, thank you for sharing your presentation and plans for development. We appreciate the efforts
you are making to help address the housing needs in the Vail community.
Sincerely,
Steve Lindstrom, Chair
Vail Local Housing Authority
June 2, 2020 - Page 671 of 772
From:MICHAEL SPIERS
To:Greg Roy
Cc:tania boyd
Subject:Highline hotel development.
Date:Tuesday, March 3, 2020 2:16:40 PM
Dear Greg, Hi my name is Mike Spiers and I am a member of the Brandywine condominium
association in West Vail.
I wanted to express to you our concerns regarding the Highline hotel development in West
Vail.
Please understand that we are not NIMBYs and understand the need for more employee
housing and don’t necessarily oppose the development of more hotel rooms on the Doubletree
lot.
What we are very concerned about is the size of the project and it’s effect on the overall
character of the neighborhood. In particular the proposed EHU building parallel to Chamonix
Lane would dwarf the street and be completely out of character with other buildings on the
street.
Not only would it block the views of the Apartments on the north side of Chamonix ln but it
would completely shade Chamonix ln and permanently change the look of the neighborhood.
I have attended all the community meetings provided by the Highline people. Initially they
seemed receptive to reducing the size of this building to two stories which we thought would
be a good compromise. Unfortunately in their latest plans the building is still a monolithic
three stories high reducing only one small end of the building to two stories.
Many of my fellow neighbors are sure to express concerns about snow removal, parking,
traffic along Chamonix ln and these are all legitimate concerns.
It is my hope that you will get a chance to thoroughly look at the impact of this building and
the main hotel building to see if we can make it more compatible with the size of the other
buildings in the neighborhood.My suggestion for compromise is to reduce the EHU Building
to two stories maximum. This would still provide many employee housing units but not alter
the nature and character of the neighborhood as much. Thank you for listening to our
concerns, regards Mike Spiers.
Get Outlook for iOS
June 2, 2020 - Page 672 of 772
April 11, 2020
Mr. Greg Roy, AICP
Planner ll
Community Development Department
Town of Vail
75 South Frontage Road
Vail, CO 81557
The Tall Pines Homeowners Assoc at 2239 A & B Chamonix Lane, & 2241 A & B Chamonix Lane are
again reaching out to you to oppose this Doubletree Developers proposal. We had a filed our first
complaint with you on March 7, 2020, and now after seeing the proposed modifications from the
developer- we see that they are minimal modifications. This is so disappointing, as there were so many
comments from the PEC committee and the Public comments at the March meeting, which we
attended. Our Tall Pines development is directly behind the Doubletree Hotel and parking area. We have
been West Vail residents for 20 years.
We are in complete agreement with Pat & Jay Lauer’s letter sent to you April 10, 2020. They recognized
3 parts to the Developers request which is Rezoning, Special Development District and Exterior
Alterations. The community Development Dept (Vail Planning Staff) recommended a denial on all of the
3 parts of the Developers Request at the March Town Council meeting. The Lauer’s most recent April
letter to you, summarized the areas below to re-emphasize that the developer has specific criteria that
needed to be met according to the Vail regulatory codes. Especially for the SDD- the developer has the
burden of proof to meet each design criteria and the Tall Pines Homeowners Assoc thinks this new
proposal falls way short!
FAILURE OF ZONE CODE AMENDMENT/REZONING - LIMITED COMMERCIAL SPACE IN VAIL:
Since Vail has a very small commercial area development (1% as pointed out in the Vail Land Use Plan),
the commercial area should stay as currently zoned as there is not enough commercial space allotted for
the size of Vail. If you look at the current commercial space in West Vail, there is very little commercial
vacancy. The commercial space we have now should be protected as to what was originally designated
in the Vail Land Use Plan.
At the last PEC meeting, Vail planning staff found that the proposed rezone district amendment did
not conform to 4 out of 8 rezoning criteria by the developer (2, 3, 4 and 7 – shown below). Nothing
has changed in the rezoning request in the developer’s modified proposal.
2. The extent to which the zone district amendment is suitable with the existing and potential land uses
on the site and existing and potential surrounding land uses as set out in the town’s adopted planning
documents.
June 2, 2020 - Page 673 of 772
3. The extent to which the zone district amendment presents a harmonious, convenient, workable
relationship among land uses consistent with municipal development objectives.
4. The extent to which the zone district amendment provides for the growth of an orderly viable
community and does not constitute spot zoning as the amendment serves the best interests of the
community as a whole.
7. The extent to which the zone district amendment demonstrates how conditions have changed since
the zoning designation of the subject property was adopted and is no longer appropriate.
FAILURE ON SPECIAL DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT (SDD) CRITERIA – APPLICANT DID NOT PROVE THEIR
BURDEN OF PROOF FOR EACH REVIEW CRITERIA:
Per section 12-9A-8, under the design criteria and necessary findings, section A states:
SDD Criteria: The following design criteria shall be used as the principal criteria in evaluation the merits
of the proposed special development district. It shall be the burden of the applicant to demonstrate that
the submittal material and the proposed development plan comply with each of the following
standards, or demonstrate that one or more of them is not applicable or that a practical solution
consistent with the public interest has been achieved.
With this new proposal, the first criteria, compatibility, will still fail since there were minimal design
changes on the EHU 15 apartment complex, so the developer does not comply with each of the SDD
criteria.
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.
3. Parking and Loading: Compliance with parking and loading requirements as outlined in chapter 10 of
this title.
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.
7. Traffic: A circulation system designed for both vehicles and pedestrians addressing on and off site
traffic circulation.
8. Landscaping: Functional and aesthetic landscaping and open space in order to optimize and preserve
natural features, recreation, views and function.
SDD Deviations: Also, there were a total of 11 deviations requested by the developer of which 3 were
denied at the last meeting. The last deviation will never be met due to the design of the EHU 15
apartment complex.
3. Exception from the requirement that landscaped areas with trees cannot be used for snow storage.
4. Reduction in the amount of snow storage required.
June 2, 2020 - Page 674 of 772
7. Relief from the subdivision requirement that requires a new lot be able to enclose an 80’ by 80’
square.
FAILURE ON EXTERIOR ALTERATION– APPLICANT FAILED TO MEET THEIR CRITERIA:
The Vail planning staff found that the criteria for section 2 below was not met and was denied. The
new proposal will not change as the EHU 15 apartment complex design has barely changed.
2. That the proposal does not otherwise have a significant negative effect on the character of the
neighborhood.
The reply from the Vail planning staff stated: The proposal does have a negative effect on the
character of the neighborhood. The height that is proposed is as part of this application is not
compatible with this neighborhood. As discussed in SDD criteria #1, there is a large difference
between the residential zone districts across Chamonix Road and the proposed height of the buildings
in this application. With this proposal, that difference is tripled, which is out of character to any other
properties in the neighborhood.
OUR ADDITIONAL COMMENTS:
Lastly, we mentioned (and want to emphasize again) the following points in our previous letter to PEC
and in the March meeting:
Density of the Complex: The number of people (guests, employees and tenants) at this entire complex
will be over double the current capacity (386 people) with a new maximum capacity of 782 people.
We believe this is excessively high density during the peak visitor time periods and definitely doesn’t
benefit our neighborhood. There would be increased pedestrian and vehicle traffic in the area with the
employee housing development.
Excessive Stress on Our Public Bus System: Currently, the DoubleTree has 2 shuttle buses that each hold
14 people. If you figure the shuttles can only move 112 people per hour (4 round trips per shuttle in an
hour), then the DoubleTree guests, employees and residents during the busy winter hotel time periods
(Saturdays, Christmas/New Years, President’s Week, March spring breaks, winter weekends and powder
snow days) will be utilizing our public bus system to get to Vail Resort instead of waiting for the hotel’s
shuttle buses. When people have the option of less than a 1 minute walk to get to the Pine Ridge bus
stop, we think it will put excessive pressure on our already congested public bus system. The public
buses during these peak time periods are currently very full, with standing room only once you go to the
next one or two shuttle bus stops down from Pine Ridge.
Lack of Adequate Parking in the 15 EHU building: With only 16 parking spots for 34 bedrooms
(maximum of 98 people), the parking is inadequate. The McDowell Engineering performed a parking
needs analysis at Lion’s Ridge, which is not a good comparison as the location is substantially different
compared to the DoubleTree location. Having only 16 parking spots for this many people seems
unrealistic.
Lack of Adequate Parking for DoubleTree Employees: With only 4 employee spaces, this is inadequate
parking for a hotel expansion this size. Our concern is that employees driving cars to work will park
their vehicles in other commercial spots to the east of the DoubleTree hotel or in our residential
building’s parking areas immediately behind the DoubleTree on Chamonix Lane.
June 2, 2020 - Page 675 of 772
Destruction of the Neighborhood’s Mature Spruce Trees: This project is going to remove and destroy
the atheistic beauty of the mature spruce trees that line Chamonix Lane. These spruce trees are
“trophy” trees that can’t be replaced. Replanting with smaller trees doesn’t have the screening
impact as well as the majestic beauty of these mature spruce trees. It changes the character of our
neighborhood.
No Penalty if the Project is not completed in 15 Months: The last remodel at the hotel a couple of
years ago went way over the projected time period to be finished. It took them well over two years to
remodel the inside and do some minor exterior alterations. We are concerned that if this development
goes through, our neighborhood will suffer for years with dirt and noisy construction and increased
congestion from the construction workforce. The developer told us that they estimated it would take
15 months to complete this project. If this project is approved, there needs to be some agreement
between the developer and the Town of Vail that the project will be completed in the agreed upon
time so our neighborhood is not compromised and disrupted for an unreasonable time period.
Thank you for your time and consideration in reading our concerns about this proposed development.
By the way: We will be in attendance via the internet for the Mon April 13 meeting.
Sincerely,
Tall Pines HOA:
Kathy Standage & Mike Oldham- 2239B Chamonix Lane
Plowden Bridges & Vaughn Bollard- 2239A Chamonix Lane
Judy & Charles Goldman, 2241B Chamonix Lane
Evan Noyes, 2241A Chamonix Lane
June 2, 2020 - Page 676 of 772
1
Ashley Brown
From:tania boyd <scubakiwi2@yahoo.com>
Sent:Monday, April 13, 2020 9:30 AM
To:Greg Roy
Subject:Doubletree Expansion
Dear Greg,
Brandywine Trace Condominium Association concurs with Pat and Jay Lauer’s letter representing Tenterrace
regarding issues with the Double Tree expansion.
I attended part of the last PEC meeting and am disappointed to see the latest plans from the developer. They
do not seem to have taken any of the recommendations and concerns into account in their revised plans, at
least as far as the drawings are concerned.
I wish to reiterate previous concerns that Brandywine has in regards to the shading and snow removal on
Chamonix Lane. As I’m sure you are aware, the sun is low in the south during the winter months and as a
consequence both Chamonix Lane along with Tenterrace and Brandywine parking areas receive limited snow
or ice melt depending on the weather. Our parking lot and walking along Chamonix Lane can be very
treacherous at times. With significantly reduced sun on the street and parking lot, along with our steep entry,
we foresee an increase in the number of falls and injuries. Also, as the town needs to plow along the street,
would the proposed sidewalk be available to walk on? Currently the town pushes snow over the bank on the
south side and also along the front of our properties. Would the town still push snow over the bank or would it
now be pushed in front of our properties where we already struggle with enough room for snow storage??
We are wondering how the entryway to the EHU would be kept clear and who would be responsible for that
and maintaining the stairs? Our condo complex struggles with ice on our stairs and we are south facing. These
north facing areas would not melt until long after the season ends and would be a hazard for the guests and
employees trying to use the Pine Ridge bus stop.
Also during the meeting you addressed the snow removal issue and valet parking. We agree with you that their
proposed snow removal and storage would definitely be of concern particularly in high snow years. We have
witnessed this for the past several years and are struggling to understand with an increased building footprint
that there would be enough room for snow storage. Their proposed parking and particularly 3 deep valet
parking is definitely going to be problematic in regards to enough spaces for the expanded number of guests
and employees, along with being able to move cars for plowing.
We also wanted to bring up something that we aren’t sure if anyone has addressed so far. There are multiple
semi’s and other truck drivers along with tour buses who stay at the Double Tree for tournaments in Vail. They
are often parked up where the EHU will be built or around the corner near where the hotel expansion will be.
Will these trucks and buses still be allowed to park on the hotel property or will they need to park on the
Frontage road thereby blocking the Frontage road for plowing and skier parking? Or will they be allowed to
park in the commercial parking adjacent to the hotel also rendering plowing difficult. Currently no vehicles are
allowed to be stored overnight in these spaces.
Several years ago we approached the Town about adding 2 guest parking spaces to our lot. We were told that
we could not exceed the GPA required by the town as that percentage of land needed to be landscaped
according to code. We would be disappointed if these huge edifices are approved when all the surrounding
HOA’s are required to follow the Town code and landscaping requirements.To Tenterrace‘s point, the mature
spruce trees would be need to removed and minimal landscaping would be possible.
June 2, 2020 - Page 677 of 772
2
We feel that the sheer size of the EHU building in particular is not in keeping with the current size of the other
buildings on this part of Chamonix Lane contrary to what the developer has tried to prove. It will definitely be
taller and not fit in with the general aesthetic of the neighborhood where all the buildings are set back from the
roadway with landscaping in front. As mentioned in our previous email, we are not completely opposed to the
project but would want the construction to enhance the beauty and safety of our neighborhood.
As locals who have made West Vail our home we hope you will take our concerns to heart and consider the
long term vision for our neighborhood.
Regards Tania Boyd
on behalf of Michael Spiers, Jackie Nickel and Brandywine Trace Condominium Association
June 2, 2020 - Page 678 of 772
April 10, 2020
Mr. Greg Roy, AICP
Planner ll
Community Development Department
Town of Vail
75 South Frontage Road
Vail, CO 81557
My husband (Jay Lauer) and myself (Pat Lauer) are full time Vail residents at 2269 Chamonix Lane, Apt 4, which is behind
the DoubleTree. We have owned our Vail Tenterrace property for approximately seven years so we are very familiar
with the area. We are disappointed with the DoubleTree developer’s newest proposal as the modifications are minimal,
especially given the comments from the PEC committee and public at the March meeting, which we attended.
There are three parts to this developer’s request which are the rezoning, special development district and exterior
alterations. The Community Development Department (Vail planning staff) recommended a denial on all three of the
above requests at the March Vail Town Council meeting. We summarized these areas below to re-emphasize that the
developer has specific criteria that need to be met according to the Vail regulatory codes. Especially for the SDD, the
developer has the burden of proof to meet each design criteria and we think it is clear that their new proposal falls
short.
FAILURE OF ZONE CODE AMENDMENT/REZONING - LIMITED COMMERCIAL SPACE IN VAIL:
Since Vail has a very small commercial area development (1% as pointed out in the Vail Land Use Plan), the commercial
area should stay as currently zoned as there is not enough commercial space allotted for the size of Vail. If you look at
the current commercial space in West Vail, there is very little commercial vacancy. The commercial space we have now
should be protected as to what was originally designated in the Vail Land Use Plan.
At the last PEC meeting, Vail planning staff found that the proposed rezone district amendment did not conform to 4
out of 8 rezoning criteria by the developer (2, 3, 4 and 7 – shown below). Nothing has changed in the rezoning request
in the developer’s modified proposal.
2. The extent to which the zone district amendment is suitable with the existing and potential land uses on the
site and existing and potential surrounding land uses as set out in the town’s adopted planning documents .
3. The extent to which the zone district amendment presents a harmonious, convenient, workable relationship
among land uses consistent with municipal development objectives.
4. The extent to which the zone district amendment provides for the growth of an orderly viable community and
does not constitute spot zoning as the amendment serves the best interests of the community as a whole.
7. The extent to which the zone district amendment demonstrates how conditions have changed since the zoning
designation of the subject property was adopted and is no longer appropriate.
FAILURE ON SPECIAL DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT (SDD) CRITERIA – APPLICANT DID NOT PROVE THEIR BURDEN OF
PROOF FOR EACH REVIEW CRITERIA:
Per section 12-9A-8, under the design criteria and necessary findings, section A states:
June 2, 2020 - Page 679 of 772
SDD Criteria: The following design criteria shall be used as the principal criteria in evaluation the merits of the proposed
special development district. It shall be the burden of the applicant to demonstrate that the submittal material and the
proposed development plan comply with each of the following standards, or demonstrate that one or more of them is
not applicable or that a practical solution consistent with the public interest has been achieved.
With this new proposal, the first criteria, compatibility, will still fail since there were minimal design changes on the EHU
15 apartment complex, so the developer does not comply with each of the SDD criteria.
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.
3. Parking And Loading: Compliance with parking and loading requirements as outlined in chapter 10 of this title.
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.
7. Traffic: A circulation system designed for both vehicles and pedestrians addressing on and off site traffic
circulation.
8. Landscaping: Functional and aesthetic landscaping and open space in order to optimize and preserve natural
features, recreation, views and function.
SDD Deviations: Also, there were a total of 11 deviations requested by the developer of which 3 were denied at the last
meeting. The last deviation will never be met due to the design of the EHU 15 apartment complex.
3. Exception from the requirement that landscaped areas with trees cannot be used for snow storage.
4. Reduction in the amount of snow storage required.
7. Relief from the subdivision requirement that requires a new lot be able to enclose an 80’ by 80’ square.
FAILURE ON EXTERIOR ALTERATION– APPLICANT FAILED TO MEET THEIR CRITERIA:
The Vail planning staff found that the criteria for section 2 below was not met and was denied. The new proposal will
not change as the EHU 15 apartment complex design has barely changed.
2. That the proposal does not otherwise have a significant negative effect on the character of the neighborhood.
The reply from the Vail planning staff stated: The proposal does have a negative effect on the character of the
neighborhood. The height that is proposed is as part of this application is not compatible with this neighborhood. As
discussed in SDD criteria #1, there is a large difference between the residential zone districts across Chamonix Road and
the proposed height of the buildings in this application. With this proposal, that difference is tripled, which is out of
character to any other properties in the neighborhood.
OUR ADDITIONAL COMMENTS:
Lastly, we mentioned (and want to emphasize again) the following points in our previous letter to PEC and in the March
meeting:
June 2, 2020 - Page 680 of 772
Density of the Complex: The number of people (guests, employees and tenants) at this entire complex will be over
double the current capacity (386 people) with a new maximum capacity of 782 people. We believe this is excessively
high density during the peak visitor time periods and definitely doesn’t benefit our neighborhood. There would be
increased pedestrian and vehicle traffic in the area with the employee housing development.
Excessive Stress on Our Public Bus System: Currently, the DoubleTree has 2 shuttle buses that each hold 14 people. If
you figure the shuttles can only move 112 people per hour (4 round trips per shuttle in an hour), then the DoubleTree
guests, employees and residents during the busy winter hotel time periods (Saturdays, Christmas/New Years, President’s
Week, March spring breaks, winter weekends and powder snow days) will be utilizing our public bus system to get to
Vail Resort instead of waiting for the hotel’s shuttle buses. When people have the option of less than a 1 minute walk to
get to the Pine Ridge bus stop, we think it will put excessive pressure on our already congested public bus system. The
public buses during these peak time periods are currently very full, with standing room only once you go to the next one
or two shuttle bus stops down from Pine Ridge.
Lack of Adequate Parking in the 15 EHU building: With only 16 parking spots for 34 bedrooms (maximum of 98 people),
the parking is inadequate. The McDowell Engineering performed a parking needs analysis at Lion’s Ridge, which is not a
good comparison as the location is substantially different compared to the DoubleTree location. Having only 16 parking
spots for this many people seems unrealistic.
Lack of Adequate Parking for DoubleTree Employees: With only 4 employee spaces, this is inadequate parking for a
hotel expansion this size. Our concern is that employees driving cars to work will park their vehicles in other commercial
spots to the east of the DoubleTree hotel or in our residential building’s parking areas immediately behind the
DoubleTree on Chamonix Lane.
Destruction of the Neighborhood’s Mature Spruce Trees: This project is going to remove and destroy the atheistic
beauty of the mature spruce trees that line Chamonix Lane. These spruce trees are “trophy” trees that can’t be
replaced. Replanting with smaller trees doesn’t have the screening impact as well as the majestic beauty of these
mature spruce trees. It changes the character of our neighborhood.
No Penalty if the Project is not Completed in 15 Months: The last remodel at the hotel a couple of years ago went way
over the projected time period to be finished. It took them well over two years to remodel the inside and do some
minor exterior alterations. We are concerned that if this development goes through, our neighborhood will suffer for
years with dirt and noisy construction and increased congestion from the construction workforce. The developer told us
that they estimated it would take 15 months to complete this project. If this project is approved, there needs to be
some agreement between the developer and the Town of Vail that the project will be completed in the agreed upon
time so our neighborhood is not compromised and disrupted for an unreasonable time period.
Thank you for your time and consideration in reading our concerns about this proposed development.
Sincerely,
Jay and Pat Lauer
2269 Chamonix Ln Apt 4,
Vail, CO 81557
plauer@sisna.com
June 2, 2020 - Page 681 of 772
1
Ashley Brown
From:MICHAEL SPIERS <mspiersy@msn.com>
Sent:Monday, April 13, 2020 12:07 PM
To:Greg Roy
Cc:tania boyd
Subject:Highline West Vail Expansion
Dear Greg Roy, I am writing to you to highlight my concerns about the Double Tree expansion in West Vail. Many of my
neighbors in the area have expressed their concerns over several aspects of the development which I am sure you have
received.
My particular focus is on the size of the employee housing unit along Chamonix Lane. Having lived here for 25 years we
all realize the importance of employee housing. I attended several of the preliminary meetings when the Highline
developers were asking for feedback from the neighborhood. We expressed to them that we thought the height of the
EHU would completely shade the street on Chamonix Lane, cause problems for snow Removal, and is totally out of
character with the other buildings in the neighborhood. We suggested to them that perhaps they could reduce the
height of the EHU by one floor as a compromise and then the neighborhood would be more likely to get behind this
development. Unfortunately in the latest plans that they are presenting today most of the building is still at four stories
high and in fact the skyline will now look like a jigsaw puzzle. None of our concerns about the aesthetics were addressed
either.
I have taken several photographs of buildings along the south side of Chamonix Lane to illustrate the height
discrepancies with the rest of the neighborhood. Unfortunately because of the remote nature of the upcoming meeting I
won’t be able to present this to the committee but have included them here for your perusal.
As you can see the buildings along the south side of Chamonix Lane consist mostly of one and two story buildings with
the highest point above the road being approximately 20 feet. As I am sure you are aware the EHU building rises 3
Stories above road level(36ft) and has four levels total.The building is also very thin so what we have is a monolith
towering over Chamonix ln. I believe a reasonable solution here would be to reduce this to a 3 level building total.This
would only slightly affect the number of units in the EHU but would be way more in keeping with the size of other
buildings in the neighborhood. This would not only be more aesthetically pleasing but would not block the views of the 3
apartment buildings that are directly behind the Doubletree and are extremely affected by the development as it is now.
Hopefully I will be able to express these concerns at today's meeting,Thank you for time, Regards, Mike Spiers
Get Outlook for iOS
June 2, 2020 - Page 682 of 772
June 2, 2020 - Page 683 of 772
June 2, 2020 - Page 684 of 772
June 2, 2020 - Page 685 of 772
June 2, 2020 - Page 686 of 772
June 2, 2020 - Page 687 of 772
From: Barry Davis <williambarrydavis@gmail.com>
Date: March 9, 2020 at 10:58:56 AM MDT
To: jspence@vailgov.com, George Ruther <GRuther@vailgov.com>, Dave Chapin
<DChapin@vailgov.com>
Subject: Highline by DoubleTree Support
Dear Mayor Chapin, Mr. Ruther and Mr. Spence:
My name is Barry Davis and my family and I live in the Chamonix Town homes right across the street
from the Highline / DoubleTree.
I want to thank the hotel ownership and development team for hosting open houses and providing
information about their proposal. I understand they've even met with neighbors who were concerned
about their views.
As a very engaged community member, I appreciate the hotel wanting to enhance the Vail economy
with an additional 79 rooms - the DoubleTree is an important brand for many of our guests.
And as a proud resident of deed-restricted housing allowing my young family to live, work and go to pre-
school in Vail, I am fully supportive of the proposed 16-unit apartment building and its design that fits in
well with our West Vail neighborhood. Our community is a leader when it comes to affordable and
workforce housing and to have this hotel operator step up and do the right thing is huge public benefit.
This project has my support and I hope PEC and the Council approves this, as well.
Thank you,
Barry Davis
June 2, 2020 - Page 688 of 772
From: Brian Nolan <brian@group970.com>
Sent: Friday, March 6, 2020 4:44 PM
To: Jonathan Spence <JSpence@vailgov.com>; Dave Chapin <DChapin@vailgov.com>
Subject: Blue Moose support
Dear Mayor Chapin and Mr. Spence:
As a longtime Vail business owner and active participant on the Vail Economic Advisory Council, I'd like
to convey my support for the proposed 79 new hotel rooms at Highline, a DoubleTree by Hilton, in West
Vail. The DoubleTree should be commended for proactively making significant upgrades recently and
now wanting to further contribute to our local economy with these rooms.
Further, what a terrific neighborhood to in-fill with incremental workforce housing, meeting another
community priority.
Please lend your support in approving the applications before you.
Brian Nolan
Blue Moose Pizza
Lionshead Arrabelle
Vail
Brian Nolan
GROUP970 | FOOD.DRINK.ADVENTURE.
Blue Moose Vail | Blue Moose Beaver Creek
63 Avondale Lane, Suite C-1, PO Box 5549, Beaver Creek, CO 81620
(P) 970.845.0545 (F) 970.845.8444 (E) brian@group970.com
June 2, 2020 - Page 689 of 772
June 2, 2020 - Page 690 of 772
From:
2239 A & B, 2241A & B
Vail, CO 81657
March 7, 2020
To:
Mr. Greg Roy, AICP
Planner ll
Community Development Department
Town of Vail
75 South Frontage Road
Vail, CO 81657
Dear Mr. Roy,
This letter is concerning the proposed DoubleTree Expansion and especially the plan to build
employee housing on the site. Our family has owned our home at 2239 B Chamonix Ln for 20
years. Our home is located in the Tall Pines development directly north of the Doubletree
Hotel. We are members of the Tall Pines HOA (4 homeowners in the Tall Pines HOA). We are
regular riders of the town bus and frequent the West Vail stores and restaurants; we know the
West Vail area very well and have stayed here all these years because of the less populated and
hectic nature of the neighborhood. We are not opposed to reasonable expansion of the hotel,
but we do sincerely believe the proposed plan is too aggressive and has not been proper ly
vetted with the residents of the neighborhood.
Therefore, our family and the Tall Pines HOA oppose this development as it is currently
proposed.
We would like to see a comprehensive and long-term plan for West Vail development that
incorporates traffic planning, pedestrian safety, allocation of parks and open space, noise
reduction, sidewalks, bike lanes, trails, trees and shrubbery, protecting our views, minimizing
environmental impact, etc. We would like to see more thought given to maintaining th e
character of the West Vail neighborhood. We expect the city planning and community
development departments to represent the needs of the entire community not cater to
developers and Vail Associates. So far, this plan is woefully deficient in many of th ese areas.
We plan to attend the meeting on March 9th and hope these issues are discussed and this
project is not forced on our neighborhood.
We appreciate your consideration of our family, the Tall Pines HOA and the West Vail
community’s input to this proposed project. We also appreciate the effort that the Vail
June 2, 2020 - Page 691 of 772
Development Team has put into the design and planning of this project, but we strongly believe
a project of this magnitude and impact on the neighborhood requires a more comprehensive
and thoughtful approach.
To reiterate, we are not opposed to reasonable development of the Doubletree property, but
we are strongly opposed to this project as it is currently proposed.
Sincerely,
Tall Pines HOA:
Kathy Standage & Mike Oldham- 2239B Chamonix Lane
Plowden Bridges & Vaughn Bollard- 2239A Chamonix Lane
Judy & Charles Goldman, 2241B Chamonix Lane
Evan Noyes, 2241A Chamonix Lane
June 2, 2020 - Page 692 of 772
I as Founder and Co-Chair of the Eagle County Housing Task
Force (ECOHTF) support the Highline Project in West Vail
without reservations. The project proposes the construction of
an additional 79 hotel rooms, approximately 4,000SF of new
conference space, an employee housing apartment building
consisting of 16 units with a total of 38 bedrooms and a 12
bedroom employee housing dorm in the existing lodge
commercial space. I believe that many visitors to Town will
benefit from additional moderately priced lodging and the need
for additional workforce housing is clear to all of us! The
ECOHTF believes the location is very good given its proximity to
amenities, services and transportation. This project would
provide a public benefit to the Vail community and economy.
As a resident of West Vail I believe the architectural design will
enhance the quality of the property and the view for
neighboring properties.
Bobby Lipnick, Co-Chair, ECOHTF
Robert N. Lipnick, M.D., MBA, LEED AP
Kogod School of Business
Adjunct Faculty
202-223-1080 ext.105
June 2, 2020 - Page 693 of 772
P L ANNI NG AND E NV I RO NM E NTAL C O M M I S S I O N
December 9, 2019, 1:00 P M
Town Council C hambers
75 S. F rontage Road - Vail, Colorado, 81657
1.Call to Order
1.1.Attendance
Present: Brian Gillette, Rollie Kjesbo, Ludwig Kurz, J ohn-Ryan Lockman,
Karen Perez, Pete Seibert
Absent: Pam Hopkins
1.2.Swearing I n New Member
New Member Pete Seibert was sworn in by the Town Clerk
1.3.Election of Officers
Brian Gillette moved to appoint Ludwig Kurz as Chair. Rollie Kjesbo
seconded the motion and it passed (6-0).
Absent:(1)Hopkins
Brian Gillette moved to appoint Karen Perez as Vice Chair. Rollie Kjesbo
seconded the motion and it passed (6-0).
Absent:(1)Hopkins
2.Main Agenda
2.1.A request for a recommendation to the Vail Town Council for a zone district
boundary amendment, pursuant to Section 12-3-7, Amendment, Vail Town
Code, to allow for the rezoning of 2211 North Frontage Road W est which is
composed of Tract C, Lot 1 Lot 2, and Lot 3 Vail Das Schone Filing No. 1
and Lot 1, Vail Das Schone Filing 3, from the Commercial Core 3 (C C3)
District to the Public Accommodation-2 (PA-2) District and setting forth
details in regard thereto. (P E C19-0047)
This item will be heard concurrently with P E C19-0046 and P E C19-0048.
45 min.
Applicant:TNRE F I I I Bravo Vail L L C W idewaters Group I nc., represented
by Mauriello Planning Group
Planner:Greg Roy
2.1, 2.2, & 2.3 will all be heard concurrently.
Chairman Kurz: Clarified that the 3 items are all being heard as
worksessions today.
Planner Roy: Not looking for any motion today, just looking for feedback
from the P E C. Started by introducing the location of the site and the existing
June 2, 2020 - Page 694 of 772
conditions. Described an increase in accommodation units and the addition
of E HUs and a new building only for housing E HUs. Roy then described the
reason for the rezoning to PA-2 and the criteria for the rezoning. Lodges
are not allowed in the current C C3 zoning. Roy then went on to describe the
application for a Special Development District. This will help the proposal
reach compliance with the Code with regard to parking requirements.
Commissioner Lockman: Asked staff to clarify “nonconforming”
Roy: The hotel was built before it was annexed into the Town. W hen it was
annexed into the Town under C C3 it became legally nonconforming with
respect to use. This means that the current development can be maintained
but not expanded under the current zoning.
Dominic Mauriello: Began by introducing his team.
Mark Mutkoski: I ntroduced himself by describing his history visiting Vail. He
then described the current state of the Hotel renovation. Also described the
chain of ownership until now including his role as the Owner Representative.
Described how they reinvigorated the property already in order to bring it in
line with the Town’s standards. The current hotel is not the highest and best
use for the property.
Mauriello: Continued to describe the site as it exists today. Pointed out
several largely unutilized areas of the site and the surrounding commercial
uses. Mauriello then began to describe the proposed additions to the site.
Seventy-nine (79) net new accessory units, 19 limited-service lodge units
(L S L Us), 12 dormitory units, and 16 employee housing units of 2-3
bedrooms. Two-hundred-twenty-three (223) parking spaces proposed,
however this number will change due to some Fire Department concerns.
From here, the applicant moved on to describe the proposed hotel units
themselves. The applicant also provided a number of renderings, including
some neighboring view renderings.
Commissioner Perez: Asked if these renderings showed both buildings.
Mauriello: I ndicated that they did, but also stated that other angles showing
more of both buildings could be provided in the future. Mauriello then went
on to describe how the development would align with the goals of the Town.
He then described the hotel’s history and how this relates to the current non-
conformities. This property has both nonconforming structures and
nonconforming uses. Nonconforming structures cannot have their non-
conformity expanded upon, but compliant additions and alterations are
permitted by the code. Nonconforming uses effectively stop all additions to
the nonconforming use. Current nonconformities include building height,
density, parking, and internal landscaping. W ith respect to use, hotels and
dwelling units are not permitted in the C C3 zone district, hence the rezoning
request. The PA-2 zone district is more applicable to this development. The
special development district is being proposed primarily in order to address
some parking compliance difficulties. The parking requirements for the PA-2
would be 250 spaces, but 223 are being proposed. One reason for this
proposed reduced parking has to do with the proposed meeting space on
site. As attendees to this conference space would primarily be lodged within
the Highline Hotel, there is a large overlap between the parking necessary
for the conference space and the parking necessary for the hotel itself.
Mentioned that the E HU building is creating the need for some of these
deviations from the code, so there is a question regarding the value of E HUs
June 2, 2020 - Page 695 of 772
to the Town vs the standards that relief is being requested from. Available
land for Employee Housing is very limited in Vail. A Public Open House was
hosted by the applicant in early December to share the proposed
development to the neighboring public. Mauriello then addressed some of the
concerns mentioned by staff in their memorandum to the Commission.
Addressed concerns related to the increased density in the area, the
rezoning to PA-2 in an area with limited commercial services, and parking
deviations from what is required by the Code.
Perez: The SDD is Vail’s equivalent of a Planned building group. What is
the purpose of the rezoning AND an SDD?
Mauriello: In Vail, an SDD is an overlay as opposed to a replacement for a
rezoning district. The SDD cannot violate the allowed uses of the underlying
zone district.
Perez: Clarified that she was referring to planned building groups as
opposed to a planned unit development.
Mauriello: Stated that it made sense for them to propose both in order to
bring the hotel into compliance and to allow for the proposed EHU building.
Lockman: Asked a question about an existing SDD on the property.
Mauriello: Stated that this SDD was no longer active.
Lockman: Directed staff to correct this in future memos.
Kurz: Asked about the specific benefit to the town for the proposed SDD.
Mauriello: Talked about the need to increase hotel units in Vail. The Town
has lost some significant hotel units in recent history. The SDD will also
facilitate the addition of more EHUs, this is not required for the project, but
the applicant feels this a net benefit for the Town.
Kurz: Asked about the upcoming West Vail Master Plan.
Matt Gennett: Stated that staff will be going in front of Town Council to
get direction on the Master Plan scope on December 17. This Master
Plan process is expected to take a calendar year.
Mauriello: There was a previous attempt to improve this property, but it was
recommended they wait for a previous West Vail Master Plan effort. This
Master Plan effort fell through, so the applicant would like to avoid risking
this happening again to the property owner.
Kjesbo: Felt that the EHUs are being waved as a carrot for this application
but saw that the EHU building could be sold off.
Mauriello: This was stated in order to add some flexibility.
Kjesbo: Felt that the employee housing needs to be tied in with the rest of
the project to avoid the EHUs being sold off and never being developed.
Perez: The three applications makes it unclear what is being proposed and
what the timing will be for this project. It also obfuscates the benefit to the
Town and the community.
June 2, 2020 - Page 696 of 772
Mauriello: Stated that the proposed benefits were well stated in the proposal.
Perez: Need to look at how the stated benefits to the Town relate to the
proposed deviations from the code.
Lockman: Had a question regarding the proposed height, as staff and the
applicant had a disagreement on how the height should be measured.
Mauriello: Showed a rendering of the buildings. Stated that the height is
strictly compliant with the code as some of the roof forms have been
staggered in order to meet compliance.
Perez: I t would also be helpful to know how high the buildings would be
above Chamonix Rd. Feels that existing residents are concerned about the
view.
Lockman: Had a question about the parking and valet.
Mauriello: I ndicated that most units, including the E HU units, would be using
the valet parking. Also, there will be a stairwell and sidewalk from the E HU
building leading down to the rest of the development and Frontage Rd.
Kurz then opened the floor for public comment.
Molly Rabin Concerned about density in West Vail. Glad that the parking is
being kept off of Chamonix. There are no sidewalks on Chamonix, so an
increase in development will create a greater safety issue. Asked for some
form of density study.
Mike Spiers: Representing Brandywine Trace Condominiums behind this
development. The proposed buildings dwarf the existing. There is no building
of the scale of the E HU unit on Chamonix. Mentioned that some affected
views not shown in the application would be potentially significant.
J im Pike: Echoing Mike’s comments. Specifically mentioned how some
impacted views were not represented in the meeting. Thinks it would also be
a great opportunity to add solar to these buildings.
Pam Stenmark: Expressed gratitude for the questions presented by the
P E C.
Public Comments closed.
Kjesbo: Stated that his E HU concerns were already mentioned. W ants the
E HU building to be in conjunction with the rest of the site. Could likely
support the deviation from parking requirements. Needs a sun/shade
analysis. Need references to new and existing heights. Feels PA-2 zoning is
likely the correct zoning here. Likes the idea of adding a sidewalk heading
towards the Frontage Road.
Gillette: Thinks of something grander than this for the redevelopment of W est
Vail. Thinks the planning for W est Vail should be done first before this.
Doing the Master Plan right, might help direct this development to more
accurately reflect Town goals. Sees this area being redeveloped as multiuse
in the future. Approving the development like this may hamper redevelopment
efforts in the rest of W est Vail.
June 2, 2020 - Page 697 of 772
Perez: Also indicated that the development needs to be developed
comprehensively, needs a timeline as well. Need to make sure that the
applicant is meeting the requirements of an S D D. Wants to also see a
sun/shade analysis and more information on building heights. Concerned
that with the conference center not being utilized much now, that increasing
the conference space and needs is unnecessary.
Seibert: Liked how this would solve some nonconforming use. Has a
concern with the proposed valet parking for the E HUs. A large number of
employees are likely to need their cars at the same time.
Lockman: Echoed the concerns of Perez regarding the expanded
conference space. Likes the idea of converting the underutilized commercial
space into employee dorms, however, he also needed to see a parking plan
for the E HUs. Likes the effort to reduce nonconforming uses. Also
struggling with this project in the absence of a W est Vail Master Plan. The
Master Plan would help describe the appropriate density and bulk and mass
for this site. I mproving circulation and safety along Chamonix could be an
additional public benefit of this project.
Kurz: Also concerned about this project going ahead of the West Vail
Master Plan. However, in responding just to the project that is before the
commission, Kurz echoes Kjesbo’s comments. One could call the proposed
“carrot” of the E HUs as a “quid pro quo.” I mportant that sensitivity toward
the surrounding neighborhood is shown. Also wants sun/shade analysis.
Largely neutral on parking now but would like to see parking maximized.
Brian Gillette moved to continue to J anuary 13, 2019. Rollie Kjesbo
seconded the motion and it passed (6-0).
Absent:(1)Hopkins
2.2.A request for a recommendation to the Vail Town Council of an application
establishing Special Development District No. 42 (Highline Hotel Renovation
2019), pursuant to Section 12-9(A), Special Development Districts, Vail
Town Code, to allow for the development of a hotel addition to add 79
accommodation units, convert 19 existing dwelling units to 19 limited service
lodge units, create a 12 unit E HU dormitory, remove office space, add
conference space and build 16 unit employee housing apartment building,
and related uses and improvements, located at 2211 North Frontage Road
West which is composed of Tract C, Lot 1, Lot 2, and Lot 3 Vail Das
Schone Filing No. 1 and Lot 1, Vail Das Schone Filing 3, and setting forth
details in regard thereto. (P E C19-0048)
This item will be heard concurrently with P E C19-0047 and P E C19-0046.
Applicant:TNRE F I I I Bravo Vail L L C W idewaters Group I nc., represented
by Mauriello Planning Group
Planner:Greg Roy
Brian Gillette moved to continue to J anuary 13, 2019. Rollie Kjesbo
seconded the motion and it passed (6-0).
Absent:(1)Hopkins
2.3.A request for review of an Exterior Alteration, pursuant to Section 12-7J -12,
Exterior Alterations or Modifications, Vail Town Code, to allow for
construction of a hotel addition and an E HU apartment building, located at
June 2, 2020 - Page 698 of 772
2211 North Frontage Road West which is composed of Tract C, Lot 1, Lot
2, and Lot 3 Vail Das Schone Filing No. 1 and Lot 1, Vail Das Schone
Filing 3, and setting forth details in regard thereto. (P E C19-0046)
This item will be heard concurrently with P E C19-0047 and P E C19-0048.
Applicant:TNRE F I I I Bravo Vail L L C W idewaters Group I nc., represented
by Mauriello Planning Group
Planner:Greg Roy
Brian Gillette moved to continue to J anuary 13, 2019. Rollie Kjesbo
seconded the motion and it passed (6-0).
Absent:(1)Hopkins
2.4.A request for review of a Conditional Use Permit, pursuant to Section 12-
16, Conditional Use Permits, Vail Town Code, to allow for the installation of
an outdoor dining patio, located at 254 Bridge Street Unit C/Lot C & L,
Block 5C, Vail Village Filing 1, and setting forth details in regard thereto.
(P E C19-0049)
20 min.
Applicant:Mt. Belvedere 45 LLC North Bridge Venture Partners,
represented by Resort Design Architects
Planner:J onathan Spence
1. This Conditional Use Permit approval is contingent upon the applicant
obtaining Town of Vail approval of an associated design review
application.
2. The applicant shall operate the outdoor patio in a manner generally
consistent with the approved site plan dated 07/19/2019.
Chairman Kurz: Moved this item to the front of the Main Agenda
Planner Spence: Began by explaining the need for a C UP for an outdoor
patio in Vail Village. This proposed outdoor patio is entirely within private
property. Spence then went on to explain some of the proposed
improvements. Public W orks and Fire Department have both reviewed and
found no issues.
Tom Braun: Began by introducing his team members present at the meeting.
During construction of Gorsuch, the unit below vacated, so the new proposal
is for a new café on the street level. The C UP is only for the patio with
outdoor seating and firepits. No food service will occur outside, patrons will
have to order inside and bring items out to the patio.
No Public Comment.
Commissioner Kjesbo: No additional comment
Commissioner Gillette: No additional comment
Commissioner Perez: Asked about how far the patio extends.
Planner Spence showed a diagram demonstrating the extent of the patio.
Perez: Concerned about the amount of clutter in the corridor. The corridor
is already narrow and ski racks also are set out in this area. The proposed
patio will be put right in this area.
Spence: Felt that the patio will be an overall improvement to the area over
the ski racks.
Commissioner Seibert: No additional comment
Commissioner Lockman: No additional comment.
J ohn-Ryan Lockman moved to approve with conditions. Rollie Kjesbo
seconded the motion and it passed (6-0).
Absent:(1)Hopkins
June 2, 2020 - Page 699 of 772
2.5.A request for the review of a variance from Section 12-6D-8, Density
Control, Vail Town Code, to allow for a variance to the requirement that a
secondary unit in the Two-Family Primary/Secondary Residential zone
district not exceed 40% of allowable site GRFA, and a request for the review
of a variance from Section 12-15-3, Definition, Calculation, and Exclusions,
Vail Town Code, to allow for a variance to the stipulation that basement
GRFA deductions apply only to floors within six vertical feet of the lowest
level of a structure, both in accordance with the provisions of Section 12-17,
Variances, Vail Town Code, located at 775 Potato Patch Drive/Lot 19, Block
1, Vail Potato Patch Filing 1, and setting forth details in regard thereto.
(P E C19-0050)
The applicant has requested this item be tabled to J anuary 13, 2020.
5 min.
Applicant:Scott Ryan & Foster Gillett, represented by Mauriello Planning
Group
Planner:Erik Gates
Karen Perez moved to table to J anuary 13, 2019. Brian Gillette seconded
the motion and it passed (6-0).
Absent:(1)Hopkins
2.6.A request for review of a variance from Section 14-6-7, Retaining Walls,
Vail Town Code, pursuant to Title 12 Chapter 17, Variances, Vail Town
Code, to allow for a retaining wall in excess of six (6) feet tall at the Town of
Vail Public Works facility located at 1289 Elkhorn Drive/Unplatted, and
setting forth details in regard thereto. (P E C19-0041)
45 min.
Applicant:Town of Vail, represented by Greg Hall
Planner:Erik Gates
1. Construction of the shoring wall and rockfall berm shall be limited to
the months of J une to November, unless a consultation with Colorado
Parks and W ildlife reveals a need to adjust this window.
Planner Erik Gates recapped the process on how the application got to the
current meeting. Third meeting before P E C. Master plan schedule, and
process. Applications today are for the streets building expansion and the
retaining wall. Both need C UP due to being in the General Use Zone
District.
Changes from last meeting are the comments from C P W on this application
and the E I R submitted. Staff added another condition that the construction
of the wall be limited to J une to November. Another comment from C P W
was to prohibit dogs, which is already a policy at the Public Works site and
Buzzard Park units.
Greg Hall introduced Rick Kahn the wildlife biologists. Streets building will be
pushed off until 2021 due to schedule. Gives time to monitor the site this
winter and next winter. I f approved, the wall, berm, and utilities would
hopefully be built next summer.
Gillette – Can you not build the wall and do the streets building?
Hall – Yes, but severely limits parking.
Kahn – Professional wildlife biologist hired to consult on this project and
Booth Heights for context. General comments, a lot of interests in the sheep
June 2, 2020 - Page 700 of 772
right now. People are comparing it to Booth Heights, and there are
differences and similarities. Both projects in overall winter range of S2 native
herd. Herd is not doing well due to bad winters and hasn’t picked back up to
former levels. Very small winter range, as typical of sheep in high altitudes.
Booth Creek area is typically ewes and rams. The town area is exclusively
used by rams. Ewes are much less mobile and tied into steep areas to stay
away from mountain lions. W inter range for ewes much more critical. Rams
are more mobile, bigger, and less susceptible to change in landscape. Site
is used intermittently, and 3-4 times in the last few years. Not every winter
such as last year when there was a big snow layering. Groups segregate by
sexes during the winter. Rams could be attracted to salt storage or
something to attract them to the site. Site has not always been historically
occupied by sheep. Less than ideal information since there are a lack of
studies. This is not at all unusual. Made an observation during the process
that the area of the rockfall berm and solar that would be occupied and lost,
occurs in a small narrow band of the sheep habitat. Not a significant loss.
Biggest concern would be that this greens up earlier in the spring due to
non-native grasses. W inter is a period where they starve and lose weight.
They are attracted to that disturbed area with non-native grasses. Loss of
area of disturbed area is not a big concern. Key is that the disturbed areas
needs to be located near escape cover and they are. This site has had
extensive human activity for 40-50 years. Not new area loss, but small
disturbance of an already active site. The solar array extends to the west a
couple hundred yards that is not heavily disturbed yet. No literature on the
topic of solar array disturbance to sheep. Very narrow area that could have
small impact. Losing native vegetation could be potentially problematic.
Cumulative impacts unknown. W ith mitigation and C P W ’s recommended
mitigation it can be managed to minimize impact. As it sits, with available
information, impacts will be minimal and mitigatable.
Perez – Do you think the proposed condition from staff is sufficient or is
more required?
Kahn – J une thru November makes a lot of sense. I t depends on if the
sheep are present.
Gillette – How do we get to a collar study?
Kahn – Money
Gillette – How much?
Kahn – For state-of-the-art collar study it could be $500,000. A lot of the
habitat work would need to be on the US FS land. Habitat improvement would
be better done by Booth Heights. There could still be some done on this site.
Gillette – Of $500,000 how much is collar and how much is emergency
funds?
Kahn – $150,000 for collar and $100,000 for personnel. The rest would be
money in the bank for reaction to what was discovered during that study.
This one herd is not #1 on the books for C P W and they would need money
to make something happen soon.
Gillette – W hat kind of checks would you need for habitat work.
Kahn – Three things, fertilization, fire, and hand trimming and setback of
June 2, 2020 - Page 701 of 772
vegetation. I don’t have figures, but you’re talking about hundreds of
thousands of dollars to do all the sites, maybe $1 million.
Gillette – On a yearly basis, what would be the most important?
Kahn – Collar and some habitat would be best.
Gillette – So $250,000 for collar and another $250,000 for habitat.
Kahn – I f you maintain the status quo and development you can expect the
herd to continue to be affected.
Gillette – So let’s say $250,000 a year for the next 10 years, do you think
this would affect this herd?
Kahn – Yes, it would dramatically lower the risk of extirpation.
Gillette - W hat’s the number one thing you can do to increase herd
numbers?
Kahn – Limit disturbance, resetting habitat in winter range specifically and
summer range. Not all of which is in the purview of Town of Vail.
Gillette – So the plan to burn hasn’t happened after it was planned for 20
years. W hy didn’t that happen?
Kahn – I don’t think the town was behind it because of the concern of fire.
The Forest Service could do it if they needed to. I t is the initiative of leaders
at district level that needs to happen.
Gillette – I f the Town wants to be a lobbyist, how would they do that? Use
staff, hire someone?
Kahn – Citizenry has to consent moving forward. There are a variety of
ways moving forward.
Lockman – I s there a recommendation on the terraced retaining wall vs non-
terraced wall. Does one have more benefits?
Kahn – I think in the long term keeping the sheep out of habited area is the
best option. Non-terraced wall does more of a job keeping them out. W e
don’t want to see them on I -70. Adding a fence is not a huge deal as they
can get around it.
Gillette – So no fence, correct?
Kahn – No, it wouldn’t do a lot, and you don’t want to keep them out of the
disturbed sites that could give them early spring greenery. Large fences not
a solution to this problem.
Kurz – We got a letter from C P W , should we hear them now or at public
comment.
Gillette – Let’s bring C P W up so we can ask questions instead of during
public comment.
Duval – C P W . This is a remarkably different proposal from what you’ve
June 2, 2020 - Page 702 of 772
heard before. This is a small review of a limited area. For me, I have to view
it through a wholistic lens where we look at miles around for the effect.
Limited habitat right now, that needs to be treated as a valuable and finite
resource.
Gillette – Any comments on the numbers?
Duval – Those sound good, but mitigation is not a one and done deal. It is a
concerted effort and needs to be done in perpetuity. In conjunction with
habitat, contingency and collars, then a $500,000 starts to get you to that
area.
Gillette – What is the value of the collar study? What are we learning?
Duval – It says whether the mitigation is working, and what habitat use looks
like. Where are they congregating. We’re operating on old information on
where they are utilizing the landscape based on our best guesses.
Gillette – We don’t know the extent of the problem is what you’re saying?
Isn’t the solution always doing mitigation?
Duval – But where is the question. Do we focus in the middle or on the
edges? Where are they actually using the landscape?
Public Comment
Larry Stewart, East Vail
I just heard for the first time today that the building is not going to be built
until 2021, so why are we approving that now? We have more time to do
more observations between then. There is no time limit for when the streets
building could get built. They could start tomorrow. One question you need to
address is why are we approving the CUP today until we can study it since it
won’t be built until later? I want this to be built in the most effective way.
There is a dearth of information on how the sheep are using the site. This
points towards caution, since there is no do over. They are already stressed
and compressed. I think fencing would be a good idea to keep the sheep out
and the humans from entering the hills. What you want to accomplish here is
to keep the human activities from the sheep. You could also require
landscaped screening to keep them out. They don’t like cover and would
keep them out. Why isn’t there a condition that no dogs are allowed on the
site. That should be part of the approval since the masterplan and comments
are not enforceable. I implore you not to look at this just as a variance on a
retaining wall and building, but the larger impact on the herd. No room for
error. This has to be gotten right.
Tom Vucich, 4957 Juniper Lane
You expressed at the last meeting that you wanted a more comprehensive
view and thank you. The only difference is the CPW statement. **reads
from CPW comments** You all touched on it two weeks ago about wanting a
more comprehensive plan. It is time that you and the town put a specific
number and timeline on this project and how to address the impacts to the
herd.
Patti Langmaid, 2940 Manns Ranch Road
On the burn, one of the reasons that the neighbors were opposed was
because there was an escaped forest service burn that burned down a
couple houses in Colorado. I think now, we are more savvy and that with the
June 2, 2020 - Page 703 of 772
right conditions a burn would be acceptable.
Blondie Vucich, East Vail
Bill was unable to be here, so I wanted to read a couple sentences from the
public comment he submitted **reads from letter**.
Close public comment
Open Commissioner Comments
Lockman – Thanks C P W for memorandum. I ’m struggling here on this one
with all of the dialogue. I would implore our elected officials to do something
on this issue. This board faces challenging decisions that impact wildlife.
W hether that is putting specific funding towards it or making a plan. On the
retaining wall, the variance for the non-terraced wall makes the most sense.
I f we look at the criteria of the application, I think public works has met all
the items needed for approval.
Seibert – I concur with the need for a more comprehensive plan. We need
to get to a more proactive point, but not what is before us today. The vertical
wall makes more sense to save hillside and doesn’t tempt a sheep to come
down. I t’s a small site, so they will get around a fence. I agree on the
prohibition of dogs and possibly adding it as a condition. On timing, they
need this approval so they can meet the window even if they aren’t doing the
whole building.
Perez – I want to know where the mitigation plan is, and what the plan is.
We have to treat the applicants the same, in particular criteria #2 **quotes
criteria**. The Booth Height project had many conditions of approval related
to the sheep herd, and this site is only 2 miles away from Booth Heights. I
don’t see how we are treating these sites with consistency. There is no real
mitigation plan here. I f we approve now, we aren’t going there with a
comprehensive view. I don’t think this conforms today. W ould vote against.
Gillette – Agree with Perez 100%. W e need this building to provide bus
service and snow removal service. The mitigation effort should be part of this
plan. We need to do some significant study and dedication half a million
towards it. W e need to lobby congress to get this stuff done, and we need to
have this money in place, and we need to have Council fund this. Kristen
where are we with this?
Kristen Bertuglia – The Town had to get a strategic plan and divvy up what
we could do on this. We did some cutting and stacking. W e had a burn plan
approved, but the presence of sheep delayed it. We’ve had several meetings
with the Forest Service but heard that burning for wildlife was not supportive
there. W e continue to look at the option for a larger burn but cannot do that
due to the burn in designated wilderness area. W e’ve got $100,000 this year
to do some effort. W hat we want to do is find what the best thing to do for
these sheep.
Gillette – W hat’s next?
Bertuglia – Rewrite the mitigation plan from the 90s to today’s conditions.
Hopefully in the next couple months.
Gillette – Greg, what do you need? I f we separate the wall and building?
Hall – Based on time limits, getting materials ready and making construction
June 2, 2020 - Page 704 of 772
go quickly is why we need another year. We couldn’t have everything done
next year. No issues on dog prohibition. By waiting one more year we have
more time for observation. For collaring there are a lot of costs that go in as
well as staff. We are waiting for a comprehensive study to do some
mitigation, instead of doing something that won’t be as effective. I don’t have
the $250,000 budget to put towards something like this, as Town Council
does. W ith regard to construction, get a contract, get final approval, we
need that longer time period to get it done.
Kurz – On dog rules, how are they being adhered to and controlled, what
about recreation on the hill, have they done a ski jump that you are aware
of?
Hall – Three-year leases with no pets, if we find one then they’re gone.
Limited approval for dogs when it comes to vet visits (for employee pet
emergencies). As for a ski jump, there might have been, but I hadn’t seen
anything back there except one hiker.
Gillette – Kristen, is the collar study part of your funding?
Bertuglia – Depends on the mitigation plan.
Gillette – J ust so Council understands the importance of this stuff I suggest
we break this up and get the wall and the berm approved and hold them
hostage on the building. J ust to let them know that it is important to us, we’ll
hold them hostage on the one part. I t adds to the importance of getting the
long term plan done.
Lockman – Does that affect your ability to operate Greg?
Hall – Limits us to the timeline of the plan.
Kjesbo – I f we disturb habitat, we need to build it somewhere. W e need a
mitigation plan that is equal at the same time. I ’d like to see the Forest
Service be part of that, but we can’t wait on them. W e need it defined from
council and staff what the end result on the public works area. I f the town
defines the final result of the plan, then we need to have an E I S started or
under contract with this approval. I ’d like a definition from the council what
the final number of units would be approved in the masterplan. W e need to
control this and not do it piecemeal. Definitely no dogs. I don’t think we’re
ready for a vote yet and I think we have time.
Gillette – Kahn, do you value an E I S over E I R?
Kahn – I don’t know how an E I R is defined here, but it just needs to be
comprehensive. For an official E I S, feels that these studies can take
upwards of 10 years to complete, by which time conditions on the site have
often changed.
Gillette – Greg if we don’t vote today what is your schedule on this wall?
Hall – Part of this is moving the project along, planning time is being taken
away from us if delayed. Getting a plan together is less time than getting the
construction plans and approvals for the building.
Gillette – Less concerned with the actual mitigation than a commitment from
council on actually doing it.
June 2, 2020 - Page 705 of 772
Kjesbo – I ’d be open to mitigation in other areas, if not here, in the case that
we don’t have US FS approval to do it on other town areas. Our constituents
are concerned with the sheep, so we need to be.
Gillette – I want to hold the Town of Vail to a higher standard. Let’s hold this
project and see if we can get Council to do something. W e want to hear
from the Town of Vail as the applicant whether they are committed to the
herd.
Perez – The other alternative path is that we say no, and Town Council calls
it up to do what they want anyway.
Gillette – W here are we with requiring the E I S in masterplans? We want an
update from Kristen on the mitigation, and staff on the master planning
process including an environmental portion.
Spence – We can do that now and moving forward that all masterplans
include an environmental study.
Kjesbo – I ’m fine with separating them and voting on the variance so they
can move forward with design, but not construction.
Spence – We’ll add the conditions to the C UP that you are not going to vote
on tonight, so it is cleaned up for the next meeting.
Kurz – This commission has some issues that we are not ok with as of now.
We understand their time constraint. We are all ok with the motion on the
variance as of today.
Rollie Kjesbo moved to approve with conditions. Brian Gillette seconded the
motion and it passed (6-0).
Absent:(1)Hopkins
2.7.A request for review of a Conditional Use Permit pursuant to Section 12-
9C-3, Conditional Uses, Vail Town Code, in accordance with Title 12,
Chapter 16, Conditional Use Permits, Vail Town Code, to allow for an
amendment to the conditional use permit for the Town of Vail Public W orks
facility located at 1289 Elkhorn Drive/Unplatted, and setting forth details in
regard thereto. (P E C19-0039)
45 min.
Applicant:Town of Vail, represented by Greg Hall
Planner:Erik Gates
Karen Perez moved to table to J anuary 13, 2019. Brian Gillette seconded
the motion and it passed (6-0).
Absent:(1)Hopkins
3.Approval of Minutes
3.1.November 25, 2019 P E C Results
Karen Perez moved to approve. Brian Gillette seconded the motion and it
passed (5-0).
Abstain:(1)Seibert
June 2, 2020 - Page 706 of 772
Absent:(1)Hopkins
4.Adjournment
Rollie Kjesbo moved to adjourn. Brian Gillette seconded the motion and it
passed (6-0).
Absent:(1)Hopkins
The applications and information about the proposals are available for public inspec tion during regular offic e 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 vis its that prec ede the public hearing in the Tow n of Vail Community Development Department.
Times and order of items are approximate, subject to c hange, and c annot be relied upon to determine at w hat time the
Planning and Environmental Commission w ill c onsider an item. Please c all (970) 479-2138 for additional information. Please
call 711 for sign language interpretation 48 hour prior to meeting time.
Community Development Department
June 2, 2020 - Page 707 of 772
PLANNING AND ENVIRONMENTAL COMMISSION
March 9, 2020, 1:00 PM Town Council Chambers
75 S. Frontage Road - Vail, Colorado, 81657
1. Call to Order
1.1. Attendance
Present: Ludwig Kurz, Karen Perez, Pam Hopkins, John-Ryan Lockman, Rollie Kjesbo,
Pete Seibert, and Brian Gillette
Absent:
2. Main Agenda
2.1. A request for a recommendation to the Vail Town Council for a zone district boundary amendment, pursuant to Section 12-3-7, Amendment, Vail Town Code, to allow for the rezoning of 2211 North Frontage Road West which is composed of Tract C, Lot 1 Lot 2, and Lot 3 Vail Das Schone Filing No. 1 and Lot 1, Vail Das Schone Filing 3, from the Commercial Core 3 (CC3) District to the Public Accommodation-2 (PA-2) District and setting forth details in regard thereto. (PEC19-0047) 90 min.
This item will be heard concurrently with PEC19-0046 and PEC19-0048.
Applicant: TNREF III Bravo Vail LLC Widewaters Group Inc., represented by Mauriello Planning Group
Planner: Greg Roy
Motion: Continued to March 23rd
First: Gillette Second: Perez Vote: 7-0-0
Planner Roy began by introducing the rezoning application (PEC19-
0047). He showed a vicinity map showing surrounding residential and
commercial property. He also explained the existing zoning and uses in
the vicinity. Roy then explained the criteria for a rezoning. In discussing
the 3rd criteria, Roy discussed the additional height and density
allowances that would result from a rezoning from CC3 to PA-2. In
discussing the 7th criteria, Roy discussed the history of development on
this property. It was built as a hotel in the county and later annexed into
the town with the CC3 zone district. Staff found that site conditions have
not significantly changed over time. Concluded that Staff is
recommending denial, but stressed that staff is not opposed to
redevelopment, instead suggesting the current zoning remain and add a
Conditional Use into the CC3 be sought for the hotel.
Commissioner Perez: Had a question about links to code sections in the
staff memo that were not working.
Roy: Indicated that staff would work with Sterling Codifiers and the IT
department to fix this issue.
Perez: They’re going for an SDD anyway, so why are we rezoning or
changing zoning requirements if the SDD will set their standards anyway.
June 2, 2020 - Page 708 of 772
Roy: An SDD cannot allow a new use, so they need a zoning change
regardless.
Perez: Asked a question about the relevance of the upcoming West Vail
Master Plan to this project.
Gillette: Asked staff about the idea to add a text amendment for a
conditional use to the CC3. Worried that everyone in CC3 would try to
redevelop for a hotel.
Roy: The conditional use for a hotel could be tailored and have other
specific requirements that could limit hotel development in CC3.
Roy: Proceeded to explain the SDD request (PEC19-0048)
Perez: Asked what is different from the last time this came before the
PEC.
Roy: Stated some design changes have been made as a result of DRB
and Public Works comments. Roy pointed out these changes on a
diagram.
Perez: Asked if the height has been changed.
Roy: Ridge heights have not changed, but one building was moved in
order to reduce its height as defined by the code.
Gillette: Asked about a proposed sidewalk.
Tom Kassmel: This sidewalk was requested largely for the use of
residents north of the site to access the commercial area along North
Frontage Road. PW requested the sidewalk connect to the existing
sidewalk, but this is not shown on the application.
Roy: Continued by explaining the purpose of an SDD as defined by the
Code. Then began to describe the deviations from the proposed zone
district that the SDD would be addressed. Staff identified 11 deviations.
There are also 4 proposed public benefits from this SDD which are,
EHUs, pedestrian access along the east side of the property, pedestrian
access along the west side of the property, and (missed this one). Roy
continued by discussing proposed parking deviations. Then discussed
deviation for the snow storage requirement.
Perez: They want excess valet parking, but also to use some of these
excess spaces for temporary snow storage, why?
Roy: Staff would rather see some valet parking being converted to
permanent snow storage.
Hopkins: Had a question about snow storage in relation to the trees and
proposed walkway on the east side of the property. June 2, 2020 - Page 709 of 772
Roy: Continued discussing the requested deviations by discussing a
deviation from the minimum size of landscaping areas requirement and
deviation from total landscaping required. Roy then finished out the
discussion of deviations by discussing the remaining 5 deviations that
Staff found appropriate.
Hopkins: Asked about fire access.
Roy: Stated that the applicant had worked with the Fire department and
was able to meet the Fire department’s requirements.
Roy: Next discussed the design criteria for this application. These criteria
include compatibility, parking and loading, design features, traffic,
landscaping, and a workable plan.
Perez: Asked why having a valet to shuffle cars for snow storage would
be worse than asking people to self-move.
Roy: If the parking lot was full, which is most likely to happen in the
winter, then the development would only have two spots to shuffle cars
to.
Perez: Mentioned that with her building they work around limits like that
by utilizing temporary street parking.
Roy: Stated that staff was just looking at parking viability at the site scale.
Roy: Then discussed the review criteria for the exterior alteration
application (PEC19-0046). Thinks that with changes to parking,
landscaping, and snow storage, this could be a very successful project.
Lockman: Asked if staff had been working with the applicant.
Roy: Indicated that staff had and had been discussing these issues with
the applicant.
Dominic Mauriello: Introduced himself and his team. Also mentioned that
the Widewaters Group is no longer associated with this property.
Discussed some of the process that led to this meeting. Mauriello then
began discussing their request. Argued that EHUs were not meant to be
counted as GRFA in the CC3 zone district and that the PA-2 district
exempts EHU GRFA. The PA-2 zone district would also allow other kinds
of units like hotel units and lodge units. The proposed district also brings
the existing height closer into compliance.
In discussing the Vail Land Use Plan, Mauriello stated that hotels are
considered a commercial use in this document. The Land Use Plan also
doesn’t indicate that this hotel in West Vail should be removed.
Perez: Asked if by switching to PA-2, they are limiting commercial uses,
which is not encouraged by the Vail Land Use Plan.
June 2, 2020 - Page 710 of 772
Mauriello: We are proposing what we think will be on this property for
decades, and that zoning eventually changes over time. Continuing the
discussion of the Land Use Plan, thinks Staff has misinterpreted the
goals of the Vail Land Use Plan.
Mauriello then discussed the feedback from the previous PEC discussion.
Feedback included keeping the rezoning to PA-2 with an SDD concept,
changing the existing roof color, pedestrian access, building the EHU
building around the same time as everything else, and additional
feedback.
Mauriello continued with a discussion of the existing site conditions and
the proposed project. Ultimately reducing parking area on the site. Adding
additional hotel rooms and EHUs. Acknowledges that the lower units of
the EHU building are not as good as the above floor units, but it felt like a
missed opportunity to not include additional EHUs when it is possible.
Discussed how the applicant has met with the local community, and
community and town boards multiple times. Vail Local Housing Authority
and the Eagle County Housing Taskforce have also stated their support
for this project.
Discussed the changes to the plan as a result of discussions with the Fire
Department. Discussed the Chamonix Lane sidewalk. Not bringing this
sidewalk all the way down through the property as to not direct
pedestrians into a parking lot. Proposing more parking than required.
Conducted a traffic study that showed that the Frontage Rd can handle
the additional traffic. Next discussed the minimum landscaping standards
by showing that the Town does not have consistent minimum
landscaping area standards.
Hopkins: Asked about snow storage and trees.
Mauriello: Stated that while evergreens limit snow storage somewhat, you
wouldn’t clear out a 20’ landscaping area of trees to make room for snow
storage.
Mauriello: Continued to show how much of the uses in this area are non-
conforming, not just the hotel. A 3-story building is not uncommon in this
area. Then showed some renderings of the proposed buildings and their
effect on surrounding views.
Perez: Asked if there were renderings from the Chamonix development.
Mauriello: Showed a rendering from Chamonix Road near the site.
Mauriello: Continued his presentation by discussing the anticipated
revenue. Next discussed the hotel occupancy. In 2019, the hotel had an
average occupancy of just under 60% with about 1.7 persons per
occupied room. The hotel will never reach its theoretical maximum
occupancy.
Then discussed the need for the SDD. Discussed the variations needed
and what is being offered in return.
Stated how the project was strongly aligned with the Vail Housing
Authority Plan.
Open to forwarding a recommendation of approval with conditions for
height, parking, or snow storage, if deemed necessary.
June 2, 2020 - Page 711 of 772
Gillette: Had a question about putting some EHU into the mitigation bank.
Mauriello: Explained how these unit’s credits could be purchased by
future development.
Gillette: So what’s the community development for those units? This
means that the next development that comes in won’t have to add 2
EHUs and could buy these banked units instead.
Mauriello: Many developments find that they can meet EHUs on site
anyway and that it is common for these banked units to take years to sell
off.
Hopkins: Asked a question about access to the West Vail Mall and the
bus stop from the EHU building.
Perez: Talked about how walking through parking lots in the winter can
be treacherous, but mentioned how for a hotel it is better risk
management to have the lot well maintained.
Public Comment
Pat Lauer: Lives right behind the development. Wrote a letter about this
project and is opposed to the development. Already very limited
commercial space in this area. While everyone wants EHU housing, but
the proposed building is too tall. This building is actually 4 levels and
there is no 4-level building in the area. Worried also that Chamonix Ln will
be hazardous in the winter due to the shading from the EHU building.
Discussed some ideas on how this could be mitigated. Also worried about
traffic and snow removal on Chamonix. Density is too high and will
overcrowd the already crowded public shuttles. Unclear on how the
proposed parking will work. Understands that only 4 spots are designated
for employee parking. The tripled conference space size benefits the
parking requirement in favor of the developer.
Mike Oldham: Lives on Chamonix Ln. and represents the HOA at Tall
Pines. Not opposed to the expansion of the hotel use as long as it is done
effectively. Opposed to the EHU building and especially with its north
facing orientation. The now will pile up and will not melt in the winter
season, this is why the residential developments in the area face south.
The current stairs from Chamonix into the West Vail mall gets icy and
hazardous, feels that a walkway on the east side is an overdue idea.
Opposed to removing large conifers and doesn’t think snow storage in
this east area makes sense. Likes the idea of better using this land, but
there are a lot of issues with this proposal.
Joel Barton: In favor of expanding existing uses. Most lowest-level
residential units will not have their views impacted. Workforce housing is
a big issue for his work and as a result is supportive of the additional
workforce housing.
Public Comment closed
June 2, 2020 - Page 712 of 772
Planner Roy: Supportive of the expansion of the existing use and adding
EHUs, but finds that the site plan needs improvement.
Lockman: Thinks that the broad zoning approach with CC3 in the 80s
made created this and a lot of issues. Can’t hold up this project for the
West Vail Master Plan. Wishes there was more overall planning for West
Vail already. Doesn’t want to lose the hotel and doesn’t want to lose
commercial uses. We want West Vail to have a broad option of
commercial uses. Ultimately doesn’t see a huge barrier with the proposed
rezoning. See’s Staff’s concerns with the criteria, but also finds that the
applicant has made an effort to meet these criteria and is working with
the situation they’re given. Wants a clearer plan for pedestrian access
along this lot. EHU building could make more sense with a south-facing
orientation.
Seibert: Could the SDD be used to limit the development potential of this
property so that the full extent of the PA-2 density could not be used
here?
Roy: Yes.
Seibert: Concerned about parking in the first meeting, and still a little
concerned. Understands Gillette’s concern about the EHU banking, but
finding land to build new housing is difficult and we have a proposal here
to build new units.
Hopkins: Doesn’t like small spot landscaping that doesn’t work with snow
storage. Looking at the plan it seems like the applicant has been trying to
put too much on the property. Wishes the EHU building was further offset
from the road, doesn’t seem like this building is as effective as it could be.
Thinks this might have a negative impact on the neighborhood. The
Chamonix development is more balanced with density and height.
Perez: This is a big improvement from the December meeting. Thinks this
is a nice transition from the residential areas, to the commercial, to I-70.
This could reduce I-70 impacts for residents north of the development.
Concerned about the light in the lower units of the EHU building. Doesn’t
like the island landscaping, would rather see some extra landscaping
around the EHU building. Thinks it is absurd that hotels aren’t considered
commercial in the Zoning Code. Doesn’t think that this project or others
should be held up by the West Vail Master Planning process. Wants the
sidewalk as a condition of approval. Blocks some view, but is not out of
character for the neighborhood.
Kjesbo: Thinks this method will get the property more in compliance.
Agrees that hotels should be considered commercial. Thinks that the
EHU building towers too high above Chamonix Rd. The bulk and mass is
too great for being that close to the road. The hotel will deal with the
parking and it is in their best interest to make it work for the guests. Not
holding his breath for a West Vail Master Plan. Doesn’t think the parking
makes sense specifically for the EHU units, would need snowmelt along
the entire path for those residents.
Gillette: Still in the same place as last meeting. Yes a hotel is
commercial, but it is not community commercial. Zoning is the only way to June 2, 2020 - Page 713 of 772
protect the community commercial as commercial developers will go with
the use that gets them the most value. CC3 was created to protect the
commercial that is still in town. Doesn’t see how the commission can
approve this project. The project can’t and doesn’t meet the criteria. Feels
that this process needed more discussion when talking about the
expansion of a hotel in this area. Can’t get on board with the current
proposal.
Kurz: Tends to agree with Gillette’s comments, but we need to act on this
project today. Complimented both the applicant and staff. Feels that there
must not have been enough discussion between staff and the applicant if
staff is recommending denial on all three applications. It appears that this
application is not approvable based on the required criteria. Wants to
table in the effort to create a more approvable plan for this project.
Comfortable with the height. There is a problem with access between
parking and the EHU. Worried about the owner maintaining the snow
storage. Seeing a project of this scale continuing to have major Staff
concerns, brings him concern.
Perez: Had a question about being able to preserve the current allowed
commercial uses.
Planner Spence: Indicated that Staff would envision more of a mixed use
project to maintain the commercial nature of this area. The SDD process
can limit uses, but cannot expand them.
Mauriello: Zoning is not forever, and we are not rezoning the entire CC3
district. If the West Vail Master plan comes in at a later date, this property
can still be rezoned to come in conformance with that plan. Has met
many times with Staff, but feels that there is a philosophical difference of
opinion.
Perez: There are some issues remaining on this project. Specifically, the
orientation of the entry and access for the EHU.
Kjesbo: Wants the height for the EHU building to come down a story.
Mauriello: Requested a tabling.
2.2. A request for review of an Exterior Alteration, pursuant to Section 12-7J-12, Exterior Alterations or Modifications, Vail Town Code, to allow for construction of a hotel addition and an EHU apartment building, located at 2211 North Frontage Road West which is composed of Tract C, Lot 1, Lot 2, and Lot 3 Vail Das Schone Filing No. 1 and Lot 1, Vail Das Schone Filing 3, and setting forth details in regard thereto. (PEC19-0046)
This item will be heard concurrently with PEC19-0047 and PEC19-0048.
Applicant: TNREF III Bravo Vail LLC Widewaters Group Inc., represented by Mauriello Planning Group
Planner: Greg Roy
Motion: Continued to March 23rd
June 2, 2020 - Page 714 of 772
First: Gillette Second: Perez Vote: 7-0-0
2.3. A request for a recommendation to the Vail Town Council of an application establishing Special Development District No. 42 (Highline Hotel Renovation 2019), pursuant to Section 12-9(A), Special Development Districts, Vail Town Code, to allow for the development of a hotel addition to add 79 accommodation units, convert 19 existing dwelling units to 19 limited service lodge units, create a 12 unit EHU dormitory, remove office space, add conference space and build 16 unit employee housing apartment building, and related uses and improvements, located at 2211 North Frontage Road West which is composed of Tract C, Lot 1, Lot 2, and Lot 3 Vail Das Schone Filing No. 1 and Lot 1, Vail Das Schone Filing 3, and setting forth details in regard thereto. (PEC19-0048)
This item will be heard concurrently with PEC19-0047 and PEC19-0046.
Applicant: TNREF III Bravo Vail LLC Widewaters Group Inc., represented by Mauriello Planning Group
Planner: Greg Roy
Motion: Continued to March 23rd
First: Kjesbo Second: Perez Vote: 7-0-0
2.4. A request for the review of a variance from Section 12-6D-8, Density Control, Vail Town Code, to allow for a variance to the requirement that a secondary unit in the Two-Family Primary/Secondary Residential zone district not exceed 40% of allowable site GRFA, and a request for the review of a variance from Section 12-15-3, Definition, Calculation, and Exclusions, Vail Town Code, to allow for a variance to the stipulation that basement GRFA deductions apply only to floors within six vertical feet of the lowest level of a structure, both in accordance with the provisions of Section 12-17, Variances, Vail Town Code, located at 775 Potato Patch Drive/Lot 19, Block 1, Vail Potato Patch Filing 1, and setting forth details in regard thereto. (PEC19-0050) 5 min.
The applicant has requested this item be tabled to May 11, 2020.
Applicant: Scott Ryan & Foster Gillett, represented by Mauriello Planning Group
Planner: Erik Gates
Motion: Table to May 11, 2020
First: Gillette Second: Perez Vote: 7-0-0
2.5. A request for the review of a variance from Section 12-6D-6 Setbacks, Vail Town Code in accordance with the provisions of Section 12-17, Variances, Vail Town Code, to allow for a variance to the required front setback for a stair tower, located at 2696 Davos Trail/Lot 6, Block C, Vail Ridge Subdivision, and setting forth details in regard thereto. (PEC20-0001) 20 min.
Applicant: Michael & Carol Kay Phillips
Planner: Greg Roy
Motion: Approve with conditions
First: Kjesbo Second: Gillette Vote: 7-0-0
Conditions:
June 2, 2020 - Page 715 of 772
1. Approval of this variance is contingent upon the applicant
obtaining Town of Vail design review approval for this
proposal; and
2. The applicant shall clearly demonstrate, via an
Improvement Location Certificate (ILC), to the Community
Development Department prior to requesting a final
planning inspection that improvements have been
constructed per plan.
Planner Roy: Introduced the project and described the site
conditions. Staff is supportive of this variance as it allows for a
more workable site. There are a number of existing garages in the
area in the front setback, doesn’t feel that a stairway would have
any greater impact.
Michael Phillips: Has lived in this house for decades and has had to
snow shovel the existing walkway for a long time. Age has made
this more and more difficult and adding a stair would allow them to
continue living in this house.
No Public Comment.
2.6. A request for the review of a variance from Section 14-3-1, Minimum Standards, Vail Town Code in accordance with the provisions of Section 12-17, Variances, Vail Town Code, to allow for a variance to the maximum centerline driveway grade, located at 1801 Sunburst Drive Unit A/Lot 2, Vail Valley Filing 3, and setting forth details in regard thereto. (PEC20-0002) 5 min.
The applicant has requested this item be tabled to a future date.
Applicant: Hilliard West LLC, represented by Pierce Austin Architects
Planner: Erik Gates
Motion: Table to March 23rd
First: Gillette Second: Kjesbo Vote: 7-0-0
2.7. A request for a recommendation to the Vail Town Council for a zone district boundary amendment, pursuant to Section 12-3-7, Amendment, Vail Town Code, to allow for the rezoning of a portion of the property located at 366 Hanson Ranch Road/Lot 1, 366 Hanson Ranch Road Subdivision. The proposed rezoning would change the Zone District from Agriculture and Open Space (A) District to the Public Accommodation (PA) District and setting forth details in regard thereto. (PEC19-0022) 90 min.
Applicant: Vailpoint LLC, represented by Sarah J Baker PC
Planner: Jonathan Spence
Motion: Recommend Approval
First: Kjesbo Second: Seibert Vote: 4-2-0 Gillette &
Perez opposed
Read concurrently with PEC20-0003 and PEC19-0008
June 2, 2020 - Page 716 of 772
Planner Spence opened the project by describing the nature of the
application and the history of this project. In the past, the PEC requested
that the exterior alteration be heard alongside the rezoning request for
context. The two applications cannot be tied together, so a motion on the
rezoning will be requested today, but the other items will be tabled.
Gillette: Disagrees with Staff’s assessment of the court order regarding
the rezoning. Says the order does not require a change of the zoning. It
preserves the covenants on the property, including conservation
easements.
Spence: Clarified that Staff did not mean to say otherwise in the memo.
Rick Pylman: Introduced his team on the project. Trying to meet the goals
of the Vail Master Plan. This building was built in the 60s and much of the
neighborhood has stayed the same. Continued to discuss the proposed
lodge and amenities involved. Goal is to build the nicest lodge property in
vail. Next discussed the site redevelopment. Showed the areas of the
lodge that extend over previous other properties.
Hanz Berglund: Began by introducing the exterior alteration application
and design. Aiming to enhance the quality of this site. Made a significant
effort to meet the goals and objectives of the Master Plan. Discussed that
this would pull more lodging demand into Vail Village rather than in the
more residential neighborhoods. Showed floor plans and elevations of the
project. Next he discussed the surrounding character and scale. The
existing building is significantly smaller than the buildings surrounding it.
The proposed building is comparable in height to its neighbors. Berglund
discussed the proposed tower on the building and showed another of
other towers throughout Vail Village and Lionshead. He discussed the
nature of the proposed setback encroachments and how surrounding
buildings also extend into their setbacks.
Perez: Asked about a previous discussion of a square design for the
property.
Berglund: To fit in the side setbacks would cut about 20ft of the building
off. It would lead to a steeper façade. Felt that the current proposal was a
better design architecturally.
Proposing an increase in landscaping between the proposed building and
the Christiana. Also aiming to create a more inviting walking portion in
front of the proposed Avanti building. Also showed a sun-shade analysis
for this building on Hanson Ranch Road.
Perez: Asked a clarifying question about ownership and operations
management
Sarah Baker: Stated that they refer to Vailpoint as “the client” as they
make all final decisions on the property.
Perez: Asked a question about if rooms could be rented individually.
June 2, 2020 - Page 717 of 772
Rick Pylman: Discussed the need for the setback variances and a
parking variance.
Kjesbo: Is there an ability to move the building back further to minimize
parking in the front setback?
Pylman: Potentially, but it is not preferred. Didn’t want to give too much
front space in parking and risk someone trying to double park and end up
parking on the sidewalk.
Kjesbo: In speaking to the design, feels that the tower is too much bulk
and mass. Didn’t think the Tivoli towers had as much b&m
Hopkins: Also felt that the building was too large. Feels that this scale
does not fit the goal of the project to be a small, highest-class lodge. Also
feels like the applicant may not be taking as many sustainability
measures as they could. This could also attract guests.
Baker: Refreshed the PEC on the history of the rezoning application. She
presented a diagram showing the old property and the former separate
parcels that are zoned agricultural/open space. Believes this is the only
parcel in vail with multiple zoning designations. Showed an overlay of the
proposed building over the old agricultural/open space tracts, tried to
keep the building off of the back tract as much as possible. Then showed
how the current zonings on the lot do not meet their lot size requirements.
Rezoning the whole lot to PA would bring the lot size into conformance.
Baker continued to describe how the redevelopment would further the
Vail Village Master Plan objectives.
Commissioner Lockman had to leave during this time and be absent for
the remainder of the meeting.
Baker: Discussed other factors to consider for redevelopment. Argued
that development is already allowed on agriculture/open space so this will
not result in or set precedent for further additional development on open
space lots.
Public Comment
Wendle Porterfield: Representing Villa Valhalla. Asked a question to Pete
Seibert about his previous employment with Vailpoint.
Seibert: Said that he had considered whether he should recuse himself
for this. However, he has not been involved in Vailpoint for around 3
years and does not stand to make any money off the project.
Porterfield: Asked a question about the sale of the property.
Seibert: Discussed the sale of the property and how the additional tract
was acquired and assumed to be a part of this property originally.
Porterfield: Feels that this is a self-inflicted situation. The applicant is
June 2, 2020 - Page 718 of 772
asking for a rezoning but they are clearly going for the rezoning that
makes them the most money instead of rezoning for ag and open space
for example. Feels that this is a clever way for the applicant to force the
PEC to rezone open space.
Carol Krueger: Argument against this development has not changed for
her since the last meeting. The back part of the property looks unkempt
because it is meant to be natural open space. Over 1600 sq ft of patio
with development is not undisturbed and will change the character of
previous open space. Also stated that the proposed design has not
significantly changed. Asked the PEC to carefully consider the setback
variance. The original buildings were built before the setback regulations
were in place. Doesn’t feel that this practice should be continued for a
redevelopment. Shouldn’t prioritize visitors over the neighboring
properties with bedrooms housing Vail residents. For the parking
variance, she asks the Commission to consider the current state of
Hansen Ranch Road. It’s a mess and drop offs happen in the road all the
time.
Public Comment Closed
Baker: The adverse possession case was not a contested trial. It was
resolved by stipulation. In addressing the claim that this a self-created
issue. Applicant has not proposed to build to a greater scale than what
would have been allowed with the previous, smaller parcel. Argues that
as such they are not asking to be “rewarded” for the extra lot size. They
recognize that parking and loading is an issue in this area and do not
want to contribute to that problem.
Hopkins: Asked about trash storage
Berglund: The current plan is to use regular garbage cans and store them
in the garage.
Perez: Disappointed that this is the 4th time hearing this project and
nothing has really changed. We disagreed that this is not an owner-
created problem. Not in agreement with staff that this meets the criteria.
Quoted a section of the Land Use Plan that stated that all greenspace
should be attempted to be preserved. Applicant hasn’t made an attempt
to comply with the PEC’s comments. The applicant has asked for
variances and does not feel that they shown the grounds for these
variances.
Hopkins: In agreement with Perez. There doesn’t seem to be any benefit
for the Town for this project.
Seibert: Feel there are 2 ways of looking at this. Open space is what
anyone sees when walking by natural vegetation. Seeing manicured
grass inside a fence does not read as open space. Disagrees with the
argument for the setbacks just because that is the old way buildings were
built. Wants to verify that they are not gaining GRFA. Generally
supportive of the rest.
Kjesbo: If we rezone this, and create a PA compliant lot, why are you
June 2, 2020 - Page 719 of 772
requesting a setback variance.
Spence: The PA zone district can enter the setbacks
Gillette: In the “preserve open space at all costs” boat. In agreement with
Perez and Hopkins.
Kurz: Based on the Staff report, it seems that the criteria for rezoning has
been met. Was in support of the rezoning. Ready to let Town Council to
make the final decision on this.
2.8. A request for the review of a variance from Section 12-7A-11: Parking and Loading, Vail Town Code in accordance with the provisions of Section 12- 17, Variances, Vail Town Code, to allow for a variance from the prohibition of parking located within the front setback and from the requirement that 75% of the required parking be located within the main building, located at
366 Hanson Ranch Road/Lot 1, 366 Hanson Ranch Road Subdivision, and setting forth details in regard thereto. (PEC20-0003)
Applicant: Vailpoint LLC, represented by Sarah J Baker PC
Planner: Jonathan Spence
Motion: Continued to March 23rd
First: Kjesbo Second: Gillette Vote: 6-0-0
2.9. A request for the review of a Major Exterior Alteration, pursuant to Section 12-7A-12, Exterior Alterations or Modifications, Vail Town Code, to allow for the replacement of the existing structure with a seven (7) suite private lodge with related site improvements, located at 366 Hanson Ranch Road/Lot 1, 366 Hanson Ranch Road Subdivision, and setting forth details in regard thereto. (PEC19-0008)
Applicant: Vailpoint LLC, represented by Sarah J Baker PC
Planner: Jonathan Spence
Motion: Continued to March 23rd
First: Kjesbo Second: Gillette Vote: 6-0-0
3. Approval of Minutes
3.1. February 10, 2020 PEC Results
Motion: Approve
First: Kjesbo Second: Gillette Vote: 6-0-1 Perez
abstain
4. Adjournment
Motion: Adjourn
First: Kjesbo Second: Perez Vote: 7-0-0
June 2, 2020 - Page 720 of 772
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. Please call 711 for sign language
interpretation 48 hour prior to meeting time. Community Development Department Published
in the Vail Daily March 6, 2020
June 2, 2020 - Page 721 of 772
PLANNING AND ENVIRONMENTAL COMMISSION
April 13, 2020, 1:00 PM
Virtual
75 S. Frontage Road - Vail, Colorado, 81657
1. Call to Order
1.1. Link to Virtual Meeting:
Join from a PC, Mac, iPad, iPhone or Android device:
Please click this URL to join. https://zoom.us/j/269691644
Password: 266421
Or join by phone: Dial:
US: +1 346 248 7799
Webinar ID: 269 691 644
1.2. Attendance
Present: Ludwig Kurz, Karen Perez, Henry Pratt, John-Ryan Lockman,
Rollie Kjesbo, Pete Seibert, and Brian Gillette
Absent:
1.3 Swearing in of new members.
2. Main Agenda
2.1. A request for the review of a variance from Section 14-3-1, Minimum
Standards, Vail Town Code in accordance with the provisions of Section
12-17, Variances, Vail Town Code, to allow for a variance to the
maximum centerline driveway grade, located at 1801 Sunburst Drive Unit
A/Lot 2, Vail Valley Filing 3, and setting forth details in regard thereto.
(PEC20-0002) 20 min.
Applicant: Hilliard West LLC, represented by Pierce Austin Architects
Planner: Erik Gates
Motion: Approve
First: Gillette Second: Lockman Vote: 6-0-0 Kurz absent
Planner Gates presents the application.
Commissioners had no questions for the applicant.
No public comments.
Lockman: Straight forward and would improve safety.
Rollie: I see the issue, and this is a better alternative.
Gillette: I agree with commissioners and staff.
Seibert: This is an improvement all around.
June 2, 2020 - Page 722 of 772
Pratt: Site constraints warrant granting.
Perez: This meets the requirements for a variance.
2.2. A request for the review of a variance from Section 11-6 Business and
Building Identification Signs, Vail Town Code, in accordance with the
provisions of Section 11-10, Variances, Vail Town Code, to allow for a
variance to the number and size of hospital campus signs, located at 180
South Frontage Road West/Lot E and F, Vail Village Filing 2, and setting
forth details in regard thereto. (PEC20-0006) 20 min.
Applicant: Vail Health, represented by Braun Associates Inc.
Planner: Jonathan Spence
Motion: Table to 27th of April
First: Gillette Second: Perez Vote: 7-0-0
Planner Spence presents the application.
Lockman: Please provide some clarity on why staff does not want to have
the name on the tower but allows the cross.
Spence: The cross is needed to identify the building for safety, the name
is not necessary for safety and does not meet the criteria.
Pratt: Does this integrate with signs on the highway?
Spence: These are for the campus; those other signs are separate from
this application.
Gillette: Are we allowing more signs and larger signs than we typically
allow?
Spence: The signs and size are more for wayfinding. Braun’s
presentation will address this question more fully.
Applicant Tom Braun presents.
Lockman: What would be the alternative? Is the red cross alone ok?
Braun: We would take the cross at a minimum but would also like Vail
Health up there even if lower. However, don’t want to do it too low so that
a redevelopment of the Evergreen would block it in future.
Gillette: What about the signs on the road?
Braun: We are working with Tom Kassmel on signs in the ROW.
Kurz: Great looking signs to meet public needs. Concern of highest sign,
which seems to be branding. I would like to see mock up of sign on tower
for visual impact.
June 2, 2020 - Page 723 of 772
Braun: Happy to do that if rest of commissioners agree.
Perez: I would like to see how these compare to the current signs.
Braun: Prior to construction, not a lot if signs on there.
Spence: Agreed most of the signs were along meadow.
Lockman: What about wayfinding for helicopter? Is there a need for aerial
signs for helicopters?
Spence: That would be handled by FAA.
Braun: This is private pad without necessity for aerial signs.
Lockman: Based on what we did for museum, we only allowed “museum”
without added parts.
Gillette: What is the international symbol for hospital? Is it the cross or the
H?
Braun: Unsure if it is H or the cross.
Pratt: Is the cross backlit?
Spence: Yes, it is halo lit. Staff has concerns that lettering up there will
not be legible.
Lockman: Would the mock up be digital or physical.
Braun: Physical.
Kjesbo: Agree with staff, I support for the cross only.
Gillette: I disagree. Better off with H path on roads than the red cross.
Red cross ineffective and better done with road signs.
Kurz: Total package effective and well done. Issue with big sign high up.
Would like to see a mock up.
Seibert: Agree with staff that signs should be limited to 25 feet for these
brand signs. Understand the comments on the red cross from everyone,
but no problem with cross alone.
Lockman: Agree on branding. Crucial that people are able to identify and
get to the hospital. Think the cross or other indicator helpful on tower.
Would like to see mockups.
Pratt: I don’t think anything needed on the tower. Agree with Gillette, that June 2, 2020 - Page 724 of 772
people will be looking for blue H. Think 28, 29 and 30 are overkill.
Question the need for 28 for branding. Rest ok.
Perez: We want to be consistent with “hospital” and “H” wherever
possible. The branding is not necessary and inconsistent. Want to see
mockup and what the old signs are compared to what is now. Like a big
H better than cross.
Discussion of the existing signs included in this packet. All signs existing
are included in packet, but most are new signs.
Braun: Happy to regroup and come back with new plans in two weeks.
What about the other signs in the packet?
Gillette: Do wayfinding signs need to be so big?
Lockman: Would like to see other examples of hospitals with these signs.
2.3. A request for a recommendation to the Vail Town Council for a prescribed
regulation amendment pursuant to Section 12-3-7 Amendment, Vail
Town Code to amend Section 12-10-6 Parking; Off Site and Joint
Facilities, Vail Town Code, to refine standards to be used in the review of
such proposals and to clarify the review process and other
considerations, and setting forth details in regard thereto. (PEC20-0007)
20 min.
Applicant: Braun Associates, Inc.
Planner: Greg Roy
Motion: Motion: Table to 4/27
First: Gillette Second: Kjesbo Vote: 7-0-0
Planner Roy introduced the project by describing the code section in its
existing form and describing the substantive changes proposed by this
application. Major changes include increasing the maximum required
distance to off-site parking, allow review of off-site parking to be handled
by PEC, setting a percentage of off-site parking allowed, requiring an
outline of off-site parking operation and maintenance, and a minimum
lease of 10 years.
Gillette: Asked a question about the 10-year lease. Asked when the last
time this provision had been used.
Planner Spence: No memory of this provision being used but knows it
had been used by the Lift House over 40 years ago.
Gillette: Asked about why only 10 years for the lease, indicated 50 or 100
may be more appropriate.
Perez: Echoed Gillette’s statement, and also had a question about
submittal requirements
Roy: The 10-year lease would provide more flexibility to the town if the
property changed uses over the years. The submittal material would be June 2, 2020 - Page 725 of 772
reviewed by PEC.
Tom Braun: This provision provides more flexibility for developments. The
proposal also closes a potential gap in the code in regard to what an
applicant is to do once their parking lease expires.
Public Comment
Bill Pierce: Asked a question about the goal of this change. Wanted
clarification on the 25% allowance and if this was new provision. Had a
question about the last proposed provision for what happens when a 10-
year lease ends. Also asked why the Town couldn’t expand fee in lieu
areas. Some areas, like in Lionshead, would benefit from this.
Braun: All of the properties along Meadow Drive are not in the fee-in-lieu
area. However, these places do have road access into their on-site
parking. It was decided among the applicant and town staff that this
method would bring less issues in the future than expanding the fee-in-
lieu areas to areas with road access.
Gillette: Expressed concern about potentially recommending a code
change for the benefit for an applicant. Thinks that the fee-in-lieu
structure should be reviewed. “Quarter mile” and “10-year lease”
language feels arbitrary.
Kjesbo: Also expressed concern about the 10year lease. What happens if
after 10 years the lease is not agreed to be renewed? A potentially bigger
parking problem would arise.
Perez: A 10-year lease is not long-term control.
Spence: Is it the responsibility of the town or the applicant to provide
parking. If we just collect fee-in-lieu the town will not be able to provide
the needed parking to the market. Feels that many developments will opt
for the fee.
Gillette: Feels that we have a current parking issue due to allowing the
market to handle parking.
Spence: Feels that tourism is the biggest stressor on the town’s parking.
We have a lot of underutilized parking.
Gillette: That underutilized parking is more the issue for town parking.
Doesn’t feel that the proposed language would address this.
Braun: We have parking in the town parking structures and most
developments have their own parking. There needs to be something to
address additions to existing structures that will require additional
parking. With fee-in-lieu a development is “in or out” with their parking.
Gillette: Asked staff to look at the towns current parking provisions and
the fee-in-lieu structure.
June 2, 2020 - Page 726 of 772
Roy: Yes, staff can look into this.
Spence: Addressing these issues will take multiple meetings
Gillette: Feels that addressing these issues more comprehensively is
appropriate.
Lockman: What would a more comprehensive parking program look like?
Spence: The town has hired a mobility planner to look at town parking
requirements and approach. Moving forward we would likely need to
include this employee.
Braun: To put the quarter mile distance into perspective. The on-site
parking for the hospital, for example, would have people walking up to
400 ft into the building. The quarter mile distance is also a common
walkability measure.
Perez: Need to adjust the lease length and look at this issue more
globally rather than using specific project examples.
Braun: Requested to table to April 27th.
2.4. A request for a recommendation to the Vail Town Council to adopt the
Community Wildfire Protection Plan as an element of the Town of Vail
Comprehensive Plan to reduce the risk of wildfire, and setting forth
details in
regard thereto. (PEC20-0004) 30 min.
Applicant: Town of Vail, represented by Paul Cada
Planner: Greg Roy
Motion: Recommend Approval
First: Gillette Second: Kjesbo Vote: 7-0-0
Planner Roy introduced the project and Paul Cada, Wildland Program
Manager.
Paul Cada: Introduced the concept of a Community Wildfire Protection
Plan. This is a planning tool that helps communities identify and reduce
wildfire risk. These plans are also used by federal land management
agencies to help prioritize their efforts. A CWPP does not obligate the
town to implement any specific recommendations or expend funds. There
are however minimum standards for a CWPP. These standards are:
defining the community’s wildland-urban interface (WUI), identify adjacent
land owners, conduct a community risk analysis, a discussion with the
community about preparedness to respond to a wildland fire,
recommendations to reduce structural ignitability.
Cada then described the stakeholder involvement conducted for the
CWPP. This started in early 2018.
June 2, 2020 - Page 727 of 772
Cada went on to discuss the goals of the plan which include reducing
wildland fire risk and community preparedness.
Cada continued by discussing the town’s wildland fire risk, he provided
maps to aid in this portion of the presentation.
Next Cada discussed completed and ongoing measures within the town,
these included things such as outreach and education, fuels reduction,
the WUI Code amendments, and other operational programs. Cada then
explained proposed preparedness strategies.
Gillette: Is the CWPP a requirement for fire department funding.
Cada: Yes, this plan would open up more grant funding for the mitigation
projects desired by Fire. This plan can be updated to include completed
projects and new identified projects.
Kjesbo: Asked about the recommendation for clearing 100ft worth of fuels
from structures. Is this going to be a requirement?
Cada: This is just a recommendation, but it would be targeted towards
specific at-risk properties.
No public comment.
Lockman: Thinks this is a good collaborative effort and plan for the
community.
Seibert: Asked about how this connects with the mitigation above Booth
Heights.
Cada: This recommendation would help the forest service to reduce and
manage the wildlife hazard above booth heights. This would also help
reduce other hazards.
Pratt: Has concerns about applying these recommendations to properties
not adjacent to forest land. Also had a question asking if people have
been sued for implementing or not implementing these
recommendations.
Cada: In his experience no, he has not seen this happen. Cada did not
see this as opening up lawsuits for property owners.
Perez, Gillette, and Kurz were in support of the proposal.
2.5. A request for a recommendation to the Vail Town Council for a zone
district boundary amendment, pursuant to Section 12-3-7, Amendment,
Vail Town Code, to allow for the rezoning of 2211 North Frontage Road
West which is composed of Tract C, Lot 1 Lot 2, and Lot 3 Vail Das
Schone Filing No. 1 and Lot 1, Vail Das Schone Filing 3, from the
Commercial Core 3 (CC3) District to the Public Accommodation-2 (PA-2)
District and setting forth details in regard thereto. (PEC19-0047) 90 min.
This item will be heard concurrently with PEC19-0046 and PEC19-0048. June 2, 2020 - Page 728 of 772
Applicant: TNREF III Bravo Vail LLC True North Management Group
LLC, represented by Mauriello Planning Group
Planner: Greg Roy
Motion: Recommend Approval
First: Kjesbo Second: Lockman Vote: 6-1-0 (Gillette
opposed)
Planner Greg Roy read into the record correspondence received after all
other correspondence had been provided to the commission and the
public.
Planner Greg provided the commission with an overview of the proposal
and the applicable criteria. Greg discussed the change in
recommendation from the previous meeting. Staff also looked more
closely at the criteria related to what has changed. Greg discussed the
PA-2 zone district and its intent.
Commissioner Lockman asked for additional clarification regarding the
commercial uses.
Greg spoke to staff considerations on this.
Dominic Mauriello provided a presentation concerning all three
applications. Dominic spoke to the resolution of long-standing
nonconformities related to use, density and height.
Dominic spoke to the reasoning for the SDD. Dominic summarized the
ideas/issues that arose during the previous meeting(s).
Dominic discussed the conditions of approval and the condition related to
public art. The applicant does not agree with the proposed AIPP
contribution proposed by staff.
Dominic walked the commission through changes that were made to the
plans, specifically the changes to the EHU building and the
parking/sidewalk/snow storage configurations.
Lockman asked for clarification on the “sharrow” through the parking lot.
Dominic clarified that it is striping only at that the valet will be aware.
Lockman spoke to the sidewalk alignment and what is intended for the
public vs the occupants.
Dominic clarified that the western sidewalk is intended for the public while
the area through the site is intended for occupants. The easement on the
east side was spoken to.
PUBLIC COMMENT
June 2, 2020 - Page 729 of 772
Michael Spiers-Spoke to concerns/comments related to the EHU building,
its location and height. Feels that it is out of scale with the neighborhood
and that it should be reduced the three stories.
Pat Lauer- Spoke to the need to hear staff’s view on the SDD criteria.
Feels that staff has changed their direction concerning the rezoning.
COMMISSIONER COMMENTS
Rollie- Supports the rezoning.
Lockman- Supports the rezoning and removing the nonconformities.
Siebert- Concurs with Lockman and Rollie.
Gillette- A loss of the commercial uses cannot be overlooked. Interested
in more multiple used, need community commercial. This is a huge
mistake and is short sighted.
Perez- Supports the rezoning
Pratt- Recognizes the change in the commission. Supports the rezoning.
Kurz- Supports the rezoning.
2.6. A request for review of an Exterior Alteration, pursuant to Section 12-7J-
12, Exterior Alterations or Modifications, Vail Town Code, to allow for
construction of a hotel addition and an EHU apartment building, located
at 2211 North Frontage Road West which is composed of Tract C, Lot 1,
Lot 2, and Lot 3 Vail Das Schone Filing No. 1 and Lot 1, Vail Das Schone
Filing 3, and setting forth details in regard thereto. (PEC19-0046)
This item will be heard concurrently with PEC19-0047 and PEC19-0048.
Applicant: TNREF III Bravo Vail LLC True North Management Group
LLC, represented by Mauriello Planning Group
Planner: Greg Roy
Motion: Approve with Conditions
First: Lockman Second: Seibert Vote: 4-3-0 (Pratt,
Kjesbo and Gillette opposed)
Conditions:
1.This approval is contingent upon the applicant receiving
approval of the Special Development District application
PEC19-0048 and the Zoning Code Amendment application
PEC19-0047.
Planner Roy continued his presentation, focusing on the SDD and
Exterior Alteration. Roy walked through the changes that occurred since
the previous hearing including the changes to the EHU building including
massing and building entrances.
June 2, 2020 - Page 730 of 772
Roy spoke to changes in the snow storage management plan and the
inclusion of the grasscrete pavers. Many of the changes reduced the
level of deviations necessary and has improved the functionality of the
project.
Roy spoke to the deviations requested, the benefits offered and the
reason for the level of AIPP contribution requested. Roy spoke to the
changes in building height.
Dominic had no further comments but referenced the criteria in the staff
report and applicant narrative.
PUBLIC COMMENT
Tanya Boyd- Concerned with the sun shading of the EHU building and
how snow storage and removal will occur.
Tom Kassmel-Town Engineer-Spoke to the separated sidewalk allowing
an adequate area for snow storage. Recognized that additional sun
shading will require increased maintenance.
Pat Lauer- Spoke to the mass of the building and the image shown and
feels that it is excessive in size. Would require removing the entire top
floor. Not just chunks. Concerned about the shading creating unsafe
conditions for pedestrians. Concerned with the public transit capacity and
that Highline does not have the shuttle capacity. Feels that the EHU
building is out of character with the neighborhood. Double standard with
the developer being allowed things that are not otherwise permissible.
Tanya Boyd- Concerned about large vehicles, buses and tractor trailers
and a lack of parking for them. Concerned about parking for EHU
building. Has witnessed a lot of parking on site during the winter months.
Kathy Standage-President of the Tall Pines HOA on Chamonix. Major
concerns with parking for the EHU building. Concerned with the
aesthetics of the EHU building. Cheep façade that does not match hotel.
People in West Vail are not happy about this. How can this be stopped
from being pushed through?
Mike Spiers- Is this the last opportunity to discuss the height of the EHU
building? What would be the harm in reducing the EHU building to an
acceptable height? Need a compromise here.
Pat Lauer- Where do employees park at the Double Tree? Does anybody
care about the mature trees that will be removed? Are there any penalties
if the project takes too long?
Steve Lindstrom- Speaking for Housing Authority- This proposal is
absolutely what we should be doing. On the bus line, close to services
with minimal infrastructure needed.
Kathy Standish-No discussion on pollution, trees removal etc. June 2, 2020 - Page 731 of 772
END OF PUBLIC COMMENT
Brian Gillette- Its public comment not negotiation between the public and
the applicant. Great letters have been received that speak to how the
application relate to the standards and guidelines. The public has done a
great job.
Kurz- Questions arose concerning employee parking and large buses.
Planner Roy spoke to the parking study that was provided and that the
parking provided exceeds that what demand is anticipated.
Dominic spoke to required parking of the EHU building based on other
similar developments. Dominic also spoke to tour buses and other large
vehicles.
COMMISSIONER COMMENTS
Rollie- Still concerned with the height of the EHU building. Need to
remove a total floor. Asked to look at the elevations again as some of the
mass is increased with the proposal. Ok with the parking being managed.
Still have a problem with height being over 38’ on the EHU building.
Support staff on public art.
Lockman- Likes other commissioners’ comments. Looking at criteria and
process, a good process. Interior walkway through the parking lot is a
good compromise but that easement on the east is important. Agrees
with staff on AIPP contribution.
Siebert- Good changes made to EHU building. Will support.
Gillette- A lot can be done to improve this development. Questions public
benefit and deviations. Need to reduce deviation or add increased public
benefit.
Perez- Applicant has made good changes. Not perfect but a lot of the
concerns are view based. Project good for community.
Pratt- Very concerned about the height, bulk and mass of the EHU
building. Concerned with criteria 1,2 and 6 in the staff report. Questions
about loading and trash. (Planner ROY responded to question) Question
for the applicant concerning placing the EHU building along the east side
of the property (Dominic responded that it was looked at and did not
work) Thinks north south is a better orientation.
Kurz- Feels that the applicant has made significant changes. Has
concerns with the height but does not want to lose units. Thinks there are
more public benefits including tax revenue. Feels the sun/shading has
been addressed. We should ask the applicant to table so more can be
worked on. Feels that the public benefit outweighs deviation. Supports
staff on AIPP contribution.
June 2, 2020 - Page 732 of 772
Dominic: Ok with AIPP. Would like to move forward to the TC.
2.7. A request for a recommendation to the Vail Town Council of an
application establishing Special Development District No. 42 (Highline
Hotel Renovation 2019), pursuant to Section 12-9(A), Special
Development Districts, Vail Town Code, to allow for the development of a
hotel addition to add 79 accommodation units, convert 19 existing
dwelling units to 19 limited service lodge units, create a 12 unit EHU
dormitory, remove office space, add conference space and build 16 unit
employee housing apartment building, and related uses and
improvements, located at 2211 North Frontage Road West which is
composed of Tract C, Lot 1, Lot 2, and Lot 3 Vail Das Schone Filing No. 1
and Lot 1, Vail Das Schone Filing 3, and setting forth details in regard
thereto. (PEC19-0048)
This item will be heard concurrently with PEC19-0047 and PEC19-0046.
Applicant: TNREF III Bravo Vail LLC True North Management Group
LLC, represented by Mauriello Planning Group
Planner: Greg Roy
Motion: Approve with Conditions
First: Lockman Second: Seibert Vote: 4-3-0 (Pratt,
Kjesbo and Gillette opposed)
Conditions:
1. Applicant shall obtain approval for subdivision before a
certificate of occupancy for the EHU building is granted.
2. The applicant shall obtain the certificate of occupancy for the
EHU building before requesting a certificate of occupancy for
the hotel addition.
3. Approval is contingent upon the applicant obtaining Town of Vail
approval of an associated design review application.
4. The applicant shall obtain approval for a conditional use permit
for the commercial space on the first floor before a building
permit is issued.
5. Applicant shall obtain approval from Holy Cross to vacate the
easement under the proposed hotel addition before a building
permit is issued.
6. Applicant shall set aside two (2) three-bedroom units and two
(2) one-bedroom units in the EHU building not to be included in
the mitigation bank.
7. Prior to the issuance of a certificate of occupancy, the applicant
shall record deed restrictions with the Eagle County Clerk and
Recorder, in a format approved by the Town Attorney, for the
Type III Employee Housing Units.
June 2, 2020 - Page 733 of 772
8. The applicant shall coordinate and resolve landscape conflicts
with utilities and sight distance before a building permit is
issued.
9. The applicant shall show the drainage outfall for Chamonix
Lane swale in the building permit submittal.
10. The applicant shall provide a 2’ gravel shoulder along Chamonix
Lane and side slopes of swale no steeper than 2:1.
11. Applicant shall increase AIPP contribution to $32,500 and the
installation shall be completed before a certificate of occupancy
for the hotel addition is granted.
12. Applicant shall correct plans to meet the comments from the
Fire Department prior to the submittal for a building permit.
13. Applicant shall update all plan pages to match the latest
submission prior to the submittal for the Design Review Board
application.
(Please see commentary from previous item)
2.8. A request for the review of a variance from Section 12-7A-11: Parking
and Loading, Vail Town Code in accordance with the provisions of
Section 12- 17, Variances, Vail Town Code, to allow for a variance from
the prohibition of parking located within the front setback and from the
requirement that 75% of the required parking be located within the main
building, located at 366 Hanson Ranch Road/Lot 1, 366 Hanson Ranch
Road Subdivision, and setting forth details in regard thereto. (PEC20-
0003) 2 min.
The applicant has requested that this item be continued to the April 27,
2020 public hearing.
Applicant: Vailpoint LLC, represented by Sarah J Baker PC
Planner: Jonathan Spence
Motion: Continue to April 27, 2020
First: Perez Second: Kjesbo Vote: 7-0-0
2.9. A request for the review of a Major Exterior Alteration, pursuant to
Section 12-7A-12, Exterior Alterations or Modifications, Vail Town Code,
to allow for the replacement of the existing structure with a seven (7)
suite lodge with related site improvements, located at 366 Hanson Ranch
Road/Lot 1, 366 Hanson Ranch Road Subdivision, and setting forth
details in regard thereto. (PEC19-0008) 2 min.
The applicant has requested that this item be continued to the April 27,
2020 public hearing.
Applicant: Vailpoint LLC, represented by Sarah J Baker PC
Planner: Jonathan Spence
June 2, 2020 - Page 734 of 772
Motion: Continue to April 27, 2020
First: Gillette Second: Perez Vote: 7-0-0
2.10. A request for a recommendation to the Vail Town Council, pursuant to
Section 12-3-7, Amendment, Vail Town Code, for prescribed regulations
amendments to Title 12, Zoning Regulations, Vail Town Code, to amend
Section 12-6I-8: Parking and Loading, to revise the requirements related
to mobility and onsite parking in the Housing (H) District, and setting forth
details in regard thereto. (PEC20-0005) 2 min.
The applicant has requested this item be tabled to April 27, 2020.
Applicant: Town of Vail
Planner: Jonathan Spence
Motion: Tabled to April 27, 2020
First: Kjesbo Second: Perez Vote: 7-0-0
3. Approval of Minutes
3.1. March 9, 2020 PEC Results
Motion: Approve
First: Gillette Second: Perez Vote: 6-0-1 (Pratt
recused)
4. Adjournment
Motion: Adjourn
First: Kjesbo Second: Perez 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. Please call 711 for
sign language interpretation 48 hour prior to meeting time.
Community Development Department Published in the Vail Daily April 10, 2020
June 2, 2020 - Page 735 of 772
TO: Planning and Environmental Commission
FROM: Community Development Department
DATE: April 13, 2020
SUBJECT: A request for a recommendation to the Vail Town Council of an application
to establish Special Development District No. 42 (Highline Double Tree),
pursuant to Section 12-9-A Special Development (SDD) District, Vail Town
Code, to allow for the development of a hotel addition to add 79
accommodation units, convert 19 existing dwelling units to 19 limited
service lodge units, create a 12 unit EHU dormitory, remove office space,
add conference space and build a 15 unit employee housing apartment
building, and related uses and improvements, located at 2211 North
Frontage Road West which is composed of Tract C, Lot 1, Lot 2, and Lot 3
Vail Das Schone Filing No. 1 and Lot 1, Vail Das Schone Filing 3, and
setting forth details in regard thereto. (PEC19-0048)
And
A final review for a Major Exterior Alteration, pursuant to Section 12-7J-12,
Exterior Alterations or Modifications, Vail Town Code, to allow for the
development of a hotel addition to add 79 accommodation units, convert
19 existing dwelling units to 19 limited service lodge units, create a 12 unit
EHU dormitory, remove office space, add conference space and build a
15 unit employee housing apartment building, and related uses and
improvements, located at 2211 North Frontage Road West which is
composed of Tract C, Lot 1, Lot 2, and Lot 3 Vail Das Schone Filing No. 1
and Lot 1, Vail Das Schone Filing 3, and setting forth details in regard
thereto. (PEC19-0046)
Applicant: TNFREF III Bravo Vail LLC represented by Mauriello
Planning Group & Triumph Development
Planner: Greg Roy
June 2, 2020 - Page 736 of 772
Town of Vail Page 2
I. SUMMARY
Special Development District
The applicant, TNFREF lll Bravo Vail LLC, represented by Mauriello Planning Group
and Triumph Development, is requesting a recommendation to the Vail Town Council
for approval of a Special Development District, pursuant to Section 12-9-A, Special
Development (SDD) District, Vail Town Code, located at the property of 2211 N.
Frontage Road West, which is comprised of Tract C, Lot 1, Lot 2, and Lot 3 Vail Das
Schone Filing No. 1 and Lot 1, Vail Das Schone Filing 3.
Based upon Staff’s review of the criteria outline in Section VIIl of this memorandum and
the evidence and testimony presented, the Community Development Department
recommends the Planning and Environmental Commission forward a
recommendation of approval, with conditions to the Vail Town Council to establish a
Special Development District.
Major Exterior Alteration
The applicant, TNFREF lll Bravo Vail LLC, represented by Mauriello Planning Group
and Triumph Development, is also requesting approval of a Major Exterior Alteration,
pursuant to Section 12-7J-12, Exterior Alterations or Modifications, Vail Town Code,
located at the property of 2211 N. Frontage Road West, which is composed of Tract C,
Lot 1, Lot 2, and Lot 3 Vail Das Schone Filing No. 1 and Lot 1, Vail Das Schone Filing 3 .
Based upon Staff’s review of the criteria outline in Section VlII of this memorandum and
the evidence and testimony presented, the Community Development Department
recommends the Planning and Environmental Commission approve, with conditions,
the applicant’s request for the major exterior alteration.
II. DESCRIPTION OF REQUEST
The applicant, TNFREF III Bravo Vail LLC represented by Mauriello Planning Group &
Triumph Development, is requesting a recommendation to the Vail Town Council of an
application to establish Special Development District No. 42 (Highline Double Tree),
pursuant to Section 12-9-A Special Development (SDD) District, Vail Town Code, and a
final review for a major exterior alteration, pursuant to Section 12-7J-12, Exterior
Alterations or Modifications, Vail Town Code to allow for the development of a hotel
addition to add 79 accommodation units, convert 19 existing dwelling units to 19 limited
service lodge units, create a 12 unit EHU dormitory, remove office space, add
conference space and build a 15 unit employee housing apartment building, and related
uses and improvements, located at 2211 North Frontage Road West which is composed
of Tract C, Lot 1, Lot 2, and Lot 3 Vail Das Schone Filing No. 1 and Lot 1, Vail Das
Schone Filing 3. Attached for review are:
June 2, 2020 - Page 737 of 772
Town of Vail Page 3
A. Vicinity Map
B. Applicant Cover Letter Dated 3-16-2020
C. Applicant Narrative, 3-16-2020
D. Plan Set, Pierce Austin Architects, 3-16-2020
E. Parking Study 1-10-2020
F. Public Comment – Patricia Lauer – 12-3-2019
G. Public Comment – Tania Boyd – 12-3-2019
H. Public Comment – Patricia Lauer – 2-4-2020
I. Public Comment – Elyse Howard – 2-3-2020
J. Public Comment – Chris Romer – 1-27-2020
K. Public Comment – Carey and Brett August – 12-7-2019
L. Public Comment – James Pyke – 2-26-2020
M. Public Comment – VCBA – 3-4-2020
N. Vail Local Housing Authority Letter – 12-18-2019
O. Public Comment – Michael Spiers – 3-3-2020
P. PEC Minutes from Meeting on 12-09-2019
Q. PEC Minutes from Meeting on 3-09-2020
III. BACKGROUND
In 1980, the hotel was built under Eagle County jurisdiction and was annexed into the
Town of Vail per Ordinance No. 43, Series 1980 and the zoned Commercial Core 3
(CC3) within the required ninety days. The Ordinance was later overturned by the
Colorado Court of Appeals due to a lack on contiguity. It was then annexed again with
Ordinance No. 1, Series 1986 and was again zoned CC3 with Ordinance No. 10, Series
of 1986.
Over time there have been multiple application for small remodels or exterior
alterations. Most recently was an exterior alteration that allowed for the restriping of the
parking lot, pool upgrades, and exterior facade upgrades to the building in 2016.
This application was discussed before the PEC as part of a work session on December
9th, 2019. Please find the minutes from this meeting included as Attachment P. The
Design Review Board also reviewed a conceptual application on December 18th, 2019.
This application was scheduled to be heard on March 23rd but was to the April 13th
meeting.
June 2, 2020 - Page 738 of 772
Town of Vail Page 4
IV. APPLICABLE PLANNING DOCUMENTS
Staff believes that following provisions of the Vail Land Use Plan, the Vail Village Master
Plan and the Vail Town Code are relevant to the review of this proposal:
Vail Town Code
ARTICLE A. SPECIAL DEVELOPMENT (SDD) DISTRICT
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
June 2, 2020 - Page 739 of 772
Town of Vail Page 5
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.
B. Applicability: Special development districts do not apply to and are not available in
the following zone districts: hillside residential, single-family residential, two-family
residential and two-family primary/secondary residential. (Ord. 29(2005) § 26: Ord.
9(1994) § 1: Ord. 21(1988) § 1)
12-9A-2: DEFINITIONS:
AFFECTED PROPERTY: Property within a special development district that, by virtue
of its proximity or relationship to a proposed amendment request to an approved
development plan, may be affected by redesign, density increase, change in uses, or
other modifications changing the impacts, or character of the approved special
development district.
AGENT OR AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE: Any individual or association
authorized or empowered in writing by the property owner to act on his (her) stead. If
any of the property to be included in the special development district is a
condominiumized development, the pertinent condominium association may be
considered the agent or authorized representative for the individual unit owners if
authorized in conformity with all pertinent requirements of the condominium
association's declarations and all other requirements of the condominium declarations
are met.
MAJOR AMENDMENT (PEC AND/OR COUNCIL REVIEW): Any proposal to change
uses; increase gross residential floor area; change the number of dwelling or
accommodation units; modify, enlarge or expand any approved special development
district (other than "minor amendments" as defined in this section), except as provided
under section 12-15-4, "Interior Conversions", or 12-15-5, "Additional Gross Residential
Floor Area (250 Ordinance)", of this title.
MINOR AMENDMENT (STAFF REVIEW): Modifications to building plans, site or
landscape plans that do not alter the basic intent and character of the approved special
development district, and are consistent with the design criteria of this article. Minor
amendments may include, but not be limited to, variations of not more than five feet (5')
to approved setbacks and/or building footprints; changes to landscape or site plans that
do not adversely impact pedestrian or vehicular circulation throughout the special
development district; or changes to gross floor area (excluding residential uses) of not
more than five percent (5%) of the approved square footage of retail, office, common
June 2, 2020 - Page 740 of 772
Town of Vail Page 6
areas and other nonresidential floor area, except as provided under section 12-15-4,
"Interior Conversions", or 12-15-5, "Additional Gross Residential Floor Area (250
Ordinance)", of this title.
UNDERLYING ZONE DISTRICT: The zone district existing on the property, or imposed
on the property at the time the special development district is approved. The following
zone districts are prohibited from special development districts being used: hillside
residential, single-family residential, two-family residential, two-family primary/secondary
residential. (Ord. 29(2005) § 26: Ord. 13(1997) § 2: Ord. 9(1994) § 2: Ord. 21(1988)
§ 1)
12-9A-4: DEVELOPMENT REVIEW PROCEDURES:
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 with the applicant, staff and the planning and
environmental commission to discuss special development district. A report of the
department of community development staff's 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
June 2, 2020 - Page 741 of 772
Town of Vail Page 7
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. (Ord. 29(2005) § 26: Ord.
21(1988) § 1)
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. (Ord. 29(2005) § 26:
Ord. 21(1988) § 1)
12-9A-7: USES:
Determination of permitted, conditional and accessory uses shall be made by the
planning and environmental commission and town council as a part of the formal review
of the proposed development plan. Unless further restricted through the review of the
proposed special development district, permitted, conditional and accessory uses shall
be limited to those permitted, conditional and accessory uses in a property's underlying
zone district. Under certain conditions, commercial uses may be permitted in residential
special development districts if, in the opinion of the town council, such uses are
primarily for the service and convenience of the residents of the development and the
immediate neighborhood. Such uses, if any, shall not change or destroy the
predominantly residential character of the special development district. The amount of
area and type of such uses, if any, to be allowed in a residential special development
district shall be established by the town council as a part of the approved development
plan. (Ord. 29(2005) § 26: Ord. 21(1988) § 1)
12-9A-8: DESIGN CRITERIA AND NECESSARY FINDINGS:
June 2, 2020 - Page 742 of 772
Town of Vail Page 8
A. Criteria: The following design criteria shall be used as the principal criteria in
evaluating the merits of the proposed special development district. It shall be the
burden of the applicant to demonstrate that submittal material and the proposed
development plan comply with each of the following standards, or demonstrate that
one or more of them is not applicable, or that a practical solution consistent with the
public interest has been achieved:
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.
2. Relationship: Uses, activity and density which provide a compatible, efficient
and workable relationship with surrounding uses and activity.
3. Parking And Loading: Compliance with parking and loading requirements as
outlined in chapter 10 of this title.
4. Comprehensive Plan: Conformity with applicable elements of the Vail
comprehensive plan, town policies and urban design plans.
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.
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.
7. Traffic: A circulation system designed for both vehicles and pedestrians
addressing on and off site traffic circulation.
8. Landscaping: Functional and aesthetic landscaping and open space in order
to optimize and preserve natural features, recreation, views and function.
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.
B. Necessary Findings: Before recommending and/or granting an approval of an
application for a special development district, the planning and environmental
commission and the town council shall make the following findings with respect to
the proposed SDD:
June 2, 2020 - Page 743 of 772
Town of Vail Page 9
1. That the SDD complies with the standards listed in subsection A of this
section, unless the applicant can demonstrate that one or more of the
standards is not applicable, or that a practical solution consistent with the
public interest has been achieved.
2. That 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; and
3. That the SDD is compatible with and suitable to adjacent uses and
appropriate for the surrounding areas; and
4. That 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. (Ord. 29(2005) § 26: Ord. 21(1988) § 1)
12-9A-9: DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS:
Development standards including lot area, site dimensions, setbacks, height, density
control, site coverage, landscaping and parking shall be determined by the town cou ncil
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. (Ord. 29(2005) § 26: Ord. 21(1988) § 1)
ARTICLE J. PUBLIC ACCOMMODATION-2 (PA-2) DISTRICT
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 Lionsh ead
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
June 2, 2020 - Page 744 of 772
Town of Vail Page 10
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. (Ord. 2(2006) § 2)
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. (Ord. 1(2008) § 23:
Ord. 2(2006) § 2)
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.
June 2, 2020 - Page 745 of 772
Town of Vail Page 11
Religious institutions.
Theaters and convention facilities. (Ord. 2(2016) § 18: Ord. 12(2008) § 25: Ord. 1(2008)
§ 23: Ord. 2(2006) § 2)
12-7J-4: ACCESSORY USES:
The following accessory uses shall be permitted in the PA-2 district:
Home occupations, subject to issuance of a home occupation permit in accordance with
the provisions of section 12-14-12 of this title.
Meeting rooms.
Swimming pools, tennis courts, patios, or other recreation facilities customarily
incidental to permitted lodge uses.
Other uses customarily incidental and accessory to permitted or conditional uses, and
necessary for the operation thereof. (Ord. 2(2006) § 2)
12-7J-5: LOT AREA AND SITE DIMENSIONS:
The minimum lot or site area shall be ten thousand (10,000) square feet of buildable
area and each site shall have a minimum frontage of thirty feet (30'). Each site shall be
of a size and shape capable of enclosing a square area eighty feet (80') on each side
within its boundaries. (Ord. 2(2006) § 2)
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 criter ia:
A. Proposed building setbacks provide necessary separation between buildings and
riparian areas, geologically sensitive areas and other environmentally sensitive
areas.
B. The proposed building setbacks will provide adequate availability of light, air and
open space.
June 2, 2020 - Page 746 of 772
Town of Vail Page 12
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. (Ord. 2(2006) § 2)
12-7J-7: HEIGHT:
For a flat roof 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').
(Ord. 2(2006) § 2)
12-7J-8: DENSITY CONTROL:
Up to one hundred fifty (150) square feet of gross residential floor area (GRFA) may be
permitted for each one hundred (100) square feet of buildable site area. Final
determination of allowable gross residential floor area shall be made by the planning
and environmental commission in accordance with section 12-7J-12 of this article.
Specifically, in determining allowable gross residential floor area the planning and
environmental commission shall make a finding that proposed gross residential floor
area is in conformance with applicable elements of the Vail comprehensive plan. Total
density shall not exceed twenty five (25) dwelling units per acre of buildable site area.
For the purposes of calculating density, employee housing units, limited service lodge
units, accommodation units and fractional fee club units shall not be counted tow ards
density (dwelling units per acre).
A dwelling unit in a multiple-family building may include one or more attached
accommodation units. (Ord. 2(2006) § 2)
12-7J-9: SITE COVERAGE:
Site coverage shall not exceed sixty five percent (65%) of the total si te 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 o f the Vail
comprehensive plan. (Ord. 2(2006) § 2)
12-7J-10: LANDSCAPING AND SITE DEVELOPMENT:
June 2, 2020 - Page 747 of 772
Town of Vail Page 13
At least thirty percent (30%) of the total site area shall be landscaped. The minimum
width and length of any area qualifying as landscaping shall be fifteen fee t (15') with a
minimum area not less than three hundred (300) square feet. (Ord. 2(2006) § 2)
12-7J-11: PARKING AND LOADING:
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. (Ord. 2(2006) § 2)
12-7J-12: EXTERIOR ALTERATIONS OR MODIFICATIONS:
A. Review Required: The construction of a new building or the alteration of an existing
building shall be reviewed by the design review board in accordance with chapter 11
of this title. However, any project which adds additional dwelling units,
accommodation units, fractional fee club units, limited service lodge units, any
project which adds more than one thousand (1,000) square feet of commercial floor
area or common space, or any project which has substantial off site impacts (as
determined by the administrator) shall be reviewed by the planning and
environmental commission as a major exterior alteration in accordance with this
chapter and section 12-3-6 of this title. Complete applications for major exterior
alterations shall be submitted in accordance with administrative schedules
developed by the department of community development for planning and
environmental commission and design review board review. The following submittal
items are required:
1. Application: An application shall be made by the owner of the building or the
building owner's authorized agent or representative o n a form provided by the
administrator. Any application for condominiumized buildings shall be authorized
by the condominium association in conformity with all pertinent requirements of
the condominium association's declarations.
2. Application; Contents: The administrator shall establish the submittal
requirements for an exterior alteration or modification application. A complete list
of the submittal requirements shall be maintained by the administrator and filed in
the department of community development. Certain submittal requirements may
be waived and/or modified by the administrator and/or the reviewing body if it is
demonstrated by the applicant that the information and materials required are not
relevant to the proposed development or applicable to the planning documents
that comprise the Vail comprehensive plan. The administrator and/or the
reviewing body may require the submission of additional plans, drawings,
June 2, 2020 - Page 748 of 772
Town of Vail Page 14
specifications, samples and other materials if deemed necessary to properly
evaluate the proposal.
3. Work Sessions/Conceptual Review: If requested by either the applicant or the
administrator, submittals may proceed to a work session with the planning and
environmental commission, a conceptual review with the design review board, or
a work session with the town council.
4. Hearing: The public hearing before the planning and environmental commission
shall be held in accordance with section 12-3-6 of this title. The planning and
environmental commission may approve the application as submitted, approve
the application with conditions or modifications, or deny the application. The
decision of the planning and environmental commission may be appealed to the
town council in accordance with section 12-3-3 of this title.
5. Lapse Of Approval: Approval of an exterior alteration as prescribed by this article
shall lapse and become void three (3) years following the date of approval by the
design review board unless, prior to the expiration, a building permit is issued and
construction is commenced and diligently pursued to completion. Administrative
extensions shall be allowed for reasonable and unexpected delays as long as
code provisions affecting the proposal have not changed. (Ord. 2(2006) § 2)
12-7J-13: COMPLIANCE BURDEN:
It shall be the burden of the applicant to prove by a preponderance of the evidence
before the planning and environmental commission and the design review board that
the proposed exterior alteration or new development is in compliance with the purposes
of the public accommodation-2 (PA-2) zone district, and that the proposal does not
otherwise have a significant negative effect on the character of the neighborhood, and
that the proposal substantially complies with other applicable elements of the Vail
comprehensive plan. (Ord. 2(2006) § 2)
12-7J-14: MITIGATION OF DEVELOPMENT IMPACTS:
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 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
June 2, 2020 - Page 749 of 772
Town of Vail Page 15
intent of this section is to only require mitigation for large scale
redevelopment/development projects which produce substantial off site impacts. (Ord.
2(2006) § 2)
12-7J-15: LOCATION OF BUSINESS ACTIVITY:
A. Limitations; Exception: All permitted and conditional uses shall be operated and
conducted entirely within a building except for permitted parking and loading areas
and such activities as may be specifically authorized to be unenclosed by a
conditional use permit and the outdoor display of goods. For purposes of this
section, "conducted entirely within a building" means that all activities related to the
permitted use, including contacting potential customers and clients, must occur
completely inside of a building, and not in an open doorway of the building.
B. Outdoor Displays: The area to be used for an outdoor display shall be located directly
in front of the establishment displaying the goods and entirely upon the
establishment's own property. Sidewalks, building entrances and exits, driveways
and streets shall not be obstructed by outdoor displays. (Ord. 11(2019) § 10)
V. SITE ANALYSIS
Address: 2211 North Frontage Road West
Legal Description: Tract C, Lot 1, Lot 2, and Lot 3 Vail Das Schone Filing
No. 1 and Lot 1, Vail Das Schone Filing 3
Existing Zoning: Commercial Core 3 (CC3)
Proposed Zoning: Public Accommodation-2 (PA-2) District
Land Use Plan Designation: Community Commercial
Current Land Use: Lodge
Proposed Land Use: Lodge and Employee Housing Apartment Building
Geological Hazards: Debris Flow, Steep Slopes and Rock Fall Hazard
June 2, 2020 - Page 750 of 772
Town of Vail Page 16
* Snow storage is 10% for paved areas that are snow melted.
** Including areas that do not meet the dimension or size requirements and area of grasscrete. Additional
discussion in deviation #4 below.
*** Including areas with trees. Additional discussion in deviation #3 below.
Vl. SURROUNDING LAND USES AND ZONING
Existing Use Zone District
North: Multi-family/Single-
family
Two-Family Primary/Secondary Residential
South: I-70 N/A
East: Commercial Commercial Core 3 (CC3)
W est: Commercial/Housing Commercial Core 3 (CC3) & Housing (H)
VlI. SPECIAL DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT DEVIATIONS REQUESTED:
1. Reduction in the parking requirements for the site.
The application includes a parking study perfomed by McDowell Engineering that
analyzed the parking counts for the hotel, conference space, retail, and commercial
uses on the property. The counts suggested do not include the EHU units or the two
existing independent restaurants in the hotel building. The study utilizes the Institute of
Transportation Engineers (ITE) counts as well as an onsite parking survey performed by
the property owner over a period of 11 months.
Development
Standard
Required by Town
Code
Proposed Complies?
Lot Size Min. 10,000 sq. ft. 3.95 acres (172,047 sq.
ft.)
Complies
Minimum Setbacks Front – 20’
Side – 20’
Rear – 20’
North: 20’
South: >20’
East: 12’
West: >20’
Deviation Requested
Maximum Height 48 ft. max - mansard
45 ft. max - flat
47’6” ft. max
44’3” ft. max
Complies
GRFA Max. 150/100 Buildable
Site Area or 258,070 SF
77,805 sq. ft. Complies
Site coverage
maximum
Max. 65% of site area or
111,830 sq. ft.
62,070 sq. ft. or 36%
Complies
Minimum Landscaping Min. 30% of site area or
51,614 sq. ft.
53,948 sq. ft. or 31% **
Deviation Requested
Minimum Snow
Storage
Min. 30% of paved area*
or 16,945 sq. ft.
17,189 sq. ft. or 30%*** Deviation Requested
Required Parking 256 spaces 208 spaces
Deviation requested
June 2, 2020 - Page 751 of 772
Town of Vail Page 17
The study concludes that for the uses proposed, a rate of 0.7 parking spaces per room
will be sufficient 99% of the time. At 0.7 spaces per room that comes to a total of 137
spaces for 195 rooms. With the restaurant seating (18.9), the dormitory (2.5), and the
EHU building (17) parking the total spaces proposed to be required would be 175
spaces.
Use Rooms/Units
Spaces Per
Room/Unit GRFA/SF 1 Space Per
Parking
Required
Applicant’s
Suggestion
Accommodation Units 176 0.4 57755 1000SF GRFA 128.2 123.2
Limited Service Lodge Unit 19 0.7 13.3 13.3
Restaurants and lobby bar(seating area) 2357 120 SF 19.6 18.9
Spa/retail 1520 300 SF 5.1 0
Dorm (dwelling unit 2000+SF 1 2.5 2.5 2.5
EHU 16 2 32 17
Conference Space (seating floor area) 6616 120 SF 55.1 0
Total Parking Required 255.8 174.9
Based on the data of actual parking usage collected on the site, and the study
performed by McDowell Engineering, staff finds that the proposed required parking
count suggested by the applicant will be sufficient.
2. Increase in the amount of parking controlled by valet.
Town Code stipulates that “Valet parking shall be allowed but shall not exceed fifty
percent (50%) of the required parking on site.” If the required parking is decided upon
as 175 parking spaces, then 50% would be 87.5 spaces that would be allowed to be
operated by valet parking. The application is proposing to valet park 111 spaces or
78.8% of the required parking, which would be 23 more spaces than the maximum
allowed by code.
The application proposes to include 208 parking spaces, which exceeds the required
parking (175 spaces) by 33 spaces. The application shows the third row of exterior valet
spaces will be covered with grass pavers. This increases the flexibility of the parking on
site and will allow for overflow parking in the summer and increased snow storage in the
winter months. Three deep, exterior valet parking could cause functionality concerns if
utilized during winter months, but the ability of the site to flex and utilize the third row for
snow storage instead of parking minimizes any potential conflicts.
3. Exception from the requirement that landscaped areas with trees cannot be
used for snow storage.
Section 14-5-2(g) does not allow landscaped areas with trees to be counted for snow
storage purposes. Some of the areas that are currently being utilized for snow storage
are included in the proposed snow storage in this plan . With these areas included in the
calculation the site is meeting the snow storage minimums. Meeting the minimum
June 2, 2020 - Page 752 of 772
Town of Vail Page 18
amount with a snow removal plans makes it less likely that the snow storage will be
utilized in and around the trees, reducing the possible negative impacts from including
these areas in the calculation.
4. Relief from the minimum size of landscaping areas qualifying to meet
landscape standards.
There is a minimum size for landscaping in the PA-2 Zone District that is eligible to meet
the minimum landscape requirement. The Code requires “The minimum width and
length of any area qualifying as landscaping shall be fifteen feet (15’) with a minimum
area of not less than three hundred (300) square feet.” This application wishes to be
granted relief from this requirement. Allowing these areas that do not meet the minimum
size requirements makes it possible to disperse more landscaping throughout the site.
While the survivability of the planting in these areas may be challenged, with
appropriate care and maintenance they will add to the overall aesthetic of the site.
5. Relief from the subdivision requirement that requires a new lot be able to
enclose an 80’ by 80’ square.
For a future subdivision, which would be required to create a new lot, the minimum lot
area and dimensions in Section 12-7J-5 requires that “each site shall be of a size and
shape capable of enclosing a square area eighty feet (80’) on each side within its
boundaries.” Due to the nature of the proposed EHU building and the site plan, there is
no practical way to meet this requirement.
6. Relief from the interior setbacks for the proposed two lots.
If the new subdivision is proposed to be treated as one development lot then the interior
setbacks may be waived.
7. Relief from the required maximum allowed driveway slope.
As an existing condition the slope of the entrance drives do not meet the commerci al
requirements of 8% for centerline and 8.5% for cross-slope. Since this is an existing
condition there is no practical way to meet these requirements today with out full
redevelopment of the site.
8. Relief from the side setback for the recycling and dumpster enclosure.
Due to the typical size of a trash enclosure the side setback being reduced for only this
portion would not be unreasonable.
9. Relief from the restriction that no structure shall be built on a slope that
exceeds forty percent (40%) or greater except in a single -family residential
zone district as outlined in section 12-21-10.
June 2, 2020 - Page 753 of 772
Town of Vail Page 19
Since this is a man-made condition the request to be exempted from this provision is a
reasonable deviation.
Deviations/Benefits
Through the SDD process deviations from development standards can be requested
from the underlying zone district. Before approval is given/recommended it should be
determined that such deviation provides benefits to the town that outweigh the adverse
effects of such deviation. Listed is the amount of deviations requested by the application
and the benefits the town would see.
SDD Deviations Requested:
1. Reduction in parking requirements for the site.
2. Increase in the amount of parking controlled by the valet .
3. Exception to from the requirement that landscaped areas with trees cannot be
used for snow storage.
4. Relief from the minimum size of landscaping areas.
5. Relief from the subdivision requirement that requires a new lot be able to enclose
an 80’ by 80’ square.
6. Relief from the interior setbacks for the proposed two lots.
7. Relief from the required maximum allowed driveway slope.
8. Relief from the side setback for the recycling and dumpster enclosure.
9. Relief from the restriction that no structure shall be built on a slope that exceeds
forty percent (40%) or greater except in a single-family residential zone district as
outlined in section 12-21-10.
Benefits:
1. Four EHU units above and beyond the requirement and the additional interim
period between when the other 11 units are first leased and when they are
credited towards another development.
2. A six-foot easement for pedestrian access along the far eastern boundary of the
lot.
3. A sidewalk along Chamonix Lane and Chamonix Road.
4. A Public art contribution which is proposed to amount to $15,000. Staff suggests
the amount be increased to $32,500 to reflect the PEC’s suggestion.
5. A walkway from the bus stop through the property and to the frontage road.
Vlll. REVIEW CRITERIA – SDD
Criteria: The following design criteria shall be used as the principal criteria in evaluation
the merits of the proposed special development district. It shall be the burden of the
applicant to demonstrate that the submittal material and the proposed development plan
comply with each of the following standards, or demonstrate that one or more of them is
not applicable or that a practical solution consistent with the public interest has been
achieved:
June 2, 2020 - Page 754 of 772
Town of Vail Page 20
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.
The proposed SDD is generally compatible and sensitive to the immediate environment,
neighborhood or adjacent properties.
The SDD hotel addition is in the west and north portion of the lot. This is adjacent to
residential properties to the north and the Chamonix development to the west. In
relation to the properties to the west the proposed height is similar to what was
approved for Chamonix. The homes there have a maximum height of 44 feet for sloped
roofs. This is similar to the proposed height of the hotel addition which would be higher
at 48 feet. While the height of the addition is taller than the homes to the north, there is
more of a setback from those homes that may lessen the impact.
The SDD also is proposing an EHU apartment building on the north end of the property.
The structure is broken down to have steps in the floors on the Chamonix Lane façade.
It alternates between being two stories and three stories on the façade facing Chamonix
Lane. This brings the mass of the structure down and has two story portions that are
closer to thirty feet (30’) in height instead of forty five feet (45’). These portions of the
building relate to the maximum heights of the residences across the street.
Other commercial buildings that have frontage on Chamonix Lane and the North
Frontage road have larger buffers to the residential area than the current proposal. The
Safeway and the Das Schone buildings have parking lots in the rear of the building to
set the building further away from residential properties. City Market has a similar buffer
to what is proposed here by facing a residential component on the Chamonix Lane side
of the lot and the commercial portion towards the frontage road.
Staff finds that the proposed SDD conforms to this criterion.
2. Relationship: Uses, activity and density which provide a compatible, efficient
and workable relationship with surrounding uses and activity.
The SDD does not propose a change in the use, or activity on the site. Density in terms
of residential will be decreased with this application. In terms of building density as site
coverage, the application proposes 36% site coverage which would be within the
maximum 40% allowed in the CC3 Zone District on either side of this property.
Staff finds that this criterion is met.
June 2, 2020 - Page 755 of 772
Town of Vail Page 21
3. Parking And Loading: Compliance with parking and loading requirements as
outlined in chapter 10 of this title.
This application proposes a deviation from the maximum amount of parking that is
allowed to be controlled by valet and to minimize the amount of parking on the lot
according to the provided parking study.
There are several things to consider when it comes to the amount of parking that is
proposed to be valet parked. The application shows valet parking that is three cars deep
on the surface parking lot. The third row of the parking aisle is proposed to be covered
by grass pavers. The application states that this area will be used for snow storage
during the winter and allow for it to be used as excess parking during the summer.
Keeping the lot clear enough for fire access and staging could be difficult, but with the
available third row of parking snow removal operations should not be of concern.
The PA-2 zone district has a requirement that 75% of the required parking be located
within the main building. With this application there will be 48 parking spaces located
within the main building, or twenty five percent (27%) of the 175 spaces discussed
above. There are only 39 spaces being added with this application, meaning the
application does not exacerbate the existing non-conformity, but does not reach the
75%. Staff finds that as there is no increase to the non-conformity, this is acceptable.
Staff finds that this criterion is met.
4. Comprehensive Plan: Conformity with applicable elements of the Vail
comprehensive plan, town policies and urban design plans.
The application would be forwarding the Goal #4 of the Land Use and Development
section of the comprehensive plan if the employee housing building would be in addition
to required employee housing. The applicant is proposing to build this as a mitigation
bank so that future developments that are unable to build the necessary units on their
site can buy into the mitigation bank to satisfy their requirement. The application is
leaving two one-bedroom units and two three-bedroom units out of the bank as a true
benefit that cannot be credited towards another development. Having these additional
units puts the town closer to achieving its goals for providing housing.
Staff finds that this criterion is met.
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.
There are steep slopes, hazardous rock fall, and debris flow that affect this property.
The applicant supplied a report on these hazards. The report states that a site specific
study would need to be completed for debris flow to suggest the needed mitigation for
June 2, 2020 - Page 756 of 772
Town of Vail Page 22
the site, and that the rock fall hazard was low for this site. A site specific study for all
geologic hazards will be required prior to building permit.
Staff finds that this criterion is met.
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 site plan does produce a functional development that is in line with aesthetic quality
of the community.
The employee housing building is oriented towards Chamonix Lane with two entrances
on the street side and one entrance on the rear of the building that faces the interior
parking lot. The rear entrance allows for the residents to have a covered access when
entering from the parking lot. The entrance does not service the western units of the
building but will give them a covered stairway to a heated path that leads to their portion
of the building. This will be a benefit to residences during the winter months to have an
interior stairwell to avoid snow.
If residents are parking in the enclosed garage, then they must walk up the sloped drive
aisle to the building. However, having that rear access makes the travel distance to their
unit easier. For residents utilizing the valet parking they have a designated walkway that
is striped in the drive aisle to access their building. This acknowledges the pedestrians
and gives vehicular traffic an indication that pedestrians may be present and increases
the safety and walkability of the parking lot.
The grass pavers in the third row of valet parking allows for seasonal flexibility when it
comes to the valet operations. It will allow the additional parking in the summer and
extra snow storage during the winter months.
When it comes to the design of the buildings the Design Review Board (DRB) made
several comments on the overall design of the proposed buildings and the site as a
whole. The DRB, based on the Code, had concerns relating to a lack of unified
architecture and extensive unbroken roof lines. The application has incorporated a few
changes to try to address these concerns. The color of the roofs have been coordinated
and, the building color on the existing hotel will match the new addition, breaks between
dormers on the new building have also been added to improve the aesthetic
appearance.
Two of the units on the bottom floor have a window in the living room portion of the unit,
which allows some natural light into the living areas of the units. On the west half of the
building, the bottom floor windows will be cast in the shadow of the hotel, as seen on
the sun/shade analysis. Additional possibilities to adding windows will be explored
through the Design Review Board process.
June 2, 2020 - Page 757 of 772
Town of Vail Page 23
Staff finds that this criterion is met.
7. Traffic: A circulation system designed for both vehicles and pedestrians
addressing on and off site traffic circulation.
The application proposes a sidewalk along Chamonix Lane and Chamonix Road that
fluctuates between five feet, six feet, and ten feet in areas. The sidewalk improves off
site pedestrian circulation resulting in a benefit to the community. The sidewalk
terminates into the property and will provide an access path to the frontage road from
those users.
The interior circulation system promotes walkability to and through the site. It features a
way for residents and hotel users to access the frontage road sidewalk without walking
through the entrance drive. There is a delineated path through the parking lot for
residents and users going to the bus stop. The stairs and paths around the EHU
building that lead to the entrances are proposed to be heated. All of these items
combined assist in creating a safer pedestrian environment.
Staff finds that this criterion is met.
8. Landscaping: Functional and aesthetic landscaping and open space in order
to optimize and preserve natural features, recreation, views and function.
At the December 9th PEC work session, the Commissioners requested the landscape
plan to be revised to provide adequate screening of the buildings from adjacent
properties. The plan includes two 10’-14’ conifers between Chamonix Lane and the
EHU building and nine between the hotel addition and Chamonix Lane and Chamonix
Road. The exact size and location of the trees will be decided through the Design
Review Board approval process.
The SDD asks for relief from the minimum dimensions for landscaped areas to count in
the landscaping calculations. Allowing these areas that do not meet the minimum size
requirements allows more landscaping to be distributed throughout the site e venly. This
increases the aesthetic quality of the landscaping on the site.
Staff finds that this criterion is met.
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 applicant has stated that the EHU building will be constructed at the same time as
the hotel addition. A future subdivision is proposed to occur prior to the first certificate of
occupancy. The applicant will also be required to obtain a Conditional Use Permit for
retail uses that exceeds the 10% PA-2 zone district maximum.
June 2, 2020 - Page 758 of 772
Town of Vail Page 24
Staff finds that this criterion is met.
REVIEW CRITERIA – EXTERIOR ALTERATION
Section 12-7J-13, Compliance Burden, Vail Town Code, outlines the review criteria for
exterior alteration applications proposed within the Public Accommodation -2 (PA-2)
zone district. According to Section 12-7J-13, Vail Town Code, a major exterior alteration
shall be reviewed for compliance with the following criteria:
1. The proposed exterior alteration or new development is in compliance with the
purpose of the public accommodation-2 (PA-2) zone district.
The proposed exterior alteration is generally consistent with the PA -2 zone district’s
purpose, as it allows for lodges and residential accommodations on a short term basis
outside of the main core areas of the villages. It also includes a limited amount of
commercial to support the lodging use.
Staff finds that this criterion is met.
2. That the proposal does not otherwise have a significant negative effect on the
character of the neighborhood.
The proposal does not have a significant negative effect on the character of the
neighborhood. The height that is proposed is as part of this application is generally
compatible with this neighborhood. As discussed in SDD criteria #1, there is a
difference between the residential zone districts across Chamonix Road and the
proposed height of the buildings in this application.
Staff finds that this criterion is met.
3. The proposal substantially complies with other applicable elements of the Vail
comprehensive plan.
The proposal supports the goals and objectives of the Vail comprehensive plan through
the inclusion of deed restricted housing and the promotion of alternative transportation
options.
Staff finds that this criterion is met.
lX. STAFF RECOMMENDATION
SPECIAL DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT
Based upon the review of the criteria outlined in Section Vlll of this memorandum and
the evidence and testimony presented, the Community Development Department
recommends the Planning and Environmental Commission forward a
recommendation of approval with conditions to the Vail Town Council to establish a
June 2, 2020 - Page 759 of 772
Town of Vail Page 25
Special Development District No. 42 (Highline Double Tree), pursuant to Section 12 -9-A
Special Development (SDD) District, Vail Town Code, on the parcel which is composed
of Tract C, Lot 1, Lot 2, and Lot 3 Vail Das Schone Filing No. 1 and Lot 1, Vail Das
Schone Filing 3.
Suggested Motion
Should the Planning and Environmental Commission choose to forward a
recommendation of approval with conditions, the Community Development
Department recommends the Commission pass the following motion:
“The Planning and Environmental Commission forwards a recommendation of
approval with conditions to the Vail Town Council to establish a Special
Development District No. 42 (Highline Double Tree), pursuant to Section 12-9-A
Special Development (SDD) District, Vail Town Code, on the parcel which is
composed of Tract C, Lot 1, Lot 2, and Lot 3 Vail Das Schone Filing No. 1 and
Lot 1, Vail Das Schone Filing 3 and setting forth details in regard thereto”.
Should the Planning and Environmental Commission choose to forward a
recommendation of approval with conditions, the Community Development
Department recommends the Commission applies the following conditions:
1. Applicant shall obtain approval for subdivision before a certificate of occupancy
for the EHU building is granted.
2. The applicant shall obtain the certificate of occupancy for the EHU building
before requesting a certificate of occupancy for the hotel addition.
3. Approval is contingent upon the applicant obtaining Town of Vail approval of an
associated design review application.
4. The applicant shall obtain approval for a conditional use permit for the
commercial space on the first floor before a building permit is issued.
5. Applicant shall obtain approval from Holy Cross to vacate the easement under
the proposed hotel addition before a building permit is issued.
6. Applicant shall set aside two (2) three-bedroom units and two (2) one-bedroom
units in the EHU building not to be included in the mitigation bank.
7. Prior to the issuance of a certificate of occupancy, the applicant shall record deed
restrictions with the Eagle County Clerk and Recorder, in a format approved by
the Town Attorney, for the Type III Employee Housing Units.
June 2, 2020 - Page 760 of 772
Town of Vail Page 26
8. The applicant shall coordinate and resolve landscape conflicts with utilities and
sight distance before a building permit is issued.
9. The applicant shall show the drainage outfall for Chamonix Lane swale in the
building permit submittal.
10. The applicant shall provide a 2’ gravel shoulder along Chamonix Lane and side
slopes of swale no steeper than 2:1.
11. Applicant shall increase AIPP contribution to $32,500 and the installation shall be
completed before a certificate of occupancy for the hotel addition is granted.
12. Applicant shall correct plans to meet the comments from the Fire Department
prior to the submittal for a building permit.
13. Applicant shall update all plan pages to match the latest submission prior to the
submittal for the Design Review Board application.
Suggested Findings
Should the Planning and Environmental Commission choose to forward a
recommendation of approval with conditions, the Community Development
Department recommends the Commission makes the following findings:
“Based upon the review of the criteria outline in Section Vlll of the Staff
memorandum to the Planning and Environmental Commission dated April 13th,
2020, and the evidence and testimony presented, the Planning and
Environmental Commission finds:
1. That the SDD does comply with the standards listed in subsection A of this
section; and
2. That 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; and
3. That the SDD is compatible with and suitable to adjacent uses and
appropriate for the surrounding areas; and
4. That the SDD does promote the health, safety, mo rals, and general welfare of
the town and promote 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.”
June 2, 2020 - Page 761 of 772
Town of Vail Page 27
EXTERIOR ALTERATION
The Community Development Department recommends that the Planning and
Environmental Commission approve with conditions the request for a major exterior
alteration, pursuant to Section 12-7J-12 Exterior Alterations or Modifications, Vail Town
Code, to allow for the development of a hotel addition to add 79 accommodation units,
convert 19 existing dwelling units to 19 limited service lodge units, create a 12 unit EHU
dormitory, remove office space, add conference space and build 15 unit employee
housing apartment building, and related uses and improvements, located at 2211 North
Frontage Road West which is composed of Tract C, Lot 1, Lot 2, and Lot 3 Vail Das
Schone Filing No. 1 and Lot 1, Vail Das Schone Filing 3, and setting forth details in
regard thereto.
Suggested Motion
Should the Planning and Environmental Commission choose to approve with
conditions, the Community Development Department recommends the Commission
pass the following motion:
“The Planning and Environmental Commission approve with conditions the
major exterior alteration, pursuant to Section 12-7J-12, Exterior Alterations or
Modifications, Vail Town Code, on the parcel which is composed of Tract C, Lot
1, Lot 2, and Lot 3 Vail Das Schone Filing No. 1 and Lot 1, Vail Das Schone
Filing 3 and setting forth details in regard thereto”.
Should the Planning and Environmental Commission choose to approve with
conditions, the Community Development Department recommends the Commission
applies the following condition:
1. This approval is contingent upon the applicant receiving approval of the Special
Development District application PEC19-0048 and the Zoning Code Amendment
application PEC19-0047.
Suggested Findings
Should the Planning and Environmental Commission choose to approve with
conditions, the Community Development Department recommends the Commission
makes the following findings:
“Based upon the review of the criteria outline in Section Vlll of the Staff
memorandum to the Planning and Environmental Commission dated April 13th,
2020, and the evidence and testimony presented, the Planning and
Environmental Commission finds:
1. That the proposed exterior alteration or new development is in compliance with
the purposes of the public accommodation-2 (PA-2) zone district; and
June 2, 2020 - Page 762 of 772
Town of Vail Page 28
2. That the proposal does not otherwise have a significant negative effect on the
character of the neighborhood; and
3. That the proposal does substantially comply with other applicable elements of the
Vail comprehensive plan.”
X. ATTACHMENTS
A. Vicinity Map
B. Applicant Cover Letter Dated 3-16-2020
C. Applicant Narrative, 3-16-2020
D. Plan Set, Pierce Austin Architects, 3-16-2020
E. Parking Study 1-10-2020
F. Public Comment – Patricia Lauer – 12-3-19
G. Public Comment – Tania Boyd – 12-3-19
H. Public Comment – Patricia Lauer – 2-4-2020
I. Public Comment – Elyse Howard – 2-3-2020
J. Public Comment – Chris Romer – 1-27-2020
K. Public Comment – Carey and Brett August – 12-7-2019
L. Public Comment – James Pyke – 2-26-2020
M. Public Comment – VCBA – 3-4-2020
N. Vail Local Housing Authority Letter – 12-18-2019
O. Public Comment – Michael Spiers – 3-3-2020
P. PEC Minutes from Meeting on 12-09-2019
Q. PEC Minutes from Meeting on 3-09-2020
June 2, 2020 - Page 763 of 772
Ordinance No. 4, Series of 2020 1
ORDINANCE NO. 4
SERIES OF 2020
AN ORDINANCE CREATING SPECIAL DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT NO. 42,
HIGHLINE DOUBLETREE, PURSUANT TO ARTICLE A, SPECIAL DEVELOPMENT
(SDD) DISTRICT, CHAPTER 9, TITLE 12, ZONING REGULATIONS, VAIL TOWN
CODE, AND SETTING FORTH DETAILS IN REGARD THERETO
WHEREAS, the Town of Vail, in the County of Eagle and State of Colorado (the
"Town"), is a home rule municipal corporation duly organized and existing under the laws of
the State of Colorado and the Vail Town Charter;
WHEREAS, the members of the Town Council of the Town (the "Council") have
been duly elected and qualified;
WHEREAS, the creation of a Special Development District (“SDD”) is permitted
pursuant to the parameters set forth in Section 12-9A, Vail Town Code;
WHEREAS, the Planning and Environmental Commission of the Town held a public
hearing on April 13, 2020 to consider the proposed SDD in accordance with the provisions
of the Vail Town Code and forwarded a recommendation of approval to the Council;
WHEREAS, the Council finds that the proposed Special Development District No.
42, Highline DoubleTree, complies with the design criteria outlined in Section 12-9A-8, Vail
Town Code;
WHEREAS, the Council finds that the Special Development District complies with
the standards listed Article 12-9A, Special Development District, or that a practical solution
consistent with the public interest has been achieved;
WHEREAS, the Council finds that the Special Development District is consistent with
the adopted goals, objectives and policies outlined in the Vail comprehensive plan and
compatible with the development objectives of the Town;
WHEREAS, the Council finds that the Special Development District is compatible
with and suitable to adjacent uses and appropriate for the surrounding areas;
WHEREAS, the Council finds that the Special Development District 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;
WHEREAS, the approval of this Special Development District, and the development
standards in regard thereto, shall not establish a precedent or entitlements elsewhere
June 2, 2020 - Page 764 of 772
Ordinance No. 4, Series of 2020 2
within the Town; and
WHEREAS, all notices as required by the Town of Vail Municipal Code have been
sent to the appropriate parties.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE TOWN COUNCIL OF THE TOWN
OF VAIL, COLORADO, THAT:
Section 1. Purpose of the Ordinance
The purpose of Ordinance No. 4, Series of 2020, is to adopt a Development Plan for
Special Development District No. 42 Highline Double Tree, and to prescribe
appropriate development standards for Special Development District No. 42, in
accordance with the provisions of Chapter 12-9A, Vail Town Code. The "underlying"
zone district for Special Development District No. 42 shall remain Public
Accommodation 2 zone district.
Section 2. Establishment Procedures Fulfilled, Planning Commission Report
The procedural requirements described in Chapter 12-9A of the Vail Town Code have
been fulfilled and the Vail Town Council has received the recommendation of approval
from the Planning & Environmental Commission for the establishment of Special
Development District No. 42, Highline DoubleTree. Requests for the establishment of
a special development district follow the procedures outlined in Chapter 12-9A of the
Vail Town Code.
Section 3. Special Development District No. 42
The Special Development District is hereby established to assure comprehensive
development and use of the area in a manner that would be harmonious with the
general character of the Town, provide adequate open space and recreation
amenities, and promote the goals, objectives and policies of the Town of Vail
Comprehensive Plan. Special Development District No. 42, Highline DoubleTree, is
regarded as being complementary to the Town of Vail by the Vail Town Council and
the Planning & Environmental Commission, and has been established because there
are significant aspects of the Special Development District that cannot be satisfied
through the imposition of the standard Public Accommodation 2 zone district
requirements.
Section 4. Development Standards – Special Development District No. 42,
Highline DoubleTree Development Plan
The Approved Development Plan for Special Development District No. 42, Highline
DoubleTree, shall include the following plans and materials provided by Pierce Austin
Architects, and Alpine Engineering Inc, dated March 16, 2020, and stamped approved
June 2, 2020 - Page 765 of 772
Ordinance No. 4, Series of 2020 3
by the Town of Vail, dated March 16, 2020:
A. A0.02A – GRFA Existing Hotel
B. A0.02B – GRFA Proposed Hotel
C. A0.02C – GRFA Proposed EHU
D. A0.02D – GRFA Proposed Dorm Units
E. A0.03 – Site Data
F. A0.04 – Site Parking Data
G. A0.05 – Exterior Materials – EHU
H. A0.06 – Exterior Materials – Hotel
I. A0.11 – Shade Analysis
J. A1.00A – Roof Plan Historic Grade
K. A1.00B – Roof Plan Finished Grade
L. A1.00C – Roof Height Section
M. A1.01 – Existing Hotel Level 1
N. A1.02 – Level 2
O. A1.03 – Level 3
P. A1.04 – Level 4
Q. A1.05 – Loft Level
R. A1.11 – Hotel Addition Level 1
S. A1.12 – Hotel Addition Level 2
T. A1.13 – Hotel Addition Level 3
U. A1.14 – Hotel Addition Level 4
V. A1.20 – Double Rooms
W. A1.21 – Single Room
X. A1.29 – EHU LVL 2 (Above Casa Mexico)
Y. A1.31 – EHU Level 1/Level 2
Z. A1.32 – EHU Level 3/Level 4
AA. A1.33 – EHU Room Plan
BB. A1.34 – EHU Room Plan
CC. A2.05 – Proposed North Elevation
DD. A2.06 – Proposed East Elevation
EE. A2.07 – Proposed South Elevation
FF. A2.08 – Proposed West Elevation
GG. A2.09 – EHU North
HH. A2.10 – EHU East/West
II. A2.11 – EHU South
JJ. A3.04 – EHU Site Section
KK. A3.05 – EHU Site Section
LL. A3.06 – Hotel Site Section
MM. A9.01 – 3D
NN. A9.02 – 3D
OO. A9.03 – 3D
PP. A9.04 – 3D
June 2, 2020 - Page 766 of 772
Ordinance No. 4, Series of 2020 4
QQ. A9.05 – 3D
RR. A9.06 – 3D
SS. A9.07 – 3D
TT. C1.1 – Site Layout
UU. C1.2 – Historical Site Grades
VV. C1.3 – Site Layout
WW. C2.0 – Demolition Plan
XX. C2.1 – Grading Plan
YY. C2.2 – Grading Plan
ZZ. C3.0 – Storm Sewer Plan
AAA. C3.1 – Fire Turning Simulation
BBB. C4.0 – Utility Plan
CCC. C5.0 – Fire Turning Simulation
DDD. G0.00 – Cover
EEE. G0.01 – Sheet Index
FFF. 1 of 1 – Topographic Map (Inter-Mountain Engineering)
GGG. L-1 – Landscape Plan
Permitted Uses –
The permitted uses in Special Development District No. 42 shall be as set forth in the
underlying Public Accommodation 2 zone district, Section 12-7J-2.
Conditional Use –
The conditional uses for Special Development District No. 42, Highline DoubleTree,
shall be set forth in Section 12-7J-3 of the Town of Vail Zoning Regulations. All
conditional uses shall be reviewed per the procedures as outlined in Section 12-16 of
the Town of Vail Zoning Regulations.
Density - Accommodation Units, and Limited Service Lodging Units–
The number of units permitted in Special Development District No. 42, Highline
Double Tree, shall not exceed the following:
Accommodation Units – 176
Limited Service Lodging Units - 19
Density – Floor Area –
The gross residential floor area (GRFA) and commercial square footage permitted for
Special Development District No. 42, Highline Double Tree, shall generally be as set
forth in the Approved Development Plan referenced in Section 4 of this ordinance,
with the following development standard limitations.
June 2, 2020 - Page 767 of 772
Ordinance No. 4, Series of 2020 5
GRFA – 80,000 square feet (allowed)
Retail/Restaurant/Lounge –11,670 square feet (allowed)
Conference Facilities – 7,666 square feet (gross)
Setbacks –
Required setbacks for Special Development District No. 42, Highline DoubleTree,
shall be as set forth in the Approved Development Plan referenced in Section 4 of this
ordinance.
Height –
The maximum building height for Special Development District No. 42, Highline
Double Tree, shall be as set forth in the Approved Development Plan referenced in
Section 4 of this ordinance.
Site Coverage –
The maximum site coverage allowed for Special Development District No. 42,
Highline Double Tree, shall be:
Site Coverage Maximum: 40%
Landscaping –
The minimum landscape area requirement for Special Development District No. 42,
Highline Double Tree, shall be as set forth in the Approved Development Plan
referenced in Section 4 of this ordinance.
Landscaping Minimum: 30%*. *Including areas that do not meet the minimum size to
qualify as landscaping.
Parking and Loading –
The required number of off-street parking spaces and loading/delivery berths for
Special Development District No. 42, Highline Double Tree, shall be provided as set
forth in the Approved Development Plan referenced in Section 4 of this ordinance with
the minimum number of parking spaces being 175 spaces.
Section 5. Approval Agreements for Special Development District No. 42,
Highline DoubleTree
June 2, 2020 - Page 768 of 772
Ordinance No. 4, Series of 2020 6
The approval Special Development District No. 42, Highline DoubleTree shall be
conditioned upon the developer's demonstrated compliance with the following
approval agreements:
1. Applicant shall obtain approval for subdivision before a certificate of occupancy
for the EHU building is granted.
2. The applicant shall obtain the certificate of occupancy for the EHU building
before requesting a certificate of occupancy for the hotel addition.
3. Approval is contingent upon the applicant obtaining Town of Vail approval of an
associated design review application.
4. The applicant shall obtain approval for a conditional use permit for the
commercial space on the first floor before a building permit is issued.
5. Applicant shall obtain approval from Holy Cross to vacate the easement under
the proposed hotel addition before a building permit is issued.
6. Applicant shall set aside two (2) three-bedroom units and two (2) one-bedroom
units in the EHU building not to be included in the mitigation bank.
7. Prior to the issuance of any certificate of occupancy for the EHU building, the
applicant shall record deed restrictions with the Eagle County Clerk and
Recorder, in a format approved by the Town Attorney, for the Type III Employee
Housing Units.
8. The applicant shall coordinate and resolve landscape conflicts with utilities and
sight distance before a building permit is issued.
9. The applicant shall show the drainage outfall for Chamonix Lane swale in the
building permit submittal.
10. The applicant shall provide a 2’ gravel shoulder along Chamonix Lane and side
slopes of swale no steeper than 2:1.
11. Applicant shall increase AIPP contribution to $32,500 and the installati on shall be
completed before a certificate of occupancy for the hotel addition is granted.
12. Applicant shall correct plans to meet the comments from the Fire Department
prior to the submittal for a building permit.
13. Applicant shall update all plan pages to match the latest submission prior to the
submittal for the Design Review Board application.
Section 7.
If any part, section subsection, sentence, clause or phrase of this ordinance is for any
reason held to be invalid, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining
portions of this ordinance; and the Town Council hereby declares it would have
passed this ordinance, and each part, section, subsection, sentence, clause or phrase
thereof, regardless of the fact that any one or more parts, sections, subsections,
sentences, clauses or phrases be declared invalid.
Section 8.
June 2, 2020 - Page 769 of 772
Ordinance No. 4, Series of 2020 7
The repeal or the repeal and re-enactment of any provisions of the Vail Municipal
Code as provided in this ordinance shall not affect any right which has accrued, any
duty imposed, any violation that occurred prior to the effective date hereof, any
prosecution commenced, nor any other action or proceeding as commenced under or
by virtue of the provision repealed or repealed and reenacted. The repeal of any
provision hereby shall not revive any provision or any ordinance previously repealed
or superseded unless expressly stated herein.
Section 9.
All bylaws orders, resolutions and ordinances, or parts thereof, inconsistent herewith
are hereby repealed to the extent only of such inconsistency. The repealer shall not
be construed to revise any bylaw, order, resolution or ordinance, or part thereof,
heretofore repealed.
Section 10.
The Town Council hereby finds, determines and declares that this Ordinance is
necessary and proper for the health, safety and welfare of the Town of Vail and
inhabitants thereof.
Section 11.
If any part, section, subsection, sentence, clause or phrase of this ordinance is for any
reason held to be invalid, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining
portions of this ordinance; and the Town Council hereby declares it would have
passed this ordinance, and each part, section, subsection, sentence, clause or phrase
thereof, regardless of the fact that any one or more parts, sections, subsections,
sentences, clauses or phrases by declared invalid.
Section 12.
The repeal or the repeal and reenactment of any provisions of Vail Municipal Code as
provided in this ordinance shall not affect any right which has accrued, any duty
imposed, any violation that occurred prior to the effective date hereof, any prosecution
commenced, nor any other action or proceeding as commenced under or by virtue of
the provision repealed or repealed and reenacted. The repeal of any provision hereby
shall not revive any provision or any ordinance previously repealed or superseded
unless expressly stated herein.
Section 13.
All bylaws, orders, resolutions and ordinances, or parts thereof, inconsistent herewith
are hereby repealed to the extent only of such inconsistency. This repealer shall not
June 2, 2020 - Page 770 of 772
Ordinance No. 4, Series of 2020 8
be construed to revise any bylaw, order, resolution or ordinance, or part thereof,
heretofore repealed.
INTRODUCED, READ ON FIRST READING, APPROVED, AND ORDERED
PUBLISHED ONCE IN FULL ON FIRST READING this 19th day of May, 2020 and a public
hearing for second reading of this Ordinance set for the 2nd day of June, 2020, at 6:00 p.m.
in the Council Chambers of the Vail Municipal Building, Vail, Colorado.
_______________________
Dave Chapin, Town Mayor
ATTEST:
_________________________
Tammy Nagel, Town Clerk
READ AND APPROVED ON SECOND READING AND ORDER PUBLISHED in
full this 16th day of June, 2020.
_______________________
Dave Chapin, Town Mayor
ATTEST:
_________________________
Tammy Nagel, Town Clerk
June 2, 2020 - Page 771 of 772
VA I L TO W N C O UNC I L A G E ND A ME MO
I T E M /T O P I C: A djournment at 8:55 pm (estimate)
June 2, 2020 - Page 772 of 772