Loading...
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