Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPEC Sept 22 2003MEMORANDUM TO: Planning and Environmental Commission FROM: Community Development Department DATE: September 22, 2003 SUBJECT: A request for a final review of an exterior alteration or modification, pursuant to Section 12-7B-7, Exterior Alterations or Modifications, Vail Town Code, to allow for an addition to the Lodge at Vail; a request for a variance from Section 12-21-10, Development Restricted, Vail Town Code, pursuant to Chapter 17, Variances, Zoning Regulations, to allow for the construction of multiple-family dwelling units on slopes in excess of 40%; and a request for the establishment of an approved development plan to facilitate the construction of Vail's Front Door, and setting forth details in regard thereto. (A more complete metes and bounds legal description is available at the Town of Vail Community Development Department) Applicant: Vail Resorts, represented by Jay Peterson Planner: George Ruther I. SUMMARY The applicant, Vail Resorts Development Company (VRDC), represented by Jay Peterson, is requesting a final review of three development review applications intended to facilitate the development of Vail's Front Door project. Staff has reviewed the three applications is recommending that the Planning and Environmental Commission approves with conditions the applicant's requests. Staff recommendation is based upon the review of the applicable criteria, as outlined in the Town of Vail Zoning Regulations and the evidence and testimony presented. II. DESCRIPTION OF THE REQUEST The applicant, Vail Resorts Development Company (VRDC), represented by Jay Peterson, is requesting a final review of three development review applications intended to facilitate the development of Vail's Front Door project. The three applications include: 1) an exterior alteration or modification, pursuant to Section 12-7B-7, Exterior Alterations or Modifications, Vail Town Code, to allow for an addition to the Lodge at Vail; 2) a request for a variance from Section 12-21-10, Development Restricted, Vail Town Code, pursuant to Chapter 17, Variances, Zoning Regulations, to allow for the construction of multiple-family dwelling units on slopes in excess of 40%; and, 3) a request for the establishment of an approved development plan to facilitate the construction of Vail's Front Door project. A written description of the three applications is described in greater detail below: 1) Major Exterior Alteration or Modification in the Commercial Core I zone district The applicant is requesting approval of a major exterior alteration or modification to allow for an exterior addition and modification to the Lodge at Vail, pursuant to Section 12-713-7, of the Vail Town Code. Pursuant to Section 12-713-7, in part, "The construction of a new building, the alteration of an existing building which adds or removes any enclosed floor area, the alteration of an existing building which modifies exterior rooflines, the replacement of an existing building, the addition of a new outdoor dining deck or the modification of an existing outdoor dining deck shall be subject to review by the Planning and Environmental Commission (PEC) " The applicant is proposing to renovate a portion of the Lodge at Vail. The proposed renovation includes remodeling existing space on the first floor of the Lodge to accommodate a new spa facility. To accommodate the new spa facility, three hotel rooms on the first floor of the Lodge will be removed. The combined area of the rooms to be removed is approximately 1,100 square feet of GRFA. To replace the lost area of the three rooms, the applicant proposes to reconstruct two new hotel rooms on the second floor of the Lodge. The approximate total square footage of the new hotel rooms is roughly 2,000 square feet of GRFA. As a result of the proposed changes, there will be a net reduction in the number of required parking spaces associated with the hotel room use. In addition to the new hotel room improvements, the applicant proposes the construct a new pool and patio area on the south side of the Lodge. These new recreational amenities will be shared between the Lodge at Vail and the proposed skier's club. The new pool and patio area will be located atop a sub-surface parking and loading facility which serves to replace the existing outdoor gravel surface parking lot and loading and delivery area. A copy of the reduced proposed plans and elevations has been attached for reference. 2) Variance The applicant has requested a variance from Section 12-21-10, Development Restricted, of the Vail Town Code. According to Section 12-21-10, in part, "No structure shall be built in any flood hazard zone or red avalanche hazard area. No structure shall be built on a slope of forty percent (40916) or greater except in Single-Family Residential, Two-Family Residential, or Two-Family Primary/Secondary Residential Zone Districts. The term "structure" as used in this Section does not include recreational structures that are intended for seasonal use, not including residential use." U 2 The applicant is requesting a variance to allow the proposed 13 residential dwelling units to be constructed on slopes in excess of 40%. A copy of the topographic survey depicting the areas of 40% slopes or greater relative to the location of the proposed building footprints has been attached for reference 3) Approved Development Plan The applicant is requesting approval of an Approved Development Plan, pursuant to Section 12-8E-6, Development Plan, of the Vail Town Code. Pursuant to Section 12-8E-6, "Prior to site preparation, building construction, or other improvements to land within the Ski Base/Recreation 2 District, there shall be an approved development plan for said District or portion thereof. An approved development plan shall be the principal document in guiding the development, uses and activities of land within the district. A development plan shall be approved by the Planning and Environmental Commission. Development standards including setbacks, site coverage, landscaping, density (GRFA) and parking shall be determined by the Planning and Environmental Commission as part of the approved development plan. This determination is to be made based on the proposed development plan's compliance with the design criteria outlined in Section 12-8E-9 of this Article. " The request for approval of an Approved Development Plan is intended to facilitate the development of Vail's Front Door project. Vail's Front Door project is the comprehensive redevelopment of one of three primary portals to Vail Mountain and is intended to create a world-class arrival point and transition between Vail Village and Vail Mountain. Vail's Front Door project includes the following components: Vista Bahn Park - A comprehensive redesign of the ski yard and ski base area. Lodge at Vail - An addition of a new spa facility and renovations to a number of existing lodge rooms. Residence Club - A fractional fee residential project compromised of thirteen new ski-in/ski-out residences at the base of Vail Mountain. Member's Ski Club - A new ski club that will provide members with a variety of skier-related amenities such as a skier's lounge, changing rooms, ski storage, lockers, outdoor pool and hot tubs, and member's parking at the base of Vail Mountain. Vail Park - The development of a new neighborhood park and private parking structure on Lots P3 and J, in Vail Village. Skier Services Building - A new skier-related facilities building designed to provide a variety of guest and mountain employee services at the base of Vail Mountain. Delivery, Loading and Circulation - An entirely underground parking, loading, and delivery facility that replaces an existing surface parking lot and loading area at the base of Vail Mountain. A copy of the reduced plans has been attached for reference. Upon consideration of the three development review applications, the action requested of the Commission by the applicant and staff is to either, approve, approve with conditions, or deny the applicant's requests. III. BACKGROUND On January 6, 2003, the Community Development Department received the applicant's submittal of 14 development review applications to facilitate the redevelopment of Vail's Front Door project. On February 10 and 24, 2003, the Planning and Environmental Commission held worksessions to discuss the applicant's proposal and requests to amend various planning documents of the Town of Vail. 9010, On March 10, 2003, the Planning and Environmental Commission voted unanimously to forward a recommendation of approval of the applicant's request to amend the Vail Land Use Plan, Vail Village Master Plan, and the Town of Vail Zoning Regulations to the Vail Town Council. On April 1, 2003, the Vail Town Council approved Resolutions No. 2 and 3, Series of 2003, amending the Vail Land Use Plan and Vail Village Master Plan, and approved Ordinance No. 4, Series of 2003, amending the Town of Vail Zoning Regulation, upon first reading. On April 14, 2003, the Planning and Environmental Commission held a worksession to discussed the proposed plans for improvements to Lots P3 and J, Block 5A, Vail Village 5th Filing (Vail Park). On April 15, 2003, the Vail Town Council approved Ordinance No. 4, Series of 2003, amending the Town of Vail Zoning Regulation, upon second reading. On June 9, 2003, the Planning and Environmental Commission held a worksession to continue discussions on the proposed plans for improvements to Lots P3 and J, Block 5A, Vail Village 5th Filing (Vail Park). The Commission tabled the final review of the four development review applications directly associated with the Vail Park improvements until the July 14, 2003, public hearing of the Planning and Environmental Commission. On June 23, 2003, the Planning and Environmental Commission held a worksession to discuss the proposed improvements and development applications associated with the Vista Bahn Ski and Vail's Front Door project. Upon presentation of the 4 op", proposed plans, the Commission accepted public comment and then provided feedback to the applicant. In providing feedback to the applicant, the Commission raised a number of questions. The applicant and staff agreed to provide answers to those questions at the July 14, 2003 meeting. On July 14, 2003 the Planning and Environmental Commission held a worksession to discuss the proposed improvements and development applications associated with the Vista Bahn Ski and Vail's Front Door project. Upon presentation of the proposed plans, the Commission accepted public comment and then provided feedback to the applicant. In providing feedback to the applicant, the Commission raised a number of questions. The applicant and staff agreed to provide answers to those questions at the July 28, 2003 worksession meeting. The more significant issues raised by the Commission and public were questions regarding traffic impacts, loading and delivery operations and management, and the summer and winter programming of the Vista Bahn ski yard. On July 28, 2003, the Planning and Environmental Commission held a worksession to discuss the proposed improvements and development applications associated with the Vista Bahn Ski and Vail's Front Door project. Specifically, the Commission directed their attention to the operational and management issues associated with the proposed loading and delivery facility and the conclusions of the revised traffic impact report. To help understand the impacts of the loading and delivery facility the Commission members visited the centralized loading facility in Beaver Creek. The Commission also focused their attention on the site plan location and design concepts of the skier services building. On August 6, 2003, the Town of Vail Design Review Board held a hearing to discuss the proposed design concepts of the four major components of Vail's Front Door Project. Following a presentation on the proposed Vail Park, the 13 residences, the member's ski club, and skier services building improvements, the Board provided their initial comments and input. On August 11, 2003, the Planning and Environmental Commission held a public hearing on the proposed improvements to Lots P3 & J and a request to amend the Official Town of Vail Zoning Map. Upon evaluation of the applications, the Commission voted to approve the requests, with conditions, and to forward a recommendation of approval of the zone district amendments to the Vail Town Council. On August 25, 2003, the Planning and Environmental Commission held a worksession to continue discussions regarding the proposed improvements for Vail's Front Door Project. The main purposes of the meeting were to present the revised plans for the skier services building and to visit the proposed development site to view the staked locations of the improvements. In discussing the~roposal in light of an anticipated final review of the application on September 22" , the Commission provided the applicant and staff with a list of additional materials and items that would be required for review and consideration by the Commission prior to taking a final vote on the proposed project. On September 2, 2003, the Vail Town Council approved Ordinance No. 21, Series of 2003, amending the Official Zoning Map of the Town of Vail to zone Lots 1 and 2, 5 Mill Creek Subdivision Ski Base Recreation - 2 District and Lots P3 & J, Block 5A, Vail Village First Filing Parking District, upon first reading of an amending ordinance. On September 8, 2003, the Town of Vail Planning and Environmental Commission held a worksession to continue discussions regarding the proposed improvements for Vail's Front Door Project. The focus of the meeting was to respond to the list of additional materials and items that the Commission identified at their August 25th worksession meeting. Upon consideration of the applicant's and staff's responses to the identified list of materials and items, the Commission directed the staff and applicant to proceed towards the consideration of a final review of the proposed improvements at the September 22, 2003, public hearing of the Planning and Environmental Commission. On September 16, 2003, the Vail Town Council approved Ordinance No. 21, Series of 2003, amending the Official Zoning Map of the Town of Vail to zone Lots 1 and 2, Mill Creek Subdivision Ski Base Recreation - 2 District and Lots P3 & J, Block 5A, Vail Village First Filing Parking District, upon second reading of an amending ordinance. IV. APPLICABLE PLANNING DOCUMENTS Title 12, Zoning Regulations, Vail Town Code According to Sectionl2-7B-1, Purpose, Vail Town Code, the purpose of the Commercial Core I zone district is to, `provide sites and to maintain the unique character of the Vail Village commercial area, with its mixture of lodges and commercial establishments in a predominantly pedestrian environment. The Commercial Core 1 District is intended to ensure adequate light, air, open space, and other amenities appropriate to the permitted types of buildings and uses. The District regulations in accordance with the Vail Village Urban Design Guide Plan and Design Considerations prescribe site development standards that are intended to ensure the maintenance and preservation of the tightly clustered arrangements of buildings fronting on pedestrianways and public greenways, and to ensure continuation of the building scale and architectural qualities that distinguish the Village." According to Chapter 8, Vail Town Code, the regulations for development in the Ski Base Recreation - 2 zone district are as outlined below: Chapter 8 Open Space and Recreation Districts ARTICLE E. SKI BASE/RECREATION 2 (SBR2) DISTRICT SECTION: 12-8E-1: Purpose 6 12-8E-2: Permitted Uses 12-8E-3: Conditional Uses 12-8E-4: Accessory Uses 12-8E-5: Location of Business Activity 12-8E-6: Development Plan 12-8E-7: Development Review Procedures 12-8E-8: Submittal Requirements 12-8E-9: Design Criteria 12-8E-10: Lot Area 12-8E-11: Setbacks 12-8E-12: Height 12-8E-13: Density Control 12-8E-14: Site Coverage 12-8E-15: Landscaping and Site Development 12-8E-16: Parking Plan and Program 12-8E-17: Mitigation of Development Impacts 12-8E-18: Amendment Procedures 12-8E-19: Time Requirements 12-8E-1: PURPOSE: The Ski Base/Recreation 2 District is intended to provide sites for facilities, activities and uses necessary for and appurtenant to the operation of a ski mountain. A variety of other facilities, uses and activities, including but not limited to residential, public and semi-public uses and special community events typically associated with a vibrant resort community are also permitted within the District. The Ski Base/Recreation 2 District is intended to ensure adequate light, air, open space and other amenities appropriate to permitted and conditional uses throughout the District. In order to achieve this objective and to ensure compatibility with adjacent land uses, all permitted uses, development and 7 activity within the District shall be subject to approval of a comprehensive development plan in accordance with the provisions of this Article. Furthermore, due to the likelihood of this District being located at the base of Vail Mountain, and upon some of the most critical and important lands to the future success and resort character of the Town, development within this District shall be evaluated based upon its ability to meet the specific purposes of this Title and to provide "compelling public benefits which further the public interests" that go beyond any economic benefits to the landowner. 12-8E-2: PERMITTED USES: A. The following uses shall be permitted within the Ski Base/ Recreation 2 District. Ski base-oriented uses including the following: Ski trails Ski lifts and tows Ski racing facilities Snowmaking facilities Skier and guest services including but not limited to uses such as basket rental, lockers, ski repair, ski rental, lift ticket sales, public restrooms, information/activity desk Ski school facilities Ski patrol facilities Commercial ski storage on the basement or garden level of a building Retail stores and establishments Special community events, including but not limited to ski races, festivals, concerts, and recreational, cultural and educational programs and associated improvements/facilities, subject to the issuance of a Special Events License. 2. Eating and drinking establishments including the following: L~ Bakeries and delicatessens with food service, restricted to preparation of products specifically for sale on the premises Coffee shop Fountains and sandwich shops Restaurants Cocktail lounges and bars 3. Residential Uses including the following: Single-family residential dwelling units Two-family residential dwelling units Multi-family residential dwelling units Accommodation units r 4. Lodges 6. Private or public off-street vehicle parking structures 7. Private or public off-street loading facilities 8. Public parks and outdoor recreation facilities 12-8E-3: CONDITIONAL USES: The following conditional uses shall be permitted in the Ski Base/Recreation 2 District, subject to the issuance of a conditional use permit in accordance with the provisions of Chapter16 of this Title: 1. Brew pubs 2. Fractional fee units 3. Private and public clubs 4. Public utility and public service uses 5. Outdoor dining decks and patios 6. Type 111 employee housing units as provided in chapter 13 of this title 9 7 Additional uses determined to be similar to conditional or permitted uses described in this chapter, in accordance with the provisions of Section 12- 3-4 of this Title. 12-8E-4: ACCESSORY USES: The following accessory uses shall be permitted in the Ski Base/Recreation 2 District. Accessory uses customarily incidental to permitted and conditional uses and necessary for the operation thereof. Ski school offices, sales, and activities Ski patrol offices Skier and guest service employee offices, locker rooms, and meeting rooms Swimming pools, patios or other recreation facilities customarily incidental to permitted uses. 12-8E-5: LOCATION OF BUSINESS ACTIVITY. A. Limitations; Exception: All offices, retail sales, and commercial ski storage conducted in the Ski Base/Recreation 2 (SBR2) district shall be operated and conducted entirely within a building, except for approved special community events, outdoor display of goods, and outdoor restaurant seating. B. Outdoor Displays: The area to be used for outdoor display must 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 display. 12-8E-6: DEVELOPMENT PLAN: A. Development Plan Required Prior to site preparation, building construction, or other improvements to land within the Ski Base/Recreation 2 District, there shall be an approved development plan for said District or portion thereof. An approved development plan shall be the principal document in guiding the development, uses and activities of land within the district. A 10 development plan shall be approved by the Planning and Environmental Commission. Development standards including setbacks, site coverage, landscaping, density (GRFA) and parking shall be determined by the Planning and Environmental Commission as part of the approved development plan. This determination is to be made based on the proposed development plan's compliance with the design criteria outlined in Section 12- 8E-9 of this Article. B. Application An application for approval of a development plan may be filed by any owner of property within the Ski Base/Recreation 2 district or his (her) agent or authorized representative. The application shall be made on a form provided by the Department of Community Development and shall include: a legal description of the property, a list of names and mailing addresses of all adjacent property owners and written consent of owners of all property to be included in the development plan, or their agents or authorized representatives. The application shall be accompanied by submittal requirements outlined in Section 12-8E-8 A. of this Article and a development plan as outlined in Section 12-8E-6 C. of this Article. C. Contents The development plan shall be comprised of materials submitted in accordance with Section 12-8E-8 A. of this Article. The development plan shall contain all relevant material and information necessary to establish the parameters within which land in the district may be developed. The development plan may consist of, but not be limited to, the approved site plan, floor plans, building sections and elevations, vicinity plan, off- street parking/loading plan, off-site improvements plan, preliminary open space/landscape plan, densities and permitted, conditional and accessory uses. 12-8E-7: DEVELOPMENT REVIEW PROCEDURES: A. Pre-Application Conference Prior to submittal of a formal application for a development plan, the applicant shall hold a pre-application conference with the Department of Community Development. The purpose of this meeting shall be to discuss the goals of the proposed development plan, 1-01 11 the relationship of the proposal to applicable elements of the Vail Comprehensive Plan, and the review procedure that will be followed for the application. B. PEC Conducts Final Review The final review of a proposed development plan shall be by the Planning and Environmental Commission at either a regularly scheduled meeting or a special meeting. Prior to this meeting, and at the discretion of the Administrator, a worksession may be held with the applicant, staff and the Planning and Environmental Commission to discuss development plan. A report of the Department of Community Development staffs findings and recommendations shall be presented at a public hearing before the Planning and Environmental Commission. The Planning and Environmental Commission shall review the development plan in accordance with the provisions of Section 12-8E-9 of this Article. 12-8E-8: SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS: A. Information and Materials Required The Administrator shall establish the submittal requirements for an approved development plan application. Certain submittal requirements maybe waived or modified by the Administrator or the Planning and Environmental Commission if it is demonstrated by the applicant that the information and materials required is not relevant to the proposed development or applicable to the Vail Comprehensive Plan. A complete list of the submittal requirements shall be maintained by the Administrator and filed in the Department of Community Development. 12-8E-9: DESIGN CRITERIA: The following design criteria shall be used as the principal criteria in evaluating the merits of a proposed development plan. It shall be the burden of the applicant to prove by a preponderance of the evidence 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: 4; 12 A. 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. B. Relationship: Uses, activity and density which provide a compatible, efficient and workable relationship with surrounding uses and activity. C. Parking and Loading: Compliance with parking and loading requirements as outlined in Chapter 10 of this Title. D. Comprehensive Plan: Conformity with Vail Comprehensive Plan, Town policies and urban design plans. E. Natural And/Or Geologic Hazard. Identification and mitigation of natural and/or geologic hazards that affect the property on which the development plan is proposed. F. 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. G. Traffic: A circulation system designed for both vehicles and pedestrians addressing on and off-site traffic circulation. H. Landscaping: Functional and aesthetic landscaping and open space in order to optimize and preserve natural features, recreation, views and function. 1. Workable Plan: Phasing plan or subdivision plan that will maintain a workable, functional and efficient relationship throughout the development of the development plan. J. Annexed Lands: Conformity with the terms of an annexation agreement and demonstration of a compelling public benefit which furthers the public interest. 12-8E-10: LOT AREA: The minimum lot or site area shall be ten thousand (10, 000) square feet of buildable site area. 12-8E-11: SETBACKS: 13 In the Ski Base/Recreation 2 District, front, side and rear setbacks shall be as indicated on the approved development plan. 12-8E-12: HEIGHT. In the Ski Base/Recreation 2 District buildings shall range in height from 0' - 43' and be indicated on the approved development plan. All development shall comply with the building height guidelines found in the Vail Village Master Plan Conceptual Building Height Plan. In no instance, however, shall the maximum building height exceed 43'. 12-8E-13: DENSITY CONTROL (DWELLING UNITS PER ACRE/GRFA): Total density shall not exceed eight (8) dwelling units per acre of buildable site area. The total allowable Gross Residential Floor Area (GRFA) shall as indicated on the approved development plan. 12-8E-14: SITE COVERAGE: In the Ski Base/Recreation 2 District, site coverage shall be as indicated on the approved development plan. 12-8E-15: LANDSCAPING AND SITE DEVELOPMENT: In the Ski Base/Recreation 2 District, landscaping requirements shall be as indicated on the approved development plan. 12-8E-16: PARKING/LOADING PLAN AND PROGRAM: Off-street parking and loading shall be provided in accordance with Chapter 10 of this Title. At least 95% of the required parking shall be located within the main building or buildings, and as approved by the Planning and Environmental Commission in review of the development plan. The off-street parking and loading plan shall be indicated on and described in the approved development plan. 12-8E-17: 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 14 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, loading/delivery, streetscape improvements, stream tract/bank improvements, public art improvements, parking, 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. 12-8E-18: AMENDMENT PROCEDURES A. Minor Amendments: Minor amendments are modifications to building plans, site or landscape plans that do not alter the basic intent and character of the approved development plan, 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 development site; or changes to gross floor area of not more than five percent (591o) of the approved square footage of residential floor area or retail, office, common areas and other nonresidential floor area. 2. Minor amendments consistent with the design criteria outlined in Section 12-8E-9 of this Article may be approved by the Department of Community Development. All minor amendments shall be indicated on a completely revised development plan. Approved changes shall be noted, signed, dated and filed by the Department of Community Development. 3. Notification of a proposed minor amendment, and a report of staff action of said request, shall be provided to all property owners within or adjacent to the district that may be affected by the amendment. Affected properties shall be as determined by the Department of Community Development. Notifications shall be postmarked no later than five (5) days following staff action on the amendment request and shall include a brief statement describing the amendment and the time and date of when the Planning and Environmental Commission will be informed of the staff decision. In all cases the report to the Planning and Environmental Commission shall 15 op" be made within twenty (20) days from the date of the staff's decision on the requested amendment. 4. Appeals of staff decisions may be filed by adjacent property owners, owners of property within the district, the applicant, Planning and Environmental Commission members or members of the Town Council as outlined in Section 12-3-3 of this Title. B. Major Amendments: 1. Major amendments are any proposal to change uses; increases to residential floor area greater than 5% of the approved square footage; increases to retail, office, or common floor area greater than 5 % of the approved square footage; increases or decreases to the number of dwelling, accommodation, or fractional fee club units; any request to modify, enlarge or expand the boundary of an approved development plan and any amendment to the approved development plan that is not a minor amendment as determined by the Administrator and defined in this Article 2. Requests for major amendments to an approved development plan shall be evaluated based upon the degree of deviation of the amendment from the basic intent and character of the approved development plan and reviewed in accordance with the procedures described in Section 12-8E-7 of this Article. All major amendments shall be indicated on a completely revised development plan. Approved changes shall be noted, signed, dated and filed by the Department of Community Development. 3. Owners of all property requesting the amendment, or their agents or authorized representatives, shall sign the application. Notification of the proposed amendment shall be made to owners of all property adjacent to the property requesting the proposed amendment, owners of all property adjacent to the district, and owners of all property within the district that may be affected by the proposed amendment (as determined by the Department of Community Development). Notification procedures shall be as outlined in subsection 12-3-6C of this Title. 12-8E-19: TIME REQUIREMENTS A. Start of Construction; Completion: 16 The developer must begin initial construction of the development plan within three (3) years from the time of its final approval, and continue diligently toward the completion of the project. If the development plan is to be developed in phases, the developer must begin construction of subsequent phases within one year of the completion of the previous phase. 8. Approval Voided. If the applicant does not begin and diligently work toward the completion of the development plan or any stage of the development plan within the time limits imposed by the preceding subsection, the approval of said development plan shall be void. The Planning and Environmental Commission shall review the development plan upon submittal of an application to re-establish the development plan following the procedures outlined in Section 12-8E-7 of this Article. Vail Land Use Plan The Vail Land Use Plan was initiated in 1985 and adopted in 1986 by the Vail Town Council. The main purpose of the Land Use Plan is two-fold: 1. To articulate the land use goals of the Town. 2. To serve as a guide for decision making by the Town. The Vail Land Use Plan is intended to serve as a basis from which future land use decisions may be made within the Town of Vail. The goals, as articulated within the Land Use Plan, are meant to be used as adopted policy guidelines in the review process for new development proposals. In conjunction with these goals, land use categories are defined to indicate general types of land uses which are then used to develop the Vail Land Use Map. The Land Use Plan is not intended to be regulatory in nature, but is intended to provide a general framework to guide decision making. Where the land use categories and zoning conflict, existing zoning controls development on a site. The Vail Land Use Plan contains the following goals: 1.0 General Growth/Development 1.1 Vail should continue to grow in a controlled environment, maintaining a balance between residential, commercial and recreational uses to serve both the visitor and the permanent resident. 1.2 The quality of the environment including air, water and other natural resources should be protected as the Town grows. 17 1.3 The quality of development should be maintained and upgraded whenever possible. 1.4 The original theme of the old Village Core should be carried into new development in the Village Core through continued implementation of the Urban Design Guide Plan. 1.5 Commercial strip development of the Valley should be avoided. 1.6 Development proposals on the hillsides should be evaluated on a case by case basis. Limited development may be permitted for some low intensity uses in areas that are not highly visible from the Valley floor. New projects should be carefully controlled and developed with sensitivity to the environment. 1.7 New subdivisions should not be permitted in high geologic hazard areas. 1.8 Recreational and public facility development on National Forest lands may be permitted where no high hazards exist if: a) Community objectives are met as articulated in the Comprehensive Plan. b) The parcel is adjacent to the Town boundaries, with good access. C) The affected neighborhood can be involved in the decision-making process. 1.9 National Forest land which is exchanged, sold or otherwise falls into private ownership should remain as open space and not be zoned for private development. 1.10 Development of Town owned lands by the Town of Vail (other than parks and open space) may be permitted where no high hazards exist, if such development is for public use. 1.11 Town owned lands shall not be sold to a private entity, long term leased to a private entity or converted to a private use without a public hearing process. 1.12 Vail should accommodate most of the additional growth in existing developed areas (infill areas). 1.13 Vail recognizes its stream tract as being a desirable land feature as well as its potential for public use. 2.0 Skier/Tourist Concerns 2.1 The community should emphasize its role as a destination resort while accommodating day skiers. ~49 ICJ 18 2.2 The ski area owner, the business community and the Town leaders should work together closely to make existing facilities and the Town function more efficiently. E 2.3 The ski area owner, the business community and the Town leaders should work together to improve facilities for day skiers. 2.4 The community should improve summer recreational and cultural opportunities to encourage summer tourism. 2.5 The community should improve non-skier recreational options to improve year-round tourism. 2.6 An additional golf course is needed. The Town should work with the down valley communities to develop a public golf course as well as other sports facilities to serve the regional demand for recreational facilities. 2.7 The Town of Vail should improve the existing park and open space lands while continuing to purchase open space. 2.8 Day skiers need for parking and access should be accommodated through creative solutions such as: a) Increased busing from out of town. b) Expanded points of access to the mountain by adding additional base portals. C) Continuing to provide temporary surface parking. d) Addition of structured parking. 3.0 Commercial 3.1 The hotel bed base should be preserved and used more efficiently. 3.2 The Village and Lionshead areas are the best location for hotels to serve the future needs of the 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. 3.5 Entertainment oriented business and cultural activities should be encouraged in the core areas to create diversity. More nighttime businesses, on-going events and sanctioned "street happenings" should be encouraged. 4.0 Village Core / Lionshead 19 Objective 1.2: Encourage the upgrading and redevelopment of residential and commercial facilities. Objective 1.3: Enhance new development and redevelopment through public improvements done by private developers working in cooperation with the Town. Goal #2 To foster a strong tourist industry and promote year-round 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 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. Objective 2.4: Encourage the development of a variety of new commercial activity where compatible with existing land uses. Objective 2.5: Encourage the continued upgrading, renovation and maintenance of existing lodging and commercial facilities to better serve the needs of our guests. Objective 2.6: Encourage the development of affordable housing units through the efforts of the private sector. Goal #3 To recognize as a top priority the enhancement of the walking experience throughout the Village. Objective 3.1: Physically improve the existing pedestrian ways by landscaping and other improvements. Objective 3.2: Minimize the amount of vehicular traffic in the Village to the greatest extent possible. Objective 3.3: Encourage a wide variety of activities, events, and street life along pedestrian ways and plazas. Objective 3.4: Develop additional sidewalks, pedestrian-only walkways and accessible green space areas, including pocket parks and stream access. Lam' 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 greenspaces and pocket parks. Recognize the 22 4.1 Future commercial development should continue to occur primarily in existing commercial areas. Future commercial development in the Core areas needs to be carefully controlled to facilitate access and delivery. 4.2 Increased density in the Core areas is acceptable so long as the existing character of each area is preserved thorough implementation of the Urban Design Guide Plan. 11 4.3 The ambiance of Vail Village is important to the identity of Vail and should be preserved. (scale, alpine character, small town feeling, mountains, natural setting, intimate size, cosmopolitan feeling, environmental quality.) 4.4 The connection between the Village Core and Lionshead should be enhanced through: a) Installation of a new type of people mover. b) Improving the pedestrian system with a creatively designed connection, oriented toward a nature walk, alpine garden, and/or sculpture plaza. C) New development should be controlled to limit commercial uses. 5.0 Residential 5.1 Additional residential growth should continue to occur primarily in existing, platted areas and as appropriate in new areas where high hazards do not exist. 5.2 Quality time-share units should be accommodated to help keep occupancy rates up. 5.3 Affordable employee housing should be made available through private efforts, assisted by limited incentives, provided by the Town of Vail with appropriate restrictions. 5.4 Residential growth should keep pace with the marketplace demands for a full range of housing types. 5.5 The existing employee housing base should be preserved and upgraded. Additional employee housing needs should be accommodated at varied sites throughout the community. Vail Village Master Plan The Vail Village Master Plan is based on the premise that the Village can be planned and designed as a whole. It is intended to guide the Town in developing land use laws and policies for coordinating development by the public and private sectors in Vail Village and in implementing community goals for public improvements. It is intended to result in ordinances and policies that will preserve and improve the unified and attractive appearance of Vail Village. Most importantly, this Master Plan shall serve as a guide to the staff, review boards, 20 and Town Council in analyzing future proposals for development in Vail Village and in legislating effective ordinances to deal with such development. Furthermore, the Master Plan provides a clearly stated set of goals and objectives outlining how the Village will grow in the future. The Vail Village Master Plan is intended to be consistent with the Vail Village Urban Design Guide Plan, and along with the Guide Plan, it underscores the importance of the relationship between the built environment and public spaces. Goals for Vail Village are summarized in six major goal statements. While there is a certain amount of overlap between these six goals, each focuses on a particular aspect of the Village and the community as a whole. The goal statements are designed to establish a framework, or direction, for the future growth of the Village. A series of objectives outline specific steps that can be taken toward achieving each stated goal. Policy statements have been developed to guide the Town's decision-making in achieving each of the stated objectives, whether it be through the review of private sector development proposals or in implementing capital improvement projects. The Vail Village Master Plan's objectives and policy statements address key issues relative to growth and development. These statements establish much of the context within which future development proposals are evaluated. In implementing the Plan, the objectives and policies are used in conjunction with a number of graphic planning elements that together comprise this Plan. While the objectives and policies establish a general framework, the graphic plans provide more specific direction regarding public improvements or development potential on a particular piece of property. The Vail Village Master Plan is intended to serve as a guide to the staff, review boards and Town Council in analyzing future proposals for development in Vail Village and in legislating effective ordinances to deal with such development. The most significant elements of the Master Plan are the goals, objectives, policies and action steps. They are the working tools of the Master Plan. They establish the broad framework and vision, but also layout the specific policies and action steps that will be used to implement the Plan. As noted on page 35 of the Master Plan, "It is important to note that the likelihood of project approval will be greatest for those proposals that can fully comply with the Vail Village Master Plan. " Staff believes this statement re-emphasizes that the Master Plan is a general document providing advisory guidelines to aid the Town in analyzing development proposals and that full compliance is not required in order for a project to be approved. The stated goals of the Vail Village Master Plan are: Goal #1 Encourage high quality redevelopment while preserving the unique architectural scale of the Village in order to sustain its sense of community and identity. 21 different roles of each type pf open space in forming the overall fabric of the Village. Objective 4.2 Improve and expand the opportunity for active and passive recreational activity throughout the Village. Goal #5 Increase and improve the capacity, efficiency and aesthetics of the transportation and circulation system throughout the Village. Objective 5.1: Meet parking demands with public and private parking facilities. Objective 5.2: Encourage the use of public transportation to minimize the use of private automobiles throughout Vail. Goal #6 To insure the continued improvement of the vital operational elements of the Village. Objective 6.1: Provide service and delivery facilities for existing and new development. Objective 6.2: Provide for the safe and efficient functions of fire, police and public utilities within the context of an aesthetically pleasing resort setting. FRONT DOOR SUB-AREA (#11) The following is language describes the Front Door Sub-Area: The Front Door sub-area plays a critical role in the interface between the ski mountain and the fabric of Vail Village. As the premier guest portal to Vail Mountain, the Front Door area should reflect in both use and design the world-class stature of the Vail resort and community. The goals for development in this sub-area are as follows: • To provide for a year-round, world-class guest experience at the interface between Vail Village and the ski mountain. • To provide new and improved guest service facilities at the top of Bridge Street that will not only improve the quality of the entire guest experience, but will increase evening guest retention in Vail Village. • Provide for new below-grade loading and delivery facilities to better serve the Front Door and upper Bridge Street areas, consistent with the overall "dispersed quadrant" approach of the Vail loading and delivery master plan. • To provide a venue for outdoor cultural/art and sporting events and other similar special community events. • Provide for the removal of surface vehicular traffic and parking that currently occurs within the sub-area. 23 • To provide for limited (6-10 dwelling units/acre) medium density residential development. • With the exception of development that may be approved within Sub-Area Concepts 11-1 and 11-2, the balance of the Front Door Sub-Area should remain in a predominantly undeveloped, open space condition. The Front Door Sub-area includes two Sub-Area Concepts. Please refer to the Vail Village Master Plan Action Plan for a graphic depiction of these concepts. #11-1 Lodge Exchange Parcel Limited development of this site provides an opportunity to consolidate and/or remove existing uses and in doing so improve the visual quality of this area. Medium density residential development and associated uses respecting and complimenting the adjacent Lodge at Vail, Lodge Tower, and Vista Bahn ski yard are appropriate. Most parking except temporary guest arrival spaces should be located below grade. Existing mountain and USFS access should be maintained and if feasible placed below grade throughout the parcel. To the extent feasible, service and delivery facilities, including existing service and delivery facilities for the Lodge Tower, the Lodge at Vail, and surrounding commercial uses should be located below grade. A pedestrian/bicycle connection between Willow Circle/Vail Road and the Vista Bahn ski yard should be retained. Development of this sub-area will attract additional traffic and population to this area and may have significant impacts on sub area 1- 12 (Willow Circle). # 11-2 The Vista Bahn Park Redevelopment of ski yard should improve and emphasize the connection between the Vista Bahn lift area (the mountain) and the lower skier plaza area (the village). Opportunities exist to re-grade the ski yard to improve access and usefulness of the site. Existing modular ski storage structures in the ski yard should be replaced with new skier/guest service facilities to improve year-round use of the area and to encourage summer season usage. If developed, the scale of a skier/guest service building should be limited to one-story as viewed from the skier plaza area. Vail Village Urban Design Guide Plan This Guide Plan represents collective ideas about functional and aesthetic objectives for Vail Village. Diagrammatic in nature, the Guide Plan is intended to suggest the nature of improvements desired. It is based on a number of urban design criteria determined to be appropriate for guiding change in the Vail Village. The Guide plan is intended to be a guide for current planning in both the public and private sectors. Vail Village Design Considerations The Town of Vail adopted the Vail Village Design Considerations in 1980. The Design Considerations were revised in 1993. The Design Considerations are considered an integral part of the Vail Village Urban Design Plan. The Design Considerations are intended to: 24 • guide growth and change in ways that will enhance and preserve the essential qualities of the Village; and • serve as design guidelines instead of rigid rules of development; and • help influence the form and design of buildings. The Vail Village Design Considerations are divided into two categories (urban design considerations and architectural/landscape considerations): 1. URBAN DESIGN CONSIDERATIONS These considerations relate to general, large-scale land use planning issues, as well as form considerations which affect more than one property or even whole areas. These considerations are primarily the purview of the Planning and Environmental Commission. A. PEDESTRIAN IZATION A major objective for Vail Village is to encourage pedestrian circulation through an interconnected network of safe, pleasant pedestrian ways. Many of the improvements recognized in the Urban Design Guide Plans, and accompanying Design Considerations, are to reinforce and expand the quality of pedestrian walkways throughout the Village. Since vehicular traffic cannot be removed from certain streets (bus routes, delivery access), a totally care-free pedestrian system is not achievable throughout the entire Village. Therefore, several levels of pedestrian ization have been identified. B. VEHICLE PENETRATION To maximize to the extent possible, all non-resident traffic should be routed along the Frontage Road to Vail Village/Lionshead Parking Structures. In conjunction with pedestrianization objectives, major emphasis is focused upon reducing auto penetration into the center of the Village. Vail Road and Vail Valley Drive will continue to serve as major routes for service and resident access to the Village. Road constrictions, traffic circles, signage, and other measures are indicated in the Guide Plans to visually and physically discourage all but essential vehicle penetration upon the Frontage Road. Alternative access points and private parking relocation, where feasible, should be considered to further reduce traffic conflicts in the Village. C. STREETSCAPE FRAMEWORK To improve the quality of the walking experience and give continuity to the pedestrian ways, as a continuous system, two 25 general types of improvements adjacent to the walkways are considered: 1. Open space and landscaping, berms, grass, flowers and tree planting as a soft, colorful framework linkage along pedestrian routes; and plazas and park greenspaces as open nodes and focal points along those routes. 2. Infill commercial storefronts, expansion of existing buildings, or new infill development to create new commercial activity generators to give streetlife and visual interest, as attractions at key locations along pedestrian routes. It is not intended to enclose all Village streets with buildings as in the core areas. Nor is it desirable to leave pedestrian streets in the open in somewhat undefined condition evident in many other areas of Vail. Rather, it is desired to have a variety of open and enclosed spaces, both built and landscaped, which create a strong framework for pedestrian walks, as well as visual interest and activity. D. STREET ENCLOSURE While building facade heights should not be uniform from building to building, they should provide a "comfortable" enclosure for the street. Pedestrian streets are outdoor rooms, whose walls are formed by the buildings. The shape and feel of these "rooms" are created by the variety of heights and massing (3-dimensional variations), which give much of the visual interest and pedestrian scale unique to Vail. Very general rules, about the perception of exterior spaces have been developed by designers, based on the characteristics of human vision. They suggest that: "an external enclosure is most comfortable when its walls are approximately 112 as high as the width of the space enclosed, if the ratio falls to 114 or less, the space seems unenclosed, and if the height is greater than the width it comes to resemble a canyon". In actual application, facades are seldom uniform in height on both sides of the street, nor is this desired. Thus, some latitude is appropriate in the application of this 1/2 to 1 ratio. Using the average facade height on both sides will generally still be a guide to the comfortableness of the enclosure being created. In some instances, the "canyon" effect is acceptable and even desirable. For example, as a short connecting linkage between larger spaces, to give variety to the walking experience. For sun/shade reasons it is often advantageous to orient any longer 26 segments in a north/south direction. Long canyon streets in an east/west direction should generally be discouraged. When exceptions to the general height criteria occur, special consideration should be given to create a well-defined ground floor pedestrian emphasis to overcome the "canyon" effect. Canopies, awnings, arcades and building extensions can all create a pedestrian focus and divert attention from the upper building heights and "canyon" effect. E. STREET EDGE Buildings in the Village core should form a strong but irregular edge to the street. Unlike many American towns, there are no standard setback requirements for buildings in Vail Village. Consistent with the desire for intimate pedestrian scale, placement of portions of a building at or near the property line is allowed and encouraged to give strong definition to the pedestrian streets. This is not to imply continuous building frontage along the property line. A strong street edge is important for continuity, but perfectly aligned facades over too long a distance tends to be monotonous. With only a few exceptions in the Village, slightly irregular facade lines, building jogs, and landscaped areas, give the life to the street and visual interest for pedestrian travel. Where buildings jog to create activity pockets, other elements can be used to continue the street edge: low planter walls, tree planting, raised sidewalks, texture changes in ground surface, arcades, raised decks. Plazas, patios, and green areas are important focal points for gathering, resting, orienting and should be distributed throughout the Village with due consideration to spacing, sun access, opportunities for views and pedestrian activity. F. BUILDING HEIGHT Vail Village is perceived as a mix of two and three story facades, although there are also four and five story buildings. The mix of building heights gives variety to the street, which is desirable. The height criteria are intended to encourage height in massing variety and to discourage uniform building heights along the street. G. VIEWS AND FOCAL POINTS Vail's mountain/valley setting is a fundamental part of its identity. Views of the mountains, ski slopes, creeks and other natural features are reminders to our visitors of the mountain environment and, by repeated visibility, are orientation reference points. Certain building features also provide important orientation 27 references and visual focal points. The most significant view corridors in the Village have been adopted as part of Chapter 18.73 of the Vail Municipal Code. The view corridors adopted should not be considered exhausted. When evaluating a development proposal, priority should be given to an analysis of the impacted project on public views. Views that should be preserved originate from either major pedestrian areas or public spaces, and include views of the ski mountain, the Gore Range, the Clock Tower, the Rucksack Tower and other important man- made and natural elements that contribute to the sense of place associated with Vail. These views, which have been adopted by ordinance, were chosen due to their significance, not only from an aesthetic standpoint, but also as orientation reference points for pedestrians. Development in Vail Village shall not encroach into any adopted view corridor, unless approved under Chapter 18.73. Adopted corridors are listed in Chapter 18.73 of the Vail Municipal Code. Whether affecting adopted view corridors or not, the impact of proposed development on views from public ways and public spaces must be identified and considered where appropriate. H. SERVICE AND DELIVERY Any building expansion should preserve the functions of existing service alleys. The few service alleys that exist in the Village are extremely important to minimizing vehicle congestion on pedestrian ways. The use of, and vehicular access to, those alleys should not be eliminated except where functional alternatives are not provided. In all new and remodeled construction, delivery which avoids or reduces impacts on pedestrian ways should be explored; and adopted whenever practical, for immediate or future use. Rear access, basement and below ground delivery corridors reduce congestion. Weather protection increases delivery efficiency substantially. Below grade delivery corridors are found in a few buildings in Vail Village (Sitzmark/Gore Creek Plaza, Village Center, Vail Village Inn). Consideration should be given to extending these corridors, where feasible, and the creation of new ones. As buildings are constructed or remodeled, the opportunity may exist to develop segments of a future system. I. SUN/SHADE Due to Vail's alpine climate, sun is an important comfort factor, especially in winter, fall and spring. Shade areas have ambient temperatures substantially below those of adjacent direct sunlight areas. On all but the warmest of summer days, shade can easily lower temperatures below comfortable levels and thereby, negatively impact use of those areas. Im 28 All new or expanded buildings should not substantially increase the spring and fall shadow line (March 21 - September 23) on adjacent properties or the public right-of-way. In all building construction, shade shall be considered in massing and overall height consideration. Notwithstanding, sun/shade considerations are not intended to restrict building height allowances, but rather to influence the massing of buildings. Limited height exceptions may be granted to meet this criteria. V. ZONING ANALYSIS Address: 145 Vail Road Legal Description: Lots 1 and 2, Mill Creek Subdivision, Tract E, Vail Village First Filing, and Unplatted Zoning: Commercial Core 1 and Ski Base Recreation - 2 zone districts Land Use Plan Designation: Ski Base and Vail Village Master Plan Hazards: Areas of 40% Slope Lot Area: 261,685 square feet/6.01 acres Development Standards Allowed Proposed Lot Area (min.): 10,000 sq. ft. of buildable area Setbacks: As indicated on the approved development plan Building Height (max.): Density Control: (du's/ac) (GRFA) 43' and as indicated on the approved development plan (Compliance with the Vail Village Master Plan is required) 48 du's or 8 du's/ac As indicated on the approved development plan Site Coverage As indicated on the approved development plan 261,685 sq. ft. of buildable area > 20' and as indicated on the approved development plan Varies with all buildings <43' and as indicated on the approved development plan 13 du's or 2.2 du's/ac 36,500 sq. ft. As indicated on the approved development plan 29 VI. VII. Landscaping and Site Development: Parking/Loading Plan and Program As indicated on the approved development plan As indicated on the approved development plan SURROUNDING LAND USES AND ZONING Land Use North: Mixed Use South: Open Space East: Residential West: Residential CRITERIA AND FINDINGS FOR REVIEW Zoning As indicated on the approved development plan See attached spreadsheet > 90% of the parking is enclosed per the Code requirements Commercial Core 1 Resource (Eagle County) Two-Family Primary/Secondary Two-Family Primary/Secondary 1) Major Exterior Alteration or Modification in the Commercial Core I zone district According to Section 12-713-7 (A)(6), Compliance With Comprehensive Applicable Plans, Vail Town Code, "1t shall be the burden of the applicant to prove by a preponderance of the evidence before the Planning and Environmental Commission that the proposed exterior alteration is in compliance with the purposes of the CC1 District as specified in Section 12-78-1 of this Article; that the proposal is consistent with applicable elements of the Vail Village Master Plan, the Town of Vail Streetscape Master Plan, and the Vail Comprehensive Plan; and that the proposal does not otherwise negatively alter the character of the neighborhood. Further, that the proposal substantially complies with the Vail Village Urban Design Guide Plan and the Vail Village Design Considerations, to include, but not be limited to, the following urban design considerations: pedestrianization, vehicular penetration, streetscape framework, street enclosure, street edge, building height, views, service/delivery and sun/shade analysis; and that the proposal substantially complies with all other elements of the Vail comprehensive plan." The applicable elements of the comprehensive plans and the relevant planning documents have been summarized and outlined in Section IV of this memorandum. Upon review of the applicable elements of the comprehensive plans and the relevant planning documents of the Town of Vail, the staff has determined that the proposed major exterior alteration or modification to the Lodge at Vail is in substantial compliance with the purposes of the Commercial Core 1 zone district; that the proposal is consistent with applicable elements of the Vail Village Master Plan, the Town of Vail Streetscape Master Plan, and the Vail Comprehensive Plan; and that the proposal does not otherwise negatively alter the character of the neighborhood. 30 Specifically, staff finds that the proposed improvements maintain the unique character of the Vail Village commercial area, with its mixture of lodges and commercial establishments in a predominantly pedestrian environment. The proposed improvements ensure adequate light, air, open space, and other amenities appropriate to the permitted types of buildings and uses in the vicinity. Further, through the removal of the existing surface parking lot and the incorporation of an underground loading and delivery facility, the proposed improvements further the goals and objectives of the Vail Village Master Plan, the Town of Vail Streetscape Master Plan, and the Town of Vail Transportation Master Plan; each of which is an element of the Vail Comprehensive Plan. Additionally, the proposed improvements substantially comply with recommendations outlined in the Vail Village Urban Design Guide Plan and the Vail Village Design Considerations, to include, but not be limited to, the following urban design considerations: pedestrian ization, vehicular penetration, streetscape framework, street enclosure, street edge, building height, views, service/delivery and sun/shade analysis. Further assurance of such will result through the final review of the proposal by the Town of Vail Design Review Board. 2) Variance Section 12-17-6, Criteria and Findings, of the Vail Town Code, prescribes the criteria to be used by the Planning and Environmental Commission when considering a request for a variance. According to Section 12-17-6, Criteria and Findings, Before acting on a variance application, the planning and environmental commission shall consider the following factors with respect to the requested variance: 1. The relationship of the requested variance to other existing or potential uses and structures in the vicinity. According to Section 12-21-1, Purpose, Hazard Regulations, Vail Town Code, the purpose of the hazard regulations is, "to help protect the inhabitants of the Town from dangers relating to development of flood plains, avalanche paths, steep slopes and geologically sensitive areas; to regulate the use of land areas which may be subject to flooding and avalanche or which may be geologically sensitive; and further to regulate development on steep slopes; to protect the economic and property values of the Town, to protect the aesthetic and recreational values and natural resources of the Town, which are sometimes associated with flood plains, avalanche areas and areas of geological sensitivity and slopes; to minimize damage to public facilities and utilities and minimize the need for relief in cleanup operations; to give notice to the public of certain areas within the Town where flood plains, avalanche areas and areas of geologic sensitivity exist, and to promote the general public health, safety and welfare. " The proposed development site contains isolated areas of slopes in excess of 40%. According to the stamped, topographic survey information submitted by the applicant and reviewed by staff, the areas of 40% slopes are located primarily in the center of the development site allocated to the 13 residential units. As 31 0011- depicted on the topographic survey, the areas of 40% slope are randomly distributed about the development site and occupy approximately 4.6 percent, or 4,222 square feet of the total development site. If approved, the areas of 40% slope will be removed, or mitigated, resulting in no areas of 40% slope on the site upon completion of the construction. Upon review of the purpose statement of the hazard regulations, staff believes that the intent of the hazard regulations as they relate to steep slopes is to both protect the integrity of the resulting slopes after construction and to protect the inhabitants occupying the structures from the potential hazards of steep and unstable slopes. As a result of the development, the 40% slope areas will be completely removed and replaced by professionally designed residential structures. As such, staff believes that the development proposal complies with the intent of the hazard regulations and that any possible negative impacts of developing on steep slopes will have been successfully mitigated. Mitigation of geologic hazards is an accepted practice as documented in the Town of Vail Hazard Regulations (ie, debris flow, rock fall, snow avalanche). 2. The degree to which relief from the strict or literal interpretation and enforcement of a specified regulation is necessary to achieve compatibility and uniformity of treatment among sites in the vicinity, or to attain the objectives of this title without grant of special privilege. As previously stated above, the purpose of the hazard regulations is to protect and preserve the integrity of steep slopes and the inhabitants of the Town. Through the development of the site, the isolated areas of 40% slope will be completely removed and the hazard mitigated. Upon review of the Environmental Impact Report, submitted by the applicant, which contains geologic reports, prepared by licensed professionals, the design of the development will mitigate any resulting hazards associated with steep slopes as well as eliminate the possible negative aesthetic impacts associated with the proposed development. Staff believes that the proposed variance will allow the property owner to attain the development objectives and comply with the intent of the zoning regulations without resulting in a grant of special privilege inconsistent with the purposes of the hazard regulations. 3. The effect of the requested variance on light and air, distribution of population, transportation and traffic facilities, public facilities and utilities, and public safety. Staff believes the variance request will, have little, if any, negative impacts on the criteria described above. The planning and environmental commission shall make the following findings before granting a variance: 1. That the granting of the variance will not constitute a grant of special privilege inconsistent with the limitations on other properties classified in the same district. Ls~ 32 00, . 2. That the granting of the variance will not be detrimental to the public health, safety, or welfare, or materially injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity. 3. That the variance is warranted for one or more of the following reasons: a. The strict or literal interpretation and enforcement of the specified regulation would result in practical difficulty or unnecessary physical hardship inconsistent with the objectives of this title. b. There are exceptional or extraordinary circumstances or conditions applicable to the site of the variance that do not apply generally to other properties in the same zone. c. The strict or literal interpretation and enforcement of the specified regulation would deprive the applicant of privileges enjoyed by the owners of other properties in the same district. 3) Approved Development Plan The following design criteria shall be used as the principal criteria in evaluating the merits of a proposed development plan. It shall be the burden of the applicant to prove by a preponderance of the evidence 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: A. 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 redevelopment of Vail's Front Door has been redesigned to the highest quality of architecture drawing from Vail's architectural vernacular. Above grade structures have been designed to a bulk and mass consistent with neighboring properties and in compliance with the recommendations and requirements of the Town's master plans. The proposed skier services and ski club building have been designed as low-level structures to respect private agreements and covenants and in direct response to input from the Planning and Environmental Commission and Design Review Board. The residential structures have been benched into the hillside in order to reduce perceived bulk and mass and oriented towards the views to the east. A buffer zone of more than fifty feet will be provided where the proposed development adjoins residential uses. All of the proposed parking and loading for the project has been provided in a sub-surface structure, thus reducing the visual impacts of these uses on the neighboring uses and the community as a whole. The Design Review Board has requested that the applicant retain a outdoor lighting consultant to design the exterior lighting on the buildings minimize the negative effects of nighttime lighting without compromising the necessary safety needs. 33 The proposed development is consistent in design, character, and mass with the Town's Design Guidelines and with neighboring uses and structures. A condition of approval requires that the Town of Vail Design Review Board approves the final plans which will ensure compliance with the applicable design guidelines and standards. B. Relationship: Uses, activity and density which provide a compatible, efficient and workable relationship with surrounding uses and activity. The proposed uses, activities, and densities create a compatible and efficient workable relationship with surrounding uses and activities. The Front Door area is surrounded by a mixture of uses including ski runs and skiing facilities, retail, lodging facilities, and multiple-family/single-family residential dwellings. The proposed development plan includes many of these same uses strategically located to create compatibility with the surrounding environment. A complete zoning analysis has been provided in Section V of this memorandum indicating compliance with the Town's prescribed development standards. C. Parking and Loading: Compliance with parking and loading requirements as outlined in Chapter 10 of this Title. The proposed development plan provides parking and loading facilities which meet or exceed the minimum requirements of Chapter 10 of the Zoning Regulations. The applicant has proposed to construct a centralized loading and delivery facility within the development to accommodate much of tehloading and delivery needs for those businesses and uses located in the southerly portion of Vail Village. A summary of the parking requirement prescribed for the development has been attached for reference. D. Comprehensive Plan: Conformity with Vail Comprehensive Plan, Town policies and urban design plans. The proposed development plan complies with the Town's master planning documents as applicable to the site. The proposed development plan implements numerous Town policies and goals as described in Sections IV and VII of this memo. E. Natural And/Or Geologic Hazard: Identification and mitigation of natural and/or geologic hazards that affect the property on which the development plan is proposed. As documented in the Environmental Impact Report for this project, there are no geologic or other natural hazards existing on the property. A variance is being sought from a Town standard that restricts development on areas of 40% slope or greater. The intent of the slope restrictions in the hazard regulations is to prevent development in areas that are potentially unstable and in areas that are of consistently steep slopes. The proposed development site contains isolated areas in excess of 40% slope that occur in the middle of the proposed development site which are areas clearly not intended to be restricted by the hazard regulation. These 40% sloped areas are not contiguous with other vast steep hillside areas. Geological reports submitted with the application indicate that the proposed development site is suitable for the type of development being proposed. The proposed variance will allow the owner to attain the objectives 34 and intent of the zoning regulations without a grant of special privilege. Mitigation measures recommended by the EIR, if any, will be implemented during the construction process. Staff believes that the proposed development complies with the intent of the prescribed hazard regulations. F. 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 proposed development plan is designed to respond directly to the skier services and activities currently existing in the area and proposed for the site. The proposed plans are responsive and sensitive to natural features, vegetation, and the aesthetic qualities of the community. Vail's Front Door Project site is situated in an area where skiers, shoppers, and residents interface with the Vail Village and the ski mountain. The proposed design responds to this interface to provide order, interest, and vitality. The proposed uses are intended to provide essential services to residents and tourists while at the same time concealing back of house type uses and functions in a sub-surface parking and loading area. The proposed residences are designed and located in an area that has little impact on adjoining residential uses and is responsive to the overall site. Open space areas are created and preserved as shown on the proposed development plan. G. Traffic: A circulation system designed for both vehicles and pedestrians addressing on and off-site traffic circulation. The proposed development plan includes a circulation system designed with both vehicles and pedestrians in mind. The on-site circulation system provides for a mostly separated pedestrian and vehicular system. The bulk of cars and trucks enter the site through a subsurface tunnel to parking and loading areas. Pedestrians are provided pathways on the surface of the site in efficient and logical locations. While there is some intermingling of pedestrian and vehicular traffic on the surface of the site, the type of vehicular traffic in very minor and similar to that found in low-density residential areas throughout the Town of Vail. Off-site vehicular traffic is improved with enhancements to the adjoining street system making traffic flow more efficient and orderly. The proposed loading facility located on the site is intended to help reduce the impacts of delivery trucks on the existing pedestrianized areas of the Vail Village as part of a dispersed loading program. The applicant is also proposing significant enhancements to off-site pedestrian areas as part of a mitigation of development impacts and public improvement plan. These improvements will make the pedestrian experience in the Vail Village safer and more enjoyable. H. Landscaping: Functional and aesthetic landscaping and open space in order to optimize and preserve natural features, recreation, views and function. The proposed development plan includes significant open space areas and landscape treatment. The open space areas created will provide for and 35 maintain public views of the ski mountain as well as provide adequate open areas necessary for running a ski base facility and ski lift area. Landscaping and buffering have been generously planned throughout the site to create an aesthetically pleasing environment. The type of landscape materials proposed mirror that treatment found on adjacent lands. 1. Workable Plan: Phasing plan or subdivision plan that will maintain a workable, functional and efficient relationship throughout the development of the development plan. The development plan does not currently anticipate a phased development approach. The proposed development plan maintains a workable, functional, and efficient relationship among the planned uses. J.Annexed Lands: Conformity with the terms of an annexation agreement and demonstration of a compelling public benefit which furthers the public interest. The proposed development project includes lands anticipated to be annexed into the Town of Vail. All provisions of the approved development plan and conditions of approval will be incorporated into an annexation agreement with the Town. The proposed development plan provides a compelling public benefit and interest by: • Providing private land and constructing facilities for a public loading and delivery system for the Village Core area; • Providing pedestrian and streetscape improvements which enhance the citizen's and guest's experience; • Enhancing the overall aesthetics of the Town; • Reducing physical barriers for pedestrians and skiers; • Providing a skier club which includes parking spaces that will help reduce the public's reliance on the Town's public parking structures; and • Providing public and quasi-public facilities such as restrooms on private property. VIII. STAFF RECOMMENDATION The Community Development Department recommends that the Planning and Environmental Commission approves with conditions the request for a final review of an exterior alteration or modification, pursuant to Section 12-713-7, Exterior Alterations or Modifications, Vail Town Code, to allow for an addition to the Lodge at Vail; the request for a variance from Section 12-21-10, Development Restricted, Vail Town Code, pursuant to Chapter 17, Variances, Zoning Regulations, to allow for the construction of multiple-family dwelling units on slopes in excess of 40%; and the request for the establishment of an approved development plan to facilitate the construction of Vail's Front Door, and setting forth details in regard thereto. Staff's 36 recommendation of approval is based upon the review of the evidence presented and the testimony provided at the public hearings on these requests. Should the Commission choose to approve the applicant's requests, staff recommends that the following findings of fact be made as part of the motion: 1) Major Exterior Alteration "That the applicant has proven by a preponderance of the evidence and testimony presented before the Planning and Environmental Commission at a public hearing, that the proposed exterior alteration to the Lodge at Vail is in compliance with the purposes of the CC1 District as specified in Section 12-7B-1 of the Zoning Regulations; that the proposal is consistent with applicable elements of the Vail Village Master Plan, the Town of Vail Streetscape Master Plan, and the Vail Comprehensive Plan; and that the proposal does not otherwise negatively alter the character of the neighborhood. Further, the Commission finds that the proposal substantially complies with the Vail Village Urban Design Guide Plan and the Vail Village Design Considerations, to include, but not be limited to, the following urban design considerations: pedestrianization, vehicular penetration, streetscape framework, street enclosure, street edge, building height, views, service/delivery and sun/shade analysis; and that the proposal substantially complies with all other elements of the Vail comprehensive plan." 2) Variance "The Planning and Environmental Commission finds that based upon the evidence and testimony presented before the Commission at a public hearing, 1. That the granting of the variance to allow development on slopes in excess of 40% will not constitute a grant of special privilege inconsistent with the limitations on other properties classified in the Ski Base Recreation -2 zone district as the development will mitigate the geologic hazard. 2. That the granting of the variance to allow development on slopes in excess of 40% will not be detrimental to the public health, safety, or welfare, or materially injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity as design of the development mitigates the possible negative impacts associated with the geologic hazard. 3. The strict or literal interpretation and enforcement of the specified hazard regulation restricting development on steep slopes would result in practical difficulty or unnecessary physical hardship inconsistent with the objectives of the Zoning Regulations. " 3) Approved Development Plan "That the applicant has proven by a preponderance of the evidence and testimony presented before the Planning and Environmental Commission at a public hearing, that the submittal material, as presented, and the development plan, as proposed, comply with each of the design criteria outlined in Section 12-8E-9 of the Zoning Regulations, or has demonstrated that one or more of the criteria is not applicable to 37 Op, the proposed development, or has demonstrated that a practical solution consistent with the public interest has been achieved as a result of the proposed development plan. Furthermore, in keeping with the adopted purpose statement of the Ski Base Recreation - 2 zone district, as prescribed in Section 12-8E-1, of the Zoning Regulations, due to the likelihood of the district being located at the base of Vail Mountain, and upon some of the most critical and important lands to the future success and resort character of the Town, development within the district shall be evaluated based upon its ability to meet the specific purposes of the Zoning Regulations and to provide "compelling public benefits which further the public interests" that go beyond any economic benefits to the landowner, the Commission finds that the applicant has demonstrated to the satisfaction of the Commission, that the proposed development plan for Vail's Front Door Project, will provide compelling public benefits which further the public interests. Specifically, the Commission finds that the proposed development plan for Vail's Front Door Project furthers the development objectives of the Town as outlined in the applicable elements of the Vail Comprehensive Plan and provides benefits and amenities that will serve the residents, guests ,and community at-large, both now and into the future." Should the Planning and Environmental Commission choose to approve the three development review applications, as proposed, the staff recommends that the Commission make the following conditions part of the approval: l 1. That the Developer provides a deed, at his sole expense, to the Town of Vail, legally transferring that portion of land under Pirate Ship Park, as generally described in Exhibit A (attached), to the Town of Vail, prior to the issuance of a building permit for the construction of Vail's Front Door Project improvements. The terms and conditions of said transfer shall be reviewed and approved by the Town of Vail. 2. That the Developer submits a complete application to the Town of Vail Community Development Department for the review and approval of a Comprehensive Sign Program by the Town of Vail Design Review Board, prior to the issuance of a Temporary Certificate of Approval for any of Vail's Front Door Project improvements. 3. That the Developer submits a complete application to the Town of Vail Community Development Department for the final review and approval of the proposed development plan by the Town of Vail Design Review Board, prior to making an application for the issuance of a building permit for any of Vail's Front Door Project improvements. 4. That the Developer submits a Construction Staging Plan to the Town of Vail Community Development Department for the review and approval of the proposed staging plan by the Town of Vail, prior to the issuance of a building permit for the Vail's Front Door Project improvements. 5. That the Developer provides deed-restricted employee housing that complies it with the Town of Vail Employee Housing requirements (Chapter 12-13) for a minimum of 9 employees, and that said restrictions shall be made available 38 op", for occupancy, prior to the issuance of a Temporary Certificate of Occupancy for the Vail's Front Door Project improvements. In addition, the deed- restrictions shall be legally executed by the Developer and duly recorded with the Eagle County Clerk & Recorder's Office, prior to the issuance of a Temporary Certificate of Occupancy for the Vail's Front Door Project improvements. 6. That the Developer prepares a Vail's Front Door Project Art in Public Places Plan, for review and comment by the Town of Vail Art in Public Places Board, prior to the issuance of a building permit for the Vail's Front Door Project improvements. Said Plan shall including the funding for a minimum of $1,000,000 in public art improvements to be developed in conjunction with Vail's Front Door Project. The implementation of the Plan shall be completed within two years of the issuance of a Temporary Certificate of Occupancy for the Vail's Front Door Project improvements. 7. That the Developer prepares an easement agreement for the review and approval of the Town of Vail for public access through Tract E and the development site from Mill Creek Circle to Vail Road, and as generally depicted on the Approved Development Plan. The easement agreement shall be legally executed by the Developer and duly recorded with the Eagle County Clerk & Recorder's Office, prior to the issuance of a Final Certificate of Occupancy for the Vail's Front Door Project improvements. A4W1 8. That the Developer prepares a Developer Improvement Agreement for Off- Site Improvements, as depicted on the Approved Development Plan, for review and approval by the Town of Vail Planning and Environmental Commission. Upon approval of the Agreement, the Developer and the Town of Vail shall legally execute the Agreement. Upon execution of the Agreement, the Developer shall post a bond as financial surety with the Town of Vail as the beneficiary in the amount of 125% of a bona fide contractor's estimate of the cost to complete the required off-site improvements. Said Agreement shall be in place, prior to the issuance of a building permit for the Vail's Front Door Project improvements. 9. That the Developer submits a roof top mechanical plan to the Town of Vail Community Development Department for the review and approval of the Town of Vail Design Review Board, prior to the issuance of a building permit for the Vail's Front Door Project improvements. 10. That the Developer executes a Memorandum of Understanding for the Operation, Maintenance, and Management of the Vail Village Loading and Delivery Facility, to be located on the Developer's property. The Memorandum shall be reviewed and approved by the Vail Town Council, prior to the issuance of a Final Certificate of Occupancy for Vail's Front Door Project improvements. 11. That the Developer submits a complete set of civil engineered drawings of the Approved Development Plans including the required off site improvements, to the Town of Vail Community Development Department for review and approval of the drawings, prior to making application for the 39 00"1 . issuance of a building permit for Vail's Front Door Project improvements. It shall be noted that the review of the civil engineered drawing may take up to six months to review and approve. 12. That the Developer shall be assessed a transportation impact fee in the amount of $5,000 per increased vehicle trip in the peak hour generated as a result of the new development. The assessment of the impact fee will be offset and addressed by the Developer through the construction of four (4) additional loading berths and the replacement of 260 lineal of Hanson Ranch Road street improvements adjacent to Vail Park. 13. That the Developer agrees to construct the off site improvements, as generally indicated on the Off Site Improvement, with the exception of the improvements to Checkpoint Charlie. Within one year from the date of the issuance of a Temporary Certificate of Occupancy for Vail's Front Door Project improvements, the Developer and the Town of Vail Public Works Department shall evaluate and determine the appropriate location for the Checkpoint Charlie improvements based upon traffic circulation and patterns. Upon determination of the appropriate location for Checkpoint Charlie, the Developer agrees to design, obtain approval, and construct the Checkpoint Charlie improvements. The Checkpoint Charlie improvements shall be constructed in accordance with the provisions outlined in the Developer Improvement Agreement for Off Site Improvements. 14. That the Developer agrees to design and construct the required streetscape improvements, as generally depicted on the Off Site Improvements Plan and as stated in the Town of Vail Streetscape Master Plan. The Developer acknowledges that the final design for the improvements may be subject to change. 15. That the Developer prepares a Vista Bahn Ski Yard Use Agreement outlining the terms and conditions allowing public use of the ski yard for special events. The Agreement shall be submitted to the Town of Vail Community Development Department for the review and comment of the Town of Vail Commission on Special Events. The Agreement shall be completed prior to the issuance of a Temporary Certificate of Occupancy for the Vail's Front Door Project improvements. (1 16. That the Developer submits a partial topographic map of the alleyway east of the Lodge at Vail to the Town of Vail Community Development Department. The topographic information shall be used to determine the feasibility of providing handtruck delivery access to Gore Creek Drive from Founder's Plaza. The Developer agrees to evaluate the opportunity for reconstructing the alleyway to minimize the grade to provide improved handtruck delivery access to Gore Creek Drive. If it is determined by the Town of Vail to be both feasible and advantageous to provide handtruck delivery access to Gore Creek Drive via the Wildflower alleyway, the Developer shall submit a revised set of Off Site Improvements Plan to the Town of Vail Community Development Department for review and approval and further agrees to construct the improvements as approved. 40 17. That the Developer submits a development application to the Town of Vail Community Development Department requesting approval of a conditional use permit to allow for the operation for a 'private and public club ; pursuant to Section 12-8E-3, Conditional Uses, of the Vail Town Code. The application for the conditional use permit shall be reviewed in accordance with the provisions of Chapter 16 of the Zoning Regulations, prior to making application for the issuance of a building permit for Vail's Front Door Project improvements. 18. That the Developer identifies a "No Build Area"on the Approved Development Plan indicating that no building or site disturbance shall occur within thirty feet (30') of the westernmost and southernmost property lines in the area of the residential unit construction. 19. That the Developer legally executes all necessary easements and agreements allowing for public roadway access, drainage, signs, utilities, etc. on and across the development site. Said easements and agreements shall be submitted to the Town of Vail Community Development Department for review and approval by the Town of Vail. All easements and agreements shall be duly recorded with the Eagle County Clerk and Recorder's Office prior to the issuance of a Temporary Certificate of Occupancy for the Vail's Front Door Project improvements. X L.7~- 41 i f Amended Conditions of Approval (9/22/03) Should the Planning and Environmental Commission choose to approve the three development review applications, as proposed, the staff recommends that the Commission make the following conditions part of the approval: 1. Standard conditions of approval applicable to all PEC development plan approvals: • That the Developer submits a complete application to the Town of .`,MLJCommunity Development Department for the review and approval by the Tov3ngf•Vaij Design Review Board of a Comprehensive Sign Program prior to the issuance.-pt a Ternporafy Certificate of Approval for any of Vail's Front • ; .,Tpppr Project improvements • That the Developer submits a complete Design Review Board application, including details of all proposed roof top mechanical systems, to the Town of Vail Community Development Department for review and approval by the Town of Vail Design Review Board, prior to making an application for the issuance of a building permit for any of Vail's Front Door Project improvements. • That the Developer submits a Construction Staging Plan to the Town of Vail Community Development Department for the review and approval of the proposed staging plan by the Town of Vail, prior to the issuance of a building permit for the Vail's Front Door Project improvements. 2. The Developer provides deed-restricted employee housing that complies with the Town of Vail Employee Housing requirements (Chapter 12-13) for a minimum of 9 employees, and that said housing shall be made available for occupancy, prior to the issuance of a Temporary Certificate of Occupancy for the Vail's Front Door Project improvements. In addition, the deed-restrictions shall be legally executed by the Developer and duly recorded with the Eagle County Clerk & Recorder's Office, prior to the issuance of a Temporary Certificate of Occupancy for the Vail's Front Door Project improvements. 3. That the Developer submits a complete set of *F@4wAiaayc civil engineered drawings of the Approved Development Plans including the required off site improvements, to the Town of Vail Community Development Department for review and approval of the drawings, prior to making application for the issuance of a building permit for Vail's Front Door Project improvements. 4. That the Developer submits a partial topographic map of the alleyway east of the Lodge at Vail to the Town of Vail Community Development Department. The topographic information shall be used by the Town of Vail and the Developer to determine the feasibility of providing improved handtruck delivery access to Gore Creek Drive from Founder's Plaza. If it is determined by the Town of Vail and the Developer that proposed improvements are both feasible and advantageous for providing handtruck delivery access to Gore Creek Drive via the Wildflower alleyway, the Developer shall submit a revised set of Off Site Improvements Plan to the Town of Vail Community Development Department for review and approval and further agrees to construct the improvements as approved. W 41110 5. That the Developer submits a development application to the Town of Vail Community Development Department requesting approval of a conditional use permit to allow for the operation for a "private and public club", pursuant to Section 12-8E-3, Conditional Uses, of the Vail Town Code. The application for the conditional use permit shall be reviewed in accordance with the provisions of Chapter 16 of the Zoning Regulations, prior to making application for the issuance of a building permit for Vail's Front Door Project improvements. 6. That the Developer identifies a,,No Build Area" on the Approved Development Plan indicating that no building or site disturbance shall occur within t et (30') of the proposed westernmost and southernmost prope li a area of the residential (unit _construction. 6i*atu~ 7. That th Developer legally execules-alr necessary easements and agreements allowing for public pedestrian/bike access through Tract E and the development site from Mill Creek Circle to Vail Road, public roadway access, drainage, signs, utilities, etc. on and across the development site. Said easements and agreements shall be submitted to the Town of Vail Community Development Department for review and approval by the Town of Vail. Upon approval by the Town, said easements and agreements (if necessary) shall be legally executed by the Developer and duly recorded with the Eagle County Clerk & Recorder's Office, prior to the issuance of a Final Certificate of Occupancy for the Vail's Front Door Project improvements. 8. The Developer agrees to provide to the Town of Vail for review and approval by the Vail Town Council a comprehensive Development Agreement for Vail's Front Door Project improvements. Said Agreement shall be submitted to the Town by no later than October 31, 2003. The Development Agreement shall be a legally binding agreement between the Town of Vail and Vail Resorts. The purpose of this agreement is to document, among other things, the manner and timeframes within which the Town and the Developer will complete certain required aspects of the project. The Development Agreement will include, but may not be limited to, addressing the following aspect of the- project: • The conveyance of.a deed from the Developer to the Town for a parcel of land under Pirate Ship Park, as depicted in Exhibit A attached. • A written description of all off-site improvements to be provided by the Developer (as generally depicted on the approved development plans), providing additional details on the specific improvements to be provided, the manner in which developer assurances for completion of said improvements will be provided, acknowledgment that design details will conform to the Town's streetscape standards, schedules for completing said improvements, the manner in which the Developer and Town will coordinate streetscape improvement efforts and defining specific terms to determine when and where Checkpoint Charlie will be constructed by the Developer, as maybe amended • The legal mechanisms to be used wherein the Town of Vail will allow the Developer to construct a portion of the proposed parking structure at P3&J beneath the Town's road right-of-way (as depicted on approved plans for P3&J). r • The legal mechanisms to be used wherein the Developer will allow the Town to utilize a portion of its parking and loading structure as a 14-bay public loading and delivery facility (as depicted on the approved development plans). • An agreement to be prepared which outlines the Developer's responsibilities for funding $1,000,000 in public art to be provided in conjunction with the Project. This agreement is to be prepared with input from the Town of Vail Art in Public Places Board. • A use agreement to be prepared which outlines the terms and conditions for public use of the Vista Bahn Ski Yard. This agreement is to be prepared with input from the Town of Vail Commission on Special Events. X 4o T'~ ~v l G~~ {14L1Q i sipu r. 0 r 101 ..elS ►f1 ~•y;.:~•~, „fir SSS n?i . ..7,..:,•..l i1_l',`~ i p....: .)l,' e;! 1.• 1 .'.i`:•'/'+i'I~' ~C`; ,^y ~.,r"'1~. a ~ d • • II I 1 i C Oo i i 1 OM 1 ! N i 0 I c 1 - 1 1 i 1 1 1 1 I H - IL. _ t 4 s i IMP i~ % N~yy Fd r o [A n I1]y]' ~ ~ I y S: ao ~n r~ nrt~ t~ G d `i`= VAMS FRONT DOOR L jj ' pz 1 1 1 1 11 arO 1 of 6 b Z rd, s d 1 ~ ~ D VAIL'S FRONT DOOR /I 0 x n F S ~ m p ~ z ri~ I k ! I > ~ VAIL'S FRONT DOOR I ISI r!i ~I~ g)~ fit' ~1 s9~ ~ 93° r . I I , _A ' i iY ~g J iz r_;~ Ie 1= m r n - I=~ I - I I a x e ~ 1 I ~ r I I a s Y - I I 1 _ II I I _ S e I I j ° e ~F e t ~ I I I I ~ L Y II e ~ ~ e c e c ~ I iri ri i j y - I I i v Avg a I I ~ s I I 1 I I a ~ _ x I 1 n J l F Y I C~ ~ I +L 1 s 1 r 54 ~ 1 1 ' 1 ' - 6~s II I illlL'ikc v< ~7 f F e Is~ 1 ~ ~ VAIL'S FRONT DOOR R I LE O T I i i i i i_ i. is i= i= i i i t I i i I i i l I mo J ° OO~....;{{~d ..{{Z °ZOns~~ m oo i ~ I i i I I I I P1f Yp'J9 I ;j I i I i St S ' D+~Z NAIL'S FRONT DOOR i T C o z - w f - J i ( 4 J N~ ~pve - °"s €`j i+ l5'~ s'° ! VAIL'S FRONT DOOR I 0 VAIL'S FRONT DOOR • 6 0 n m y a n n zO O O z 5 ..d .y n 0 z 0 0 Z n 1 m 1 a 11 Z f z 1 ~ 11 1 n ~ o~ n 1 0 1 'I o 1 1 1 L- c v =~4 p Q 1 1 ll ~i, i I A ° JR I iG F3Y 1SI ~t 1'S (i~ Po ~l~ t 11 Cab LFRONT AIS DOOR of. a? _ i 7m ~ k °ii s pro- yAyf~ y vs a `t Y t o f g q j f i i(f 3l~i if g; s VAIL'S FRONT ODOR s d Oy O ^s i 0 ~N lip 6 ti =o D "a i O Nv OR Z ~o sg R~ ~R a q o g j r/ ! ~i ~Il ~l~?I ~j3 ►i g i VAIL S FRONT DOORJ x b~~~a I r~ _r ~z i ?~5 i1 •G; VAIL'S FRONT DOOR V aF i-i 10-1 ~Vi "R VAIL'S FRONT DOOR w 0 Z x i i i i i i i I I i I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 1•. i Eo i ~gg o~ i i ~ i i i i i i i i i i i 411 J Pit ~qqq~pp~ I ~E VAIL'S FRONT DOOR 0 i i i i I I I 1 I I I 1 ~o i v r~ e I I I I I I 1 I I 50 e 0 ~ z I 1 I a~ I I I I I Dill ti Tl I I I I i s' r v~ > [J VAT-L's FRONT DOOR ~ - z^, ~ ~ e + vavnnrnno .wO C z i-i i• I I - i i ail t~ Es ~o I I I I I I J I I f i l 5 VAIL'S FRONT DOOR ~-I i i i i i i i i i i 10 i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i t i a i ~z J 6 i ~ i i i 4 J A ,y~ ' ~r fEi;l~lf#;(;01 VAIL'S FRONT DOOR Q L, I ' i : ~ < .i iI I i I I~ y L ? ; ( . ~ ~ vi,y KadnvO `z E _ ryry~t Z o~ z i i I ~ I I I I i I -ID I I I I I 1 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I T\ I I ~°o I proo o~ I ~~Sg I "°3 y~ I ~K I I I I I I J p€ II 55 4 a~ lag ~g F ~I %0t I ( s ! f , 8~~ j VAIL'S FRONT DOOR i- ag ~ tir - U~ ' ' 1 1 F ~ $ I ZI l 4 / 1 L ' ~P 7 I 1 ~Z a~ 8 I R i ! -AV GA; i i OW ID, 'gf%Vc V,u i , ~o M" -j ~Ao -11 I ° I s I I I I I I J ~g g~ p~ r _ , as VAIL'S FRONT DOOR ON .Z t~ ~o i a n ROD Eli jig ADg Ak i i i i i I i I I I I I I I i i I I I I I y 1 ~s b I I i ~ 7 I I z I a ~ I I p a t i FUR fie '~bfl V~.FRONT DOOR J, 0 0 a o d .z i I ~ II I i I lip li _ I I - X11 $ a t Ka 1 \ I ,7 I nl o ~ I ~ i i 1 ! i. ~a 1 is, i ~ k ate I I r , I I I N I I i - I ~ I{ I ~ {f y _i I VAIL S FRONT DOOR _ ~ E d S m 0 rZ I, f t I~ .j w c - - - - - - - - - - I ~d i; o _ x N • ~ e y~3 R~ vI "a a .`s I I f IFP ;s as s c gg VAIL'S FRONT DOOR J 'I I 0 I I I I 1 I I I I I I I I Y I I 1 I I ~`;rl I ! I I I I I I ~i 1+9 J 1 i I ! I I 1 I ! I e ~ hE `cE z'k ' ~ F 1 ppp I I I~ `p I I ~ y I 'b ---1---J- W I~ I I f I IJ ' 1 I I+ , I l ^F x ~ F =1 a=I ~ y I 1 F e t= I 1 I . I 1 I I I I I I I ~-r I I I 1 - I I I, i s ~ I 1 - -t °l 2 e~ c 411 k'~( I~rl (7 I_. II' I~=. I[ Irk i 4E I' II .f y ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ I y ► ~ ~ ~ ~~i ~~i i!~'~~ ~ VAIL'SFRONT DOOR ~ ~ o e ~ ~ ; r _ j s Ir . i s I 11 I I ~a.-I I ~ i I I a.7 I ~ n 11 . M I y i sal ^ k F t _ Y II I 9g I Ia S~ I I y,; I I \ rI ,I I I RF III II i II II II I I I O .z z r :E I I I A I 8 i I I r _L I I I I r„ I a r''~ ~ f d a ~F ~3 ~ I e I 3 3 r E31 I I I I Ip a FS I I 1 ~s 1 , h 1 II { , > d ~ 0 n zu. I I ~,r • Z~ l i ` I I I I L I ~ • rrl F{,,;[ li X1j r ;{{11 { rl N - VAIL'S FRONT D ; I E{i Iii 7 " e 1 ~m~.. 0 I ' I I I I ' ~ I I ' I ' i I _ I 1 I I I I I I a / 1 ~ ~g I/ k I~ I, 1 d J 31 - 1 I ~ ~ I4g \ I. - - - - - - - - - - (-j I Ii I~ 'F X r ~ ~ I i I I I x I ~ v b~ q a t S F I ~ - I I , I I ah€a ~ R~ S r I I I r I I i i 3 I I i ! yll II I, I~ I I~ I i( III Ji E; "g4 I 1 VAIL S FRONT DOOR 'i 0 I~ I I I i I ` ~ I I ' I L r z I r: I 1 I { 1 I a I 1 I I 1 L- . I I I ~ I I I 1: ~ I I > I I ~ -Z I I ~ I I I I I. - - 3 I I I h n I I I' I //IJJIII ~I 55 / 1 ~5 e~ / I lilt 1 ~ I 1 I 1 I~ 1 ~b I€ I E if; I11 ~F' Iii N I}- i l 1 I 1 , I ~ I c# I I~ II ; 8 8 ~e 1 € i -3 _i I I k Z I I I~ggg} I I K 0l6 ~3 _ ~ 3 e kk+ - - z 4 r- I I I I I F t - l i I ~ I ~ r I;1 ~n ggE k~ I lit so I tl si I ~I II ~II I . =5 I I 1 - t ~4 ~1l~o I s. I:z 1~= I i F E 1 0> - VAIL'S FRONT DOOR ~;?~Illlll;l,l; llfi~l 1 I 1 0 L~ z a' .'I 4 VAIL'S FRONT DOOR lj . GS i'~'~~' ?lI 2~n AI VAIL'S FRONT DOOR Dil z i 1 VAIL'S FRONT DOOR El 0 z 0 zz i Z~sz j Iji►iilj~~i ijf ►'°j s VAIL'S FRONT DOOR j ILA=r I L s .-1 6:J ~fbl ~s 0 z ti I 0 z T T T H9'- 5 g ~ I VAIL'S FRONT DOOR P 9 6 A • 17-~ C APPROWED PLANNING AND ENVIRONMENTAL COMMISSION PUBLIC MEETING UPY Monday, September 22, 2003 FILE PROJECT ORIENTATION / - Community Development Dept. PUBLIC WELCOME 12:00 pm MEMBERS PRESENT Doug Cahill George Lamb Chas Bernhardt John Schofield Site Visits: MEMBERS ABSENT Gary Hartman Erickson Shirley Rollie Kjesbo 1. Pirateship Park- Tract E, Vail Village 5th 2. Lionshead Tennis Court Site- 615 West Forest Road 3. O'Dorisio- 4444 Streamside Circle Driver: George 0 NOTE: If the PEC hearing extends until 6:00 p.m., the board may break for dinner from 6:00 - 6:30 Public Hearing - Town Council Chambers 2:00 pm A request for a final review of an exterior alteration or modification, pursuant to Section 12-713-7, Exterior Alterations or Modifications, Vail Town Code, to allow for an addition to the Lodge at Vail; a request for a variance from Section 12-21-10, Development Restricted, Vail Town Code, pursuant to Chapter 17, Variances, Zoning Regulations, to allow for the construction of multiple-family dwelling units on slopes in excess of 40%; and a request for the establishment of an approved 'development plan to facilitate the construction of Vail's Front Door, and setting forth details in regard thereto. (A more complete metes and bounds legal description is available at the Town of Vail Community Development Department) Applicant: Vail Resorts, represented by Jay Peterson Planner: George Ruther Motion: Doug Cahill Second: George Lamb Vote: 4-0-0 APPROVED WITH CONDTIONS Conditions: Standard conditions of approval applicable to all PEC development plan approvals: That the Developer submits a complete application to the Town of Vail Community Development Department for the review and approval by the Town of Vail Design Review Board of a Comprehensive Sign Program prior to the issuance of a Temporary Certificate of Approval for any of Vail's Front Door Project improvements. That the Developer submits a complete Design Review Board application, including details of all proposed roof top mechanical systems, to the Town of Vail Community Development Department for review and approval by the Town of Vail Design Review Board, prior to making an application for the issuance of a building permit for any of Vail's Front Door Project improvements. That the Developer submits a Construction Staging Plan to the Town of Vail Community Development Department for the review and approval of the proposed staging plan by the Town of Vail, prior to the issuance of a building permit for the Vail's Front Door Project improvements. 2. The Developer provides deed-restricted employee housing that complies with the Town of Vail Employee Housing requirements (Chapter 12-13) for a minimum of 9 employees, and that said housing shall be made available for occupancy, prior to the issuance of a Temporary Certificate of Occupancy for the Vail's Front Door Project improvements. In addition, the deed-restrictions shall be legally executed by the Developer and duly recorded with the Eagle County Clerk & Recorder's Office, prior to the issuance of a Temporary Certificate of Occupancy for the Vail's Front Door Project improvements. 3. That the Developer submits a complete set of civil engineered drawings of the Approved Development Plans including the required off site improvements, to the Town of Vail Community Development Department for review and approval of the drawings, prior to making application for the issuance of a building permit for Vail's Front Door Project improvements. 4. That the Developer submits a partial topographic map of the alleyway east of the Lodge at Vail to the Town of Vail Community Development Department. The topographic information shall be used by the Town of Vail and the Developer to determine the feasibility of providing improved handtruck delivery access to Gore Creek Drive from Founder's Plaza. If it is determined by the Town of Vail and the Developer that proposed improvements are both feasible and advantageous for providing handtruck delivery access to Gore Creek Drive via the Wildflower alleyway, the Developer shall submit a revised set of Off Site Improvements Plan to the Town of Vail Community Development Department for review and approval and further agrees to construct the improvements as approved. 5. That the Developer submits a development application to the Town of Vail Community Development Department requesting approval of a conditional use permit to allow for the operation for a "private and public club", pursuant to Section 12-8E-3, Conditional Uses, of the Vail Town Code. The application for the conditional use permit shall be reviewed in accordance with the provisions of Chapter 16 of the Zoning Regulations, prior to making application for the issuance of a building permit for Vail's Front Door Project improvements. 6. That the Developer identifies a "No Build Area" on the Approved Development Plan indicating that no building or site disturbance shall occur within thirty feet (30') of the proposed westernmost and southernmost property lines in the area of the residential unit construction. Subsurface soil nailing for slope stabilization shall be permitted in the "No Build Area". 7. That the Developer legally executes all necessary easements and agreements allowing for public pedestrian/bike access through Tract E and the development site from Mill Creek Circle to Vail Road, public roadway access, drainage, signs, utilities, etc. on and across the development site. Said easements and agreements shall be submitted to the Town of Vail Community Development Department for review and approval by the Town of Vail. Upon approval by the Town, said easements and agreements (if necessary) shall be legally executed by the Developer and duly recorded with the Eagle County Clerk & Recorder's Office, prior to the issuance of a Final Certificate of Occupancy for the Vail's Front Door Project improvements. 8. The Developer agrees to provide to the Town of Vail for review and approval by the Vail Town Council a comprehensive Development Agreement for Vail's Front Door Project improvements. Said Agreement shall be submitted to the Town by no later than October 31, 2003. The Development Agreement shall be a legally binding agreement between the Town of Vail and Vail Resorts. The purpose of this agreement is to document, among other things, the manner and timeframes within which the Town and the Developer will complete certain required aspects of the project. The Development Agreement will include, but may not be limited to, addressing the following aspect of the project: • The conveyance of a deed from the Developer to the Town for a parcel of land under Pirate Ship Park, as depicted in Exhibit A attached. • A written description of all off-site improvements to be provided by the Developer (as generally depicted on the approved development plans), providing additional details on the specific improvements to be provided, the manner in which developer assurances for completion of said improvements will be provided, acknowledgment that design details will conform to the Town's streetscape standards, schedules for completing said improvements, the manner in which the Developer and Town will coordinate streetscape improvement efforts and defining specific terms to determine when and where Checkpoint Charlie will be constructed by the Developer, as maybe amended • The legal mechanisms to be used wherein the Town of Vail will allow the Developer to construct a portion of the proposed parking structure at P3&J beneath the Town's road right-of-way (as depicted on approved plans for P3&J). • The legal mechanisms to be used wherein the Developer will allow the Town to utilize a portion of its parking and loading structure as a 14-bay public loading and delivery facility (as depicted on the approved development plans). • An agreement to be prepared which outlines the Developer's responsibilities for funding $1,000,000 in public art to be provided in conjunction with the Project. This agreement is to be prepared with input from the Town of Vail Art in Public Places Board. • A use agreement to be prepared which outlines the terms and conditions for public use of the Vista Bahn Ski Yard. This agreement is to be prepared with input from the Town of Vail Commission on Special Events. 9. That the Developer submits a copy of the proposed plans and use agreements to the Town of Vail Community Development Department for review by the Art in Public Places Board and the Town of Vail Commission on Special Events at a regularly scheduled meeting. Each of the respective meetings shall be duly noticed to the public, adjacent property owners, and potentially interested parties. Upon review of the proposed plans and use agreements, with input from the public, the Board and Commission shall forward a recommendation on the proposed plans and use agreement to the Vail Town Council. 2. A request for a conditional use permit pursuant to Section 12-7A-3, Vail Town Code; a major exterior alteration pursuant to 12-7A-12, Vail Town Code, to allow for modifications to the existing fractional fee club and a restaurant addition; and a request for a building height variance pursuant to Chapter 17, Vail Town Code, to allow for dormer additions, at the Vail Mountain Lodge and Spa, located at 352 E. Meadow Drive / Tract B, Vail Village 151 Filing. Applicant: Vail Mountain Lodge LLC, represented by Braun Associates, Inc. Planner: George Ruther Motion: George Lamb Second: Doug Cahill Vote:4-0 TABLED TO OCTOBER 13, 2003 3. A request for a floodplain modification pursuant to Chapter 14-6, Grading Standards, Vail Town Code, to allow for the construction of new bridge abutments in the Mill Creek floodplain at Pirate Ship Park located at Tract E, Vail Village 5`h Filing Applicant: Vail Resorts, represented by Town of Vail Planner: Bill Gibson Motion: Chas Bernhardt Second: George Lamb Vote: 4-0 APPROVED WITH CONDITIONS Conditions: 1. The applicant shall submit proof of US Army Corp of Engineers approval of a Nationwide Permit 18 - Minor Discharge to the Town of Vail Community Development Department prior to the issuance of building and grading permits. 2. The applicant shall submit a stamped Improvement Location Certificate and "as-built" topographic survey to the Town of Vail Community Development Department for review and approval, prior to Town of Vail final construction inspection. 4. A request for a major subdivision pursuant to Chapter 13-3, Major Subdivision, Vail Town Code, to allow for the platting of four lots at the Lionshead tennis court site and a rezoning pursuant to Section 12-3-7, Administration, Vail Town Code, from Agriculture and Open Space zone district, Vail Town Code, to Primary/Secondary Two-Family Residential zone district, Vail Town Code, to allow for the construction of single-family homes on the four proposed lots, located at 615 West Forest Road/Unplatted ( A more complete metes and bounds legal description is available at the Town of Vail Community Development Department) Applicant: Vail Resorts, represented by Braun Associates, Inc. Planner: Warren Campbell *MW: Motion: Doug Cahill Second: George Lamb Vote: 4-0 Tabled to October 13, 2003 5. A request for a variance from Section 12-14-17, Setback from Watercourse, Vail Town Code, to allow for a residential addition in the Gore Creek setback, located at 4444 Streamside Circle / Lot 11, Bighorn 4th Addition. Applicant: Thomas O'Dorisio, represented by John Perkins. Planner: Warren Campbell Motion: Chas Bernhardt Second: George Lamb Vote: 4-0 APPROVED WITH ONE CONDITION: Condition: 1. That the applicant is not permitted to perform an interior conversion of this space at a later date as the dormer additions would not have been constructed prior to August 5, 1997, as required by Section 12-15-4, Interior Conversion, Vail Town Code. 6. A request for a recommendation to the Vail Town Council for an amendment to the Town of Vail Streetscape Master Plan, and setting forth details in regard thereto. Applicant: Town of Vail, represented by Greg Hall Planner: Warren Campbell Motion: John Schofield Second: Doug Cahill Vote: 4-0 RECOMMENDATION OF APPROVED TO COUNCIL WITH CONDITIONS Conditions: 1. That the applicant shall verify that all materials proposed for use in the streetscape are low maintenance, have a long lifespan, and are durable so as to avoid costly maintenance and upkeep. 2. That the applicant shall explore funding options other than an impact fee such as the use of Tax Increment Financing. In addition, funding models should be explored which impact residential properties to a lesser extent than commercial properties and include a time frame for which the fee will be collected, such as a sunset provision. 7. A request for major exterior alteration pursuant to Section 12-7H-7, Vail Town Code, to allow for the construction of new dwelling units and accommodation units at Vail Marriott Mountain Resort, located at 715 West Lionshead Circle / Lots C and D, Morcus Subdivision, and Lot 7, Marriott Subdivision Applicant: Mountain Marriott Vail Resort, represented by Gwathmey, Pratt, Schultz Architects Planner: George Ruther Motion: George Lamb Second: Doug Cahill Vote:4-0 TABLED TO OCTOBER 13, 2003 8. Approval of September 81h meeting minutes Motion: George Lamb Second : Doug Cahill Vote:3-0-1 (Chas Bernhardt Abstained) APPROVED 9. Information Update: • GRFA • Four Seasons The applications and information about the proposals are available for public inspection during regular office hours in the project planner's office located at the Town of Vail Community Development Department, 75 South Frontage Road. Please call 479-2138 for information. Sign language interpretation available upon request with 24 hour notification. Please call 479- 2356, Telephone for the Hearing Impaired, for information. Community Development Department Published September 19, 2003, in the Vail Daily. 0 0 X 0 0 C71 /1p ~ ~jy { t ~ ~ c ~ ~~z VAIL'S F DOOR { C 0 g VAIL'S FRONT DOOR ' ~ ~ ` p 'tt ' y!~ 4 i ti MM, MATCHUNE -REFER,' 77 , 1/6 n II~ ~ - -xi J 11 w. e ~ _ (/q r qL ;-pill 2 kE ~ IIIRa ~ 5 jit yRgg ~s="~ }}t a gE.~7 cE 9~fi Z i E lo-r - j=~49i 401, Fla w II 1111111""' rnti, I I I 1 I m i~ I ~ C m o >a1v01 FVAIL'S FRONT DOOR Z~!)1i I - I,°__ _..^~I' ;3 t i'n^~ VA0. COIdUUo I. J --11 t I- I Vg 4 XA NOD _ D y0L7 ~mOm =on moo 0 T O p O C Dyi pm C1 (m jj o Im m nN Z 6 ~ m m D O Z 8 N D mp~ - y > C 0 Nn~O 0 Z D OOr mmr y O m m U- N D , m D Z N nN Z m Sm D O Z 8 N 1 1 h ~ n. _ O v trt ~ 0022 N m 0 N m 1 O nm 1m 'n m,MM N r m m m M-Zim y D m<0 om Crr ~r Ivi 41 I VAIL'S FRONT DOOR I F7i Y e~ >o mm 000 8a D mm~ M,a~ it ~m gym+ i>=,M D O[ r M CO D~ N Z A y T mr ? ~ Ocn m n y<O A { O Z r { X September 22, 2003 Mr. George Ruther, Chief of Planning Department of Community Development Town of Vail Vail, CO 81632 RE: Front Door Update/September 22°d PEC Hearing Dear George: The purpose of this letter is to provide a brief summary of refinements that have been made to plans for the Front Door. These refinements are reflected on the plan set dated September 11, 2003 that was submitted to you last week. 1. A number of very minor refinements have been made (in response to your referral letter) in order to clarify "inconsistencies" in our previous plan set. 2. The proposed project site has been extended on the west and south sides of the residences. The proposed land exchange area is now 4.9 acres. As we discussed last week, this change was made due to the structural design of the residences. Underground soil nails will be used in the construction of a shoring wall. These nails will extend upwards of 60' horizontally into the ground on the west and south sides of the residences. The USFS has indicated that the nails cannot extend into their land. As a result, we have enlarged the proposed land exchange boundary such that the nails will be on private property. To ensure against future development extending further up the hillside, we have depicted a "no build zone" on the south and east sides of the residences as depicted on the Illustrative Site Plan (sheet SD 1.02) of our plan set. 3. A bike path extension has been added to the south end of the skier service building/skier plaza. This extension will provide a connection for bikes to access the plazalbike path directly from the Vail Mountain access road. 4. A slight increase has been made to parking provide by the project. The upper level parking garage has been increased to 42 spaces. A detailed parking matrix is attached. This matrix outlines the total parking required as per the zoning code and the total parking required. The total number of parking spaces provided at the Front Door in excess of zoning requirements (not including the 95 spaces dedicated to the ski club) is now 56.81 spaces. We have also provided under separate cover detailed floor plans depicted square footage calculations of specific uses. Among other things, these floor plans identify the uses and square footage used to calculate parking requirements. A technical memo summarizing how these numbers relate to specific zoning standards is also attached (i.e. site coverage calc for the new building footprint at the Lodge at Vail). 5. The proposed site wall east of the Vista Bahn has been changed to a stone veneer wall. 6. More detailed grading and spot elevations are provided around the ski club and poll/spa area. 7. Elevations of the ski club and skier service building have been refined in response to preliminary comments of the DRB. 8. As we discussed at the DRB's conceptual review, Duplex 1 at the residences has been lowered by five feet. We look forward to our final review with the PEC on the 22°d. As you know, considerable time and effort has been put forth over the past nine months and this review process has resulted in a project that we believe will be an incredibly positive asset for Vail. You have had a significant role in this process and your efforts are very much appreciated. Sincerely, Thomas A. Braun Encl.: Detailed floor plans Existing site coverage calculation of the Lodge at Vail Technical memo, re: zoning standards Parking Matrix Cc: Jack Hunn Jay Peterson Bob Fitzgerald 101 `OWN OF VAIL LY Department of Public Works & Transportation 1309 Elkhorn Drive Vail, Colorado 81657 970-479-2158 Fax: 970-479-2166 www. ci. vail. co. us To: George Ruther From: Greg Hall Date: September 19, 2003 Subject: Vail Front Door The Public Works Department has reviewed the submittal and has the following comments. The review of a development of this size and complexity requires an over all general agreement and understanding of the improvements being proposed and the related impacts of the development to approve or deny the project as presented at this time. However to say the plans and reports submitted are final approved documents at this time requires all involved to spend significant time to ensure every line dimension, and detail to be correct. As this project moves toward final approval and building permit approval, it is recognized by all parties that finalization of the design, Design Review Board approval, Civil Engineering plan approval and Building permit plan approval will result in further and more detailed review of the project which may require changes and additions to the requirements of the plans. However the scope of the overall development and its impacts shall remain consistent with the project as presented and reviewed. Traffic Report The Trip Generation does not directly address the expansion of the spa and the additional employees who will work at the facility. In addition, for the Skiers Club the employees are not addressed. However the trips are accounted for in the employee parking lot which is to meet the increase in employees for the development. If this situation is deemed to be incorrect a correction of the traffic generation numbers will need to be addressed. he Town of Vail assesses a transportation impact fee of $5000 per net increase in peak hour trips generated. This fee can be offset by the developer constructing transportation improvements beyond what is required to mitigate any adjacent improvements. This development is providing 4 additional loading bays and, replacing 260 lineal feet of on street loading space displaced with P3&J project to underground bays. ith regard to Checkpoint Charlie, the developer and the Town have agreed to construct the project as presented with the exception of a reconstructed Checkpoint Charlie. With in the first year of operation of the new project, traffic circulation will be evaluated to determine the extent the project has on reducing the number of trips which pass through Checkpoint Charlie. In addition tests will be conducted by temporarily moving the traffic management operation to the location as depicted in both the Transportation and Streetscape Master Plan which is the intersection of Vail Road and Willow Road, opposite the Lodge at Vail entrance. This is to determine if checkpoint functions at this location has an adverse impact on the traffic circulation patterns of the new development and surrounding properties. Based on these observations, the permanent location of Checkpoint Charlie will be determined and the developer will be required to design, obtain approval and construct the final Checkpoint Charlie. If the location is determined to be near its current location, not only is a building for traffic operation management to be constructed but incorporated within the design shall be public restrooms and an information booth. RECYCLED PAPER Drainage Report Over the last decade the Town has made significant improvements to the drainage system adjacent to the front door project to provide the necessary capacity to handle the 100 year storm and avoid overflow runoff from entering Vail Village below the front door /ski yard area. This includes new storm sewers down Vail Road from Forrest Road, Vail Road to the International Bridge and improvements to the ski yard drainage to Mill Creek. The Mill Creek basin preliminary drainage report was reviewed and the following comments apply. The Town's master drainage report prepared by Muller Engineering which included most of the Front Door Project incorporated a smaller drainage basin from the south than does the current report by Alpine Engineering. Even though the basin is larger, the overall flow is relative the same due to the time of concentration differences and the method used to calculate the flow based on the different sizes. Further investigation and discussion between Alpine Engineering, the Town and Muller Engineering will need to take place to ensure that the system designed can handle the 100 year run off from the offsite and developed basins or ensure any overflow has no adverse impacts on downstream properties. The overall preliminary drainage report was increasing the flow to the Wall Street storm sewer by 3 cfs. And states the pipe to founder's plaza will need to upsized to handle the flow. It states the new pipe will tie into the rebuilt storm sewer of the Town's streetscape project. There are two issues with this assumption which may cause concern. There is a limiting constraint of the capacity of the storm sewer where it passes through the Gasthoff Gramshimer. This section of pipe will not be upsized with any streetscape project. The second is assuming the Town will replace the pipe with the Streetscape project. The project is budgeted to be constructed in 2004, however, until the project is actually completed, assuming increased capacity will be provided is unacceptable. The third item, is the if the size of the pipe up Wall Street needs to be upsized due to the increased developed flow the difference in the price of upsizing the replacement of the pipe should be the cost of the developer. The drainage system which currently is in place in the ski yard includes the drainage system from Mill Creek Circle. The future system shall be constructed to intercept this flow as well. The town still has an interest in a water feature/water conveyance using a diversion of water off of Mill Creek through Wall Street for aesthetic purposes. The developer will work with the Town as the Town further investigates the possibility of a diversion of flow of Mill Creek through Wall Street as a water feature for Founders Plaza and beyond. This includes coordination of installing the pipe from the Front Door/Pirate Ship Park to Founders Plaza. Streetscape improvements. The developer has agreed to install the approved streetscape improvements for the area from Seibert Circle to Hanson Ranch Chute, the intersection of Hanson Ranch Chute/Hanson Ranch Road and Hanson Ranch Chute. The streetscape improvements include all work necessary including hardscape and subsurface support, drainage, lighting, retaining, utility relocations and planters, landscaping, site furniture, public art, street support systems, snow melt systems with in the public right of way. In addition the developer has agreed install the streetscape improvements from Willow Road/Vail Road to Checkpoint Charlie and enhance the design to include snowmelt and full paver pavement treatment. In addition the incorporation on Willow Road of an eight foot paver band at grade as the road turns to the west and as far as is needed to finish the roadway transaction. Lodge at Vail entrance. The entrance is designed and operated to allow no stacking on the public roadway and will accommodate appropriate emergency vehicles as well as over the road coaches. Public Art the developer will need to incorporate Public Art into the project and at this time has committed $1 million dollars to be used in integrated art. Pedestrian bicycle Path. The Gore Valley trail runs from Vail Road to the ski yard and past Pirate ship Park. An easement for the improvements from Vail Road to Mill Creek Circle and strong design intent that this is a public space from Pirate Ship Park to Vail Road which invites and encourages pedestrians and bicyclists to use the space. This should be designed for all seasons and both daytime as well as night time use The developer agrees to convey the eastern portion of Tract E to the Town of Vail. Loading and delivery The developer is providing 14 truck bays designed for the following AASHTO design vehicles 3 WB-50, 4 WB-40 and 7 SU-35. In addition, there are three van spaces provided for delivery use. This area in addition to the drive access and walkway/elevators out which all will be placed in a public access easement. The developer will work with the Town and provide if deemed feasible a ramp way form Founders Plaza to Gore Creek Drive via the Wildflower Alley to assist the delivery of goods to Gore Creek Drive. The Control of the dock area will be under the management of the Town of Vail. The developer will be required to provide the space which includes, design and construction along with lighting, and other utility costs, ongoing building repair and capital maintenance. The Town is responsible for ensuring use of the facility is maximized to provide the greatest public benefit and occasional cleaning and signing the area. The Town will be responsible for the elevator maintenance. Access and sight distance will be designed to provide a safe facility to meet the minimum or approved performance alternatives of the Town and the Professional Engineer stamping the plans. This includes not only stopping sight distances but access sight distances for all access points in the tunnel as well as the access to Vail Road. Ski Yard use for special event activity. The ski yard is available by public easement to use the yard for special events as determined with terms of the easement agreement. Public Restrooms. The developer is providing year-round access to the public restrooms for hours which match the demand of the public needs as determined by the Town of Vail. The developer is responsible for all costs of providing and running the restrooms. Public roadway easement for Forest Service Road Number All necessary easements for drainage, roadway, signs, utilities and pedestrian access. Grading /retaining walls the plans will conform to all Town Standards with regards to grading and retaining walls at design approval and as constructed in the field within the limits of disturbance approved at this time. All roads, driveways and bike paths will meet the Town's Standards with regards to grades, and horizontal and vertical alignment. All parking spaces throughout the development will meet the Town's standards, be independently accessible in a forward motion and will be exited in an appropriate motion; once the space is exited no reverse operation down drivelines will be permitted. Final approval of Civil Engineered Plans will be required prior to submitting for building permit. Allow up to 6 months of review and resubmission for this time in your design/construction schedule. C01 The Vail Town Code identifies employee housing as an impact of development that must be mitigated by developers when proposing new development in the Ski Base Recreation-2 zone district. Historically, the Town of Vail has relied upon a study completed by Rosall, Remen, & Cares in 1991, on behalf of the Town, to be used in determining the number of new employees expected to be generated by a development. Additionally, the Town has used a multiplier of 15% as a factor for determining the total number of employees that will need to be provided deed-restricted housing as a result of the development. The table below summarizes the employee housing requirement for Vail's Front Door Project based upon the study prepared by Rosall, Remen, & Cares. Proposed New Development Use Skier Services-Commercial Skier Services-Office Spa use Ski Club Restaurant/Lounge Meeting rooms Lodging Multi-Family Formula Employ ees Generated = 4,775 sq. ft. @(5/1000 sq. ft.) = 23.87 = 1,575 sq. ft. @(5/1000 sq. ft.) = 7.87 = 11,554 sq. ft. @(1.25/1000 sq. ft.) = 14.44 = 2,263 sq. ft. @(1.25/1000 sq. ft.) = 2.83 = 293 @(5/1000 sq. ft.) = 1.47 = 0 @(1/1000 sq. ft.) = 0 = 2 units @(.25/unit) = 0.5 = 13 units @(.4/unit) = 5.2 Total Employees =56.18 or 57 Employees Existing Development Use Lodging Net Employees Generated Town's 15% factor Formula Employees Generated = 3 units @(.25/unit) = 0.75 Total Employees Removed = (0.75) or -1 = 56 = 8.4 or 9 New Employees 0 ~z O J N 0o Cn cn r z J J C o F! A r V ~ D C C D n o o p, ` a N n x= y 9 A~ a N W Oo G~ ° ° o o n , ~ 1~ P'F d rt r~ p C1 vii rri) \ Ch z Q c~ Z ID , 44, m n a C CD [ r) CD D Y,. f ° o ro: ~ rD a' O ~ \ J s` O ' ~ O ~ ll (n ~l V o 71 U4 Ul W W W Cn W ~ ~1 cn W cn cn J cn p J ~ ►K cn -0 rp 7; 0 0 0 0 O O cn O Cl) v) rh cn O O" ~ O W 4~, O fD = ' C ~ N ~ J ~ lV tat G C V Cn Cn OO W Vr O ~ O E GE IG O~ G oo\;O \ O ~P . 100 54'00" =:CE`.►_~ DOMpS r ~ LOT LOT b LOT a 150'01'00" -57- 00'1 00.00 DECK -65 12.0' c~LEC. Box \ 92'35'00" -4 - E 77 i WALL LIGHT POLE ELEC. M.H. j SEWER M. H. / I -b • T1 APPROX. SEWER LINEt' 1 p. , 6 REE I WATER M.H. << 84'40'00' LOT d, E VAIL V FIRST x \ FND. PIN & CAP L.S. i 20'10'00" CATV. _ TEL. RI R--,,, SIGN POST ELEC. TF MILL coNC. CREE / rP►h HA\ / BIKE AIRS (TYP:) G TRACT E PIRATE o V IL VILLAGE RK ~Fl TH FILING 3.835 AC. ~rND. PIN & FLA WALK CAP L.S. 16827 WOOD W / 16 EASEMEN ELEC. SWITCH t . BOX 2~JO•~~ PREMISES LEASED UNDER PIRATE SHIP PARK LEASE LOT 2 tSPLIT RAIL =ENCE . 10 'f; lit LOT 1 EXHIBIT A t.ynn Frilzlen, ;AIA, Architc,,ct William F. Pierce, ;Architera. Kathy lie-dinga, Business Manager September 12, 2003 To: The Town of Vail Design Review Board From: Luanne Wells and the Wells Team Re: Front Door Project FRITZLEN PIERCE ARCHITECTS VAIL, COLORADO Mrs. Wells and the Wells team have monitored the Front Door Project since its original unveiling. Luanne Wells is a long time Vail homeowner, residing at One Vail Place. Mrs. Wells is committed to making the Front Door Project the best possible development for the Town and the surrounding community. The Front Door has gone through many design iterations since its inception. The most recent submission to the Town of Vail Planning Commission is dated August 20, 2003. The Wells Team has attended public hearings on the project for over a year. As the project has been refined, we have provided specific comments on planning and design issues. Several of the comments and suggestions which we have presented in meetings with Vail Resorts, as well in front of the Planning Commission, have been incorporated in the design. The Wells Team values the opportunity to continue to be part of the review process of such an important development in the Town of Vail, and appreciate past considerations. The Wells team has provided verbal input during Planning and Environmental Commission hearings as well as submitting suggestions in a written and graphic format. The thrust of the Wells Team PEC comments have been focused on: 1. Overall integrity of the Front Door Project; to ensure that the Front Door development results with appropriate improvements and creates the formidable presence Vail deserves. 2. The appropriateness of locating the entirety of the truck delivery system in the Front Door location. 3. Integration of skiers/visitors/pedestrians/ with the truck loading and delivery system 4. Location and configuration of the hand truck portal. 5. The traffic impact of the loading and delivery system, including routing trucks on Gore Creek Drive. 6. The need for additional retail in the Skier Services building in light of the conversion of the first level of One Vail Place from VRI offices to retail and historical vacancy in Vail. 7. Preservation of the Wall Street View Corridor to the Mountain. 8. The size of the Vista Bahn Ski Yard, the configuration of the Skier's Services Building, and the relocation of the Vista Bahn Ski Lift. 9. Preservation of the alleyway between the Lodge at Vail and One Vail Place PEC Outstanding Issues - We continue to have concerns regarding the traffic impact of the loading and delivery facility on Vail Road as well on the Front Door neighboring properties. We are concerned that the assumptions used are not accurate. We do not to recreate the traffic problems at Gold Peak . Additionally, we do not believe that the hand truck delivery system has been adequately studied. We are awaiting the detailed management plan for the delivery system which should highlight the impact. It is our recommendation that these plans be thoroughly reviewed prior to finalizing the location of FRITZLEN Ie;SD Fast Vail Valley Drive, Fallrid;e C-1, P I E R C E Vail, Colorado 81657 P: 5}-Q. €71 6.6342 F: 97(}.476.4901 E: ink,)( i!arc:hitee t .a>m iw~wv.v<;ilair'hflcza:,.c:c}rti FRITZLEN PIERCE ARCHITECTS VAIL, COLORADO hand truck portals as well as determining the number of truck bays necessary to support a Front Door distribution Center. As the project moves through Design Review the Wells Team would appreciate the opportunity to provide input on design related issues. We share several of the same concerns that the DRB members voiced in the August 18, 2003 and the September 8, 2003 meetings. We are concerned that the analysis provided to the DRB to date is not commensurate with the magnitude of this project. Our preliminary comments are as follows: Village Character - Vail is known for its village atmosphere and web of pedestrian streets and alleys. The spaces between the buildings in Vail are as important or more important than the buildings themselves. The pedestrian circulation around and to the Front Door edifices is a key to the design success of this project. Relationships between the buildings facades and entrances should be studied carefully. The Wells team envisions sunny, intimately scaled spaces that invite strolling and casual conversation. We encourage the integration of alternate pedestrian pathways to reduce conflict at rush hour. 2. Building Elevations - Each facade of the building will be visible to the public and neighboring properties. Each elevation should be studied carefully and have equal visual appeal. Blank and unfenestrated walls should be avoided. There should be no back door to the Front Door development. 3. Rooftop Equipment - Mitigating noise and visual impacts from heating and ventilation equipment is important. Architectural screening of rooftop equipment and fan hoods is important for skiers returning to the Front Door and neighbors looking down on the buildings. 4. Pedestrian and Bikeways Connections - In the current plan pedestrian and bike path interconnections appear to be disjointed and discontinuous. Easy and safe pedestrian access from both the east and the west should be incorporated in the design. We would like to see skiers dispersed through a number of pedestrian pathways rather than funneled au masse down Bridge Street. 5. Pedestrian and Bikeways Design - Attractively designed pedestrian and bike pathways that include landscape improvements, clear separation between vehicles and pedestrians and a predictable flow are important to the appeal of this key public area. In particular we would like to see landscape and low level lighting improvements throughout, including the alleyway between One Vail Place and the Lodge at Vail. These design goals are also consistent with other adopted Vail Design Guidelines. 6. Paving Materials - We encourage the use of durable attractive materials for the Vista Bahn Ski Yard. The existing pavers in the ski yard are showing wear. We encourage the use of materials that develop a patina with age rather than a look of disrepair. In addition we encourage the use of a wider palette of natural materials that introduce a variety of texture and coloration. 7. Landscaping - The August 20, 2003 Front Door plan does not indicate any significant landscaping in the plaza or in the Ski Yard. We recognize that balancing the need for FRITZLEN IW)i` astVail Valley Diivu. Fallrid<;e' C..1, P I E R C E Vail, Colorcu o 8165) 7 P: 9170. 6.t)j42 F: info( va lart hito(ls.com ww~-v.waila~'chile:ia:,.com FRITZLEN PIERCE ARCHITECTS VAIL, COLORADO hardscape for skier traffic and softscape is difficult. On the other hand the unique vegetation of our Alpine climate is a signature feature of Vail and should be incorporated in the exterior improvements. We encourage the applicant to incorporate additional landscaping into the design. 8. Site Walls - We encourage the integration of site walls and other features that encourage the passive use and enjoyment of the Vista Bahn Ski Yard. 9. Architectural Finishes - Attractive and durable materials for the building exteriors as well as the architectural finishes on the buildings. We encourage the use of stucco, wood, stone and low reflectivity roof shingles. We are not in favor of flat roofs with membrane or ballasted membrane finishes. 10. Clock Tower - We have concerns about the location and configuration of the clock tower on the Skier Services building. The proper location and configuration should be studied from the perspective of approach from all sides. We are in agreement with the DRB comments that a Ski School Bell or other low profile focal point be incorporated in the Vista Bahn Ski Yard. 11. Design Critique - At the PEC level, Vail Resorts resisted the concept of having their design reviewed and critiqued by an outside design consultant. Vail Resorts assumes the DRB will provide enough design critique. While we respect the DRB, this project can only become better if alternative design ideas are considered. This is the most prominent redevelopment project in Vail. We ask this board to not shut out other creative ideas. In order to enhance the review process, we would like to have the most recent submittal critiqued by an outside consultant. 12. Rooflines - We are in agreement with the DRB's assessment that the roof ridge of the Skier Services building should have more variation. We also are not in support of the flat roof area on the Skier Services building. We request that the flat roof be broken up by varying the roof heights or adding roof gardens or architectural features. This project will forever change Vail. This project has been called our Front Door with a goal of enhancing the experience of those visiting Vail. We believe that due to the long term significance of this project, we should ensure that the most creative and talented resources are available and utilized. Based on the status today, it is our opinion that this has not occurred. We believe that it is imperative that resources be made available to the DRB to ensure that the potential of the project is optimized. This could require the utilization of outside consultants with expertise in both building and landscape design. To date, we are not aware that these resources have been available to the DRB. In order to properly evaluate these items more detailed drawings and/or models will be required to be submitted. We request that these additional design documents be submitted in a timely fashion so that the public and the Wells team have adequate time to review and understand the content. Thank you for your consideration. Sincerely, FRITZLEN 1f550 East Vail Valloy Drive, Falind, , C_-1, P I E R C E Vail, Colorado 81165 P: 970.4'6.63=42 F: 970.476.=4901 E: i€ife~{iuvailarchitCC~CS.i':+:zr~i 14'W1V.Vd31aY(:hltGiaS.CC}fTl FRITZLEN PIERCE ARCHITECTS VAIL, COLORADO x Luanne Wells and the Wells Team Andy Littman Karen Romeo Tom Boni, Knight Planning Lynn Fritzlen, Fritzlen Pierce Architects O FRITZLEN 166)t1 Fast Vail Vadlev Drive, Fallrid.ge C 1, P I E R C E Vail. Colorado 8165 7 P: 970 4; 6.O342 F: 970.,} 76,4901 F: ir~fc,{~9tailar;liiCec:I:.c~;;n~ ~w~~wv.vailar~.:hii.ects.cam ~lorr ~arr FRONT DOOR - UNRESOLVED ISSUES C~m. 9/22/03 Cov %p. VoWL- ILL cr, ~A WORLD CLASS PROJECT? -5E, A:!=" J2 IS VAIL'S FRONT DOOR THE RIGHT LOCATION FOR BACKDOOR FUNCTIONS? 1. 04SSURANCES OF OTHER SATELLITES? SEA- ~c1rEs: 4. ESCROW FUNDS TO ASSURE SATELLITES o= CE J 5. IGNORING CONGESTION AND TRAFFIC FLOW ISSUES 6. REPEAT GOLD PEAK '211 vvQ- RePomir 7. NO ANALYSIS OF COST/BENEFIT TO TOW PVT pagvidc~, 1 VAIL IS NOT BEAVER CREEK (~✓i:wo, V" p5a jRB, 09 INCREASED COST OF LOADING AND DELIVERY? V'" HAND TRUCK PORTAL NOT OPTIMALLY LOCATED LET tMp&4-r o*'J 11. 1 VAIL PLACE EASEMENT COMPROMISED c.v Aumc u l clk.. 12. OPTIMIZE PEDESTRIAN AND BIKEWAY ACCESS 13. CART BEFORE THE HORSE • NO DELIVERY PLAN • NO MANAGEMENT PLAN • NO LAND EXCHANGE • NO ARCHITECTURAL CONSULTANT • NO COST/BENEFIT ANALYSIS TO TOV • NO SATELLITES • NO ENVIRONMENTAL STUDY I Vv*;l ptruo- b: PLANNING AND ENVIRONMENTAL COMMISSION PUBLIC MEETING Monday, September 22, 2003 APPROVED PROJECT ORIENTATION / - Community Development Dept. PUBLIC WELCOME 12:00 pm MEMBERS PRESENT John Schofield Doug Cahill George Lamb Chas Bernhardt Site Visits: MEMBERS ABSENT Erickson Shirley Gary Hartmann Rollie Kjesbo 1. Pirateship Park- Tract E, Vail Village 5th 2. Lionshead Tennis Court Site- 615 West Forest Road 3. D'Orisio - 4444 Streamside Circle Driver: George ~a NOTE: If the PEC hearing extends until 6:00 p.m., the board may break for dinner from 6:00 - 6:30 Public Hearinq - Town Council Chambers 2:00 pm 1. A request for a final review of an exterior alteration or modification, pursuant to Section 12-713-7, Exterior Alterations or Modifications, Vail Town Code, to allow for an addition to the Lodge at Vail; a request for a variance from Section 12-21-10, Development Restricted, Vail Town Code, pursuant to Chapter 17, Variances, Zoning Regulations, to allow for the construction of multiple-family dwelling units on slopes in excess of 40%; and a request for the establishment of an approved development plan to facilitate the construction of Vail's Front Door, and setting forth details in regard thereto. (A more complete metes and bounds legal description is available at the Town of Vail Community Development Department) Applicant: Vail Resorts, represented by Jay Peterson Planner: George Ruther George Ruther introduced the project according to the memorandum. The applicant, Jay Peterson, from Vail Resorts, mentioned that comment would be withheld until comments and questions were made by the public. John Schofield wanted to make sure that Lodge Tower information had been addressed. Ron Riley, from Los Amigos restaurant, mentioned that he was most concerned about the loading and delivery plan. He was curious about what the merchants knew about the loading and delivery. He wanted to make sure that the record reflected the lack of detail that was presented to the public, stating that he would not be surprised if the *VA1 W)W loading and delivery plan was not as efficient or workable as was currently hoped for. Being involved with Russell's restaurant, at the end of the street, he was skeptical as to how "the product" was transported from the dock to that location. He stated that some impairment may be caused through the relocation of the ski storage to the basement and wanted to make sure that the ordinance justifying that change was, indeed, sensible. He urged the PEC to be mindful of the things he had spoken about. John Schofield replied that the Town of Vail would be operating the loading and delivery operations and that some details were still forthcoming. Sarah Baker, an attorney representing the residential owners of Bridge Street Lodge, stated that her clients supported the plan, but were primarily concerned about any future development that might occur as a result of the project. She also expressed concern about the future of Tract E. Andy Littman, representing Luanne Wells and the Wells Team, mentioned that Ms. Wells wanted the project to be a world-class project, since even the master plan dictated such types of development. He stated that the Wells Team felt the plan was not yet of "world-class" caliber. He wanted to make sure that sufficient public good would result from the project. The fourteen bays were being placed "in the middle of the town" and specific conditions should require satellite locations for loading and delivery operations. He wondered whether it was compatible to have "back-door functions" at this "front-door location", unless there was considerable public benefit that resulted. Were environmental impacts being addressed? He wondered, again, why a world-class architect was not consulted about the plans as they were being shown today. Other issues unsolved to date included traffic flow and congestion issues, and he mentioned the lack of a cost/benefit analysis. Did the Town know that the project was a "safe and prudent" one? Vail was not Beaver Creek, he went on to say. Did Vail want the same amount of hardscape that existed at Beaver Creek? The landscaping plan was lacking and the areas within the project would not to be optimally maintained. The hand truck portal should be located in a place where it would impact residents to a lesser degree. The One Vail Place easement had been compromised, he added. He wanted to know if the spaces between the buildings would be as conducive as Bridge Street currently is for meeting, congregating and socializing. Gwen Scalpello mentioned the traffic impact study and her concern about the traffic generation at the four way stop at Vail Road and Meadow Drive. The time spent waiting for pedestrian and vehicular traffic was already notable, she said, and asked that the carrying capacity between the main roundabout and the stop sign be re-analyzed. Sybill Navas questioned condition number 15, now condition number 8. George Ruther explained that Vail Resorts would work with the Special Events Commission to use the Vista Bahn ski yard for special events. Sybill Navas commented that the condition did not imply that the result was going to be amenable to both sides. She wanted to see the space available for community use and was concerned that that Commission would be "handed a use agreement". John Schofield said that ski races, bike races, and other similar events were anticipated for the area. The area was well-suited for special events, and Mr. Schofield said that input from the SEC would definitely be solicited. George Ruther mentioned that if the agreement between the SEC (Town of Vail) and the applicant was not reached, then the condition had not been met. Jim Lamont expressed confusion about the condition. George Ruther said that October 31, 2003, was the deadline for submitting an agreement. Jim Lamont wanted to know what the process would be for solidifying special events. George Ruther stated that the process would be communicated to affected parties after it had been presented to the Town Council. Jim Lamont asked if there would be public hearings conducted in order for affected agencies to have discussions about special events issues. George Ruther replied that once the document had been through Council, a schedule to address these issues would be organized. Jim Lamont wanted to verify that certain covenants would be affected. He also asked about the "no build area": would it be inappropriate to designate in the development plan a "no build area" in the special event area? John Schofield said that the proposed condition number 6 already referenced a no build area. Mr. Lamont mentioned that the version he had received had probably already been reviewed by the Town Attorney, and others, but that many, besides himself, deemed the area appropriate for a "no build area". He then expressed mild concern about the wakefulness of the Commission and wondered if a management committee could be instituted to organize special events. George Ruther said that a balance of special events interests would be achieved. In regard to Gold Peak, Mr. Lamont clarified that adjacent property owners were not consulted about special events at that location, but instead had to be proactive to gain a voice. He was confused about where the loading and delivery bays were. He further questioned the importance of the bays' locations. He asked if there would be any problems with the location if the land was not brought into the Town of Vail. He felt it not in the purview of the PEC to require a design review consultant, as the Wells Team had suggested. He did assume that the Town staff was not "playing favorites" on the design review issues, however. Regarding Pirate Ship Park, he questioned the liquor license policies for that area. Furthermore, the large size of the tract did not seem proportional to what was being built. He asked that the TOV clarify what "recreational uses" are, since area homeowners would staunchly approach any dining deck extension. He also wondered about the "public access easement": why is there an interconnection with Mill Creek Circle? George Ruther answered that the connection would be made from Tract E, south of Los Amigos, a general east-west connection. Mr. Lamont requested further clarification about that connection in the form of a schematic. He asked about the draft of the master plan that was reference earlier in the meeting. Greg Hall stated that the plan was a 1997 plan referencing one facility for the entire Village, which would have definitely been impractical, and was therefore correct. Mr. Lamont finished by stating that plenty of room remained to fine-tune the details he had, and others had spoken about. Russ Forrest stated that he could not respond to the Pirate Ship Park issue. George Ruther said that the boundary line had been extended to 5 feet east of the creek so that maintenance to the stream banks could be done by the TOV. Jay Peterson stated that the connection was made to Tract H, and therefore a comprehensive ownership existed by the TOV. The biggest concern of merchants was to separate the trucks from the main pedestrian areas, he said. Regarding ski storage, it was located according to the customers, not the zoning regulations. If anything were to be changed, the PEC would be privy to those changes through an amendment, he added. Regarding special events, a ski park AND a summer recreation area had been designed that would hopefully work for everybody. Vail Resorts would not be making the decisions regarding the use of the space for special events: Town of Vail staff would be, however. He stated that the Wells Team had presented the same concerns for the past five months, each of which had been answered numerous times. The Town of Vail would be in charge of decisions regarding the project from this point out. A world-class architect, Planning Commission, Design Review Board, and Staff had given input, he pointed out. Many, many meetings and much collaboration had brought Vail Resorts to the place they stood at today, Mr. Peterson finished by saying. John Schofield asked when construction was slated to begin, assuming no major changes. Jay Peterson responded that P3 & J construction would begin next year and the Front Door aspect would begin in 2005, though the land exchange was still pending. The development plan was the only thing that assured the building process. Jim Lamont asked if the project would go to Council automatically or if the Council would have to call the project up. George Ruther responded that the Town had adopted a development review process in which the PEC was the final reviewing board. Mr. Lamont asked if the plan was able to be appealed by affected property owners to the Town Council and the related time table. George Ruther stated that twenty days existed during which an appeal could be made. The Council took a five-minute break. Doug Cahill stated that though the process had been long, it had been thorough. Public comment had been taken into consideration. He acknowledged that the loading and delivery plan would need to be discussed further. The project was already world-class, and the design would be privy to DRB approval and suggestions from here on. Regarding satellite delivery locations, those were being discussed. The Town of Vail would make sure that traffic flows and congestion were dealt with appropriately, he added. The "no build zone" would automatically be part of the development plan, pending no further changes. The development plan was contingent on the approval of the land swap, he finished. Chas Bernhardt stated that he believed the project to be world-class, and in an appropriate location as well. The traffic consultants did not feel that traffic would be an issue, he continued. The projects that Vail Resorts had completed in the past were beneficial to the community, though no plan is perfect the first time around. Certain adjustments would be made as the plan was implemented. Regarding agreements with groups for special events usage, he didn't think that would be a problem. The forty percent slope would likely not cause any problems in the future because that slope would be eliminated with project completion. George Lamb agreed with Mr. Cahill's comments about the efficacy of the methodical approach the applicant followed in getting the project approved. The loading and delivery issue was a "big piece" of the project, but not the most important aspect, and could be flexible in the creation of a special environment. The plan would be refined over time, he added. He felt it was appropriate that the DRB would have input on many of the remaining issues. He mentioned the importance of artwork in the project's completion, referencing the million dollars that had been allocated for creative usage of art. Doug Cahill asked about the location of the EHLI's and stressed that the public access, from the west to the east of the project, be well-lighted and obviously open to the public. John Schofield stated that the Front Door project was the first major project that the Commission had considered in stages. The record reflected the expert reports and studies that had contributed to the project's review. Specifically, a condition of approval would be added that the various conditions of approval would be referred to the appropriate Town agencies for further review. Ski storage had always been an issue, he continued, and could be re-examined. The cost/benefit ratio would be astronomically in the Town's favor as the applicant was building and donating the project and its uses to the Town! Landscaping would be addressed by the DRB, who would critique it closely. The delineation of the bike path through the project was important, he continued. Traffic concerns and questions were shared by both the public and the Commission. Regarding Vail Road and Meadow Drive, traffic could be regulated before entering the Village by diversion to East Vail or other areas as deemed necessary. Regarding the "no build zone", any modifications proposed would return to the PEC, and therefore were not currently an issue. As for the annexation to the TOV, the PEC approval would be contingent on that annexation approval. Jay Peterson commented that a portion of the project could be built with a special use permit, if necessary. However, the project was planned on being built according to the development plan, though a different direction may need to be taken. John Schofield expressed concern that the PEC approval would be null and void if the land was under Eagle County jurisdiction. Jay Peterson stated that PEC approval and conditions would apply whether the land was annexed or not, according to his sources. John Schofield asked about the validation of certain zoning if the annexation was not carried out. George Ruther stated that the zoning under question would not apply if the annexation was not completed. Sybill Navas commented that the annexation or lack thereof would significantly affect special events. Exterior Alteration Vote, with conditions dated 9.22.03, 1)with the deletion of "preliminary" and 2)the addition of the "no build area" clause; also, 3)items be reviewed by appropriate reviewing boards with public notice. Motion: Doug Cahill Second: George Lamb Vote: 4-0-0 John Schofield clarified to George Ruther that the conditions would need to be referred to the appropriate reviewing boards. George Ruther clarified that the public notice, would include notice to the appropriate reviewing boards. Slope Variance Vote Motion: Doug Cahill Second: George Lamb Vote: 4-0-0 Final Development Plan Vote, with amended conditions Motion: Doug Cahill Second: George Lamb Vote: 4-0-0 John Schofield asked Jay Peterson for clarification of remaining issues, which Mr. Peterson replied affirmatively to. 2. A request for a conditional use permit pursuant to Section 12-7A-3, Vail Town Code; a major exterior alteration pursuant to 12-7A-12, Vail Town Code, to allow for modifications to the existing fractional fee club and a restaurant addition; and a request for a building height variance pursuant to Chapter 17, Vail Town Code, to allow for dormer additions, at the Vail Mountain Lodge and Spa, located at 352 E. Meadow Drive / Tract B, Vail Village 1 st Filing. Applicant: Vail Mountain Lodge LLC, represented by Braun Associates, Inc. Planner: George Ruther Motion: Second: Vote: TABLED TO OCTOBER 13, 2003 3. A request for a floodplain modification pursuant to Chapter 14-6, Grading Standards, Vail Town Code, to allow for the construction of new bridge abutments in the Mill Creek floodplain at Pirate Ship Park located at Tract E, Vail Village 5th Filing Applicant: Vail Resorts, represented by Town of Vail Planner: Bill Gibson Bill Gibson introduced the project according to the memorandum. No public input was offered. George Lamb, Doug Cahill, and Chas Bernhardt had no comment. John Schofield commented that constructing a project once, instead of twice, was always preferable (i.e. referring to the storm water sewer upgrade included with the bridge abutment replacement). Motion: Chas Bernhardt Second: George Lamb Vote: 4-0-0 John Schofield asked Greg Barrie, Public Works Department, when construction would begin, and Mr. Barrie replied that the planned start date is in October. 4. A request for a major subdivision pursuant to Chapter 13-3, Major Subdivision, Vail Town Code, to allow for the platting of four lots at the Lionshead tennis court site and a rezoning pursuant to Section 12-3-7, Administration, Vail Town Code, from Agriculture and Open Space zone district, Vail Town Code, to Primary/Secondary Two-Family Residential zone district, Vail Town Code, to allow for the construction of single-family homes on the four proposed lots, located at 615 West Forest Road/Unplatted ( A more complete metes and bounds legal description is available at the Town of Vail Community Development Department) Applicant: Vail Resorts, represented by Braun Associates, Inc. Planner: Warren Campbell Warren Campbell introduced the project according to the memorandum. Jay Peterson, the applicant's representative, mentioned that this session was slated for preliminary review and initial introduction to the entire Lionshead redevelopment proposal. He added that snowcat access was also a part of this proposal, as was a new skier bridge, the hotel component of the west day lot, the north day lot (with employee housing and VR offices), and the course site. Dominic Mauriello, the applicant's representative, presented a PowerPoint presentation which gave an overview of the project, which involved five separate areas: Lionshead tennis court redevelopment, west day lot - residences redevelopment, core site redevelopment, north day lot redevelopment, and west day lot - hotel redevelopment, each project which would be approximately two years in length. He then displayed several boards which represented the project and detailed such specifics as grading and access. He finished by saying that the snowcat access would be submitted in October and that a vote on the tennis court site would be welcome as soon as possible. John Schofield asked that the Staff give a review of the Lionshead Redevelopment Master Plan at the next meeting. He continued by saying that the approval timeline seemed sensible. Art Abplanalp, representing several adjacent property owners, began by saying that Vail Resorts had been listening to the concerns of neighboring property owners: firstly, that the redevelopment be appropriate, and secondly, that the snowcats be placed elsewhere. He expressed some confusion about the zoning of the ski way. Dominic Mauriello assured him that that zoning would not change. Regarding chronology, Mr. Abplanalp commented that the relocation of the staging would have to be a prerequisite to any other work on the site; otherwise, congestion would occur. He also wanted to verify that single-family residential and not two-family zoning would result at that site. Fred Rumford, a homeowner near the site, wondered what would happen to the existing bike path that led to the ski bridge and then to Lionshead. Jim Lamont, Vail Village Homeowner's Association, asked for clarification about the zoning that would be affected as a result of the redevelopment. He expressed concern about the use of the site as stated in the Lionshead Redevelopment Master Plan. John Schofield answered that at the time the master plan was completed, the owners on Forest Road requested that the tennis court site not be included in the plan, which it was not. Jim Lamont continued by stating that concern remained about the parcel to the east of the tennis courts site (stream tract), which had transitioned from Vail Associates ownership to TOV ownership. He asked that, for any change of uses on the site under question (unlike that aforementioned site), proper public notice be given, etc. John Schofield asked if Mr. Lamont's group would oppose the proposed paths, etc. in the Town's stream tract. Mr. Lamont said that fisherman's paths and similar walkways would be more than appropriate, due to the wildlife that exists in the area. This area was an opportunity to care about the environment, he said. Jeff Wright, on behalf of the Landmark, stated that he considered this to be the first step in the redevelopment of Lionshead. Regarding the process, he mentioned that the Landmark had several concerns regarding height, the north day lot and proposed transit center, the employee housing on the north day lot, and other similar issues that would affect him. He looked forward to the process, however. Bob Lazier, a property owner in the Lionshead area, mentioned his support of the direction of the project. He thought that the idea to divide the project into varied parts was effective and efficient, allowing the "community to start blooming". Many of the buildings in the area were prepared to do necessary renovations once the new projects were begun in the surrounding area. He expressed his support again, stating that he was looking forward to final results. Dominic Mauriello stated that the location of the bike path had been studied. In the winter, the path was not used much, and in the summer, alternative pathways existed already. He added that the path was presently very steep and likely did not meet pathway standards currently: therefore, the proposal did not include the path. Fred Rumford expressed further concern about the path's existence, on behalf of Forest Road homeowners. He was also concerned about the boundary line from the creek as it exists and as it is proposed. Jim Lamont mentioned that people on Forest Road would need access to Lionshead through the bridge. Would the bridge have ski and pedestrian access? John Schofield stated that there would be no change to the bike path on the North side of the creek. Dominic Mauriello stated that at a later date a proposal for the ski bridge would be submitted and that it would include a pedestrian portion. Jim Lamont then asked about the subdivision process. Russ Forrest clarified that no change or development was proposed on the wetland area that the Town owns. Mr. Rumford stated that there was still plenty of land on the north side of the site and that the bike path should be preserved. John Schofield asked for further public comment and then for general Commissioner comment. George Lamb wondered if any design guidelines would apply specifically to the four lots that would tie the homes together as one project. Dominic Mauriello commented that general guidelines would apply and had yet to be decided on. In general the Town's zoning and design guidelines would determine the appearance of the homes. George Lamb urged the applicant to consider continued use of the path under question near Forest Road. Doug Cahill commented that this plan was much more detailed and thorough than the previous plan. He had concerns about the numbers and placement of parking spaces and asked about the zoning of the four lots. Dominic Mauriello responded that there was no single-family residential zoning in the Lionshead filing under question, which is why Vail Resorts decided to make it an extension of the Two-family Primary/Secondary zone district which currently exists on the neighboring properties. Doug Cahill clarified that spring of 2004 was when construction was slated to begin. He also asked about a gate for the residences. Regarding the path, he asked how the path was maintained in the winter. Chas Bernhardt commented that overall, he though the projects would provide great improvements to the area. He questioned the fact that the use of private property had become the right of area homeowners and asked that more research be done regarding the use and ownership of that path. Mr. Rumford commented that plenty of public property existed in the area he was concerned about using. John Schofield hoped that these projects would be catalysts for extensive Lionshead rejuvenation efforts. He thought the timeline for approval was appropriate and commented that each aspect of the project would likely move at a different pace. He urged Staff and Council to make speedy progress on the location of the Transportation Center. He asked that progress be made on the tract along the stream as well. Regarding the skier bridge, he requested that the design be effective year round and not just seasonal. He asked about access to the Kaltenberg and parking issues, which would need to be addressed sooner, rather than later, with special attention paid to phasing. As for the specifics of the tennis courts, the owners on Forest Road were adamant that the parcel in question was not included in the master plan. He thought that design regulations for the homes should be in accordance with the Town of Vail/Design Review Board regulations, and nothing else. He wanted to ensure that a distinct delineation between the ski hill and the residences was made via a gate, a fence, or by other means, and asked that the applicant address the path under question near Forest Road. He requested that Staff give an overview to the PEC on the Lionshead Redevelopment Master Plan. Russ Forrest commented that Staff would provide an overview and that an amendment to the master plan may eventually occur. John Schofield said that further changes to the four lots would likely be minor, but that the bigger projects would need more time as they were more complex. Motion: Doug Cahill Second: George Lamb Vote: 4-0-0 Tabled to October 13, 2003 5. A request for a variance from Section 12-14-17, Setback from Watercourse, Vail Town Code, to allow for a residential addition in the Gore Creek setback, located at 4444 Streamside Circle / Lot 11, Bighorn 4th Addition. Applicant: Thomas O'Dorisio, represented by John Perkins. Planner: Warren Campbell Warren Campbell introduced the project according to the memorandum. Neither the applicant nor any members of the public had any comment. Doug Cahill, Chas Bernhardt, and George Lamb had no further comment. John Schofield mentioned that it would be interesting to know how the building was originally constructed in the setback (in the 1970's). Motion: Chas Bernhardt Second: George Lamb Vote: 4-0-0 APPROVED WITH ONE CONDITION: Condition: 1. That the applicant is not permitted to perform an interior conversion of this space at a later date as the dormer additions would not have been constructed prior to August 5, 1997, as required by Section 12-15-4, Interior Conversion, Vail Town Code. 6. A request for a recommendation to the Vail Town Council for an amendment to the Town of Vail Streetscape Master Plan, and setting forth details in regard thereto. Applicant: Town of Vail, represented by Greg Hall Planner: Warren Campbell Warren Campbell introduced the project according to the memorandum. No public input was given. Chas Bernhardt commented that the fee schedule did not seem fair to the homeowners that would be affected. Greg Hall replied that a formula could be reached that would differentiate between commercial and residential fee structures. Doug Cahill asked how the fees would apply. Greg Hall answered that, unless a major exterior alteration and/or an increase in square footage occurred, the fees would not be a concern. Russ Forrest commented that an impact fee needed to be based on the impact that was generated. Doug Cahill commented on the length of the impact. Would there be a sunset provision for when new development would not be assessed any fees as the development was complete. George Lamb added that the impact was his primary concern as well. He continued by saying that Design Review Board and Town of Vail issues were the only ones that seemed to remain. John Schofield said that the plan seemed great, except that ongoing maintenance was not addressed as thoroughly as he had hoped. He would recommend to Council that that information was obtained and clarified. The idea of residential assessment also struck him as being unfair. He thought that tax increment financing seemed a better way to do things and stressed that the Council needed to be expedient in making decisions! Furthermore, there would never be enough tax increments to do all projects. The Council should allocate a portion of tax increment funding to the streetscape plan, he recommended. The balance not covered by the developers could be covered in that way. Russ Forrest added that Staff looked hard at tax increment financing: however, private developers would move forward with their projects without the public developments being proposed. The question was how far the attorneys would go in letting the Town set up a tax increment district. John Schofield encouraged Staff to "screw the attorneys" and requested that he be quoted accordingly. Motion: John Schofield Second: Doug Cahill Vote: 4-0 RECOMMENDATION OF APPROVED TO COUNCIL WITH CONDITIONS Recommendations: 1. That the applicant should verify that all materials proposed for use in the streetscape are low maintenance, have a long lifespan, and are durable so as to avoid costly maintenance and upkeep. 2. That the applicant should explore funding options other than an impact fee such as the use of Tax Increment Financing. In addition, funding models should be explored which impact residential properties to a lesser extent than commercial properties and include a time frame for which the fee will be collected, such as a sunset provision. 7. A request for major exterior alteration pursuant to Section 12-7H-7, Vail Town Code, to allow for the construction of new dwelling units and accommodation units at Vail Marriott Mountain Resort, located at 715 West Lionshead Circle / Lots C and D, Morcus Subdivision, and Lot 7, Marriott Subdivision Applicant: Mountain Marriott Vail Resort, represented by Gwathmey, Pratt, Schultz Architects Planner: George Ruther Motion: George Lamb Second: Doug Cahill Vote: 4-0-0 TABLED TO OCTOBER 13, 2003 8. Approval of September 8th meeting minutes Motion: George Lamb Second: Doug Cahill Vote: 3-0-1 (CB abstained) Approved John Schofield asked if GRFA information was going to Council, and if so, when. Russ Forrest said that the PEC recommendation was being forwarded to Council on October 7, 2003. At the following Council meeting, those persons instrumental in the GRFA discussions from the beginning would be invited to share comments, etc. He added that PEC participation would be helpful at that time. 9. Information Update: • GRFA - see above comments by Russ Forrest • Four Seasons Russ Forrest commented that parking issues still presided over the project, though the developer was ready and wanting to get on with the project. Four spaces (headed to DRB for review) and then six additional spaces remained the issue between the applicant and the property owners of Nine Vail Road. John Schofield asked about the presentation to the new council of the plans and schedule for Four Seasons. Russ Forrest commented that Mr. Schofield's idea was a good idea. Motion: George Lamb Second: Doug Cahill Vote: 4-0-0 Meeting adjourned at 6:17 p.m. The applications and information about the proposals are available for public inspection during regular office hours in the project planner's office located at the Town of Vail Community Development Department, 75 South Frontage Road. Please call 479-2138 for information. Sign language interpretation available upon request with 24 hour notification. Please call 479- 2356, Telephone for the Hearing Impaired, for information. Community Development Department Published September 19, 2003, in the Vail Daily. N Amended Conditions of Approval (9/22/03) Should the Planning and Environmental Commission choose to approve the three development review applications, as proposed, the staff recommends that the Commission make the following conditions part of the approval: 1. Standard conditions of approval applicable to all PEC development plan approvals: • That the Developer submits a complete application to the Town of .AyfiL Community Development Department for the review and approval by the TPrd itf: Vaij Design Review Board of a Comprehensive Sign Program prior to the. issud6sq;,p~ a T mp©ra;y C04icate of Approval for any of Vail's Front ..,Doer Projept improvements- • That the Developer submits a complete Design Review Board application, including details of all proposed roof top mechanical systems, to the Town of Vail Community Development Department for review and approval by the Town of Vail Design Review Board, prior to making an application for the issuance of a building permit for any of Vail's Front Door Project improvements. • That the Developer submits a Construction Staging Plan to the Town of Vail Community Development Department for the review and approval of the proposed staging plan by the Town of Vail, prior to the issuance of a building permit for the Vail's Front Door Project improvements. 2. The Developer provides deed-restricted employee housing that complies with the Town of Vail Employee Housing requirements (Chapter 12-13) for a minimum of 9 employees, and that said housing shall be made available for occupancy, prior to the issuance of a Temporary Certificate of Occupancy for the Vail's Front Door Project improvements. In addition, the deed-restrictions shall be legally executed by the Developer and duly recorded with the Eagle County Clerk & Recorder's Office, prior to the issuance of a Temporary Certificate of Occupancy for the Vail's Front Door Project improvements. 3. That the Developer submits a complete set of {aeiigax~C civil engineered drawings of the Approved Development Plans including the required off site improvements, to the Town of Vail Community Development Department for review and approval of the drawings, prior to making application for the issuance of a building permit for Vail's Front Door Project improvements. 4. That the Developer submits a partial topographic map of the alleyway east of the Lodge at Vail to the Town of Vail Community Development Department. The topographic information shall be used by the Town of Vail and the Developer to determine the feasibility of providing improved handtruck delivery access to Gore Creek Drive from Founder's Plaza. If it is determined by the Town of Vail and the Developer that proposed improvements are both feasible and advantageous for providing handtruck delivery access to Gore Creek Drive via the Wildflower alleyway, the Developer shall submit a revised set of Off Site Improvements Plan to the Town of Vail Community Development Department for review and approval and further agrees to construct the improvements as approved. 5. That the Developer submits a development application to the Town of Vail Community Development Department requesting approval of a conditional use permit to allow for the operation for a "private and public club", pursuant to Section 12-8E-3, Conditional Uses, of the Vail Town Code. The application for the conditional use permit shall be reviewed in accordance with the provisions of Chapter 16 of the Zoning Regulations, prior to making application for the issuance of a building permit for Vail's Front Door Project improvements. 6. That the Developer identifies a "No Build Area" on the Approved Development Plan indicating that no building or site disturbance shall occur within t ' et (30') of the proposed westernmost and southernmost prope li a area of the residential unit construction. s 66- .l Gt~p Ih t a1 ~D f r 4 l~ V ~~J i ( l~YLky~ • • t 7. That the Developer legally executes alf necessary easements and agreements allowing for public pedestrian/bike access through Tract E and the development site from Mill Creek Circle to Vail Road, public roadway access, drainage, signs, utilities, etc. on and across the development site. Said easements and agreements shall be submitted to the Town of Vail Community Development Department for review and approval by the Town of Vail. Upon approval by the Town, said easements and agreements (if necessary) shall be legally executed by the Developer and duly recorded with the Eagle County Clerk & Recorder's Office, prior to the issuance of a Final Certificate of Occupancy for the Vail's Front Door Project improvements. 8. The Developer agrees to provide to the Town of Vail for review and approval by the Vail Town Council a comprehensive Development Agreement for Vail's Front Door Project improvements. Said Agreement shall be submitted to the Town by no later than October 31, 2003. The Development Agreement shall be a legally binding agreement between the Town of Vail and Vail Resorts. The purpose of this agreement is to document, among other things, the manner and timeframes within which the Town and the Developer will complete certain required aspects of the project. The Development Agreement will include, but may not be limited to, addressing the following aspect of the project: • The conveyance of.a deed.from the Developer to the Town for a parcel of land under Pirate Ship Park, as depicted in Exhibit A attached. • A written description of all off-site improvements to be provided by the Developer (as generally depicted on the approved development plans), providing additional details on the specific improvements to be provided, the manner in which developer assurances for completion of said improvements will be provided, acknowledgment that design details will conform to the Town's streetscape standards, schedules for completing said improvements, the manner in which the Developer and Town will coordinate streetscape improvement efforts and defining specific terms to determine when and where Checkpoint Charlie will be constructed by the Developer, as maybe amended • The legal mechanisms to be used wherein the Town of Vail will allow the Developer to construct a portion of the proposed parking structure at P3&J beneath the Town's road right-of-way (as depicted on approved plans for P3&J). • The legal mechanisms to be used wherein the Developer will allow the Town to utilize a portion of its parking and loading structure as a 14-bay public loading and delivery facility (as depicted on the approved development plans). • An agreement to be prepared which outlines the Developer's responsibilities for funding $1,000,000 in public art to be provided in conjunction with the Project. This agreement is to be prepared with input from the Town of Vail Art in Public Places Board. • A use agreement to be prepared which outlines the terms and conditions for public use of the Vista Bahn Ski Yard. This agreement is to be prepared with input from the Town of Vail Commission on Special Events. vJ 4o "a &PPj24t,-PWM*. TvbC. L.101'1~t` . S ~ ..,t:. 1{ ..~;.~4r Y • it +r r l ,f-~1 ~''t._`- + e~ ~ ~ M4. .,lw {~K qM!'~'--fit' j,~• r r • . ~ t r '1 s} -t i~ 4.w•. a'. l~i f • ~ d' .'~'I E.,a.~",... , sr~.. I li R r y ' S n 3 C' N z 1`, S~ i C 1 ~ 1 1 _ nr co 1 0 I ~ 1 _ 1 r 1 I ~ 1 _ 1 I I I 1 1 1 I 1 1 + N N _ - - li - _ 1 - 1 1 J 1 1 ~s 1 C d 11 9 ~ ;1I ^r 1~ 1 - 1 ; 11 -1 11 as C✓ X g ~ 'tom- ~ 4 ~ fi yy) 11 r~ ,I r I I C 1 'rte ~ 1' _ ~~--yy I 77 f II--._ ~I r i f1 ► ~ ~o~' DOOR i./ [[~SCd +s~_ I F`t ~Il 9ES ;fi e~[1{_~ 69~ r a VAIL S FRONT a g .m. t0 f e °z 0 t a ' i q FY~ i- I Id sff ;A~ f t i yyob' VAILS FRONT DOOR I 9 p 2 ~ f f r o 4I m~oiu i i I`. I I i - ~ 1= 1 I ~ a x e - 1, I ~ I I I y~aa~ a s r - I I I I j s _ a j I I j s t ~F e t I I I ,r L~. I t ~ -x I I t3~s° ~l I\ ~ x m"' ~ i~ x' I i\\l i a x e c I 1 e a e _@ c( ~ 1 ° I Ir Ln ~t~ i s ~ e a ~ ~ 1~ I y x I ~ I - x ` I L__ J ~ s r-' 1 1 y 1 i j j _I b t 1 it 1 I (T~ 1 1 i 1 I 1 L j1 1 L I 60 !I i I!II i K - fill 10" a I ! j iii~Ei~~~;ii~i►~gi ! VAIL'S FRONT DOOR I i i i i i= i. i~ i= i= i i= i i i i i i i I i i l I mo J r n ~~~Z~C10 z° bo~oz~ ~ n ~f N ~ Mo~cn son i ~ I _ I i i 5 i t II Y o i"= 4 `i j ` 3 yyg v r ; VAIL'S FRONT DOOR! o Z 2 y ' 3~ ' o ' VAIL'S FRONT DOOR - w n g r ~ I I i I ~e ~ i~'• ~I~ lj~ 9?~ j ~ i I Sg ~ ~y y~e ~ ~a p~ z ~ I I v~~ i ~ i r;l;~ ' •;'S11!' ~'fi~ boo ~ ! ~s N - , I ptp~'9ii11'I ; E~- VAIL'S FRONT DOOR 5 z .I 0 n m y C i~ n n ZO O O z s _d m .y n z 0 a 0 z ~i ~c n I 1 i y 1 Z 1.~ 11 1 1 n 1 0 1 d 1 1 9 1 i 1 1 v e~ - S sF;I I II~II;~,~,f3(``t11~°# FRONT DOOR 66 s'; ~ sh~~ s ~o Y$ c°e~ ? m ~~~ec ?F$~ al€ a ~.gg. g 0 z a? 61. w o 1 a a m_ AC) ppo A.~ y Ng~ ~ /-Nz ~h u9 - `s Y T WJL'S FRON DOOR J -r i S I` e s> v i=' I I= _s 0 g J 6 9 R ~I g N I €o yyy Oy O ~ a~ sg :v n nas ~a N oyy ~ I ~ I I if{i~3)!~#s)f~(i~>~ j"o~~ z 5- - I es e~ e ! s5 fM VAIL'S FRONT DOOR ~N '1' e e fx ~~ro m ~z i 3~p 7 55 4 q4q~m anE' rpv1 Jill l J ~ o~ v TAIL'S FRONT DOOR i B i i 11 VAIL'S FRONT DOOR I 1 I I I I i i i i i i i i I i i i i i I 1~.. , I ado o~ i pig o' ~I i i i i '4~C Z i i i - i i 4 All III ~ r I i I c Ii i c [~-c 5 o~ I rtF>19j!'!~i~l~p~ 6'~~~i ! nm VML'S FRONT DOOR t I` 1 its t t - i _ I i i i i i i i i i i i z a~ 1 J r ~o B 0 HE i I INS F r n i i o I i! 13 Il j~ ;ii g o s VAIL'S FRONT DOOR I I a I i t~ ~o , N9 Oil N ~z 11flH VAIL'S FRONT DOOR ~ t vnR COIDanW ~ I I a ~z O E3 4 ~ p F= 0 z I i i i i i i i i i i i i I Eli? r.. ~o a ~e i t I I I I J Flu ddd r Hill" VAIL'S DOOR FRONT - - - - - - ~ Z 6 i 0 ti z I mo ~a H~ Ag- I ~K I I I I I I 0j I'd ! Ell z z~ 8 I ! i i i i I i i I i i od, i i i i L -J- ! T I \l I ~o I I ° 11°mS PIN- I~ I I i I I I J S VAIL'S FRONT DOOR i r i i I i ~ i i i i i i i i i i LL -J I ~~s i i n ~ II J c M jig 90 A- a s b 9 zib i~~o° AIL'S FRONT DOOR I i t 9 , ~ Eg E , €5g 's I EE 3 {=j I ~ I Z Ip I v j - i i y i •e~ i' 1 5'am 1 • ii i VAIL'S FRONT DOOR i I t + I I I I i, ~ 1 I I t tl II II II ~ ~ I I II I _ - 11 5 I I 5' 1 e I\\ I 11 I i ~a ~ Ids \ s 1 lay I ~ 1 IBS 114 I h I I / 16 L ~ ~ °an . °°lll . _ E s I 3" I I r, t I L_. lkti9 N a ~ s•. e s I p 7a B. VAIL'S FRONT DOOR I' ~ m °z r 'J i; f" 4- :r ~ a 0 0l N za -li III II ' y °z ,I ?I :,I/ % i ~ ~ I!1 !li lT ~ I. I a 4 I a =e .T S2 ([;;~,3;~~~ fi o VAIL'S FRONT DOOR f R it - DF C I 9M3Ry~ I €z I I ~ I I I I I I I I I I I I I S~ e~ 9 ~ f _ •'S 1+4 Ig 1 J 1 / 1 a E' RI `4 l~ 8 8 ' I I \ I b \ i- i I I \ I ,a I \ t \ I a \1 o I I 1 _ - ~ ',1 I I - l+ It I ~ I ; I 1 I a 8 F id i I i I I k / r-- I I I 1 I I i I I I I I I I I I - I I it a I~ I i. 1 00 E~ oT _ a i H- ` oL S ~8 I I I I I I/ I I 11 111 ppsso ill k€•` 1 r•~ - ;I I~- ICI;;`" _E I ~ ~f I I I , I' J I _ I / I ~ I to 11~ I ;4 ,~1{ I Ng NAIL'S FRONT DOOR rr I i I t~ I ~ : ~ I lI y I 1 1 _ I I I i I'w' I I I, n i /1 x I I { ~ E ll I I~ f eT I 'z I 9~ a Y ~ I 1 ~ ~ S n iz _ ~ z aF I ~ 0 r" - I I ' II VE I Oil I A % I E I 1 ~ ~ f I I I I~ I t1 I d~ ~-1 I ~s I I I ~ II Ro y i I' ,i I 1 I~ II II II I I I I I aZ z e~ 32 I I I I I t _L I I I I -~TI a r'. . r 1 I ; r- 4 31 ;B r ;.1 1 r I i I I \I r ~ I 1 F.. S I r N 4-YLI l~ f~1l~lli~Ji,iEr,~o~ VAIL S FRONT DOOR r--T- T I I IT I I I I I 3 I d ~ I I I I I + l l j I! i 4- 4- I - Z5 e~ y _ pp3 F,~ fi5 ~ z I I I 1 I I 1/ k h i /I IScM 9^ -3 1 ,I \ 1 ~I I~ x° C r-- I ~ I ~ I I I I I ~I I r I I I r I II I i 12 i I I i l~ Ir Se d~ J N ~ ~ I I ull! j I I , ; i ~ _.s-- ; ; < ppI @q!,g,l1~ Ian I VAILS FRONT DOOR ~ l l f~ i~~ ail ~ ° ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ I o I , F , I I I I I I I I I I ;o ~s^ I I _J iZ I I 47 Ti t I ~I .I I I ~ I I1 ~ i- , 5 I ~I I ~ ~ li /7 I I I I I I 1 I ; I 1 ~ I I I I I (.`I I 11 1 =Fi I I Q 1 ~ I I 1 R I I 1 I ~ ~ I I .z° I I I I I I I O 9117 i k 8 =i 1 1 41 1 I 1 I Ill I ~i Ike 1 I It I i~E 1 ' I~f 1 I N I~ 1 I 1 1 I ~ I a~ 1 I 1 I I \ 1 I S i I i I ~ I I I I I f E z ~ I III II %a' II I JI I C~ I~ 1 a I 1 X11 1 Ic= IR a a, ~ i ~ .f- f I, 1 >e } 1 it e i lit ~i ~ v VAIL'S FRONT DOOR II, I i In I , 4 a 1'-s o i tl s7 7 171 II ^ _z 4~ z a' Y C x~~i ;5 - E€4 r!E'i i3; ~e~;v3 Bib VAIL S FRONT DOOR II E ~ 24. AN RM "or 07 y l ~ j"k IN, x , VAIL S FRONT DOOR z 11; 1il ~I T S { ; 3 ..+a cou,.nno 8 $go O Z $#r t 0 O z fill i s s o~t I N ~y~m ~ ixr_ I i i ~ I of ~9 )!I lI"fl~t~~NI ~ 4 ° z ~ y I i III !I! jjj,~j iii l' ' i VAIL'S FRONT DOOR o S'. i O z O z 4~ 41 41 ~G g v VAIL'S FRONT DOOR &PPROWED PLANNING AND ENVIRONMENTAL COMMISSION PUBLIC MEETING r I L E T Monday, September 22, 2003 F t; PROJECT ORIENTATION / - Community Development Dept. PUBLIC WELCOME 12:00 pm MEMBERS PRESENT Doug Cahill George Lamb Chas Bernhardt John Schofield Site Visits: MEMBERS ABSENT Gary Hartman Erickson Shirley Rollie Kjesbo 1. Pirateship Park- Tract E, Vail Village 5th 2. Lionshead Tennis Court Site- 615 West Forest Road 3. O'Dorisio - 4444 Streamside Circle Driver: George 0 NOTE: If the PEC hearing extends until 6:00 p.m., the board may break for dinner from 6:00 - 6:30 Public Hearing - Town Council Chambers 2:00 pm 1. A request for a final review of an exterior alteration or modification, pursuant to Section 12-713-7, Exterior Alterations or Modifications, Vail Town Code, to allow for an addition to the Lodge at Vail; a request for a variance from Section 12-21-10, Development Restricted, Vail Town Code, pursuant to Chapter 17, Variances, Zoning Regulations, to allow for the construction of multiple-family dwelling units on slopes in excess of 40%; and a request for the establishment of an approved 'development plan to facilitate the construction of Vail's Front Door, and setting forth details in regard thereto. (A more complete metes and bounds legal description is available at the Town of Vail Community Development Department) Applicant: Vail Resorts, represented by Jay Peterson Planner: George Ruther Motion: Doug Cahill Second: George Lamb Vote: 4-0-0 APPROVED WITH CONDTIONS Conditions: 1. Standard conditions of approval applicable to all PEC development plan approvals: • That the Developer submits a complete application to the Town of Vail Community Development Department for the review and approval by the Town of Vail Design Review Board of a Comprehensive Sign Program prior to the issuance of a Temporary Certificate of Approval for any of Vail's Front Door Project improvements. That the Developer submits a complete Design Review Board application, including details of all proposed roof top mechanical systems, to the Town of Vail Community Development Department for review and approval by the Town of Vail Design Review Board, prior to making an application for the issuance of a building permit for any of Vail's Front Door Project improvements. That the Developer submits a Construction Staging Plan to the Town of Vail Community Development Department for the review and approval of the proposed staging plan by the Town of Vail, prior to the issuance of a building permit for the Vail's Front Door Project improvements. 2. The Developer provides deed-restricted employee housing that complies with the Town of Vail Employee Housing requirements (Chapter 12-13) for a minimum of 9 employees, and that said housing shall be made available for occupancy, prior to the issuance of a Temporary Certificate of Occupancy for the Vail's Front Door Project improvements. In addition, the deed-restrictions shall be legally executed by the Developer and duly recorded with the Eagle County Clerk & Recorder's Office, prior to the issuance of a Temporary Certificate of Occupancy for the Vail's Front Door Project improvements. 3. That the Developer submits a complete set of civil engineered drawings of the Approved Development Plans including the required off site improvements, to the Town of Vail Community Development Department for review and approval of the drawings, prior to making application for the issuance of a building permit for Vail's Front Door Project improvements. 4. That the Developer submits a partial topographic map of the alleyway east of the Lodge at Vail to the Town of Vail Community Development Department. The topographic information shall be used by the Town of Vail and the Developer to determine the feasibility of providing improved handtruck delivery access to Gore Creek Drive from Founder's Plaza. If it is determined by the Town of Vail and the Developer that proposed improvements are both feasible and advantageous for providing handtruck delivery access to Gore Creek Drive via the Wildflower alleyway, the Developer shall submit a revised set of Off Site Improvements Plan to the Town of Vail Community Development Department for review and approval and further agrees to construct the improvements as approved. 5. That the Developer submits a development application to the Town of Vail Community Development Department requesting approval of a conditional use permit to allow for the operation for a "private and public club", pursuant to Section 12-8E-3, Conditional Uses, of the Vail Town Code. The application for the conditional use permit shall be reviewed in accordance with the provisions of Chapter 16 of the Zoning Regulations, prior to making application for the issuance of a building permit for Vail's Front Door Project improvements. 6. That the Developer identifies a "No Build Area" on the Approved Development Plan indicating that no building or site disturbance shall occur within thirty feet (30') of the proposed westernmost and southernmost property lines in the area of the residential unit construction. Subsurface soil nailing for slope stabilization shall be permitted in the "No Build Area". 7. That the Developer legally executes all necessary easements and agreements allowing for public pedestrian/bike access through Tract E and the development site from Mill Creek Circle to Vail Road, public roadway access, drainage, signs, utilities, etc. on and across the development site. Said easements and agreements shall be submitted to the Town of Vail Community Development Department for review and approval by the Town of Vail. Upon approval by the Town, said easements and agreements (if necessary) shall be legally executed by the Developer and duly recorded with the Eagle County Clerk & Recorder's Office, prior to the issuance of a Final Certificate of Occupancy for the Vail's Front Door Project improvements. 8. The Developer agrees to provide to the Town of Vail for review and approval by the Vail Town Council a comprehensive Development Agreement for Vail's Front Door Project improvements. Said Agreement shall be submitted to the Town by no later than October 31, 2003. The Development Agreement shall be a legally binding agreement between the Town of Vail and Vail Resorts. The purpose of this agreement is to document, among other things, the manner and timeframes within which the Town and the Developer will complete certain required aspects of the project. The Development Agreement will include, but may not be limited to, addressing the following aspect of the project: • The conveyance of a deed from the Developer to the Town for a parcel of land under Pirate Ship Park, as depicted in Exhibit A attached. • A written description of all off-site improvements to be provided by the Developer (as generally depicted on the approved development plans), providing additional details on the specific improvements to be provided, the manner in which developer assurances for completion of said improvements will be provided, acknowledgment that design details will conform to the Town's streetscape standards, schedules for completing said improvements, the manner in which the Developer and Town will coordinate streetscape improvement efforts and defining specific terms to determine when and where Checkpoint Charlie will be constructed by the Developer, as maybe amended • The legal mechanisms to be used wherein the Town of Vail will allow the Developer to construct a portion of the proposed parking structure at P3&J beneath the Town's road right-of-way (as depicted on approved plans for P3&J). • The legal mechanisms to be used wherein the Developer will allow the Town to utilize a portion of its parking and loading structure as a 14-bay public loading and delivery facility (as depicted on the approved development plans). • An agreement to be prepared which outlines the Developer's responsibilities for funding $1,000,000 in public art to be provided in conjunction with the Project. This agreement is to be prepared with input from the Town of Vail Art in Public Places Board. • A use agreement to be prepared which outlines the terms and conditions for public use of the Vista Bahn Ski Yard. This agreement is to be prepared with input from the Town of Vail Commission on Special Events. 9. That the Developer submits a copy of the proposed plans and use agreements to the Town of Vail Community Development Department for review by the Art in Public Places Board and the Town of Vail Commission on Special Events at a regularly scheduled meeting. Each of the respective meetings shall be duly noticed to the public, adjacent property owners, and potentially interested parties. Upon review of the proposed plans and use agreements, with input from the public, the Board and Commission shall forward a recommendation on the proposed plans and use agreement to the Vail Town Council. 2. A request for a conditional use permit pursuant to Section 12-7A-3, Vail Town Code; a major exterior alteration pursuant to 12-7A-12, Vail Town Code, to allow for modifications to the existing fractional fee club and a restaurant addition; and a request for a building height variance pursuant to Chapter 17, Vail Town Code, to allow for dormer additions, at the Vail Mountain Lodge and Spa, located at 352 E. Meadow Drive / Tract B, Vail Village 1" Filing. Applicant: Vail Mountain Lodge LLC, represented by Braun Associates, Inc. Planner: George Ruther Motion: George Lamb Second: Doug Cahill Vote:4-0 TABLED TO OCTOBER 13, 2003 3. A request for a floodplain modification pursuant to Chapter 14-6, Grading Standards, Vail Town Code, to allow for the construction of new bridge abutments in the Mill Creek floodplain at Pirate Ship Park located at Tract E, Vail Village 5`h Filing Applicant: Vail Resorts, represented by Town of Vail Planner: Bill Gibson Motion: Chas Bernhardt Second: George Lamb Vote: 4-0 APPROVED WITH CONDITIONS Conditions: 1. The applicant shall submit proof of US Army Corp of Engineers approval of a Nationwide Permit 18 - Minor Discharge to the Town of Vail Community Development Department prior to the issuance of building and grading permits. 2. The applicant shall submit a stamped Improvement Location Certificate and "as-built" topographic survey to the Town of Vail Community Development Department for review and approval, prior to Town of Vail final construction inspection. 4. A request for a major subdivision pursuant to Chapter 13-3, Major Subdivision, Vail Town Code, to allow for the platting of four lots at the Lionshead tennis court site and a rezoning pursuant to Section 12-3-7, Administration, Vail Town Code, from Agriculture and Open Space zone district, Vail Town Code, to Primary/Secondary Two-Family Residential zone district, Vail Town Code, to allow for the construction of single-family homes on the four proposed lots, located at 615 West Forest Road/Unplatted ( A more complete metes and bounds legal description is available at the Town of Vail Community Development Department) Applicant: Vail Resorts, represented by Braun Associates, Inc. Planner: Warren Campbell Motion: Doug Cahill Second: George Lamb Vote: 4-0 Tabled to October 13, 2003 5. A request for a variance from Section 12-14-17, Setback from Watercourse, Vail Town Code, to allow for a residential addition in the Gore Creek setback, located at 4444 Streamside Circle / Lot 11, Bighorn 4th Addition. Applicant: Thomas O'Dorisio, represented by John Perkins. Planner: Warren Campbell Motion: Chas Bernhardt Second: George Lamb Vote: 4-0 APPROVED WITH ONE CONDITION: Condition: 1. That the applicant is not permitted to perform an interior conversion of this space at a later date as the dormer additions would not have been constructed prior to August 5, 1997, as required by Section 12-15-4, Interior Conversion, Vail Town Code. 6. A request for a recommendation to the Vail Town Council for an amendment to the Town of Vail Streetscape Master Plan, and setting forth details in regard thereto. Applicant: Town of Vail, represented by Greg Hall Planner: Warren Campbell Motion: John Schofield Second: Doug Cahill Vote: 4-0 RECOMMENDATION OF APPROVED TO COUNCIL WITH CONDITIONS Conditions: 1. That the applicant shall verify that all materials proposed for use in the streetscape are low maintenance, have a long lifespan, and are durable so as to avoid costly maintenance and upkeep. 2. That the applicant shall explore funding options other than an impact fee such as the use of Tax Increment Financing. In addition, funding models should be explored which impact residential properties to a lesser extent than commercial properties and include a time frame for which the fee will be collected, such as a sunset provision. 7. A request for major exterior alteration pursuant to Section 12-7H-7, Vail Town Code, to allow for the construction of new dwelling units and accommodation units at Vail Marriott Mountain Resort, located at 715 West Lionshead Circle / Lots C and D, Morcus Subdivision, and Lot 7, Marriott Subdivision Applicant: Mountain Marriott Vail Resort, represented by Gwathmey, Pratt, Schultz Architects Planner: George Ruther Motion: George Lamb Second: Doug Cahill Vote:4-0 TABLED TO OCTOBER 13, 2003 8. Approval of September 8`h meeting minutes Motion: George Lamb Second : Doug Cahill Vote:3-0-1 (Chas Bernhardt Abstained) APPROVED 9. Information Update: • GRFA • Four Seasons The applications and information about the proposals are available for public inspection during regular office hours in the project planner's office located at the Town of Vail Community Development Department, 75 South Frontage Road. Please call 479-2138 for information. Sign language interpretation available upon request with 24 hour notification. Please call 479- 2356, Telephone for the Hearing Impaired, for information. Community Development Department Published September 19, 2003, in the Vail Daily. O [n i I3 I~ t i ~ IO r i _ ;x I 3F~9E;~'sl~3~►i7=3 °y=- VAIL'S F DOOR 1 n s I s^v~ s ao r Z Is€;}st;il;ljF it = VAIL'S FRONT DOOR ' 16 O jo' 7 I' 4 A i l vuL m[nanm _ -J 1 qj i d 'F'8 1 f \ gntYg n ig ` V 22 0 ~ Q C)O e 5 3 BBs d- q F = ~ S i a9 5 F2 ~ =S1, ?>ta€ y 5Ar i ~il3q~-;~ t1FpbeB ~ ~ a RF~a -Z q 2 ) g } ;~rprp bFY( 8'6 E a - es€ T t=~;°€ 1 Rg tea AN, jAd VAIL S FRONT DOOR Y Z co mm mmo O N 77 7 pm$ Zm 0 i r < rDM, p O r im _i fA Z r N N ~ 0 n O O z m O z DvmoO A~,;o A =nn m00 0 0 A Or n pmn A ~mj 0 ~ rn z ~ s m zi \ z a s m s (A m o d 0 m m r ~ m r z re ,J`~ O ~ `t F n ~=F~ C > N O i~1m mnM-4 ;a E 00r T V r ,o m m V D N P O p Nm 0 A~,'on C: mMm9 0 mm 0Dm p > D m~z p m O I p VAIL'S FRONT DOOR 1- ~ n ? I September 22, 2003 Mr. George Ruther, Chief of Planning Department of Community Development Town of Vail Vail, CO 81632 RE: Front Door Update/September 22nd PEC Hearing Dear George: The purpose of this letter is to provide a brief summary of refinements that have been made to plans for the Front Door. These refinements are reflected on the plan set dated September 11, 2003 that was submitted to you last week. 1. A number of very minor refinements have been made (in response to your referral letter) in order to clarify "inconsistencies" in our previous plan set. 2. The proposed project site has been extended on the west and south sides of the residences. The proposed land exchange area is now 4.9 acres. As we discussed last week, this change was made due to the structural design of the residences. Underground soil nails will be used in the construction of a shoring wall. These nails will extend upwards of 60' horizontally into the ground on the west and south sides of the residences. The USFS has indicated that the nails cannot extend into their land. As a result, we have enlarged the proposed land exchange boundary such that the nails will be on private property. To ensure against future development extending further up the hillside, we have depicted a "no build zone" on the south and east sides of the residences as depicted on the Illustrative Site Plan (sheet SD 1.02) of our plan set. 3. A bike path extension has been added to the south end of the skier service building/skier plaza. This extension will provide a connection for bikes to access the plaza/bike path directly from the Vail Mountain access road. 4. A slight increase has been made to parking provide by the project. The upper level parking garage has been increased to 42 spaces. A detailed parking matrix is attached. This matrix outlines the total parking required as per the zoning code and the total parking required. The total number of parking spaces provided at the Front Door in excess of zoning requirements (not including the 95 spaces dedicated to the ski club) is now 56.81 spaces. We have also provided under separate cover detailed floor plans depicted square footage calculations of specific uses. Among other things, these floor plans identify the uses and square footage used to calculate parking requirements. A technical memo summarizing how these numbers relate to specific zoning standards is also attached (i.e. site coverage calc for the new building footprint at the Lodge at Vail). 5. The proposed site wall east of the Vista Bahn has been changed to a stone veneer wall. 6. More detailed grading and spot elevations are provided around the ski club and poll/spa area. 7. Elevations of the ski club and skier service building have been refined in response to preliminary comments of the DRB. 8. As we discussed at the DRB's conceptual review, Duplex 1 at the residences has been lowered by five feet. We look forward to our final review with the PEC on the 22°d. As you know, considerable time and effort has been put forth over the past nine months and this review process has resulted in a project that we believe will be an incredibly positive asset for Vail. You have had a significant role in this process and your efforts are very much appreciated. Sincerely, Thomas A. Braun Encl.: Detailed floor plans Existing site coverage calculation of the Lodge at Vail Technical memo, re: zoning standards Parking Matrix Cc: Jack Hunn Jay Peterson Bob Fitzgerald '"OWN OF VAIL Department of Public Works & Transportation 1309 Elkhorn Drive Vail, Colorado 81657 970-479-2158 Fax: 970-479-2166 www.ci.vail.co.us To: George Ruther From: Greg Hall Date: September 19, 2003 Subject: Vail Front Door The Public Works Department has reviewed the submittal and has the following comments. The review of a development of this size and complexity requires an over all general agreement and understanding of the improvements being proposed and the related impacts of the development to approve or deny the project as presented at this time. However to say the plans and reports submitted are final approved documents at this time requires all involved to spend significant time to ensure every line dimension, and detail to be correct. As this project moves toward final approval and building permit approval, it is recognized by all parties that finalization of the design, Design Review Board approval, Civil Engineering plan approval and Building permit plan approval will result in further and more detailed review of the project which may require changes and additions to the requirements of the plans. However the scope of the overall development and its impacts shall remain consistent with the project as presented and reviewed. Traffic Report The Trip Generation does not directly address the expansion of the spa and the additional employees who will work at the facility. In addition, for the Skiers Club the employees are not addressed. However the trips are accounted for in the employee parking lot which is to meet the increase in employees for the development. If this situation is deemed to be incorrect a correction of the traffic generation numbers will need to be addressed. he Town of Vail assesses a transportation impact fee of $5000 per net increase in peak hour trips V generated. This fee can be offset by the developer constructing transportation improvements beyond what is required to mitigate any adjacent improvements. This development is providing 4 additional loading bays and, replacing 260 lineal feet of on street loading space displaced with P3&J project to underground bays. _With regard to Checkpoint Charlie, the developer and the Town have agreed to construct the project as presented with the exception of a reconstructed Checkpoint Charlie. With in the first year of operation of the new project, traffic circulation will be evaluated to determine the extent the project has on reducing the number of trips which pass through Checkpoint Charlie. In addition tests will be conducted by temporarily moving the traffic management operation to the location as depicted in both the Transportation and Streetscape Master Plan which is the intersection of Vail Road and Willow Road, opposite the Lodge at Vail entrance. This is to determine if checkpoint functions at this location has an adverse impact on the traffic circulation patterns of the new development and surrounding properties. Based on these observations, the permanent location of Checkpoint Charlie will be determined and the developer will be required to design, obtain approval and construct the final Checkpoint Charlie. If the location is determined to be near its current location, not only is a building for traffic operation management to be constructed but incorporated within the design shall be public restrooms and an information booth. S~• RECYCLEDPAPER Drainage Report Over the last decade the Town has made significant improvements to the drainage system adjacent to the front door project to provide the necessary capacity to handle the 100 year storm and avoid overflow runoff from entering Vail Village below the front door /ski yard area. This includes new storm sewers down Vail Road from Forrest Road, Vail Road to the International Bridge and improvements to the ski yard drainage to Mill Creek. The Mill Creek basin preliminary drainage report was reviewed and the following comments apply. The Town's master drainage report prepared by Muller Engineering which included most of the Front Door Project incorporated a smaller drainage basin from the south than does the current report by Alpine Engineering. Even though the basin is larger, the overall flow is relative the same due to the time of concentration differences and the method used to calculate the flow based on the different sizes. Further investigation and discussion between Alpine Engineering, the Town and Muller Engineering will need to take place to ensure that the system designed can handle the 100 year run off from the offsite and developed basins or ensure any overflow has no adverse impacts on downstream properties. The overall preliminary drainage report was increasing the flow to the Wall Street storm sewer by 3 cfs. And states the pipe to founder's plaza will need to upsized to handle the flow. It states the new pipe will tie into the rebuilt storm sewer of the Town's streetscape project. There are two issues with this assumption which may cause concern. There is a limiting constraint of the capacity of the storm sewer where it passes through the Gasthoff Gramshimer. This section of pipe will not be upsized with any streetscape project. The second is assuming the Town will replace the pipe with the Streetscape project. The project is budgeted to be constructed in 2004, however, until the project is actually completed, assuming increased capacity will be provided is unacceptable. The third item, is the if the size of the pipe up Wall Street needs to be upsized due to the increased developed flow the difference in the price of upsizing the replacement of the pipe should be the cost of the developer. The drainage system which currently is in place in the ski yard includes the drainage system from Mill Creek Circle. The future system shall be constructed to intercept this flow as well. The town still has an interest in a water feature/water conveyance using a diversion of water off of Mill Creek through Wall Street for aesthetic purposes. The developer will work with the Town as the Town further investigates the possibility of a diversion of flow of Mill Creek through Wall Street as a water feature for Founders Plaza and beyond. This includes coordination of installing the pipe from the Front Door/Pirate Ship Park to Founders Plaza. Streetscape improvements. The developer has agreed to install the approved streetscape improvements for the area from Seibert Circle to Hanson Ranch Chute, the intersection of Hanson Ranch Chute/Hanson Ranch Road and Hanson Ranch Chute. The streetscape improvements include all work necessary including hardscape and subsurface support, drainage, lighting, retaining, utility relocations and planters, landscaping, site furniture, public art, street support systems, snow melt systems with in the public right of way. In addition the developer has agreed install the streetscape improvements from Willow Road/Vail Road to Checkpoint Charlie and enhance the design to include snowmelt and full paver pavement treatment. In addition the incorporation on Willow Road of an eight foot paver band at grade as the road turns to the west and as far as is needed to finish the roadway transaction. Lodge at Vail entrance. The entrance is designed and operated to allow no stacking on the public roadway and will accommodate appropriate emergency vehicles as well as over the road coaches. Public Art the developer will need to incorporate Public Art into the project and at this time has committed $1 million dollars to be used in integrated art. Pedestrian/bicycle Path. The Gore Valley trail runs from Vail Road to the ski yard and past Pirate ship Park. An easement for the improvements from Vail Road to Mill Creek Circle and strong design intent that this is a public space from Pirate Ship Park to Vail Road which invites and encourages pedestrians and bicyclists to use the space. This should be designed for all seasons and both daytime as well as night time use The developer agrees to convey the eastern portion of Tract E to the Town of Vail. Loading and delivery The developer is providing 14 truck bays designed for the following AASHTO design vehicles 3 WB-50, 4 WB-40 and 7 SU-35. In addition, there are three van spaces provided for delivery use. This area in addition to the drive access and walkway/elevators out which all will be placed in a public access easement. The developer will work with the Town and provide if deemed feasible a ramp way form Founders Plaza to Gore Creek Drive via the Wildflower Alley to assist the delivery of goods to Gore Creek Drive. The Control of the dock area will be under the management of the Town of Vail. The developer will be required to provide the space which includes, design and construction along with lighting, and other utility costs, ongoing building repair and capital maintenance. The Town is responsible for ensuring use of the facility is maximized to provide the greatest public benefit and occasional cleaning and signing the area. The Town will be responsible for the elevator maintenance. Access and sight distance will be designed to provide a safe facility to meet the minimum or approved performance alternatives of the Town and the Professional Engineer stamping the plans. This includes not only stopping sight distances but access sight distances for all access points in the tunnel as well as the access to Vail Road. Ski Yard use for special event activity. The ski yard is available by public easement to use the yard for special events as determined with terms of the easement agreement. Public Restrooms. The developer is providing year-round access to the public restrooms for hours which match the demand of the public needs as determined by the Town of Vail. The developer is responsible for all costs of providing and running the restrooms. Public roadway easement for Forest Service Road Number All necessary easements for drainage, roadway, signs, utilities and pedestrian access. Grading /retaining walls the plans will conform to all Town Standards with regards to grading and retaining walls at design approval and as constructed in the field within the limits of disturbance approved at this time. All roads, driveways and bike paths will meet the Town's Standards with regards to grades, and horizontal and vertical alignment. All parking spaces throughout the development will meet the Town's standards, be independently accessible in a forward motion and will be exited in an appropriate motion; once the space is exited no reverse operation down drivelines will be permitted. Final approval of Civil Engineered Plans will be required prior to submitting for building permit. Allow up to 6 months of review and resubmission for this time in your design/construction schedule. The Vail Town Code identifies employee housing as an impact of development that must be mitigated by developers when proposing new development in the Ski Base Recreation-2 zone district. Historically, the Town of Vail has relied upon a study completed by Rosall, Remen, & Cares in 1991, on behalf of the Town, to be used in determining the number of new employees expected to be generated by a development. Additionally, the Town has used a multiplier of 15% as a factor for determining the total number of employees that will need to be provided deed-restricted housing as a result of the development. The table below summarizes the employee housing requirement for Vail's Front Door Project based upon the study prepared by Rosall, Remen, & Cares. Proposed New Development Use Skier Services-Commercial Skier Services-Office Spa use Ski Club Restaurant/Lounge Meeting rooms Lodging Multi-Family Existing Development Use Lodging Net Employees Generated Town's 15% factor Formula Employ ees Generated = 4,775 sq. ft. @(5/1000 sq. ft.) = 23.87 = 1,575 sq. ft. @(5/1000 sq. ft.) = 7.87 = 11,554 sq. ft. @(1.25/1000 sq. ft.) = 14.44 = 2,263 sq. ft. @(1.25/1000 sq. ft.) = 2.83 = 293 @(5/1000 sq. ft.) = 1.47 = 0 @(1/1000 sq. ft.) = 0 = 2 units @(.25/unit) = 0.5 = 13 units @(.4/unit) = 5.2 Total Employees = 56.18 or 57 Employees Formula Employees Generated = 3 units @(.25/unit) = 0.75 Total Employees Removed = (0.75) or -1 = 56 = 8.4 or 9 New Employees O ~ Id Q 0 C ° a: a r ^ t r a v~ J N J rV rV N 00 un Ul 'V z A~ rt YQ r C O r c r ~ CD fD r 0 a~ ' o a r a~ J ~ GV rV N N W Oo C\ O O O rs 0 a a r-I ~ ~ ~ o 0 rt rt fD p n to O O O CD 0 \ ~ r z a~ rD r+ CD Cn C z a - D ( ) d CD Y P r n Fr rA C O r n 0 cr ~ 1~0 o ~rJ W Cn W u W N N N ~ Uj --A \ ~ 7t 0 -0 O O O O O O v O ~F cn cn cn ' * * Q' A~ r~ C C D o CD -A U l g o cn O V N V ~l ~ p N O CTS C.n 00 W ~ O C7 d N ~ O O O War ors ~ ~ 7d C PD A r O `C O a a. rD a f9 AQ n z A~ O U) C to rt O d 0 GE IG LOT a \ O . 100.54'00" OuMps-~, ~ LOT b X50 10 LOT 5. ' \ 12.0' 92'35'00"LEC. BOX 150'01'00" 0'~ 00.00 DECK - - 5 65 0010001 SEWER M.H: iTL. M.H. I -b TY EASE~MEN APPROX. SEWER LINE~` (P 0. # 6 REBAR WATER M.H. 84'40'00' PIRATE t ~-c tSPLIT RAP -~FNCE 10 LOT 1 1 IT O~ ~P d- LIbHT POLE 11 ELEC. M.H. j LOT d, VA I L FIRST FNC. PIN & CAP L.S. t 120'10'00 CATV. , RISER SIGN POST ELEC. T `C WALL I MILL CREE ~ HA BIKE\ (TYP.) k TRACT E o V IL VILLAGE tK BFI TH FILING 3.835 AC. FNO. PIN & FLA WALK CAP L.S. 16827 WOOD W / 1 E ELEC. SWITCH BOX eZ50"PREMISES LEASED UNDER l PIRATE SHIP PARK LEASE LOT 2 EXHIBIT A Lynn Fritzlen, AIA, Aahi let I William 1 . Pierce, Archite(a Kathy H{:slinga, Bwsiness h}anager September 12, 2003 To: The Town of Vail Design Review Board From: Luanne Wells and the Wells Team Re: Front Door Project FRITZLEN PIERCE ARCHITECTS VAIL, COLORADO Mrs. Wells and the Wells team have monitored the Front Door Project since its original unveiling. Luanne Wells is a long time Vail homeowner, residing at One Vail Place. Mrs. Wells is committed to making the Front Door Project the best possible development for the Town and the surrounding community. The Front Door has gone through many design iterations since its inception. The most recent submission to the Town of Vail Planning Commission is dated August 20, 2003. The Wells Team has attended public hearings on the project for over a year. As the project has been refined, we have provided specific comments on planning and design issues. Several of the comments and suggestions which we have presented in meetings with Vail Resorts, as well in front of the Planning Commission, have been incorporated in the design. The Wells Team values the opportunity to continue to be part of the review process of such an important development in the Town of Vail, and appreciate past considerations. The Wells team has provided verbal input during Planning and Environmental Commission hearings as well as submitting suggestions in a written and graphic format. The thrust of the Wells Team PEC comments have been focused on: 1. Overall integrity of the Front Door Project; to ensure that the Front Door development results with appropriate improvements and creates the formidable presence Vail deserves. 2. The appropriateness of locating the entirety of the truck delivery system in the Front Door location. 3. Integration of skiers/visitors/pedestrians/ with the truck loading and delivery system 4. Location and configuration of the hand truck portal. 5. The traffic impact of the loading and delivery system, including routing trucks on Gore Creek Drive. 6. The need for additional retail in the Skier Services building in light of the conversion of the first level of One Vail Place from VRI offices to retail and historical vacancy in Vail. 7. Preservation of the Wall Street View Corridor to the Mountain. 8. The size of the Vista Bahn Ski Yard, the configuration of the Skier's Services Building, and the relocation of the Vista Bahn Ski Lift. 9. Preservation of the alleyway between the Lodge at Vail and One Vail Place PEC Outstanding Issues - We continue to have concerns regarding the traffic impact of the loading and delivery facility on Vail Road as well on the Front Door neighboring properties. We are concerned that the assumptions used are not accurate. We do not to recreate the traffic problems at Gold Peak . Additionally, we do not believe that the hand truck delivery system has been adequately studied. We are awaiting the detailed management plan for the delivery system which should highlight the impact. It is our recommendation that these plans be thoroughly reviewed prior to finalizing the location of FRITZLEN tb5(1 Fast Vail Valley Drive, Fallrid,e C,1, P I E R C E Veil, Colorado 816), 1'. 97().=1-6.6, 42 ~•<-,T•=•• 14Lb'tiN.'v ai!drChll,gt_(j,(;(; ril FRITZLEN PIERCE ARCHITECTS VAIL, COLORADO hand truck portals as well as determining the number of truck bays necessary to support a Front Door distribution Center. As the project moves through Design Review the Wells Team would appreciate the opportunity to provide input on design related issues. We share several of the same concerns that the DRB members voiced in the August 18, 2003 and the September 8, 2003 meetings. We are concerned that the analysis provided to the DRB to date is not commensurate with the magnitude of this project. Our preliminary comments are as follows: Village Character - Vail is known for its village atmosphere and web of pedestrian streets and alleys. The spaces between the buildings in Vail are as important or more important than the buildings themselves. The pedestrian circulation around and to the Front Door edifices is a key to the design success of this project. Relationships between the buildings facades and entrances should be studied carefully. The Wells team envisions sunny, intimately scaled spaces that invite strolling and casual conversation. We encourage the integration of alternate pedestrian pathways to reduce conflict at rush hour. 2. Building Elevations - Each facade of the building will be visible to the public and neighboring properties. Each elevation should be studied carefully and have equal visual appeal. Blank and unfenestrated walls should be avoided. There should be no back door to the Front Door development. 3. Rooftop Equipment - Mitigating noise and visual impacts from heating and ventilation equipment is important. Architectural screening of rooftop equipment and fan hoods is important for skiers returning to the Front Door and neighbors looking down on the buildings. 4. Pedestrian and Bikeways Connections - In the current plan pedestrian and bike path interconnections appear to be disjointed and discontinuous. Easy and safe pedestrian access from both the east and the west should be incorporated in the design. We would like to see skiers dispersed through a number of pedestrian pathways rather than funneled au masse down Bridge Street. 5. Pedestrian and Bikeways Design - Attractively designed pedestrian and bike pathways that include landscape improvements, clear separation between vehicles and pedestrians and a predictable flow are important to the appeal of this key public area. In particular we would like to see landscape and low level lighting improvements throughout, including the alleyway between One Vail Place and the Lodge at Vail. These design goals are also consistent with other adopted Vail Design Guidelines. 6. Paving Materials - We encourage the use of durable attractive materials for the Vista Bahn Ski Yard. The existing pavers in the ski yard are showing wear. We encourage the use of materials that develop a patina with age rather than a look of disrepair. In addition we encourage the use of a wider palette of natural materials that introduce a variety of texture and coloration. 7. Landscaping - The August 20, 2003 Front Door plan does not indicate any significant landscaping in the plaza or in the Ski Yard. We recognize that balancing the need for FRITZLEN e~50 I as'r Vail Vallcv Dri ~c, Fallrid ~c C P I E R C E aiColorado 8165~ F '''17_47, I E ir, ~iAlara-l~iil~ccts.con, --=-,T.~-• ~wv:•.~;.~.:ilarehilE~,as.arrzi FRITZLEN PIERCE ARCHITECTS VAIL, COLORADO hardscape for skier traffic and softscape is difficult. On the other hand the unique vegetation of our Alpine climate is a signature feature of Vail and should be incorporated in the exterior improvements. We encourage the applicant to incorporate additional landscaping into the design. 8. Site Walls - We encourage the integration of site walls and other features that encourage the passive use and enjoyment of the Vista Bahn Ski Yard. 9. Architectural Finishes - Attractive and durable materials for the building exteriors as well as the architectural finishes on the buildings. We encourage the use of stucco, wood, stone and low reflectivity roof shingles. We are not in favor of flat roofs with membrane or ballasted membrane finishes. 10. Clock Tower - We have concerns about the location and configuration of the clock tower on the Skier Services building. The proper location and configuration should be studied from the perspective of approach from all sides. We are in agreement with the DRB comments that a Ski School Bell or other low profile focal point be incorporated in the Vista Bahn Ski Yard. 11. Design Critique - At the PEC level, Vail Resorts resisted the concept of having their design reviewed and critiqued by an outside design consultant. Vail Resorts assumes the DRB will provide enough design critique. While we respect the DRB, this project can only become better if alternative design ideas are considered. This is the most prominent redevelopment project in Vail. We ask this board to not shut out other creative ideas. In order to enhance the review process, we would like to have the most recent submittal critiqued by an outside consultant. 12. Rooflines -We are in agreement with the DRB's assessment that the roof ridge of the Skier Services building should have more variation. We also are not in support of the flat roof area on the Skier Services building. We request that the flat roof be broken up by varying the roof heights or adding roof gardens or architectural features. This project will forever change Vail. This project has been called our Front Door with a goal of enhancing the experience of those visiting Vail. We believe that due to the long term significance of this project, we should ensure that the most creative and talented resources are available and utilized. Based on the status today, it is our opinion that this has not occurred. We believe that it is imperative that resources be made available to the DRB to ensure that the potential of the project is optimized. This could require the utilization of outside consultants with expertise in both building and landscape design. To date, we are not aware that these resources have been available to the DRB. In order to properly evaluate these items more detailed drawings and/or models will be required to be submitted. We request that these additional design documents be submitted in a timely fashion so that the public and the Wells team have adequate time to review and understand the content. Thank you for your consideration. Sincerely, FRITZLEN 105O East Veil Vallcy DiT c, Fallrid,ge C; I. I P I E R C E Vail, Colorado f~1657 F': 970.476.0134-1 F: 9?0.476 4901 E:: ini :aivaslar 'litcds.cx m ~.=-,.e<-• ~tiv4~w.vail;ar~,:hileus.r:urn FRITZLEN PIERCE ARCHITECTS VAIL, COLORADO Luanne Wells and the Wells Team Andy Littman Karen Romeo Tom Boni, Knight Planning Lynn Fritzlen, Fritzlen Pierce Architects FRITZLEN I(60 East Vad V, llev Drip Fahrd~c~ C 1, P I E R C E Vail. (srlof ado R 1057 t_: inf i;> a-larc-hitects.c;.>n Ilor ~arr FRONT DOOR - UNRESOLVED ISSUES Gsa2 . 9/22/03 Cov-4e. Vo L- 'E"r, ~A WORLD CLASS PROJECT? •St~. A:!= , '~E~w~E~c,•~-}+'oat~_, J2 IS VAIL'S FRONT DOOR THE RIGHT LOCATION FOR BACKDOOR FUNCTIONS? yG5 SASSURANCES OF OTHER SATELLITES? SEf- t1c 's~ 4. ESCROW FUNDS TO ASSURE SATELLITES 5. IGNORING CONGESTION AND TRAFFIC FLOW ISSUES 6. REPEAT GOLD PEAK 'C~2Nrt-t~+c_ R~pcxs-t' `~rr~~o~y~ 7. NO ANALYSIS OF COST/BENEFIT TO TOW 40T V`9v;,2e,~ ~ c!) VAIL IS NOT BEAVER CREEK (jai Vs, N) Ly+Ar% VA-a pe& 1*gS. 9 INCREASED COST OF LOADING AND DELIVERY? V'` HAND TRUCK PORTAL NOT OPTIMALLY LOCATED LET Imps r 0111 11. 1 VAIL PLACE EASEMENT COMPROMISED L.vME W alts. 12. OPTIMIZE PEDESTRIAN AND BIKEWAY ACCESS OuTooo,Q SP~4t-e . vA ✓ I ~ 13. CART BEFORE THE HORSE • NO DELIVERY PLAN • NO MANAGEMENT PLAN • NO LAND EXCHANGE • NO ARCHITECTURAL CONSULTANT • NO COST/BENEFIT ANALYSIS TO TOV • NO SATELLITES • NO ENVIRONMENTAL STUDY 6armj PLANNING AND ENVIRONMENTAL COMMISSION PUBLIC MEETING Monday, September 22, 2003 APPROVED PROJECT ORIENTATION / - Community Development Dept. PUBLIC WELCOME 12:00 pm MEMBERS PRESENT John Schofield Doug Cahill George Lamb Chas Bernhardt Site Visits: MEMBERS ABSENT Erickson Shirley Gary Hartmann Rollie Kjesbo 1. Pirateship Park- Tract E, Vail Village 5th 2. Lionshead Tennis Court Site- 615 West Forest Road 3. D'Orisio - 4444 Streamside Circle Driver: George P3 NOTE: If the PEC hearing extends until 6:00 p.m., the board may break for dinner from 6:00 - 6:30 Public Hearinq - Town Council Chambers 2:00 pm 1. A request for a final review of an exterior alteration or modification, pursuant to Section 12-713-7, Exterior Alterations or Modifications, Vail Town Code, to allow for an addition to the Lodge at Vail; a request for a variance from Section 12-21-10, Development Restricted, Vail Town Code, pursuant to Chapter 17, Variances, Zoning Regulations, to allow for the construction of multiple-family dwelling units on slopes in excess of 40%; and a request for the establishment of an approved development plan to facilitate the construction of Vail's Front Door, and setting forth details in regard thereto. (A more complete metes and bounds legal description is available at the Town of Vail Community Development Department) Applicant: Vail Resorts, represented by Jay Peterson Planner: George Ruther George Ruther introduced the project according to the memorandum. The applicant, Jay Peterson, from Vail Resorts, mentioned that comment would be withheld until comments and questions were made by the public. John Schofield wanted to make sure that Lodge Tower information had been addressed. Ron Riley, from Los Amigos restaurant, mentioned that he was most concerned about the loading and delivery plan. He was curious about what the merchants knew about the loading and delivery. He wanted to make sure that the record reflected the lack of detail that was presented to the public, stating that he would not be surprised if the ii Tl}WN !}R VA TT. ~ loading and delivery plan was not as efficient or workable as was currently hoped for. Being involved with Russell's restaurant, at the end of the street, he was skeptical as to how "the product" was transported from the dock to that location. He stated that some impairment may be caused through the relocation of the ski storage to the basement and wanted to make sure that the ordinance justifying that change was, indeed, sensible. He urged the PEC to be mindful of the things he had spoken about. John Schofield replied that the Town of Vail would be operating the loading and delivery operations and that some details were still forthcoming. Sarah Baker, an attorney representing the residential owners of Bridge Street Lodge, stated that her clients supported the plan, but were primarily concerned about any future development that might occur as a result of the project. She also expressed concern about the future of Tract E. Andy Littman, representing Luanne Wells and the Wells Team, mentioned that Ms. Wells wanted the project to be a world-class project, since even the master plan dictated such types of development. He stated that the Wells Team felt the plan was not yet of "world-class" caliber. He wanted to make sure that sufficient public good would result from the project. The fourteen bays were being placed "in the middle of the town" and specific conditions should require satellite locations for loading and delivery operations. He wondered whether it was compatible to have "back-door functions" at this "front-door location", unless there was considerable public benefit that resulted. Were environmental impacts being addressed? He wondered, again, why a world-class architect was not consulted about the plans as they were being shown today. Other issues unsolved to date included traffic flow and congestion issues, and he mentioned the lack of a cost/benefit analysis. Did the Town know that the project was a "safe and prudent" one? Vail was not Beaver Creek, he went on to say. Did Vail want the same amount of hardscape that existed at Beaver Creek? The landscaping plan was lacking and the areas within the project would not to be optimally maintained. The hand truck portal should be located in a place where it would impact residents to a lesser degree. The One Vail Place easement had been compromised, he added. He wanted to know if the spaces between the buildings would be as conducive as Bridge Street currently is for meeting, congregating and socializing. Gwen Scalpello mentioned the traffic impact study and her concern about the traffic generation at the four way stop at Vail Road and Meadow Drive. The time spent waiting for pedestrian and vehicular traffic was already notable, she said, and asked that the carrying capacity between the main roundabout and the stop sign be re-analyzed. Sybill Navas questioned condition number 15, now condition number 8. George Ruther explained that Vail Resorts would work with the Special Events Commission to use the Vista Bahn ski yard for special events. Sybill Navas commented that the condition did not imply that the result was going to be amenable to both sides. She wanted to see the space available for community use and was concerned that that Commission would be "handed a use agreement". John Schofield said that ski races, bike races, and other similar events were anticipated for the area. The area was well-suited for special events, and Mr. Schofield said that input from the SEC would definitely be solicited. George Ruther mentioned that if the agreement between the SEC (Town of Vail) and the applicant was not reached, then the condition had not been met. Jim Lamont expressed confusion about the condition. George Ruther said that October 31, 2003, was the deadline for submitting an agreement. Jim Lamont wanted to know what the process would be for solidifying special events. George Ruther stated that the process would be communicated to affected parties after it had been presented to the Town Council. Jim Lamont asked if there would be public hearings conducted in order for affected agencies to have discussions about special events issues. George Ruther replied that once the document had been through Council, a schedule to address these issues would be organized. Jim Lamont wanted to verify that certain covenants would be affected. He also asked about the "no build area": would it be inappropriate to designate in the development plan a "no build area" in the special event area? John Schofield said that the proposed condition number 6 already referenced a no build area. Mr. Lamont mentioned that the version he had received had probably already been reviewed by the Town Attorney, and others, but that many, besides himself, deemed the area appropriate for a "no build area". He then expressed mild concern about the wakefulness of the Commission and wondered if a management committee could be instituted to organize special events. George Ruther said that a balance of special events interests would be achieved. In regard to Gold Peak, Mr. Lamont clarified that adjacent property owners were not consulted about special events at that location, but instead had to be proactive to gain a voice. He was confused about where the loading and delivery bays were. He further questioned the importance of the bays' locations. He asked if there would be any problems with the location if the land was not brought into the Town of Vail. He felt it not in the purview of the PEC to require a design review consultant, as the Wells Team had suggested. He did assume that the Town staff was not "playing favorites" on the design review issues, however. Regarding Pirate Ship Park, he questioned the liquor license policies for that area. Furthermore, the large size of the tract did not seem proportional to what was being built. He asked that the TOV clarify what "recreational uses" are, since area homeowners would staunchly approach any dining deck extension. He also wondered about the "public access easement": why is there an interconnection with Mill Creek Circle? George Ruther answered that the connection would be made from Tract E, south of Los Amigos, a general east-west connection. Mr. Lamont requested further clarification about that connection in the form of a schematic. He asked about the draft of the master plan that was reference earlier in the meeting. Greg Hall stated that the plan was a 1997 plan referencing one facility for the entire Village, which would have definitely been impractical, and was therefore correct. Mr. Lamont finished by stating that plenty of room remained to fine-tune the details he had, and others had spoken about. Russ Forrest stated that he could not respond to the Pirate Ship Park issue. George Ruther said that the boundary line had been extended to 5 feet east of the creek so that maintenance to the stream banks could be done by the TOV. Jay Peterson stated that the connection was made to Tract H, and therefore a comprehensive ownership existed by the TOV. The biggest concern of merchants was to separate the trucks from the main pedestrian areas, he said. Regarding ski storage, it was located according to the customers, not the zoning regulations. If anything were to be changed, the PEC would be privy to those changes through an amendment, he added. Regarding special events, a ski park AND a summer recreation area had been designed that would hopefully work for everybody. Vail Resorts would not be making the decisions regarding the use of the space for special events: Town of Vail staff would be, however. He stated that the Wells Team had presented the same concerns for the past five months, each of which had been answered numerous times. The Town of Vail would be in charge of decisions regarding the project from this point out. A world-class architect, Planning Commission, Design Review Board, and Staff had given input, he pointed out. Many, many meetings and much collaboration had brought Vail Resorts to the place they stood at today, Mr. Peterson finished by saying. John Schofield asked when construction was slated to begin, assuming no major changes. Jay Peterson responded that P3 & J construction would begin next year and the Front Door aspect would begin in 2005, though the land exchange was still pending. The development plan was the only thing that assured the building process. Jim Lamont asked if the project would go to Council automatically or if the Council would have to call the project up. George Ruther responded that the Town had adopted a development review process in which the PEC was the final reviewing board. Mr. Lamont asked if the plan was able to be appealed by affected property owners to the Town Council and the related time table. George Ruther stated that twenty days existed during which an appeal could be made. The Council took a five-minute break. Doug Cahill stated that though the process had been long, it had been thorough. Public comment had been taken into consideration. He acknowledged that the loading and delivery plan would need to be discussed further. The project was already world-class, and the design would be privy to DRB approval and suggestions from here on. Regarding satellite delivery locations, those were being discussed. The Town of Vail would make sure that traffic flows and congestion were dealt with appropriately, he added. The "no build zone" would automatically be part of the development plan, pending no further changes. The development plan was contingent on the approval of the land swap, he finished. Chas Bernhardt stated that he believed the project to be world-class, and in an appropriate location as well. The traffic consultants did not feel that traffic would be an issue, he continued. The projects that Vail Resorts had completed in the past were beneficial to the community, though no plan is perfect the first time around. Certain adjustments would be made as the plan was implemented. Regarding agreements with groups for special events usage, he didn't think that would be a problem. The forty percent slope would likely not cause any problems in the future because that slope would be eliminated with project completion. George Lamb agreed with Mr. Cahill's comments about the efficacy of the methodical approach the applicant followed in getting the project approved. The loading and delivery issue was a "big piece" of the project, but not the most important aspect, and could be flexible in the creation of a special environment. The plan would be refined over time, he added. He felt it was appropriate that the DRB would have input on many of the remaining issues. He mentioned the importance of artwork in the project's completion, referencing the million dollars that had been allocated for creative usage of art. Doug Cahill asked about the location of the EHU's and stressed that the public access, from the west to the east of the project, be well-lighted and obviously open to the public. John Schofield stated that the Front Door project was the first major project that the Commission had considered in stages. The record reflected the expert reports and studies that had contributed to the project's review. Specifically, a condition of approval would be added that the various conditions of approval would be referred to the appropriate Town agencies for further review. Ski storage had always been an issue, he continued, and could be re-examined. The cost/benefit ratio would be astronomically in the Town's favor as the applicant was building and donating the project and its uses to the Town! Landscaping would be addressed by the DRB, who would critique it closely. The delineation of the bike path through the project was important, he continued. Traffic concerns and questions were shared by both the public and the Commission. Regarding Vail Road and Meadow Drive, traffic could be regulated before entering the Village by diversion to East Vail or other areas as deemed necessary. Regarding the "no build zone", any modifications proposed would return to the PEC, and therefore were not currently an issue. As for the annexation to the TOV, the PEC approval would be contingent on that annexation approval. Jay Peterson commented that a portion of the project could be built with a special use permit, if necessary. However, the project was planned on being built according to the development plan, though a different direction may need to be taken. John Schofield expressed concern that the PEC approval would be null and void if the land was under Eagle County jurisdiction. Jay Peterson stated that PEC approval and conditions would apply whether the land was annexed or not, according to his sources. John Schofield asked about the validation of certain zoning if the annexation was not carried out. George Ruther stated that the zoning under question would not apply if the annexation was not completed. Sybill Navas commented that the annexation or lack thereof would significantly affect special events. Exterior Alteration Vote, with conditions dated 9.22.03, 1)with the deletion of "preliminary" and 2)the addition of the "no build area" clause; also, 3)items be reviewed by appropriate reviewing boards with public notice. Motion: Doug Cahill Second: George Lamb Vote: 4-0-0 John Schofield clarified to George Ruther that the conditions would need to be referred to the appropriate reviewing boards. George Ruther clarified that the public notice, would include notice to the appropriate reviewing boards. Slope Variance Vote Motion: Doug Cahill Second: George Lamb Vote: 4-0-0 Final Development Plan Vote, with amended conditions Motion: Doug Cahill Second: George Lamb Vote: 4-0-0 John Schofield asked Jay Peterson for clarification of remaining issues, which Mr. Peterson replied affirmatively to. 2. A request for a conditional use permit pursuant to Section 12-7A-3, Vail Town Code; a major exterior alteration pursuant to 12-7A-12, Vail Town Code, to allow for modifications to the existing fractional fee club and a restaurant addition; and a request for a building height variance pursuant to Chapter 17, Vail Town Code, to allow for dormer additions, at the Vail Mountain Lodge and Spa, located at 352 E. Meadow Drive / Tract B, Vail Village 1s' Filing. Applicant: Vail Mountain Lodge LLC, represented by Braun Associates, Inc. Planner: George Ruther Motion: Second: Vote: TABLED TO OCTOBER 13, 2003 3. A request for a floodplain modification pursuant to Chapter 14-6, Grading Standards, Vail Town Code, to allow for the construction of new bridge abutments in the Mill Creek floodplain at Pirate Ship Park located at Tract E, Vail Village 5th Filing Applicant: Vail Resorts, represented by Town of Vail Planner: Bill Gibson Bill Gibson introduced the project according to the memorandum. No public input was offered. George Lamb, Doug Cahill, and Chas Bernhardt had no comment. John Schofield commented that constructing a project once, instead of twice, was always preferable (i.e. referring to the storm water sewer upgrade included with the bridge abutment replacement). Motion: Chas Bernhardt Second: George Lamb Vote: 4-0-0 John Schofield asked Greg Barrie, Public Works Department, when construction would begin, and Mr. Barrie replied that the planned start date is in October. 4. A request for a major subdivision pursuant to Chapter 13-3, Major Subdivision, Vail Town Code, to allow for the platting of four lots at the Lionshead tennis court site and a rezoning pursuant to Section 12-3-7, Administration, Vail Town Code, from Agriculture and Open Space zone district, Vail Town Code, to Primary/Secondary Two-Family Residential zone district, Vail Town Code, to allow for the construction of single-family homes on the four proposed lots, located at 615 West Forest Road/Unplatted ( A more complete metes and bounds legal description is available at the Town of Vail Community Development Department) Applicant: Vail Resorts, represented by Braun Associates, Inc. Planner: Warren Campbell Warren Campbell introduced the project according to the memorandum. Jay Peterson, the applicant's representative, mentioned that this session was slated for preliminary review and initial introduction to the entire Lionshead redevelopment proposal. He added that snowcat access was also a part of this proposal, as was a new skier bridge, the hotel component of the west day lot, the north day lot (with employee housing and VR offices), and the course site. Dominic Mauriello, the applicant's representative, presented a PowerPoint presentation which gave an overview of the project, which involved five separate areas: Lionshead tennis court redevelopment, west day lot - residences redevelopment, core site redevelopment, north day lot redevelopment, and west day lot - hotel redevelopment, each project which would be approximately two years in length. He then displayed several boards which represented the project and detailed such specifics as grading and access. He finished by saying that the snowcat access would be submitted in October and that a vote on the tennis court site would be welcome as soon as possible. John Schofield asked that the Staff give a review of the Lionshead Redevelopment Master Plan at the next meeting. He continued by saying that the approval timeline seemed sensible. Art Abplanalp, representing several adjacent property owners, began by saying that Vail Resorts had been listening to the concerns of neighboring property owners: firstly, that the redevelopment be appropriate, and secondly, that the snowcats be placed elsewhere. He expressed some confusion about the zoning of the ski way. Dominic Mauriello assured him that that zoning would not change. Regarding chronology, Mr. Abplanalp commented that the relocation of the staging would have to be a prerequisite to any other work on the site; otherwise, congestion would occur. He also wanted to verify that single-family residential and not two-family zoning would result at that site. Fred Rumford, a homeowner near the site, wondered what would happen to the existing bike path that led to the ski bridge and then to Lionshead. Jim Lamont, Vail Village Homeowner's Association, asked for clarification about the zoning that would be affected as a result of the redevelopment. He expressed concern about the use of the site as stated in the Lionshead Redevelopment Master Plan. John Schofield answered that at the time the master plan was completed, the owners on Forest Road requested that the tennis court site not be included in the plan, which it was not. Jim Lamont continued by stating that concern remained about the parcel to the east of the tennis courts site (stream tract), which had transitioned from Vail Associates ownership to TOV ownership. He asked that, for any change of uses on the site under question (unlike that aforementioned site), proper public notice be given, etc. John Schofield asked if Mr. Lamont's group would oppose the proposed paths, etc. in the Town's stream tract. Mr. Lamont said that fisherman's paths and similar walkways would be more than appropriate, due to the wildlife that exists in the area. This area was an opportunity to care about the environment, he said. Jeff Wright, on behalf of the Landmark, stated that he considered this to be the first step in the redevelopment of Lionshead. Regarding the process, he mentioned that the Landmark had several concerns regarding height, the north day lot and proposed transit center, the employee housing on the north day lot, and other similar issues that would affect him. He looked forward to the process, however. Bob Lazier, a property owner in the Lionshead area, mentioned his support of the direction of the project. He thought that the idea to divide the project into varied parts was effective and efficient, allowing the "community to start blooming". Many of the buildings in the area were prepared to do necessary renovations once the new projects were begun in the surrounding area. He expressed his support again, stating that he was looking forward to final results. Dominic Mauriello stated that the location of the bike path had been studied. In the winter, the path was not used much, and in the summer, alternative pathways existed already. He added that the path was presently very steep and likely did not meet pathway standards currently: therefore, the proposal did not include the path. Fred Rumford expressed further concern about the path's existence, on behalf of Forest Road homeowners. He was also concerned about the boundary line from the creek as it exists and as it is proposed. Jim Lamont mentioned that people on Forest Road would need access to Lionshead through the bridge. Would the bridge have ski and pedestrian access? John Schofield stated that there would be no change to the bike path on the North side of the creek. Dominic Mauriello stated that at a later date a proposal for the ski bridge would be submitted and that it would include a pedestrian portion. Jim Lamont then asked about the subdivision process. Russ Forrest clarified that no change or development was proposed on the wetland area that the Town owns. Mr. Rumford stated that there was still plenty of land on the north side of the site and that the bike path should be preserved. John Schofield asked for further public comment and then for general Commissioner comment. George Lamb wondered if any design guidelines would apply specifically to the four lots that would tie the homes together as one project. Dominic Mauriello commented that general guidelines would apply and had yet to be decided on. In general the Town's zoning and design guidelines would determine the appearance of the homes. George Lamb urged the applicant to consider continued use of the path under question near Forest Road. Doug Cahill commented that this plan was much more detailed and thorough than the previous plan. He had concerns about the numbers and placement of parking spaces and asked about the zoning of the four lots. Dominic Mauriello responded that there was no single-family residential zoning in the Lionshead filing under question, which is why Vail Resorts decided to make it an extension of the Two-family Primary/Secondary zone district which currently exists on the neighboring properties. Doug Cahill clarified that spring of 2004 was when construction was slated to begin. He also asked about a gate for the residences. Regarding the path, he asked how the path was maintained in the winter. Chas Bernhardt commented that overall, he though the projects would provide great improvements to the area. He questioned the fact that the use of private property had become the right of area homeowners and asked that more research be done regarding the use and ownership of that path. Mr. Rumford commented that plenty of public property existed in the area he was concerned about using. John Schofield hoped that these projects would be catalysts for extensive Lionshead rejuvenation efforts. He thought the timeline for approval was appropriate and commented that each aspect of the project would likely move at a different pace. He urged Staff and Council to make speedy progress on the location of the Transportation Center. He asked that progress be made on the tract along the stream as well. Regarding the skier bridge, he requested that the design be effective year round and not just seasonal. He asked about access to the Kaltenberg and parking issues, which would need to be addressed sooner, rather than later, with special attention paid to phasing. As for the specifics of the tennis courts, the owners on Forest Road were adamant that the parcel in question was not included in the master plan. He thought that design regulations for the homes should be in accordance with the Town of Vail/Design Review Board regulations, and nothing else. He wanted to ensure that a distinct delineation between the ski hill and the residences was made via a gate, a fence, or by other means, and asked that the applicant address the path under question near Forest Road. He requested that Staff give an overview to the PEC on the Lionshead Redevelopment Master Plan. Russ Forrest commented that Staff would provide an overview and that an amendment to the master plan may eventually occur. John Schofield said that further changes to the four lots would likely be minor, but that the bigger projects would need more time as they were more complex. Motion: Doug Cahill Second: George Lamb Vote: 4-0-0 Tabled to October 13, 2003 5. A request for a variance from Section 12-14-17, Setback from Watercourse, Vail Town Code, to allow for a residential addition in the Gore Creek setback, located at 4444 Streamside Circle / Lot 11, Bighorn 4th Addition. Applicant: Thomas O'Dorisio, represented by John Perkins. Planner: Warren Campbell Warren Campbell introduced the project according to the memorandum. Neither the applicant nor any members of the public had any comment. Doug Cahill, Chas Bernhardt, and George Lamb had no further comment. John Schofield mentioned that it would be interesting to know how the building was originally constructed in the setback (in the 1970's). Motion: Chas Bernhardt Second: George Lamb Vote: 4-0-0 APPROVED WITH ONE CONDITION: Condition: 1. That the applicant is not permitted to perform an interior conversion of this space at a later date as the dormer additions would not have been constructed prior to August 5, 1997, as required by Section 12-15-4, Interior Conversion, Vail Town Code. 6. A request for a recommendation to the Vail Town Council for an amendment to the Town of Vail Streetscape Master Plan, and setting forth details in regard thereto. Applicant: Town of Vail, represented by Greg Hall Planner: Warren Campbell Warren Campbell introduced the project according to the memorandum. No public input was given. Chas Bernhardt commented that the fee schedule did not seem fair to the homeowners that would be affected. Greg Hall replied that a formula could be reached that would differentiate between commercial and residential fee structures. Doug Cahill asked how the fees would apply. Greg Hall answered that, unless a major exterior alteration and/or an increase in square footage occurred, the fees would not be a concern. Russ Forrest commented that an impact fee needed to be based on the impact that was generated. Doug Cahill commented on the length of the impact. Would there be a sunset provision for when new development would not be assessed any fees as the development was complete. George Lamb added that the impact was his primary concern as well. He continued by saying that Design Review Board and Town of Vail issues were the only ones that seemed to remain. John Schofield said that the plan seemed great, except that ongoing maintenance was not addressed as thoroughly as he had hoped. He would recommend to Council that that information was obtained and clarified. The idea of residential assessment also struck him as being unfair. He thought that tax increment financing seemed a better way to do things and stressed that the Council needed to be expedient in making decisions! Furthermore, there would never be enough tax increments to do all projects. The Council should allocate a portion of tax increment funding to the streetscape plan, he recommended. The balance not covered by the developers could be covered in that way. Russ Forrest added that Staff looked hard at tax increment financing: however, private developers would move forward with their projects without the public developments being proposed. The question was how far the attorneys would go in letting the Town set up a tax increment district. John Schofield encouraged Staff to "screw the attorneys" and requested that he be quoted accordingly. Motion: John Schofield Second: Doug Cahill Vote: 4-0 RECOMMENDATION OF APPROVED TO COUNCIL WITH CONDITIONS Recommendations: 1. That the applicant should verify that all materials proposed for use in the streetscape are low maintenance, have a long lifespan, and are durable so as to avoid costly maintenance and upkeep. 2. That the applicant should explore funding options other than an impact fee such as the use of Tax Increment Financing. In addition, funding models should be explored which impact residential properties to a lesser extent than commercial properties and include a time frame for which the fee will be collected, such as a sunset provision. 7. A request for major exterior alteration pursuant to Section 12-7H-7, Vail Town Code, to allow for the construction of new dwelling units and accommodation units at Vail Marriott Mountain Resort, located at 715 West Lionshead Circle / Lots C and D, Morcus Subdivision, and Lot 7, Marriott Subdivision Applicant: Mountain Marriott Vail Resort, represented by Gwathmey, Pratt, Schultz Architects Planner: George Ruther 8 9 Motion: George Lamb Second: Doug Cahill TABLED TO OCTOBER 13, 2003 Vote: 4-0-0 Approval of September 8'h meeting minutes Motion: George Lamb abstained) Second: Doug Cahill Vote: 3-0-1 (CB Approved John Schofield asked if GRFA information was going to Council, and if so, when. Russ Forrest said that the PEC recommendation was being forwarded to Council on October 7, 2003. At the following Council meeting, those persons instrumental in the GRFA discussions from the beginning would be invited to share comments, etc. He added that PEC participation would be helpful at that time. Information Update: • GRFA - see above comments by Russ Forrest • Four Seasons Russ Forrest commented that parking issues still presided over the project, though the developer was ready and wanting to get on with the project. Four spaces (headed to DRB for review) and then six additional spaces remained the issue between the applicant and the property owners of Nine Vail Road. John Schofield asked about the presentation to the new council of the plans and schedule for Four Seasons. Russ Forrest commented that Mr. Schofield's idea was a good idea. Motion: George Lamb Second: Doug Cahill Vote: 4-0-0 Meeting adjourned at 6:17 p.m. The applications and information about the proposals are available for public inspection during regular office hours in the project planner's office located at the Town of Vail Community Development Department, 75 South Frontage Road. Please call 479-2138 for information. Sign language interpretation available upon request with 24 hour notification. Please call 479- 2356, Telephone for the Hearing Impaired, for information. Community Development Department Published September 19, 2003, in the Vail Daily.